[House Report 107-194]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
107th Congress Report
1st Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 107-194
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002
__________
R E P O R T
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ON
H.R. 2586
together with
ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
September 4, 2001.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
One Hundred Seventh Congress
BOB STUMP, Arizona, Chairman
FLOYD D. SPENCE, South Carolina IKE SKELTON, Missouri
DUNCAN HUNTER, California JOHN SPRATT, South Carolina
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania LANE EVANS, Illinois
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi
JIM SAXTON, New Jersey NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York MARTY MEEHAN, Massachusetts
TERRY EVERETT, Alabama ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
HOWARD P. ``BUCK'' McKEON, SILVESTRE REYES, Texas
California THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine
J.C. WATTS, Jr., Oklahoma VIC SNYDER, Arkansas
MAC THORNBERRY, Texas JIM TURNER, Texas
JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana ADAM SMITH, Washington
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia LORETTA SANCHEZ, California
VAN HILLEARY, Tennessee JAMES H. MALONEY, Connecticut
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY, Georgia
JIM RYUN, Kansas ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California
BOB RILEY, Alabama ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey
ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina BARON P. HILL, Indiana
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico MIKE THOMPSON, California
KEN CALVERT, California JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut
ROB SIMMONS, Connecticut SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
ANDER CRENSHAW, Florida JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island
MARK STEVEN KIRK, Illinois RICK LARSEN, Washington
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia
ED SCHROCK, Virginia
W. TODD AKIN, Missouri
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia
Robert S. Rangel, Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Explanation of the Committee Amendments.......................... 1
Purpose.......................................................... 2
Relationship of Authorization to Appropriations.................. 2
Summary of Authorization in the Bill............................. 2
Summary Table of Authorizations................................ 3
Rationale for the Committee Bill................................. 12
Hearings......................................................... 18
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION.................. 19
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT............................................. 19
OVERVIEW....................................................... 19
Aircraft Procurement, Army................................... 22
Overview................................................... 22
Items of Special Interest.................................. 27
AH-64 modifications...................................... 27
Air traffic control...................................... 27
Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE)................... 27
CH-47 cargo helicopter modifications..................... 28
Longbow.................................................. 28
UH-60 modifications...................................... 28
Missile Procurement, Army.................................... 29
Overview................................................... 29
Items of Special Interest.................................. 33
Missile procurement army (MPA) transfers................. 33
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army.................... 33
Overview................................................... 33
Items of Special Interest.................................. 38
Abrams upgrade program................................... 38
Bradley base sustainment................................. 38
Ammunition Procurement, Army................................. 39
Overview................................................... 39
Items of Special Interest.................................. 44
Army ammunition procurement.............................. 44
Remote area denial artillery munition (RADAM)............ 44
White phosphorus production facility..................... 44
Other Procurement, Army...................................... 44
Overview................................................... 44
Items of Special Interest.................................. 56
Artillery accuracy equipment............................. 56
Combat support medical................................... 56
Combat training centers instrumentation support.......... 56
Deployable universal combat earthmovers (DEUCE).......... 57
Earthmoving scrapers..................................... 57
High mobility trailers................................... 57
Improved high frequency radio (IHFR)..................... 58
Modification of in service equipment..................... 58
Nonsystem training devices............................... 58
Product improved combat vehicle crewman (PICVC).......... 59
Reserve component automation system (RCAS)............... 59
Ribbon bridge............................................ 59
Special equipment for user testing....................... 60
Super high frequency (SHF) terminal...................... 60
Tactical unmanned aerial vehicle (TUAV).................. 61
Water distributors....................................... 61
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army.............. 61
Overview................................................... 61
Items of Special Interest.................................. 63
Chemical agents and munitions destruction................ 63
Aircraft Procurement, Navy................................... 63
Overview................................................... 63
Items of Special Interest.................................. 69
AV-8B modifications...................................... 69
Calibration test equipment............................... 69
E-2 modifications........................................ 69
F/A-18E/F................................................ 70
HH/UH-1N reclamation and conversion program.............. 70
Joint primary air training system (JPATS)................ 70
SH-60 series modifications............................... 70
T-45 training system (TS)................................ 71
Tactical air reconnaissance pod system (TARPS)-completely
digital (CD)........................................... 71
Weapons Procurement, Navy.................................... 71
Overview................................................... 71
Items of Special Interest.................................. 76
MK 46 Mod 0 lightweight machine gun...................... 76
Tomahawk missile......................................... 76
Trident II missile....................................... 76
Ammunition Procurement Navy/Marine Corps..................... 77
Overview................................................... 77
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................ 81
Overview................................................... 81
Items of Special Interest.................................. 85
Completion of prior year shipbuilding programs........... 85
Minehunter small waterplane area twin hull (SWATH)....... 85
Outfitting............................................... 85
SSGN conversion.......................................... 86
Other Procurement, Navy...................................... 86
Overview................................................... 86
Items of Special Interest.................................. 97
Operating forces industrial plant equipment.............. 97
Other navigation equipment............................... 97
Other supply support equipment........................... 97
Other training equipment................................. 98
Radar support............................................ 98
Satellite communications systems......................... 98
Procurement, Marine Corps.................................... 99
Overview................................................... 99
Items of Special Interest.................................. 105
Container family......................................... 105
Expeditionary warfare.................................... 105
Family of construction equipment......................... 106
Night vision equipment................................... 106
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force.............................. 106
Overview................................................... 106
Items of Special Interest.................................. 114
B-2...................................................... 114
C-130.................................................... 114
C-17..................................................... 115
CV-22.................................................... 115
Defense airborne reconnaissance program (DARP), line 55.. 116
F-15 modifications....................................... 116
F-16 modifications....................................... 117
Fixed aircrew standardized seats......................... 117
MC-130 simulation training upgrades...................... 118
Predator unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)................... 118
Ammunition Procurement, Air Force............................ 119
Overview................................................... 119
Missile Procurement, Air Force............................... 122
Overview................................................... 122
Other Procurement, Air Force................................. 126
Overview................................................... 126
Items of Special Interest.................................. 133
Air national guard air traffic control tower radio
upgrade................................................ 133
Combat arms training system (CATS)....................... 133
Laser eye protection..................................... 133
Senior scout............................................. 134
Supply asset tracking system (SATS)...................... 134
Theater air control system improvement (TACSI)........... 134
Procurement, Defense-Wide.................................... 135
Overview................................................... 135
Items of Special Interest.................................. 141
Chemical/biological defense procurement program.......... 141
Anthrax vaccination immunization program............... 141
Chemical/biological defense collective protection
shelters........................................... 141
Portable intelligence collection and relay capability
(PICRC).............................................. 141
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense........... 141
Overview................................................... 141
Items of Special Interest.................................. 144
Chemical agents and munitions destruction................ 144
Review of program for destruction of lethal chemical
agents and munitions............................... 144
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 145
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 145
Sections 101-107--Authorization of Appropriations.......... 145
Subtitle B--Army Programs.................................... 145
Section 111--Extension of Multiyear Contract for Family of
Medium Tactical Vehicles............................... 145
Section 112--Repeal of Limitation on Number of Bunker
Defeat Munitions that May Be Acquired.................. 145
Subtitle C--Air Force Programs............................... 145
Section 121--Responsibility of Air Force for Contracts for
All Defense Space Launches............................. 145
Section 122--Multiyear Procurement of C-17 Aircraft........ 145
Subtitle D--Chemical Munitions Destruction................... 146
Section 141--Destruction of Existing Stockpile of Lethal
Chemical Agents and Munitions.......................... 146
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............ 147
OVERVIEW....................................................... 147
Army RDT&E................................................... 149
Overview................................................... 149
Items of Special Interest.................................. 160
Advanced display technology.............................. 160
All Source Analysis System............................... 160
Applied communications and information networking program 161
Army missile defense systems integration................. 161
Aviation engineering development......................... 161
Brooks Air Force Base energy and sustainability
laboratory........................................... 161
Collaboration in biotechnology research.................. 162
Combat ready food safety................................. 162
Combustion-driven eye safe laser......................... 162
Comanche................................................. 162
Combat vehicle and automotive advance technology......... 163
Crusader................................................. 163
Dismounted situational awareness system.................. 163
Electronics and electronic devices....................... 164
Electronic warfare (EW) development...................... 164
Environmental quality technology......................... 164
Full authority digital engine control.................... 164
Funding transfers to support transformation.............. 165
High-energy laser-low aspect target tracking............. 165
Hybrid track technology.................................. 165
Hyperspectral long-wave imager for the tactical
environment.......................................... 166
Infantry support weapons................................. 166
International medical program global satellite system.... 166
Landmine warfare/barrier engineering development......... 167
Lightweight x-band radar antenna......................... 167
Medical advanced technology.............................. 167
Medical technology....................................... 167
MedTeams................................................. 168
Missile and rocket advanced technology................... 168
Missile technology....................................... 168
Night vision advanced technology......................... 169
Passive millimeter-wave imaging.......................... 169
Silent sentry surveillance test.......................... 169
Soldier-Centered Design Tools for the Army Transformation 169
Survival radios.......................................... 170
Tactical high energy laser............................... 170
Tactical unmanned aerial vehicle......................... 170
Weapons and munitions.................................... 171
Weapons and munitions advanced technology................ 171
Navy RDT&E................................................... 171
Overview................................................... 171
Items of Special Interest.................................. 184
Advanced anti-radiation guided munition (AARGM).......... 184
Advanced composite sail phase II......................... 184
Advanced multi-band surveillance systems................. 184
Aegis combat systems engineering......................... 185
Aviation-shipboard information technology initiative..... 185
Combat systems integration............................... 185
Common command and decision system..................... 186
Wideband optically multiplexed beam-forming
architecture....................................... 186
Common picture applied research.......................... 186
Hybrid fiber optic wireless communication.............. 186
SEADEEP................................................ 187
E2-C2 eight-blade composite propeller.................... 187
Electronic warfare (EW) development...................... 187
Electro optical framing reconnaissance................... 188
Embedded software engineering research initiative........ 188
Expeditionary warfare testbed-supporting arms technology
insertion............................................ 188
Extending the littoral battlespace....................... 189
F/A-18 improvements...................................... 189
Fuel cell second source................................ 189
Joint helmet mounted cueing system (JHMCS)............. 189
Force protection advanced technology..................... 190
Advanced water jet AWJ-21.............................. 190
DC Homopolar Motor..................................... 190
Direct ship service fuel cell.......................... 190
Electric propulsion/ship power systems distributed test
bed................................................ 191
Littoral support craft-experimental.................... 191
SEALs Mark V patrol craft modification................. 192
Funding transfers to support transformation.............. 192
Land attack standard missile............................. 193
Laser aim scoring system (LASS).......................... 193
Laser welding and cutting................................ 194
Marine Corps ground combat/support system................ 194
Metrology Projects....................................... 195
Multipurpose processor................................... 195
Navy's intelligent agent security module................. 195
Navy logistics productivity.............................. 196
Compatible processor upgrade program................... 196
Rapid retargeting...................................... 196
Non-acoustic anti-submarine warfare...................... 196
Oceanographic survey of continental shelf beyond U.S.
exclusive economic zone.............................. 197
Organ transfer technology................................ 197
Photovoltaic energy savings initiative................... 198
Power projection advanced technology..................... 198
Affordable weapon...................................... 198
DP-2 thrust vectoring system concept demonstration..... 198
Precision targeting systems modernization and enhancement 199
Project Bear Trap........................................ 199
Radiation-hardened electronics applications.............. 200
SPAWAR enhanced modeling and simulation initiatives...... 200
Submarine electrical power............................... 200
Supply Chain Best Practices.............................. 201
Surface navy integrated undersea tactical technology..... 201
Surface ship torpedo defense............................. 201
Telemedicine for minimally invasive surgery.............. 201
Titanium watertight door and hatch cover................. 202
Torpedo rapid COTS insertion............................. 202
Vacuum electronics....................................... 203
VECTOR study and analysis................................ 203
Warfighter sustainment advanced technology............... 204
Naval environmental compliance operations monitoring
system............................................. 204
Real time heart rate variability monitor............... 204
Warfighter sustainment applied research.................. 204
Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) carbon fiber
qualification...................................... 204
Detection and identification of human pathogens........ 204
Formable aligned carbon thermo sets.................... 205
Knowledge-based ship system diagnosis and repair....... 205
Air Force RDT&E.............................................. 205
Overview................................................... 205
Items of Special Interest.................................. 216
Access to space.......................................... 216
Advanced aerospace sensors............................... 216
Aerospace propulsion..................................... 216
Aging landing gear life extension (ALGLE) program........ 216
Airborne reconnaissance systems.......................... 217
Assessment relating to gasoline and diesel engine fuel
systems.............................................. 217
Bipolar wafer cell nickel-metal hydride battery.......... 217
Commercial imagery strategy.............................. 218
Free electron laser...................................... 218
Funding transfers to support transformation.............. 218
GPS jammer detection and location system................. 219
High Accuracy Network Demonstration System............... 219
Joint precision approach landing system.................. 219
Joint STARS multi-platform radar technology insertion
program.............................................. 220
Joint strike fighter (JSF) alternate engine.............. 220
Low cost autonomous attack system........................ 220
Low cost launch technology............................... 221
Major T&E investment..................................... 221
Materials technologies for aging aircraft................ 221
Missile Technology demonstration-3B...................... 221
Non-space SIGINT architecture............................ 222
Precision location and identification (PLAID)............ 222
Satellite planning information network (SPIN)............ 223
Space and missile rocket propulsion...................... 223
Special aerospace metals and manufacturing processes..... 223
Synthetic Theater Operations Research Model.............. 224
Texas regional institute for environmental studies....... 224
Defense-Wide RDT&E........................................... 224
Overview................................................... 224
Items of Special Interest.................................. 233
Aircraft affordability initiative........................ 233
Backscatter mobile truck system.......................... 233
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO)............ 233
Technology............................................. 234
Ballistic missile defense system....................... 234
Terminal defense segment............................... 234
Midcourse defense segment.............................. 235
Boost defense segment.................................. 235
Sensors segment........................................ 236
Chemical/biological defense research, development, test
and evaluation program............................... 236
Research in percutaneous, optical, and pulmonary
effects of mustard agent........................... 237
Optical computing device materials for chemical sensors 237
Chemical/biological regenerative air filtration systems 237
Chemical and biological mass spectrometer.............. 238
Mobile chemical agent detector......................... 238
Asymmetric protocols for biological defense............ 238
Complex systems design................................... 238
Counterproliferation analysis and planning system........ 239
Defense imagery and mapping program...................... 239
Distributed common ground station/networking ISR assets.. 239
Distributed operational testing capabilities............. 240
Electrostatic decontamination system..................... 240
Facial recognition technology............................ 241
Funding transfers to support transformation DW........... 241
DARPA ``Exoskeleton Project''.......................... 241
Global infrastructure data conversion initiative &
document exploitation................................ 242
High energy laser research and development............... 242
Implantable cardioverter defibrillator................... 243
Joint Technology Applications Analysis Pilot Program..... 243
Medical free electron laser.............................. 244
Microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) sensors............ 244
More efficient science and technology investment......... 244
Special operations forces acquisition.................... 245
Tactical missile recycling............................... 245
Thermobaric warhead development.......................... 245
U.S.-Israel boost phase intercept........................ 246
Warfighter rapid acquisition programs.................... 246
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense..................... 247
Overview................................................... 247
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 250
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 250
Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations............... 250
Section 202--Amount for Basic and Applied Research......... 250
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
Limitations.............................................. 250
Section 211--Cooperative Department of Defense-Department
of Veterans Affairs Medical Research Program........... 250
Section 212--Advanced Land Attack Missile Program.......... 250
Section 213--Collaborative Program for Development of
Advanced Radar Systems for Naval Applications.......... 251
Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense........................ 252
Section 231--Transfer of Responsibility for Procurement for
Missile Defense Programs from Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization to Military Departments................... 252
Section 232--Repeal of Program Element Requirements for
Ballistic Missile Defense Programs..................... 253
Section 233--Support of Ballistic Missile Defense
Activities of the Department of Defense by the National
Laboratories of the Department of Energy............... 253
Section 234--Missile Defense Testing Initiative............ 253
Section 235--Missile Defense System Test Bed Facilities.... 254
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 254
Section 241--Establishment of unmanned aerial vehicle joint
operational test bed system............................ 254
Section 242--Demonstration Project to Increase Small
Business and University Participation in Office of
Naval Research Efforts to Extend Benefits of Science
and Technology Research to Fleet....................... 255
Section 243--Management Responsibility for Navy Mine
Countermeasures Programs............................... 256
Section 244--Program to Accelerate the Introduction of
Innovative Technology in Defense Acquisition Programs.. 256
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE............................. 258
OVERVIEW....................................................... 258
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 289
Budget Request Adjustments................................... 289
Department of the Army Adjustments: [in millions of
dollars]............................................... 289
Department of the Navy Adjustments: [in millions of
dollars]............................................... 289
Department of the Air Force Adjustments: [in millions of
dollars]............................................... 289
Office, Secretary of Defense Adjustments: [in millions of
dollars]............................................... 289
Defense-wide Activities Adjustments: [in millions of
dollars]............................................... 290
Advisory and Assistance Services........................... 290
Excess Foreign Currencies Reductions....................... 290
Strategic Sourcing (A-76).................................. 290
Other Items of Special Interest.............................. 291
Corrosion Prevention and Control........................... 291
Information Systems........................................ 292
Enterprise Resource Planning............................... 292
Environmental Issues......................................... 292
Environmental Restoration Activities....................... 292
Vernon Hills NIKE Missile Site............................. 293
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Issues....................... 293
Access to Slot Machines.................................... 293
Military Exchange Private Label Manufacturers.............. 293
Other Issues................................................. 294
Army's Capital Investment Program for Depot Facilities..... 294
Army Workload and Performance System....................... 294
Automated Document Conversion System Program............... 295
Automatic Inventory Technology............................. 295
Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities......... 295
Distance Learning Implementation Program................... 296
Hunter Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.................... 296
Navy-Marine Corps Intranet................................. 296
Non-nuclear Ship Maintenance............................... 297
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 297
Subtitle A--Authorization Of Appropriations.................. 297
Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding............. 297
Section 302--Working Capital Funds......................... 297
Section 303--Armed Forces Retirement Home.................. 297
Section 304--Transfer From National Defense Stockpile
Transaction Fund....................................... 297
Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions......................... 298
Section 311--Inventory of Explosive Risk Sites at Former
Military Ranges........................................ 298
Section 312--National Security Impact Statements........... 298
Section 313--Reimbursement for Certain Costs in Connection
with Hooper Sands Site, South Berwick, Maine........... 298
Section 314--River Mitigation Studies...................... 298
Section 315--Elimination of Annual Report on Contractor
Reimbursement for Costs of Environmental Response
Actions................................................ 298
Subtitle C--Commissaries and Nonappropriated Fund
Instrumentalities........................................ 298
Section 321--Reserve Component Commissary Benefits......... 298
Section 322--Reimbursement for Noncommissary Use of
Commissary Facilities.................................. 298
Section 323--Civil Recovery for Nonappropriated Fund
Instrumentality Costs Related to Shoplifting........... 299
Subtitle D--Workforce and Depot Issues....................... 299
Section 331--Fiscal year 2002 Limitations on Workforce
Reviews................................................ 299
Section 332--Applicability of Core Logistics Capability
Requirements to Nuclear Aircraft Carriers.............. 299
Section 333--Continuation of Contractor Manpower Reporting
System in Department of the Army....................... 299
Section 334--Limitation on Expansion of Wholesale Logistics
Modernization Program.................................. 300
Section 335--Pilot Project for Exclusion of Certain
Expenditures from Limitation on Private Sector
Performance of Depot-Level Maintenance................. 300
Section 336--Protections for Purchasers of Articles and
Services Manufactured or Performed by Working-Capital
Funded Industrial Facilities of the Department of
Defense................................................ 300
Subtitle E--Defense Dependents Education..................... 300
Section 341--Assistance to Local Educational Agencies that
Benefit Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and
Department of Defense Civilian Employees............... 300
Section 342--Availability of Auxiliary Services of Defense
Dependents' Education System for Dependents Who Are
Home School Students................................... 300
Section 343--Report Regarding Compensation for Teachers
Employed in Teaching Positions in Overseas Schools
Operated by the Department of Defense.................. 301
Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 301
Section 351--Availability of Excess Defense Personal
Property to Support Department of Veterans Affairs
Initiative to Assist Homeless Veterans................. 301
Section 352--Continuation of Limitations on Implementation
of Navy-Marine Corps Intranet Contract................. 301
Section 353--Completion and Evaluation of Current
Demonstration Programs to Improve Quality of Personal
Property Shipments of Members.......................... 301
Section 354--Expansion of Entities Eligible for Loan, Gift,
and Exchange of Documents, Historical Artifacts, and
Obsolete Combat Materiel............................... 301
Subtitle G--Service Contracting Reform....................... 302
Section 361--Short Title................................... 302
Section 362--Required Cost Savings Level for Change of
Function to Contractor Performance..................... 302
Section 363--Applicability of Study and Reporting
Requirements to New Commercial or Industrial Type
Functions.............................................. 302
Section 364--Repeal of Waiver for Small Function........... 302
Section 365--Requirement for Equity in Public-Private
Competitions........................................... 302
Section 366--Reporting Requirements Regarding Department of
Defense's Service Contractor Workforce................. 302
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 303
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 303
Subtitle A--Active Forces.................................... 303
Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces............... 303
Section 402--Revision in Permanent End Strength Minimum
Levels................................................. 303
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces................................... 303
Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve............ 303
Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in
Support of the Reserves................................ 304
Section 413--End Strength for Military Technicians (Dual
Status)................................................ 304
Section 414--Fiscal Year 2002 Limitation on Non-Dual Status
Technicians............................................ 304
Section 415--Limitations on Numbers of Reserve Personnel
Serving on Active Duty or Full-Time National Guard Duty
in Certain Grades for Administration of Reserve
Components............................................. 305
Subtitle C--Other Matters Relating to Personnel Strengths.... 305
Section 421--Increase in Percentage by Which Active
Component End Strengths for any fiscal year may be
increased.............................................. 305
Section 422--Active Duty End Strength Exemption for
National Guard and Reserve Personnel Performing Funeral
Honors Functions....................................... 305
Section 423--Increase in Authorized Strengths for Air Force
Officers on Active Duty in the Grade of Major.......... 305
Subtitle D--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 305
Section 431--Authorization of Appropriations for Military
Personnel.............................................. 305
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY............................... 307
OVERVIEW....................................................... 307
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 307
Alternative Recruiting Media............................... 307
Army Reserve Military Technician Positions................. 308
Defense Prisoner of War/Missing in Action Office........... 308
Improved Use of Existing Military Centers for Scientific
and Technological Education............................ 309
Review of General and Flag Officer Authorizations.......... 309
Uniting Through Reading.................................... 309
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 310
Subtitle A--General Personnel Management Authorities......... 310
Section 501--Enhanced Flexibility for Management of Senior
General and Flag Officer Positions..................... 310
Section 502--Original Appointments in Regular Grades for
Academy Graduates and Certain other New Officers....... 310
Section 503--Temporary Reduction of the Time-in-Grade
Requirement for Eligibility for Promotion for Certain
Active-Duty List Officers in Grades of First Lieutenant
and Lieutenant (Junior Grade).......................... 310
Section 504--Increase in Senior Enlisted Active Duty Grade
Limit for Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force............ 311
Section 505--Authority for Limited Extension of Medical
Deferment of Mandatory Retirement or Separation........ 311
Section 506--Authority for Limited Extension on Active Duty
of Members Subject to Mandatory Retirement or
Separation............................................. 311
Section 507--Clarification of Disability Severance Pay
Computation............................................ 311
Section 508--Officer in Charge of United States Navy Band.. 311
Section 509--One-Year Extension of Expiration Date for
Certain Force Management Authorities................... 311
Subtitle B--Reserve Component Personnel Policy............... 311
Section 511--Placement on Active-Duty List of Certain
Reserve Officers on Active Duty for a Period of Three
Years or Less.......................................... 312
Section 512--Expanded Application of Reserve Special
Selection Boards....................................... 312
Section 513--Exception to Baccalaureate Degree Requirement
for Appointment of Reserve Officers to Grades Above
First Lieutenant....................................... 312
Section 514--Improved Disability Benefits for Certain
Reserve Component Members.............................. 312
Section 515--Time-in-Grade Requirement for Reserve
Component Officers with a Non-Service Connected
Disability............................................. 312
Section 516--Reserve Members Considered to be Deployed for
Purposes of Personnel Tempo Management................. 313
Section 517--Funeral Honors Duty Performed by Reserve and
Guard Members to be Treated as Inactive-Duty Training
for Certain Purposes................................... 313
Section 518--Members of the National Guard Performing
Funeral Honors Duty While in Non-Federal Status........ 313
Section 519--Use of Military Leave for Funeral Honors Duty
by Reserve Members and National Guardsmen.............. 313
Subtitle C--Joint Specialty Officers and Joint Professional
Military Education....................................... 313
Section 521--Nominations for Joint Specialty............... 313
Section 522--Joint Duty Credit............................. 314
Section 523--Retroactive Joint Service Credit for Duty in
Certain Joint Task Forces.............................. 315
Section 524--Revision to Annual Report on Joint Officer
Management............................................. 315
Section 525--Requirement for Selection for Joint Specialty
Before Promotion to General or Flag Officer Grade...... 315
Section 526--Independent Study of Joint Officer Management
and Joint Professional Military Education Reforms...... 316
Section 527--Professional Development Education............ 316
Section 528--Authority for National Defense University to
Enroll Certain Private Sector Civilians................ 316
Section 529--Continuation of Reserve Component Professional
Military Education Test................................ 316
Subtitle D--Military Education and Training.................. 317
Section 531--Defense Language Institute Foreign Language
Center................................................. 317
Section 532--Authority for the Marine Corps University to
Award Degree of Master of Strategic Studies............ 317
Section 533--Increase in Number of Foreign Students
Authorized to be Admitted to the Service Academies..... 317
Section 534--Increase in Maximum Age for Appointment as a
Cadet or Midshipman in Senior Reserve Officer Training
Corps Scholarship Programs............................. 317
Section 535--Active Duty Participation as a Cadet or
Midshipman in Senior ROTC Advanced Training............ 317
Section 536--Authority to Modify the Service Obligation of
Certain ROTC Cadets in Military Junior Colleges
Receiving Financial Assistance......................... 317
Section 537--Modification of Nurse Officer Candidate
Accession Program Restriction on Students Attending
Educational Institutions with Senior Reserve Officers'
Training Programs...................................... 318
Section 538--Repeal of Limitation on Number on Junior
Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) Units......... 318
Section 539--Reserve Health Professionals Stipend Program
Expansion.............................................. 318
Section 540--Housing Allowance for the Chaplain for the
Corps of Cadets, United States Military Academy........ 318
Subtitle E--Decorations, Awards, and Commendations........... 318
Section 541--Authority for Award of the Medal of Honor to
Humbert R. Versace for Valor During the Vietnam War.... 318
Section 542--Review Regarding Award of Medal of Honor to
Certain Jewish American and Hispanic American War
Veterans............................................... 318
Section 543--Authority to Issue Duplicate Medal of Honor... 319
Section 544--Authority to Replace Stolen Military
Decorations............................................ 319
Section 545--Waiver of Time Limitations for Award of Navy
Distinguished Flying Cross to Certain Persons.......... 319
Section 546--Korea Defense Service Medal................... 319
Section 547--Cold War Service Medal........................ 319
Section 548--Option to Convert Award of Armed Forces
Expeditionary Medal Awarded for Operation Frequent Wind
to Vietnam Service Medal............................... 319
Subtitle F--Matters Relating to Voting....................... 320
Section 551--Voting Assessments and Assistance for Members
of the Uniformed Services.............................. 320
Section 552--Electronic Voting Demonstration Project....... 320
Subtitle G--Matters Relating to Military Spouses and Family
Members.................................................. 320
Section 561--Improved Financial and Other Assistance to
Military Spouses for Job Training and Education........ 320
Section 562--Authority to Conduct Surveys of Dependents and
Survivors of Military Retirees......................... 321
Section 563--Clarification of Treatment of Classified
Information Concerning Persons in a Missing Status..... 321
Section 564--Transportation to Annual Meeting of Next-of-
Kin of Persons Unaccounted for from Conflicts after
World War II........................................... 321
Section 565--Amendments to Charter of Defense Task Force on
Domestic Violence...................................... 321
Subtitle H--Military Justice and Legal Matters............... 322
Section 571--Requirement that Courts-Martial Consist of Not
Less than 12 Members in Capital Cases.................. 322
Section 572--Right of Convicted Accused to Request
Sentencing by Military Judge........................... 322
Section 573--Codification of Requirement for Regulations
for Delivery of Military Personnel to Civil Authorities
When Charged with Certain Offenses..................... 323
Section 574--Authority to Accept Voluntary Legal Services
for Members of the Armed Foces......................... 323
Subtitle I--Other Matters.................................... 323
Section 581--Shipment of Privately Owned Vehicles When
Making Permanent Change of Station Moves Within the
United States.......................................... 323
Section 582--Payment of Vehicle Storage Costs in Advance... 323
Section 583--Permanent Authority for Use of Military
Recruiting Funds for Certain Expenses at Department of
Defense Recruiting Functions........................... 323
Section 584--Clarification of Military Recruiter Access to
Secondary School Directory Information About Students.. 323
Section 585--Repeal of Requirement for Final Comptroller
General Report Relating to Army end Strength
Allocations............................................ 324
Section 586--Posthumous Army Commission in the Grade of
Captain in the Chaplains corps to Ella E. Gibson for
Service as Chaplain of the First Wisconsin Heavy
Artillery Regiment During the Civil War................ 324
Section 587--National Guard Challenge Program.............. 324
Section 588--Payment of FEHBP Premiums for Certain
Reservists Called to Active Duty in Support of
Contingency Operations................................. 324
Section 589--18-month Enlistment Pilot Program............. 324
Section 590--Per Diem Allowance for Lengthy or Numerous
Deployments............................................ 325
Section 591--Congressional Review Period for Change in
Ground Combat Exclusion Policy......................... 326
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS.............. 327
OVERVIEW....................................................... 327
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 328
Additional Reporting Instructions Concerning the
Supplemental Subsistence Allowance for Low-Income
Members with Dependents................................ 328
Personal and Family Financial Management Programs.......... 328
The Right of Former Prisoners of War Forced to Work as
Slave Laborers During World War II to Sue Japanese
Corporations for Mistreatment.......................... 329
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 329
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances............................... 329
Section 601--Increase in Basic Pay for Fiscal Year 2002.... 329
Section 602--Basic Pay Rate for Certain Reserve
Commissioned Officers with Prior Service as an Enlisted
Member or Warrant Officer.............................. 329
Section 603--Subsistence Allowances........................ 329
Section 604--Eligibility for Basic Allowance for Housing
While Between Permanent Duty Stations.................. 330
Section 605--Uniform Allowance for Officers................ 330
Section 606--Family Separation Allowance for Certain
Members Electing to Serve Unaccompanied Tour of Duty... 330
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays........... 330
Section 611--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonus and
Special Pay Authorities for Reserve Forces............. 330
Section 612--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonus and
Special Pay Authorities for Nurse Officer Candidates,
Registered Nurses, and Nurse Anesthetists.............. 331
Section 613--One-Year Extension of Other Bonuses and
Special Pays Authorities............................... 331
Section 614--Conforming Accession Bonus for Dental Officers
Authority with Authorities for Other Special Pay and
Bonuses................................................ 331
Section 615--Additional Type of Duty Resulting in
Eligibility for Hazardous Duty Incentive Pay........... 331
Section 616--Equal Treatment of Reservists Performing
Inactive-Duty Training for Receipt of Aviation Career
Incentive Pay.......................................... 331
Section 617--Secretarial Discretion in Prescribing
Submarine Duty Incentive Pay Rates..................... 331
Section 618--Imposition of Critical Wartime Skill
Requirement for Eligibility for Individual Ready
Reserve Bonus.......................................... 332
Section 619--Installment Payment Authority for 15-year
Career Status Bonus.................................... 332
Section 620--Accession Bonus for New Officers.............. 332
Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances............. 332
Section 631--Minimum Per Diem Rate for Travel and
Transportation Allowance for Travel Performed Upon a
Change of Permanent Station and Certain Other Travel... 332
Section 632--Payment or Reimbursement of Temporary
Subsistence Expenses................................... 332
Section 633--Increased Weight Allowance for Transportation
of Baggage and Household Effects for Junior Enlisted
Members................................................ 332
Section 634--Reimbursement of Members for Mandatory Pet
Quarantine Fees for Household Pets..................... 333
Section 635--Availability of Dislocation Allowance for
Married Member, Whose Spouse is a Member, Assigned to
Military Family Housing................................ 333
Section 636--Elimination of Prohibition on Receipt of
Dislocation Allowance by Members Ordered to First Duty
Station................................................ 333
Section 637--Partial Dislocation Allowance Authorized for
Housing Moves Ordered for Government Convenience....... 333
Section 638--Allowances for Travel Performed in Connection
with Members Taking Authorized Leave Between
Consecutive Overseas Tours............................. 333
Section 639--Funded Student Travel as Part of School-
Sponsored Exchange Programs............................ 334
Subtitle D--Retirement and Survivor Benefit Matters.......... 334
Section 641--Contingent Authority for Concurrent Receipt of
Military Retired Pay and Veterans' Disability
Compensation........................................... 334
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 334
Section 651--Funeral Honors Duty Allowance for Retired
Members................................................ 334
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS................................ 335
OVERVIEW....................................................... 335
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 336
Health Care Benefits for Members of the Reserve Components. 336
Military Health Care System Information Management......... 336
North Chicago Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center
and Naval hospital, Great Lakes, Illinois.............. 337
TRICARE in Illinois........................................ 337
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 338
Subtitle A--TRICARE Program.................................. 338
Section 701--Implementing Cost-Effective Payment Rates
Under the TRICARE Program.............................. 338
Section 702--Waiver of Nonavailability Statement or
Preauthorization Requirement........................... 338
Section 703--Improvements in Administration of the TRICARE
Program................................................ 338
Section 704--Sub-Acute and Long-Term Care Program Reform... 339
Section 705--Reimbursement of Travel Expenses of a Parent,
Guardian or Responsible Family Member of a Minor
Covered Beneficiary.................................... 339
Subtitle B--Other Matters.................................... 339
Section 711--Prohibition Against Requiring Military
Retirees to Receive Health Care Solely Through the
Department of Defense.................................. 339
Section 712--Trauma and Medical Care Pilot Program......... 339
Section 713--Enhancement of Medical Product Development.... 340
Section 714--Repeal of Obsolete Report Requirement......... 340
Section 715--Clarifications and Improvements Regarding the
Department of Defense Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health
Care Fund.............................................. 340
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND
RELATED MATTERS.............................................. 341
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 341
Extraordinary Contractual Actions............................ 341
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 341
Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management................ 341
Section 801--Acquisition Milestones........................ 341
Section 802--Acquisition Workforce Qualifications.......... 341
Section 803--Two-Year Extension of Program Applying
Simp342lified Procedures to Certain Commercial Items... 342
Section 804--Contracts for Services to Be Performed Outside
the United States...................................... 342
Section 805--Codification and Modification of ``Berry
Amendment'' Requirements............................... 342
Subtitle B--Erroneous Payments Recovery...................... 342
Section 811--Short Title................................... 342
Section 812--Identification of Errors Made by Executive
Agencies in Payments to Contractors and Recovery of
Amounts Erroneously Paid............................... 342
Section 813--Disposition of Recovered Funds................ 343
Section 814--Sources of Recovery Services.................. 343
Section 815--Management Improvement Programs............... 343
Section 816--Reports....................................... 343
Section 817--Relationship to Authority of Inspectors
General................................................ 343
Section 818--Privacy Protections........................... 343
Section 819--Definition.................................... 343
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANGEMENT....... 344
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 344
Regional Centers and China Center.......................... 344
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 344
Section 901--Further Reductions in Defense Acquisition and
Support Workforce...................................... 344
Section 902--Sense of Congress on Establishment of an
Office of Transformation in the Department of Defense.. 345
Section 903--Revised Joint Report On Establishment of
National Collaborative Information Analysis Capability. 346
Section 904--Elimination of Triennial Report by Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff on Roles and Missions of the
Armed Forces........................................... 346
Section 905--Repeal of Requirement for Semiannual Reports
Through March 2003 on Activities of Joint Requirements
Oversight Council...................................... 346
Section 906--Correction of References to Air Mobility
Command................................................ 346
Section 907--Organizational Alignment Change for Director
for Expeditionary Warfare.............................. 347
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS...................................... 348
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 348
Arms Control Implementation.................................. 348
Counter-Drug Activities...................................... 348
Overview................................................... 348
Items of Special Interest.................................. 349
Counter-drug tanker operations........................... 349
Operation Caper Focus.................................... 349
Peru support............................................. 349
Southwest border fence................................... 349
Tethered Aerostat Radar System........................... 349
OTHER MATTERS.................................................. 350
Classification of Foreign Military Training Reports........ 350
Counter-Drug Forward Operating Locations................... 350
Information Security Scholarship Program................... 350
Potential Reallocation of Radio Frequency Spectrum for
Third Generation Mobile Wireless Communications........ 350
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 352
Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................ 352
Section 1001--Transfer Authority........................... 352
Section 1002--Incorporation of Classified Annex............ 352
Section 1003--Limitation on Funds for Bosnia and Kosovo
Peacekeeping Operations for Fiscal Year 2002........... 352
Section 1004--Increase in Limitations on Administrative
Authority of the Navy to Settle Admiralty Claims....... 353
Subtitle B--Naval Vessels.................................... 353
Section 1011--Revision in Types of Excess Naval Vessels for
which Approval by Law Is Required for Disposal to
Foreign Nations........................................ 353
Subtitle C--Counter-Drug Activities.......................... 353
Section 1021--Extension of Reporting Requirement Regarding
Department of Defense Expenditures to Support Foreign
Counter-Drug Activities................................ 353
Section 1022--Authority to Transfer Tracker Aircraft
Currently Used by Armed Forces for Counter-Drug
Purposes............................................... 354
Section 1023--Authority to Transfer Tethered Aerostat Radar
System Currently Used by Armed Forces for Counter-Drug
Purposes............................................... 354
Subtitle D--Reports.......................................... 354
Section 1031--Requirement that Department of Defense
Reports to Congress be Accompanied by Electronic
Version................................................ 354
Section 1032--Report on Department of Defense Role in
Homeland Security Matters.............................. 354
Section 1033--Revision of Annual Report to Congress on
National Guard and Reserve Component Equipment......... 354
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 355
Section 1041--Department of Defense Gift Authorities....... 355
Section 1042--Termination of Referendum Requirement
Regarding Continuation of Military Training on Island
of Vieques, Puerto Rico, and Imposition of Additional
conditions on closure of Live-Fire Training Range...... 355
Section 1043--Repeal of Limitation on Reductions in
Peacekeeper ICBM Missiles.............................. 355
Section 1044--Sense of Congress on the Importance of the
Kwajalein Missile Range/Ronald Reagan Defense
Initiative Test Site at Kwajalein Atoll................ 355
Section 1045--Transfer of Vietnam Era F-4 Aircraft to
Nonprofit Museum....................................... 356
Section 1046--Bomber Force Structure....................... 356
Section 1047--Technical and Clerical Amendments............ 356
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL..................................... 357
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 357
Section 1101--Undergraduate Training Program for Employees
of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency............. 357
Section 1102--Pilot Program for Payment of Retraining
Expenses............................................... 357
Section 1103--Payment of Expenses to Obtain Professional
Credentials............................................ 357
Section 1104--Retirement Portability Elections for Certain
Department of Defense and Coast Guard Employees........ 357
Section 1105--Removal of Requirement that Granting Civil
Service Compensatory Time be Based on Amount of
Irregular or Occasional Overtime Work.................. 357
Section 1106--Applicability of Certain Laws to Certain
Individuals Assigned to Work in the Federal Government. 358
Section 1107--Limitation on Premium Pay.................... 358
Section 1108--Use of Common Occupational and Health
Standards as a Basis for Differential Payments Made as
a Consequence of Exposure to Asbestos.................. 358
Section 1109--Authority for Designated Civilian Employees
Abroad to Act as a Notary.............................. 358
Section 1110--``Monroney Amendment'' Restored to its Prior
Form................................................... 358
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS..................... 359
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 359
Section 1201--Clarification of Authority to Furnish Nuclear
Test Monitoring Equipment to Foreign Governments....... 359
Section 1202--Acquisition of Logistical Support for
Security Forces........................................ 359
Section 1203--Report on the Sale and Transfer of Military
Hardware, Expertise, and Technology from States of the
Former Soviet Union to the People's Republic of China.. 360
Section 1204--Limitation on Funding for Joint Data Exchange
Center................................................. 360
Section 1205--Extension of Authority to Provide Assistance
Under Weapons of Mass Destruction Act for Support of
United Nations-Sponsored Efforts to Inspect and Monitor
Iraqi Weapons Activities............................... 360
Section 1206--Repeal of Requirement for Reporting to
Congress on Military Deployments to Haiti.............. 361
Section 1207--Report by Comptroller General on Provision of
Defense Articles, Services, and Military Education and
Training to Foreign Countries and International
Organizations.......................................... 361
Section 1208--Limitation on Number of Military Personnel in
Colombia............................................... 361
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE
FORMER SOVIET UNION.......................................... 362
OVERVIEW....................................................... 362
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 364
Arms Elimination Projects in Russia.......................... 364
Arms Elimination Projects in Ukraine......................... 365
Biological Weapons Proliferation Prevention in Russia........ 365
Chemical Weapons Destruction in Russia....................... 365
Defense and Military Contacts................................ 367
Elimination of Plutonium Production in Russia................ 367
Fissile Material Processing and Packaging.................... 368
Fissile Material Storage Facility............................ 368
Nuclear Weapons Storage Security in Russia................... 368
Nuclear Weapons Transportation Security...................... 368
Other Assessments and Administrative Support................. 368
Weapons of Mass Destruction Infrastructure Elimination in
Kazakhstan............................................... 369
Weapons of Mass Destruction Infrastructure Elimination in
Ukraine.................................................. 369
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 369
Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction
Programs and Funds..................................... 369
Section 1302--Funding Allocations.......................... 369
Section 1303--Prohibition Against Use of Funds Until
Submission of Reports.................................. 369
Section 1304--Report on Use of Revenue Generated by
Activities Carried Out Under Cooperative Threat
Reduction Programs..................................... 370
Section 1305--Prohibition Against Use of Funds for Second
Wing of Fissile Material Storage Facility.............. 370
Section 1306--Prohibition on Use of Funds for Construction
or Refurbishment of Fossil Fuel Energy Plants.......... 370
Section 1307--Reports on Activities and Assistance Under
Cooperative Threat Reduction Programs.................. 370
Section 1308--Report on Responsibility for Carrying Out
Cooperative Threat Reduction Programs.................. 370
Section 1309--Chemical Weapons Destruction................. 370
TITLE XIV--DEFENSE SPACE REORGANIZATION.......................... 371
OVERVIEW....................................................... 371
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 371
Section 1401--Short Title.................................. 371
Section 1402--Authority to Establish Position of Under
Secretary of Defense for Space, Intelligence, and
Information............................................ 371
Section 1403--Authority to Designate Under Secretary of the
Air Force as Acquisition Executive for Space of the
Department of Defense.................................. 371
Section 1404--Major Force Program Category for Space
Programs............................................... 371
Section 1405--Comptroller General Assessment of
Implementation of Recommendations of Space Commission.. 371
Section 1406--Commander of Air Force Space Command......... 372
Section 1407--Authority to Establish Separate Career Field
in the Air Force for Space............................. 372
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS................. 373
PURPOSE........................................................ 373
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION OVERVIEW................................. 373
TITLE XXI--ARMY.................................................. 396
SUMMARY........................................................ 396
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 396
Planning and Design.......................................... 396
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 396
Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects................................... 396
Section 2102--Family Housing............................... 396
Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 396
Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army........ 396
Section 2105--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
Certain Fiscal Year 2001 Project....................... 396
TITLE XXII--NAVY................................................. 398
SUMMARY........................................................ 398
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 398
Improvements to Military Family Housing...................... 398
Planning and Design.......................................... 398
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 398
Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects................................... 398
Section 2202--Family Housing............................... 398
Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 398
Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy........ 399
Section 2205--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal
Year 2000 Project...................................... 399
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE........................................... 400
SUMMARY........................................................ 400
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 400
Improvements to Military Family Housing...................... 400
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 400
Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects................................... 400
Section 2302--Family Housing............................... 400
Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 400
Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force... 400
Section 2305--Modification of Authority to Carry Out
Certain Fiscal Year 2001 Project....................... 401
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES..................................... 402
SUMMARY........................................................ 402
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 402
Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects.............................. 402
Section 2402--Energy Conservation Project.................. 402
Section 2403--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense
Agencies............................................... 402
Section 2404--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal
Year 2001 Project...................................... 402
Section 2405--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal
Year 2000 Project...................................... 402
Section 2406--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal
Year 1999 Project...................................... 403
Section 2407--Modification of Authority To Carry Out Fiscal
Year 1995 Project...................................... 403
Section 2408--Prohibition on Expenditures to Develop
Forward Operating Location on Aruba for United States
Southern Command Counter-Drug Detection and Monitoring
Flights................................................ 403
TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION INFRASTRUCTURE..... 404
SUMMARY........................................................ 404
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 404
Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects................................... 404
Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO........ 404
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES.................. 405
SUMMARY........................................................ 405
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 405
Planning and Design, Air National Guard...................... 405
Unspecified Minor Construction, Army National Guard.......... 405
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 405
Section 2601--Authorized Guard and Reserve Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects.............................. 405
TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS.......... 406
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 406
Section 2701--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts
Required to be Specified by Law........................ 406
Section 2702--Extensions of Authorizations of Certain
Fiscal Year 1999 Projects.............................. 406
Section 2703--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
Year 1998 Projects..................................... 406
Section 2704--Effective Date............................... 406
TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS................................. 407
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 407
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family
Housing Changes.......................................... 407
Section 2801--Increase in Certain Unspecified Minor
Military Construction Project Thresholds............... 407
Section 2802--Exclusion of Unforeseen Environmental Hazard
Remediation From Limitation on Authorized Cost
Variations............................................. 407
Section 2803--Repeal of Annual Reporting Requirement on
Military Construction and Military Family Housing
Activities............................................. 407
Section 2804--Permanent Authorization for Alternative
Authority for Acquisition and Improvement of Military
Housing................................................ 407
Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration...... 407
Section 2811--Use of Military Installations for Certain
Recreational Activities................................ 407
Section 2812--Base Efficiency Project at Brooks Air Force
Base, Texas............................................ 408
Subtitle C--Defense Base Closure and Realignment............. 408
Section 2821--Lease Back of Base Closure Property.......... 408
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances Generally....................... 408
Part I--Army Conveyances................................... 408
Section 2831--Transfer of Jurisdiction, Rock Island
Arsenal, Illinois...................................... 408
Section 2832--Modification of Land Conveyance, Fort Dix,
New Jersey............................................. 408
Section 2833--Lease Authority, Fort Derussy, Hawaii........ 408
Section 2834--Land Exchange and Consolidation, Fort Lewis,
Washington............................................. 409
Section 2835--Land Conveyance, Whittier-Anchorage Pipeline
Tank Farm, Anchorage, Alaska........................... 409
Part II--Navy Conveyances.................................. 409
Section 2841--Transfer of Jurisdiction, Centerville Beach
Naval Station, Humboldt County, California............. 409
Section 2842--Land Conveyance, Naval Weapons Industrial
Reserve Plant, Toledo, Ohio............................ 409
Section 2843--Modification of Authority for Conveyance of
Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station, Cutler,
Maine.................................................. 410
Section 2844--Modification of Land Conveyance, Former
United States Marine Corps Air Station, Eagle Mountain,
Texas.................................................. 410
Section 2845--Land Transfer and Conveyance, Naval Security
Group Activity, Winter Harbor, Maine................... 410
Part III--Air Force Conveyances............................ 410
Section 2851--Water Rights Conveyance, Andersen Air Force
Base, Guam............................................. 410
Section 2852--Reexamination of Land Conveyance, Lowry Air
Force Base, Colorado................................... 411
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 411
Section 2861--Transfer of Jurisdiction for Development of
Armed Forces Recreational Facility, Park City, Utah.... 411
Section 2862--Selection of Site for United States Air Force
Memorial and Related Land Transfers for the Improvement
of Arlington Cemetery, Virginia........................ 411
Section 2863--Management of the Presidio of San Francisco.. 412
Section 2864--Effect of Limitation on Construction of Roads
or Highways, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton,
California............................................. 412
Section 2865--Establishment of World War II Memorial at
Additional Location on Guam............................ 413
TITLE XXIX--FORT IRWIN MILITARY LAND WITHDRAWAL.................. 415
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 415
Section 2901--Short Title.................................. 415
Section 2902--Withdrawal and Reservation of Lands for
National Training Center............................... 415
Section 2903--Map and Legal Description.................... 415
Section 2904--Management of Withdrawn and Reserved Lands... 415
Section 2905--Water Rights................................. 415
Section 2906--Environmental Compliance and Environmental
Response Requirements.................................. 415
Section 2907--West Mojave Coordinated Management Plan...... 415
Section 2908--Release of Wilderness Study Areas............ 415
Section 2909--Training Activity Separation From Utility
Corridors.............................................. 415
Section 2910--Duration of Withdrawal and Reservation....... 415
Section 2911--Extension of Initial Withdrawal and
Reservation............................................ 415
Section 2912--Termination and Relinquishment............... 416
Section 2913--Delegation of Authority...................... 416
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATION
AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS..................................... 417
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS...... 417
OVERVIEW....................................................... 417
Environmental and Other Defense Activities................... 435
Overview................................................... 435
Items of Special Interest.................................. 435
Defense Environmental Management Privatization........... 435
Hanford Site Operations, Richland, Washington............ 435
Plutonium Stabilization and Packaging.................... 436
Post 2006 Completion..................................... 436
National Nuclear Security Administration..................... 436
Overview................................................... 436
Items of Special Interest.................................. 436
Budget Structure of the National Nuclear Security
Administration....................................... 436
Computer Security........................................ 438
Critical Weapons Components.............................. 438
Defense Nuclear Counterintelligence Budget............... 438
Directed Stockpile Work.................................. 438
Facilities and Infrastructure............................ 439
International Nuclear Safety............................. 439
Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention and the Nuclear
Cities Initiative.................................... 440
National Ignition Facility............................... 440
National Nuclear Security Administration's Planning,
Programming, and Budgeting System.................... 441
National Nuclear Security Administration's Reorganization
Plan................................................. 441
Naval Reactors Program................................... 442
Recruitment and Retention................................ 442
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 442
Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations........ 442
Section 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration..... 442
Section 3102--Defense Environmental Restoration and Waste
Management............................................. 443
Section 3103--Other Defense Activities..................... 443
Section 3104--Defense Environmental Management
Privatization.......................................... 443
Section 3105--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal............... 443
Subtitle B--Recurring General Provisions..................... 443
Section 3121--Reprogramming................................ 443
Section 3122--Limits on General Plant Projects............. 443
Section 3123--Limits on Construction Projects.............. 443
Section 3124--Fund Transfer Authority...................... 443
Section 3125--Authority for Conceptual and Construction
Design................................................. 444
Section 3126--Authority for Emergency Planning, Design and
Construction Activities................................ 444
Section 3127--Funds Available for All National Security
Programs of the Department of Energy................... 444
Section 3128--Availability of Funds........................ 444
Section 3129--Transfers of Defense Environmental Management
Funds at Field Offices of the Department of Energy..... 444
Section 3130--Transfers of Weapons Activities Funds at
National Security Laboratories and Nuclear Weapons
Production Facilities.................................. 444
Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and
Limitations.............................................. 445
Section 3131--Termination Date of Office of River
Protection, Richland, Washington....................... 445
Section 3132--Organizational Modifications for National
Nuclear Security Administration........................ 445
Section 3133--Consolidation of Nuclear Cities Initiative
Program with Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention
Program................................................ 445
Section 3134--Disposition of Surplus Plutonium at Savannah
River Site, Aiken, South Carolina...................... 445
Section 3135--Support for Public Education in the Vicinity
of Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico.......... 446
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD............. 447
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 447
Section 3201--Authorization................................ 447
TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE......................... 448
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 448
Section 3301--Definitions.................................. 448
Section 3302--Authorized Uses of Stockpile Funds........... 448
Section 3303--Disposal of Excess Materials from the
National Defense Stockpile............................. 448
Section 3304--Expedited Implementation of Authority to
Dispose of Cobalt From National Defense Stockpile...... 448
TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES............................ 449
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 449
Section 3401--Authorization of Appropriations.............. 449
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION.............................. 450
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 450
Merchant Marine Academy.................................... 450
Ship Scrapping............................................. 450
Title XI Loan Guarantee Program............................ 451
Transfer of the Maritime Security Program to the Department
of Defense............................................. 451
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 451
Section 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for Fiscal
Year 2002.............................................. 451
Section 3502--Define ``War Risks'' to Vessels to Include
Confiscation, Expropriation, Nationalization, and
Deprivation of the Vessels............................. 451
Section 3503--Holding Obligor's Cash as Collateral Under
Title XI of Merchant Marine Act, 1936.................. 452
Departmental Data................................................ 453
Department of Defense Authorization Request.................... 453
Military Construction Authorization Request.................... 453
Committee Position............................................... 454
Communications From Other Committees............................. 454
Fiscal Data...................................................... 460
Congressional Budget Office Estimate........................... 460
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate...................... 460
Committee Cost Estimate........................................ 483
Oversight Findings............................................... 483
General Performance Goals and Objectives......................... 484
Constitutional Authority Statement............................... 485
Statement of Federal Mandates.................................... 485
Roll Call Votes.................................................. 485
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 493
Additional and Dissenting Views.................................. 706
Additional views of Lane Evans................................. 708
Additional views of Tom Allen.................................. 710
Additional views of Ike Skelton, John Spratt, Lane Evans,
Silvestre Reyes, Tom Allen, John B. Larson, Loretta Sanchez,
James R. Langevin, Rick Larsen, Ellen O. Tauscher, Robert E.
Andrews, Cynthia A. McKinney, Adam Smith, Jim Turner, Rod R.
Blagojevich, Susan A. Davis, Solomon P. Ortiz, James H.
Maloney, Marty Meehan, Vic Snyder, Robert A. Brady, Mike
Thompson, Neil Abercrombie, Ciro D. Rodriguez, Baron P. Hill. 706
Dissenting Views of Cynthia A. McKinney........................ 713
107th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 107-194
======================================================================
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002
_______
September 4, 2001.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Stump, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 2586]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 2586) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year
2002 for military activities of the Department of Defense, to
prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2002,
and for other purposes, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill
as amended do pass.
The amendments are as follows:
The amendment strikes all after the enacting clause of the
bill and inserts a new text which appears in italic type in the
reported bill.
The title of the bill is amended to reflect the amendment
to the text of the bill.
EXPLANATION OF THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a
substitute during the consideration of H.R. 2586. The title of
the bill is amended to reflect the amendment to the text of the
bill. The remainder of the report discusses the bill, as
amended.
PURPOSE
The bill would--(1) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2002 for procurement and for research, development, test
and evaluation (RDT&E); (2) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2002 for operation and maintenance (O&M) and for working
capital funds; (3) Authorize for fiscal year 2002: (a) the
personnel strength for each active duty component of the
military departments; (b) the personnel strength for the
Selected Reserve for each reserve component of the armed
forces; (c) the military training student loads for each of the
active and reserve components of the military departments; (4)
Modify various elements of compensation for military personnel
and impose certain requirements and limitations on personnel
actions in the defense establishment; (5) Authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2002 for military construction
and family housing; (6) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2002 for the Department of Energy national security
programs; (7) Modify provisions related to the National Defense
Stockpile; and (8) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year
2002 for the Maritime Administration.
RELATIONSHIP OF AUTHORIZATION TO APPROPRIATIONS
The bill does not generally provide budget authority. The
bill authorizes appropriations. Subsequent appropriation acts
provide budget authority. The bill addresses the following
categories in the Department of Defense budget: procurement;
research, development, test and evaluation; operation and
maintenance; working capital funds, military personnel; and
military construction and family housing. The bill also
addresses Department of Energy National Security Programs and
the Maritime Administration.
Active duty and reserve personnel strengths authorized in
this bill and legislation affecting compensation for military
personnel determine the remaining appropriation requirements of
the Department of Defense. However, this bill does not provide
authorization of specific dollar amounts for personnel.
SUMMARY OF AUTHORIZATION IN THE BILL
The President requested budget authority of $343.3 billion
for the national defense budget function for fiscal year 2002.
Of this amount, the President requested $328.0 billion for the
Department of Defense (including $10.0 billion for military
construction and family housing) and $13.8 billion for
Department of Energy national security programs and the Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.
The committee recommends an overall level of $343.2 billion
in budget authority. This amount is consistent with the
discretionary defense spending limitations imposed by the
Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and it represents an increase of
approximately $33.3 billion from the amount authorized for
appropriation by the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398).
SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATIONS
The following table provides a summary of the amounts
requested and that would be authorized for appropriation in the
bill (in the column labeled ``Budget Authority Implication of
Committee Recommendation'') and the committee's estimate of how
the committee's recommendations relate to the budget totals for
the national defense function. For purposes of estimating the
budget authority implications of committee action, the table
reflects the numbers contained in the President's budget for
proposals not in the committee's legislative jurisdiction.
RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL
To ``provide for the common defense'' is one of the most
important responsibilities vested in the federal government.
Article I, section 8, of the Constitution grants Congress the
power ``to raise and support armies'' and ``to provide and
maintain a navy,'' in order to provide for the common defense.
It is a solemn responsibility Congress must exercise with
diligence, wisdom, and foresight.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002
continues the process of rebuilding America's defenses and
restoring the health of the military. The policies, programs,
and priorities it supports are intended to ensure continued
U.S. military preeminence for decades to come and to provide
America's men and women in uniform with the training and tools
necessary to deal successfully with the security challenges of
the future.
The committee bill would authorize $343.3 billion for
defense during fiscal year 2002--matching the President's
amended budget request and marking the most significant
increase to the defense budget since fiscal year 1986.
Restoring the health of America's military will take years of
work. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, in testimony before
the committee on June 28, 2001, noted that a one year increase
in spending ``does not get us well. The underinvestment went on
far too long, the gap is too great, and there is no way it can
be fixed in a year or, in my view, even in six.''
In the committee's view, significant increases in defense
spending are long overdue. The committee is pleased with the
new Administration's recognition that defense spending in the
post-Cold War era has fallen too far too fast and applauds the
Administration's commitment to reverse this trend. The U.S.
military for too long has been living off the defense
investments made in the 1980s. Military equipment is being
utilized beyond its service life, weapons systems are becoming
costlier to maintain, and military readiness has declined
virtually across the board. The U.S. military has been called
on to do more with less, deploying with increasing frequency
around the globe. Morale and quality of life have suffered.
This is the unfortunate legacy of years of underfunding.
This year, the challenge facing the Administration and
Congress is to ensure that the most immediate modernization,
readiness, and personnel needs are met, while preparing to
transition the armed forces into a more capable force prepared
to meet emerging threats.
The Strategic Defense Review and U.S. National Military Strategy
The committee supports the efforts of the Department of
Defense (DOD) to assess defense requirements in light of the
potential and emerging threats to U.S. interests expected to
materialize over the next decade and beyond. For the past
several months, the Department of Defense has been conducting
an extensive and multifaceted review of U.S. national military
strategy. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld formed more than
a dozen Task Forces to review the assumptions and strategic
underpinnings of U.S. defense policy. Separate Task Forces were
established on Strategy, Transformation, Acquisition Reform,
Quality of Life, Nuclear Forces, Conventional Forces,
Intelligence and Space, National Missile Defense, and a variety
of other issues. The underlying premise of these reviews was
that resources and force levels should flow from strategy, not
the other way around.
The results of the DOD strategy review will be incorporated
into the next Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), scheduled to be
completed by September 30, 2001. The results of the QDR will,
in turn, be factored into the Administration's defense budget
request for fiscal year 2003. The committee expects that the
2001 QDR will be strategy-based and not budget-driven. In the
meantime, U.S. military strategy continues to be guided by the
tenets outlined in the 1997 QDR. The 1997 QDR, building upon
its predecessor, the 1993 Bottom-Up Review, postulated that the
sizing and composition of U.S. military forces should be based
on the requirement to fight two nearly simultaneous major
theater wars. This force-sizing construct has been called into
question by the Administration.
The Administration has indicated that the two major theater
war construct may need to be replaced with a different force
sizing metric. Although Secretary Rumsfeld has cautioned that
no final decision has been made, he has also noted that DOD is
``looking carefully at an alternative.'' That alternative would
be to replace the traditional ``threat-based'' military
strategy with one that is ``capability-based'' and designed to
deal with the kinds of asymmetric threats that might emerge in
the future.
The committee believes that the two major theater war
standard has served as a useful planning tool and is concerned
that its abandonment could be viewed as an attempt to scale
back U.S. military strategy to conform to budgetary realities.
Such an approach would be ill-advised. Jettisoning the two
major theater war construct without an effective alternative
would lead to acceptance of a greater than prudent level of
risk. Indeed, Secretary Rumsfeld has stated that ``you don't
tear down what is unless you have something better....'' The
committee expects to work closely with the Administration in
the coming year to ensure that any changes to U.S. military
strategy are based on sound strategic principles and do not
result in increased risk to U.S. national security.
Although Department of Defense officials have emphasized
the need for the U.S. armed forces to transform themselves into
a more capable force able to successfully confront the more
difficult challenges in the future, the Department's budget
request for fiscal year 2002 is not a ``transformation''
budget. At minimum, it properly addresses many of the
deficiencies that plague existing forces without laying the
groundwork for significant structural changes. In his testimony
before the committee on June 28, 2001, Secretary of Defense
Rumsfeld stated that even a budget of nearly $350 million
``would just be holding where we are'' and ``would not make a
significant contribution to transformation.''
As the Department of Defense wrestles with options for
transforming the U.S. military in the long-term, the
committee's approach this year has been guided by an effort to
develop a defense budget that is more responsive to the post-
Cold War threats faced by the United States and commensurate
with America's global responsibilities--and, in so doing, to
ensure that U.S. forces can successfully execute their missions
at the lowest possible level of risk.
The Administration's Defense Budget Request
The President's defense budget request for fiscal year 2002
reflects the most significant real increase in defense funding
since the mid-1980s. Nevertheless, despite the increases
proposed by the Administration this year, serious problems
continue to exist in readiness, modernization, and quality of
life. The previous Administration significantly underfunded the
defense budget and overcommitted U.S. military forces to a
variety of peacekeeping andhumanitarian missions. The result
was a high operating tempo, degraded morale, aging equipment, reduced
training, and decaying infrastructure. General Henry Shelton, Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified before the committee on June
28, 2001, that since 1995 there has been ``a 133 percent increase in
the number of military personnel committed to joint operations. These
are real-world events, not exercises, and we are doing it with nine
percent fewer people.''
Although the fiscal year 2002 defense budget request
reflects nearly a $33 billion increase over the fiscal year
2001 level, significant shortfalls remain unaddressed. In
particular, the service chiefs have identified more than $32
billion in critical unfunded requirements in fiscal year 2002,
roughly twice the amount they identified last year. These
shortfalls were not addressed in the fiscal year 2001
supplemental appropriations bill recently passed by the
Congress and signed by the President. Moreover, the Army is the
smallest it has been since 1950, the Navy has shrunk to 317
ships--more than 40 percent fewer than a decade ago and the
smallest fleet since 1933, and the average age of the Air
Force's aircraft is 22 years.
With this in mind, the committee has sought to address in
this year's budget the most serious aspects of the shortfalls
in readiness, modernization, and quality of life.
Restoring the Bond of Trust with Our Men and Women in Uniform
Ensuring a decent quality of life for military personnel
and their families remains one of the most important national
defense priorities. America's military is only as good as the
people who serve in it. Recruiting and retaining top-notch
personnel remains vital to ensuring that the U.S. armed forces
are the best in the world.
With the efforts of Congress over the past six years, the
quality of living for U.S. military personnel and their
families has improved, and recruiting and retention trends have
improved. Nevertheless, meeting the challenge of recruiting and
retaining sufficient numbers of high quality personnel remains
difficult, and the troublesome trend of the continued departure
of many of the best and brightest mid-career enlisted and
officer personnel continues.
Continuing its effort to improve quality of life and ensure
adequate military pay and bonuses, the committee recommends the
largest single-year increase in military personnel funding
since 1985--a total increase of $6.9 billion over the fiscal
year 2001 level. The committee bill also would fund the largest
military pay raise since 1982, thereby fully supporting the
President's proposal to add $1.0 billion to military pay. This
pay raise provides five to six percent across-the-board pay
raises for all military personnel, as well as targeted pay
increases for mid-career service members that range above 10
percent. In addition, the bill would boost military special pay
and enhance incentives to join the Reserve Officers Training
Corps (ROTC). Moreover, the committee bill would improve the
recruiting and retention efforts of the services and would
provide for enlistment and re-enlistment bonuses. The committee
bill also contains the increases for military housing contained
in the budget request. Further, the committee bill recommends
an additional effort: innovative programs to reduce the
significant out-of-pocket costs experienced by military
personnel as a result of permanent change of station moves.
Importantly, the committee bill satisfies $95 million of the
service chiefs' unfunded personnel requirements.
The committee bill also would increase funding for defense
medical programs of over $6 billion. With this authorization,
the committee bill would provide the funding needed this coming
fiscal year to implement fully the new TRICARE For Life program
enacted last year.
These actions follow up on the efforts of Congress last
year to reform the military health care system and compensation
practices. The quality of life improvements contained in the
committee bill this year represent the most significant step
toward making a real improvement in military quality of life in
nearly two decades. However, this is just one step forward, and
real progress in this area will require additional actions over
the next several years.
Enhancing Readiness
Restoring military readiness remains a key priority for the
committee, as U.S. military readiness is essential to securing
America's future as the world's sole superpower. Over the past
six years, Congress has led the effort to identify and reverse
the declining state of military readiness. Today, there is
bipartisan agreement that U.S. military readiness has declined
due to an increased pace of operations combined with inadequate
funding and escalating maintenance costs of aging equipment.
The committee bill would make real progress toward reversing
this decline by providing significant increases to key
operations, maintenance, and training accounts.
Despite the increases in the Administration's fiscal year
2002 defense budget request, readiness remains a serious
concern. Existing readiness problems include a shortage of
spare parts, aging equipment, decaying infrastructure, growing
equipment and facilities' backlogs, insufficient training, and
personnel shortages. In the past, essential modernization was
deferred to provide for near-term readiness requirements. In
addition, maintaining the readiness of ``first-to-fight''
forces has led to the diversion of resources from other
operational support units, including strategic airlift,
intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, combat service
support units, and training bases. As General Henry Shelton,
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified before the
committee on June 28, 2001, ``The bottom line is, I do not
believe that we will be able to sustain our long-term readiness
under these conditions.''
Secretary of the Army, Thomas White, testifying before the
committee on July 18, 2001, stated, ``After a decade of
underfunding and overworking our force, we are clearly in a
hole, and getting out will require a significant investment.''
Secretary of the Air Force James Roche and Air Force Chief of
Staff General Michael Ryan, testified before the committee on
July 11, 2001, that ``overall Air Force readiness is lower than
any time since June 1987.'' The Chief of Naval Operations,
Admiral Vern Clark, testified on July 12, 2001, ``The challenge
of sustaining our current readiness while investing in key
future capabilities remains a very difficult balancing act. . .
. [T]his is an area where we do not meet the goals and the
targets that we need in this budget.'' Despite this challenge,
Admiral Clark stated, ``I believe this is the best readiness
budget that we have seen in at least a decade.''
The committee bill seeks to improve both the near-term and
long-term readiness of U.S. military forces by addressing
critical readiness priorities. Specifically, the committee bill
would increase key readiness accounts by $7.5 billion above the
fiscal year 2001 level. Unfortunately, the decision to halt
combined arms naval training on the island of Vieques, Puerto
Rico, beginning in 2003 will negatively impact the readiness of
the armed forces. The committee billwould ensure that live-fire
training could continue on the island until such time as an alternative
site is found that would provide for at least an equivalent level of
training.
Modernizing and Equipping the Force of the Future
Despite the end of the Cold War, the U.S. military has not
fully adapted to meet the new challenges of the post-Cold War
environment. For the United States to ensure that U.S. service
members retain the technological edge on the battlefields of
tomorrow--thereby saving lives and winning wars--the U.S.
military must ensure that it has the weapons, equipment, and
strategies to successfully meet future challenges.
While the exact path for transforming the military to meet
these future challenges is not yet clear, modernizing the force
with new technologies and advanced capabilities to fight and
win future conflicts is vital. Until this path is clear, the
transformation effort must take place on two fronts--
maintaining the current force through a steady procurement
program and developing revolutionary technologies through an
aggressive research and development program.
The committee notes that today's military is continuing to
live off the investment in equipment made decades ago. In his
testimony before the committee on June 28, 2001, Secretary
Rumsfeld stated, ``We have been living off the substantial
investments of the 1970s and 1980s.''
Unfortunately, the Administration's request for procurement
programs was the weakest aspect in an otherwise strong defense
budget. Secretary White, in testimony before the committee on
July 18, 2001, stated that ``there will continue to be
shortfalls in a number of critical areas such as modernization
and recapitalization of our current force.'' Secretary of the
Navy, Gordon England, testifying on July 12, 2001, stated,
``What this increase does not do, however, is adequately
address our infrastructure and procurement shortfalls.''
In effect, the fiscal year 2002 amended defense budget
request for procurement would place modernization efforts on
hold, pending completion of DOD's strategic review. Instead,
the committee bill would provide $62 billion ($442.1 million
more than the President's request) to procure weapons,
ammunition, and equipment, while careful reprioritization of
the budget enabled the committee to meet $253.4 million of the
service chiefs' unfunded requirements. The resulting
procurement budget will slow the erosion of the force while
laying the foundation for transformation into the future
military force.
By contrast, the Administration's research and development
(R&D) budget represents the first significant increase in the
past decade and the first time in six years that the requested
amount for R&D was greater than the amount provided by Congress
in the previous year. This significant level of support for R&D
programs will likely ensure rapid progress in developing
innovative technologies, deploying ballistic missile defenses,
and testing and evaluating transformation programs. Therefore,
the committee bill would provide $47.7 billion ($228.5 million
more than the President's request and $6.7 billion more than
the fiscal year 2001 level) for research and development
programs, including funds for ballistic missile defense
programs.
Defending Americans From Ballistic Missile Threats
Today, Americans at home and abroad are within striking
range of thousands of ballistic missile warheads. The risk of
accidental or unauthorized launch of ballistic missiles remains
real, and the proliferation of missile technology has allowed
nations like North Korea to develop and test ballistic missiles
capable of reaching U.S. soil.
Furthermore, American military forces and allies around the
world have no effective defense against the ballistic missile
threat. Over 100,000 U.S. troops in South Korea and Japan live
under the threat of ballistic missile attack, as do American
forward-based air and naval forces in Northeast Asia, the
Mediterranean, and the Persian Gulf. Even vital U.S. allies
including South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan face known ballistic
missile threats and have no effective defense.
Unfortunately, ballistic missiles and weapons of mass
destruction technology are proliferating faster than the U.S.
ability to defend against them. Secretary Rumsfeld, in
testimony before the committee on June 28, 2001, warned against
underestimating the threat posed by ballistic missiles and the
weapons they carry. ``We would be making a terrible mistake to
not be attentive to the spread of weapons of mass destruction
and the ability to deliver them,'' he stated. Deputy Secretary
of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, testifying before the committee on
July 19, 2001, explained the reason other states seek ballistic
missile capabilities: ``To those who wonder why so many of the
regimes hostile to the United States--many of them desperately
poor--are investing such enormous sums of money to acquire
ballistic missiles, I suggest this possible answer: They know
we don't have any defenses.''
Ten years after 28 U.S. service personnel lost their lives
as a result of a single Iraqi Scud missile attack during the
Persian Gulf War, Americans remain vulnerable to ballistic
missile threats. For this reason, the committee supports
efforts to accelerate research, development, and deployment of
effective ballistic missile defenses.
The committee believes that America's total vulnerability
to ballistic missiles must end. Unfortunately, missile defense
programs have never received the level of support and funding
necessary to support such an important mission. As a result,
the committee bill would support the Administration's request
for a significant increase in funding for ballistic missile
defense programs as the first step toward the day when all
Americans are protected against ballistic missile attack. The
committee endorses the President's approach to ballistic
missile defense, and is encouraged that the proposed missile
defense program includes plans for a layered defense system and
realistic testing, and explores a full range of technologies.
As such, the committee endorses the Administration's missile
defense program, with modest adjustments, and recommends $8.2
billion, $2.9 billion more than the fiscal year 2001 level, for
the continued development of ballistic missile defenses.
The Committee Bill: A Significant Step Forward on the Path Toward
Ensuring U.S. National Security
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002
represents a significant step forward in the committee's
efforts to ensure that U.S. national security is protected and
that the U.S. armed forces are second-to-none. It contains
significant improvements in personnel, readiness, and
modernization designed to keep America's military on the
cutting edge of technology and able to defeat any potential
military challenge. This bill accomplishes much, but much more
remains to be done.
Modernizing and maintaining today's military forces--and
transforming them to meet future challenges--will require a
serious and sustained commitment of resources. The committee
understands that in the current prolonged period of peace,
additional investments in national defense are seen by some as
unnecessary. However, the cost of keeping the peace is always
less than the cost of failing to do so. Clearly, defense
increases are not only affordable but also essential if the
United States is to remain a superpower able to promote and
protect its global interests.
HEARINGS
Committee consideration of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 results from hearings
that began on March 22, 2001 and that were completed on July
18, 2001. The full committee conducted 7 sessions. In addition,
a total of 20 sessions were conducted by five different
subcommittees and two panels of the committee on various titles
of the bill.
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
OVERVIEW
The committee did not receive the Administration's
amendment to its February 2001 ``Budget Blueprint'' for the
Department of Defense (DOD) until the end of June. During this
period, Secretary Rumsfeld initiated over twenty separate
review panels to examine various topics, ranging from overall
defense strategy to the size and shape of conventional forces.
The recommendations of these panels are still being studied and
are expected to be considered during the ongoing Quadrennial
Defense Review (QDR), which is to be submitted to Congress
September 30th. Consequently, no decisions were made with
regard to major weapons systems in the fiscal year 2002 amended
budget. Although the Administration has spoken of the need to
transform the military to deal with new challenges of the 21st
century, the transformation process is expected to be a lengthy
one that cannot be implemented with a single fiscal year's
budget. The Secretary's description of the fiscal year 2002
procurement request concedes that there would be less real
transformation-related change from fiscal year 2001 programs
than previously thought, due to the overwhelming need to, as he
put it, ``repair potholes.''
The fiscal year 2002 DOD procurement request of $61.6
billion is notably the weakest link in an otherwise strong
defense budget. Many analysts, as well as prior DOD senior
officials, have argued that an additional $20.0 to $30.0
billion above this amount is necessary annually to ensure
military capabilities are adequately modernized.
The committee recommends a net increase of $442.1 million
to the Department's procurement request, which includes an add
of almost $525.0 million. While this amount is modest by
comparison to committee actions over the past several years,
it, nevertheless, represents the seventh consecutive year that
the committee has provided an increase to the procurement
accounts.
Aircraft Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request contained $1,925.5 million for Aircraft
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 2002. The committee recommends
authorization of $1,987.5 million for fiscal year 2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
AH-64 modifications
The budget request contained $38.5 million for AH-64
modifications but included no funds to continue procurement of
the oil debris detection system (ODDS) or the vibration
management enhancement program (VMEP).
The ODDS is an on-board detection system that alerts
aircrews to the presence of metal chips in engines and
propeller gear boxes, which allows flights to be terminated
prior to catastrophic failure of critical components. The
system also permits the clearing of smaller particles that
routinely accumulate in engine oil and cause false impending
engine failure alarms resulting in unnecessary termination of
aircraft missions and costly engine diagnostics.
The VMEP is an Army National Guard (ARNG) effort currently
directed toward resolving vibration management problems on the
ARNG's AH-64 Apache fleet.
Since the ODDS, which has been successfully integrated into
other Department of Defense aircraft, both reduces aircraft
maintenance costs and enhances aircrew safety, the committee
recommends an increase of $5.0 million to incorporate the ODDS
on the AH-64 Apache. The committee also recommends an increase
of $7.0 million to continue procurement of VMEP systems for the
ARNG Apache fleet and to transition this technology to the UH-
60 Blackhawk and the CH-47 Chinook.
In total, the committee recommends $50.5 million for AH-64
modifications, an increase of $12.0 million.
Air traffic control
The budget request contained $68.9 million to procure air
traffic control systems but included no funds for the
procurement of cold cathode portable landing lights.
Cold cathode portable landing lights are commercial-off-
the-shelf items that provide airfield taxiway, runway, and
heliport edge lighting for both permanent and temporary
locations, thereby enhancing ground safety and flight
operations. The committee understands that the Army has an
unfunded requirement for 100 systems of this type of lighting
and recommends $78.9 million for air traffic control systems,
an increase of $10.0 million, for procurement of cold cathode
portable landing lights.
Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE)
The budget request contained $32.8 million for the
procurement of ASE, but included no funds for AN/AVR-2A laser
detecting sets (LDS). The LDS is the only device in the Army
capable of providing warning to helicopter crews when they have
been illuminated by a laser-targeted weapon. It detects,
identifies, and characterizes threats 360-degrees-around and
plus-or-minus 45 degrees above-and-below an aircraft.
The committee continues to be concerned with the growing
laser threat to helicopter aircrews and notes the limited
fielding of this system to force package one aircraft only. The
committee also notes the Army Chief of Staff's $28.3 million
fiscal year 2002 unfunded requirement to continue LDS kit
installation on AH-64A Apaches,AH-64D Apache Longbows, MH-47D
Chinook and MH-60L Blackhawk Special Operations Aircraft. Based on a
growing laser threat to Army helicopters, its desire to continue
fielding this system beyond force package one units, and the Chief's
unfunded requirement, the committee recommends $52.8 million for ASE,
an increase of $20.0 million, for procurement of AN/AVR-2A LDS kits.
CH-47 cargo helicopter modifications
The budget request contained $277.5 million for CH-47 cargo
helicopter modifications, but included no funds for crashworthy
cockpit seats.
While existing pilot and co-pilot seats offer some
protection in the event of a hard impact landing or a crash,
crashworthy cockpit seats provide increased protection from the
acceleration forces created by such a landing or crash, thereby
avoiding serious injuries or, in extreme cases, fatalities to
soldiers. Accordingly, the committee recommends $281.5 million
for CH-47 modifications, an increase of $4.0 million, to
procure crashworthy cockpit seats for CH-47 cargo helicopters.
Longbow
The budget request contained $888.6 million to upgrade 60
AH-64A aircraft to the AH-64D Longbow variant, including $70.2
million for Apache Longbow recapitalization.
The committee understands that the Army entered into a
multiyear procurement contract in October 2000 for the
remanufacture of 269 AH-64A analog variant aircraft to the
digital Longbow variant. The committee notes that because of
numerous problems over the last several years resulting in
grounding of the Apache fleet, this contract was restructured
to upgrade fewer aircraft and apply the resultant funds to meet
recapitalization requirements. The committee also notes that
the Army Chief of Staff identified a $47.0 million fiscal year
2002 unfunded requirement for recapitalization of the Apache
Longbow fleet.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $898.6 million for
Apache Longbow upgrades, an increase of $10.0 million, for
Apache Longbow recapitalization.
UH-60 modifications
The budget request contained $52.3 million for UH-60
modifications, of which $17.3 million was for crashworthy
external fuel systems. However, the budget request included no
funds for these systems for Army National Guard (ARNG) UH-60
combat search and rescue aircraft.
UH-60 crashworthy external fuel systems are self-sealing,
ballistically-tolerant tanks that replace existing 230 gallon
non-crashworthy external fuel tanks originally intended only
for ferry flights. However, expanding Army aviation missions
have increasingly required these non-crashworthy tanks to be
used to extend UH-60 tactical mission ranges, creating safety
risks to flight crews, passengers, and aircraft, which require
individual mission waivers by individual commands. As a result
of the safety risks imposed by these existing systems and
expanding ARNG search and rescue mission requirements, the
committee recommends $58.3 million for UH-60 modifications, an
increase of $6.0 million, for crashworthy external fuel systems
for ARNG combat search and rescue aircraft.
Missile Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request contained $1,859.6 million for Missile
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 2002. The committee recommends
authorization of $1,097.3 million for fiscal year 2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Missile procurement army (MPA) transfers
The budget request contained $1,859.6 million for the
procurement of Army missile systems.
The committee recommends the following transfers from MPA
to the program elements listed, as requested by the Army.
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2002 FY 2002
Program authorization Committee change committee
request form request recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stinger System Summary...................................... $45,890 ($22,500) $23,390
Line Of Sight Anti-Tank System.............................. 11,427 (2,000) 9,427
MLRS Launcher Systems....................................... 148,294 (10,250) 138,044
Army Tactical Missile System................................ 34,263 (9,000) 25,263
Patriot Mods................................................ 37,617 (12,510) 25,107
Avenger Mods................................................ 17,991 (6,114) 11,877
ITAS/TOW Mods............................................... 96,204 (35,400) 60,804
MLRS Mods................................................... 23,599 (3,000) 20,599
Combat Vehicle Improvement Programs (PE 203735)............. 195,602 20,000 215,602
Tractor Card (PE 203808).................................... 6,551 5,000 11,551
LOSAT (PE 603654)........................................... 57,384 13,072 70,456
Comanche (PE 604223)........................................ 732,890 28,500 761,390
Brilliant Anti-Armor Submunition (PE 604768)................ 123,899 9,000 132,899
Javelin (PE 604611)......................................... 492 5,202 5,694
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
Overview
The budget request contained $2,276.7 million for
procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army for
fiscal year 2002. The committee recommends authorization of
$2,367.0 million for fiscal year 2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Abrams upgrade program
The budget request contained $395.8 million for the upgrade
of 104 M1 Abrams tanks to the M1A2 system enhancement program
(SEP) variant.
The committee notes that the Army's M1A2 SEP upgrades are
currently obtained under a three-year multiyear procurement
(MYP) contract at 104 SEP tank upgrades per year. Congress
authorized a combined M1A2 SEP tank and Wolverine Heavy Assault
Bridge (HAB) MYP contract in fiscal year 2000, a year earlier
than the planned fiscal year 2001 contract award year, based
upon the estimated $118.0 million in savings that could be
accrued from the 80 percent commonality of SEP and HAB chassis
and component upgrades and its belief that both of the vehicles
met the stable design criteria to enter into a MYP contract.
The committee is concerned, however, by the 74 percent increase
requested for systems technical support in fiscal year 2002 for
104 SEP upgrades, compared to the amount appropriated for
fiscal year 2001 systems technical support for 100 SEP
upgrades.
The committee believes that the cost growth in systems
technical support is unjustified and, therefore, recommends
$385.8 million for the Abrams upgrade program, a decrease of
$10.0 million.
Bradley base sustainment
The budget request contained $400.8 million for the
procurement of Bradley A3 fighting vehicle upgrades, including
$1.7 million for fielding Army National Guard (ARNG) A2
Operation Desert Storm (ODS) variants.
The Bradley A2ODS is derived from upgrading the first-
generation Bradley A0's lethality, survivability, and mobility,
as well as the situational awareness of its crew. Modifications
include installation of a laser range finder, Global
Positioning System navigation capability, a combat
identification system, a driver's thermal viewer and a missile
countermeasure device.
When the Army completes all of its planned upgrades to the
Bradley, the active fleet will include a mix of the most
advanced A3 variant, along with A2 and A2ODS versions. The
majority of the ARNG's Bradley fleet, on the other hand, will
remain unmodified and be comprised mainly of first-generation
A0 vehicles, which, because of major survivability
deficiencies, were not mobilized during the Persian Gulf War.
However, as part of the new ARNG enhanced brigades, the
committee notes that some of these A0 vehicles will be required
to deploy with active Army forces.
Because ARNG enhanced brigades will comprise an increasing
percentage of the Army's warfighting capability as a result of
active force reductions, the committee recommends $460.8
million for Bradley base sustainment, an increase of $60.0
million, to upgrade an additional 45 Bradley A0 vehicles to the
A2ODS variant for the ARNG.
Ammunition Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request contained $1,193.4 million for
Ammunition Procurement, Army in fiscal year 2002. The committee
recommends authorization of $1,208.6 million for fiscal year
2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Army ammunition procurement
The budget request contained $1,193.3 million for
procurement of ammunition and production base support. The
committee recommends $1,208.6 million, an increase of $15.2
million, for the following types of ammunition programs:
[Dollars in millions]
Mortar Ammunition:
81mm M816..................................................... $8.0
CTG 120mm Illum XM930 w/MTSQ Fuze (Production line upgrade)... 2.8
CTG 120mm IR Illum XM983...................................... 5.0
Rockets: Bunker Defeating Munition................................ 10.0
Demolition Munitions, All Types: Modernization Demolition
Initiators.................................................... 3.0
Signals, All Types: XM-211/XM-212 AIRCM........................... 6.2
Production Base Support: ARMS Initiative.......................... 7.6
Remote area denial artillery munition (RADAM)
The budget request contained $48.2 million for RADAM
procurement. The committee understands that the Army does not
plan to obligate $27.4 million of fiscal year 2001 funds for
RADAM prior to the beginning of fiscal year 2002. As a result,
the committee believes that these funds can be used to meet
fiscal year 2002 requirements. Accordingly, the committee
recommends $20.8 million for RADAM, a decrease of $27.4
million.
White phosphorus production facility
The budget request contained no funds to upgrade the white
phosphorous production facility at the Pine Bluff Arsenal.
The committee is aware of plans to upgrade the production
line at the Pine Bluff Arsenal, the only production facility
for white phosphorous ammunition in the western hemisphere. The
committee views this as an important effort and recommends $2.8
million for design work leading to replacement of the
production line. The committee also directs the Secretary of
the Army to examine and to refine further these plans in
preparation for the submission of the fiscal year 2003 budget
request.
Other Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request contained $3,961.7 million for Other
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 2002. The committee recommends
authorization of $4,144.0 million for fiscal year 2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Artillery accuracy equipment
The budget request contained $10.4 million to procure the
artillery accuracy equipment, including $6.8 million for the
procurement of seven Meteorological Measuring System (MMS)
units for the Army National Guard (ARNG). The MMS provides
weather data to field artillery units that improves the firing
accuracy of those units.
The committee is encouraged that the Army has budgeted for
MMSs for the ARNG; however, it recognizes that accelerated
fielding of MMS to the ARNG would benefit total Army mission
requirements, since the ARNG provides nearly 70 percent of the
total Army's artillery fire support. Therefore, the committee
recommends $14.9 million for artillery accuracy equipment, an
increase of $4.5 million, to accelerate procurement of the MMS
for the ARNG.
Combat support medical
The budget request contained $16.7 million to procure
deployable medical systems and field medical equipment, of
which $641 thousand was for surgical temper tents. However, the
budget request included no funds for rapid intravenous (IV)
infusion pumps.
Surgical temper tents offer medical personnel and surgical
teams shelter to provide medical and trauma care to soldiers in
forward deployed sites. As a result of increased deployment of
Army Reserve medical units, additional surgical temper tents
are required to replace those that have been left behind in
humanitarian missions.
The rapid IV infusion pump is a miniature, portable,
lightweight pump specifically designed for life-saving
intravenous fluid resuscitation by a medic in the field to
restore blood pressure of victims with severe blood loss or
dehydration. The committee notes that it is estimated that up
to 15 percent of the soldiers that died in Vietnam who were not
immediate battlefield casualties would have survived their
wounds if rapid infusion of fluids had been a possibility
during that conflict.
The committee understands the benefits of clean, sterile
field medical treatment areas and, therefore, recommends an
increase of $1.0 million for replacement of surgical temper
tents for the Army Reserve. Also, the committee is impressed
with the potential life saving capability that rapid IV
infusion pumps offer and recommends an increase of $6.0 million
to procure these pumps. In total, the committee recommends
$23.7 million for combat support medical equipment.
Combat training centers instrumentation support
The budget request contained $10.3 million for combat
training centers instrumentation support but included no funds
for the Army National Guard (ARNG) deployable force-on-force
instrumented range system (DFIRST).
Encouraged by the fact that the DFIRST system was chosen
over all current force-on-force instrumentation systems by the
All Service Combat IdentificationEvaluation Team (ASCIET) as
the instrumentation system for the fiscal year 1999 Joint Exercise, in
the committee report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106-162), the committee
recommended a pilot program at two ARNG training sites to explore the
capabilities and benefits of DFIRST systems to increase the readiness
of ARNG units through more effective training with greater safety and
at a lower cost. To continue this force-on-force, simulation-based
training at regional training centers, the committee recommends $16.3
million for combat training centers instrumentation support, an
increase of $6.0 million, for additional DFIRSTs for the ARNG.
Deployable universal combat earthmovers (DEUCE)
The budget request contained $5.3 million to procure 12
DEUCEs for the interim brigade combat teams. The DEUCE is a
military-unique, high speed, earthmoving tractor capable of
clearing, leveling, and excavating operations for light and
airborne divisions.
Although, the committee understands that the DUECE will be
a critical piece of equipment for the Army's interim medium
brigades, it notes that the Army Chief of Staff has identified
a $7.8 million unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2002 to
procure 19 DEUCEs for Army war reserve requirements and to
prevent a break in the production line.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $21.3 million for
DEUCE, an increase of $16.0 million, for additional war reserve
DEUCEs and to address industrial base concerns.
Earthmoving scrapers
The budget request contained $7.2 million to procure 17
commercial, self-propelled elevating scrapers.
This commercial, self-propelled elevating scraper is
sectionalized into two pieces for external sling load
helicopter transport. It will be used by airborne and air
assault combat engineers for road and airfield construction and
maintenance to support early entry forces. This new start
program supports the Army's legacy-to-objective transformation
campaign plan, enabling forces to more rapidly deploy and be
sustained by quickly constructed infrastructure.
Therefore, the committee recommends $13.2 million for
earthmoving scrapers, an increase of $6.0 million, to
accelerate the procurement of commercial, self-propelled
elevating scrapers.
High mobility trailers
The budget request contained no funds for safety
modifications for high mobility trailers.
The Army has procured 5,116 high mobility trailers since
fiscal year 1994 is unable to field these trailers due to an
inability to meet mobility and safety requirements. The
committee understands that the Army has an ongoing program to
correct these deficiencies that is scheduled to be completed in
fiscal year 2002. The committee also understands that the Army
plans to conduct a re-competition for these trailers in fiscal
year 2003 and, in conducting its market survey for this
competition, expects the Secretary of the Army to determine if
there is a requirement for low cost, state-of-the-art,
lightweight, detachable equipment storage and equipment
transport carriers for non-combat missions, logistics support,
and fire fighting services.
Improved high frequency radio (IHFR)
The budget request contained no funds to procure IHFRs.
The IHFR is the primary means of communications for
maneuver battalions, combat support and combat service support
units, the latter of which are comprised primarily of Army
Reserve forces. The IHFR provides a versatile capability for
short- and long-range communications, particularly important
for highly mobile and geographically dispersed units not
supported by active component communications units. The IHFR is
also the only tactical radio that possesses a long-range
communications capability independent of terrestrial or
satellite relays and exceeds the range of the line-of-sight
Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System. To date, only
215 systems have been fielded to the Army Reserve due to budget
constraints; consequently, the Army Reserve must continue to
maintain a mixture of older and unsupportable HF communications
radios. For this reason, the Chief of the Army Reserve has
identified a $38.5 million fiscal year 2002 unfunded
requirement for 1,003 IHFRs.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million to procure IHFRs for the Army Reserve.
Modification of in service equipment
The budget request contained $49.2 million for
modifications of in service equipment, but included no funds
for the procurement of a rubber wheel-to-track conversion
system.
The committee understands that there is an existing rubber
track system, capable of converting both commercial and
military four-wheel drive vehicles weighing up to 1.5 tons,
such as the high mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicle
(HMMWV), into true all-terrain vehicles in about 30 minutes.
The committee believes this track system could enable HMMWVs to
greatly expand their operational domain into all types of off-
road conditions, such as soft sand, deep snow, and swampy
areas.
Based on the potential to expand the HMMWV's off-road
capability, the committee recommends $59.2 million for
modifications of in service equipment, an increase of $10.0
million, to procure a wheel-to-track conversion system.
Nonsystem training devices
The budget request contained $74.5 million to procure
nonsystem training devices, but included no funds for Army
Aviation Institutional Training Simulators (AAITS), BEAMHIT
laser marksmanship training systems (LMTS) for the Army
Reserve, or fire fighter training systems (FFTS).
The committee understands that the AAITS provide full-
motion, reconfigurable cockpit simulation for AH-64 Apache, UH-
60 Blackhawk, and OH-58D Kiowa Warriorhelicopters and notes
that a shortfall exists for the simulators at the Army Aviation Center.
The committee notes that the Army Reserve lacks adequate BEAMHIT LMTS
to maintain markmanship training skills, required to fulfill
increasingly greater contingency operations and missions. Furthermore,
the committee is aware that a shortfall of commercially-available,
mobile FFTS remains, despite the increases for this system in prior
fiscal years provided by the committee as well as the committee's prior
recommendations that the Secretary of the Army adequately budget for
this system.
In view of these concerns, the committee recommends $111.7
million for nonsystems training devices, an increase of $37.2
million, including $20.0 million for AAITS, $14.2 million for
BEAMHIT LMTS for the Army Reserve, and $3.0 million for FFTS.
Product improved combat vehicle crewman (PICVC) headset
The budget request contained no funds to procure PICVC
headsets.
The committee is aware that loss of communications in CVC
headsets was identified in late fiscal year 1998 during Force
XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below (FBCB2) testing and
evaluation in armored vehicles. This testing revealed that
electromagnetic interference (EMI) generated by Single Channel
Ground and Airborne Radio Systems installed in armored vehicles
to transmit FBCB2 data created intermittent communication
problems. The committee believes that intermittent
communications caused by EMI could endanger crews as a result
of not receiving complete command and control and targeting
information in a high operational tempo or combat environment.
Since the PICVC headset eliminates EMI communication
losses, the committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million to
procure PICVC headsets to address this safety issue.
Reserve component automation system (RCAS)
The budget request contained $89.3 million for the
procurement of RCAS components.
The committee expects the Army to continue to provide
adequate funding for the on-going information technology
support to the National Guard and the Army Reserve. Currently,
the RCAS program provides integrated support for mobilization
and day-to-day management in both the Army National Guard
(ARNG) and Army Reserve. In setting future priorities, the
committee believes that funds should be provided to ensure that
the ARNG and Army Reserve can continue to equip and support
their full IT needs, including their requirements to upgrade
the equipment originally installed under RCAS. Consequently,
the committee expects the Army to provide funds for these
requirements so that the ARNG and Army Reserve can meet their
national security, homeland security, civil support, and
national missile defense missions.
Ribbon bridge
The budget request contained $48.2 million for ribbon
bridge equipment, but included no funds to procure this
equipment for Army National Guard (ARNG) multi-role bridge
companies (MRBC). Ribbon bridge equipment consists of 10-ton,
8-wheel drive M1977 Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck
Common Bridge Transporters, M15 Bridge Adaptor Pallets, and M14
Improved Boat Cradles.
The committee understands that the ARNG will establish
seven MRBCs in fiscal year 2001 and will equip them with
existing engineer bridging equipment and older, lower-capacity,
five-ton trucks. However, the committee also understands that
without additional funds, these new MRBCs will not convert to
the new equipment required for their mission until fiscal year
2004.
Therefore, the committee recommends $59.4 million for
ribbon bridging equipment, an increase of $11.2 million, to
accelerate the fielding of two ARNG MRBCs.
Special equipment for user testing
The budget request contained $16.4 million for the
procurement of special equipment for user testing, including
$10.1 million for 1 XM Target Acquisition Radar--Agile Multi-
Beam (XMTARAMB) system, but included no funds for Target
Receiver Injection Module (TRIM) threat simulators.
The XMTARAMB is an advanced air defense acquisition and
targeting radar which incorporates advanced frequency hopping,
agile, multi-beam, three-dimensional targeting technology with
an associated command, control, and communication facility.
This system is critical to the ability of the United States and
its allies to counter threats with enhanced technologies, as
well as to develop proper tactics, techniques and procedures to
ensure maximum protection for personnel and their weapon
systems. Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of
$12.0 million to procure an additional XMTARAMB system.
The committee is also aware of the benefits of TRIM, which,
when inserted in antenna cables of Army information collection,
transmission, or dissemination systems, stimulate the system
with threat signals. This capability will replace current open-
air radiations of radio frequency threats, which are becoming
obsolete and prohibited by the Federal Communications
Commission due to the growing number of threats now required to
be simulated. Understanding the benefits derived from threat
simulations, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million for TRIM.
In total, the committee recommends $32.4 million for
special equipment for user testing, an overall increase of
$16.0 million.
Super high frequency (SHF) terminal
The budget request contained $17.0 million for the
procurement of 8 SHF Tri-Band Advanced Range Extension
Terminals (STAR-T).
The committee is aware that this system has been plagued
with cost overruns and technical and understands that,
subsequent to the submission of the budget request to Congress,
the Army terminated the program because of default by its
contractor. The committee further understands that there are no
program termination costs to the Army and that the service
intends to recoup $24.0 million of unliquidated progress
payments from the contractor.
The committee outlined its concerns with STAR-T program
delays in the committee report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106-162)
and agrees with the Army's termination action. Because no
contract termination fees are required, the committee
recommends no funds for STAR-T, a decrease of $17.0 million.
Tactical unmanned aerial vehicle (TUAV)
The budget request contained $84.3 million to procure 9
TUAV systems and 5 attrition air vehicles.
The TUAV system will provide Army maneuver commanders with
dedicated reconnaissance, surveillance, and target recognition
and battle damage assessment from information collected through
its electro-optical and infrared sensor payloads down-linked to
ground control units. The committee notes that the Army Chief
of Staff has identified a $16.2 million fiscal year 2002
unfunded requirement to upgrade low rate initial production
TUAVs with a synthetic aperture radar/moving target indicator
(SAR/MTI) all weather sensor, a digital tactical control data
link (TCDL), and an improved avionics suite. The committee
supports these enhancements to the TUAV despite the program's
recent delays as a result of several crashes during testing.
The committee therefore recommends $91.6 million for TUAV, an
increase of $7.3 million for SAR/MTI, TCDL, and improved
avionics upgrades.
Water distributors
The budget request contained $1.0 million to procure four
2,000-gallon capacity module water distributors for use by
tactical fire fighting teams.
These new distributors will replace currently fielded
6,000-gallon water distributors, which suffer from poor
mobility, safety issues when transported with partial loads,
and maintenance problems. This new start program supports the
Army's legacy-to-objective transformation campaign plan,
enabling tactical fire fighting teams to rapidly deploy with
enhanced cross country mobility.
Therefore, the committee recommends $5.0 million for water
distributors, an increase of $4.0 million, to accelerate
procurement of 2,000-gallon capacity module water distributors.
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army
Overview
The budget request contained $1,153.6 million for Chemical
agents and Munitions Destruction, Army, for fiscal year 2002.
The committee recommends no funds for fiscal year 2002.
Items of Special Interest
Chemical agents and munitions destruction
The budget request contained $1,153.6 million for Chemical
Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army.
The committee notes that section 1412 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1986 (Public Law 99-
145), as amended, requires that funds for the destruction of
the U.S. stockpile of lethal chemical agents and munitions,
including funds for military construction projects necessary to
carry out the demilitarization program, shall only be
authorized and appropriated in the budget of the Department of
Defense (DOD) as a separate program and shall not be included
in the budget accounts for any military department. The
committee notes that for the third year in a row, the
Department's budget request contains authorization and
appropriation of funds for the chemical demilitarization
program in a budget account of the Department of the Army in
contravention of direction provided by the law.
The committee believes that the original legislation, which
mandated that funds for the chemical demilitarization program
be authorized and appropriated in a defense-wide budget account
in order to emphasize that destruction of the chemical weapons
stockpile was a national issue affecting all of the Department
and not just a single military service was valid in 1986, when
the estimated cost of the chemical stockpile demilitarization
program was approximately $1.5 billion and is even more valid
today, when the estimated cost of the program has grown more
than ten-fold.
Accordingly, the committee recommends no funds for Chemical
Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army, a decrease of $1,153.6
million. The committee recommends an increase of $1,078.6
million for Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense,
as described elsewhere in this report.
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
Overview
The budget request contained $8,252.5 million for Aircraft
Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 2002. The committee recommends
authorization of $8,337.2 million for fiscal year 2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
AV-8B modifications
The budget request contained $49.5 million for various AV-
8B modifications but included no funds for the Litening II, a
precision targeting system that allows the AV-8B aircraft to
autonomously detect and track targets and to deliver precision
munitions.
The committee understands that the Marine Corps has a
requirement for 98 Litening II targeting pod systems but has
thus far only procured 56. The committee also notes that the
Commandant of the Marine Corps included this system among his
unfunded requirements for fiscal year 2002. Consequently, the
committee recommends $79.5 million for AV-8B modifications, an
increase of $30.0 million, to procure additional Litening II
targeting pods.
Calibration test equipment
The budget request contained $18.2 million for aircraft
industrial facilities, of which $8.8 million was included for
calibration equipment.
Calibration equipment provides the Navy with products and
services to maintain accurate test equipment used for
maintenance of weapons, aircraft, ships, submarines, and Marine
Corps ground systems. The committee notes that without
calibration equipment, test equipment drifts to inaccurate
performance levels which could induce errors in weapons systems
or result in serviceable components being removed for
unnecessary maintenance or unserviceable components remaining
in a system. The committee also notes that during the past 10
years funding for the Navy's calibration test equipment has
decreased by over 60 percent and that this situation has
resulted in a corresponding decrease in the availability of
calibrated equipment from 86 percent to 74 percent.
Since the committee understands that the budget request for
calibration test equipment funds only 59 percent of the fiscal
year 2002 requirement, the committee recommends $22.7 million
for aircraft industrial facilities, an increase of $4.5
million, for additional calibration test equipment.
E-2 modifications
The budget request contained $14.6 million for E-2
modifications but included no funds to upgrade an E-2 mission
computer test aircraft to the Hawkeye 2000 configuration.
The Hawkeye 2000 configuration is an upgrade to older-model
E-2 aircraft that integrates satellite communications, a
commercial-off-the-shelf, high-capacity mission computer and
associated workstations, and cooperative engagement capability
equipment. The committee understands that the Navy's E-2
aircraft inventory includes a mission computer test aircraft
that can be economically upgraded to the Hawkeye 2000
configuration and, therefore, recommends $39.6 million for E-2
modifications, an increase of $25.0 million, to upgrade the
Navy's mission computer E-2 test aircraft to the Hawkeye 2000
configuration.
F/A-18E/F
The committee notes that the F/A-18E/F aircraft is
currently procured under a multiyear contract, but notes
further that the aircraft's F414 propulsion system is not
procured under either this contract or a separate multiyear
contract.
To promote further F/A-18E/F acquisition savings, the
committee strongly urges that the Department of the Navy
evaluate the benefits of a five-year multiyear procurement
structure for the F414 propulsion system beginning in fiscal
year 2002.
Joint primary air training system (JPATS)
The budget request contained no funds for the Navy JPATS.
The JPATS, consisting of both the T-6A aircraft and a
ground-based training system, will be used by the Navy and Air
Force for primary pilot training. The T-6A will replace both
the Navy's T-34 and Air Force's T-37B fleets, providing safer,
more economical and more effective training for future student
pilots.
The committee notes that, although the Navy has already
procured 12 T-6A aircraft in fiscal year 2000 and 24 T-6As in
fiscal year 2001, it plans to discontinue JPATS acquisition
between fiscal years 2002 and 2007. Expressing concern about
this decision, the committee also notes that the report
accompanying H.R. 2216 (H. Rept. 107-148) directed the
Secretary of the Navy to provide a report to the House and
Senate Appropriations Committees detailing the business case
for the Navy's deferring JPATS acquisition. The committee
believes that JPATS procurement for the Navy would not only
reduce procurement costs for both the Navy and the Air Force
but would reduce operations and maintenance costs as well. The
committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to report to the
committee within 90 days after enactment of this Act his plan
to begin full implementation of the JPATS program beginning in
fiscal year 2003.
SH-60 series modifications
The budget request contained $1.7 million for SH-60 series
modifications but included no funds for the SH-60F's AN/AQS-13F
dipping sonar upgrade or for the advanced helicopter emergency
egress lighting system (ADHEELS).
The SH-60F is the Navy's anti-submarine warfare helicopter
based aboard aircraft carriers and uses the AN/AQS-13F as its
principal dipping sonar to detect submarines near the aircraft
carrier. The committee understands that a pre-planned product
improvement program for the AN/AQS-13F could achieve improved
shallow-water detection capability and provide increased system
reliability. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase
of $11.0 million to upgrade the SH-60F's AN/AQS-13 dipping
sonar.
The ADHEELS provides crew escape lighting for H-60 series
helicopters in the event of water impact. The committee
understands that the Department of the Navy has selected
ADHEELS as its future helicopter escape lighting system due to
its superior performance, significantly increased operational
reliability, and lower life-cycle costs.Consequently, the
committee recommends an increase of $3.2 million to accelerate the
installation of ADHEELS in the Navy's H-60 helicopter fleet.
In total, the committee recommends $15.9 million, an
increase of $14.2 million, for SH-60 series modifications.
T-45 training system (TS)
The budget request contained $179.3 million to procure 6 T-
45C aircraft and associated ground-based training equipment but
included no funds for T-45C operational flight trainers. The T-
45TS is an integrated training system that combines the T-45
aircraft, simulators, and computer-based training for the
Navy's intermediate-level undergraduate pilot training.
The committee notes that the Navy is replacing older-model
T-45As with new-production T-45Cs but understands that all
bases planned for upgrade to the T-45C are not scheduled to
receive T-45C operational flight trainers upon arrival of the
new-production aircraft.
Since the T-45C operational flight trainer will provide
improved replication of the T-45C cockpit configuration and
performance characteristics, he recommends $192.3 million, an
increase of $13.0 million, for two additional T-45C operational
flight trainers.
Tactical air reconnaissance pod system (TARPS)-completely digital (CD)
The budget request contained $27.6 million for other
production charges but included no funds for the TARPS-CD
system, an electro-optic sensor upgrade designed to validate
digital imaging technologies and to mitigate development risks
for the next-generation shared reconnaissance pod (SHARP)
system.
Since the SHARP system remains in development, the
committee understands that the Navy is upgrading several TARPS-
CD cameras with an 18-lens configuration which improves the
system's standoff and survivability capabilities.
To upgrade all remaining TARPS-CD systems to a common 18-
lens configuration, the committee recommends $30.6 million for
other production charges, an increase of $3.0 million, for the
TARPS-CD 18-lens configuration and for spares and support
costs.
Weapons Procurement, Navy
Overview
The budget request contained $1,433.5 million for Weapons
Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 2002. The committee recommends
authorization of $1,476.7 million for fiscal year 2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
MK 46 Mod 0 lightweight machine gun
The budget request contained $910 thousand for small arms
and weapons but included no funds for the MK 46 Mod 0
lightweight machine gun.
The MK 46 Mod 0 lightweight machine gun is a variant of the
existing M249 squad automatic weapon designed to meet the
unique lower-weight and reliability requirements for the Navy's
sea-air-land (SEAL) teams and other special operations forces.
The committee understands that the Navy's SEAL teams and
special operations forces require approximately 1875 MK 46 Mod
0 lightweight machine guns and, consequently, recommends $6.1
million for small arms and weapons, an increase of $5.2
million, to procure MK 46 Mod 0 lightweight machine guns.
Tomahawk missile
The budget request contained $50.1 million for the first 34
block IV low-rate initial production tactical tomahawk (TACTOM)
missiles but included no funds for special tooling and test
equipment for rate production of the block IV TACTOM missile.
The Tomahawk missile is a long-range, precision strike
cruise missile launched from surface ships or submarines, and
the block IV TACOM missile will provide improved performance at
a lower unit cost than previous missile versions. The committee
understands that subsequent to the block IV TACTOM contract
award in 1998, the Navy has had to switch to a different engine
manufacturer than originally planned and that this decision
requires increased funding for special tooling and test
equipment to accommodate rate production of the TACTOM missiles
equipped with the newly-selected engine.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $70.1 million for the
tomahawk missile, an increase of $20.0 million, to procure the
special tooling and test equipment necessary for rate
production of the block IV TACTOM.
Trident II missile
The budget request contained $559.0 million for Trident II
missiles, including $143.7 million for D5 continuous production
life extension.
The Trident II D5 missile is carried on the Ohio class
fleet ballistic missile submarines to provide a highly
survivable strategic ballistic missile deterrent. The Trident
II D5 continuous production life extension (CPLE) program
sustains the production of Trident II D5 missile motors and
other critical components. The committee views the Trident II
as critically important strategic deterrence and strongly
supports the fiscal year 2002 budget request for 12 Trident D5
missiles and associated funding for the CPLE program.
While the Navy has not provided the committee with its
Trident II D5 CPLE program budget projections beyond fiscal
year 2002, it notes that the Navy has recently extended the
hull life of its Ohio class fleet ballistic missile submarines
from 30 to 44years and is concerned that the CPLE program may
not be fully funded in the future years defense program commensurate
with the extended submarine hull life. Therefore, the committee urges
the Department to include funds for the CPLE program in its fiscal year
2003 budget and in the future years defense program to preclude both
the loss of the critical missile motor production base and the
possibility that expensive start-up costs may be incurred at a future
date to regenerate Trident II missile production capability.
Ammunition Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps
Overview
The budget request contained $457.0 million for Ammunition
Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps in fiscal year 2002. The
committee recommends authorization of $463.5 million for fiscal
year 2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy
Overview
The budget request contained $9,344.1 million for
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy in fiscal year 2002. The
committee recommends authorization of $9,321.1 million for
fiscal year 2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Completion of prior year shipbuilding programs
The budget request contained $800.0 million to cover
increases in the costs to complete construction of certain
ships for which Congress authorized and appropriated funds in
prior fiscal years. Included in this amount was $248.0 million
for the first of the San Antonio-class amphibious transport
dock ships, the LPD-17.
The committee notes that the Department of Defense
requested a supplemental appropriation of $65.0 million in
fiscal year 2001, in addition to the $248 million in the budget
request, to cover the increased costs of the LPD-17. The
committee also notes, Congress approved the $65.0 million
supplemental request, but understanding that the fiscal year
2002 budget request did not contain funds for construction of
the fifth and sixth ships of the class, as had been
anticipated, Congress rescinded $75.0 million of advance
procurement funds for these two ships appropriated in fiscal
year 2001 and applied the funds to the LPD-17. The committee
does not believe such action would have been taken if it were
going to result in a requirement to payback those funds at a
later date.
Since the LPD-17 received an additional $75.0 million in
the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 107-80),
the committee concludes that $75.0 million of the $248.0
million in the budget request is not required. Consequently,
the committee recommends $725.0 million for prior year
shipbuilding, a decrease of $75.0 million.
Minehunter small waterplane area twin hull (SWATH)
The budget request contained no funds for the Minehunter
SWATH.
The Navy's minehunting fleet includes one Minehunter SWATH
boat, which is its only surface mine warfare vessel capable of
operating in very shallow water or capable of transport by C-5
aircraft for operational deployment within 24 hours. The
committee understands that, during the past two years, the
Minehunter SWATH has completed highly successful testing in the
Pacific theater and notes that senior naval officers support
its immediate acquisition and deployment to meet shallow water
minehunting requirements.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million for the procurement of the Minehunter SWATH.
Outfitting
The budget request contained $307.2 million for outfitting,
of which $208.6 million was for outfitting and $96.0 million
was for post delivery. Outfitting funds are used to acquire
items necessary in the pre-commissioning activities of ship
construction, and post delivery funds are used to fix items for
which the government is responsible after ship delivery.
The committee believes that $3.2 million of outfitting
funds budgeted for ships which are scheduled to begin
construction in fiscal year 2002 and $6.8 million budgeted for
ships which are planned for delivery in fiscal year 2003 are
premature. Consequently, the committee recommends $297.2
million for outfitting, a decrease of $10.0 million.
SSGN conversion
The budget request contained $86.4 million for the advance
procurement of products and materials necessary to refuel and
convert two fleet ballistic missile carrying submarines (SSBN)
to a conventional cruise missile carrying submarine (SSGN)
configuration but included no funds for the advance planning
necessary to refuel two additional SSBNs.
Once refueled and converted, SSGNs will be capable of both
delivering up to 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles and deploying
special operations forces. Although four SSBNs are available
for the SSGN refueling and conversion program, the Department
of the Navy has only budgeted for the conversion of two. The
committee strongly supports the SSGN conversion program and
believes that all four SSBNs should be converted to the SSGN
configuration.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $137.4 million, an
increase of $51.0 million, for the advance planning necessary
to refuel the remaining two SSBNs in preparation for their
conversion to the SSGN configuration.
Other Procurement, Navy
Overview
The budget request contained $4,097.6 million for Other
Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 2002. The committee recommends
authorization of $4,157.3 million for fiscal year 2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Operating forces industrial plant equipment
The budget request contained $27.5 million for operating
forces industrial plant equipment but included no funds for
expeditionary maintenance facilities (EMF).
The committee is aware that the Navy is continuing to
decommission its repair tenders, thereby limiting its ability
to rapidly deploy a ship and equipment repair capability to
support forward deployed forces. However, the committee is also
aware that EMF, which are surface and air transportable, self-
contained facilities, can be operational within 72 hours of
deployment, and can meet the service's needs for a rapidly
deployable repair and maintenance capability.
The committee fully supports the EMF concept and,
accordingly, recommends $28.0 million for operating forces
industrial plant equipment, an increase of $500 thousand, for
procurement of EMF.
Other navigation equipment
The budget request contained $45.9 million for the
procurement of other navigation equipment but included no funds
to procure force protection thermal imaging equipment for
military sealift command ships.
As a result of the committee's investigation into the
attack on the U.S.S. Cole, the committee is keenly aware of the
lack of force protection equipment and sensors on board Naval
warships and supply ships to identify and counter
unconventional threats. The committee is also aware of, and
supports, the Navy's rapid request for emergency funds to meet
many of these requirements for its warships. However, military
sealift command ships, which often steam independently and make
port calls in remote and hostile areas separate from battle
groups, lack adequate thermal imaging sensors to identify
potential threats and hazards at ranges that would allow a
timely response to avoid a collision or counter a terrorist
attack.
Understanding new threats and vulnerabilities of U.S. ships
while underway and at anchor, the committee recommends $55.9
million for other navigation equipment, an increase of $10.0
million, for the procurement of military sealift command force
protection thermal imaging equipment.
Other supply support equipment
The budget request contained $7.5 million for the
procurement of other supply support equipment, of which $741
thousand was for automatic identification technology (AIT) in
support of the serial number tracking system (SNTS).
The SNTS will use commercial AIT to provide web-based,
cradle-to-grave, total asset visibility of individual
components throughout the supply, maintenance, and
transportation transfer process within Naval and Marine Corps
aviation depots and will enhance the maintenance,
remanufacture, and rebuild process of Navy and Marine Corps
aircraft. The committee believes that streamlined business
processes, such as SNTS, can be readily achieved by
implementing AIT and has recommended increases for this
technology for maintenance and ammunition tracking systems for
other services in prior fiscal years.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $13.5 million for
other supply support equipment, an increase of $6.0 million,
for the SNTS.
Other training equipment
The budget request contained $37.2 million for other
training equipment, of which $32.5 million was for the
procurement to support the battle force tactical training
(BFTT) program.
The BFTT system allows surface combatants and aircraft
carriers to conduct realistic coordinated training scenarios
using ownship equipment instead of shore-based training
simulators. The committee notes that Congress provided funds in
fiscal years 2000 and 2001 to upgrade the BFTT system in order
to provide an air traffic control (ATC) training capability for
aircraft carrier crews. However, the committee understands that
additional BFTT ATC upgrades are required on both landing
helicopter assault (LHA) and landing helicopter dock (LHD)
amphibious ships for integrated battle group training. Because
of the enhanced benefits to ships' crews from integrated battle
group training, the committee recommends $41.2 million for
other training equipment, an increase of $4.0 million, to
procure BFTT ATC upgrades for 5 LHAs and 7 LHDs.
Radar support
The budget request contained no funds to procure radar
support equipment.
The committee understands that an upgrade to the Mk92 Mod 1
system, which provides surveillance and gunfire control on
medium-sized ships is required because the current system
relies on obsolete components that are no longer manufactured,
resulting in a spare parts inventory incapable of sustaining it
beyond fiscal year 2002. The committee believes this situation
should be avoided and, therefore, recommends an increase of
$15.0 million to upgrade Mk92 Mod 1 radars to the Mod 2
variant.
Satellite communications systems
The budget request contained $198.1 million to procure
satellite communication systems, of which $9.6 million is for
the procurement of digital modular radios (DMR).
The DMR is a software programmable radio which replaces AN/
WCS-3 transceivers and TD-1271 multiplexer modems that are not
compliant with Joint Chiefs of Staff directives. The DMR is
backward compatible with existing radios and cryptographic
devices, while being 90 percent compatible with the next-
generation Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) common
architecture. The committee understands that additional
software development is required for DMRs to maintain
compliance with JTRS software compliance architecture (SCA)
and, therefore, recommends $213.1 million for satellite
communications systems, an increase of $15.0 million, to
migrate the DMR to the JTRS SCA version 2.0 software.
Procurement, Marine Corps
Overview
The budget request contained $981.7 million for
Procurement, Marine Corps in fiscal year 2002. The committee
recommends authorization of $1,025.6 million for fiscal year
2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Container family
The budget request contained $5.9 million to procure
container handling equipment but included no funds to conduct a
service life extension program (SLEP) for the tractor, rubber
tired, articulated steering, multi-purpose (TRAM).
The TRAM, a multi-purpose material handling and earthmoving
machine capable of lifting up to 10,000 pounds, provides the
primary heavy lift and earth moving capability for the Marine
Corps. Since this system has been heavily relied upon to
facilitate expeditionary operations, it requires a SLEP to
extend its service life for an additional 10 years. The
committee notes that the Commandant of the Marine Corps has
identified a $7.4 million fiscal year 2002 unfunded requirement
to conduct a SLEP for 521 of the 617 TRAMs on hand. Because the
committee understands the vital mobility requirements that this
system fulfills, the committee recommends $13.3 million for
container family equipment, an increase of $7.4 million, for
TRAM SLEP.
Expeditionary warfare
The committee supports the Department of the Navy's efforts
in developing expeditionary warfare capabilities to address
threats of the 21st century. The committee believes that an
expeditionary force capable of rapid, sustained employment that
possesses the ability to conduct forcible entry is a necessary
military asset. However, the committee is concerned that
programmed funding is inadequate to execute the full spectrum
of expeditionary warfare operations. This disparity was
highlighted in a recent General Accounting Office report, which
concluded that it will be another 10 to 20 years before the
Navy and the Marine Corps have the capabilities needed to
successfully execute littoral warfare operations against
competent enemy forces. The committee also notes that testimony
provided by Navy and Marine Corps officials acknowledged that
the nation's sea service lacks a number of key warfighting
capabilities and that these deficiencies place at risk
expeditionary warfare operations.
Consequently, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees by March 1, 2002, that examines the relationship
between expeditionary warfare funding and mission requirements.
At a minimum, the report shall contain the following
information:
(1) Identification of those missions which are
assigned to and can best be carried out by
expeditionary warfare forces;
(2) Identification of major programs that directly
support execution of expeditionary warfare and a
comparison between required and actual funding for
these programs over the past three fiscal years as well
as a comparison between required and planned funding
for them as identified in the future years defense
program; and
(3) An explanation of the risks of underfunding these
programs, including any impact on personnel morale,
retention and effectiveness.
Family of construction equipment
The budget request contained $8.3 million for the
remanufacture or product improvement of D-7G dozers, 621B
scrapers, and 130G graders. The dozer/scraper/grader fleet is
used throughout Marine Corps combat engineer and support units
for airfield construction, as well as for combat clearing and
debris excavation.
The committee notes that the service's rapidly
deteriorating dozer, scraper and grader fleet is over 15 years
old and that the Commandant of the Marine Corps has identified
a fiscal year 2002 unfunded requirement to accelerate
remanufacture of this equipment. The committee also notes that
the remanufacturing/product improvement program will extend the
life of this equipment for an additional 10 years.
Consistent with its actions in prior years, the committee
recommends $25.3 million for the family of construction
equipment, an increase of $17.0 million, to remanufacture/
product improve D-7G dozers, scrapers, and graders.
Night vision equipment
The budget request contained $22.4 million to procure night
vision equipment but included no funds to procure AN/PVS-17
night vision sights.
The AN/PVS-17 is a lightweight, rifle-mounted, generation
III image intensification night vision sight that replaces
obsolete, post-Vietnam era AN/PVS-4 sights. The committee notes
that the Commandant of the Marine Corps has identified a $16.5
million fiscal year 2002 unfunded requirement to procure 3,682
AN/PVS-17 night vision sights, which would complete this
system's acquisition objective. The committee recognizes the
increased benefits of generation III technology, and,
therefore, recommends $36.9 million for night vision equipment,
an increase of $14.5 million, for AN/PVS-17 night vision
sights.
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request contained $10,744.5 million for Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 2002. The committee
recommends authorization of $10,705.7 million for fiscal year
2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
B-2
The budget request contained $11.9 million for B-2
modifications, of which $11.3 million was included to upgrade
one B-2 aircraft with satellite communications (SATCOM). The
budget request also contained $155.0 million in PE 64240F but
included no funds for the link 16, center instrument display
and in-flight replanner (Link16/CID/IFR) upgrade, or for
integration of the enhanced guided bomb unit (EGBU)-28 weapon.
The B-2 is the Department of Defense's most advanced long-range
strike aircraft, capable of global force projection in a highly
defended target environment.
The B-2 SATCOM upgrade provides beyond-line-of-sight secure
voice and data communications that will ensure global command
and control of this aircraft, and the committee believes that
the entire fleet of 21 B-2 aircraft should be upgraded with
SATCOM. Accordingly, the committee recommends $44.9 million for
B-2 modifications, an increase of $33.0 million, to upgrade all
21 B-2s with SATCOM.
The B-2 link 16 provides networked battlefield situational
awareness for improved survivability and flexible targeting,
while the center instrument display and in-flight replanner
portions of this upgrade provide an improved tactical situation
picture and a capability to adjust mission planning while
enroute. The EGBU-28 weapon will replace the aging, B-2 unique
GBU-37B with a common weapon to continue the B-2's capability
to attack hard and deeply buried targets. The committee views
the Link16/CID/IFR and EGBU-28 upgrades as critical to future
B-2 effectiveness. Consequently, the committee recommends
$245.0 million in PE 64240F, an increase of $90.0 million--
$63.0 million to accelerate the Link 16/CID/IFR upgrade and
$27.0 million to complete engineering and manufacturing
development activities for the EGBU-28 upgrade.
Additionally, the committee notes that the Air Force's
concept of a global strike task force includes F-22 and B-2
aircraft and believes that its implementation may require
procurement of additional B-2s. Accordingly, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide a report to
the congressional defense committees with the submission of the
fiscal year 2003 budget request that describes the number and
type of aircraft required to implement this concept and the
acquisition strategy to procure these aircraft.
C-130
The committee notes that the Air Force has developed a
long-range plan called the ``C-130 Roadmap,'' to assist in the
planning, budgeting and beddown of the newest aircraft in the
C-130 fleet. The C-130 aircraft has been the workhorse of the
military's tactical airlift fleet supporting operations around
the globe for over four decades. The committee strongly
supports the beddown of C-130Js as depicted in the ``C-130
Roadmap.'' The committee expects the Air Force to continue to
work closely with Congress on its beddown plan for the C-130J
fleet and on the proposed C-130J-30 multiyear procurement. The
committee encourages the Air Force to use similar roadmaps as
the baseline to plan, budget, and beddown other aircraft in
order to modernize and replace aging systems.
C-17
The budget request contained $2,875.8 million to procure 15
C-17 aircraft and $228.1 million for advance procurement of 12
aircraft in fiscal year 2003. The C-17 aircraft is currently
procured under a seven-year multiyear procurement contract that
ends in fiscal year 2003.
The committee notes that the recent Mobility Requirements
Study-2005 concluded that the currently programmed airlift
fleet is not adequate to meet requirements for the existing
national military strategy. While the Department of Defense's
on-going strategic review and upcoming Quadrennial Defense
Review may change strategy or requirements for combat force
structure, the committee believes that fiscal year 2003
procurement of C-17s will need to be maintained at current
levels to replace the aging C-141 aircraft fleet scheduled for
retirement. Accordingly, the committee recommends a transfer of
$36.0 million from C-17 procurement to C-17 advance procurement
in order to provide for the more efficient production rate of
15 C-17s in fiscal year 2003, rather than the 12 now planned.
Therefore, the committee recommends $2,839.8 million for
the procurement of 15 C-17s, a decrease of $36.0 million, and
$264.1 million, an increase of $36.0 million for the advance
procurement for 15 C-17s in fiscal year 2003.
The committee has included a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to proceed with a follow-on C-17
multiyear procurement contract if the Secretary certifies the
necessity to do so prior to enactment of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002.
CV-22
The budget request contained $95.1 million for CV-22
engineering and support costs, $15.0 million for the advance
procurement for three CV-22 tiltrotor aircraft in fiscal year
2003, and $26.4 million for CV-22 spares. The budget request
also contained $28.2 million, In Procurement, Defense-Wide, to
procure Special Operations Forces (SOF)-unique CV-22 long-lead
items, peculiar training equipment, publications, and technical
data. Additionally, the budget request contained $546.7 million
in PE 64262N, of which $100.0 million was included to continue
the development of two CV-22 aircraft for initial operational
test and evaluation (IOT&E) activities.
The V-22 is a tilt-rotor vertical takeoff and landing
aircraft that is being developed first for the Marine Corps as
an MV-22 variant, followed by a CV-22 variant for the Air
Force's SOF, and an HV-22 variant for the Navy. The committee
notes that following two mishaps involving the MV-22 last year,
the Marine Corps grounded its fleet pending a review of the
program by a panel appointed by the Secretary of Defense. In
April 2001, the panel recommended a near-term decrease in V-22
production along with increased design and re-engineering
efforts to improve the aircraft's safety and reliability. These
actions have delayed both the full-rate MV-22 production
decision and the development activities of the CV-22 variant.
The committee further notes that thereport accompanying H.R
2216 (H. Rept. 107-148) included the rescission of a portion of the
fiscal year 2001 funds for MV-22 and CV-22 production and for CV-22
test articles pending the correction of the MV-22 deficiencies.
Consequently, the committee believes that CV-22 procurement
funds and CV-22 test article development funds are not required
in fiscal year 2002 and recommends the following amounts: no
funds for CV-22 procurement, a decrease of $95.1 million; no
funds for CV-22 advance procurement, a decrease of $15.0
million; no funds for CV-22 spare parts, a decrease of $26.4
million; no funds in Procurement, Defense-Wide to procure SOF-
unique CV-22 long-lead items, a decrease of $28.2 million; and
$446.7 million for PE 64262N, a decrease of $100.0 million for
development of two CV-22 aircraft for IOT&E activities.
Defense airborne reconnaissance program (DARP), line 55
The budget request contained $195.0 million for various RC-
135, U-2 and C-130 aircraft modifications but included no funds
to modify the RC-135S Cobra Ball to a dual-sided, three-channel
optics and signal collection configuration.
The RC-135S Cobra Ball fleet consists of three aircraft
configured for airborne measurement and signature intelligence
(MASINT) and signals intelligence (SIGINT) collection missions
to monitor and verify treaty agreements and to provide
ballistic missile defense information to theater commanders.
The committee notes that, of the RC-135S three-aircraft fleet,
only one is configured with the dual-sided, three-channel
optics and signal collection modification that allows it to
collect MASINT and SIGINT on both sides of the aircraft with
improved accuracy. The committee believes that one additional
RC-135S Cobra Ball aircraft should be upgraded with this
capability.
Consequently, the committee recommends $206.0 million for
DARP, line 55, an increase of $11.0 million, to modify one RC-
135S Cobra Ball aircraft to the dual-sided three-channel optics
and signal collection configuration.
F-15 modifications
The budget request contained $212.2 million for F-15
modifications, of which $24.4 million was included to convert
the F100 engine to the F100-220E configuration and $39.9
million was included for the ALQ-135 Band 1.5 countermeasures
system modification. However, the budget request included no
funds for F-15E fighter data link (FDL)-16 modification.
Conversion kits for the F-15's F100 engine, also known as
``E-kits,'' provide increased thrust, greater reliability,
better fuel efficiency, and reduced operations and maintenance
costs. For fiscal year 2001, the committee recommended a $70.0
million increase to accelerate this modification and notes that
$36.0 million was appropriated for this purpose.
The committee continues to support this upgrade and,
therefore, recommends an increase of $25.0 million to
accelerate the conversion of the F-15 fleet's engines to the
F100-220E configuration.
The ALQ-135 Band 1.5 countermeasures system modification
provides a self-protection jamming capability against modern
surface-to-air enemy missiles and is integrated with the F-15's
existing internal countermeasure set and its ALR-56C radar
warning receiver to provide full threat coverage. The committee
believes that improved self-protection capability such as the
ALQ-135 Band 1.5 countermeasures system modification addresses
deficiencies identified subsequent to Operation Allied Force in
1999, as well as those in current combat operations.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0
million for the ALQ-135 Band 1.5 countermeasures system
modification. While the committee notes that the budget
estimates for fiscal years 2003 to 2007 do not reflect the
Department's strategic review results, the committee strongly
urges the Air Force to establish a consistent funding approach
for the ALQ-135 Band 1.5 countermeasures system that will
complete production and installation of this modification on
all F-15E aircraft by fiscal year 2005.
The F-15E FDL-16 modification provides the F-15E with a
tactical data link radio which significantly improves
operational effectiveness by providing real-time, jam-resistant
digital data and voice transfer capability. The committee
understands that this continuous automated exchange of data
between aircraft provides our pilots with a significant
increase in situational awareness and improves survivability by
four times. The committee notes that the final increment of F-
15E FDL-16 funding is currently planned for fiscal year 2004
but believes that such timing will result in an F-15E FDL-16
production break with a concomitant increase in costs to
restart production and higher unit costs at the later date.
Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $19.5
million to accelerate the final increment of F-15E FDL-16
procurement. In total, the committee recommends $264.7 million
for F-15 modifications, an increase of $52.5 million.
F-16 modifications
The budget request contained $232.0 million for various F-
16 modifications but included no funds for advanced concept
ejection seat (ACES) co-operative improvement program (CIP).
The committee understands that, as a result of pilot
demographic changes, 17 percent of the pilot population is
outside the weight threshold for existing ejection seats, and
that the ACES CIP will address this safety concern by improving
seat stability and limb restraint to accommodate a wider range
of pilot sizes.
Consequently, the committee recommends $234.0 million for
F-16 modifications, an increase of $2.0 million, to begin the
incorporation of ACES CIP safety improvements and expects the
Department of the Air Force to budget for this upgrade in its
future years defense program.
Fixed aircrew standardized seats
The budget request contained $51.0 million for other
modifications but included no funds for fixed aircrew
standardized seats (FASS).
FASS would provide crewmembers and passengers on C-130, C-
135, C-141, C-5, E-3, KC-10, C-17, and E-8 aircraft protection
against aircraft crash loads up to 16 times the force of
gravity. In prior years, the committee has supported the
development of theFASS and continues to believe that its
implementation will not only increase safety, but also reduce supply
and maintenance costs through the commonality and interchangeability of
its parts.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $55.8 million for
other modifications, an increase of $4.8 million, to begin
procurement of FASS.
MC-130 simulation training upgrades
The budget request contained $1.4 million for C-130 post-
production support but included no funds for an MC-130P weapon
system trainer (WST) software upgrade or for an MC-130H
simulator visual scene and sensor display.
The committee notes that the MC-130P simulator software is
three versions behind the software installed on MC-130P
aircraft and fails to properly interface with critical
navigation and defensive avionics systems. The committee
understands that this training limitation results in the
development of poor MC-130P student aircrew habits that
negatively affect mission accomplishment. Consequently, the
committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million for an MC-130P
WST software upgrade to correct this deficiency.
The committee also understands that the current MC-130H
simulator uses a visual display system that limits the
aircrew's cockpit field of view, resulting in poor night vision
training. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of
$1.3 million to upgrade the MC-130H simulator's visual scene
and sensor display to improve aircrew night vision training. In
total, the committee recommends $4.2 million for C-130 post-
production support, an increase of $2.8 million.
Predator unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)
The budget request contained $19.6 million for procurement
of six Predator UAV systems but included no funds for the
Predator B, a larger, faster variant with increased payload
capacity. Each Predator UAV system consists of four air
vehicles, one ground control station, a communications suite,
and associated ground support equipment. The budget request
also contained $10.4 million for Predator modifications but
included no funds for a structured reliability and
maintainability program.
The Predator UAV system provides long-dwell, real-time
intelligence information to Joint Task Force Commanders. The
committee notes that following the accomplishments of the
Predator UAV system in its reconnaissance role, the system has
also successfully demonstrated its capability to be weaponized
to deliver Hellfire missiles. As missions for the Predator UAV
system expand, the committee believes that improved speed and
payload capacity are necessary.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $39.6 million for
Predator procurement, an increase of $20.0 million, for the
acquisition of the follow-on Predator B variant.
However, the committee notes that the Predator UAV system
is accumulating significant flying hours and believes that the
long-term sustainment of current reliability and
maintainability levels is imperative. Consequently, the
committee recommends $16.4 million for Predator modifications,
an increase of $6.0 million, to facilitate the implementation
of a structured reliability and maintainability program.
Ammunition Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request contained $865.3 million for Ammunition
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 2002. The committee
recommends authorization of $871.3 million for fiscal year
2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Missile Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request contained $3,233.5 million for Missile
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 2002. The committee
recommends authorization of $3,226.3 million for fiscal year
2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Other Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request contained $8,159.5 million for Other
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 2002. The committee
recommends authorization of $8,250.8 million for fiscal year
2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Air national guard air traffic control tower radio upgrade
The budget request contained $4.7 million for air traffic
control and landing systems but included no funds to upgrade
the air traffic control tower radio systems at McEntire Air
National Guard Base (ANGB).
The committee notes that current plans for this new air
traffic control tower anticipate the continued use of outdated
radio systems and believes that flight safety will be
significantly enhanced with the installation of modern digital
radios.
Consequently, the committee recommends $5.2 million for air
traffic control and landing systems, an increase of $500
thousand, to upgrade the air traffic control tower radio system
at McEntire ANGB.
Combat arms training system (CATS)
The budget request contained $12.0 million for base
procured equipment but included no funds for CATS. CATS is a
computer-based simulation system that provides marksmanship
training for security force personnel as well as training to
deal with less-than-lethal judgmental scenarios.
The committee notes that the Air Force has also recognized
the value of CATS and has authorized Air Force reserve
component category ``C'' personnel to qualify on this trainer
instead of conducting live-fire training, which saves
substantial live training ammunition costs. The committee also
notes the need for additional CATS for Air National Guard (ANG)
security force units to meet the demanding training requirement
for both their wartime and peacetime missions. These units must
be capable of performing both combat and police missions, which
requires that they be fully trained to respond to situations of
varying levels of threat, including anti-terrorism training, to
protect the 72 ANG sites located throughout the United States.
Since the Air Force increasingly relies on ANG security forces
for overseas deployments and for anti-terrorism missions, the
committee views the training proficiency provided by CATS to be
imperative.
Therefore, the committee recommends $17.0 million for base
procured equipment, an increase of $5.0 million, for the CATS.
Laser eye protection
The budget request contained $7.7 million for items less
than $5.0 million, of which $2.8 million was included for clear
laser eye protection for infrared (CLEPIR) spectacles.
CLEPIR spectacles reflect infrared laser energy wavelengths
away from the eye while allowing the transmission of other
light wavelengths such that CLEPIR spectacles can be used day
or night and in conjunction with night vision goggles. The
committee understands that the Air Force requires additional
CLEPIR spectacles for use in Europe and Southwest Asia and
notes that increased CLEPIR spectacle production in fiscal year
2002 would provide for a more economic production rate.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $11.7 million for
items less than $5.0 million, an increase of $4.0 million, for
CLEPIR spectacles.
Senior scout
The budget request contained $2.0 million for intelligence
communications equipment but included no funds to upgrade
Senior Scout equipment. Senior Scout is an intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance suite of equipment, configured
in a shelter capable of installation on C-130E or C-130H
aircraft, that provides communications and electronic signals
intelligence collection.
The committee notes that Senior Scout mission data
management processors currently use 16-year old technology and
are not compatible with modern data storage or retrieval
systems. Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of
$820 thousand to update the Senior Scout data management
processor.
The committee also notes that joint tactical information
dissemination system (JTIDS) capability is not fully
implemented in the Senior Scout suite and recommends an
increase of $3.6 million to procure and install JTIDS
connectivity equipment.
The committee understands that of the three existing Senior
Scout shelters, one is an older configuration and requires
updating to avoid the future operating costs of maintaining two
different configurations. Accordingly, the committee recommends
an increase of $2.8 million to modernize the third Senior Scout
shelter.
Finally, the committee has learned that the Senior Scout
ground data reduction (GDR) system, used to refine emitter
location data, contains legacy computer equipment that is no
longer commercially supportable. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $1.6 million to modernize the GDR
system.
In total, the committee recommends $10.8 million for
intelligence communications equipment, an increase of $8.8
million, to upgrade Senior Scout equipment.
Supply asset tracking system (SATS)
The budget request contained $14.4 million for mechanized
material handling equipment but included no funds for SATS.
SATS provides total asset visibility and reduces
documentation at the base level by incorporating radio
frequency terminals and smart cards that electronically confirm
each transaction and eliminate documentation in the delivery
process.
The committee notes that Congress has provided additional
funds for SATS installation over the past two years and,
consistent with these actions, recommends $22.4 million for
mechanized material handling equipment, an increase of $8.0
million, to continue the installation of this system at Air
Force bases worldwide.
Theater air control system improvement (TACSI)
The budget request contained $15.1 million for TACSI, but
included no funds to initiate a technology insertion and
sustainment program for the Air National Guard's (ANG) AN/TYQ-
23 modular control equipment (MCE) operations modules.
The AN/TYQ-23 MCE operations module is used to manage air
operations in a deployed location. The committee notes that the
Marine Corps also uses the AN/TYQ-23 MCE and has embarked on a
technology insertion program to replace their operations
modules with new software and hardware that improves
performance and is more sustainable. The committee understands
that this technology insertion and sustainment upgrade program
will ensure that the AN/TYQ-23 MCE operations modules are
viable to perform contingency operational deployment missions
for at least 10 additional years.
Consequently, the committee recommends $30.1 million for
TACSI, an increase of $15.0 million, to initiate a technology
insertion and sustainment program for the ANG's AN/TYQ-23 MCE
operations modules.
Procurement, Defense-Wide
Overview
The budget request contained $1,604.0 million for
Procurement, Defense-Wide in fiscal year 2002. The committee
recommends authorization of $2,267.3 million for fiscal year
2002.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Chemical/biological defense procurement program
The budget request also contained a total of $348.7 million
for chemical/biological defense (CBD) procurement, including
$114.3 million for procurement of individual protection
equipment, $15.2 million for decontamination, $155.9 million
for the joint biological defense program, $38.9 million for
collective protection, and $24.3 million for contamination
avoidance.
Anthrax vaccination immunization program
The committee is concerned with the lack of progress in the
completion of the contractor submitting a Biologic License
Application Supplement for production of Anthrax Vaccine
Adsorbed (AVA). Accordingly, if by February 1, 2002, the
Secretary of Defense determines that the contractor has failed
to submit to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) a
completed Biologic License Application Supplement for
production of AVA, then the committee directs that the
Secretary review all contracts for the production, fill and
packaging of the AVA and report to the congressional defense
committees the results of this review no later than April 1,
2002. If based on that review, or at the conclusion of FDA's
review of the Biologic License Application Supplement,
discrepancies are found that cannot be resolved in a fiscally
prudent manner then the Secretary should not request funds to
continue the current production contract in future budget
submissions, but should take action to procure a suitable
vaccine from an alternative source.
Chemical/biological defense collective protection shelters
The committee recommends $51.9 million for procurement of
collective protection equipment, an increase of $13.0 million,
for procurement of CBD collective protection shelters.
Portable intelligence collection and relay capability (PICRC)
The budget request contained $8.1 million for special
operations forces (SOF) intelligence systems but included no
funds for the PICRC.
The PICRC integrates commercial-off-the-shelf, full-
dimensional mapping and display software; desktop computers;
hand-held computing devices; and wireless communications to
provide SOF operators with high-resolution imagery for
precision navigation, annotation of real-time visual
observations, and relaying information to command elements.
The committee understands that this system would
significantly enhance SOF capabilities to accurately collect,
quickly report, and promptly act upon real-time intelligence
data. Therefore, the committee recommends $13.1 million for SOF
intelligence systems, an increase of $5.0 million, for
procurement of PICRC systems.
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense
Overview
As described elsewhere in this report, the committee
recommends transferring the budget request of $1,153.6 million
for Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army (CAMD, A)
to Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense (CAMD,
D), and recommends a total of $1,078.6 million for Chemical
Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense, including $192.9
million for research, development, test, and evaluation, $157.2
million for procurement, and $728.5 for operations and
maintenance. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are
without prejudice and based on affordability consideration.
Items of Special Interest
Chemical agents and munitions destruction
The committee notes that chemical demilitarization
facilities for 95 percent of the stockpile at eight stockpile
storage sites in the continental United States are either in
operation, under construction, or have had permits granted. To
date, 22 percent of the total U.S. stockpile has been destroyed
in operational demilitarization facilities at Johnston Atoll
and Tooele, Utah. Stockpile demilitarization operations at the
former facility have been completed and shutdown of that
facility begun. Construction of the Anniston, Alabama, facility
was completed in June 2001 and systematization operations have
begun at that location, while construction of the Umatilla,
Oregon, facility is 98 percent complete and the Pine Bluff,
Arkansas, facility is 53 percent complete. Only facilities at
the Pueblo Chemical Depot, Colorado, and Lexington-Blue Grass
Army Depot, Kentucky, which are being addressed by the
Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment (ACWA), are not yet
covered. Current law requires the Secretary of Defense to
provide recommendations on alternative disposal technologies
for these two facilities by the end of the calendar year. The
ACWA program evaluation of potential alternative technologies
for assembled weapons has been completed and a Defense
Acquisition Board review of the program is underway that is
expected to provide the basis for Secretary of Defense decision
in December 2001, and report to Congress on the
demilitarization technologies that will be used at Pueblo and
Blue Grass. The review will also assess the overall management
and funding of the program and the ability of the program to
complete destruction of the stockpile by April 29, 2007, as
required by the Chemical Weapons Convention.
Review of program for destruction of lethal chemical agents
and munitions
Section 141(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) required the Secretary
of Defense to conduct an assessment of the current program for
destruction of the United States stockpile of chemical agents
and munitions, including the Assembled Chemical Weapons
Assessment, for the purposes of significantly reducing the cost
of the program and ensuring its completion in accordance with
the obligations of the United States under the Chemical Weapons
Convention while maintaining maximum protection of the general
public, the personnel involved in the program, and the
environment. The provision required the Secretary of Defense to
report the results of the assessment to Congress by March 1,
2000, including those actions taken, or planned to be taken by
the Secretary and any recommendations for additional
legislation required to achieve the purposes of the assessment
and of the chemical agents and munitions destruction program.
The committee notes that the Secretary of Defense has
initiated a Defense Acquisition Board review of the chemical
agents and munitions destruction program to assess the results
of the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment, to make
recommendations for the possible use of alternative
technologies for destruction of the stockpile, and to review
the overall management and conduct of the program. As a part of
this review, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
update the assessmentrequired by Public Law 106-65 and to
report the results of that updated assessment to the congressional
defense committees by March 1, 2002.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Sections 101-107--Authorization of Appropriations
These sections would authorize the recommended fiscal year
2002 funding levels for all procurement accounts.
Subtitle B--Army Programs
Section 111--Extension of Multiyear Contract for Family of Medium
Tactical Vehicles
This section would amend Section 112 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-
85) to authorize the Secretary of the Army to extend the
existing multiyear procurement contract for one year to
continue procuring ``A1'' variants of the Family of Medium
Tactical Vehicles if the Secretary determines that it is
necessary to do so in order to prevent a break in production.
Section 112--Repeal of Limitation on Number of Bunker Defeat Munitions
that May Be Acquired
This section would repeal Section 116 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-
337).
Subtitle C--Air Force Programs
Section 121--Responsibility of Air Force for Contracts for All Defense
Space Launches
This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force
to prepare, negotiate, execute, and manage all Department of
Defense contracts for space launch vehicles and space launch
services and to report to the congressional defense and
intelligence committees on the implementation of this
requirement.
Section 122--Multiyear Procurement of C-17 Aircraft
This section would, beginning in fiscal year 2002,
authorize the Secretary of Defense to enter into a follow-on
multi-year contract or extend the current multi-year contract
in order to procure up to 60 additional C-17 aircraft if the
Secretary certifies to the congressional defense committees
prior to the enactment of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2002 that it is in the interest of the
Department of Defense to proceed with either of these two
options.
Subtitle D--Chemical Munitions Destruction
Section 141--Destruction of Existing Stockpile of Lethal Chemical
Agents and Munitions
This section would amend section 152 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-
106; 50 U.S.C. note) to add to the requirements that must be
satisfied before the Secretary of Defense may initiate
destruction of the chemical munitions stockpile stored at a
chemical stockpile destruction site the requirement that
emergency preparedness and response capabilities have been
established at the site and in the surrounding communities. The
section would require the Under Secretary of Defense
(Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics) to convene an
independent oversight board to make a recommendation to the
Under Secretary, no later than six months after the board is
convened, whether the destruction of the chemical munitions
stockpile should be initiated at a particular chemical
stockpile destruction site. Finally, the section would require
that the Under Secretary, after considering a negative
recommendation of the board, may not recommend beginning
destruction of the chemical munitions stockpile at a site until
90 days after the Under Secretary notifies the Congress of his
intent to recommend initiation of live agents and munitions
destruction operations.
The committee notes that the live chemical agents and
munitions destruction operations are scheduled to begin at
Anniston Chemical Activity, Alabama, in the third quarter of
fiscal year 2002 and encourages the Under Secretary to convene
the oversight board for the Anniston site immediately upon
enactment of this act. For the other sites for which live agent
and munitions destruction operations are scheduled to begin
upon completion of construction and systematization operations
at the site, the committee recommends that the Under Secretary
convene the oversight board no later than nine months prior to
the date scheduled for beginning live agents and munitions
destruction operations. The committee also recommends the Under
Secretary to establish as a goal for the panel appointed for
each site the completion of the panel's review of the readiness
to begin live agents and munitions destruction operations at
the site no later that 120 days prior to the scheduled
initiation of such operations.
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
OVERVIEW
The budget request contained $47,429.4 million for
research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E),
representing an increase to the amount of $41,008.6 million
provided for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends
$47,735.2 million, an increase of $230.5 million to the budget
request. The committee also recommends $65.3 million, the
requested amount, for Defense Health Program RDT&E funding.
The committee notes that the fiscal year 2002 request for
RDT&E funding represents the first significant increase in the
past decade, and the first time in six years that the requested
amount for RDT&E was greater than the amount provided by
Congress in the previous year.
The committee strongly supports this much needed increase
and notes that the Department of Defense and the military
services have all initiated major efforts to transform military
warfighting capabilities to better prepare for future threats
and challenges. While supportive of these transformation
efforts, the committee remains concerned that the largest
portion of the total RDT&E request is contained in the fielded
system development category, the area primarily dedicated to
upgrades of existing systems. The committee reviewed these
program increases and recommended a number of funding transfers
specified in the report from mature systems development
accounts to science & technology programs which are more
representative of transformation.
The committee believes that the amount requested for RDT&E
for fiscal year 2002 represents an appropriate level of funding
to support initial transformation efforts, but this level of
funding is insufficient to support both transformation of the
services and continued modernization of legacy capabilities.
The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to outline clearly
the priorities for RDT&E investment strategies in consonance
with the results of the Quadrennial Defense Review results and
in coordination with Congress.
Army RDT&E
Overview
The budget request contained $6,693.9 million for Army
RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of $6,749.0
million, an increase of $235.8 million and the transfer of
$180.7 million for missile defense programs from Army RDT&E to
Defense-wide RDT&E.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2002 Army
RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes
to the Army request are discussed following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced display technology
The budget request contained $27.8 million in PE 62705A for
applied research in electronics and electronic devices; $71.3
million in PE 62236N for warfighter sustainment applied
research; and $69.1 million in PE 62202F for human
effectiveness applied research, including $4.4 million for
applied research in advanced visual displays. No funds were
included for advanced high definition displays in the budget
request for the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency
(DARPA).
The committee notes that the responsibility for supporting
the development of advanced high definition display
technologies for military applications, which cannot be met by
commercial industry, has transitioned from DARPA to the
research and development programs of the military departments.
The committee report on H. R. 4205 (H. Rept. 106-616) directed
the Secretary of Defense to develop a strategy for meeting the
Department's requirement for advanced high definition displays
and to report the proposed strategy and budget requirements to
the congressional defense committees with the submission of the
fiscal year 2002 budget request. The Secretary's report
indicated that the Department of Defense will make use of
global industrial capability where it is available, relying on
an highly competitive and rapidly evolving global market.
Research and development investments within the Department will
be focused on those needs where industry is not yet leading the
way and a military advantage is foreseen. DARPA funding for
large area, high definition displays ends in fiscal year 2001.
Service-funded work in micro-displays for cockpits and
immersive head-mounted systems continues through 2005. New
initiatives in 25 megapixel and true three-dimensional displays
will support transition of the technology for both commercial
and military applications.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
62705A, an increase of $4.0 million in PE 62236N, and an
increase of $5.0 million in PE 62202F for applied research in
advanced high definition displays for military applications.
All source analysis system
The budget request included $42.2 million in PE 64321A for
the All Source Analysis System (ASAS), but included no funds to
develop a multi-discipline capability for the Army's stability
and support operations.
The committee strongly endorses the Army's objective force
concept and supports the effort to transform the current force
to a lighter, leaner, stealthier, more lethal, and more mobile
one. Further, the committee supports the plan to transition to
the objective force by initially fielding interim brigade
combat teams. However, the committee is concerned with the
Department's lack of commitment to concurrently develop an
open-architecture data-exchange capability suitable for both
the interim and objective forces at all echelons of command.
The committee is aware of the stated plans to develop ASAS-
Light as the baseline automated support system for intelligence
and electronic warfare for the interim brigades and the First
Digitized Division. To maintain interoperability between ASAS-
Light and other automated battle management systems, the
committee encourages the Army to develop a multi-discipline
capability for the Army's stability and support operations.
Therefore, the committee recommends $45.7 million in PE
64321A, an increase of $3.5 million, to develop this
capability.
Applied communications and information networking program
The budget request contained no funds in PE 64805A for the
Applied Communications and Information Networking (ACIN)
program.
The committee understands that the ACIN program includes
projects aimed at integrating commercial off-the-shelf
components and adapting commercial technologies to fulfill
military communications applications for 21st century warfare.
Consistent with its prior years actions to promote increased
partnering with commercial industry, the committee recommends
an increase of $15.0 million in PE 64805A for ACIN.
Army missile defense systems integration
The budget request contained $19.5 million in PE 63308A for
Army missile defense systems integration, but did not include
funds for super-cluster memory technology, or P3 micro-power
devices. The committee notes that designing defensive missile
systems requires sophisticated, powerful simulations that
accurately characterize missile flight. The committee is aware
that super-cluster distributed memory technology holds promise
as a low-cost means to run required simulations quickly.
The committee is also aware that missile defense systems
require micro-power devices for autonomous and remote
applications.
The committee recommends $31.5 million in PE 63308A, an
increase of $4.0 million for the Army Space and Missile Defense
Command supervised super-cluster distributed memory technology
demonstration, $3.0 million for P3 micro power devices, $3.0
million for family of systems simulators, $3.0 million for
thermionics technology, and a decrease of $1.0 million for
management savings.
Aviation engineering development
The budget request contained $2.3 million in PE 64801A for
aviation engineering development but included no funds for the
development of the cockpit air bag system (CABS) for CH-47
Chinook aircraft.
The committee is highly supportive of technological
advances that contribute to improved aircraft crashworthiness
and aircrew safety, and, therefore, recommends $4.8 million in
PE 64801A, an increase of $2.5 million, for the integration of
the CABS into the CH-47 Chinook upgrade program.
Brooks Air Force Base energy and sustainability laboratory
The budget request contained $42.9 million in PE 62784A for
military engineering technology, but included no funds for the
Energy and Sustainability Laboratory (ESL) at Brooks Air Force
Base.
The laboratory is a consortium of Air Force and university
partners working to improve life-cycle effectiveness of real
assets and the infrastructure on the base.
The committee recommends $45.9 million in PE 62784A, an
increase of $3.0 million for Army Corps of Engineers'
Construction Research Laboratory collaboration with the ESL.
Collaboration in biotechnology research
The budget request contained $69.1 million in PE 61104A for
university and industry research, including federated
laboratories.
The committee notes that the federated laboratories program
is a very successful peer reviewed program. The committee is
aware that biotechnology is increasingly important and offers
many potential applications in support of the Army's transition
to the objective force, such as casualty reduction, improved
nutrition, protection from infectious diseases, and chemical/
biological agents.
The committee supports effective collaboration between the
government, industry and academia and recommends $79.1 million
in PE 61104A, an increase of $10.0 million for biotechnology
collaborative research.
Combat ready food safety
The budget request contained $27.1 million in PE 62786A for
warfighter technology, and included $5.0 million for joint
service combat feeding technology.
The committee notes that continued improvement in food
processing is important to ensure the safety of ready-to-eat
meals.
The committee recommends $30.1 million in PE 62786A, an
increase of $3.0 million for research and development of
improved meal ready-to-eat processing.
Combustion-driven eye safe laser
The budget request contained $20.6 million in PE 62709A for
night vision, but included no funds for combustion-driven eye-
safe laser.
The committee is aware that eye-safe lasers are important
for military applications, and that the combustion-driven eye-
safe laser has potential to meet requirements for several
applications.
The committee recommends $22.6 million in PE 2709A, an
increase of $2.0 million to complete development of the
combustion-driven eye-safe laser.
Comanche
The budget request contained $787.9 million in PE 64223A
for Comanche.
The committee notes that the Comanche armed reconnaissance
helicopter is the only new Army aviation system under
development. The committee further notes that Comanche will
provide key capability for the objective force with its state-
of-the-art stealthy platform, multiple sensors, and advanced
weapons.
The committee continues to support Comanche and recommends
the budget request and increases described elsewhere in this
report.
Combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology
The budget request contained $193.9 million in PE 63005A
for combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology, but
included no funds for standardized exchange of product data,
document conversion, or the medium brigade composite bridge.
The committee notes that standardized exchange of product
data has the potential to increase efficiency and reduce costs
of parts, and is aware that the National Automotive Center
standardized exchange of product data (N-STEP) initiative is
intended to fill this void. The committee is aware that many
existing documents require conversion to 2-dimension/3-
dimension computer aided design format.
The committee is aware of the need for a lightweight bridge
for medium brigades.
The committee recommends $201.9 million in PE 63005A, an
increase of $7.0 million for N-STEP, an increase of $9.0
million for Army medium brigade composite bridge, an increase
of $2.0 million for conversion of technical manuals, and an
undistributed decrease of $10.0 million.
Crusader
The budget request contained $447.9 million in PE 63854A
for Crusader.
The committee is aware that the Army considers the Crusader
self-propelled howitzer an essential war fighting capability as
it transforms itself to a lighter, more lethal, and more
logistically efficient force.
The committee notes that developmental firing testing has
clearly demonstrated a significantly increased capability. The
committee further notes that many attributes such as the high
degree of automation, imbedded diagnostics, and improved
mobility are clearly technology carriers for future autonomous
and semi-autonomous vehicles. The committee is concerned that
funds allocated to management appear to be excessive, and
directs that $17.9 million of the funds allocated within the
program for management be redirected within the Crusader
program to develop technology, in particular, to reduce
Crusader weight and production costs.
The committee strongly supports continued Crusader
development and recommends the budget request.
Dismounted situational awareness system
The budget request contained $29.3 million for digitization
in PE 23758A, but included no funds for the dismounted
situational awareness system.
The committee is aware that situational awareness is
critical for dismounted soldiers. The committee notes that the
dismounted situational awareness system (DISM), the result of a
very successful commercial-off-the-shelf technology-based small
business innovative research effort, is being transitioned to
the Army's force XXI battle command brigade and below (FBCB2)
as a dismounted extension of the vehicle based system.
The committee recommends $31.3 million in PE 23758A, an
increase of $2.0 million, for full scale testing of DISM.
Electronics and electronic devices
The budget request contained $27.8 million in PE 62705A for
electronics and electronic devices.
The committee notes that hybrid power systems and other
fuel cell applications have the potential to provide more cost
effective portable power for future military systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
62705A for hybrid battery-fuel cell and other fuel cell power
sources.
Electronic warfare (EW) development
The budget request contained $57.0 million in PE 64270A for
the development of EW equipment, of which $43.8 million was for
continued development of the Advanced Threat Infrared
Countermeasures/Common Missile Warning System (ATIRCM/CMWS).
The ATIRCM system integrates defensive infrared (IR)
countermeasures into currently fielded aircraft for more
effective protection against a greater number of IR-guided
missiles than is provided by currently fielded technology. The
CMWS provides warning of a threat IR-guided missile on a
variety of tactical aircraft and helicopters.
The committee is aware of a critical requirement to upgrade
Army test facilities in order to perform effective tests on
integrated helicopter self-protection systems installed on the
AH-64D Apache Longbow against multi-mode missile seekers.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $66.0 million for PE
64270A, an increase of $9.0 million, for this purpose.
Environmental quality technology
The budget request contained $7.5 million in PE 63779A for
environmental quality technology, but included no funds for
either an asbestos removal pilot project or the Porta Bella
environmental cleanup technology demonstration.
The committee is aware that asbestos remediation remains a
problem within the Department of Defense and notes the need for
research to find better, more cost-effective means of
remediation, including asbestos conversion.
The committee also notes that while the cleanup of ordnance
and explosive wastes at the Porta Bella site is important to
the Army and the local community, it has much broader potential
benefits because the new technology developed under this pilot
program can be used at similar sites elsewhere.
The committee recommends $14.0 million in PE 63779A, an
increase of $2.0 million for asbestos conversion research and
technology development, an increase of $7.0 million for
completion of the Porta Bella environmental cleanup technology
demonstration, and a general decrease of $2.5 million.
Full authority digital engine control
The budget request contained $13.0 million in PE 23752A for
aircraft engine component improvement, including $11.0 million
for improvements to the T700 engine family.
The committee notes that full authority digital engine
control (FADEC) improves capability and reliability of aircraft
engines. The committee further notes that development of a
dual-channel FADEC will improve engine reliability and aircraft
safety.
The committee recommends $21.0 million in PE 23752A, an
increase of $8.0 million for completion of FADEC development.
Funding transfers to support transformation
The committee is concerned that the largest area of growth
in Army research and development investments has occurred in
the category of fielded system development and other mature
technologies. While these programs are important, the committee
does not believe they support the highest priority efforts
directly related to Army transformation. Therefore, the
committee recommends the following decreases to Army accounts,
to be transferred to other programs within the Army that
support higher transformation priorities:
63003A.................................................. $9,000,000
63639A.................................................. 2,986,000
63747A.................................................. 3,482,000
63774A.................................................. 2,756,000
63782A.................................................. 5,000,000
65103A.................................................. 3,000,000
65326A.................................................. 10,000,000
65801A.................................................. 9,000,000
65803A.................................................. 5,000,000
23735A.................................................. 12,000,000
23744A.................................................. 5,000,000
23802A.................................................. 6,000,000
78045A.................................................. 10,000,000
High energy laser--low aspect target tracking
The budget request contained no funds for the high energy
laser--low aspect target tracking HEL-LATT program.
The committee is aware of the Navy's interest in high
energy laser weapons systems for ship self defense. This
application is particularly challenging because the inbound
target presents a low aspect view to the defender, and the
weapons system must track the target in the presence of intense
laser reflection. The program will use an existing megawatt
class high energy laser and beam director at the Department of
Defense high energy laser test facility, and full size targets
to verify that a small cross section low altitude target can be
simultaneously engaged and tracked.
The committee recommends a $10.0 million increase to PE
65605A and a $10.0 million increase to PE 63114N to support
this new start.
Hybrid track technology
The budget request contained $89.0 million in PE 65712A for
support of operational testing, but included no funds for
testing hybrid track technologies.
The committee is aware that the MATTRACKS program is a
commercial version of a technologically advanced independent
rubber track system. The committee notes MATTRACKS is a simple
bolt-in-place replacement for wheels for vehicles, including
the HMMWV, that provides increased traction.
The committee recommends $99.0 million in PE 65712A, an
increase of $10.0 million for continued testing and evaluation
of hybrid track technology.
Hyperspectral long-wave imager for the tactical environment
The budget request included $6.9 million for Airborne
Reconnaissance Operational Systems Development in PE 35206A,
but included no funds for hyperspectral long wave imager.
The committee notes the potential benefits of imagery
intelligence, measurement and signature intelligence
applications, and supports further development of hyperspectral
sensors for these uses. The committee is aware of the unique
day/night, all-terrain capability offered by the hyperspectral
long wave imagery, and supports additional development of
enhanced target detection algorithms and improved target
detection hardware. The committee further notes the potential
tactical applications of long wave infrared and medium wave
infrared hyperspectral technology as a means for augmenting U-2
and Global Hawk platforms.
Accordingly, the committee authorizes $14.9 million in PE
35206A, an increase of $8 million for hyper-spectral long wave
imager.
Infantry support weapons
The budget request contained no funds in PE 64601A for the
development of infantry support weapons.
The XM303 prototype is a lightweight, multi-shot, magazine-
fed, semi-automatic delivery system that attaches under both M-
16 series and M-4 carbine barrels and launches a variety of
non-lethal blunt-force, dye-marking, malodorant, or
illuminating projectiles.
The committee understands that this system was initially
developed by the Marine Corps, the Department of Defense's
executive agent for non-lethal weapons development, but that
the Army is now interested in the system's capabilities.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in PE 64601A for accelerated development of the XM303
for Army units and so that it may enter into low-rate initial
production sooner.
International medical program global satellite system
The budget request contained $15.5 million in PE 63807A
medical systems, and included $1.6 million for telemedicine.
The committee is aware that the International Medical
Program Global Satellite System (IMPGSS) successfully
demonstrated the medical education component of its program in
the Republic of Georgia. The integration of commercially
reliable telecommunication capabilities, particularly `spot-
casting', with the education component, however, has yet to be
proven.
As a result, the committee recommends $18.5 million in PE
63807A, an increase of $3.0 million for IMPGSS integrated
development and delivery concept in at least two countries and
strongly recommends that IMPGSS continue to be managed by the
Telemedicine and Advanced Technology Research Center at Fort
Detrick, Maryland.
Landmine warfare/barrier engineering development
The budget request contained $89.2 million in PE 64808A for
landmine warfare/barrier engineering development, of which
$21.2 million was for non-self-destruct anti-personnel landmine
alternatives (NSD-A).
The committee understands that the Army does not plan to
obligate $37.2 million of fiscal year 2001 NSD-A funds prior to
the beginning of fiscal year 2002. As a result, the committee
believes that these funds can be used to meet fiscal year 2002
requirements.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $69.2 million in PE
64808A for fiscal year 2002, a decrease of $20.0 million.
Lightweight x-band radar antenna
The budget request contained $30.4 million in PE 12419A for
the Aerostat Joint Project, but included no funds for micro-
mechanical electronics systems (MEMS) based lightweight radar
antenna.
The committee is aware that development of a lightweight,
MEMS based, electronically steerable x-band radar antenna has
the potential to improve performance while reducing weight and
power requirements for the joint elevated netted sensor
(JLENS).
The committee recommends $32.4 million in PE 12419A, an
increase of $2.0 million for design of a lightweight, MEMS
based, and electronically steerable antenna.
Medical advanced technology
The budget request contained $17.5 million in PE 63002A for
medical advanced technology, but included no funds for special
operations medical diagnostic system (SOMDS), or volumetrically
controlled manufacturing (VCM).
The committee is aware that the clinical assessment and
recording environment (CARE) is being adapted to support
special operations forces. The committee notes that the first
SOMDS, a beta version of CARE, has undergone successful
testing.
The committee also notes that VCM offers the potential to
eliminate the current mode of failure in composites, de-
lamination, and polymer-fiber interface breakdown, and may also
improve composite applications in aerospace and other
manufacturing
The committee recommends $23.5 million in PE 63002A, an
increase of $1.0 million for SOMDS, and an increase of $5.0
million for VCM. The committee further recommends an increase
of $3.5 million in PE 63313A for aerospace applications of VCM.
Medical technology
The budget request contained $82.5 million in PE 62787A for
medical technology, but included no funds for hemoglobin-based
oxygen carrier.
The committee notes that the military has identified a need
for an oxygen carrier capability that is both readily and
easily employed in the treatment of combat casualties, and
stable at room temperature. The committee is aware that a
recent Department of Defense (DOD) Inspector General audit of
the Armed Services Blood program indicated that the DOD blood
program cannot currently meet its stated requirements, and
noted specifically that a hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier would
minimize or eliminate the storage and transportation problems
identified in the report. The committee is also aware that
unlike human blood, a hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier has an
extended life, making it more adaptive to a wide range of
military deployment conditions. The committee believes that a
hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier offers significant potential
benefits for the military.
The committee is also aware that a need exists to develop
technologies that would permit the long-term storage of cells
and tissues needed to treat battlefield casualties.
The committee recommends $91.5 million in PE 62787A, an
increase of $7.0 million for room temperature stable oxygen
therapeutic drugs, in particular hemoglobin-based oxygenated
carriers, and an increase of $2.0 million for metabolically
engineered tissues for trauma care.
MedTeams
The budget request contained $16.5 million in PE 62716A for
human factors engineering, but included no funds for the
Emergency Team Coordination program (MedTeams).
The committee notes that the Army MedTeams research in
emergency departments showed an 80 percent reduction in
clinically significant errors. The committee recognizes that
MedTeams research has significant life saving potential in a
broader base of medical settings.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.8 million in PE
62716A for MedTeams.
Missile and rocket advanced technology
The budget request contained $59.5 million in PE 63313A for
missile and rocket advanced technology, but included no funds
for the Army composites manufacturing program.
The committee notes that many existing weapon systems are
being extended beyond their planned life. The committee is
aware of new manufacturing and materials technologies that are
being developed that have potential use to cost-effectively
extend existing systems lives.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63313A for composites manufacturing and maintenance technology.
Missile technology
The budget request contained $40.1 million in PE 62303A for
missile technology, including funds for integrated guidance
systems, but no funds for short-range missile defense with
optimized radar distribution (SWORD).
The committee notes that the Army has initiated a
competitive development program for highly integrated, jam-
proof, micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS) based inertial
measurement unit-geo positioning systems (IMU-GPS) that is
essential to achieving the goal of affordable precision
weapons. The committee also notes that development of these
technologies including deep integration have the potential to
reduce the cost of precision weapons and other devices, thereby
saving billions of dollars for the Department of Defense.
The committee is also aware that the Army over the last ten
years has investigated interferometry to develop a highly
accurate radar system. The committee notes that the current
SWORD concept uses this technology to support the counter air
munitions defense mission to protect against saturation
attacks.
Therefore, the committee recommends $65.1 million in PE
62303A, an increase of $20.0 million for continued development
of a fully integrated IMU-GPS, and an increase of $5.0 million
for continued evaluation of SWORD.
Night vision advanced technology
The budget request contained $37.1 million in PE 63710A for
night vision.
The committee notes that superiority in night vision is
fundamental to successful warfighting. The committee is aware
that recent advances in digital fusion of image intensification
and infrared have been demonstrated to significantly improve
night vision.
The committee is also aware that the Army prototype helmet
mounted infrared sensor has direct applicability to Department
of Defense and civilian firefighting personnel, and increases
safety in smoke and other obscurants.
The committee recommends $49.1 million in PE 63710A, an
increase of $9.0 million for continued development of digital
night vision fusion technology, and an increase of $3.0 million
for helmet mounted infrared sensor.
Passive millimeter-wave imaging
The budget request contained $25.8 million in PE 62120A for
sensors and electronic survivability, but included no funds for
passive millimeter-wave (PMW) imaging.
The committee is aware that PMW imaging has demonstrated
the potential to improve airborne remote sensing capability in
the dark and obscurant environments such as smoke and fog. The
committee notes that terrain and obstacle avoidance benefits
have also been demonstrated.
The committee recommends $30.8 million in PE 62120A, an
increase of $5.0 million for continued development of PMW
advanced imaging technology.
Silent sentry surveillance test
The budget request contained $27.8 million in PE 65604A for
survivability/lethality analysis, but included no funds for
Silent Sentry, a passive medium range surveillance technology
that exploits commercial radio and television signals.
The committee recommends $32.8 million in PE 65604A, an
increase of $5.0 million for Silent Sentry surveillance
testing.
Soldier-centered design tools for the Army transformation
The budget request included $16.5 million for Human Factors
Engineering Technology in PE 62716A, but included no funding
for the Army's manpower and personnel integration (MANPRINT)
program.
The committee views MANPRINT modeling technologies as an
excellent initiative for reducing the Department's operations
and maintenance costs through improvements in weapon systems
design integrated of manpower, personnel, training, health
hazard, safety, human factors and soldier survivability
concerns. The committee further believes that MANPRINT modeling
successes on the Comanche weapon system can serve as a basis
for optimizing the performance of the Army's anticipated
objective force. The committee encourages the Army to examine
the full potential of MANPRINT's soldier-centered design that
may enhance and improve objective force performance during a
wider range of operations and in extreme environments.
Therefore, the committee recommends $19.5 million in PE
62716A, an increase of $3.0 million for MANPRINT.
Survival radios
The budget request contained $9.1 million in PE 63801A for
aviation system improvement, but included no funds to continue
improvement of survival radios.
The committee notes that the combat survivor evader locator
(CSEL) is not yet fielded. The committee is aware that until
CSEL is operational, the PRC-112 survival radio capability must
be maintained to support the warfighter. The committee supports
the Army's Sustainment Center program to provide reliability,
supportability, and commercial technology insertion
enhancements to improve the functionality of the PRC-112
survival radio until the replacement is fully fielded.
The committee therefore recommends $19.1million in PE
63801A, an increase of $10.0 million for the PRC-112 survival
radio.
Tactical high energy laser
The budget request included no funds to the Tactical High
Energy Laser (THEL), a high energy chemical laser system
jointly developed by the United States and Israel, and designed
to demonstrate the feasibility of defeating short range rockets
using directed energy.
The committee is aware of THEL test activities at White
Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, which have recently culminated
in the simultaneous engagement of two targets. The committee
understands that the original scope of work for THEL is
complete, but believes options to develop a mobile version
should be explored.
The committee recommends a $10.0 million increase to PE
65605A for THEL in fiscal year 2002, and urges the Secretary of
Defense to continue cooperative development efforts with Israel
for this important new capability.
Tactical unmanned aerial vehicle
The budget request contained $38.2 million in PE 35204A for
tactical unmanned aerial vehicles.
The committee notes that despite a thorough competitive
selection of a commercial-off-the-shelf tactical unmanned
aerial vehicle (TUAV), development has been slowed by a series
of seemingly unrelated mishaps. The committee is aware that an
independent review panel, created to assess the program, is
expected to make recommendations soon, and a six-month to a
year delay in fielding is expected.
Therefore the committee recommends $18.2 million in PE
35204A, a reduction of $20 million, without prejudice.
Weapons and munitions
The budget request contained $7.0 million in PE 64802A for
the development of weapons and munitions but included no funds
for airworthiness testing and development and flight safety
certification of M240D helicopter door-mounted machine guns.
The committee understands that the Army has a new
requirement for M240D door guns for UH-60 Blackhawks. The
committee also understands that the cost to complete the
necessary airworthiness and flight safety certifications for
the ``D'' variant to enter into low rate initial production is
$3.5 million, and that without these funds a three to four year
delay in fielding this weapon could occur.
In order to complete flight testing, airworthiness
certification, and begin procuring new M240D helicopter door-
mounted machine guns at low-rate initial production sooner, the
committee recommends $10.5 million in PE 64802A, an increase of
$3.5 million.
Weapons and munitions advanced technology
The budget request contained $29.7 million in PE 63004A for
weapons and munitions advanced technology, but included no
funds for a large caliber training round or the trajectory
correctable munition.
The committee is aware that past efforts to develop large
caliber training rounds with reduced explosive charges has been
difficult due to production costs for small quantities of such
rounds. The committee believes that new technology may offer a
potential solution to this problem.
The committee is aware that the trajectory correctable
munition being developed through the memorandum of
understanding between the United States and Sweden has made
significant progress and met key milestones. The committee
notes that precision weapons are essential for the objective
force.
The committee recommends $51.7 million in PE 63004A, an
increase of $5.0 million in PE 63004A for development of
affordable, low explosive 120mm and 155mm training rounds and
an increase of $17.0 million for TCM.
Navy RDT&E
Overview
The budget request contained $11,123.4 million for Navy
RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of $10,863.3
million, an increase of $128.4 million, and the transfer of
$388.5 million for missile defense programs from Navy RDT&E to
Defense-wide RDT&E.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2002 Navy
RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes
to the Navy request are discussed following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced anti-radiation guided munition (AARGM)
The budget request contained $13.6 million in PE 25601N for
improvements in the High-speed Anti-radiation Missile, but
included no funds for the advanced anti-radiation guided
munition (AARGM) program.
The committee notes the AARGM program development of
advanced seeker, guidance and control technologies that, when
integrated on the existing High-speed Anti-Radiation Missile
(HARM) airframe, should provide a significant improvement in
the U.S. capability for suppression of enemy air defenses
(SEAD). The committee understands that AARGM test firings
indicate substantial progress to date and that four additional
test firings in 2001 will complete the demonstration program.
The committee further understands that the AARGM program will
compete for funding and entry into the system design and
development phase in the Navy's fiscal year 2003 program
objective memorandum.
The committee has strongly supported the development and
demonstration of AARGM and believes that this Small Business
Innovative Research (SBIR) program and the Quick Bolt Advanced
Concept Technology Demonstration program utilizing AARGM both
offer the potential to satisfy critical military requirements
for lethal SEAD and attack of time-critical targets. The
committee recommends $23.6 million in PE 25601N, an increase of
$10.0 million for continuation of the risk reduction and
productibility phase of the AARGM program.
Advanced composite sail phase II
The budget request contained $110.8 million in PE 63561N
for advanced submarine system development, demonstration, and
validation, including $6.1 million for continued development of
the advanced composite sail.
The committee notes that the Navy's technology insertion
plan for the Virginia class submarine includes installation of
an advanced sail on the seventh Virginia class submarine. The
advanced sail program is intended to provide substantial
additional payload capacity and stealth improvements over
conventional submarine sails. Program milestones include
completion of advanced composite sail development and
transition of the project to the Virginia class submarine
program. The committee understands that the results of the
program and lessons learned from other Navy composites programs
have identified the need for a phase II advanced composite sail
development program that will incorporate full-scale design
features and meet the complete spectrum of full-scale load
specifications that were not addressed in phase I of the
program.
The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE
63561N for Phase II of the Advanced Composite Sail development
program.
Advanced multi-band surveillance systems
The budget request contained $29.2 million in PE 35207N for
manned reconnaissance systems operational systems development.
The committee recommends $34.2 million in PE 35207N, an
increase of $5.0 million to accelerate the development of
advanced multi-band surveillance systems as discussed in the
classified annex.
Aegis combat systems engineering
The budget request contained $262.0 million in PE 64307N
for Aegis combat systems engineering, of which $345 thousand
was included for continued development of the operational
readiness test system (ORTS) on Aegis combat systems.
The ORTS is the primary testing and condition assessment
system for the Aegis SPY 1 radar and the Aegis Mk99 fire
control radar system.
The committee also notes the need for system engineering
and development of equipment upgrades and replacements for
major Aegis weapon system computer peripheral subsystems. For
example, Aegis Baselines 1-6, Phase III, utilize several types
and variants of obsolete peripheral equipment to upload
computer programs to the critical UYK-7 and UYK-43 tactical
computers used for command and decision, weapons control, and
fire control processing. The committee believes that technology
refreshment and consolidation of this peripheral equipment will
ensure the continued operational integrity of the Aegis weapon
system, as well as reduce its ownership cost.
Therefore, the committee recommends $276.9 million in PE
64307N, an increase of $6.0 million to accelerate ORTS upgrades
for the Aegis SPY 1 radar and Mk99 fire control radar system,
and an increase of $8.9 million for additional computer
peripheral technology refreshment and consolidation in the
Aegis weapon system. In total, the committee recommends an
increase of $14.9 million for Aegis combat systems engineering.
Aviation-shipboard information technology initiative
The budget request contained $16.4 million in PE 64512N for
shipboard aviation systems development but included no funds
for development of the integrated aviation-shipboard
information technology initiative (IAS/ITI), which would
upgrade and integrate aircraft carrier information systems to
improve the effectiveness of carrier aircraft launch and
recovery operations.
The committee notes that the Navy views the IAS/ITI as a
promising technology for both its next-generation aircraft
carriers and those currently in service which can enhance
accuracy and minimize latency of information, distribute
information where required, improve shipboard aircraft sortie
rates and safety, and reduce carrier operating costs.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $21.4 million in PE
64512N, an increase of $5.0 million, for development of the
IAS/ITI.
Combat systems integration
The budget request contained $42.9 million in PE 63582N for
combat systems integration demonstration and validation.
Common command and decision system
The common command and decision (CC&D) program is a pre-
planned product improvement (P3I) to the Aegis Weapon System
(AWS) and the Ship Self Defense System (SSDS) Mk2 that replaces
the command and decision capability presently in these systems
with a common set of application computer programs and
associated supporting software infrastructure which will
perform selected command and decision functions in an identical
manner across multiple Surface Navy ships. The committee report
on H.R. 4205 (H. Rept. 106-616) directed the Secretary of the
Navy to report to the congressional defense committees on the
Navy's program plan and funding for the CC&D P3I program.
The committee notes that the Navy has established a
collaborative development program involving the AWS and SSDS Mk
2 combat systems integrators, innovative small business experts
in the use of middleware, and Navy combat system development
experts all working together in an integrated process team. The
phased program will build on the Advanced Processor Build
techniques developed and proven in the Submarine Acoustic Rapid
Commercial-off-the-shelf Insertion (A-RCI) program. The program
of record would result in initial introduction of the CC&D
system in the fleet in 2010. The Secretary's report, however,
notes that it is technically and programmatically possible to
develop an executable CC&D capability by early calendar year
2005 but funding constraints do not currently support this
timeline.
The committee strongly believes that the Navy should
accelerate the program for upgrade and insertion of advanced
technology in combat systems of legacy surface ships of the
battle fleet. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase
of $25.9 million in PE 63582N to accelerate development of the
CC&D system.
Wideband optically multiplexed beam-forming architecture
The committee notes that Congress previously provided funds
for a cooperative program for research, development, and
demonstration of a prototype optically multiplexed, wideband,
radar beam-forming array that uses optical wavelength-division
multiplexing (WDM). The committee also notes that the use of
optical WDM is expected to reduce hardware complexity and
system cost in a wideband electronically-steered active radar
antenna that has high instantaneous bandwidth and the
resolution necessary for theater ballistic missile defense and
ship self defense in a littoral environment.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63582N to complete the demonstration project for the wideband
optically multiplexed beam-forming architecture.
Common picture applied research
The budget request contained $83.6 million in PE 62235N for
common picture applied research.
Hybrid fiber optic wireless communication
The committee notes the progress in the development of an
advanced hybrid fiber optic/wireless communication system with
very high bandwidth, mobility, and low probability of
intercept. The overall goal of the program is to develop a
versatile, mobile, secure communication system for military and
commercial use, which combines the most desirable features of
fiber optic and wireless communications technologies. The first
year effort resulted in production of critical components of
the system and a proof of concept demonstration.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
62235N to continue the program for applied research in hybrid
fiber optic wireless communications.
SEADEEP
The committee recognizes that integration of the submarine
into emerging naval tactical missions requires a rapid transfer
of large volumes of data that is not currently available to
submarines operating at speed and depth in the ocean. This
limitation severely constrains the submarine's tactical
operational role in support of expeditionary and strike
operations. The committee believes that the advent of new
technology and new communications architectures presents the
opportunity to revisit the concept of submarine laser
communications.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
62235N for SEADEEP, a project to develop a system concept of
operations and demonstrate the feasibility of high-speed data
transmission using laser communications between a high altitude
aircraft and submarine.
E-2/C-2 eight-blade composite propeller
The budget request contained $20.6 million in PE 24152N for
E-2 squadrons operational systems development, including $7.1
million for E-2C improvements, but included no funds for
completion of an eight-blade composite propeller for E-2C and
C-2A aircraft.
The committee notes that the Navy is seeking solutions to
operational limitations encountered with the propeller systems
used on E-2C and C-2A aircraft. In response to directions
contained in the committee report on H.R. 1110 (H. Rept. 105-
132) the Navy began a program for design, development, test,
and production of the eight-blade composite propeller for the
E-2C and C-2A. Congress provided an additional $4.0 million for
the program in fiscal year 2001 to flight test the new
propeller system on the C-2A aircraft sequentially with the E-
2C flight test program.
The committee recommends $30.6 million in PE 24152N, an
increase of $10.0 million to complete the program for
development and evaluation of an eight bladed composite
propeller system for the E-2C and C-2A aircraft.
Electronic warfare (EW) development
The budget request contained $112.5 million in PE 64270N
for electronic warfare development, but included no funds to
evaluate the location of global positioning system interferers
(LOCO GPSI) system in fleet operations or for follow-on support
jamming aircraft pre-engineering and manufacturing development
(EMD) risk reduction activities.
LOCO GPSI is a state-of-the-art precision surveillance and
targeting system for location of global positioning systems
interferers that is designed to protect global positioning
system-guided weapons against jamming and interference. The
committee understands that naval operational fleet commanders
have requested that the LOCO GPSI system participate in several
fleet exercises in fiscal year 2002 to demonstrate and evaluate
the military utility of this system. Accordingly, the committee
recommends an increase of $4.0 million to evaluate LOCO GPSI
capabilities in fleet operations.
The committee understands that the Airborne Electronic
Attack Analysis of Alternatives is scheduled to be complete in
December 2001 and believes that this analysis will conclude
that development of a follow-on support jamming aircraft will
be required to replace the aging EA-6B. To accelerate the
development of an EA-6B successor, the committee recommends an
increase of $10.0 million for pre-EMD risk reduction
activities.
In total, the committee recommends $126.5 million in PE
64270N, an increase of $14.0 million.
Electro optical framing reconnaissance
The budget request contained $5.7 million in PE 35206N for
airborne reconnaissance, but included no funds for electro-
optical (EO) framing.
The committee is aware of developmental EO framing
processing techniques that will provide real-time precision
strike targeting capability.
The committee recommends an increase of $9.5 million in PE
35206N for continuation of F-14 TARPS/CD precision strike
hardware development, continued development of integrated
electronic shutter upgrade to SHARP sensors, and evaluation and
systems engineering of cellular neural network technology in
support of EO framing processing techniques.
Embedded software engineering research initiative
The budget request contained $66.3 million in PE 62114N for
power projection applied research.
The committee notes that a majority of all current computer
applications are embedded systems and almost all defense
systems have one or more embedded computers. While embedded
software is becoming increasingly large and complex, advances
in technology for development of embedded software systems is
lagging, resulting in high development costs, long development
cycles, and error-prone products.
The committee recommends $70.3 million in PE 62114N, an
increase of $4.0 million to begin an initiative in Embedded
Software Engineering Research, focused on the development of
structured design and manufacturing capabilities for the
deployment, control, integration and utilization of embedded
software systems.
Expeditionary warfare testbed--supporting arms technology insertion
The budget request contained $24.4 million in PE 24413N for
amphibious tactical support units operational systems
development.
The committee recognizes the need for better integration
and interoperability of expeditionary forces. Force commanders
have identified the need for additional development and
integration in the supporting arms coordinating center (SACC)
of the force headquarters. The committee understands that the
Naval Sea Systems Command's expeditionary warfare test bed will
be used to develop applications of new technologies and refine
technology requirements for SACC systems used in expeditionary
operations.
To support this initiative the committee recommends an
increase of $10.0 million in PE 24413N for supporting arms
technology insertion in the expeditionary warfare testbed.
The committee encourages the Assistant Secretary of the
Navy (Research, Development, and Acquisition) to oversee and
guide this expeditionary warfare program and to use the Navy's
National Technology Alliance in support of technology
development.
Extending the littoral battlespace
The budget request contained $48.6 million in PE 63235N for
common picture advanced technology development, including $1.0
million for the extended littoral battlespace project.
The committee notes that the Office of Naval Research
sponsored the Extending The Littoral Battlespace Advanced
Concept Technology Demonstration (ELB ACTD) to provide command,
control, communications and intelligence in an extended
littoral battlespace. The ELB ACTD integrates commercial-off-
the-shelf and government-furnished technology in a military
setting to showcase the benefits of advanced networking, global
positioning systems, and other information technology
applications. The committee notes that the budget request
supports the transition of technologies, hardware, and software
to the military user; demonstration/post-demonstration analysis
and assessment of the military utility of the ELB system
concept; and residual support of equipment fielded with the
Amphibious Ready Group/Marine Expeditionary Unit that
participated in the ACTD.
The committee recommends $50.6 million in PE 63235N, an
increase of $2.0 M for support and upgrade/technical
refreshment of the ELB ACTD equipment fielded with the ARG/MEU.
F/A-18 improvements
The budget request contained $253.3 million in PE 24136N
for F/A-18 squadrons operational systems development.
Fuel cell second source
The committee understands that the Navy currently has only
a single vendor that is qualified to manufacture polyurethane
fuel cells for the F/A-18 aircraft. Due to the increased demand
for fuel cells for the aircraft and insufficient production
capacity, the Navy is not able to meet all operational
requirements and is investigating additional manufacturing
capability for F/A-18 fuel cells.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE
24136N for qualification of an additional production source for
F/A-18 fuel cells.
Joint helmet mounted cueing system (JHMCS)
The budget request included $0.4 million to complete
development of the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System.
The committee notes that the joint helmet mounted cueing
system, when combined with state of the art missile systems
currently in development provides a significant improvement in
air-to-air combat capability and survivability. The committee
is also aware that this improved capability is essential to the
success of the Navy's F/A-18 E/F strike fighter aircraft
currently being deployed. For fiscal year 2001, Congress
provided $3.5 million for continued development of the joint
helmet mounted cueing systems for the F/A-18C/D fighter.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
24136N to accelerate the completion of development, evaluation,
and fielding of the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System for the
F/A-18 and other aircraft.
Force protection advanced technology
The budget request contained $85.3 million in PE 63123N for
force protection advanced technology development.
Advanced water jet AWJ-21
The committee notes that the advanced waterjet propulsor
(AWJ-21) was originally developed in a three-year industry/
government cost-shared project under the Maritime Technology
(MARITECH) program. The committee also notes that potential
applications of the advanced water jet propulsor technology are
being considered for the Navy's small combat craft program. The
committee understands that the AWJ-21 has the potential for
being a low-cost/high-performance propulsor option for future
ships that require reduced signature and increased operational
maneuverability. The committee also understands that additional
testing at a one-fourth-scale level demonstrator at sea and
testing in the large cavitation tunnel will be required to
validate analytical predictions of critical performance
parameters.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
63123N for continuation of the AWJ-21 development and
demonstration project.
DC Homopolar Motor
The budget request included $60.3 million for advanced
development of surface ship and submarine hull, mechanical, and
electrical technology that includes the development of
superconducting and permanent magnetic ship-propulsion electric
motors.
The committee understands that the Office of Naval Research
has initiated a project for development of a 5000 shaft-
horsepower superconducting, direct current, homopolar motor
that may be used in the experimental littoral support craft
program.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63123N to complete development and at-sea testing of the DC
homopolar motor.
Direct ship service fuel cell
The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE
63123N for development of a direct ship service fuel cell
technology demonstrator for technology validation and training
of ship systems engineers, designers, system integrators,
operators and engineering students.
Electric propulsion/ship power systems distributed test bed
The committee notes that the Navy's next generation surface
combatants will rely heavily on the use of electrical power and
its applications to naval ship systems including integrated
power systems, electric drive, and configurable zonal systems.
New technologies, manufacturing processes, innovative
approaches, techniques and method, and advanced materials will
be on the critical path for the development and integration of
these high power, electricity-based systems. The committee
notes that an understanding of these factors and the
interactions of the various components, and the ability to
design and evaluate the performance of the system, both in
simulation and with hardware-in-the-loop will be critical to
the design of efficient and cost-effective electrical
propulsion systems that meet naval requirements and of the all-
electric ship itself. As a part of the Navy's program leading
to the development of an all-electric ship, the committee
continues to support the development of a virtual, distributed
test bed which will provide the software and hardware modeling
tools for shipboard machinery design and allow government and
industry ship designers and engineers to evaluate machinery
alternatives in a virtual prototype before committing to full-
scale development.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
63123N to continue the program for advanced development of a
distributed test bed for electric propulsion and ship power
systems.
Littoral support craft--experimental
The budget request in PE 63123N contained $85.3 million for
force protection advanced technology development, including
$20.0 million for the development and demonstration of
experimental craft for littoral support operations.
The committee notes progress made by the Office of Naval
Research in the development of designs and operational concepts
for a littoral support craft: a fast (above 40 knots), high
performance, low cost platform that could be an effective
adjunct to the major surface combatant and carrier battle
group. The craft would be compliant with the Navy concept for
operations in the littoral and would fulfill fleet requirements
for providing supporting command, control, communications and
combat systems in the region from the shore to other surface
combatants operating 75 miles or greater from theshore. The
committee also notes the progress that ONR has made in the development
and evaluation of important components and sub-systems that might be
used on a littoral support craft. The committee strongly supports ONR
proposals for a phased program for development of an experimental
littoral support craft demonstrator (LSC-X) that would provide the
basis for operational experiments on the contribution that such a craft
and its variants could make to naval operations in the littoral.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a total of $39.0
million in PE 63123N for development and demonstration of the
LSC-X, including an increase of $19.0 million to the ONR
program for development and demonstration of experimental craft
for littoral support operations.
SEALs Mark V patrol craft modification
The committee report on H.R. 4205 (H. Rept. 106-616)
directed the Secretary of the Navy to report to the
congressional defense committees on the Navy's plan for
transition of Project M (an active noise and vibration
cancellation system developed in the advanced submarine
technology program) from the Navy's science and technology base
to potential applications in Navy propulsion and other
machinery systems. Subsequently, the Office of Naval Research
advised the committee that a project had been established to
evaluate the ability of Project M technology to mitigate the
high shock and vibration experienced by the Navy SEALs Mark V
patrol craft crew and passengers in high-speed special
operations.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
63123N for continuation of the program for application of
Project M technology to mitigate physical shock to crew and
passengers in the Mark V patrol craft.
Funding transfers to support transformation
The committee is concerned that the largest area of growth
in Navy research and development investments has occurred in
the category of fielded system development and other mature
technologies. While these programs are important, the committee
does not believe they support the highest priority efforts
directly related to Navy transformation. In light of the delay
in the program down-select decision, the committee also notes
its concerns about the ability of the Navy to execute the DD-21
land attack destroyer. Finally, the committee notes that no
justification was provided for an apparent new program start in
PE 63237N.
Therefore, the committee recommends the following decreases
to Navy accounts to be transferred to other programs within the
Navy that support higher transformation priorities.
62235N.................................................. $1,912,000
62805N.................................................. 8,000,000
63114N.................................................. 10,000,000
63123N.................................................. 5,297,000
63236N.................................................. 5,000,000
63271N.................................................. 15,000,000
63216N.................................................. 17,900,000
63237N.................................................. 50,000,000
63382N.................................................. 3,458,000
63513N.................................................. 25,000,000
63561N.................................................. 10,457,000
63563N.................................................. 1,949,000
63564N.................................................. 10,000,000
63570N.................................................. 2,100,000
63582N.................................................. 4,900,000
63611M.................................................. 23,066,000
63851M.................................................. 10,000,000
64262N.................................................. 100,000,000
65152N.................................................. 2,679,000
65853N.................................................. 3,000,000
65864N.................................................. 7,414,000
11402N.................................................. 4,205,000
24136N.................................................. 50,000,000
24163N.................................................. 10,900,000
24229N.................................................. 2,222,000
24413N.................................................. 10,000,000
24575N.................................................. 2,300,000
25604N.................................................. 7,700,000
25620N.................................................. 3,900,000
27163N.................................................. 1,000,000
33109N.................................................. 10,000,000
35160N.................................................. 1,900,000
35188N.................................................. 13,618,000
72207N.................................................. 4,972,000
Land attack standard missile
The budget request contained $131.0 million in PE 63795N
for Land Attack Technology, including $34.5 million for
development of the Land Attack Standard Missile (LASM). The
committee recommends the budget request for LASM. As addressed
elsewhere in this report, the committee notes that the
Department of Defense has decided to endorse the Navy's
proposal to acquire LASM as an interim capability for the Navy
land attack mission and to develop an Advanced Land Attack
Missile (ALAM) as soon as possible for the DD-21 land attack
destroyer and for other Navy combatants. LASM, an adaptation of
the Navy's Standard Missile, entered engineering and
manufacturing development in July 2000, completed a preliminary
design review in December 2000, and also conducted a successful
warhead test in February 2001. Initial operational capability
for LASM is planned in fiscal year 2004. The committee also
notes a number of informal proposals for development of more
advanced warheads for LASM.
The committee has strongly supported the LASM program, as
well as the development of ALAM. Elsewhere in this report, the
committee has recommended alegislative provision (Sec. 212)
that would require the Secretary of Defense to establish a competitive
program for the development of ALAM, would provide $20.0 million for
that program, and would require the Secretary to report the program
plan, schedule, and funding required for the Advanced Land Attack
Missile program to the congressional defense committees with the
submission of the fiscal year 2003 budget request. The committee
directs that the Secretary also provide a report that describes the
operational requirement for LASM and the program plan, schedule, and
funding for development and acquisition of LASM with the submission of
the fiscal year 2003 budget request.
Laser aim scoring system (LASS)
The budget request contained $64.4 million in PE 64212N for
anti-submarine warfare (ASW) and other helicopter development
but included no funds for the sea-target LASS.
The sea-target LASS would be mounted on a Navy remote-
controlled target boat, which, when lased by a pilot practicing
delivery of a Hellfire missile, would provide immediate aiming
feedback to the pilot that would inform where the missile would
have hit or why it would have missed. The committee understands
that combat delivery of the Hellfire missile requires
considerable pilot laser aiming skill since it is conducted in
a moving helicopter and directed at a moving at-sea target. The
committee further understands that the Navy's SH-60 and HH-60
pilots have limited proficiency in this skill since Hellfire
pilot laser aiming training is accomplished in a ground-based
flight trainer which lacks the both the helicopter and target
motion and the ability to determine why a missile would have
been ineffective against its intended target. The committee
notes that Army helicopter pilots maintain Hellfire laser
aiming proficiency by using a stationary LASS on their target
practice ranges, and believes that a similar sea-target LASS
could address the Navy training deficiency by allowing in-
flight practice laser designation against a moving at-sea
target while also providing immediate laser aiming result
feedback to the pilot.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $66.4 million in
64212N, an increase of $2.0 million, to develop the sea-target
LASS.
Laser welding and cutting
The budget request contained $62.1 million in PE 62271N for
radio frequency systems applied research.
The committee understands that the technology of laser
welding and cutting applied to ship construction is anticipated
to reduce ship construction costs significantly and afford
greater design flexibility. The committee encourages the
development of laser welding technologies that have
demonstrated the potential to provide higher quality and lower
costs for building Navy ships.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.3 million in PE
62271N for the development and application to naval ship
construction of laser welding and cutting technology and
techniques.
Marine Corps ground combat/support system
The budget request contained $26.0 million in PE 63635M
combat supporting arms systems and included $18.2 million for
the lightweight 155mm towed howitzer, but no funds for the
Marine Corps urban environmental laboratory for low observable
signature ejection technology.
The committee continues to support development of the
lightweight 155mm towed howitzer for the Marine Corps and Army.
The committee is aware that a Marine Corps urban environmental
laboratory has been established to provide assessment, analysis
and remediation of capabilities to ensure predictable and
minimum environmental damage from traditional and non-
traditional capabilities used in urban missions. The committee
also notes that the Marine Corps needs weapons with low
observable ejection signatures.
The committee recognizes that the Marine Corps will require
a capability non-explosive fire from enclosures in order to
operate effectively in military operations in urbanized terrain
engagements. Innovative standoff door-breaching munition (ISOD)
technology will enable forces engaged in the urban battleground
to breach doors and other similar structures from a standoff
distance of up to 100 meters without exposing Marines to direct
hostile fire. The committee is encouraged by the Marine Corps'
pursuit of this technology and supports the Marine Corps'
efforts to examine the broad application of ISOD to both
regular and special operations forces. The committee requests
that the Commandant of the Marine Corps keep the defense
committees informed of the progress of this initiative.
The committee recommends $41.0 million in PE 63635M, an
increase of $5.0 million for the lightweight 155mm towed
howitzer, an increase of $5.0 million for the urban
environmental laboratory, and an increase of $5.0 million for
low observable signature ejection technology.
Metrology projects
The budget request contained $120.6 million in PE 64215N
for standards development, but included no funds for the Navy
metrology program. The budget request also included $1.5
million in PE 72207F for Air Force metrology program research
and development. The metrology program develops new measurement
standards and capabilities to support the development, test,
evaluation, and maintenance of the leading-edge technology
deployed in emerging military systems.
The committee understands that shortfalls in metrology
budgets have led to the erosion of critical calibration
standards development and measurement services and that this
situation negatively affects the development and support of new
weapons systems.
Consequently, the committee recommends $127.1 million in PE
64215N, an increase of $6.5 million for the Navy metrology
program. The committee also recommends $5.5 million in PE
72207F, an increase of $4.0 million for the Air Force metrology
program.
Multipurpose processor
The budget request contained $43.7 million in PE 64503N for
submarine system equipment development, including $36.0 million
for submarine sonar improvements that also included the
acoustic rapid commercial-off-the-shelf insertion (A-RCI)
program.
The A-RCI program upgrades current submarine sonar systems
with open architecture commercial-off-the-shelf computer
technology that uses advanced processing builds (APB) and
multipurpose processor (MPP) middleware architecture developed
under small business innovative research to provide continued
upgrades as technology develops. Full implementation is
currently planned for fiscal year 2008, but conversion of all
submarines can be accelerated to fiscal year 2004 with
additional funds.
The committee notes that the Chief of Naval Operations
identified $225.0 million in fiscal year 2002 unfunded
requirements for A-RCI in submarine sonar systems. The
committee believes that this technology upgrade is essential
for the submarine fleet and, therefore, recommends $68.7
million in PE 64503N, an increase of $25.0 million to
accelerate the A-RCI program for application of the APB/MPP
technology insertion process in submarine and other naval sonar
systems.
Navy's intelligent agent security module
The budget request contained $20.9 million in PE 33140N for
the Navy's information systems security program.
The committee notes the progress being made in the
development of intelligent agent security modules (IASM) in the
Navy's information systems security program, but also notes the
need to improve IASM system capability to identify and respond
to attacks on the information network. The Navy has stated that
the IASM is intended for deployment at the tactical network
operations center, shipboard, and at the fleet information
warfare center. The IASM will enhance network security by
correlating information from multiple security products; derive
a concise, accurate assessment of malicious actions and
unauthorized use; and recommend actions to respond to and
terminate an attack to network administrators.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $45.9 million in PE
33140N, an increase of $25.0 million to increase the capability
of the IASM system to identify and respond to attacks on the
network, expand the period through which attack trends can be
assessed, and provide enhanced countermeasures to respond to a
specific type of attack.
Navy logistics productivity
The budget request contained $11.7 million in PE 63739N for
Navy logistics productivity demonstration and validation.
Compatible processor upgrade program
The committee understands that compatible processor upgrade
program (CPUP) system-on-a-chip processor products are used to
modernize existing computer systems while preserving legacy
software and infrastructure, adapt commercial designs for high
radiation environments, and optimize system designs. Congress
provided $3.5 million in fiscal year 2001 to initiate a program
for the development of application-specific CPUP processors to
upgrade the capability of the Navy's AN/AYK-14, AN/AYK-44, and
AN/UYK-20 computers at a fraction of the cost and time required
to reengineer legacy software for new computer systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.5 million in PE
63739N for continuation of the compatible processor upgrade
program (CPUP).
Rapid retargeting
The committee notes that, within the logistics productivity
program, the Navy has implemented a rapid retargeting project
to address obsolete designs in electronic systems.
The project provides the technology to eliminate obsolete
components and reduce multiple electronic modules to single
programmable designs. The committee understands that the rapid
retargeting process is also being employed to replace different
types of standard electronic modules with programmable
commercial-off-the-shelf components, thereby reducing the
requirements for spare parts on board naval vessels.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63739N to continue the rapid retargeting project.
Non-acoustic anti-submarine warfare
The budget request contained $76.5 million in PE 62747N for
undersea warfare applied research and $56.3 million in PE
63747N for undersea warfare advanced technology development.
The committee recommends $86.5 million in PE 62747N, an
increase of $10.0 million for applied research in non-acoustic
anti-submarine warfare technology and $66.3 million in PE
63747N, an increase of $10.0 million for advanced development
in non-acoustic anti-submarine warfare technology. Elsewhere in
this report the committee has recommended an increase of $10.0
million to investigate the ability of the JSTARS radar to image
the ocean surface.
Oceanographic survey of continental shelf beyond U.S. exclusive
economic zone
The committee notes that Articles 76 and 77 of the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea secure coastal States'
sovereign rights over the natural resources of the continental
shelf and establish a formula for determining whether and how a
State may claim an outer shelf limit beyond the State's
exclusive economic zone (EEZ). The United Nations Commission on
the Limits of the Continental Shelf has established guidelines
on the scientific and technical evidence, including undersea
bathymetric and seismic data from the continental shelf, that
will be considered with respect to coastal State submissions.
The outer limits based on the commission's recommendations will
be final and binding under the Convention. The committee also
notes that, although the United States is not now a party to
the Convention, should it accede to the treaty in the future,
it should be able to establish final and binding limits to two
areas adjacent to its EEZ off the coast of Alaska, the Chukchi
Cap and part of the Donut Hull, and smaller areas in the Gulf
of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean. The committee believes that
the United Statesshould have the data available that would be
necessary to determine whether claims from other coastal States might
overlap with potential U.S. claims.
The committee encourages the Secretary of the Navy, in
conjunction with the Administrator of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, to identify the scope of the
bathymetric, seismic, and other data that would need to be
gathered to support United States' claims for establishment of
outer shelf limits under the Convention, develop a plan for
gathering that data, and determine the surface and subsurface
oceanographic survey resources that would need to be committed
to the effort.
Organ transfer technology
The budget request contained $17.7 million in PE 63729N for
warfighter protection advanced technology development.
The committee notes developments in immune therapies by
investigators at the Naval Medical Research Center that have
been shown to prevent the rejection of tissue and organ
transplants without the need for continuous use of
immunosuppressive drugs. The committee believes that the
ability to transplant massive tissue segments without rejection
could revolutionize the treatment of combat casualties who
suffer significant tissue loss or organ damage from blast,
missile fragments, or burns. In fiscal year 2001, the Chief of
Naval Research initiated a program to capitalize on these newly
developed methods of treatment and Congress provided $3.0
million to initiate a clinical trials program.
The committee recommends $21.7 million in PE 63729N, an
increase of $4.0 million to continue the program for clinical
trials in organ transplant and transfer technology. The
committee urges the Chief of Naval Research to include funding
for completion of the clinical trials program in future budget
requests.
Photovoltaic energy savings initiative
The budget request contained $1.7 million in PE 63725N for
demonstration and validation of improvements in naval
facilities.
The committee notes that rising energy costs and increased
concerns among the military services about the effect of
gaseous emissions on the environment have sparked greater
interest in developing renewable energy sources. The committee
understands that proposals have been made for development of a
multi-megawatt photovoltaic energy park on naval installations
to generate electricity from the sun for this purpose. Under
the proposal, a cooperative agreement would be established
between industry and the federal government that would result
in fuel savings under the federally funded share of the program
being returned to the federal government.
The committee recommends $4.1 million in PE 63725N,
including an increase of $2.4 million in PE 63725N for
demonstration of the photovoltaic energy savings initiative.
Power projection advanced technology
The budget request contained $76.4 million in PE 63114N for
power projection advanced technology development.
Affordable weapon
The Office of Naval Research (ONR) affordable weapons
program is an advanced technology demonstration to design,
develop and build a 600 mile range, 200lbs. payload, precision
strike missile with global positioning system/inertial
navigation system guidance and control and a data link. The
missile is built using commercial-off-the-shelf components
(COTS) and will have an estimated cost in production of
approximately $30,000 per missile and fly within two years of
contract initiation. The objective of the ONR program is to
demonstrate the breakthroughs in (1) technology and systems
integration that permit the development of a low-cost,
precision guided missile using primarily COTS components and
(2) acquisition reform that permits definition of costs within
the first ten production units and manufacturing changes that
can be accomplished at low cost with small unit buys. The
committee notes that ONR initiated the program in July 1999 and
accomplished air vehicle first flight in September 2000. The
committee believes that, if successful, the ONR affordable
missile program will establish a new paradigm for the
development and production of precision strike missile systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
63114N for advanced technology development and demonstration of
the affordable weapon.
DP-2 thrust vectoring system concept demonstration
The budget request contained no funds for continuation of
the DP-2 thrust vectoring system proof-of-concept
demonstration.
DP-2 is a proof-of-concept program to demonstrate the use
of thrust vector control to achieve vertical takeoff and
conventional takeoff capabilities in a one-half scale flight
test vehicle. The technology offers the potential for a low
cost, medium range aircraft of advanced composite construction.
The committee notes the progress to date in the DP-2
program in the design and fabrication of large, precise
composite structures, the design of the flight control system,
and ground test of the system leading to the initial hover test
in June 2001. The committee also notes technical issues that
were encountered during the hover test that will necessitate
additional analysis and potential redesign before a successful
hover test can be accomplished. The committee believes that the
potential of the DP-2 proof-of-concept program justifies these
efforts.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0
million in PE 63114N to continue the project for development
and demonstration of the DP-2 thrust vectoring system in an
affordable airframe.
Precision targeting systems modernization and enhancement
The budget request contained $4.5 million in PE 35208N for
distributed ground systems operational systems development.
The committee notes that the Joint Service Imagery
Processing System--Navy (JSIPS-N), the Navy's portion of the
distributed common ground system, is being installed on
aircraft carriers, amphibious assault ships, selected fleet
flagships, and shore sites to receive and exploit imagery
reports from multiple sensors and assist strike and amphibious
operations planners and tactical aviators in planning the
delivery of precision weapons. The committee understands that
the digital imagery workstation suite (DIWS) component of
JSIPS-N should be upgraded to provide a state-of-the-art
targeting capability, smaller equipment footprint aboard ship,
and increased reliability.
The committee recommends $5.5 million in PE 35208N, an
increase of $1.0 million to accelerate the program for
development, testing, and integration of the upgraded DIWS.
Project Bear Trap
The budget request contained $12.9 million in PE 63254N for
anti-submarine warfare systems demonstration and validation,
including support for Project Bear Trap.
The budget request supports hardware and software
development for the rapid prototyping of advanced capability
acoustic and non-acoustic ASW sensors, as well as data
collection and analysis for threat assessment and environmental
characterization. The committee notes the progress being made
in the evaluation and development of the phenomena of nonlinear
dynamics and stochastic resonance (NDSR) for acoustic,
magnetic, and other ASW sensor and signal processing
applications.
The committee recommends $17.9 million in PE 63254N, an
increase of $5.0 million for Project Beartrap to continue the
development, demonstration, and evaluation of NDSR technology
for ASW applications and to continue the Beartrap environmental
characterization program.
Radiation-hardened electronics applications
The budget request contained $43.3 million in PE 11221N for
strategic submarine and weapons systems support.
Radiation-hardened integrated circuits are necessary for
systems such as the guidance system for the Trident missile.
The radiation-hardened electronics application program (RHEAP)
is a Navy-sponsored initiative to improve the efficiency of
production of critical, radiation-hardened integrated circuits
through the use of advanced simulation and modeling tools. The
program addresses the transition between the science and
technology that develops more capable integrated circuit chips
and the commercial production of those next generation chips.
Benefits of RHEAP include improving the return on the science
and technology investment in the development of advanced
microelectronics, reducing the cost of production by commercial
laboratories, and reducing the time and effort required to
mature a research and development semi-conductor wafer
prototype to a production-ready product
The committee recommends $53.1 million in PE 11221N,
including an increase of $9.8 million for development of
advanced RHEAP tools for modeling, simulation and fabrication
of radiation-hardened circuits.
SPAWAR enhanced modeling and simulation initiatives
The budget request contained $7.8 million in PE 38601N for
support of Navy modeling and simulation.
The committee notes continued advances in modeling and
simulation for command, control, communications, computers,
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems.
These advances demonstrate the use of efficient systems
engineering and business practices and leverage simulation-
based acquisition applied to the assessment, planning, testing,
and technology insertion for C4ISR systems. The committee also
notes continuing progress in modeling and simulation systems
engineering initiatives that aid operations analysis, and
engineering assessment. The committee supports the development
and understanding of new modeling and simulation tools that
will assist in more effective decision-making and in the design
of C4ISR systems and information architectures.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $10.8 million in PE
38601N, an increase of $3.0 million to continue initiatives for
the development of improvements in C4ISR modeling and
simulation.
Submarine electrical power
The budget request contained $117.1 million in PE 62123N
for force protection applied research.
The committee notes that some nuclear submarines, which are
nearing the end of their hull service life and being
decommissioned may still have significant life remaining in the
submarine nuclear reactor core that could, with appropriate
modification to the steam generating system, provide a source
of power for on-shore activities when connected to the on-shore
power grid. Such a capability would be useful in augmenting the
power grid in an area where there is a submarine basing and
support capability.
The committee recommends $117.4 million in PE 62123N, an
increase of $300 thousand to initiate a study on the potential
utility and application of submarine-generated steam and
electrical power for augmentation of on-shore power grids.
Supply chain best practices
The budget request contained $1.0 million in PE 65804N for
technical information services that support cooperative
advanced technology initiatives between the Navy and U.S.
industry with the goals of improving affordability and reducing
life cycle costs of new and modernized Navy systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
654804N to continue the program for development and adoption of
industrial and logistical best business and management
practices among government and industry in support of defense
systems. The committee expects that the Office of Naval
Research will include funding for this program in future Navy
budgets.
Surface navy integrated undersea tactical technology
The budget request contained $135.3 million in PE 63502N
for surface and shallow water mine countermeasures systems
demonstration and validation.
The committee understands that in order to effectively
conduct the Navy's core anti-submarine warfare (ASW) and mine
warfare (MIW) missions, naval forces must be able to reliably
detect, locate, and target mines and enemy submarines, respond
rapidly and decisively to these hostile contacts, and provide
all commanders with a common picture of the undersea
battlespace. The committee notes the need for development of a
common undersea picture that would incorporate input data from
existing and enhanced undersea warfare systems.
The committee recommends $147.3 million in PE 63502N, an
increase of $12.0 million for the Surface Navy Integrated
Undersea Tactical Technology project. The committee expects
that this effort will be coordinated with other Navy and joint
programs for development of technology and systems to provide a
common picture of the tactical undersea battlespace.
Surface ship torpedo defense
The budget request contained $4.8 million in PE 63506N for
surface ship torpedo defense (SSTD) demonstration and
validation.
The committee understands that the fiscal year 2002 plan
for the SSTD program includes continued development of the
tripwire torpedo defense system for large deck ships and DDG-51
Flight IIA ships and continued development of the anti-torpedo
torpedo countermeasure for surface ships.
The committee recommends $9.8 million in PE 63506N, an
increase of $5.0 million to accelerate the program for
development and fielding of SSTD systems to the fleet.
Telemedicine for minimally invasive surgery
The committee notes the progress made in the application of
telemedicine to surgical procedures that allow an experienced
surgeon to perform a procedure from a remote location using
telecommunications technology and sophisticated robotic
systems. The committee believes that the technology has the
potential to increase significantly the availability of
specialized surgical skills to deployed military personnel and
the civilian community throughout the world. The committee
directs the Secretary of the Navy, in consultation with the
Secretary of Health and Human Services, to review the
telemedicine program and consider the establishment of a pilot
project for further application of telemedicine technology to
minimally invasive surgical procedures. The committee believes
that such a project would provide valuable data on human
subject outcomes, equipment use and set-up, the quality of data
transmission for remote applications, and the infrastructure
required to support such telesurgery. The committee directs
that the Secretary of the Navy report the results of the review
and recommendations regarding the establishment of such a pilot
project with the submission of the fiscal year 2003 budget
request.
Titanium watertight door and hatch cover
The budget request contained $130.4 million in PE 64567N
for ship contract design/live fire test and evaluation but
included no funds for evaluating a watertight door or hatch
cover made from titanium.
The committee is concerned about the continuing high cost
to maintain weather decks of surface combatants and notes that
the use of titanium, rather than steel, to construct these
decks could produce potentially significant life-cycle cost
savings, since titanium is lighter, stronger, and easier to
maintain than steel, as well non-corrosive in seawater.
Therefore, from within the funds requested, which the committee
recommends, the committee strongly urges the Secretary of the
Navy to use $1.0 million to initiate a pilot program, using
titanium, to produce a watertight door and hatch cover on a
flight 2A DDG-51 destroyer.
Torpedo rapid COTS insertion
The budget request contained $17.1 million in PE 25632N for
MK-48 Advanced Capability Torpedo operational systems
development, but included no funding for insertion of advanced
commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) technology into the Mk 48 ADCAP
torpedo.
The committee is concerned that the performance of the MK-
48 submarine-launched torpedo in littoral waters is far less
than desired. The committee is that the advanced rapid COTS
insertion (A-RCI) program, which uses advanced processing
builds (APB) and a multi-purpose processor (MPP) hardware
architecture developed under small business innovative
research, has successfully and very cost effectively improved
the performance of submarine sonar systems. The committee
believes that a similar A-RCI program for the MK-48 torpedo,
which leverages the experience gained in the submarine sonar
program, could have significant potential to cost effectively
improve performance of the MK-48 torpedo in the demanding
littoral waters sonar environment.
Therefore, the committee recommends $27.1 million in PE
25632N, an increase of $10.0 million to extend the application
of the advanced processing build/multipurpose processor
technology insertion process to the MK-48 ADCAP torpedo.
Vacuum electronics
The budget request contained $62.1 million in PE 62271N for
applied research in radio frequency technology, including $6.5
million for vacuum electronics; and $76.9 million in PE 63271N
for radio frequency advanced technology development.
The committee report on H.R. 1402 (H. Rept. 106-162) noted
the committee's support for a robust vacuum electronics
research and development program in the Department of Defense
and other federal agencies. The committee has reviewed the
results of the Secretary of the Navy's recent report to
Congress on the DOD vacuum electronics program and the DOD's
April 2001 Technology Area Review and Assessment (TARA) on
creating a balanced tri-service investment strategy for RF
vacuum electronics and solid state power technologies. The
committee endorses the TARA views on the criticality of support
for both vacuum electronics and solid-state power technologies.
The committee notes the TARA review's recommendations for
increased funding in thetri-service vacuum electronics program
and for establishment of a combined tri-service initiative to rapidly
advance wide bandgap semiconductor device technology to enable advanced
military radar and other systems requiring power electronics in the
mid-to-long term.
The committee recommends $16.5 million in PE 62271N for
applied research in vacuum electronics, an increase of $10.0
million; and an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63271N for
vacuum electronics advanced technology development. The
committee has recommended a legislative provision (Section 244)
that would accelerate the program for development of advanced
solid state, wide bandgap semiconductor technology. The
committee expects the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics) through the Director of Defense
Research and Engineering to ensure a balanced investment
strategy for vacuum electronics and solid state power
technologies that will meet DOD requirements for current and
future systems that use radio frequency power electronics.
VECTOR study and analysis
The budget request contained $11.6 million in PE 63790N for
the cooperative NATO research and development program.
The committee is aware that a funding shortfall has
developed in the VECTOR program, which is due in large part to
a lower-than-expected contribution provided by the Federal
Republic of Germany for fiscal year 2002. The committee is
concerned with the numerous executability problems experienced
in this program and remains concerned about the feasibility and
follow-on applications of this technology.
The committee recommends that the Secretary of the Navy
review VECTOR's technological feasibility, assess its potential
follow-on applications in accordance with the Navy's future
force structure plans, and examine in particular the possible
incorporation of VECTOR technology applied to manned and
unmanned naval aircraft in the inventory.
The committee recommends $11.6 million in PE 63790 N,
including $1.0 million for the VECTOR study and analysis
program.
Warfighter sustainment advanced technology
The budget request contained $48.6 million in PE 63236N for
warfighter sustainment advanced technology development.
Naval environmental compliance operations monitoring system
The committee understands that proposals have been made for
establishment of a naval environmental compliance operations
monitoring system (NECOSM), a two-pronged effort to increase
capabilities for situational awareness and pollution
prevention. The first effort would involve implementing
monitoring and control technology modules that were identified
during a previously funded baseline survey and cost analysis.
The second effort would use environmental analysis, cost, and
compliance driven needs assessment to identify high priority
projects for implementation of NECOSM. The committee recommends
an increase of $6.0 million in PE 63236N for development and
application of advanced technology leading to a Naval
Environmental Compliance Operations Monitoring System.
Real time heart rate variability monitor
The committee understands that real time heart rate
variability technology has the potential for enhancing on-site
assessment of disease and trauma by enabling physiological
measurement of nervous system functioning and balance. The
committee believes that improvements in these areas can lead to
improved treatment and victim survivability. The committee also
believes that the technology may permit the early detection and
treatment of the effects of weapons of mass destruction.
The committee recommends an increase of $8.9 million in PE
63236N for advanced development and demonstration of
applications for real time heart rate variability technology.
Warfighter sustainment applied research
The budget request contained $71.3 million in PE 62236N for
warfighter sustainment applied research.
Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) carbon fiber qualification
The committee notes that Navy and other DOD aircraft and
weapons systems must use a high-priced carbon fiber available
only from a single source to reinforce composite structures. As
a result of the development of a new qualification protocol,
the Navy and the Joint Strike Fighter program now have the
means to qualify new commercially available fibers for use in
advanced composite structures.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
62236N for qualification of commercially available carbon
fibers for aircraft and missile applications.
Detection and identification of human pathogens
Recent advances and maturing of design and technology have
enabled portable, cost-effective fabrication and demonstration
of high-sensitivity, high spectral-resolution sensors for the
detection and identification of spectral signatures emitted by
pathogens. The committee believes that such sensors provide the
potential for the development of active, high-resolution,
broadband spectral sensing instruments for real-time in vivo
detection and identification of human pathogens.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
62236N for applied research in the detection and identification
of human pathogens.
Formable aligned carbon thermo sets
The committee understands that a new composite technology
known as formable aligned carbon thermo sets (FACTS) has the
potential for markedly reducing the cost ofcomposites and for
enabling the production of more complex composite structures in
aircraft structures and other applications where flexibility in design
and fabrication of the structure is needed. Successful development of
the technology will lead to reductions in the cost of production of
existing composite structures, increase the percentage of composites in
the system design, and significantly reduce operations and maintenance
costs.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
62236N to accelerate the Navy's program research and
development program in formable aligned carbon thermo sets.
Knowledge-based ship system diagnosis and repair
The committee notes the establishment by the Navy of a
collaborative program for the development of a new system to
remotely monitor Navy ships and enable off-board technical
experts to assist on-board technicians that are part of the
ship's crew in ship maintenance and repair. The committee
believes that successful development and implementation of this
new approach to knowledge-based system diagnosis and repair
could be increasingly important as the Navy make the transition
to ships with reduced number of personnel and as electronic
equipment and other ships systems continues to be more complex
and powerful.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
62236N for applied research in knowledge-based ship system
diagnosis and repair.
Air Force RDT&E
Overview
The budget request contained $14,344.0 million for Air
Force RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of
$14,455.6 million, an increase of $111.7 million.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2002 Air
Force RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major
changes to the Air Force request are discussed following the
table.
Items of Special Interest
Access to space
The budget request included $26.3 million for the
demonstration and transition of Aerospace Structures in PE
63211F.
The committee recognizes the growing significance of space
operational capability and that dependable and low-cost access
to space may require the use of highly-specialized aerospace
vehicles and structures. To address these evolving challenges,
the committee urges the Secretary of the Air Force to establish
a joint program office with Army and Navy representation to
define required technology investments for access-to-space, to
perform current and future Air Force capability assessments, to
develop an integrated plan for low-cost access to space, and
initiate studies and development activities in support of such
a plan. Further, the committee strongly urges coordination
between the Aeronautical Systems Center, the Space and Missile
Center, the Air Force Research Laboratory, and the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
Accordingly, the committee authorizes $28.3 million in PE
63211F, an increase of $2.0 million to address this access-to-
space priority.
Advanced aerospace sensors
The budget request contained $55.8 million in PE 63203F for
advanced aerospace sensors.
The committee believes that advanced sensors are essential
to support future warfighter requirements and therefore
recommends $60.8 million in PE 63203F, an increase of $5.0
million for advanced aerospace sensors.
Aerospace propulsion
The budget request contained $149.2 million in PE 62203F
for aerospace propulsion.
The committee notes the recent efforts by the Department of
Defense to ensue adequate funding in this critical Air Force
applied research account. The committee is aware of a small
business innovative research effort, the Pulse Detonation
Engine (PDE), which has been in development for several years
and appears ready for fabrication and test of a flight-worthy
PDE. The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE
62203F to contain PDE efforts.
The committee also continues to support Air Force
investments in Integrated High Payoff Rocket Propulsion
Technology (IHPRPT) and recommends an increase of $9.5 million
in PE 62203F and an increase of $6.5 million on PE 63302F for
continued investments in IHPRPT.
Aging landing gear life extension (ALGLE) program
The budget request contained $20.1 million in PE 65011F for
development of products and services to improve the performance
of aging aircraft systems but included no funds for the ALGLE
program.
The ALGLE program addresses the operational, safety and
maintenance consequences of increased mishaps resulting from
landing gear failures as well as unacceptable mission incapable
rates for KC-135, C-130, C-5 and F-16 aircraft that are
attributable to either unavailable or unreliable landing gear
assets. The committee notes that the ALGLE program is
prototyping new landing gear component modifications,
developing new repair techniques, and exploiting new
technologies. The committee understands that these efforts have
already resulted in life cycle cost reductions of over $46.0
million and believes that this program should continue to
address the Air Force's aging landing gear problems in fiscal
year 2002 and in subsequent years.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $35.1 million in PE
65011F, an increase of $15.0 million, for continuation of the
ALGLE program.
Airborne reconnaissance system
The budget request contained $77.8 million in PE 35206F for
airborne systems, but included no funds for theater airborne
reconnaissance system (TARS) or Combat Sent passive airborne
ranging.
The committee recommends $97.3 million in PE 35206F, an
increase of $4.5 million for Combat Sent passive airborne
ranging and an increase of $15.0 million for TARS development.
Assessment relating to gasoline and diesel engine fuel systems
The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to assess
the potential for developing a program that would require all
military services to maintain gasoline and diesel engine fuel
systems using engine decarbonizing systems. The assessment
should address the costs and benefits of a requirement that the
equipment and cleaning agents used in decarbonizing engines be
tested and approved by entities such as the Management and
Equipment Evaluation Program (MEEP) of the Department of the
Air Force or similar testing entities in the other military
services. Consideration should be given to requirements that
cleaning agents are non-carcinogenic, non-flammable, and non-
hazardous, as documented by the Material Safety Data Sheets
(MSDS) required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
and that the use of transmission fluid exchange equipment that
is capable of exchanging virtually all contaminated automatic
transmission fluid (ATF) with new ATF.
Bipolar wafer cell nickel-metal hydride battery
The budget request contained $53.8 million in PE 78011F for
the Air Force's manufacturing technology program.
The committee notes that the Air Force has been developing
a bipolar wafer-cell nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) replacement
battery for the F-16 aircraft that has the potential to provide
significantly higher power than nickel-cadmium batteries. The
committee understands that the use of bipolar wafer-cell NiMH
batteries could lead to significant savings from reduced
procurement and maintenance of existing nickel-cadmium
batteries.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE
78011F for to complete manufacturing technology development and
testing of a bipolar wafer-cell NiMH battery for the F-16
aircraft.
Commercial imagery strategy
The committee believes that the United States should
prioritize the use of commercial remote sensing as envisioned
in Presidential Decision Directive-23. Moreover, the committee
believes that allocating certain imagery requirements to the
U.S. commercial remote sensing industry will permit National
Technical Means to focus on high priority intelligence
requirements. Thus, the committee continues to support use of
commercial satellite imagery and geo-spatial products and
services to satisfy the non-time-critical low and medium
resolution requirements of the Secretary of Defense, including
the regional Commanders-in-Chief, and the Intelligence
Community.
The committee also understands that the Administration is
developing a commercial imagery strategy to support these
requirements and strongly endorses the development and
implementation of such a strategy. The committee believes,
however, that the U.S. government must become a reliable, long-
term customer of commercial imagery if the strategy is to be
successful. The committee recognizes that there are budgetary
and contract authority issues, but does not believe they are
beyond solution.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense,
in consultation with the Director of Central Intelligence, to
plan and carry out a program to purchase a majority of their
non-time-critical low and medium resolution imagery
requirements from the U.S. commercial remote sensing industry
by 2005.
Free electron laser
The budget request contained $77.2 million in PE 62102F for
Materials, but included no funds for free electron laser.
The committee notes the progress achieved in Navy free
electron laser (FEL) development and urges the Secretary of the
Air Force to continue collaborative efforts including the
addition of ultra violet capability to the Navy's FEL
demonstration to examine aerospace applications.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.5 million in PE
62102F for FEL.
Funding transfers to support transformation
The committee is concerned that the largest area of growth
in Air Force research and development (R&D) investments has
occurred in the category of fielded system development and
other mature technologies. Other areas included increases
greater than previously forecast, apparently excessive
management funding, or un-obligated prior year funding. The
committee believes that the highest priority for R&D
investments should be to fund efforts directly related to
transformation and future capabilities. Therefore, thecommittee
recommends the following decreases to Air Force accounts, to be
transferred to other programs within the Air Force that support
transformation and future system development:
62204F.................................................. $14,100,000
62605F.................................................. 5,700,000
62702F.................................................. 5,200,000
63605F.................................................. 5,000,000
63430F.................................................. 27,000,000
63432F.................................................. 5,000,000
63438F.................................................. 10,000,000
63850F.................................................. 3,000,000
63856F.................................................. 4,433,000
63859F.................................................. 2,688,000
65101F.................................................. 5,000,000
65807F.................................................. 13,600,000
99980F.................................................. 10,000,000
27028F.................................................. 29,400,000
27133F.................................................. 30,000,000
27134F.................................................. 25,500,000
27138F.................................................. 15,100,000
27268F.................................................. 25,500,000
27277F.................................................. 1,961,000
27410F.................................................. 10,000,000
35910F.................................................. 20,000,000
41119F.................................................. 30,000,000
41134F.................................................. 22,500,000
GPS jammer detection and location system
The budget request contained $10.8 million in 27247F for
Air Force tactical exploitation of national capabilities, but
included no funds for GPS jammer detection and location system
(GPS-JLOC).
The committee notes that mission planning tools, tactics,
and procedures must be developed for countering jamming of GPS.
The committee is aware that a GPS jammer detection and location
system has been developed under a Phase II small business
innovative research (SBIR) program and further notes that GPS-
JLOC appears ready to transition to an operational capability
under SBIR Phase III.
The committee recommends $3.8 million in PE 27247F, an
increase of $3.0 million for GPS-JLOC.
High accuracy network demonstration system
The budget program included $50.5 million in PE 65864F for
the Space Test Program (STP).
The committee supports the STP initiative as an effort for
advancing space technology and enabling future U.S. space
superiority in a cost effective manner. The committee is aware
of an orbit-identification and determination capability that
may reduce errors and costs in the current space-object
maintenance catalog. The technology may improve ephemeris
determination for Defense Support Program satellites by as much
as 50 percent through the use of highly accurate angular
observations from a family of low-cost optical sensors called
the High Accuracy Network Determination System (HANDS). The
committee notes the expected low-cost nature of HANDS and
encourages the Air Force to pursue opportunities in this area.
Accordingly, the committee authorizes $55.5 million in PE
65864F for HANDS, an increase of $5.0 million over the request.
Joint precision approach landing system
The budget request contained $9.6 million in PE 63860F for
joint precision approach landing systems (JPALS).
The committee is aware that the basic requirement for joint
precision approach landing system is to provide a rapidly
deployable, adverse weather and terrain, survivable,
maintainable, interoperable precision approach and landing
system for land and sea. The committee notes that JPALS will
replace existing, obsolete landing systems in the fleet and
ashore.
The committee recommends $14.6 million in PE 63860F for
JPALS.
Joint STARS multi-platform radar technology insertion program
The budget request contained $147.8 million in PE 27581F
for Joint STARS system development, but contained no funds for
Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program (RTIP).
The committee notes the tremendous contributions of Joint
STARS aircraft to ground warfare and warfighter situational
awareness and fully supports the planned improvements inherent
in the RTIP effort that will enhance ground surveillance,
precision targeting, and battlefield coordination. However, the
committee is concerned with the operational limitations
experienced by the Joint STARS fleet refurbished airframes and
believes that the Air Force should thoroughly assess
utilization of RTIP technology on other, more modern,
airframes.
Therefore, the committee recommends $246.8 million in PE
27581F, an increase of $89.0 million for Multi-Platform RTIP
and an increase of $10.0 million for Joint STARS ocean
surveillance capability testing.
Joint strike fighter (JSF) alternate engine
The budget request contained $769.5 million in PE 64800F to
begin the engineering and manufacturing development phase of
the JSF program, but included no funds to reduce development
schedule risk of the alternate engine common hardware
components.
The JSF program will develop and field a family of aircraft
that meets the needs of the Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and
allies with commonality among the variants to minimize life
cycle costs. The committee notes that the JSF joint program
office (JPO) has encouraged two engine manufacturers to work
together on the co-development of propulsion components which
are common to both the JSF's current F-119 engine and the F-120
alternate engine and understands that this effort will develop
two interchangeable propulsion systems while preserving the
proprietary interests of each manufacturer. The committee also
understands that the JPO supports production of the F-120
alternate engine as part of the low-rate initial JSF production
scheduled for fiscal year 2009 but believes that increased
funding in fiscal year 2002 is required to reduce development
schedule risk of the common hardware components.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $779.5 million in PE
64800F, an increase of $10.0 million, to reduce development
schedule risk of the JSF alternate engine common hardware
components.
Low cost autonomous attack system
The budget request contained $37.6 million in PE 63601F,
including $8.0 million for the Low Cost Autonomous Attack
System (LOCAAS).
The committee supports continued development of precision
guided munitions (PGMs) such as LOCAAS and notes that the
LOCAAS program is preparing for final development to address
the PGM requirements for area search weapons not addressed by
the Air Force Small Diameter Bomb development program.
The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE
63601F to continue LOCAAS development.
Low cost launch technology
The budget request contained $54.5 million in PE 63401F for
advanced spacecraft technology, but included no funds for low
cost launch technology. The committee is aware of several low
cost launch concepts and technologies that offer the potential
to reduce space launch costs tremendously. The committee notes
that the Scorpius program has successfully demonstrated reduced
cost launch capabilities.
The committee recommends $69.5 million in PE 63401F, an
increase of $15.0 million for low cost launch technologies,
including Scorpius.
Major T&E investment
The budget request contained $49.9 million in PE 64759F for
test & evaluation investments, but included no funds for the
Propulsion Wind Tunnel (PWT) Upgrade project or the Laser
Induced Surface Improvement (LISI) project.
The committee notes that previous year budget requests by
the Air Force included funding to initiate the PWT Upgrade
project, but sufficient funding has not yet been committed to
complete this project. The committee also notes that the Air
Force has explored the cost savings and improved wear and
corrosion resistance demonstrated by components treated with
the LISI process.
Therefore, the committee recommends $59.9 million in PE
64759F, an increase of $4.0 million, for completion of the PWT
Upgrade project and an increase of $6.0 million for continued
development of the LISI project.
Materials technologies for aging aircraft
The budget request included $32.7 million in PE 63112F for
Advanced Materials for Weapon Systems.
The committee recognizes that future aeronautical
capability will largely depend on significant improvements in
advanced materials technologies that promise to extend the
lifespan and reduce the total life cycle costs of future
aerospace vehicles. While the committee notes that the Air
Force has experienced some success in developing and
implementing new aging aircraft technologies, it encourages the
service to increase overall effort in this area.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in PE 63112F to address this priority.
Missile Technology demonstration-3B
The budget request contained $8.5 million in PE 65860F for
rocket systems launch programs, but included no funds for the
Missile Technology Demonstration (MTD)-3B.
The committee notes that the MTD effort represents the
primary high-speed weapon system technology platform within the
Department of Defense and urges the Secretary of the Air Force
to reassess funding priorities giving full weight to the
importance of the MTD program.
The committee recommends an increase of $11.0 million to PE
65860F for continued support of MTD-3B.
Non-space SIGINT architecture
The committee notes that the programs that make up the
Joint SIGINT Architecture Family (JSAF) continue to experience
significant programmatic setbacks despite the efforts of
program officials and their industry partners. The Low Band
Subsystem (LBSS) program was recently terminated after a
seemingly endless series cost, schedule and performance
difficulties and the High Band Subsystem program is reportedly
facing similar difficulties with eventual termination possible.
Moreover, the reported ability of the JSAF programs to allow
full interoperability within emerging Department of Defense
command, control, communications and intelligence architectures
as originally envisioned was never realized and was not even
possible without coordinated wide-band communications
improvements throughout all the ISR platforms. The committee is
concerned that the JSAF efforts have drained funding from
reasonable alternatives for the near term.
The committee believes the JSAF program has failed with
respect to its original objectives. The committee believes that
this is not just another case of poor program performance, but
indeed, this was a management approach failure that has denied
theDepartment an achievable joint SIGINT architecture and the
very objectives it was to solve. As a result, an adequate joint SIGINT
architecture is still not available, critical SIGINT modernization
efforts have not occurred, and interoperability is limited. The
committee is convinced a joint architecture, replete with the ability
to share system upgrades is achievable. But, it will have to be done by
the platform program offices working together in a collaborative set of
efforts. The committee believes that this cannot be realized by a
program office independent of the platform developers, nor can it be
done without a plan for achieving system-level interoperability.
Accordingly, the committee directs that Secretary of the
Air Force, as principal acquisition executive for JSAF
programs, to develop a comprehensive, non-space SIGINT system
architecture plan for the post 2007 time frame. This plan shall
provide for a digital, open architecture that uses only non-
proprietary commercial standards and standardized, well-defined
interfaces. Further, the systems in this architecture must
include the ability to be reprogrammed through software changes
to be periodically upgraded as well as to meet emerging time-
critical requirements. The non-space SIGINT architecture plan
shall be provided to the congressional defense and intelligence
committees not later than May 31, 2002.
Precision location and identification (PLAID)
The budget request contained $41.3 million in PE 64270F for
electronic warfare (EW) development, of which $1.8 million was
included for the PLAID technology program.
The PLAID technology program will enhance aircrew
situational awareness by providing accurate ground emitter
location and unambiguous identification. The committee
understands that the Air Force plans to conduct a competition
to advance the engineering manufacturing and development (EMD)
phase of the PLAID technology program and further understands
that, upon completion of the EMD phase, the PLAID upgrade will
be installed on over 1,800 Air Force aircraft. Due to its
successful flight and ground test evaluations, the committee
believes that the PLAID technology EMD phase should be
accelerated.
Therefore, the committee recommends $54.6 million in PE
64270F, an increase of $13.3 million, to accelerate the PLAID
technology EMD phase.
Satellite planning information network (SPIN)
The budget request contained $232.1 million in PE 64479F
for development of the military strategic and tactical relay
(MILSTAR) communications satellite, but included no funds for
the SPIN development.
The SPIN is a web-based satellite communications management
technology that utilizes the Department's existing secret
internet protocol router to expand the flexibility and
efficiency of military satellite communications. The committee
notes that the demand for military satellite communications
continues to rise, and believes that development efforts of
programs such as the SPIN should be undertaken to more
efficiently use these resources.
Consequently, the committee recommends $238.6 million in PE
64479F, an increase of $6.5 million, to develop the SPIN
technology.
Space and missile rocket propulsion
The budget request contained no funds in PE 63302F for
Space and Missile Rocket Propulsion.
The committee notes the importance of continued investments
in advanced space and missile propulsion technology and
recommends an increase of $12.6 million in PE 63302F to
modernize Air Force Research Laboratory large rocket test
stands for higher pressure requirements and improved
instrumentation.
Special aerospace metals and manufacturing processes
The budget request contained $77.2 million in PE 62102F for
applied research and $32.7 million in PE 63122F for advanced
development of materials technologies for aerospace systems and
$53.8 million in PE 78011F for the Air Force's manufacturing
technology program.
The committee continues to support the need for advances in
special aerospace metals and metal alloys for aircraft and
space vehicle structures, propulsion, components, and weapon
systems. The Department of Defense needs materials that are
lightweight, high strength, high performance, and capable of
withstanding the stressing environments that are experienced by
terrestrial and aerospace systems, and for the development and
optimization of manufacturing processes for these materials.
The committee recommends increases of $4.5 million in PE
62102F, $4.5 million in PE 63112F, and $3.5 million in PE
78011F to continue the program for the development and
demonstration of special aerospace materials and materials
manufacturing processes.
Synthetic Theater Operations Research Model
The budget request included $25.3 million in PE 27601F for
Modeling and Simulation, but included no funding for the
Synthetic Theater Operations Research Model (STORM).
The committee supports the Air Force Modeling and
Simulation program and recognizes the potential savings and
enhanced training levels associated with these initiatives. As
training costs escalate, the committee continues to encourage
alternative cost-saving training techniques particularly as
potential threats continue to evolve. The committee is aware
that STORM, a program in its fifth year of development, is a
next generation simulation designed specifically to meet needs
for a greater understanding of the impact of information
technology on force structure and operational concepts.
Therefore, the committee recommends $27.3 million in PE
27601F, an increase of $2.0 million for the continued
development of STORM.
Texas regional institute for environmental studies
The budget request contained no funds in PE 63723F for
environmental engineering technology.
The committee continues to support the ongoing Texas
regional institute for environmental studies (TRIES) research
and development demonstration program, and recommends $3.0
million in PE 63723F for a joint TRIES--Brooks Air Force Base
Institute of Environment, Safety and Occupational Health Risk
environmental demonstration program addressing environmental
issues unique to the southwest border region.
Defense-Wide RDT&E
Overview
The budget request contained $15,050.8 million for Defense-
Wide RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of $15,374.6
million, a decrease of $245.2 million and the transfer of
$569.2 million for missile defense programs from Army and Navy
RDT&E to Defense-wide RDT&E.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2002
Defense-Wide RDT&E program are identified in the table below.
Major changes to the Defense-Wide request are discussed
following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Aircraft affordability initiative
The budget request contained $10.8 million in PE 64805D8Z
for the Department of Defense Commercial Operations and Support
Savings Initiative (COSSI).
The committee notes that the stated goal of COSSI is to
adapt commercial technologies to reduce operations and support
(O&S) costs and improve overall weapons systems performance.
The committee is aware of a promising technology for
improving electronic warfare (EW) performance and reducing the
overall cost of future and existing aircraft. Initiated in
fiscal year 2001, the digital EW product improvement program
(EW PIP) has utilized recent technological advancements to
permit the conversion of analogue-based EW receivers to digital
electronics. The committee understands that digital receivers
will substantially decrease the supportability cost and risk of
an aircraft's EW system and simultaneously increase combat
performance. The committee further understands that if
introduced to the F-22 fighter, the digital EW PIP should
reduce aircraft weight by more than 30 pounds and power
consumption by more than 600 watts. The committee is encouraged
by these anticipated gains and improvements and urges the
Department to also consider the introduction of digital EW PIP
on other aircraft, such as the Joint Strike Fighter, F-15s, and
as well as other military and space platforms.
The committee recommends $17.0 million in PE 6480D8Z to
complete requisite systems software development and to design,
build, and bench-test the F-22 RW/DF Digital Receiver and two
associated modules.
Backscatter mobile truck system
The budget request contained $33.5 million in PE 63228D8Z
for demonstration and validation of physical security
equipment.
The committee notes the requirement for deployed forces to
be capable of detecting explosives, weapons, or other systems
or items of potential use in acts of terrorism. The committee
also notes that there are commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS)
mobile truck-mounted systems capable of detecting organic
materials in confused and cluttered operational environments
using both backscatter and standard transmission x-ray
technology, that, if successful and cost-effective in
comparison to other cargo screening and surveillance systems,
could be used to improve the anti-terrorism posture of U.S.
military bases and forces.
The committee recommends $49.5 million in PE 63228D8Z, an
increase of $16.0 million to test and evaluate COTS mobile
truck-mounted cargo screening and surveillance systems that
employ backscatter and standard transmission x-ray technology.
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO)
The budget request contained $7,036.5 million for the RDT&E
program elements of BMDO.
The committee recommends $7,470.7 million, an increase of
$434.2 million. The increase results from disapproving the
requested transfer of RDT&E activities for Patriot Advanced
Capability-3 (PAC-3), Medium Extended Air Defense System
(MEADS), and Navy Area to the military departments.
Technology
The budget request contained $112.0 million in PE 63175C
for advanced technology development.
The committee recommends the budget request for technology.
The committee strongly believes that a robust technology
development program is the key to enhanced future capabilities
to counter more sophisticated threats. The committee notes that
BMDO investment in technology is only 1.5 percent of the total
budget request, and strongly recommends significantly
increasing this investment in future budget cycles.
Ballistic missile defense system
The budget request contained $779.6 million in PE 63880C
for ballistic missile defense (BMD) system development.
The committee recommends $754.6 million, a decrease of
$25.0 million. The committee believes that two systems
engineering and integration fourth quarter starts, for updates
to the manufacturing technology program and the threat systems
engineering library, can be deferred to fiscal year 2003.
The committee notes that the BMD system segment
consolidates activities conducted under a number of program
elements in previous years. They include battle management
command and control development, family of systems integration
activities, threat representative target development, and
countermeasures programs. The committee is especially
encouraged by the increased priority given to assessment of
countermeasures, and specifically the Hercules project, which
provides a venue for vetting potential countermeasures against
projected system capabilities.
The committee observes that this program element, which
includes target development and countermeasures assessment, is
essential to the implementation of an operationally realistic
test capability.
Terminal defense segment
The budget request contained $988.2 million in PE 63881C
for the terminal defense segment.
The committee recommends $1,577.4 million, an increase of
$589.2 million. This increase reflects incorporation of RDT&E
activities for PAC-3, MEADS, and Navy Area into this program
element as a result of the committee's recommendation to
disapprove the transfer of those programs to the services. The
committee also recommends an increase of $30.0 million to
accelerate development of the Arrow System Improvement Program
to counter advanced threats to the national security of Israel
posed by emerging systems, as represented by the Shahab series
of ballistic missiles. The committeebelieves that technical
development of missile defense by the Department of Defense benefits
from continued cooperation with the government of Israel.
The budget request included $73.6 million for MEADS in Army
research and development. The committee recommends transfer of
MEADS back to BMDO, but supports the objective of providing a
mobile theater defense capability for the U.S. and the allies,
and encourages greater participation in the program by the
members of North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
The committee is concerned by the significant projected
cost overrun and schedule slip recently announced in the Navy
Area program. Production delivery of the Navy Area interceptor
appears to be delayed by approximately 20 months until fiscal
year 2007. The committee notes that Navy Area is the Navy's
``first to field'' antiballistic missile capability and first
unit equipped was to have closely followed the fielding
schedule of PAC-3. Further, the committee is disturbed by the
absence of Navy commitment to vigorously pursue this effort
given other demands on its budget, and disapproves the transfer
of Navy Area from BMDO to the Navy. The committee recommends a
decrease of $10.0 million for this program.
Midcourse defense segment
The budget request contained $3,940.5 million in PE 63882C
for the midcourse defense segment.
The committee recommends $3,910.5 million for the midcourse
defense segment, including a decrease of $30.0 million to the
sea-based midcourse project. Within the sea-based mid-course
project, the committee recommends the budget request of $260.0
million for the Aegis LEAP Interceptor demonstration program,
the precursor to a Navy theater wide capability to defeat
ballistic missiles. The committee recommends $30.0 million, a
decrease of $30.0 million, for concept definition studies
related to a new sea-based midcourse capability against
intermediate and long range threats. The committee believes
that ongoing, competitive radar development activities will
greatly influence the course this effort will take.
The committee recommends $3,230.7 million, the budget
request, for the ground based midcourse project, including
$786.5 million for the fiscal year 2004 Pacific missile defense
test bed, including infrastructure upgrades and construction at
Fort Greely, Kodiak Island, Shemya Island, and Kwajelein Atoll.
The committee believes that such improvements to the
infrastructure that add operational realism to testing, coupled
with an aggressive test program, are crucial to the expeditious
development and demonstration of a viable ground-based
midcourse defense. The committee notes that the upgraded test
infrastructure will also, in the near term, support testing of
sea-based and integrated ``family of systems'' concepts.
Boost defense segment
The budget request contained $685.4 million in PE 63883C
for the boost phase defense segment.
The committee recommends $610.4 million, a decrease of
$75.0 million, for this program element. The committee
recommends $25.0 million, a decrease of $25.0 million, for the
sea-based boost project, reflecting the committee's view that
concept definition and operational assessment should precede
hardware design, development, and testing. The committee
recommends $400.0 million for the air-based boost project
(airborne laser), a decrease of $10.0 million. The block 2008
full power optics for the airborne laser are not required for
the fiscal year 2003 half power shoot down demonstration, which
the committee sees as a critical indicator of the continued
viability of the effort. The committee recommends $152.0
million, a decrease of $38.0 million, for the space-based boost
defense project. The committee is concerned that the space-
based laser (SBL) integrated flight experiment, has requested
funding of $200 million this year, with the experiment a decade
or more out. The committee recommends a decrease of $28.0
million to hold SBL to the level of the original fiscal year
2002 program of record, and suggests that BMDO consider other,
more near term space-based demonstrations. The committee
recommends $5.0 million for space-based kinetic energy boost
phase intercept concept definition, a decrease of $10.0
million, and believes $2.0 million in savings can be found in
program operations savings in this program element.
Sensors segment
The budget request contained $495.6 million in PE 63884C
for sensor development.
The committee recommends $470.6 million, a decrease of
$25.0 million from the budget request. The committee notes that
the Space-based Infrared System-low (SBIRS) has experienced
significant growth over the level forecast for fiscal year
2001. The committee fully supports SBIRS-low, but places lower
near term priority on SBIRS than other elements in the budget
request as the first satellites will not be available to begin
supporting test activities until fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommends the budget request of $75.3
million to complete detailed design for the Russian-American
Observation Satellite program. The committee believes that
cooperative threat reduction should include missile defense
activities that reduce the risk of an undetected launch event.
Chemical/biological defense research, development, test and evaluation
program
The budget request contained a total of $507.7 million for
chemical/biological defense, including $39.1 million in PE
61384BP for basic research, $125.5 million in PE 62384BP for
applied research, $69.2 million in PE 63384BP for advanced
technology development, $82.6 million in PE 63884BP for
demonstration/validation, $159.9 million in PE 64384BP for
engineering and manufacturing development, and $31.3 million in
PE 65384BP for RDT&E management support. The budget request
also contained $140.1 million in PE 62383E for the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) biological defense
research program.
The committee recommends a total of $502.7 million for
chemical/biological defense RDT&E, a decrease of $5.0 million
to the budget request. The committee also recommends a total of
$150.1 million in PE 62383E for the DARPA biological warfare
defense program, an increase of $10.0 million. Elsewhere in
this report the committee has recommended an increase of $13.0
million for the procurement of collectiveprotection shelters,
and has also provided guidance regarding the contracts for procurement
of anthrax vaccine.
In order to insure an integrated chemical/biological
defense program within the Department of Defense (DOD), section
1793 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
1994 (Public Law 103-160) mandated the coordination and
integration of all DOD chemical/biological defense programs and
the funding of these programs in a defense-wide account,
separate from the accounts of the military departments. The
committee believes that the Department has made considerable
progress in improving cooperation among the military
departments. The committee has previously noted a growing
tendency to fund individual chemical/biological defense
projects within the military services and again emphasizes that
this practice violates the intent and purpose of Congress in
establishing the consolidated program.
The committee also emphasizes the necessity for the
objectives of the DARPA biological defense program to be
coordinated closely and integrated with the overall Department
of Defense chemical and biological defense program, and expects
the Secretary of Defense to ensure that such an integrated
program is established and maintained.
The committee continues to support initiatives for
research, development, and demonstration of advanced chemical
and biological defense technologies and systems. These
initiatives should compete for funding within the appropriate
program elements of the joint chemical and biological defense
program and the DARPA biological defense program on the basis
of technical merit and the anticipated ability of the
technology or system to meet joint and service unique needs.
Research in percutaneous, optical, and pulmonary effects of
mustard agent
The committee notes that the United States concentrated its
research in the effects of mustard agent on the human body on
the percutaneous effects of mustard on the skin, while U.S.
allies focused on the effects of mustard agent and agent vapors
on the eyes and on the pulmonary system. The committee
understands that the research activities of U.S. allies in
these areas have been reduced and that the U.S. research
program in the effects of mustard agent now focuses on all
three areas: percutaneous, optical, and pulmonary. The
committee encourages a balanced, threat-focused research effort
on the effects of mustard and other chemical agents on the
human body and the identification and development of promising
technologies for protection and treatment against such agents.
Optical computing device materials for chemical sensors
The committee recommends $41.1 million in PE 61384BP, an
increase of $2.0 million to continue the basic research program
in organic and inorganic optical computing device materials for
use in standoff sensors for detection and identification of
chemical agents.
Chemical/biological regenerative air filtration systems
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
62384BP to accelerate the program for applied research in
chemical/biological regenerative air filtration technology.
Chemical and biological mass spectrometer
The committee understands that the Army's Chemical and
Biological Mass Spectrometer (CBMS II) upgrade project will
provide the capability to detect and identify chemical and
biological warfare agents in very low concentrations. The
committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63884BP
to continue the capability assessment, system optimization, and
enhanced field-testing the chemical and biological agent mass
spectrometer upgrade.
Mobile chemical agent detector
The committee notes the progress made in the development of
a mobile chemical agent detector (MCAD) for the Marine Corps'
Chemical/Biological Incident Response Force (CBIRF) and the
recent testing of the system. The committee also notes the
Marine Corps Systems Command's efforts to integrate, test and
develop concepts for an aerial chemical agent detection system
for manned and unmanned air platforms in support of the CBIRF
and strongly recommends that the technology be assessed for
application to the operational requirements for standoff
chemical and biological agent detectors for all the military
services as an integral part of the Defense-wide chemical/
biological defense program.
The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million in PE
63884BP for continued development, demonstration, and
validation of the MCAD for support of the Marine Corps CBIRF
and for the other military services.
Asymmetric protocols for biological defense
The committee recommends $150.1 million in PE 62383E for
the DARPA biological defense research program, including $10.0
million for research, development, and demonstration of
asymmetric protocols for biological defense with emphasis on
enhancing individual non-specific immunities to and blocking
pathogens from biological threat agents.
Complex systems design
The budget request contained $11.0 million in PE 63704D8Z
for special technical support, but included no funds for
complex systems design.
The committee notes that the effort to develop an
integrated digital environment for complex systems design has
progressed significantly and remains ahead of schedule. The
committee is aware that this development is fundamental to
improving the acquisition process and minimizing life-cycle
costs for future systems. The committee further notes that
manpower, personnel, training, health hazard, human factors,
andpersonnel survivability (MANPRINT) are among important
factors to be addressed during the complex design process.
The committee strongly supports improvements in the
acquisition process and recommends $21.0 million in PE
63704D8Z, an increase of $10.0 million for complex systems
design, and an increase of $2.5 million in PE 65326A for
MANPRINT activities within complex system design.
Counterproliferation analysis and planning system
The budget request contained $89.8 million in PE 63160BR
for advanced development of counterproliferation technologies,
including $9.0 million for the counterproliferation and
analysis system (CAPS).
The CAPS program responds to the need for a comprehensive
and timely counterproliferation target planning tool to assist
combatant commanders in the conduct of their contingency plan
targeting responsibilities and provides a thorough description
of nuclear, biological, chemical, and means of delivery
proliferation program in countries of specific concern to the
combatant commanders. The budget request would complete
detailed analysis on the first group of countries identified by
the combatant commanders and begin analysis on the second group
of countries.
The committee recommends $92.8 million in PE 63160BR, an
increase of $3.0 million to the budget request and providing a
total of $12.0 million for continued development of the CAPS
program to meet the requirements of the combatant commanders.
Defense imagery and mapping program
The budget request contained $115.2 million in PE 35102BQ
for the Defense imagery and mapping program, but included no
funds for the commercial joint mapping and visualization
toolkit, or for the geographic synthetic aperture radar
(GeoSAR).
The committee is aware that applying commercial technology
to defense and intelligence applications, has potential to
reduce costs and while increasing performance. The committee is
also aware that software commonality also offers many potential
savings.
The committee is aware that the airborne GeoSAR is being
developed to provide a dual band interferometric radar that is
able to provide the military high resolution, three dimensional
maps of the earth, above, through, and below the vegetation
canopy.
The committee recommends $139.4 million in PE 35102BQ, an
increase of $15 million for development of a common commercial
technology-based joint mapping toolkit interface to enhance and
customize intelligence, navigation and mission planning
functions, and an increase of $9.2 million for completion of
GeoSAR development and demonstration.
Distributed common ground station/networking ISR assets
The budget request included $85.2 million in PE 35208A,
$131.0 million in PE 63795N, and $11.4 million in PE 35208F for
continued development of the Services' efforts with respect to
networking Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR)
assets, especially the Distributed Common Ground Station
(DCGS).
The committee strongly supports network-centric ISR
developments that lead to the objective of network-centric
warfare. The committee believes that a fully networked ISR
enterprise will allow the more effective use of existing ISR
platforms and systems, dramatically reducing the time required
to prosecute time critical targets. The committee believes the
technologies and techniques pursued under efforts such as the
Network-Centric Collaborative Targeting (NCCT) initiative, the
Naval Fires Network (NFN), the Dynamic Time Critical War
Capability ``5 Minute War,'' and the Command and Control,
Sensor and Reconnaissance Tasking System (CSMARTS) are some of
the most critical developments for the Department's
transformation activities. Each of these initiatives use
existing platforms to produce a more capable effects-based
warfighting outcome. Therefore, the committee believes these
network-centric approaches must be given highest priority.
The committee recommends that funding requested within the
foregoing program elements be focused on developing the
infrastructure for network-centric ISR solutions and
prototyping these solutions. The committee directs the Service
Secretaries to provide the congressional defense and
intelligence committees a report no later that February 1, 2002
on how each plans to prioritize DCGS developmental efforts on
network-centric ISR warfare.
The committee recommends an increase of $25.2 million in PE
63795N for rapidly transitioning the Naval Fires Network, or a
similar capability, from an experimental system to a float
prototype aboard the USS LINCOLN and/or the USS STENNIS.
Further, the committee recommends $33.9 million in PE 35208F,
an increase of $22.5 million, for the development and
deployment of the NCCT functionality in the Air Force's DCGS to
promote network-centric ISR capabilities for use within the Air
Operations Center.
Distributed operational testing capabilities
The committee is concerned that resurgence in acquisition
spending over the next decade will place unacceptable pressure
on an already downsized Test & Evaluation infrastructure. The
committee is aware of the potential of a small investment on
distributed testing capabilities to significantly increase the
capacity and responsiveness of Department of Defense major test
facilities in meeting new demands for operational testing for
concept development and experimentation, and to ensure
interoperability, suitability, and effectiveness of deployed
systems. The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to
request increased funds in Defense-wide Central Test and
Evaluation Investment Development (CTEIP) in fiscal year 2003
for distributed operational test infrastructure. This increase
in funding should support standards and protocols being
developed in the Army's Virtual Proving Ground, the Navy's
Distributed Engineering Plant, and the Joint Synthetic Battle
Space and Foundation Initiatives 2010.
Electrostatic decontamination system
The budget request contained $42.2 million in PE 63122D8Z
for advanced technology development under the interagency
combating terrorism technology support program.
The committee notes the progress being made in the
development and limited evaluation of an initial laboratory
prototype electrostatic decontamination system that could
provide an environmentally-safe, non-corrosive, and affordable
chemical and biological agent decontamination capability for
the military services.
The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE
63122D8Z to complete advanced technology development of the
electrostatic decontamination system, including testing against
chemical and live biological warfare agents, independent
laboratory confirmation of performance, and delivery of a field
prototype system for testing and evaluation by Department of
Defense and interagency users.
Facial recognition technology
The budget request contained $42.2 million in PE 63122D8Z
for combating terrorism technology support (CTTS).
The committee supports aggressive development of advanced
technology to control access to critical facilities, in
particular biometric technology such as the principal component
method of facial recognition.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
63122D8Z for facial recognition.
Funding transfers to support transformation DW
The committee is concerned that the largest area of growth
in Defense-wide research and development (R&D) investments, far
exceeding increases proposed by the military services, has
occurred in the Defense Threat Reduction Agency and in the
Defense Advanced Research Project Agency. Several other
defense-wide programs appear to have excessive management
funding, non-specific programs, or support fielded system
development and other mature technologies. Other programs
included un-forecast increases, apparently excessive management
funding or unobligated prior year funding. The committee
believes that the highest priority for R&D investments in
fiscal year is 2002 to fund activities directly related to
transformation and future capabilities. Therefore, the
committee recommends the following decreases to Defense-wide
accounts, to be transferred to other programs within the
Services that support transformation and future system
development:
62301E.................................................. $70,000,000
62302E.................................................. 5,000,000
62384BP................................................. 20,000,000
62702E.................................................. 9,000,000
62712E.................................................. 18,000,000
62715BR................................................. 35,000,000
63285E.................................................. 25,000,000
63384BP................................................. 10,000,000
63716D8Z................................................ 30,000,000
63739E.................................................. 8,000,000
63750D8Z................................................ 20,000,000
63755D8Z................................................ 20,000,000
63762E.................................................. 4,000,000
63765E.................................................. 5,000,000
63851D8Z................................................ 3,000,000
63923D8Z................................................ 3,000,000
65104D8Z................................................ 3,000,000
65116D8Z................................................ 5,000,000
65124D8Z................................................ 10,000,000
64805D8Z................................................ 10,805,000
DARPA ``Exoskeleton Project''
The committee recommends that $4.0 million of the decrease
in PE 62712E be assessed against the DARPA exoskeleton project
for enhancement of soldier physical performance. The committee
finds the project of questionable value and largely duplicative
of work done in the 1950s and the 1970s that was subsequently
discarded because of limited operational utility and adverse
impact on the human body.
Global infrastructure data conversion initiative & document
exploitation
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense (DOD)
has a substantial requirement to standardize document
exploitation material that is resident at various DOD
departments and agencies. This legacy material, which includes
foreign languageand analytical reports, is currently in non-
useable form, and needs to be normalized into a formatted database. The
committee believes the Department should move forward to convert
sensitive, legacy Document Exploitation (Doc Ex) material into a
standard useable format, database, and media construct for use within
the Department.
In addition, the committee encourages the Department to
continue with its Global Infrastructure Data Conversion
initiative, which converts engineering data into a digital form
to ensure that critical worldwide infrastructure information
can be utilized by military analysts, mission planners, and
counterintelligence specialists in support of the warfighter.
The committee recommends that the Department continue this
effort, which supports Technology Protection and Counter-
Intelligence communities.
High energy laser research and development
The committee recognizes the potential of directed energy
in general, and high energy lasers (HEL) in particular, for
future military applications across the services. The committee
is encouraged by the progress shown by the technical community,
but also understands some of the shortfalls of currently
proposed concepts, and believes it is necessary to proceed on a
broad and coordinated front to develop a wide range of
technologies for weapons applications.
Accordingly, Subtitle D of the Floyd D. Spence National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-
398) included a number of provisions governing the funding,
organization, management, and oversight of the high energy
laser programs of the Department of Defense. Among them,
section 242 directed implementation of the High Energy Laser
Master Plan establishing a Joint Technology Office (JTO).
Section 243 directed designation of a single senior civilian
official in the Office of the Secretary of Defense (the
``designated official'') with broad authority and
responsibility for management of high energy laser research.
Section 248 required an annual report assessing management
structure, funding, technical progress, and performance.
Section 250 directed the Secretary of Defense, in consultation
with the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Science and
Technology, to evaluate the expansion of the HEL management
structure to encompass directed energy programs based on other
physics principals.
In response to section 250 of Public Law 106-398, the
Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Science and Technology
(also the ``designated official'') provided to the
congressional defense committees the Report of the Directed
Energy Review Panel, dated March 15, 2001, which recommended
that HEL JTO not be expanded at this time to encompass directed
energy programs based on other physics principals, citing
scarce resources and a potentially detrimental diffusion of
focus. The Panel also recommended revisiting this issue on a
regular basis.
The committee concurs, believing that it is valuable to
continue to assess the potential of other directed energy
technologies for military applications as they develop, and to
reconsider inclusion of those programs in the HEL management
structure. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to revise the Panel's recommendations on an annual
basis, and include those recommendations in the annual report
required under section 248 of Public Law 106-398. In addition,
the committee encourages the ``designated official'' to
coordinate HEL programs with those overseeing other directed
energy programs, including the High Power Microwave Steering
Group.
Implantable cardioverter defibrillator
The budget request contained no funds in PE 63738D8Z for
cooperative medical research between the Department of Defense
and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
The committee notes that implantation of cardioverter
defibrillators was pioneered by clinical research in
conjunction with veterans centers, where trials using the
defibrillators have reduced cardiac death by a factor of five.
The committee is aware that additional research is required on
the efficacy of antiarrhythmic drugs with implantable
cardioverter defibrillators.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million and
directs that it only be used for a joint research program on
efficacy of antiarrythmic drugs with implantable cardioverter
defibrillators conducted at the Washington, D.C. Veterans
Center.
Joint technology applications analysis pilot program
The budget request contained $33.8 million in PE 65104D8Z
for technical studies, support, and analysis.
The committee notes that the National Defense University
has established a Center for National Security Policy to
investigate the implications of technological innovation on
U.S. national security policy and military plans. The committee
also notes the findings of a recent study conducted by the
Center for Strategic and International Studies that concluded
that the Department of Defense can ``no longer depend on a
dedicated defense industrial base, but will need to find ways
to link advanced commercial technologies to improved military
capabilities.'' To meet these goals the President of the
National Defense University has indicated that the military
services and defense agencies will need to rely more directly
on the commercial information technology industry to gain
prompt access to leading-edge capabilities and has proposed a
pilot program between the university and the commercial
information technology industry. The purpose of the program is
to find practical ways in which the defense information
technology community can gain a mutual understanding of defense
needs and industry capabilities and identify opportunities to
integrate information technology innovations into the U.S.
military strategy.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE
65104D8Z for a pilot program in joint technology applications
analysis to establish a pilot program to enhance communications
between the Department of Defense and the information
technology industry.
Medical free electron laser
The budget request contained $14.7 million in PE 62227D8Z
for the medical free electron laser (MFEL).
The committee is aware that the MFEL program is a peer-
reviewed program that has continued to make significant
advances in medical applications ranging from painless burn
debreeding to bone cutting and improved cancer detection.
The committee supports the MFEL program and recommends
$19.7 million in PE 62227D8Z, an increase of $5.0 million for
MFEL.
Microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) sensors
The budget request contained $240.4 million in PE 61103D8Z
for university research initiatives.
The committee notes that the ability to accurately estimate
temperature, vibration, strain and angular rotation in a
bearing during the operation of the machine in which the
bearing is installed would provide the capability for
identifying inordinate wear, operating anomalies, or impending
failure of a critical bearing assembly and permit replacement
of the assembly before the bearing failed or adversely affected
the performance of the machine. Such a capability in critical
roller bearing assemblies in aircraft engines, tank
transmissions, and ship and submarine propulsors should result
in increased performance, extended life, and reduced life cycle
maintenance and support costs for the weapon system in which
the bearing assemblies would be installed. The committee
believes that roller bearings with integrated sensors that
incorporate microelectromechanical systems technology have
great potential for providing such a capability.
The committee recommends $243.4 million in PE 61103D8Z, an
increase of $3.0 million for the development of integrated MEMS
sensors for the determination of temperature, vibration,
strain, and angular rotation in rolling element bearings.
More efficient science and technology investment
The committee is aware that defense science & technology
(S&T) investment is critical to maintaining U.S. military
superiority. The committee notes that an efficient investment
strategy, especially in view of the diversity of the technology
challenges and fiscally constrained S&T funding, should focus
on those technologies that are identified as critical to
defense transformation. The committee that S&T originated by
the Department of Defense must avoid duplication of efforts
ongoing in the private sector as well as unnecessary
duplication of effort between government laboratories and
research centers.
Therefore, the committee directs the secretaries of the
military departments to assess their S&T investments in service
laboratories and research centers, as well as industry and
academia, to ensure that these investments fully support the
ongoing transformation of the force. The committee further
directs the Secretary of Defense to assess/integrate the
findings of the service secretaries and to report to the
congressional defense committees upon submission of the
President's budget, the results of the assessments and how
investments judged inappropriate have been redirected within
the S&T programs of the Department of Defense for the budget
request for fiscal year 2003.
Special operations forces acquisition
The budget request contained $252.3 million in PE 116444BB
for SOF acquisition programs, but included no funds for several
important development efforts. The committee notes that low-
cost solid-state synthetic aperture radar is to be optimized to
meet special operations requirements for target detection in
high sea states and high ground clutter environments. The
committee is also aware of a radar development to automatically
detect and locate enemy mortar firing positions. Additionally,
the committee is aware that the Special Operations Command
(SOCOM) is developing a reconnaissance tool kit to allow
special operations forces (SOF) to tailor communications and
other capabilities to specific mission requirements.
The committee recommends $266.0 million PE 116444BB, an
increase of $7.5 million for solid-state synthetic aperture
radar, an increase of $3.0 million for lightweight counter-
mortar radar, and an increase of $3.2 million for the special
reconnaissance tool kit.
Tactical missile recycling
The budget request contained $8.8 million in PE 63104D8Z
for advanced development of explosives demilitarization
technology.
The committee notes the development by the Army's Aviation
and Missile Command of technologies for recycling of tactical
missiles, including: disassembly, energetics removal, warhead
processing, energetics size reduction, energetics processing,
slurry explosive manufacturing, hardware decontamination, and
shipping and receiving modules. The committee believes that the
missile recycling capabilities (MRC) efforts should be
transitioned to establish an organic MRC at an appropriate Army
depot with a tactical missile disposal and recycling mission.
The committee recommends $13.8 million in PE 63104D8Z, an
increase of $5.0 million to support the transition of the
tactical missile recycling capabilities developed by the Army's
Aviation and Missile Command to an appropriate Army depot.
Thermobaric warhead development
The budget request contained $295.1 million in PE 62715BR
for applied research in nuclear sustainment and
counterproliferation technologies, including $40.5 million for
applied research in technologies including thermobaric warheads
defeat hard targets. The budget request also contained $2.9
million in PE 63609N for the Navy's insensitive munitions
advanced development program.
The committee notes that the Russians developed thermobaric
materials and have weaponized thermobaric explosive
formulations that demonstrate impressive capabilities to
generate pressure and thermal effects much greater than
conventional high explosives. Parallel work in research and
development of these materials has been proceeding in the
United States. Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) applied
research for fiscal year 2002 focuses on the development of a
thermobaric warhead payload that is optimized for hard and
deeply buried targets and destruction of weapons of mass
destruction.
The committee believes that thermobaric warheads offer the
potential for greater performance and lower cost than
conventional high explosives while providing a more insensitive
warhead and therefore a safer option to conventional warheads.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
62715BR in applied research for thermobaric warheads. The
committee recommends coordination of the DTRA program with the
Navy's insensitive munitions program.
U.S.-Israel boost phase intercept
The committee considers boost phase intercept programs to
be of the highest importance for the protection of the United
States, our forces overseas, and American allies and friends.
In previous years, Congress provided funds for a U.S.-Israel
boost phase intercept study, and in fiscal year 2000, the
Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO)
reported positively on the technical and operational
feasibility of a joint U.S.-Israel boost phase intercept
program utilizing unmanned aerial vehicles to destroy ballistic
missile launchers following a missile launch. The Director has
indicated that a decision on whether to fund the U.S. share of
such a cooperative program with Israel would be made in
conjunction with preparation of the fiscal year 2003 budget.
The committee encourages the Department of Defense to
negotiate an agreement with and undertake a joint-Boost Phase
Launcher Intercept program with Israel at the earliest possible
date and to consider other cooperative programs involving sea-
based or space-based programs. The committee believes this
program and other joint cooperative programs would make an
important contribution to Israel and the security of American
forces deployed in the Middle East. It would also enhance
regional deterrence. The lessons of such a program could be
applied to other American missile defense efforts.
The committee also urges the Secretary of Defense to
examine whether we can include American allies and Russia in
future joint missile defense programs. This cooperation could
both enhance protection to our forces overseas and build
international support and understanding for our ballistic
missile defense efforts.
Warfighter rapid acquisition programs
The budget request contained $23.6 million in PE 23761A for
Rapid Acquisition Program for Transformation (RAPT), $51.3
million in PE 63640M for Marine Corps Advanced Technology
Demonstration, $43.3 million in PE 63758N for Navy Warfighting
Experiments and Demonstrations, $50.2 million in PE 23761F for
the Warfighter Rapid Acquisition Process (WRAP) rapid
transition fund, and $25.0 million in PE 63826D8Z for Quick
Reaction Projects.
The committee notes the significant funding commitments for
rapid acquisition programs by the military services and
strongly supports the efforts of the Secretary of Defense and
the service secretaries of the military departments to
accelerate the delivery of new technologies and increased
capability to the warfighter. Although all of the rapid
acquisition programs share similar goals of shortening
acquisition time and rapid fielding of new technologies, the
committee notes variations in approaches and believes that all
of the programs should contain several common but essential
elements. Candidates for rapid acquisition programs should be
reviewed at the secretariat and service chief level, using
competitive selection criteria, and assessed on business-based
analyses including cost savings and impact on current
acquisition programs, as well as improved capability. If
selected for transition to acquisition, the services must
ensure that sufficient funding is programmed to fully develop
and acquire the selected candidates.
The committee supports the tremendous potential for cost
savings and increased capability through the use of the Army
RAPT and recommends $86.4 million in PE 63001A, an increase of
$2.5 million and a transfer of $23.6 million from PE 23761A.
The committee urges the Secretary of the Army to review the
following projects for consideration as candidates for the Army
RAPT:
Hybrid Battery-Fuel Cell
Joint Service Metrology R&D Support
Trajectory Optimized High Altitude Targeting (Top
Hat)
Warfighter Advanced Technology Expandable Shelter
The committee also supports the Marine Corps Advanced
Technology Demonstration and recommends $72.3 million in PE
63640M, an increase of $21.0 million. The committee urges the
Commandant to review the following projects for consideration
as candidates:
Fast Refueling System
Improved Long Range Rifle
Mobile Counter Fire System
Modular Ride-Along Air Filter Cleaning System
Quadrupole Resonance/Landmine Detection
The committee supports the initiation of the Navy
Warfighting Experiments and Demonstrations and recommends
authorization of $85.3 million in PE 63758N, an increase of
$42.0 million. The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to
review the following projects for consideration as candidates
for the Navy Warfighting Experiments and Demonstrations
program:
Air Crane
Geotrak Positioning Technology
Interrogator for High-Speed Retro-Reflectometer
Communication
Transportable Anti-Intrusion Pontoon Barrier System
(TABS)
Web Centric ASW Net
The committee supports the pursuit of cost savings and
increased capability through the use of the Air Force WRAP
rapid transition funding and recommends authorization of $74.2
million in PE 63XXXF, an increase of $24.0 million and a
transfer of $50.2 million from PE 23761F. The committee urges
the Secretary of the Air Force to review the following projects
for consideration as candidates for the Air Force WRAP:
Imaging and Target Support
TechSat 21/MicroSat
The committee believes that each of the service programs
should conduct reviews of candidate projects using procedures
defined for the defense-wide Challenge Program outlined in the
legislative provision Sec. 244 described elsewhere in this
report. The committee directs the service secretaries to
provide a report outlining their rapid acquisition candidate
review process, plan for transition of selected candidates,
level of leadership represented on the review panel, and plan
to ensure that sufficient funding is programmed to support
acquisition. The reports shall be submitted with budget request
justification materials accompanying the fiscal year 2003
defense budget request.
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense
Overview
The budget request contained $217.4 million for Operational
Test and Evaluation RDT&E. The committee recommends
authorization of $217.4 million.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2002
Operational Test and Evaluation RDT&E program are identified in
the table below. Major changes to the Operational Test and
Evaluation request are discussed following the table.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations
This section would establish RDT&E funding levels for the
Department of Defense for fiscal year 2002.
Section 202--Amount for Basic and Applied Research
This section would establish basic and applied research
funding levels for the Department of Defense for fiscal year
2002.
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations
Section 211--Cooperative Department of Defense-Department of Veterans
Affairs Medical Research Program
This section would require that of the funds authorized to
be appropriated by Section 201(4), $5,000,000 shall be
available only for Cooperative Department of Defense-Department
of Veterans Affairs medical research program. This section
would also require the Secretary of Defense to transfer such
amount to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for such purposes
after 30 days of the date of enactment of this Act.
Section 212--Advanced Land Attack Missile Program
This provision would direct the Secretary of Defense to
establish a competitive program for the development of an
advanced land attack missile (ALAM) for the DD-21 Land Attack
Destroyer and other naval combatants and would recommend
authorization of $20.0 million in PE 63795 for that purpose.
The provision would also direct the Secretary of Defense to
submit to the congressional defense committees with the fiscal
year 2003 budget request a report providing the program plan,
schedule and funding required for the ALAM program.
The committee notes the letter from the Under Secretary of
Defense (Acquisition and Technology) to the Chairman, House
Armed Services Committee, dated August 25, 1999, that endorsed
the Navy's proposal to acquire the Land Attack Standard Missile
(LASM) as an interim capability and to develop an ALAM as soon
as possible. The letter also stated that the Navy would pursue
a multi-team industry competition for development of ALAM. The
committee also notes the Milestone 0 Acquisition Decision
Memorandum, dated February 22, 2000, that designated the ALAM
as a major defense acquisition program. The committee further
notes that the Navy's ALAM program plan and funding included in
the fiscal year 2001 budget request provided for completion of
an ALAM analysis of alternatives and entry into the program
risk and reduction phase in fiscal year 2001, competition and
early prototyping by three to four contractors leading to an
ALAM down-select/``fly-off'' by the end of fiscal year 2003,
with delivery of the ALAM system to the fleet in early fiscal
year 2009.
In the statement of managers that accompanied the
conference report on H.R. 4205 (H. Rept. 106-945), the
conferees placed a high priority on completing the analysis of
alternatives to determine the appropriate course of action for
providing Naval fire support and directed the Secretary of the
Navy to report to the congressional defense committees with the
submission of the fiscal year 2002 budget request on
recommended revisions to the ALAM program. The committee is
concerned that the report has not been received.
The committee further notes that in April 2002 the
Comptroller of the Navy executed a below-threshold
reprogramming which redirected funds authorized and
appropriated for ALAM and effectively halted the ALAM program.
The committee believes that in the absence of a program
review appropriate to a major defense acquisition program the
Navy's redirection of fiscal year 2001 funding for ALAM and
failure to request funding to continue the program in the
fiscal year 2002 budget request contravenes the direction
previously provided to the Navy and reported to Congress by the
Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics) to develop ALAM as soon as possible and pursue a
multi-team industry competition for that development.
Section 213--Collaborative Program for Development of Advanced Radar
Systems for Naval Applications
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
carry out a program to develop and demonstrate advanced
technologies and concepts leading to advanced radar systems for
naval and other applications. The program would be carried out
under a memorandum of agreement between the Director of Defense
Research and Engineering (DDR&E), the Secretary of the Navy,
and the Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA), and would include activities needed to develop
and deploy advanced electronics materials needed to extend the
range and sensitivity of naval radars. The joint effort would
place particular emphasis on the development and maturation of
high frequency and high power wide bandgap semi-conductor
materials and devices and the identification of the weapon and
sensor systems that would use the new technology.
The committee notes that the Navy's June 2000 report to the
congressional defense committees on the Surface Navy Radar
Roadmap identified increased demands on radar performance and
performance goals to meet the operational requirements expected
in 2015 and cited advances in wide bandgap semi-conductor
materials, such as silicon carbide and gallium nitride, that
would be required to achieve increased range, advanced
discrimination, and signal processing capabilities needed for
advanced theater ballistic missile defense radars. The
committee understands that the March 2001 Technology Assessment
for the Surface Navy Radar Roadmap concluded that to achieve
these capabilities in fiscal year 2009 to meet the 2015
operational capability requires a generational change in high
power amplifiers, device and array thermal management, digital
radar, processing algorithms, and processor independent system
software. The committee notes that advances in wide bandgap
semi-conductor materials and devices arekey to that technology
development. The committee also understands that the December 2000
Special Technology Review on RF Applications for Wide Bandgap
Technology by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics recommended an increased science
and technology investment in wide bandgap materials, devices, circuits,
and packaging that would total approximately $50 million per year over
a five-year period beginning in fiscal year 2002.
The budget request contained $41.0 million in PE 62712E for
the DARPA applied research program in high frequency wide
bandgap semiconductor electronics and high power wide bandgap
semiconductor electronics. The committee understands that the
budget request contained $5.0 million in PE 61153N and $3.5
million in PE 62271N for the Navy's applied research program in
wide bandgap semiconductor technology. The provision would
authorize $41.0 million for DARPA for research and maturation
of high frequency and high power wide bandgap semiconductor
electronics technology to carry out the collaborative program
established under the memorandum of agreement and $15.5 million
for the Navy to carry out its responsibilities under the
memorandum of agreement for the collaborative program, an
increase of $7.0 million to the budget request.
Finally, the committee encourages the Director of the
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization to become a party to the
memorandum of agreement for the collaborative program and to
identify the BMDO's contribution to the program in the joint
report to be submitted to the congressional defense committees
by January 31, 2002.
Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense
Section 231--Transfer of Responsibility for Procurement for Missile
Defense Programs from Ballistic Missile Defense Organization to
Military Departments
The section would amend section 224 of title 10, United
States Code to require that the budget submitted to Congress by
the Department of Defense for research, development, test and
evaluation (RDT&E) of any Department of Defense missile defense
program be set forth under the account for Defense-wide RDT&E,
and within that account, under the sub-account for BMDO.
This section would further require the Secretary of Defense
to establish, and submit to Congress, criteria for transferring
missile defense programs from BMDO to the military departments.
The criteria would be developed to ensure the viability of the
program as it passes to the military departments.
The section would also require the Secretary of Defense to
notify the congressional defense committees of the Secretary's
intent to transfer a missile defense program to the military
departments 60 days in advance of such action.
Section 232--Repeal of Program Element Requirements for Ballistic
Missile Defense Programs
This section would strike section 223 of title 10, United
States Code, which defines the statutory program element
structure for budget justification materials submitted to
Congress by the Department of Defense for activities of the
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO).
Section 233--Support of Ballistic Missile Defense Activities of the
Department of Defense by the National Laboratories of the Department of
Energy
This section would, at the discretion of the director of
BMDO, make available from funds authorized to be appropriated
pursuant to section 201(4) up to $25.0 million for research,
development, and demonstration activities at the national
laboratories of the Department of Energy (DOE) in support of
missions of BMDO. The provision would make available to the
Director of BMDO, acting in consultation with the Administrator
of the Nuclear National Security Administration (NNSA), the
resources of the national laboratories of the DOE to address
critical missile defense needs. The availability of the funds
would be subject to provision of matching funds by NNSA.
Activities would be conducted under the terms of a memorandum
of understanding between the Secretary of Defense and the
Secretary of Energy for the use of national laboratories for
ballistic missile defense programs.
The committee believes that the national laboratories of
the National Nuclear Security Administration present a largely
untapped source of experience and expertise relevant to one of
the nation's highest priorities, ballistic missile defense. The
committee further believes that activities in support of
missile defense are consistent with the laboratories' national
security mission, will not significantly impede the
laboratories in carrying out their important role of
guaranteeing the safety, reliability and performance of nuclear
weapons, and may in fact present new opportunities as the
strategic stockpile draws down. The committee is disturbed by
the apparent lack of interest shown by the laboratories in the
last several years, especially given their unique
qualifications to address certain aspects of missile defense.
The committee strongly urges the Departments of Defense and the
Department of Energy to move beyond the negotiation of
memoranda, and begin to apply the resources of the national
laboratories to this great challenge in a meaningful way.
Section 234--Missile Defense Testing Initiative
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
develop necessary infrastructure and to implement a rigorous
test regimen for ballistic missile defense programs. This
section would require testing in as realistic a manner as is
practicable, taking into consideration the planned operational
concepts for each system, and continued testing after
deployment.
The committee is aware of shortfalls in testing of
ballistic missile defense systems, including those recently
expressed by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation
and the Panel on Reducing Risk in Ballistic Missile Defense
Flight Test Programs. The committee is similarly concerned
about both the realism of the geometry that the current test
infrastructure can support, as well as the limited range of
engagement conditions (speed, altitude, crossing angle, etc.)
accommodated. The committee also believes that test planning
and infrastructure has not been adequate to support
operationally realistic testing of the ground-based midcourse
system, such as engagementof a single target with multiple
interceptors (``shoot-look-shoot'') or engagement of multiple targets
with multiple interceptors, nor has it fully exploited opportunities
for demonstration of interoperability (``family of systems'') concepts.
The committee notes that much more can, and must, be accomplished prior
to flight testing, and strongly endorses ground testing at the highest
level of integration as possible.
While recognizing the necessity of extensive testing, the
committee places a high priority on value and believes that
approaches, such as ``campaign testing'' where multiple tests
are conducted in rapid succession, can significantly reduce the
average cost per test, delivering more realistic data for less
cost. Historically, missile systems have required extensive and
rigorous testing to ensure performance and reliability, often
suffering high failure rates initially. Rigorous testing is
especially crucial in missile defense due to the magnitude of
the technical challenges and the complexity of the systems
required to meet those challenges. The committee expects that
there will be failures in a rigorous test program, and cautions
against placing great significance on either the success or
failure of any single event.
Section 235--Missile Defense System Test Bed Facilities
This section would clarify section 2353 of title 10, United
States Code governing the use of Research, Development, Test,
and Evaluation (RDT&E) funds in fiscal year 2002 for the
specific purpose of construction of a missile defense test bed.
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to use
funds made available to the Department of Defense for RDT&E to
acquire, improve, or construct missile defense system test bed
facilities that also have general utility. The provision limits
the total cost of such activities to not more than $500.0
million. The section would also authorize the use of RDT&E
funds to mitigate the impact on local community services or
facilities resulting from the construction or operation of
missile defense system test bed facilities, provided that the
Secretary of Defense determines that there is an immediate and
substantial need as a direct result of such activities.
Subtitle D--Other Matters
Section 241--Establishment of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Joint Operational
Test Bed System
This section would require the Secretary of the Defense to
establish of a Joint Forces Command (JFCOM) Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle (UAV) Joint Operational Test Bed System (JOTBS) and to
transfer two Predator UAVs, tactical control system (TCS)
ground station and assorted equipment from the Navy to JFCOM
within 90 days of enactment of this Act. This section would
further provide for the transfer of two Predator UAVs from
JFCOM to the Air Force when no longer required for the JFCOM
JOTBS.
The committee notes that the report accompanying the Floyd
D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2001 (Public Law 106-398), directed the Secretary of the Navy
to transfer custody of two Predator unmanned aerial vehicles
(UAV) and the associated TCS ground station to the Joint Forces
Command (JFCOM) for use in the joint operational test bed
system (JOTBS).
The committee is seriously concerned that the Secretary has
not carried out this transfer. Therefore, the committee
recommends a provision (Sec. 241) that would require that this
transfer be made promptly, and that the Commander-in-Chief,
JFCOM complete establishment of an independent JOTBS. The
committee is aware that JFCOM promulgated a JOTBS Strategic
Plan May 2000 that provides clear direction for such an
independent test bed.
The committee observes that Congress established JFCOM
because the services do not inherently have a joint perspective
and that joint interoperability of intelligence, reconnaissance
and surveillance (ISR) and other systems is essential for an
enhanced future military capability. Therefore, the committee
believes that in order to be fully successful, the JOTBS must
be independent of the services.
The committee further observes that CINC JFCOM's failure to
complete establishment of the independent JOTBS raises
questions over the ability of JFCOM to effectively carry out
its mission in the face of resistance by a service. The
Predator UAV is an Air Force platform and therefore, when and
if Joint Forces Command no longer requires the two Predator
UAVs, the committee directs that custody shall be transferred
to the Air Force.
Section 242--Demonstration Project to Increase Small Business and
University Participation in Office of Naval Research Efforts to Extend
Benefits of Science and Technology Research to Fleet
This section would authorize that the Secretary of the
Navy, acting through the Chief of Naval Research, to carry out
a demonstration project to explore ways to increase and expand
small business and university participation in research efforts
beneficial to the fleet. This section would require that the
Secretary establish a Navy Technology Extension Center at a
location to be selected and would permit participants in the
Small Business Innovation Research Program (SBIR) and Small
Business Technology Transfer Program (STTR) that are awarded
contracts by the Office of Naval Research to access and use
Navy facilities without charge for the purpose of carrying out
those contracts. This section would also permit universities,
institutions of higher learning, and Federally Funded Research
and Development Centers collaborating with SBIR and STTR
participants to use Navy facilities.
The committee notes a number of initiatives to encourage
small business and university participation in the Department
of Defense (DOD) program to extend the benefits of research in
science and technology to the military components. However, the
committee is concerned that there is no overall program to
develop a comprehensive science and technology partnership
between small businesses, universities, and Department of
Defense research facilities. The committee believes that there
is much that could be gained by all participants in such
partnerships, and that the lesson learned in the demonstration
project might be applied to other DOD research programs to the
benefit of all the military departments and defense agencies.
Section 243--Management Responsibility for Navy Mine Countermeasures
Programs
This section would amend section 216 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993
(Public Law 102-190), and would extend the implementation of
the Management Responsibility for Navy Mine Countermeasures
Programs through fiscal year 2008.
The committee believes that the requirement that the
Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff provide an annual certification of the adequacy of the
Navy's mine countermeasures program has had a positive impact
on the program, increasing the visibility of and attention paid
to the program by officials in the Department of Defense and
the Department of the Navy. The committee notes the direction
contained in the committee report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-
532) that the annual certification by the Secretary of Defense
and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff address the
adequacy of funding for the mine countermeasures program for
the budget year through the end of the future years defense
program and also include objective measures against which the
Navy's progress in enhancing its mine countermeasures
capabilities can be evaluated.
Section 244--Program to Accelerate the Introduction of Innovative
Technology in Defense Acquisition Programs
This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to
establish a program to provide increased opportunities for the
introduction of innovative technology in acquisition programs
of the Department of Defense and would provide $40.0 million in
PE 63826D8Z for the program.
The committee notes the actions taken by the Department in
response to section 818 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261) and
initial improvements in facilitating the rapid transition into
Defense acquisition programs of technologies developed in
successful Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) phase two
projects. The committee also notes the initial actions taken by
the Department in response to section 812 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-
65) with the objective of fostering competition wherever
possible to create incentives for the development and rapid
insertion into Defense acquisition programs of technological
innovations developed by commercial firms, including small
technology companies.
This section would place increased emphasis on the program
for introduction of innovative and cost-saving technology into
Defense acquisition programs by requiring the Secretary of
Defense to establish a ``Challenge Program'' to provide
individuals or activities within or outside the Department of
Defense the opportunity to propose alternatives (``challenge
proposals'') at the component, subsystem, or system level of an
existing Defense acquisition program that would result in
improvements in the program. This section would also require
the Secretary to establish a panel of highly qualified
scientists and engineers to review and evaluate challenge
proposals and make recommendations to the Under Secretary of
Defense (Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics) regarding the
incorporation of the challenge proposal in the challenged
Defense acquisition program. This section would also require
that, in the event the panel finds that the challenge proposal
will result in improvements in performance, affordability,
manufacturability, or operational capability at the component,
subsystem, or system level of the challenged acquisition
program, which are substantially superior to the incumbent
component, subsystem, or system, the Secretary would carry out
a plan to acquire and implement the challenge proposal. This
section would also require the Secretary to ensure the
elimination of conflicts of interest in carrying out each
review and evaluation of challenge proposals that are submitted
to the panel. Finally, the provision would require the
Secretary to submit a report to Congress on the implementation
of the ``Defense Challenge'' program.
The budget request contained $25.0 million in PE 63826D8Z
for the Quick Reaction Projects initiative. The committee
recommends $66.0 million in PE63826D8Z, including $40.0 million
for the Defense Challenge program. The committee believes that
the introduction of innovative technology into Defense systems
through the Defense Challenge program and the Quick Reaction
Projects Initiative possess a tremendous potential for
achievement of cost-savings and increased operational
capability for U.S. armed forces. The committee urges the Under
Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics)
to review the following projects for consideration as
candidates for the Quick Reaction Projects and Defense
Challenge program:
Microwave Ferrite Components
Miniature Interceptor Technology
Pacific Fleet Force Protection Technology Testbed
Radio Frequency Vulnerability
``Spray Cooling'' Optimizing Electronics for Advanced
Controlled Environment Systems
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
OVERVIEW
The budget request for operation and maintenance represents
an increase of $17.8 billion (38.4 percent) over spending
levels authorized and appropriated for fiscal year 2001.
Although the committee is encouraged by this increased level of
attention to the critical readiness accounts, the committee is
concerned that savings assumptions presented in the amended
budget request are unattainable. As an example, of the nearly
$1.0 billion in savings assumed through the enacting of
management reforms, $140.0 million is based on a change in the
operation of the maintenance and repair depots, and $190.0
million is based on a change to section 276a of title 40,
United States Code, (46 Stat. 1494) commonly referred to as the
Davis-Bacon Act. Both of these proposals would require
legislation that has been historically unsuccessful. The
committee is troubled by the decision to assume substantial
savings associated with proposed legislation, prior to Congress
being afforded an opportunity to debate and enact into law the
requested proposals. The legislative changes assumed in the
amended budget request are significant policy changes that need
complete and thorough debate within Congress. The committee
believes that these proposed savings initiatives are premature
and, therefore, recommends an undistributed reduction of $330.0
million in the operation and maintenance accounts to offset
these assumed savings. The committee further expects the
Secretary of Defense to apply this reduction within the
defense-wide operation and maintenance accounts and not to the
individual military services.
The committee understands that a significant portion of the
proposed increases for operation and maintenance funding is
related to increased fuel, spare parts, energy costs, along
with an attempt at arresting the decline in military
installation infrastructure. In addition, the committee notes
that even with the increases recommended in the amended budget
request, the chiefs of the military services reported nearly a
$10.0 billion shortfall in operation and maintenance funding
for fiscal year 2002. Despite increased funding, there is no
significant increase in planned operations by the military
services in fiscal year 2002. In fact, the Department of the
Army is decreasing its normal operation tempo for its combat
vehicles. Although the budget request provided increased
funding for the historically under-funded real property
maintenance accounts, this increase merely arrests the decline
that has occurred over many years. The committee believes that
the Department of Defense must sustain this offset by devoting
significant resources over a multi-year program to facility
sustainment and renovations.
The committee conducted a series of hearings in an effort
to obtain a more accurate and detailed assessment of current
and near-term readiness and to determine to what extent the
amended budget request supports readiness requirements. As in
the past recent years, the evidence received during the
hearings was of an overextended force struggling to maintain
acceptable readiness levels in an environment of declining
human and budgetary resources. The committee continues to hear
significant complaints about lack of spare parts, aging
equipment, decaying infrastructure, growing equipment and
facilities' backlogs, and the difficulties of conducting
quality training and operational deployments with significant
personnel shortages.
The committee continues to believe that DOD must continue
to take steps to reduce costs in non-readiness related
accounts. At the same time, DOD must provide more aggressive
oversight of the military departments' proposals to reduce
costs through contracting out and privatization. The committee
fully supports well developed and justified programs that will
reduce costs; but, at a time when readiness shortfalls continue
to grow, the committee does not believe that poorly developed
and uncoordinated new programs, or funding for administrative
and support activities, such as headquarters management, should
be increasing. As an example, the committee believes the Navy-
Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI) program to be a well-intentioned
and potentially beneficial program. However, again this year,
the Department of the Navy has failed to adequately provide the
committee with the specific funding and budgetary data
necessary for the committee to provide full approval of this
program. Consistent with past practice, the committee has
identified spending that does not directly support military
readiness and has reprioritized it into other areas.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Budget Request Adjustments
The committee recommends the following adjustments to the
fiscal year 2002 amended budget request:
Department of the Army Adjustments:s of dollars]
Automated Identification Technology (AIT/RFID)............ +$9.0
M-Gators.................................................. +6.6
Replacement Containers, Fort Drum......................... +1.0
Electronic Maintenance and Point to Point Wiring.......... +4.0
Wage Grade Employees...................................... +4.36
BA-4 Administration....................................... -30.0
BA-4 International Military Headquarters.................. -47.0
BA-4 Servicewide Transportation........................... -21.0
BA-4 Servicewide Communications........................... -12.6
BA-4 Manpower Management.................................. -6.4
BA-4 Other Servicewide Support............................ -11.8
BA-4 Base Operations Support.............................. -19.2
Reduction in Strategic Sourcing (A-76 Studies)............ -8.36
Advisory and Assistance Services.......................... -25.0
Information Technology Automated Information System....... -20.0
Army Reserve Controlled Humidity Preservation............. +25.0
Army Reserve Cold Weather Clothing (ECWCS)................ +2.0
Army National Guard Cold Weather Clothing (ECWCS)......... +6.0
Army National Guard Special Training...................... +2.0
Department of the Navy Adjustments:
BA-3 Depot Apprenticeship Program......................... +2.0
Wage Grade Employees...................................... +3.56
ATC Corrosion Control..................................... +2.0
BA-4 Administration....................................... -40.0
BA-4 Acquisition and Program Management................... -43.0
BA-4 Planning, Engineering and Design..................... -6.6
Reduction in Strategic Sourcing (A-76 Studies)............ -53.56
NMCI Reduction............................................ -125.0
Information Technology Center............................. -35.0
Enterprise Resource Planning.............................. -33.0
Advisory and Assistance Services.......................... -25.0
Information Technology Automated Information System....... -20.0
USMC Full Spectrum Battle Equipment....................... 6.8
USMC Reduction in Strategic sourcing (A-76)............... -1.0
Department of the Air Force Adjustments:
SPARES Information System................................. +7.0
Aging Propulsion Systems Life Extension................... +10.0
SCOT Life Support System.................................. +6.0
Wage Grade Employees...................................... +4.32
BA-4 Administration....................................... -53.0
BA-4 Servicewide Communications........................... -40.0
BA-4 Servicewide Transportation........................... -41.0
BA-4 Other Servicewide Activities......................... -11.4
BA-4 Security Programs.................................... -62.9
BA-4 Personnel Programs................................... -18.0
BA-4 International Support................................ -8.0
Military Personnel Underexecution Support................. -75.0
Reduction in Strategic Sourcing (A-76 Studies)............ -8.32
Advisory and Assistance Services.......................... -25.0
Information Technology Automated Information System....... -20.0
Air Force Reserve Military Personnel Underexecution....... -12.0
Air National Guard, Continued B-1B Operations............. +100.0
Office, Secretary of Defense Adjustments:
Impact Aid................................................ +30.0
Legacy Program............................................ +2.0
Wage Grade Employees...................................... +1.26
OSD Program Growth........................................ -19.4
Defense-wide Activities Adjustments:
Washington Headquarters Service........................... -44.0
Defense Human Resources Activity.......................... -24.0
Defense Contract Audit Agency............................. -7.4
Defense Contract Management Agency........................ -6.9
Defense Information Systems Agency........................ -41.0
Defense Logistics Agency.................................. -3.5
Commercial Technology for Maint. Activities (CTMA)........ +20.0
Defense Security Cooperation Agency....................... -7.1
Defense Threat Reduction Agency........................... -4.9
BA-4 Joint Chiefs of Staff................................ -9.5
Information Technology Automated Information System....... -20.0
Reductions in Strategic Sourcing (A-76 Studies)........... -5.26
Advisory and Assistance Services.......................... -25.0
Unrealized Savings........................................ -330.0
Advisory and Assistance Services
The committee continues to believe that funding for
Advisory and Assistance Services is in excess of the needs of
the Department of Defense. Therefore, the committee recommends
the following decreases for this function:
[In millions of dollars]
Army.......................................................... $25.0
Navy.......................................................... 25.0
Air Force..................................................... 25.0
Defense Agencies.............................................. 25.0
Excess Foreign Currencies Reductions
Since the submission of the budget request, the U.S. dollar
has increased in value compared to various foreign currencies.
As a result, the committee believes that the budget request is
overstated. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction in
this account of $104.8 million to be apportioned to the
military services by the Department of Defense.
Strategic Sourcing (A-76)
The committee has expressed for several years concerns over
the process by which government positions are analyzed for
possible conversion to a contractor position pursuant to Office
of Management and Budget Circular A-76. One concern with the
process is the cost of the studies. The Secretary of Defense
recommended that an additional 3,200 positions be studied in
fiscal year 2002 over that which the services planned to study.
The Department provided to the defense agencies and military
services $16 million or $5,000 for each position to be studied.
The committee does not believe it is appropriate to increase
the number of positions to be studied. The committee,
therefore, recommends those additional 3,200 positions not be
studied and the funding for these studies be reduced. In
addition, in light of the Department's belief that for each
position to be studied the services and agencies require
$5,000, the committee is reducing the number of positions the
Department of Army and Department of Air Force can study to
reflect the funding the services requested to conduct A-76
studies. The number of positions that can be studied in the
Department of Navy and by defense agencies is limited to the
number of positions identified to be studied in the
Department's program budget decision. The committee recommends
the following reductions due to reduced A-76 studies:
[In millions of dollars]
Army.......................................................... $8.36
Navy.......................................................... 53.56
Air Force..................................................... 8.32
Marine Corps.................................................. 1.0
Defense Activities............................................ 5.26
Other Items of Special Interest
Corrosion Prevention and Control
The committee understands recent Department of Defense
(DOD) studies reveal that corrosion prevention costs roughly
$10 billion per year. As an example, the Army's Tank and
Automotive Command found that corrosion damage annually costs
$850 per truck. The committee is concerned that the cost of
damage caused by corrosion to the department's vehicle fleet
and facilities needs to be significantly reduced or the
military services will continue to shoulder an unneeded
economic burden, which will adversely affect readiness and
equipment availability and reliability.
The committee continues to monitor with interest the
efforts within the military services to reduce the related
costs to control corrosion, and is particularly encouraged by
the recent increased emphasis on finding ways to cut the cost
of maintaining their massive amounts of equipment, facilities
and infrastructure. The committee is concerned, however, that
the efforts within DOD continues to be disjointed and it
appears there is no office within DOD solely responsible to
collect, review, validate, and distribute information on proven
corrosion prevention methods and products. The absence of
leadership on this issue means that no single comprehensive
plan exists and adequate program management and funding
specifically for the eradication of the problems associated
with corrosion is not planned in future budgeting. Moreover,
decisions concerning corrosion prevention and control are left
to unit commanders, or more likely, to service maintenance
personnel. The committee believes that the military services
are in need of programmatic and technical leadership if DOD is
to reduce its corrosion related costs and the resultant adverse
impact on readiness.
The committee is aware of many existing efforts within
private industry to perfect products and methods to be used to
successfully fight corrosion and infrastructure degradation.
The committee is particularly interested in the unique
capabilities of Ambient Temperature Cure (ATC) glass coating.
These coatings cost little to produce and apply, are
environmentally safe, have the potential for enormous savings
in cost avoidance in both energy savings and infrastructure
degradation, and are particularly beneficial to those units
that must perform their assigned missions in a heavy salt
environment on or near the sea.
The committee believes that DOD should do more to take
advantage of new technologies, such as ATC, and recommends an
increase of $2.0 million for the Department of the Navy to a
conduct pilot project at Naval Air Station, Jacksonville,
Florida utilizing ATC technology. In addition, the committee
strongly urges the Secretary of Defense to establish a single
office within DOD to coordinate corrosion prevention and
control issues with the military services and with the overall
responsibility to develop and execute a department wide action
plan for how to combat corrosion.
Information Systems
The committee continues to be concerned with the control
and oversight the chief information officers (CIOs) of the
Department of Defense and the military services are exercising
over development and fielding of information systems. The
committee believes that CIOs must exercise their authority and
promote and endorse joint and interoperable systems that meet
validated requirements, but also limit or haltdevelopment of
systems that do not comply with the requirements of section 811 of the
Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
(Public Law 106-398). For example, the committee is concerned that each
of the services are developing their own version of the Global Command
Support System (GCSS). The committee is equally concerned with the
Defense Integrated Military Human Resources System, which has received
almost $200 million in funding, yet the requirements for this system
are still being developed without even an initial fielding of a system.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction in funding
for information systems as follows:
[In millions of dollars]
Army.......................................................... $20.0
Navy.......................................................... 20.0
Air Force..................................................... 20.0
Defense Agencies.............................................. 20.0
Enterprise Resource Planning
The committee believes that enterprise resource planning
could be a valuable tool to the Department of the Navy.
Unfortunately, despite repeated requests by the committee, the
Navy did not provide the committee with the basic information
required to support this initiative. Therefore, the committee
recommends a reduction of $33.0 million in the Navy account.
Environmental Issues
Environmental Restoration Activities
For the sustainable future use of land that contains
unexploded ordnance (UXO) and discarded military equipment that
has aged, there must be proper site planning, investigation,
cleanup, and finally site closeout. The committee recognizes
this can be a complex process with difficult technical
challenges. Yet, the committee is concerned with the Department
of Defense's (DOD) slow pace of progress and level of effort
toward restoring and preserving property on Guam, and other
areas, where extensive military activities occurred during the
various phases of World War II. The committee strongly
encourages DOD to be more aggressive in the management and
clearance of UXOs and other DOD-related weaponry at former
military sites, especially in Guam.
Vernon Hills NIKE Missile Site
The committee is concerned with reports of toxic
contamination at a former NIKE missile battery site located in
Vernon Hills, Illinois. The committee understands that the
Department of the Navy is transferring ownership of the land to
the Village of Vernon Hills where the land will be used to
provide recreation and athletic facilities, a veterans'
memorial, and a storm water retention area. The committee
recommends that the Secretary of the Navy review the current
land transfer plan and ensure that remediation is completed in
accordance with all applicable federal and state laws.
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Issues
Access to Slot Machines
The committee understands that the Secretary of Defense is
preparing the report on the impact of slot machines on military
communities overseas required by section 336 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-
398). The committee intends to review the report carefully and
take appropriate action based on the information provided. In
the interim, the committee is disturbed to learn of several
instances in Germany and Italy where unmonitored slot machines
are easily accessible by children. The committee found one case
where slot machines were placed in an unobserved hallway in a
club located in a military housing area and another instance
where several slot machines were located in a snack bar where
military high school students ate lunch. The committee does not
need the forthcoming report to determine that slot machines
should not be accessible by children. The committee therefore
directs the Secretary of Defense to review the locations at
which slot machines are installed and ensure that no machines
are accessible by minors.
Military Exchange Private Label Manufacturers
The committee believes that the three military exchange
systems perform a vital mission in bringing an array of
products and services to military members and their families
serving throughout the world. Part of that mission is providing
a touch of home, and is represented by the many brand name
products sold by military exchanges. Another part of that
mission is savings, which are provided to some degree by
private label goods sold by the exchanges. Private label
programs are increasing, with Army and Air Force Exchange
private label goods manufactured in some 70 factories located
in 18 countries and with sales approaching $50.0 million
annually. The committee is concerned that the exchanges have no
knowledge of worker conditions at these widespread factories.
While the committee understands that no national standard
exists under which worker conditions at these factories may be
judged, the committee believes that the exchanges should at
minimum be able to assure its patrons that none of its products
are manufactured with child or forced labor. The committee also
does not wish the exchanges to lag behind the generally
accepted practices of responsible domestic retailers. The
committee believes that the exchanges may rely upon the
manufacturers of brand name products to monitor the production
of their own goods, but believes the exchanges should have
visibility of the conditions under which their private label
goods are produced. Accordingly, the committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to ensure the military exchanges implement
a program that assures that private label exchange merchandise
is not produced by child or forced labor.
Other Issues
Army's Capital Investment Program for Depot Facilities
The committee is pleased with the Army's initiative to
increase funds for the sustainment, restoration, and
modernization of its facilities. The committee is also pleased
with the Army's Capital Investment Program for its depot
facilities. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
submit a comprehensive plan for implementing the Army's Capital
Investment Program to the House Committee on Armed Services and
the Senate Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2002. The
plan should include the following:
(1) The core logistics capabilities, competencies,
and components necessary for current and future weapons
systems;
(2) The current state of existing facilities and
equipment; and
(3) A capital needs plan to upgrade the depots to
meet current and future core requirements, continue
technology infusion in the production process, and an
estimate of the total investment costs required to
implement the plan.
Army Workload and Performance System
The committee has consistently endorsed the Army Workload
and Performance System (AWPS) as an initiative to correct
systemic problems in the Army's manpower requirements
determination process. The committee remains concerned that
AWPS system requirements, which would allow command-level cost
management capabilities, have not been achieved. The committee
also notes with concern that the installation of the AWPS
Decision Support System--which would allow Army management to
evaluate the efficiency of its maintenance depots, the actual
cost of depot-level repair, and develop a best-value
determination model to examine the economics of depot versus
private-sector repair--is two years behind schedule. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of the Army not to
reallocate depot maintenance workload from the public to the
private sector until the Army has achieved full implementation
of the Army Workload and Performance System in the depots as
detailed in the AWPS Master Plan dated June 8, 2001. This
restriction on workload allocation would remain in place until
the Secretary of the Army certifies to Congress that the Army
Workload and Performance System is fully implemented in the
depots and the General Accounting Office has reviewed the
certification.
Automated Document Conversion System Program
The committee understands that the Department of Defense
(DOD) has a continuing requirement for data capture and
conversion support for its weapons systems and logistics
databases, and the Automated Document Conversion System (ADCS)
effort in fiscal year 2002 will collect, digitize and
electronically warehouse systems engineering data, technical
manuals, and acquisition information, that will allow the
warfighter to request weapon's systems support and logistics
services on a near real-time basis. This program supports the
efforts to bring the DOD into a paperless environment by the
end of fiscal year 2002. Further, the digitizing of logistics
data supports a CJCS requirement to improve logistics services
necessary to deploy forces quickly.
Automatic Inventory Technology
The committee recognizes the long-standing and continuous
issue of inventory control within the Department of Defense,
and that the Department of the Army has made significant
strides in controlling ammunition inventories using Automatic
Inventory Technology/Radio Frequency Identification (AIT/RFID)
for ammunition. Further, the recent test and evaluation of the
AIT/RFID for Maintenance conducted at Corpus Christi Army
Aviation Depot, Texas, demonstrated the real time capability of
the system for locating parts and components in a production
line environment, thereby, significantly reducing down time for
major combat equipment during the recapitalization process. The
results of the Corpus Christi pilot program concluded that
using Maintenance AIT/RFID equipment significantly enhanced
productivity within the depot. The committee strongly believes
that the Department of the Army should increase the utilization
of AIT/RFID to provide this capability for other Army
maintenance depots and recommends an increase of $9.0 million
for this purpose.
Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities
The committee continues to believe that the Commercial
Technologies for Maintenance Activities (CTMA) program, created
by the Department of Defense (DOD) in 1998 to bring the most
modern and advanced manufacturing capabilities from commercial
industry to depot and related maintenance activities, is
valuable as a technology resource which will have a positive
effect on the efficiency and effectiveness of the Department's
industrial activities. The CTMA program is a by-product of
section 361 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) that required DOD to re-
engineer industrial processes and adopt best-business practices
at their depot-level activities. Therefore, the committee
recommends the addition of $20.0 million for the Defense
Logistics Agency to pursue strategies for re-engineering at
depot-level activities that will lower operations and
sustainment costs. The committee believes the addition of these
funds will allow depot-level activities to participate in
manufacturing technology demonstration projects in
collaboration with more than 220 of the leading U.S.
manufacturers.
Distance Learning Implementation Program
The committee remains concerned that insufficient resources
are being applied to exploit the potential that distance
learning technology offers to enhance training and readiness.
There is wide acceptance that distance learning technologies
have the potential to deliver training to military members and
support the delivery of ``learner centric'' quality training
when and where the training is needed. More importantly,
distance learning improves readiness by providing greater
access to military training and education at a lower cost. The
committee is aware of the initiatives under consideration in
the Army's Total Army Distance Learning Program (TADLP) and the
National Guard Distributive Training Technology Program (DTTP).
However, the resources presently allocated for these programs
are not sufficient to meet future needs in a responsivemanner.
The committee anticipates that the Department of the Army will use
funds authorized for distance learning to develop a comprehensive and
executable implementation plan that will more expeditiously exploit
distance learning technologies. The committee believes that a high
priority should be given to those programs focused on enhancing
training and development in the reserve components, especially in the
National Guard.
Hunter Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
The committee believes that the Hunter Tactical Unmanned
Aerial Vehicle (TUAV) system has demonstrated that it is
effective and reliable in supporting Army and joint combat
operations, warfighter exercises, and unmanned aerial vehicle
tactics, techniques and procedures development. The committee
also noted that user demands on the Hunter system exceed
current availability and are expected to grow. Therefore, the
committee strongly urges that the Army maintain the Hunter
system in an operational status by continuing to adequately
fund the system until a replacement which meets the Army TUAV
objective requirements is available.
Navy-Marine Corps Intranet
This section would permanently exclude the Marine Corps
from the Navy's initiative known as the Navy-Marine Corps
Internet (NMCI). This section would also continue the exclusion
of the shipyards and naval aviation depots from the NMCI in
fiscal year 2002.
The committee continues to support the Department of the
Navy's intention to use a cohesive and coordinated computer
network and supports initiatives that promote interoperability,
as well as effective and efficient communications. The
Department of the Navy has presumed and budgeted large savings
with the implementation of NMCI, which the committee believes
cannot be achieved and puts this program at risk. The committee
continues to receive conflicting, vague, and unsupportable
funding data on this program. In addition, despite repeated
requests, the Department of the Navy has failed to provide
funding information relating to depots. In light of these
concerns the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
analyze NMCI funding documents with particular focus on the
savings the Navy anticipates, and to include an analysis of
whether those savings have been achieved or are achievable. The
results of this review shall be provided to the Secretary of
the Navy along with the analysis required by section 814 of the
Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398).
Non-nuclear Ship Maintenance
The committee understands that the Department of the Navy
maintains a policy that large non-nuclear ship maintenance on
the west coast of the United States is assigned primarily to
non-nuclear capable private shipyards in an effort to reduce
the overall cost for ship maintenance. This policy enables the
Navy to focus its nuclear ship repair requirements in its
nuclear capable shipyards with a specially trained and
experienced workforce. The committee also understands that the
Department of the Navy does not apply this policy to the
assignment of ship maintenance on the east coast of the United
States. Although it may be necessary to occasionally balance
ship maintenance requirements in nuclear capable Naval
shipyards by the assignment of non-nuclear ship maintenance,
the committee questions whether the increased cost of this work
is fully justified. Therefore, the committee directs the
Secretary of the Navy to apply the west coast non-nuclear ship
maintenance policy to the east coast, or provide the House
Committee on Armed Services and the Senate Committee on Armed
Services by January 31, 2002, with a report specifying why this
policy cannot be implemented.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding
This section would authorize $124,024.0 million in
operations and maintenance funding for the Armed Forces and
other activities and agencies of the Department of Defense.
Section 302--Working Capital Funds
This section would authorize $2,359.7 million for Working
Capital Funds of the Department of Defense.
Section 303--Armed Forces Retirement Home
This section would authorize $71.44 million from the Armed
Forces Retirement Trust Fund for the operation of the Armed
Forces Retirement Home, including the U.S. Soldiers' and
Airmen's Home and the Naval Home.
Section 304--Transfer from National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
transfer not more than $150.0 million from the amounts received
from sales in the National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund
to the operation and maintenance accounts of the military
services.
Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions
Section 311--Inventory of Explosive Risk Sites at Former Military
Ranges
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
develop and maintain an inventory of current and former
military ranges that are known or suspected to contain
abandoned military munitions.
Section 312--National Security Impact Statements
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
examine the impact a proposed action could have on national
security when the Secretary is required to conduct an
environment impact statement (EIS), environmental assessment
(EA), or to comment on EIS or EA developed by another federal
agency.
Section 313--Reimbursement for Certain Costs in Connection with Hooper
Sands Site, South Berwick, Maine
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
reimburse the Environmental Protection Agency approximately
$1.0 million for the cleanup of a former Navy facility in South
Berwick, Maine.
Section 314--River Mitigation Studies
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
conduct studies of the Sabine River and the Delaware River in
order to identify the level of effort and funding necessary to
remove debris left in the rivers from the shipbuilding
industry.
Section 315--Elimination of Annual Report on Contractor Reimbursement
for Costs of Environmental Response Actions
This section would eliminate the requirement for an annual
report on payments the Secretary of Defense made to contractors
for costs of environmental response actions.
Subtitle C--Commissaries and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities
Section 321--Reserve Component Commissary Benefits
This section would authorize immediate eligibility for
commissary benefits for members of the reserve components.
Currently, reserve members are not eligible to shop in
commissaries until they have served a year in a reserve unit.
The committee believes that in light of the reserve components'
increased participation in all manner of military operations,
reserve members should be entitled to commissary benefits upon
entry into reserve service.
Section 322--Reimbursement for Noncommissary Use of Commissary
Facilities
This section would amend section 2685 of title 10, United
States Code, to require the secretary of a military department
to reimburse the commissary surcharge account for the residual
value of any commissary facility constructed in whole or in
part with commissary surcharge funds when that facility is
converted to military use. Since commissary surcharge funds are
generated by patron purchases, the committee believes that
capital assets purchased with those funds properly belong to
the patrons and not to the military departments.
Section 323--Civil Recovery for Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality
Costs Related to Shoplifting
This section would authorize the military exchanges to
pursue federal debt collection remedies against shoplifters in
the military exchange stores. The exchanges currently have no
effective means to recover the cost of shoplifting and security
expenses, amounting to more than $25.0 million annually. This
section would provide a mechanism outside formal judicial
proceedings that would permit the exchanges to recover some
shoplifting losses.
Subtitle D--Workforce and Depot Issues
Section 331--Fiscal Year 2002 Limitations on Workforce Reviews
This section would limit the number of full time
equivalents that can be studied for possible conversion from
the government workforce to the contractor workforce. The
committee is increasingly concerned with the outsourcing
process and believes the agencies and services have not
properly funded or properly trained personnel involved in the
effort needed to conduct a proper analysis. The committee does
not support the Department's initiative to study an additional
3,200 full time equivalents for possible outsourcing in fiscal
year 2002. In addition, the committee does not support the
agencies and the services initiating more studies than are
properly funded.
Section 332--Applicability of Core Logistics Capability Requirements to
Nuclear Aircraft Carriers
This section would amend section 2464 of title 10, United
States Code, to clarify that the exclusion from maintaining
core logistics capabilities for nuclear aircraft carriers, as
specified in section 2464, is meant solely for the process of
refueling nuclear aircraft carriers. This section is necessary
to clarify that nuclear aircraft carriers are to maintain the
same core logistics capabilities as all other ships of the
United States Navy.
Section 333--Continuation of Contractor Manpower Reporting System in
Department of the Army
This section would amend section 343 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-
65) to require the Secretary of the Army to report annually on
the size of the contractor workforce. The section would also
require the Comptroller General of the U.S. to provide Congress
with an evaluation of each report submitted by the Secretary of
the Army.
Section 334--Limitation on Expansion of Wholesale Logistics
Modernization Program
This section would prohibit the Secretary of the Army from
expanding the Wholesale Logistics Modernization Program beyond
the original legacy systems included in the scope of the
contract awarded in December 1999 until the Secretary of the
Armycertifies to Congress that the original legacy systems have
been successfully replaced. The section would also require the General
Accounting Office to provide Congress with an evaluation of the
certification provided by the Secretary of the Army.
Section 335--Pilot Project for Exclusion of Certain Expenditures from
Limitation on Private Sector Performance of Depot-Level Maintenance
This section would amend section 2474 of title 10, United
States Code, to authorize a pilot project, applicable only to
three Air Force depots, that would exclude work performed in a
public depot under a public-private partnership from the
restrictions on private sector work established by that
section.
Section 336--Protections for Purchasers of Articles and Services
Manufactured or Performed by Working-Capital Funded Industrial
Facilities of the Department of Defense
This section would amend section 2563 of title 10, United
States Code to permit a private sector entity that has
contracted with the public sector in a working-capital funded
activity of the Department of Defense, to file a claim if the
public sector fails to comply with quality, schedule, or cost
performances required in the contract. This section would also
apply to section 2474 of title 10, United States Code.
Subtitle E--Defense Dependents Education
Section 341--Assistance to Local Educational Agencies that Benefit
Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense
Civilian Employees
This section would authorize $30.0 million for educational
assistance to local education agencies where the standard for
the minimum level of education within the state could not be
maintained because of the large number of military connected
students.
Section 342--Availability of Auxiliary Services of Defense Dependents'
Education System for Dependents Who Are Home School Students
This section would require the Department of Defense (DOD)
to provide support for home-schooled students overseas who are
otherwise eligible to attend DOD schools. This support would
include participation in extracurricular activities such as
sports teams, clubs, and music programs, as well as attendance
in individual academic classes.
Section 343--Report Regarding Compensation for Teachers Employed in
Teaching Positions in Overseas Schools Operated by the Department of
Defense
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
evaluate the method by which compensation is fixed for teachers
employed by Department of Defense overseas schools. Section 903
of title 20, United States Code, requires that these salaries
be based on the average range of salaries paid for similar
positions in large urban school systems. This section would
require the Secretary to report to Congress on the results of
his evaluation and would also require him to recommend whether
this compensation should be based upon the average range of
salaries paid for similar positions by Washington, D.C., area
school systems.
Subtitle F--Other Matters
Section 351--Availability of Excess Defense Personal Property to
Support Department of Veterans Affairs Initiative to Assist Homeless
Veterans
This section would permit the Secretary of Defense to make
excess clothing, shoes, sleeping bags, and related non-lethal
excess supplies available, without reimbursement, to the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs for distribution to homeless
veterans and programs assisting homeless veterans.
Section 352--Continuation of Limitations on Implementation of Navy-
Marine Corps Intranet Contract
This section would exclude the Marine Corps from the Navy's
initiative known as the Navy-Marine Corps Intranet. This
section would also continue the exclusion of the shipyards and
naval aviation depots from the Navy Marine Corps Intranet in
fiscal year 2002.
Section 353--Completion and Evaluation of Current Demonstration
Programs to Improve Quality of Personal Property Shipments of Members
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
complete all demonstration programs in the Department of
Defense that were designed to improve the movement of household
goods of members of the Armed Forces that were being conducted
on or after October 1, 2000. The section would also require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress an evaluation not
later than August 31, 2002.
Section 354--Expansion of Entities Eligible for Loan, Gift, and
Exchange of Documents, Historical Artifacts, and Obsolete Combat
Materiel
This section would authorize the exchange of defense relics
to a greater number of local authorities.
Subtitle G--Service Contracting Reform
Section 361--Short Title
This section would identify this subtitle as the
``Department of Defense Service Contracting Reform Act of
2001''.
Section 362--Required Cost Savings Level for Change of Function to
Contractor Performance
This section would amend section 2461 of title 10, United
States Code, to require that a contractor's cost must be at
least 10 percent less expensive than the federal government's
most efficient organization to be successful in a public/
private competition under Office of Management and Budget
Circular A-76.
Section 363--Applicability of Study and Reporting Requirements to New
Commercial or Industrial Type Functions
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct an A-76 study for each new function the Department of
Defense intends to establish in order to determine whether the
function should be performed by a government employee or a
contractor employee.
Section 364--Repeal of Waiver for Small Functions
This section would repeal section 2461 of title 10, United
States Code that currently waives the applicability of Office
of Management and Budget Circular A-76 or functions with 50
employees or less.
Section 365--Requirement for Equity in Public-Private Competitions
This section would require that for each government held
position studied under Office of Management and Budget Circular
A-76, approximately the same number of contractor held
positions must also be studied for possible conversion to the
public sector.
Section 366--Reporting Requirements Regarding Department of Defense's
Service Contractor Workforce
This section would require Department of Defense (DOD)
contractors and subcontractors to report to a secure DOD
website, direct and indirect man-hour cost information, and
would require the Secretary of Defense and the military
secretaries to submit to Congress a report on the cost
information data collected. The section would also require the
Comptroller General of the United States to review this data.
This section would require the Secretary of Defense and the
secretaries of the military departments to publish for the
public the non-proprietary data from these reports.
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Active Forces
Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for active duty personnel of the armed forces as of September
30, 2002.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2002 Change from
FY 2001 ------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee FY 2002 FY 2001
and floor Request recommendation request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army........................................ 480,000 480,000 480,000 0 0
Navy........................................ 372,642 376,000 376,000 0 3,358
USMC........................................ 172,600 172,600 172,600 0 0
Air Force................................... 357,000 358,800 358,800 0 1,800
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total............................. 1,382,242 1,387,400 1,387,400 0 5,158
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 402--Revision in Permanent End Strength Minimum Levels
This section would amend section 691 of title 10, United
States Code, by establishing end strength floors for the active
forces at the end strengths contained in the budget request.
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces
Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for the selected reserve personnel, including the end strength
for reserves on active duty in support of the reserves, as of
September 30, 2002:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2002 Change from
FY 2001 -------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee FY 2002 FY 2001
Request recommendation request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard........................ 350,526 350,000 350,000 0 (526)
Army Reserve............................... 205,300 205,000 205,000 0 (300)
Naval Reserve.............................. 88,900 87,000 87,000 0 (1,900)
Marine Corps Reserve....................... 39,558 39,558 39,558 0 0
Air National Guard......................... 108,022 108,400 108,400 0 378
Air Force Reserve.......................... 74,358 74,700 74,700 0 342
DOD Total............................ 866,664 864,658 864,658 0 (2,006)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Coast Guard Reserve........................ 8,000 8,000 8,000 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in Support of
the Reserves
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for reserves on active duty in support of the reserves as of
September 30, 2002:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2002 Change from
FY 2001 -------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee FY 2002 FY 2001
Request recommendation request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard........................ 22,974 22,974 22,974 0 0
Army Reserve............................... 13,106 13,108 13,108 0 2
Naval Reserve.............................. 14,649 14,811 14,811 0 162
Marine Corps Reserve....................... 2,261 2,261 2,261 0 0
Air National Guard......................... 11,170 11,591 11,591 0 421
Air Force Reserve.......................... 1,336 1,437 1,437 0 101
--------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total............................ 65,496 66,182 66,182 0 686
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual Status)
This section would authorize the following end strengths
for military technicians (dual status) as of September 30,
2002:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2002 Change from
FY 2001 ------------------------------------------------------
Service authorized Committee
(floor) Request recommendation FY 2002 FY 2001
(floor) request authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard......................... 23,128 23,128 23,128 0 0
Army Reserve................................ 5,921 5,999 5,999 0 78
Air National Guard.......................... 22,247 22,422 22,422 0 175
Air Force Reserve........................... 9,785 9,818 9,818 0 33
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total............................. 61,081 61,367 61,367 0 286
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 414--Fiscal Year 2002 Limitation on Non-Dual Status Technicians
This section would establish the following limits on the
numbers of non-dual status technicians as of September 30,
2002:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2002 Change from
------------------------------------------------------
Service FY 2001 Committee
limit Request recommendation FY 2002 FY 2001
(limit) request limit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard......................... 1,600 1,600 1,600 0 0
Army Reserve................................ 1,195 1,095 1,095 0 (100)
Air National Guard.......................... 326 350 350 0 24
Air Force Reserve........................... 10 0 90 90 80
DOD Total............................. 3,131 3,045 3,135 90 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The committee's recommended increase in the number of Air
Force Reserve non-dual status technicians results from revised
data provided by that component subsequent to the committee's
receipt of the budget request. The committee is concerned about
the growth. Noting that the Army Reserve and the Air Force
Reserve are required by section 10217 of title 10, United
States Code, to reduce the total number of non-dual status
technicians in both components to no more than 175 by September
30, 2007, the committee urges both components to coordinate
their efforts to reach that objective.
Section 415--Limitations on Numbers of Reserve Personnel Serving on
Active Duty or Full-Time National Guard Duty in Certain Grades for
Administration of Reserve Components
This section would authorize new grade tables for all
reserve components of the military departments to limit the
number of officers and senior enlisted members serving on
active duty or full-time national guard duty for administration
of reserves or national guard in the pay grades of 0-6, 0-5, 0-
4, E-9, and E-8. The tables would allow the limits for each
grade to be adjusted as the total number of such reserve
members on active duty increases or decreases.
Subtitle C--Other Matters Relating to Personnel Strengths
Section 421--Increase in Percentage by Which Active Component End
Strengths for any fiscal year may be increased
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
increase active duty end strength of a military service up to
two percent above the authorized end strength for that service.
The committee notes that current law authorizes the Secretary
to increase a service's end strength by one percent. The
committee recommends this expanded authority to assist the
Secretary in managing dynamic strength fluctuations occurring
in the military services as a result of hard-to-predict
recruiting and retention variables, as well as variables
induced by the movement of reserve component personnel on and
off active duty.
Section 422--Active Duty End Strength Exemption for National Guard and
Reserve Personnel Performing Funeral Honors Functions
This section would permit members of the reserve components
on active duty and members on full-time national guard duty to
prepare for and perform funeral honors functions without
counting against the active duty end strengths of the armed
forces.
Section 423--Increase in Authorized Strengths for Air Force Officers on
Active Duty in the Grade of Major
This section would authorize a seven percent increase in
the maximum number of officers serving on active duty in the
grade of major.
Subtitle D--Authorization of Appropriations
Section 431--Authorization of Appropriations for Military Personnel
This section would authorize $82,279.1 million to be
appropriated for military personnel.
This authorization of appropriations reflects both
reductions and increases to the budget request that are
itemized below.
[Dollars in millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military
personnel O&M
accounts accounts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDED INCREASES
Increase TLE to $180 per day and Authorize TLE for 43.0 .........
Officer First Duty Station.......................
Authorize Annual Travel for Families of Korean/ ......... 1.0
Cold War Missing.................................
Electronic Voting Demonstration Project........... ......... 2.0
Travel Expenses for Guardian of Minor Child....... ......... 5.0
Equalize Reservists' Aviation Career Incentive Pay 10.0 .........
with Active Duty Aviators When on Active Duty....
Authorize and Fund Full Pet Quarantine 1.0 .........
Reimbursement....................................
Funding for Uniting Through Reading (Navy)........ ......... 0.18
FY 2002 Effect of Navy FY 2001 Overstrength....... 13.0 .........
Navy PCS Bow Wave from FY 2001.................... 15.0 .........
Fund Army National Guard FY 2002 Military Techs ......... 20.0
(Dual Status)....................................
Army Reserve Component Duty Training Pay.......... 25.0 .........
USMC New Camouflage Utility Uniforms.............. 20.8 .........
---------------------
Total Recommended Additions................. 127.8 28.18
RECOMMENDED REDUCTIONS
Air Force Active Strength and Grade Underexecution 145.00 .........
Air Force Reserve Strength, Grade and Drill 10.98
Underexecution...................................
---------------------
Total Recommended Reductions................ 155.98 .........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
OVERVIEW
The committee believes that the Secretary of Defense, the
secretaries of the military departments, and the uniformed
military leadership must have effective, current, and flexible
personnel management programs and guidance. Accordingly, the
committee recommends a variety of initiatives to improve the
personnel management systems of the military services.
The committee, which was deeply disappointed that military
absentee voters were not offered consistently high quality
voting information and assistance during the 2000 election,
recommends a series of voting initiatives designed to improve
the ability of the Department of Defense managers to comply
with the requirements of the Federal Voting Assistance Program
and related law. These initiatives are consistent with the
findings of post-election reviews conducted by the Comptroller
General of the United States and the Department of Defense
Inspector General. Included among the initiatives is the
testing of electronic voting systems that aim to solve the time
and distance challenges that have plagued military voters,
particularly those residing at overseas duty locations.
To improve operation of the system created by the Secretary
of Defense to provide funeral honors to military veterans and
retirees, the committee would include a series of initiatives
designed to facilitate the Secretary's program and provide more
flexible management tools.
Finally, to ensure that members of the armed services
receive the recognition they so richly deserve for serving the
nation with dedication and valor, the committee recommends a
new Cold War Medal, and a new Korea Defense Service Medal, and
a waiver of the time limits for award of decorations. The
committee also recommends a review of the decorations awarded
to Jewish and Hispanic veterans for possible upgrading to the
Medal of Honor.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Alternative Recruiting Media
The committee is aware that the services are seeking
innovative ways to recruit a quality force in the face of
increased college attendance, reduced youth population, and a
competitive job market. The committee notes that today's youth
are more receptive to information from non-traditional media
and recommends the services employ these media as recruiting
tools where financially feasible. The committee suggests the
services explore the use of 3-D film, which can support the
fast-moving action style commonly employed in recruiting
presentations.
Army Reserve Military Technician Positions
The committee believes that the reserve full time manning
program is essential to reserve component readiness and that
dual status military technicians are critically important to
unit level full time military presence in the Army Reserve.
Consequently, the committee has exercised keen oversight in
recent years of the Army Reserve's dual status technician
program in an effort to ensure that Army Reserve units are
staffed with fully qualified dual status military technicians.
The committee understands, however, that Army Reserve personnel
authorization documents prescribe that numerous headquarters
staff positions be filled by military technicians (dual
status). This practice results in military technicians (dual
status) filling clerical and administrative positions in
headquarters, performing exactly the same functions as federal
civilian employees. The effect of such authorizations is to
undercut congressional intent by maintaining higher than
necessary numbers of military technicians (dual status) in
headquarters billets that should more properly be filled by
civilian employees. Another effect of such authorizations is to
create personnel inequities. For example, the military
technicians filling these headquarters positions are required
to maintain their reserve status while civilian civil service
employees filling like jobs in the same organization are not.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army to
review the Army Reserve's military technician authorizations
with the goal of reallocating military technician positions at
headquarters staff level to unit level.
Defense Prisoner of War/Missing in Action Office
The committee believes that the Defense Prisoner of War/
Missing in Action Office (DPMO) performs a critical mission for
the Department of Defense (DOD). The work of this office
continues to ensure substantial progress toward the fullest
possible accounting for those missing in the nation's past
conflicts, coordination and preparation of the effort to locate
and recover those missing in future conflicts, and, through its
work, stands as a tangible commitment to American families that
the fate of Americans missing in the nation's conflicts will be
relentlessly pursued. In order to perform effectively its range
of missions, DPMO must be adequately resourced. Since its
establishment, the DPMO accounting workload has grown
dramatically beyond the initial emphasis on the Vietnam War to
now encompass World War II, the Korean War, and the Cold War.
In addition, it has assumed new missions for all aspects of
future recovery operations. Even though the demands upon DPMO
have escalated, the committee is disturbed to learn that both
civilian and military personnel strengths have steadily
declined. The committee notes that since DPMO was established,
the organization's civilian billets have decreased by 45
spaces, a 40 percent reduction, and 27 of DPMO's 46 military
spaces are temporary billets. The committee believes that
increased DPMO personnel resources are required in order for
the office to address effectively its assigned missions. The
committee therefore directs the Secretary of Defense to
increase resources in the fiscal year 2003 budget request and
beyond that will assure that DPMO's requirements to meet its
entire range of missions are fully met.
Improved Use of Existing Military Centers for Scientific and
Technological Education
The committee continues to be concerned that the military
services are not adequately addressing the challenge of
producing sufficient numbers of officers with the requisite
education in science, engineering, and technology to meet the
demands of the environment described in Joint Vision 2020.
Reflecting the committee's concerns, theFloyd D. Spence
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law
106-398) required the Secretary of the Air Force to examine how the Air
Force Institute of Technology could be more effectively employed to
meet the needs of that service for officers with technical education.
The committee also believes that the Naval Postgraduate School should
have a larger role to play in meeting future Navy requirements for
officers educated in the technical, engineering, and scientific
disciplines. To that end, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to review future officer education requirements and to determine
ways in which the Naval Postgraduate School can be more effectively
used to meet those requirements.
Review of General and Flag Officer Authorizations
The committee notes that the advocates of increasing the
total number of general and flag officers, or exempting general
and flag officers from current grade limits, have presented at
least six proposals for the committee's consideration. The
Secretary of Defense did not request any of these proposals as
part of his unified legislative package for the fiscal year
2002 defense authorization bill. These six proposals are only
the latest in a long line of similar unsanctioned proposals
presented piecemeal to the committee year after year. The
committee notes that section 1213 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201)
required the Secretary of Defense to conduct a comprehensive
review of active and reserve component general and flag officer
authorizations and management. The committee still awaits the
results of the mandated review. In the absence of such results,
the committee spends an inordinate effort each year trying to
sort through the merits of the many individual proposals.
Acceptance of one simply leads to the proliferation of more the
following year. To end this cycle, and to see to it that the
Secretary of Defense fulfills the standing requirement of the
law, the committee directs the Secretary to conduct the review
required by section 1213 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201) and deliver the
final results of that review to Congress no later than one year
after the date of enactment of this act.
Uniting Through Reading
The committee strongly encourages programs that strengthen
military families and improve their quality of life. The Navy's
Uniting Through Reading program allows deployed parents and
children to communicate during separations, boosts family
morale, eases children's fears about a parent's absence, and
reduces anxiety upon reunion. Deployed participants videotape
themselves reading aloud and the videos and books are sent back
to the families to enable children to watch the video and read
along with their parent. The program also encourages
videotaping the child's reading and reaction to enable those
deployed to see the positive impact they are having on their
child's development. The program is expanding to naval bases
across the country and the committee recommends that an
additional $180,000 be provided to this commendable program.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--General Personnel Management Authorities
Section 501--Enhanced Flexibility for Management of Senior General and
Flag Officer Positions
This section would repeal the current limit on the total
number of four-star general officers allowed to be on active
duty in order to provide the increased flexibility in the
assignment and utilization of senior general officers that is
required to improve oversight and control of joint and military
service operations in space.
Section 502--Original Appointments in Regular Grades for Academy
Graduates and Certain Other New Officers
This section would require that graduates of the service
academies, as well as Reserve Officer Training Corps
distinguished graduates, and distinguished graduates of other
officer commissioning programs like officer candidate schools,
be given an initial appointment as an officer in the Regular
Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force, as long as they meet
the criteria for such appointment.
Section 503--Temporary Reduction of the Time-in-Grade Requirement for
Eligibility for Promotion for Certain Active-Duty List Officers in
Grades of First Lieutenant and Lieutenant (Junior Grade)
This section would authorize the service secretaries to
reduce the time-in-grade requirement for promotion to the pay
grade of 0-3 from 24 to 18 months during the period ending
September 30, 2005. The committee recognizes the need,
particularly in the Army, to balance the number of officers
serving in the grade of 0-3 with the number of positions where
an officer in that grade is required. However, the committee
remains concerned that junior officers receive adequate
training and experience before being promoted to the grade of
0-3. The committee also expects the service secretaries to
address the retention problems believed to be the source of the
current grade mismatches and to resume promoting to the grade
of 0-3 with 24 months time-in-grade during fiscal year 2006.
Section 504--Increase in Senior Enlisted Active Duty Grade Limit for
Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force
This section would increase the limitation on the
authorized daily average number of enlisted members serving on
active duty within an armed force in the pay grade of E-8 from
two percent to two and one half percent of the total number of
enlisted members of that armed force on active duty on the
first day of that fiscal year.
Section 505--Authority for Limited Extension of Medical Deferment of
Mandatory Retirement or Separation
This section would authorize the secretaries of the
military departments to extend for an additional 30 days the
deferment of mandatory retirement or separation for medical
reasons to provide the member additional time to prepare for
retirement or separation.
Section 506--Authority for Limited Extension on Active Duty of Members
Subject to Mandatory Retirement or Separation
This section would authorize the secretaries of the
military departments to extend for an additional 90 days the
deferment of mandatory retirement or separation due to the
implementation of stop loss authority to provide the military
member additional time to prepare for retirement or separation.
Section 507--Clarification of Disability Severance Pay Computation
This section would authorize disability severance pay to be
computed based on the grade to which a member would be promoted
regardless of the purpose of the physical examination that
identifies the disqualifying physical disability.
Section 508--Officer in Charge of United States Navy Band
This section would permit a Navy limited duty officer who
holds the rank of at least lieutenant commander to be detailed
to serve in the rank of captain while holding the position of
officer in charge of the United States Navy Band.
Section 509--One-Year Extension of Expiration Date for Certain Force
Management Authorities
This section would extend through December 31, 2002,
certain force drawdown transition authorities. These
authorities would include:
(1) Active duty early retirement authority;
(2) Special separation benefit authority;
(3) Voluntary separation incentive authority;
(4) Increased flexibility in the management of
selective early retirement boards;
(5) Reduction in time-in-grade requirement for
retention of grade upon voluntary retirement;
(6) Reduction of length of commissioned service for
voluntary retirement as an officer;
(7) Enhanced travel and transportation allowances and
storage of baggage and household effects for certain
involuntary separated members;
(8) Increased flexibility for granting educational
leave relating to continuing public and community
service;
(9) Enhanced health, commissary and family housing
benefits;
(10) Increased flexibility in the management of
enrollments of dependents in the Defense Dependents'
Education System;
(11) Definition of the force reduction transition
period for reserve forces;
(12) Force reduction period for reserve retirement
authority;
(13) Reduction of length of non-regular service
requirements for reserve retirements;
(14) Reserve early retirement authority;
(15) Reduction of time-in-grade requirement for
retention of grade upon voluntary reserve retirement;
(16) Increased flexibility in the management of the
affiliation of active duty personnel with reserve
units; and
(17) Increased flexibility in the management of
eligibility for reserve educational assistance.
Subtitle B--Reserve Component Personnel Policy
Section 511--Placement on Active-Duty List of Certain Reserve Officers
on Active Duty for a Period of Three Years or Less
This section would clarify section 641 of title 10, United
States Code, to require members recalled to active duty for
three years or less to be placed on the active-duty list unless
the service secretary specifies in the service member's orders
that the member will be retained on the reserve active-status
list.
Section 512--Expanded Application of Reserve Special Selection Boards
This section would authorize reserve special selection
boards to consider officers from below the promotion zone who
were either not considered for promotion because of
administrative error, or were considered but not selected for
promotion because of material error. The section would afford
reserve officers the same special selection board access as
provided to active duty officers.
Section 513--Exception to Baccalaureate Degree Requirement for
Appointment of Reserve Officers to Grades Above First Lieutenant
This section would exempt enlisted members commissioned
under the Army Officer Candidate School from the requirement to
possess a baccalaureate degree before being promoted to the pay
grade of captain.
Section 514--Improved Disability Benefits for Certain Reserve Component
Members
This section would remove the requirement that reservists
must be performing inactive-duty for training at a site that is
outside normal commuting distance before being eligible for
disability benefits and programs if they incur or aggravate an
injury, illness, or disease in the line of duty when remaining
overnight at training locations before or between inactive-duty
training periods.
Section 515--Time-in-Grade Requirement for Reserve Component Officers
with a Non-Service Connected Disability
This section would authorize retirement eligible reserve
officers with non-service connected physical disabilities that
disqualify the officer from continued service to be retired in
the highest grade held by the officer for six months,
regardless of other time-in-grade requirements. The section
would afford officers with non-service connected disabilities
the same retired grade determination process as officers with
service connected disabilities.
Section 516--Reserve Members Considered to be Deployed for Purposes of
Personnel Tempo Management
This section would amend the definition of deployment for
reservists to make it consistent with the definition of
deployment applied to active duty members.
Section 517--Funeral Honors Duty Performed by Reserve and Guard Members
to be Treated as Inactive-Duty Training for Certain Purposes
This section would authorize reserve and national guard
members performing funeral honor duty the same rights,
benefits, and protections that would be provided members
performing inactive-duty training.
Section 518--Members of the National Guard Performing Funeral Honors
Duty While in Non-Federal Status
This section would specify that national guard members when
serving on funeral honors details shall be considered members
of the armed forces for the purpose of meeting requirements for
the minimum number of service members and service affiliation
on a funeral honors detail.
Section 519--Use of Military Leave for Funeral Honors Duty by Reserve
Members and National Guardsmen
This section would amend section 6323 of title 5, United
States Code, to authorize federal employees who are members of
the reserve components to use military leave to perform funeral
honors duty.
Subtitle C--Joint Specialty Officers and Joint Professional Military
Education
Section 521--Nominations for Joint Specialty
This section would provide for the automatic nomination of
any officer who, before or after the enactment of this
provision, meets the statutory education and service
requirements for nomination as a joint specialty officer (JSO).
The Secretary of Defense, with the advice of the Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, would remain responsible for the
actual selection of JSOs from the pool of nominated officers.
The committee has heard the concerns of joint staff personnel
that there will soon not be enough qualified officers to fill
operational joint duty positions. The committee also has
learned that there are more than 3,000 officers serving on
active duty who, although they have met the joint professional
military education and joint service requirements established
by the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization
Act of 1986 (Goldwater-Nichols Act), (Public Law 99-433), have
not been nominated by their respective military services for
selection as joint specialty officers. The committee
understands that the reluctance of the military services to
nominate these officers is related to concerns that such
nomination and subsequent selection of these officers by the
Secretary of Defense to be JSOs would adversely affect the
ability of the services to meet the promotion standards for
JSOs that were established by the Goldwater-Nichols Act. The
committee believes that the current policies of the military
services to withhold nomination from qualified officers is
unfair to those officers and places improper emphasis on
meeting a statistical standard rather than producing sufficient
numbers of JSOs.
Section 522--Joint Duty Credit
This section would set out the standards and requirements
for the Secretary of Defense to award joint duty credit to
officers serving in temporary joint task force headquarters
that are not engaged in combat or near combat operations.
Following Desert Storm, Congress addressed issues related to
the proliferating use of temporary joint task forces and the
increasing numbers of officers serving abbreviated tours of
duty in the headquarters of those joint task forces. The
fundamental question was whether service in joint task force
headquarters should be credited towards the statutory
requirements for qualification as a joint specialty officer. In
resolving the issue, Congress amended the Goldwater-Nichols Act
to permit service of at least 90 days duration in a joint task
force headquarters to be credited, as long as the joint task
force was engaged in combat, or near combat, operations. Since
Desert Storm, the Department of Defense has employed more than
240 temporary joint task forces that do not meet the combat, or
near combat, criteria. In view of this history, as well as the
certainty that many officers would likely serve in future
temporary joint task force headquarters engaged in military
operations other than war, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff asked the committee to consider ways in which service in
temporary joint task forces engaged in operations other than
war might be credited towards joint duty service requirements.
In general, the committee does not believe that the intensity
and complexity of most military operations other than war rise
to the standard for creditestablished following Desert Storm.
However, under certain limited conditions, the committee recognizes
that service may be credited when it is in the headquarters of a
temporary joint task engaged in peacekeeping or peace enforcement
operations where an extremely fragile state of peace and a high
potential for hostilities coexist.
Section 523--Retroactive Joint Service Credit for Duty in Certain Joint
Task Forces
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense,
after a case-by-case review, to award joint service credit to
an officer who served in the headquarters of a temporary joint
task force employed by the United States during one or more of
nine specific joint operations that began during the period
August 1, 1992, and June 11, 1999. The committee believes that
the awarding of retroactive joint service credit to officers
for these operations is consistent with the new authority
granted to the Secretary of Defense in section 522 to award
joint duty credit for certain military operations other than
war.
Section 524--Revision to Annual Report on Joint Officer Management
This section would change some annual reporting
requirements to reflect the committee's recommended amendments
to the joint officer management system.
Section 525--Requirement for Selection for Joint Specialty Before
Promotion to General or Flag Officer Grade
This section would require that after September 30, 2007,
officers promoted to brigadier general or rear admiral (lower
half) must be selected as a joint specialty officer (JSO) prior
to their promotion.
The Goldwater-Nichols Act intended that future combat
leaders of the armed forces would be drawn from the ranks of
JSOs. To that end, the Goldwater-Nichols Act established that
the proper qualification of an officer for effective service as
a JSO required both formal education (joint professional
military education) and completion of one ``full tour'' of
joint duty. However, as a precondition for promotion to
brigadier general, or rear admiral (lower half), the Goldwater-
Nichols Act established a less demanding standard, requiring
the completion of one ``full tour'' of joint duty, but no joint
professional military education. Fifteen years after the
enactment of the Goldwater-Nichols Act, the committee believes
that it is appropriate to move forward to secure the goal that
future leaders of the armed forces, especially those entering
general officer rank, should be drawn from the ranks of JSOs.
The committee holds this view for the following reasons:
(1) Involvement in joint operations is a fact of life
for general and flag officers today, and such
involvement will be increasingly so in the future.
Future standards for qualifying those general and flag
officers to operate effectively in the joint
environment should not differ from the rest of the
officers in the military services.
(2) In the 15 years since enactment of the Goldwater-
Nichols Act, the experience of thousands of officers
who were educated in the joint professional military
education (JPME) system and served in joint duty
assignments confirms that the JPME experience is
essential, and enhances performance in joint
operations.
(3) Requiring future officers to be JSOs as a
condition of promotion to brigadier general, or rear
admiral (lower half), would, in effect, add a twelve-
week attendance at JPME to the current service
requirement.
Section 526--Independent Study of Joint Officer Management and Joint
Professional Military Education Reforms
This section would require that the Secretary of Defense
commission an independent study of issues related to joint
officer management, joint professional military education, and
the roles of the Secretary and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff in managing and educating joint officers. The section
would require the study to be completed by June 30, 2002. The
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff presented the committee
with a set of fundamental reforms in the joint officer
management and joint officer professional military education
systems. The committee, believing that the proposed reforms
would have significant implications for joint service, the
individual military services, and every officer, wants to move
cautiously before making systemic changes. Such was the
approach used by this committee when it developed the joint
officer management initiatives contained in the Goldwater-
Nichols Act, and when it subsequently instituted joint
professional military education reforms.
Section 527--Professional Development Education
This section would make the Secretary of Defense the
executive agent for funding professional development education
operations at the National Defense University, beginning in
fiscal year 2003. At present, such funding is split between the
Army and the Navy. By taking this action to consolidate the
funding responsibility, the committee intends to strengthen the
role of the Secretary of Defense in joint professional military
education and improve the support of the National Defense
University.
Section 528--Authority for National Defense University to Enroll
Certain Private Sector Civilians
This section would permit up to 10 private sector employees
of organizations relevant to national security to receive
instruction at the National Defense University. The committee
believes such enrollments will strengthen the educational
experience of all military students at the National Defense
University.
Section 529--Continuation of Reserve Component Professional Military
Education Test
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
continue the concept validation test of the joint professional
military education (JPME) course for reserve component officers
in fiscal year 2002, and would authorize a broader pilot
program in fiscal year 2003 for reserve component JPME, if the
Secretary determines that the resultsof the concept validation
merit test it. During fiscal year 2001, the National Defense University
undertook a limited concept validation test of a JPME course for
reserve component officers. The committee believes that the results of
this concept validation are promising and that further testing of the
concept should continue.
Subtitle D--Military Education and Training
Section 531--Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center
This section would authorize the commandant of the Defense
Language Institute to award an associate of arts degree in a
foreign language to graduates of the Institute's Foreign
Language Center who meet the requirements for the degree.
Section 532--Authority for the Marine Corps University to Award Degree
of Master of Strategic Studies
This section would authorize the president of the Marine
Corps University to award the degree of master of strategic
studies upon graduates of the Marine Corps War College who meet
the requirements for that degree.
Section 533--Increase in Number of Foreign Students Authorized to be
Admitted to the Service Academies
This section would increase from 40 to 60 the number of
foreign students who may attend each of the service academies
at any one time. This section would also give the Secretary of
Defense greater authority to waive some or all of the cost of
that attendance.
Section 534--Increase in Maximum Age for Appointment as a Cadet or
Midshipman in Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps Scholarship
Programs
This section would increase the maximum allowable age for
the senior Reserve Officer Training Corps scholarship program
from age 27 on June 30 of the year in which the officer
candidate is expected to be commissioned to age 35 on December
31 of the year in which the officer candidate is expected to be
commissioned.
Section 535--Active Duty Participation as a Cadet or Midshipman in
Senior ROTC Advanced Training
This section would authorize active duty enlisted members
to participate in the senior Reserve Officer Training Corps.
Section 536--Authority to Modify the Service Obligation of Certain ROTC
Cadets in Military Junior Colleges Receiving Financial Assistance
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
permit military junior college cadets who sign future
Guaranteed Reserve Forces Duty (GRFD) contracts to satisfy
their service obligation through either active duty service or
reserve service in a troop program unit. This section would
also permit those military junior college students who signed
GRFD contracts between January 1, 1991, and July 11, 2000, to
satisfy their service obligation through active duty service
rather than service in the reserve component troop units.
Section 537--Modification of Nurse Officer Candidate Accession Program
Restriction on Students Attending Educational Institutions with Senior
Reserve Officers' Training Programs
This section would remove the restriction on officer
candidates from receiving financial assistance while training
to be nurses at institutions where Reserve Officer Training
Corps (ROTC) programs are present when the officer candidates
are ineligible to participate in the ROTC program.
Section 538--Repeal of Limitation on Number on Junior Reserve Officers'
Training Corps (JROTC) Units
This section would repeal the current statutory cap of
3,500 Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) units.
The committee notes that this repeal was contained in the
budget request and is consistent with the long-standing
committee view that JROTC expansion is in the nation's
interest.
Section 539--Reserve Health Professionals Stipend Program Expansion
This section would expand the stipend program for reserve
health professionals by authorizing medical and dental school
students to receive stipends and authorizing continuing
compensation for medical and dental school graduates
participating in residency programs involving critical wartime
specialties.
Section 540--Housing Allowance for the Chaplain for the Corps of
Cadets, United States Military Academy
This section would amend the authority of the Secretary of
the Army to provide a housing allowance to the Chaplain for the
Corps of Cadets at the United States Military Academy to
specify that the allowance should be consistent with the
allowance provided to a lieutenant colonel.
Subtitle E--Decorations, Awards, and Commendations
Section 541--Authority for Award of the Medal of Honor to Humbert R.
Versace for Valor During the Vietnam War
This section would waive the statutory time limitation for
the award of the Medal of Honor to Humbert R. Versace for valor
while interned as a prisoner-of-war by the Vietnamese Communist
National Liberation Front (Viet Cong) in the Republic of
Vietnam.
Section 542--Review Regarding Award of Medal of Honor to Certain Jewish
American and Hispanic American War Veterans
This section would require the secretaries of the military
departments to review the service records of Jewish and
Hispanic veterans from World War II and later periods to
determine if the award of the Medal of Honor is appropriate.
The secretaries would be obligated to review the records of
veterans who were previously awarded the Distinguished Service
Cross, the Navy Cross, and the Air Force Cross, and names of
veterans submitted to the secretaries during the one-year
period beginning with the date of enactment of this provision.
In those cases where the secretaries determine that service
records support the award of Medals of Honor, the section would
also waive the statutory time limitations for award.
Section 543--Authority to Issue Duplicate Medal of Honor
This section would authorize the service secretaries to
issue one duplicate Medal of Honor to recipients for display
purposes.
Section 544--Authority to Replace Stolen Military Decorations
This section would clarify that the service secretaries are
authorized to replace decorations that are considered stolen in
addition to those decorations considered lost or destroyed.
Section 545--Waiver of Time Limitations for Award of Navy Distinguished
Flying Cross to Certain Persons
This section would waive the statutory time limitations for
the award of the Distinguished Flying Cross to individuals
recommended for award of the Distinguished Flying Cross by the
secretaries of the military departments.
Section 546--Korea Defense Service Medal
This section would require the secretaries of the military
departments to issue a campaign medal, to be known as the Korea
Defense Service Medal, to members who served in the Republic of
Korea or adjacent waters during the period beginning on July
28, 1954, and ending on a future date to be determined by the
Secretary of Defense. Members who served in the Republic of
Korea and adjacent waters prior to the date of enactment of
this provision would be required to apply for award of the
medal.
Section 547--Cold War Service Medal
This section would require the secretaries of the military
departments to issue a Cold War service medal to persons who
served honorably on active duty in the armed forces during the
period beginning on September 2, 1945 and ending on December
26, 1991. In order to qualify as an enlisted member, a person
would have had to serve a full term of enlistment in an armed
force, and reenlisted as an enlisted member or have been
appointed an officer. In order to qualify as an officer, a
person would have had to complete an initial service obligation
as an officer and have served in an armed force after
completing the initial service obligation. The secretaries
would be authorized to waive the service requirements in the
case of disability or hardship separation, or other deserving
circumstance.
Section 548--Option to Convert Award of Armed Forces Expeditionary
Medal Awarded for Operation Frequent Wind to Vietnam Service Medal
This section would authorize participants in Operation
Frequent Wind, the evacuation of Vietnam conducted on April 29
and 30, 1975, to return the award of the Armed Forces
Expeditionary Medal and to receive the Vietnam Service Medal in
its place.
Subtitle F--Matters Relating to Voting
Section 551--Voting Assessments and Assistance for Members of the
Uniformed Services
This section would require the Department of Defense (DOD)
Inspector General to conduct annual random and unannounced
assessments of the compliance with the requirements of the
Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (Public Law
99-410), DOD regulations regarding the Federal Voting
Assistance Program, and other requirements of law at 15
Department of Defense installations. The section would also
require the secretaries of the military departments to include
an assessment of compliance with the requirements of the
Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act and DOD
regulations regarding the Federal Voting Assistance Program on
the list of issues and programs to be reviewed during all
management effectiveness reviews and inspections. Additionally,
the section would require voting assistance officers appointed
under DOD regulations to be appointed with the expectation of
serving a minimum of 30 months. Performance evaluation reports
pertaining to service members who have been appointed voting
assistance officers would be required to include comments on
the performance of the individual as a voting assistance
officer. Finally, the section would require the Secretary of
Defense, during the four months preceding the month during
which congressional elections are conducted, to poll all units
and ships at sea responsiblefor collecting and shipping mail to
determine if voting materials are awaiting shipment and the length of
time that the materials have been held at that location.
Section 552--Electronic Voting Demonstration Project
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
carry out a demonstration project to allow military absentee
voters to vote using an electronic voting system. This section
would require the Secretary to coordinate with state officials
to facilitate the demonstration project. The committee expects
the Secretary to actively encourage state election officials to
participate in the demonstration project and to take all
prudent steps to expand the demonstration project to reach as
many military voters as possible. The committee believes that
the method for absentee voting that holds the most promise for
protecting the voting rights of military members in the future
is electronic voting using computers.
Subtitle G--Matters Relating to Military Spouses and Family Members
Section 561--Improved Financial and Other Assistance to Military
Spouses for Job Training and Education
The section would require the Secretary of Defense to
examine existing Department of Defense and other federal, state
and non-governmental programs with the objective of improving
retention of military personnel by increasing the employability
of military spouses and helping those spouses gain access to
financial and other assistance for training and education. The
section would also require the Secretary to assess whether the
Department should begin a program of direct financial
assistance to military spouses for education, job training and
related assistance like child care and job-related
transportation. The section would also authorize the
secretaries of the military departments to make available space
in military facilities for non-Department of Defense entities
to provide employment-related training for military spouses.
Section 562--Authority to Conduct Surveys of Dependents and Survivors
of Military Retirees
This section would expand the authority of the Secretary of
Defense to survey families of military members to determine the
adequacy of facilities and services provided by the Department
of Defense. The section would authorize the Secretary to survey
families of retired members in addition to families of active
duty members.
Section 563--Clarification of Treatment of Classified Information
Concerning Persons in a Missing Status
This section would amend section 1506 of title 10, United
States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to maintain a
separate file available for review by next-of-kin that would
provide notice of the existence of classified information which
may pertain to one or more missing persons. The committee
believes that as much information as possible should be
provided to the next-of-kin of persons missing from past
conflicts.
Section 564--Transportation to Annual Meeting of Next-of-Kin of Persons
Unaccounted for from Conflicts after World War II
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
provide transportation for the next-of-kin of persons who are
unaccounted from the Korean War, the Cold War, the Vietnam War,
and the Persian Gulf Conflict to an annual meeting concerning
ongoing efforts to resolve the fate of their missing family
member.
Section 565--Amendments to Charter of Defense Task Force on Domestic
Violence
This section would extend the original three-year
authorization of the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence
from October 5, 2002, to April 24, 2003. The section also would
authorize reimbursement to be paid to task force members who
are not Department of Defense or federal civilian employees.
The task force was established by section 591 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-
65).
Subtitle H--Military Justice and Legal Matters
Section 571--Requirement that Courts-Martial Consist of Not Less than
12 Members in Capital Cases
This section would amend chapter 47 of title 10, United
States Code, to increase the number of required courts-martial
members to 12 in cases in which the death penalty may be
adjudged as a sentence. The fact that a general court-martial
presently may adjudge death with as few as five members
contributes to the unfortunate public perception that service
members have fewer constitutional protections than civilians
and undermines the legitimacy of verdicts in such cases.
The Manual for Courts-Martial requires special procedures
in capital cases, and the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
has recognized the unique status of death penalty cases and
attendant systemic burdens in its jurisprudence. Requiring 12
court-members in capital courts-martial would ensure that
service members receive the same procedural protections that
exist in other death penalty cases, with one exception. Because
the military has unique operational considerations not found in
civilian society, this section would provide that the convening
authority could reduce the number of court members serving in
capital cases to no fewer than five members when 12 members are
not reasonably available because of physical conditions or
military exigencies. In such circumstances, the convening
authority would be required to make a written statement of the
reasons 12 members could not be obtained. This statement would
be appended to the record of trial.
Section 572--Right of Convicted Accused To Request Sentencing by
Military Judge
This section would amend chapter 47 of title 10, United
States Code, to permit the sentencing phase of trial in courts-
martial to be conducted by a military judge sitting alone,
rather than by court members.
Under the present court-martial process a military judge
alone may not sentence an accused if the accused elects to be
tried with court members. Such a result, however, has
disadvantages. Sentencing trials involving members may be more
lengthy and more complicated than judge-alone proceedings,
costing the government time and expense and keeping court
members away from their regular duties for extended periods.
Moreover, military judges generally have as sound a sense of
community and disciplinary norms and mores as court members
because they typically preside over many cases at a single
installation.
This section would permit a separate choice of forum
decision to be made following announcement of findings of guilt
or innocence by the court but before evidence on sentencing is
received. A request for sentencing by judge alone could be made
orally on the record or in writing. Consistent with article 18
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, section 818 of title
10, United States Code, and Rule for Courts-Martial
201(f)(1)(C), judge-alone sentencing would not be permitted in
capital cases.
Section 573--Codification of Requirement for Regulations for Delivery
of Military Personnel to Civil Authorities When Charged With Certain
Offenses
This section would codify existing regulations by amending
section 814 of title 10, United States Code. The section would
require the Secretary of Defense to prescribe regulations to
provide for the delivery to the appropriate civil authority for
trial, a member accused by civil authority of parental
kidnapping or a similar offense.
Section 574--Authority To Accept Voluntary Legal Services for Members
of the Armed Forces
This section would improve the availability of legal
assistance services to members of the armed forces by amending
section 1588 of title 10, United States Code, and would
expressly authorize the service secretaries to accept voluntary
legal services. This section would also protect these
volunteers from legal malpractice actions by extending to them
the protections of section 1054 of title 10, United States
Code.
Subtitle I--Other Matters
Section 581--Shipment of Privately Owned Vehicles When Making Permanent
Change of Station Moves Within the United States
This section would authorize the service secretaries to
ship a vehicle at government expense from one permanent station
inside the continental United States to another permanent
station inside the continental United States when such shipment
is found to be advantageous and cost effective to the
government.
Section 582--Payment of Vehicle Storage Costs in Advance
This section would authorize the secretaries of the
military departments to pay vehicle storage costs in advance.
Section 583--Permanent Authority for Use of Military Recruiting Funds
for Certain Expenses at Department of Defense Recruiting Functions
This section would make permanent the authority for the
secretaries of the military departments to conduct social
functions involving recruit candidates and recruits awaiting
active duty entry, and other persons known to influence the
career decisions of recruitment-age youth.
Section 584--Clarification of Military Recruiter Access to Secondary
School Directory Information About Students
This section would specify that secondary schools shall
provide directory information to recruiters in the same way
that such information is provided to institutions of higher
education when the student has indicated a desire or intent to
enroll in that institution.
Section 585--Repeal of Requirement for Final Comptroller General Report
Relating to Army End Strength Allocations
This section would repeal the requirement for the last
report by the Comptroller General of the United States on the
Total Army Analysis (TAA) process--the modeling process used by
the Army to determine its combat support and combat service
support force structure.
Section 586--Posthumous Army Commission in the Grade of Captain in the
Chaplains Corps to Ella E. Gibson for Service as Chaplain of the First
Wisconsin Heavy Artillery Regiment During the Civil War
This section would authorize and request the President to
posthumously appoint Ella E. Gibson to the grade of captain for
her service as a chaplain in the First Wisconsin Heavy
Artillery Regiment during the Civil War.
Section 587--National Guard Challenge Program
This section, effective October 1, 2002, would eliminate
the $62.5 million statutory limit on Department of Defense
spending for the National Guard Youth Challenge program, and
revise the Department of Defense cost share for each state's
program from 60 percent to 75 percent. The section would also
repeal section 2033 of title 10, United States Code, which
requires that any funding appropriated to the Challengeprogram
above the Department's statutory limit be provided to the Junior
Reserve Officers' Training Program.
Section 588--Payment of FEHBP Premiums for Certain Reservists Called to
Active Duty in Support of Contingency Operations
This section would authorize federal agencies to pay the
employee portion of Federal Employee Health Benefit Program
(FEHBP) premiums for federal employees who are members of the
reserve component who are called to active duty for more than
30 days. This authority would provide continuity of medical
care for the families of reserve component members who are
called to active duty for extended periods and will encourage
federal employees to volunteer for extended active duty
missions.
Section 589--18-month Enlistment Pilot Program
This section would authorize, during the period beginning
on October 1, 2003 and ending on December 31, 2007, an 18-month
enlistment pilot program to increase the participation of prior
service persons in the Selected Reserve and increase the pool
of participants in the Individual Ready Reserve. The section
would authorize the Secretary of the Army to enlist up to
10,000 soldiers under this program and provide enlistment
bonuses and student loan repayments to recruits. Soldiers
enlisted under this program will be eligible for assignment to
overseas locations. This section would require the Secretary of
the Army to report the results of the program to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services not later than December 31, 2007 and December 31,
2012.
Section 590--Per Diem Allowance for Lengthy or Numerous Deployments
This section would amend section 574 of the Floyd D. Spence
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public
Law 106-398) to expand the scope of the report from the
Secretary of Defense that is due not later than March 31, 2002.
The Secretary would be required to review section 991 of title
10, United States Code, and section 436 of title 37, United
States Code, and include in the report:
(1) A discussion of the experience in tracking and
recording deployment of members, and paying members
subject to lengthy and numerous deployments a $100 per
diem after exceeding 400 days deployed out of the
previous 730.
(2) Specific comments regarding the effect on the
readiness of the Navy and the Marine Corps of the two
provisions given the deployment intensive mission of
these services.
(3) Any recommendation for revision of the two
provisions.
The committee is aware of concerns expressed by the Chief
of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the Marine Corps that
the law establishing a management system and per diem payment
authority for service members subjected to lengthy and numerous
deployments will have unintended fiscal and readiness
consequences for the deployment intensive sea services during
fiscal year 2002. On the other hand, the committee has heard
the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness
testify that the fiscal impact of the law can be managed in
fiscal year 2002 and the law should be allowed to operate until
the services are able to provide data to determine how the law
is working.
The committee is concerned that the law should not impose
unintended consequences on the services and is committed to
understanding what changes to the law may be required. However,
the committee is equally concerned that the members of the
armed services be spared excessive deployments that are known
to stress members and their families and erode the quality of
life that is critical to good retention.
This section would also amend section 436 of title 37,
United States Code, to require high-deployment per diem be paid
from operations and maintenance accounts.
The committee notes that, contrary to guidance included in
the statement of managers accompanying section 574 of the Floyd
D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2001 (Public Law 106-398), the services intend to pay high-
deployment per diem out of military personnel accounts. The
committee strongly believes that deploying service members in
excess of 400 days out of any 730-day period is fundamentally
an operational decision driven by operational requirements. As
such, the committee considers high-deployment per diem an
operational cost that should be paid from operations and
maintenance accounts.
Section 591--Congressional Review Period for Change in Ground Combat
Exclusion Policy
This section would amend section 542 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-
160) to change the congressional notification period required
of the Secretary of Defense before implementing revised
policies concerning the assignment of women to ground combat
units or positions. Currently, the Secretary must provide
Congress with 90 calendar days notice before making any changes
to the ground combat exclusion policy that would either close
to female members of the armed services a position or unit that
was previously open to them, or open to female members of the
armed services a position or unit that was previously closed to
them. This section would change the notification period to 60
days of continuous session of Congress.
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS
OVERVIEW
The committee continues to believe that compensation
programs are critical to successful recruiting and retention.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a pay raise that combines
both across-the-board and targeted increases for mid-grade
noncommissioned officers and officers, a new officer accession
bonus, and a number of enhancements to special and incentive
pays and bonuses.
In addition, the committee recognizes that the rate of
reimbursement for the cost of permanent changes of station
(PCS) has dropped to 62 cents for every dollar expended by
service members and their families. The committee is committed
to improving PCS reimbursement rates and to that end proposes a
series of initiatives in this bill. These measures include:
(1) An increase in the maximum amount for temporary
lodging expense (TLE) from $110 to $180 per day and
authorization for officers to receive TLE at their
first duty stations.
(2) Advanced payment of vehicle storage costs.
(3) Shipment of privately owned vehicles inside the
United States.
(4) Family separation allowances for members serving
unaccompanied overseas tours because family members
have been medically disqualified from overseas
assignment.
(5) A $500 partial dislocation allowance when ordered
out of government quarters.
(6) More flexible allowances for travel performed by
members between consecutive overseas services.
(7) An increase in the reimbursement rate for the
cost of pet quarantine services.
Because the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness testified that he will seek to reform further the PCS
reimbursement system, the committee recommends a series of
additional measures but delays their implementation date for
one year, until January 1, 2003. The committee expects the
Secretary of Defense, following completion of the Department of
Defense review of the PCS reimbursement system, will make
recommendations with regard to the implementation of the
following initiatives:
(1) Authority to pay dislocation allowance (DLA) at a
member's first duty station.
(2) Increased weight allowance for transportation of
household goods for junior enlisted personnel.
(3) Increasing the PCS reimbursement rate for
military personnel to the same rate as paid federal
civilian employees.
(4) Payment of housing allowance to junior enlisted
personnel while traveling between PCS stations.
(5) Dislocation allowance for military couples moving
into government quarters.
Finally, the committee would authorize uniformed service
retirees to receive disability compensation from the Department
of Veterans Affairs without reducing retired pay.
Implementation of the provision would be contingent on the
President submitting offsets for the increased entitlement
spending in a budget request and Congress enacting legislation
to provide those specific offsets.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Additional Reporting Instructions Concerning the Supplemental
Subsistence Allowance for Low-Income Members with Dependents
Section 402a of title 37, United States Code, as amended by
section 604 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398),
directs the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress annual
reports specifying the number of members of the armed forces
who received the supplemental subsistence allowance during the
preceding year. The first report is required on March 1, 2002
and the last report is required on March 1, 2006. The committee
is concerned that the reports include sufficient information
about the recipients to allow the merits of the program to be
evaluated.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to include in the first annual report and all reports that
follow, statistical analyses of the recipient population
regarding rank, family size, non-dependent family members, job
specialties, and service. The report shall also make
distinctions among recipients based on duty locations being in
the United States or overseas (including Alaska and Hawaii),
residences being government housing, privatized government
housing, or private sector housing, and family income including
or not including wage earners in addition to the service
member.
Personal and Family Financial Management Programs
The committee is concerned that the secretaries of the
military departments are not providing service members
sufficient training on the management of personal and family
finances, and when personal financial problems do occur, the
secretaries are not providing adequate supervision to ensure
that service members and their families regain financial
security.
Accordingly, the committee directs the secretaries of the
military departments to conduct a comprehensive examination of
the personal financial management programs operated within
their respective departments. The examination shall include at
a minimum an assessment of the severity and type of personal
financial challenges confronting service members, the magnitude
of personal debt accumulated by service members, the adequacy
of training and assistance programs available to service
members, and the merits of other programs recommended to meet
the needs of service members.
The committee further directs the Secretary of Defense to
consolidate and review the examinations conducted by the
secretaries of the military departments, identify the best
practices from each examination, and assess the need to improve
and standardize the programs operated by the secretaries of the
military departments. The committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to report the findings of his review to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services by March 31, 2002.
The Right of Former Prisoners of War Forced to Work as Slave Laborers
During World War II to Sue Japanese Corporations for Mistreatment
The committee believes that the inhumane treatment of U.S.
prisoners of war (POWs) at the hands of Japanese corporations
that benefited from their efforts as slave laborers during
World War II is a matter that requires new attention by the
United States Government. The committee believes that these
POWs are deserving of the opportunity to seek a just settlement
from the Japanese corporations in the courts. The committee
believes that the success of other claimants in gaining
reparations from the Japanese nation for World War II
misconduct signals a new era of reconciliation that must now
include the U.S. POWs forced to work as slave laborers. The
committee believes that the United States government should
reconsider its formal opposition to the court actions filed by
the U.S. POW slave laborers from World War II and apply the
resources of the Department of State and the Department of
Justice to the task of assisting these deserving former POWs to
obtain proper settlements to their claims.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances
Section 601--Increase in Basic Pay for Fiscal Year 2002
This section would increase basic pay a minimum of six
percent for all enlisted members of the uniformed services and
a minimum of five percent for all officers effective January 1,
2002. The section would provide additional increases to mid-
grade and senior noncommissioned officers, and mid-grade
officers to maintain incentives to serve throughout the
enlisted career and to increase incentives to retain junior
officers and highly skilled enlisted members in a competitive
private sector economy.
This raise fulfills the President's commitment to add $1.0
billion to pay for the uniformed services. The combined across-
the-board and targeted raise would be the equivalent of a 6.9
percent across-the-board raise and would reduce the pay gap
between military and private sector pay increases over time
from 10.4 percent to 7.5 percent.
Section 602-Basic Pay Rate for Certain Reserve Commissioned Officers
with Prior Service as an Enlisted Member or Warrant Officer
This section would authorize reserve component officers in
pay grades 0-1, 0-2, or 0-3 who are not on active duty but have
accumulated a minimum of 1,460 points credited toward reserve
retirement while serving as a warrant officer or as a warrant
officer and enlisted member to be paid at the same rate as
active duty officers credited with at least four years of
service as a warrant officer or as a warrant officer and
enlisted member.
Section 603--Subsistence Allowances
This section would make clarifying changes of an
administrative nature to the basic allowance for subsistence
(BAS) program to facilitate the termination of the transitional
BAS program effective January 1, 2002.
Section 604--Eligibility for Basic Allowance for Housing While Between
Permanent Duty Stations
This section would require the secretaries of the military
departments to pay members of the uniformed services in pay
grades below E-4 (with less than 4 years of service) a
temporary housing allowance while on travel or leave status
between permanent duty stations.
Section 605--Uniform Allowance for Officers
This section would clarify that an additional allowance of
$200 for uniforms may be paid to an officer so long as any
previous allowance received did not exceed $400.
Section 606--Family Separation Allowance for Certain Members Electing
to Serve Unaccompanied Tour of Duty
This section would require the secretaries of the military
departments to pay family separation allowance to members of
the uniformed services who elect to serve unaccompanied tours
of duty because the movement of dependents of the member to the
permanent duty station is denied for certified medical reasons.
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays
Section 611--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonus and Special Pay
Authorities for Reserve Forces
This section would extend the authority for the special pay
for health care professionals who serve in the selected reserve
in critically short wartime specialties, the selected reserve
reenlistment bonus, the selected reserve enlistment bonus,
special pay for enlisted members of the selected reserve
assigned to certain high priority units, the selected reserve
affiliation bonus, the ready reserve enlistment and
reenlistment bonus, and the prior service enlistment bonus
until December 31, 2002. The provision would also extend the
authority for repayment of educational loans for certain health
care professionals who serve in the selected reserve until
January 1, 2003.
Section 612--One-Year Extension of Certain Bonus and Special Pay
Authorities for Nurse Officer Candidates, Registered Nurses, and Nurse
Anesthetists
This section would extend the authority for the nurse
officer candidate accession program, the accession bonus for
registered nurses, and the incentive special pay for nurse
anesthetists until December 31, 2002.
Section 613--One-Year Extension of Other Bonus and Special Pay
Authorities
This section would extend the authority for the aviation
officer retention bonus, reenlistment bonus for active members,
enlistment bonus for active members, special pay for nuclear
qualified officers extending the period of active service,
nuclear career accession bonus, the nuclear career annual
incentive bonus, and the retention bonus for members with
critical skills to December 31, 2002.
Section 614--Conforming Accession Bonus for Dental Officers Authority
with Authorities for Other Special Pay and Bonuses
This section would conform the expiration date of the
accession bonus for dental officers with the expiration dates
of other special pays and bonuses. The section would extend the
authority to pay accession bonuses to dental officers until
December 31, 2002.
Section 615--Additional Type of Duty Resulting in Eligibility for
Hazardous Duty Incentive Pay
This section would authorize members of the uniformed
services to be paid hazardous duty incentive pay for duties
involving regular participation as a member of a team
conducting visit, board, search, and seizure aboard vessels in
support of maritime interdiction operations.
Section 616--Equal Treatment of Reservists Performing Inactive-Duty
Training for Receipt of Aviation Career Incentive Pay
This section would entitle qualified reserve aviators to be
paid the full amount of monthly Aviation Career Incentive Pay
in the same amount as paid to active duty aviators with the
same number of years of aviation service.
Section 617--Secretarial Discretion in Prescribing Submarine Duty
Incentive Pay Rates
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
prescribe the amount of submarine duty incentive pay by grade
and years of service within a maximum of $1,000 per month. The
committee believes this new flexibility will allow the
Secretary to respond more quickly to recruiting and retention
problems within the submarine force.
Section 618--Imposition of Critical Wartime Skill Requirement for
Eligibility for Individual Ready Reserve Bonus
This section would amend the eligibility criteria for
payment of a bonus to individuals enlisting, reenlisting, or
extending an enlistment in the individual ready reserve. The
bonus would no longer be paid to individuals with combat or
combat support skills, but would be paid to individuals with a
skill or specialty designated by the service secretary as
critically short to meet wartime requirements.
Section 619--Installment Payment Authority for 15-Year Career Status
Bonus
This section would authorize members of the uniformed
services to elect to be paid the 15-year career status bonus in
a lump sum or one of a series of annual installment options.
Section 322 of title 37, United States Code, requires the 15-
year career status bonus for military members entering service
on or after August 1, 1986, to be paid in a lump sum of
$30,000. The options for annual installment payments would be
$15,000 per year over two years, $10,000 per year over three
years, $7,500 per year over four years, or $6,000 per year over
five years.
Section 620--Accession Bonus for New Officers
This section would authorize the service secretaries to pay
an accession bonus of up to $100,000 to officer candidates who
enter into written service agreements to accept commissions as
officers.
Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances
Section 631--Minimum Per Diem Rate for Travel and Transportation
Allowance for Travel Performed Upon a Change of Permanent Station and
Certain Other Travel
This section would require the service secretaries to pay
members of the uniformed services ordered to change permanent
duty stations the per diem rate established in the federal
travel regulation for civilian employees authorized per diem
while changing permanent duty stations.
Section 632--Payment or Reimbursement of Temporary Subsistence Expenses
This section would increase from $110 to $180 per day the
maximum amount that may be paid to members of the uniformed
services as reimbursement for temporary lodging and subsistence
expenses incurred in the United States as result of a permanent
change of station. The section would also authorize payment for
temporary lodging and subsistence expenses to officers
reporting to their first permanent duty station.
Section 633--Increased Weight Allowance for Transportation of Baggage
and Household Effects for Junior Enlisted Members
This section would increase the maximum weight allowance
for shipment of household effects for enlisted military members
in grades E-4 and below. The new allowance for members in pay
grade E-4 with less than two years of service would be 8,000
pounds for members with dependents, and 7,000 pounds for
members without dependents. The new allowance for members in
pay grades E-1 through E-3 would be 8,000 pounds for members
with dependents, and 5,000 pounds for members without
dependents.
Section 634--Reimbursement of Members for Mandatory Pet Quarantine Fees
for Household Pets
This section would authorize an increase from $275 to $675
per change of station in the amount of reimbursement for pet
quarantine fees the service secretaries may pay to members of
the uniformed services.
Section 635--Availability of Dislocation Allowance for Married Member,
Whose Spouse is a Member, Assigned to Military Family Housing
This section would require service secretaries to pay
members of the uniformed services who are married to other
members and have no dependents a dislocation allowance when the
members are assigned to military family housing at a new
permanent duty station. The section would specify that only one
member of the married couple may receive such a dislocation
allowance.
Section 636--Elimination of Prohibition on Receipt of Dislocation
Allowance by Members Ordered to First Duty Station
This section would authorize the payment of dislocation
allowance to members of the uniformed services ordered from
their homes to their first duty stations.
Section 637--Partial Dislocation Allowance Authorized for Housing Moves
Ordered for Government Convenience
This section would authorize the service secretaries to pay
a $500 partial dislocation allowance to members of the
uniformed services who are ordered to occupy or vacate
government family housing to permit privatization, renovation,
or other reason unrelated to changes in permanent station.
Section 638--Allowances for Travel Performed in Connection with Members
Taking Authorized Leave Between Consecutive Overseas Tours
This section would authorize the service secretaries to
designate the locations to which members of the uniformed
services may travel at government expense while on leave
between consecutive overseas tours. Section 411b of title 37,
United States Code, specifies that the distance that a member
of the uniformed services may travel at government expense when
authorized leave tours may not exceed the distance from the
overseas duty location to the member's home of record. The
committee believes the service secretaries can best determine
the travel destination that is most advantageous to the member
and cost effective to the government.
Section 639--Funded Student Travel as Part of School-Sponsored Exchange
Programs
This section would expand the circumstances for which the
service secretaries may pay service members stationed overseas
a transportation allowance for dependent students. The section
would authorize a transportation allowance for students
participating in programs of less than one year located outside
the continental United States and approved by the institution
in the continental United States normally attended. The section
would allow the allowance to be paid so long as the cost of
that transportation does not exceed the cost of roundtrip
transportation to the institution normally attended.
Subtitle D--Retirement and Survivor Benefit Matters
Section 641--Contingent Authority for Concurrent Receipt of Military
Retired Pay and Veterans' Disability Compensation
This section would authorize retirement qualified members
of the uniformed services to receive Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) disability compensation without a reduction in
retired pay. In the case of a member who receives a disability
retirement, the section would allow the retired pay to be
reduced, but only to the extent that the member's retired pay
exceeds the amount of retired pay to which the member would
have been entitled based solely on the member's years of
service. The effective date of the section would be contingent
upon completing both of the actions outlined below.
(1) The President must submit a legislative proposal
in an annual budget request that fully offsets the
``PayGo'' costs of the initiative.
(2) Following the submission of the legislative
initiative by the President, Congress must enact
legislation with the express purpose of offsetting the
``PayGo'' costs of the initiative.
The committee is opposed to reducing military members'
retired pay to offset the receipt of compensation for service
connected disabilities paid by the VA. The committee believes
that retirees are entitled to receive both the retired pay for
which they contributed years of faithful service and the VA
compensation for a service connected disability intended to
recognize a lifelong limitation on earning potential.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Section 651--Funeral Honors Duty Allowance for Retired Members
This section would authorize the secretaries of the
military departments to pay retired members an allowance for
performing funeral honors duty.
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS
OVERVIEW
Enactment of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398),
brought with it the most significant expansion of health care
benefits since implementation, in 1965, of the Civilian Health
And Medical Program of the Uniformed Services. The committee
commends the Secretary of Defense for the smooth implementation
of the TRICARE Senior Pharmacy benefit, which will bring
critically important prescription drugs to Medicare eligible
military retirees and their eligible family members. The
committee is aware that in fiscal year 2002 the Department of
Defense must achieve an equally smooth implementation of the
new benefits provided to Medicare eligible military retirees
and their eligible beneficiaries under the TRICARE For Life
program. With this in mind, the committee limited its
recommended changes to TRICARE in fiscal year 2002 to only
those needed to facilitate implementation of TRICARE For Life
or to significantly improve already existing programs.
The committee was gratified that the President's defense
health budget request for fiscal year 2002 was based on more
realistic cost and budgeting assumptions. This combined with a
commitment to fully fund the Defense Health Program (DHP),
including the significantly improved benefit, led to a $6
billion, one-year increase in the DHP funding. Nevertheless,
the committee remains concerned that funds appropriated for the
DHP are disproportionately allocated toward purchasing care in
the private sector while the direct care system of military
treatment facilities continues to languish from a lack of
investment in maintenance and repair of facilities. As a
consequence, fewer eligible beneficiaries are able to receive
the care they need in the venue they prefer, the military
hospitals and clinics of the direct care system. The committee
is concerned that this dearth of funding for the direct care
system forces patients into the private sector further driving
up the cost of the defense health program and severely limiting
the resources available for treating patients in the direct
care system. At the behest of the Under Secretary of Defense
for Personnel and Readiness, the committee has, for the time
being, refrained from segregating DHP funds authorized for the
operations of military treatment facilities from those funds
required to purchase care in the private sector. The committee
expects to be kept informed of the Under Secretary's efforts to
allocate defense health resources in a manner that will
maximize the effectiveness of the entire DHP.
The committee is pleased with the extent to which the
defense health personnel in the office of the Secretary of
Defense engaged the private non-governmental groups
representing the interests of the beneficiaries of the military
health care system during deliberations on the implementation
of the TRICARE Senior Pharmacy and TRICARE For Life programs.
The committee encourages the Secretary to continue to reach out
to beneficiaries of the military health care system and to
begin to seek similar participation from other key stakeholders
including the Department of Defense's managed care support
contractors. Early participation of the managed care support
contractors could help avoid the unexpected budget overruns
experienced for the last few years.
The committee also notes the relatively minuscule efforts
made by the Department of Defense and the Department of
Veterans Affairs toward increasing medical resource sharing.
While the committee requires some specific actions to improve
sharing, the committee expects the Secretary of Defense to
increase efforts with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to seek
more opportunities to maximize the use of all health care
resources in providing services to beneficiaries of the two
health care delivery systems keeping in mind the missions of
the two Departments.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Health Care Benefits for Members of the Reserve Components
The committee is aware that the TRICARE health benefits
program is a valuable active component recruitment and
retention tool and might be a useful tool in the recruitment
and retention of national guard and reserve members. Therefore,
the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a
study of options for providing TRICARE benefits to all national
guard and reserve personnel and their families. The study
should evaluate, at a minimum, permitting national guard and
reserve personnel to buy into the TRICARE standard level of
benefits. In addition to determining the annual premium amount
if national guard and reserve members paid the entire amount,
the study should also consider the option of cost sharing the
annual premium charge between the government and the military
member and, alternatively, between the employer and the
military member. The committee expects the Secretary of Defense
to consider the views of national guard and reserve personnel
and their families, the non-governmental groups representing
the interests of members of the national guard and reserves,
and the employers of national guard and reserve members. For
each cost sharing option, the study should evaluate the
propensity of both military members and employers to
participate in the program. The report shall be submitted to
the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee
on Armed Services by March 31, 2002.
Military Health Care System Information Management
The committee notes and applauds the efforts made by the
Department of Defense (DOD) to establish and modernize its
medical-related clinical, cost, budget, and management
information systems. The committee also notes that medicine and
the unique missions of military medicine are changing rapidly
and is interested in learning the state of the Department's
information systems, any gaps or shortcomings in the data
collected or its accuracy and timeliness, and new initiatives
that need to be established to correct shortcomings identified.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to undertake a
comprehensive study of DOD medical data systems that are
designed to facilitate and/or track management, clinical
treatment, system performance evaluation, costs, manpower, and
enrollment. The study should examine the capability of present
and planned systems to meet stated goals and objectives,
progress on implementing systems, shortcomings in existing
systems, data systems necessary to implement the new TRICARE
For Life benefit, and an assessment of the ability of the
Department of Defense to exchange clinical and management
information with other federal and state agencies and private
sector health services providers in a timely and reliable
manner. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
undertake the study by engaging afederally funded research and
development center with experience and expertise in information
systems, military health care systems, and military affairs. The
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit an interim report
to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on
Armed Services by March 29, 2002, and a final report to the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services
by March 31, 2003.
North Chicago Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Naval
Hospital, Great Lakes, Illinois
The committee notes the current resource sharing agreement
between the North Chicago Veterans Affairs Medical Center
(NCVAMC) and the Naval Hospital, Great Lakes, Illinois (NHGL).
These two facilities are in close proximity and offer
significant additional opportunities to share services,
programs, and facilities. The Department of the Navy is engaged
in conducting an economic analysis of the potential requirement
for a modern facility to replace the aging NHGL. The Department
of Veterans Affairs has an underused inpatient facility at the
NCVAMC. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy and the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs to develop a plan to jointly make
maximum use of the NCVAMC. The Secretary of the Navy and the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall consult on further
development of joint health care delivery infrastructure,
including any future option to replace the NHGL, or to renovate
the NCVAMC to better accommodate needs of the Navy to support
the Great Lakes Naval Training Station's health care needs. If
the two Secretaries determine to further renovate the NCVAMC or
propose construction of a new facility, the committee expects
these future health care facilities to be jointly operated by
the Department of Veterans Affairs and the United States Navy.
TRICARE in Illinois
The committee notes that many TRICARE beneficiaries
enrolled for their care in the area of Naval Training Center,
Great Lakes, Illinois, are having difficulty securing specialty
care under TRICARE. The committee is concerned that many
beneficiaries must resort to seeking care outside of the state
of Illinois because of the lack of a robust network of
specialty care providers willing to provide services under
TRICARE in Illinois. The committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services by March 31, 2002, on
actions taken to augment the Northern Illinois TRICARE provider
network and the extent to which the dearth of network specialty
providers has been relieved.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--TRICARE Program
Section 701--Implementing Cost-Effective Payment Rates Under the
TRICARE Program
This section would implement reforms of TRICARE payment
methods to bring consistency of payment methods to all TRICARE
programs. The section would require the Secretary of Defense to
base TRICARE program payment rates on payment rates used by the
Medicare program, or similar rates based on Medicare payment
methods. The payment rates would apply to health care services
for civilian sector institutional and other non-institutional
providers, except where the Secretary of Defense determines the
rates to be impractical. The section would also prohibit
balance billing of beneficiaries by institutional providers for
any amount in excess of the CHAMPUS/TRICARE payment amount, and
limit balance billing by non-institutional providers to the 15%
rate allowed by Medicare.
Section 702--Waiver of Nonavailability Statement or Preauthorization
Requirement
This section would amend section 721 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-
398) by requiring the Secretary of Defense to notify the Senate
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services at least sixty days prior to implementing a prior
authorization requirement under section 721 and mandating a
maximum period for exception decisions made under the
authority. The section would also prescribe the geographic
limits affected by any specific prior authorization
requirement.
Section 703--Improvements in Administration of the TRICARE Program
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
enter into new contracts for support of delivery of health care
under TRICARE by providing flexibility in the choice of
contract vehicle. The section would also permit the Secretary
of Defense to reduce the minimum nine-month start-up for new
contracts. The committee recognizes that the health care
environment in the United States has changed significantly
since the first managed care support contracts were awarded in
1994 and that, as a result, the Secretary of Defense may
require more flexibility in selecting the most effective
contract type for future managed care support contracts.
Section 704--Sub-Acute and Long-Term Care Program Reform
This section would reform the Department of Defense Program
for care provided in skilled nursing facilities or at home.
Full implementation of the new TRICARE For Life benefits makes
it essential to coordinate the benefits structure provided in
skilled nursing facilities and through home health programs.
The committee is also aware of the unique challenges faced by
active duty families supporting a severely disabled family
memberand includes a subsection which would significantly
enhance active duty families' ability to care for these family members,
especially when the active duty sponsor is deployed. The committee is
also interested in the future relationship between the TRICARE sub-
acute care benefit and benefits offered under the Long Term Care
Security Act (Public Law 106-265). The section would require the
Secretary of Defense to report to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services on the feasibility
and desirability of establishing direct benefit linkages between
TRICARE and the Long Term Care Security Act.
Section 705--Reimbursement of Travel Expenses of a Parent, Guardian or
Responsible Family Member of a Minor Covered Beneficiary
This section would amend section 1074i of title 10, United
States Code, by requiring the Secretary of Defense to reimburse
the reasonable travel expenses of a parent or guardian of a
minor who is required to travel for specialty care services
outside the limits specified in section 1074i of title 10,
United States Code. The committee is concerned that the
original provision could be interpreted in a way that would not
authorize reimbursement for the reasonable travel expenses of a
parent or guardian of a minor eligible beneficiary.
Subtitle B--Other Matters
Section 711--Prohibition Against Requiring Military Retirees to Receive
Health Care Solely Through the Department of Defense
This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from
implementing a policy of forced choice enrollment by military
retirees who are eligible for care in the health care
facilities and programs of both the Department of Defense and
the Department of Veterans Affairs. The committee was pleased
with the establishment of the President's Task Force to Improve
Health Care Delivery for Our Nation's Veterans (Task Force) and
expects the Task Force to address the issue of mandatory
enrollment during its deliberations and in the final report.
Therefore, the committee believes any mandatory enrollment
policy implemented prior to the Task Force's deliberations and
report would be premature.
Section 712--Trauma and Medical Care Pilot Program
This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a pilot program under which the Brooke Army Medical
Center and the Wilford Hall Air Force Medical Center in San
Antonio, Texas, (the medical centers) may charge civilians who
are not covered TRICARE beneficiaries, fees representing the
actual costs of trauma and other medical care provided. The
section would also permit the medical centers to use the funds
collected under the program for various activities related to
trauma training and operation of the medical centers.
Section 713--Enhancement of Medical Product Development
This section would amend section 980 of title 10, United
States Code, by authorizing the Secretary of Defense to waive
the prohibition against the use of human subjects in research
in order to advance research into the treatment of combat
casualties. The committee is concerned that current
restrictions on the use of human subjects in medical research
severely limits the ability to conduct focused trauma treatment
research. As a result, many products with direct applicability
to the treatment of battle casualties are precluded from the
kinds of tests required for approval of the Food and Drug
Administration.
Section 714--Repeal of Obsolete Report Requirement
This section would repeal a reporting requirement in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public
Law 106-65; 1-U.S.C. 1074g note) by striking subsection 701(d).
The committee notes that the reporting requirement was
superseded by enactment of the TRICARE Senior Pharmacy program.
Section 715--Clarifications and Improvements Regarding the Department
of Defense Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund
This section would clarify that the Department of Defense
Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund (Fund) covers all
health care programs and activities of the Department of
Defense through which health care services are provided to
Medicare-eligible military retirees and their eligible
dependents, including those programs and activities purchased
in the private sector and the programs and activities through
which health care services are provided in the direct care
system of military treatment facilities. The section would also
clarify the applicability of the Fund to the Coast Guard, the
commissioned corps of the Public Health Service, and the
commissioned corps of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. The section would also authorize the Secretary
of Defense to enter into agreements with the service
secretaries responsible for the other uniformed services to
arrange for contributions into the Fund by the other service
secretaries.
TITLE VIII--ACQUISTION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT AND RELATED
MATTERS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Extraordinary Contractual Actions
The committee is concerned with the Department of Defense
(DOD) use of the authority granted in section 1431 of title 50,
United States Code, to enter into contracts when it is deemed
that such contract would facilitate the national defense.
Executive Order 10789, expands upon the statutory authority by
stating that contractual provisions which provide that the
United States will hold harmless and indemnify the contractor
against any claims or losses shall apply only to claims or
losses arising out of risks that the contract defines as
unusually hazardous or nuclear in nature. In December 2000, DOD
entered into an indemnification contract with an entity
providing satellite communications and agreed to indemnify the
contractor against claims for damages from unusually hazardous
risk associated with certain satellites. It is the committee's
understanding that the unusually hazardous risk is the concern
that some satellites would to fall out of orbit and descend
into the Earth's atmosphere. The committee questions whether
this concern meets the required standard of an unusually
hazardous or nuclear risk. In addition, the committee notes
that the contractor relies upon the same satellite
constellation to provide military and commercial
communications. In other words, the DOD is providing
indemnification to a contractor for work that is not unique or
solely provided to DOD. The committee expects that DOD will, in
the future, use the available statutory discretion with greater
prudence.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy and Management
Section 801--Acquisition Milestones
This section would amend various sections of title 10,
United States Code, to update references to the phases of
acquisition to reflect changes in Department of Defense
acquisition policy.
Section 802--Acquisition Workforce Qualifications
This section would amend section 1724 of title 10, United
States Code, to authorize the Secretary of Defense to hire an
individual into the acquisition workforce on a three-year
probationary period if the individual has a college degree or
24 semester credit hours in business. This probationary period
would allow the individual to complete the education
requirements defined in title 10, United States Code. This
section would also provide an additional exception to the
education requirements for those individuals in the contingency
contracting force. This section would also clarify the
committee's original intent to grandfather all employment
qualifications in effect prior to enactment of section 808 of
the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398).
Section 803--Two-Year Extension of Program Applying Simplified
Procedures to Certain Commercial Items
This section would extend for two years a pilot program
authorizing the Secretary of Defense to use simplified
acquisition procedures for the purchase of commercial items not
greater than $5.0 million.
Section 804--Contracts for Services to Be Performed Outside the United
States
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
contract with individuals or organizations to perform services
in countries with which the United States has no Status of
Forces Agreement (SOFA). In nations with which the United
States has negotiated a SOFA, that agreement establishes the
procedures by which the Secretary of Defense employs foreign
nationals in support of the armed forces. This provision would
provide the Secretary of Defense with the authority to contract
for local national labor in the absence of a SOFA.
Section 805--Codification and Modification of ``Berry Amendment''
Requirements
This section would codify the Department of Defense (DOD)
domestic source requirements commonly known as the ``Berry
Amendment''. The provision would also require DOD to notify
Congress and the public of a decision to waive the domestic
source requirement. The waiver would not come into effect until
30 days after congressional notification.
Subtitle B--Erroneous Payments Recovery
Section 811--Short Title
This section would name the subtitle as the ``Erroneous
Payments Recovery Act of 2001.''
Section 812--Identification of Errors Made by Executive Agencies in
Payments to Contractors and Recovery of Amounts Erroneously Paid
This section would require executive agencies to conduct a
program to recover erroneously made payments. Each agency may
determine the types of contracts for which recovery activities
are most appropriate, based on policy guidelines and procedures
the Office of Management and Budget issues.
Section 813-Disposition of Recovered Funds
This section would authorize funds collected under a
recovery audit to be available to reimburse executive agencies'
and auditors' costs. This section would also authorize a
portion of the returned funds to be available to support a
management improvement program.
Section 814--Sources of Recovery Services
This section would ensure that executive agencies consider
various auditing services within both government and the
private sector when carrying out a recovery audit program.
Section 815--Management Improvement Programs
This section would provide an executive agency the option
to carry out a management improvement program in order to
address problems that contribute to the occurrence of erroneous
payments.
Section 816--Reports
This section would require the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget to submit an annual report to Congress
evaluating executive agencies' recovery audits, the costs the
agencies have incurred, and the amount actually recovered.
Section 817--Relationship to Authority of Inspectors General
This section would ensure that nothing in this subtitle
impairs the authority of an inspector general.
Section 818--Privacy Protections
This section would prohibit a nongovernmental entity from
disclosing the identity of an individual for any purpose other
than auditing activity.
Section 819--Definition
This section would define an executive agency.
TITLE IX--DEPARMTENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Regional Centers and China Center
The committee notes the interest of the Department of
Defense in consolidating the legislative authorities under
which it operates five regional centers for security studies.
However, the Department's proposal would go beyond merely
consolidating existing authorities and would broaden and expand
the authority to operate some of these centers by allowing DOD
to absorb additional costs that are currently not borne by the
Department. The committee does not support this action.
Moreover, the committee is concerned about the policy
guidance given to the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies
on the status of Taiwanese nationals participating in
conferences with representatives from the People's Republic of
China. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary to
report to the committee no later than December 31, 2001 on the
guidance issued by the Department to the Asia-Pacific Center
for Security Studies regarding contact with officials from
Taiwan and the People's Republic of China and the participation
of Chinese and Taiwanese nationals in conferences, symposia,
and other activities of the center. In addition, the report
should include a description of how the Department's guidance
is being implemented by the center.
Finally, the committee notes that the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65)
established a Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs
and required the Department to submit a report to the committee
by February 1, 2001 detailing the proposed budget and timetable
for initial and full operations of the center. This report has
not yet been submitted. The committee is concerned that the
Department has not acted expeditiously to implement the
requirements established in Public Law 106-65. Consequently,
the committee directs the Secretary to submit the required
report expeditiously, along with an explanation of the reasons
for the delay and any recommendations the Secretary has for
ensuring the viability of the center.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 901--Further Reductions in Defense Acquisition and Support
Workforce
This section would reduce the number of personnel assigned
to the defense acquisition and support workforce by 13,000 in
fiscal year 2002.
The committee continues to believe that the Department of
Defense must significantly reorganize and streamline its
acquisition structure for a number of reasons. First, the
military services' priorities of interoperability and jointness
and the increasing sophistication of systems will require
advances in the way weapons systems are acquired. Second, at a
time of tightening budget constraints, the Department must
ensure that combat needs are not crowded out by bloated support
costs, including excessive overhead costs from the acquisition
workforce.
The committee believes that personnel reductions must be a
significant part of any effort to bring the acquisition support
costs of the Department in line with the resources dedicated to
its combat missions. However, the committee is also concerned
with the trend since the mid-1990s to outsource acquisition
functions while reducing the number of personnel in acquisition
organizations. According to the report required by section 343
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000
(Public Law 106-65), the Department paid 734,000 full-time
contractors in fiscal year 1999 to perform many acquisition
functions at the same time it maintained over 300,000 civilian
and military employees in acquisition assignments. The
committee is disturbed by this trend and believes it must be
addressed as part of a fundamental effort to reform the defense
acquisition system.
Section 902--Sense of Congress on Establishment of an Office of
Transformation in the Department of Defense
This section would express the sense of Congress on the
Administration's decision to establish an Office of
Transformation within the Department of Defense (DOD). The
committee believes the armed services must implement
transformation to meet operational challenges and exploit
opportunities resulting from changes in the threat environment
and the emergence of new technologies. The committee notes and
supports steps that the services have taken so far to promote
transformation. However, the committee also notes that the
findings of a 1999 Defense Science Board report on
transformation concluded that there was no overall DOD vision
for transformation, no ``road map'', no metrics to measure
progress, and little sense of urgency. The establishment of an
Office of Transformation will begin to address these
shortfalls.
To assure the effectiveness of the Office of
Transformation, the committee believes three key elements must
be in place: The mission and functions of the office must be
adequately defined; the Director of Transformation must have
direct access to the Secretary of Defense; and the Director
should have control of sufficient funding to sponsor key
transformation efforts.
The committee believes that the mission of the Director of
Transformation should be to develop force transformation
strategies ensuring linkage to the military strategic functions
of preparing the future military and dissuading potential
military competitors. The Director should make recommendations
to the Secretary for ensuring a continuous and broadly focused
transformation process. The Director should also collaborate on
service and joint acquisition and experimentation efforts,
selectively fund experimentation efforts, identify promising
operational concepts and technologies, and sponsor other
transformation activities as appropriate.
The committee believes the Director should have control of
funding adequate for sponsoring selective prototyping efforts,
wargames, and studies and analyses, as well as for appropriate
staffing of the Office of Transformation. To accomplish these
tasks, the committee believes that it is critical that this
office be provided sufficient budgetary resources to accomplish
its mission.
Section 903--Revised Joint Report On Establishment of National
Collaborative Information Analysis Capability
This section would require the Secretary of Defense and the
Director of Central Intelligence to submit a revised joint
report assessing the alternatives for the establishment of a
national collaborative information analysis capability. The
report, which would include draft legislation required to
establish the preferred architecture, would be required to be
submitted coincident with the submission of the budget request
for fiscal year 2003.
Section 904--Elimination of Triennial Report by Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces
This section would amend title 10 to consolidate reporting
requirements related to the roles of the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff and missions of the armed forces. The current
law requires that the Chairman review the assignment of the
roles and missions of the armed forces every three years, or at
the request of the President or the Secretary of Defense, and
to prepare a separate report, which is not required to be
submitted to Congress. This section would eliminate the current
reporting requirement, and require that the Department of
Defense's assessment of the roles and missions of the armed
services be conducted as part of the Quadrennial Defense Review
(QDR) process. The results of the assessment would be included
in the final report of the QDR and submitted to Congress.
Section 905--Repeal of Requirement for Semiannual Reports Through March
2003 on Activities of Joint Requirements Oversight Council
This section would repeal section 916 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-
398) that requires the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to
submit a semiannual report to the Senate Committee on Armed
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services on specific
activities of the Joint Requirements Oversight Council through
March 1, 2003.
Section 906--Correction of References to Air Mobility Command
This section would change all references to ``Military
Airlift Command'' contained in title 10 and title 37, United
States Code, to ``Air Mobility Command.''
Section 907--Organizational Alignment Change for Director for
Expeditionary Warfare
This section would amend section 5038(a) of title 10,
United States Code, with respect to the specific office of the
Deputy Chief of Naval Operations within which the Director for
Expeditionary Warfare shall be located.
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Arms Control Implementation
The budget request contained $228.5 million for arms
control implementation activities, representing a slight
increase from the fiscal year 2001 appropriated level of $223.6
million. The committee recommends $223.6 million, a decrease of
$4.9 million from the budget request.
The budget request contained an increase in the operations
and maintenance accounts for the Defense Threat Reduction
Agency's arms control implementation program of $18.7 million
over the fiscal year 2001 appropriated level. This reflects a
30 percent increase. The committee recommends a $4.9 million
reduction to the request without prejudice.
Counter-Drug Activities
Overview
The Department of Defense budget request for fiscal year
2002 for counter-drug activities sustains the Department's
level of effort in this important area by providing aircraft
and ships for detection and monitoring, military personnel,
intelligence support, communications systems, and training to
domestic and foreign law enforcement agencies. The committee is
aware that the Department is currently considering significant
changes to its counter-drug program as part of a broader
assessment of non-traditional activities. While the committee
continues to support a robust counter-drug role for the
Department, the committee believes that such a review is
appropriate. However, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to report in advance of any reorganization initiatives
in this area proposed to be implemented during fiscal year
2002.
The Department of Defense budget request for fiscal year
2002 contained $820.4 million for drug interdiction and
counter-drug activities, in addition to $166.8 million for
operational tempo, which is included within the operating
budgets of the military services. This represents a net
decrease of $161.2 million from the fiscal year 2001 budget in
execution primarily as a result of $184.1 million provided to
the Department in emergency supplemental appropriations for
Colombia contained in the Emergency Supplemental Act, 2000
(Public Law 106-246), which was largely obligated in fiscal
year 2001.
The committee recommends an authorization for fiscal year
2002 Department of Defense counter-drug activities as follows:
[Dollars in thousands]
FY02 Drug Interdiction & Counter-Drug Request................. $820,381
Educate America's Youth................................... 25,262
Increase Safety of Citizens............................... 78,489
Reduce Health & Social Costs.............................. 77,650
Shield America's Frontiers................................ 334,459
Break Drug Sources of Supply.............................. 304,521
Recommended Decreases:....................................
Tethered Aerostat Radar System............................ 5,900
Peru Support.............................................. 4,000
Counter-Drug Tanker Operations............................ 1,800
Recommended Increases:....................................
Operation Caper Focus..................................... 5,000
Southwest Border Fence.................................... 6,700
Recommendation................................................ $820,381
Items of Special Interest
Counter-drug tanker operations
The budget request contained $2.0 million for KC-135 tanker
operations in support of counter-drug E-3 Airborne Early
Warning and Control System (AWACS) missions. The committee
notes that the prior year budget request was only $200,000 for
this activity. Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease
of $1.8 million for this activity.
Operation Caper Focus
The committee is aware that the fiscal year 2002 budget
request does not fully support Operation Caper Focus, an
important initiative to disrupt maritime narcotics trafficking
in the Eastern Pacific. The committee continues to support this
important operation and, therefore, recommends an increase of
$5.0 million for this purpose.
Peru support
The budget request contained $9.2 million for Peru for
counter-drug support under section 1033 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85). The
committee is aware that not more than $5.0 million will be
obligated in fiscal year 2001 for Peru support under section
1033 and, therefore, recommends a decrease of $4.0 million. The
committee also notes that the authority under section 1033 with
respect to Peru expires at the end of fiscal year 2002.
Southwest border fence
The Southwest border continues to be a heavily utilized
drug trafficking corridor into the United States. The committee
continues to support fence and road-building activities in this
area. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $6.7
million for this purpose.
Tethered Aerostat Radar System
The budget request contained $42.9 million for the Tethered
Aerostat Radar System (TARS). The committee supports the
transfer of the TARS program to another federal agency in
fiscal year 2002 and, therefore, directs that no fiscal year
2002 funding be used for purposes of facility enhancement or
aerostat modernization. Accordingly, the committee recommends a
decrease of $5.9 million in the TARS program.
OTHER MATTERS
Classification of Foreign Military Training Reports
The committee is aware that the reports required by section
2011 of title 10, United States Code, and section 2416 of title
22, United States Code, concerning Department of Defense
training of foreign military personnel are classified due to
the increasing amount of detail with respect to the U.S.
military units involved. The committee understands the basis
for a certain level of classification but also believes that
the information contained in these reports regarding foreign
military units trained is important and should, where
appropriate, be made available in an unclassified form to the
general public.
Counter-Drug Forward Operating Locations
The committee is aware that the requirement for two
Caribbean forward operating locations (FOLs) at Curacao and
Aruba, Netherlands Antilles, has been impacted by the decision
of the Department of Defense to no longer support Air National
Guard F-16 deployments to Curacao. The Emergency Supplemental
Act, 2000 (Public Law 106-246) contained $43.9 million for
infrastructure improvements at Curacao including airfield
pavement improvements, installation of aircraft rinse
facilities, and construction of a maintenance hanger. As a
result of the departure of Air National Guard aircraft from
Curacao, the committee believes the Curacao FOL will be
sufficient to accommodate Customs Service aircraft and
personnel that currently operate from Aruba. Consequently, the
committee recommends a provision (sec. 2408) that would
prohibit military construction expenditures to develop Aruba as
a Forward Operating Location.
Information Security Scholarship Program
The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense
has not developed criteria to evaluate the information
assurance programs at institutions of higher education not
designated as Centers of Academic Excellence in Information
Assurance Education. The Department currently requires
individuals who have computer and network security skills
necessary to meet specific information security assurance
requirements. Increasing the number of eligible schools will
result in additional qualified individuals. The committee urges
the Department to develop the criteria necessary to allow
qualified institutions of higher education to participate in
the Information Security Scholarship Program.
Potential Reallocation of Radio Frequency Spectrum for Third Generation
Mobile Wireless Communications
Section 1062 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) amended the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration Act (section
901 et. seq. of title 47 United States Code) to provide that
the DOD shall not surrender the use of a band of frequencies
for which it is the primary user unless an alternative band or
bands of frequencies is provided as a replacement and the
Secretaries of Commerce and Defense, and the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff certify that the alternative band or
bands provides comparable technical characteristics to maintain
essential military capability. Section 1064 of the Strom
Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
1999 (Public Law 105-261) requires the private sector to pay
relocation costs, in advance, to incumbent Federal entities
required to relocate to accommodate commercial uses.
The committee notes the growth of mobile wireless
telecommunications and the development of third generation (3G)
mobile wireless communications services. An October 2000
Presidential executive memorandum stated the need and urgency
for the United States to select radio frequency spectrum (from
frequency bands previously identified for consideration by the
World Radiocommunication Conference 2000) to satisfy the future
needs of citizens and business for mobile voice, high-speed
data, and Internet-accessible wireless capability and directed
Federal agencies to carry out the selection of the spectrum.
The National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(NTIA) and the Federal Communications Commission have
identified the 1755-1850 MHz and 2500-2690 MHz bands as
candidates.
The committee notes that the telecommunications and
Internet industry has launched a campaign for reassignment of
the frequency bands in question from primary use by the federal
government to primary use (if not exclusive use) by the private
sector. The industry is particularly interested in the 1755-
1850 MHz band because of action by European countries to begin
3G operations in this band. A potential business base of as
much as $500 billion is anticipated. Draft legislation that has
been proposed that would call for the federal government to
vacate at least 60 MHz of the 1755-1850 MHz band by 2004 and
the remainder of the band by 2008.
The committee also notes that the Department of Defense
(DOD) uses the 1755-1780 MHz band for critical national defense
systems, including satellite control, precision guided weapons
data links, tactical radio relay, precision guided munitions
and combat training systems. The Department argues that
uncoordinated sharing of the frequency band with other users is
not feasible. The costs of relocating DOD systems from the band
to another suitable band (if such a band could be identified)
are estimated at $2-4 billion and relocation could not be
accomplished until 2010 and beyond for most DOD non-space
systems and until 2017 and beyond for legacy space systems (as
late as 2030 for some satellites).
The committee further notes the General Accounting Office
report ``Defense Spectrum Management: More Analysis Needed to
Support Spectrum Use Decision for the 1755 to 1850 MHz Band,''
GAO-01-795, July 2001. The report makes recommendations to the
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Commerce to more
accurately assess the potential impact of reallocation of
frequency band and provide thetime and guidance to complete the
required planning and analysis before any decision on reallocation of
the band might be made.
The committee recognizes the competing issues of national
security and economic interest that affect the proposals for
potential reallocation of radio frequency spectrum currently
reserved for use by the Department of Defense and other Federal
agencies to 3G mobile wireless communication services. However,
the committee believes that the first priority for the federal
government is to ensure the national security of the United
States and its people.
The committee reemphasizes the requirement contained in
Section 1062 of Public Law 106-65 that alternate radio
frequency spectrum with comparable technical characteristics to
maintain essential military capability operational capabilities
must be available for use by the DOD, before frequency
currently reserved for use by the DOD can be reallocated.
Noting the GAO report that a decision to reallocate the 1755-
1850 MHz band is premature and that more adequate information
is required before such a decision might be made, the committee
intends to carefully review this matter and take further
legislative action as necessary to ensure that national
security interests are not compromised in this critical area.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Financial Matters
Section 1001--Transfer Authority
This section would provide fiscal year 2002 transfer
authority to the Department of Defense for amounts up to $2.0
billion.
Section 1002--Incorporation of Classified Annex
This section would incorporate the classified annex into
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002.
Section 1003--Limitation on Funds for Bosnia and Kosovo Peacekeeping
Operations for Fiscal Year 2002
This section would limit the amount of funds available for
peacekeeping operations in Bosnia and Kosovo to the amounts
contained in the budget request, $1,315,600,000 for operations
in Bosnia and $1,528,600,000 for operations in Kosovo. This
section would authorize the president to waive the limitation
after submitting to the Congress a written certification that
the waiver is necessary to the national security interests of
the United States. This section would also require a written
certification that the exercise of the waiver will not
adversely affect the readiness of U.S. military forces; a
report setting forth the reasons for the waiver, a discussion
of the impact of the involvement of U.S. military forces in
Balkans peacekeeping operations on U.S. military readiness; and
a supplemental appropriations request for the Department of
Defense for fiscal year 2002 costs associated with U.S.
military forces participating in, or supporting, Bosnia or
Kosovo peacekeeping operations.
Section 1004--Increase in Limitations on Administrative Authority of
the Navy to Settle Admiralty Claims
This section would increase the administrative authority of
the Navy to settle admiralty claims. It would authorize the
Secretary of the Navy to settle, or compromise, and pay any and
all admiralty claims against the United States amounting to not
more than $15 million. Any claim exceeding $15 million would
require the Navy to certify that claim to Congress. This
section would further authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
delegate his authority to settle claims to any person he
designates when the amount paid is not more than $1 million.
This section would also increase the amount the United States
might receive from an admiralty claim to $15 million. It would
further allow the Secretary of the Navy to delegate his
authority to receive claims when that amount is not more than
$1 million.
Subtitle B--Naval Vessels
Section 1011--Revision in Types of Excess Naval Vessels for which
Approval by Law Is Required for Disposal to Foreign Nations
This section would amend Section 7307 of title 10, United
States Code to revise and clarify the circumstances under which
the Navy must seek statutory authority in order to transfer or
dispose of excess naval vessels. Current law requires Congress
to enact legislation specifically authorizing a transfer to
another nation of any ship exceeding 3,000 tons in weight or
less than 20 years of age. If the ship is less than 3,000 tons
in weight or over 20 years of age, the Secretary of the Navy is
required to notify the Senate Committee on Armed Services and
the House Committee on Armed Services of the proposed transfer
and wait 30 in-session days before making the transfer. This
section would permit the transfer of non-combatant naval
vessels, as well as leased or loaned vessels previously
authorized by Congress for transfer to a foreign nation without
the requirement for a statutory enactment. The committee, for
the purposes of this section, considers a combatant naval
vessel to be a large, heavily armed ship that is designed
primarily to engage enemy forces on the high seas. This would
include battleships, cruisers, destroyers, frigates,
submarines, and aircraft carriers. The committee considers non-
combatants to include logistics and combat support ships such
as T-AO's (oilers), LST's, YTB's, and T-AGOS. This change will
provide the Navy with greater flexibility in transferring
surplus and excess ships, thereby reducing the Navy's cost of
maintenance and safe stowage.
Subtitle C--Counter-Drug Activities
Section 1021--Extension of Reporting Requirement Regarding Department
of Defense Expenditures to Support Foreign Counter-Drug Activities
This section would extend the reporting requirement
contained in section 1022 of the Floyd D. Spence National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-
398) that requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a report
to the congressional defense committees on the total amount,
type and legal basis for foreign counter-drug assistance
provided by the Department of Defense. This section would
require the Secretary to report to Congress by April 15, 2002,
on expenditures made during fiscal year 2001.
Section 1022--Authority to Transfer Tracker Aircraft Currently Used by
Armed Forces for Counter-Drug Purposes
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
transfer all Tracker aircraft to another federal agency in
fiscal year 2002. Should the Secretary not exercise the
transfer authority provided in this section by September 30,
2002, this section would prohibit the Department of Defense
from using the Tracker aircraft for counter-drug purposes after
that date.
Section 1023--Authority to Transfer Tethered Aerostat Radar System
Currently Used by Armed Forces for Counter-Drug Purposes
This section would provide the authority for the Secretary
of Defense to transfer all Tethered Aerostat Radar System
(TARS) assets to another federal agency in fiscal year 2002.
Should the Secretary not exercise the transfer authority
provided in this section by September 30, 2002, this section
would prohibit the Department of Defense from using the
Tethered Aerostat Radar System for counter-drug purposes after
that date.
Subtitle D--Reports
Section 1031--Requirement that Department of Defense Reports to
Congress be Accompanied by Electronic Version
This section would amend chapter 23 of title 10, United
States Code, to require the Department of Defense to submit to
Congress electronic versions of all unclassified required
reports, to include certifications, notifications, or other
written communications. The committee believes that this
requirement is consistent with the Department's intention to
make greater use of electronic media and will facilitate
broader dissemination of, and wider access to, official DOD
information.
Section 1032--Report on Department of Defense Role in Homeland Security
Matters
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a study on the appropriate role of the Department of
Defense in homeland security matters and to submit the results
of that study to Congress at the same time the President
submits the budget request for fiscal year 2003.
Section 1033--Revision of Annual Report to Congress on National Guard
and Reserve Component Equipment
This section would amend section 10541 of title 10, United
States Code, to modify the timing and contents of the Secretary
of Defense's annual report to Congress on national guard and
reserve equipment.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Section 1041--Department of Defense Gift Authorities
This section would clarify items which may be loaned or
given under section 7545 of title 10, United States Code.
Section 1042--Termination of Referendum Requirement Regarding
Continuation of Military Training on Island of Vieques, Puerto Rico,
and Imposition of Additional Conditions on Closure of Live-Fire
Training Range
This section would repeal the requirement, contained in
sections 1503, 1504, and 1505 of the Floyd D. Spence National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-
398), for a referendum on the future of U.S. military training
on the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico. This section would also
allow the Secretary of the Navy to cease training exercises on
Vieques provided the Chief of Naval Operations and Commandant
of the Marine Corps certify that an alternative training
facility is available. This section would require that the new
facility be available and fully capable of supporting pre-
deployment training immediately upon the cessation of
operations on Vieques. In order to make the certification, this
section would also require that the new facility be able to
support an equivalent or superior level of training for U.S.
Navy and Marine Corps units on the east coast. This training is
defined as the ability to support, at a single location,
coordinated live-fire operations including the simultaneous use
of large-scale tactical airstrikes, naval surface fire support,
artillery, and amphibious landing operations, as were conducted
on Vieques prior to April 19, 1999. This section would also
require that if training operations cease on Vieques, the Navy
retain the facility on the eastern end of the island in the
event it must be reactivated for use as a training range in
time of national emergency, and allow the Navy to enter into an
agreement with the Department of the Interior for the
management of that land.
Section 1043--Repeal of Limitation on Reductions in Peacekeeper ICBM
Missiles
This section would modify section 1302 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-
85), as amended, to allow for the retirement of the Peacekeeper
ICBM force.
Section 1044--Sense of Congress on the Importance of the Kwajalein
Missile Range/Ronald Reagan Defense Initiative Test Site at Kwajalein
Atoll
This section would express the sense of Congress that the
missile defense range and test site on Kwajalein Atoll is of
vital importance to the security of the United States and that
the Department of Defense should work to continue its long-term
relationship with this test site.
Section 1045--Transfer of Vietnam Era F-4 Aircraft to Nonprofit Museum
This section would permit the Secretary of the Air Force to
convey, without consideration, one surplus F-4 aircraft to a
nonprofit museum. This section would also require that any
aircraft transferred under this authority would be completely
demilitarized prior to transfer and that the conveyance would
be at no cost to the United States.
Section 1046--Bomber Force Structure
This section would prohibit the Department of Defense from
retiring, dismantling, transferring, or reassigning any of the
93 B-1B Lancer bombers in service as of June 1, 2001, until
Congress has received a series of studies and reports. These
reports include, the National Security Strategy, the
Quadrennial Defense Review, the Secretary of Defense Annual
Report to the President and the Congress, the Revised Nuclear
Posture Review, a report from the Secretary of Defense on
changes to the 1992 and 1995 bomber studies that warrant
changes to the bomber fleet and plans regarding new missions
for decommissioned B-1 units, a new Secretary of Defense bomber
study on the role, force structure and cost effectiveness of
the manned bomber in the future national security environment,
and a General Accounting Office study on the same issues as the
Secretary of Defense bomber study.
The committee believes that the Department's request to
reduce the B-1 fleet from 93 aircraft to 60 and consolidate the
remaining B-1Bs at two operating bases was premature. This
section would restore $100 million to the Air National Guard
Operations and Maintenance Account, Budget Activity 1, Aircraft
Operations line to keep the Air National Guard B-1s operational
into fiscal year 2002 until the results of the various reports
and studies have been analyzed. The committee expects that any
bomber force structure modifications will be made in the
context of the emerging security environment as outlined in
these various documents.
Section 1047--Technical and Clerical Amendments
This section would make a number of technical and clerical
amendments to existing law of a non-substantive basis.
TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 1101--Undergraduate Training Program for Employees of the
National Imagery and Mapping Agency
This section would authorize the National Imagery and
Mapping Agency (NIMA) to establish an undergraduate training
program to recruit employees with critical skills. The
committee notes that the National Security Agency has had
success with a similar program and expects that NIMA would use
this new authority to recruit highly talented new personnel to
the agency.
Section 1102--Pilot Program for Payment of Retraining Expenses
This section would authorize the Department of Defense
(DOD) to establish a pilot program to pay retraining expenses
for DOD employees scheduled for involuntary separation. Under
the pilot program, the Secretary of Defense may pay retraining
incentives to encourage private industry to hire and retrain
displaced DOD employees.
Section 1103--Payment of Expenses to Obtain Professional Credentials
This section would authorize federal agencies to pay for
employee credentials, professional licenses, and professional
certification. The committee believes this new authority will
enable federal agencies to assist involuntarily separated
employees to qualify for new employment and will also provide
agencies with an important new recruiting and retention
incentive.
Section 1104--Retirement Portability Elections for Certain Department
of Defense and Coast Guard Employees
This section would amend sections 8347 and 8461 of title 5,
United States Code, to repeal the requirement that an employee
who transfers between appropriated fund and nonappropriated
fund employment be vested in the retirement system of the
position the employee is vacating before the employee is
permitted to choose to remain in that retirement system.
Section 1105--Removal of Requirement that Granting Civil Service
Compensatory Time be Based on Amount of Irregular or Occasional
Overtime Work
This section would amend section 5543 of title 5, United
States Code, to repeal the requirement that compensatory time
only be granted to federal employees if the overtime performed
is categorized as irregular or occasional. Removal of these
restrictions will provide federal managers and employees with
more flexibility in the use of compensatory time.
Section 1106--Applicability of Certain Laws to Certain Individuals
Assigned to Work in the Federal Government
This section would amend section 3374 of title 5, United
States Code, to clarify that state and local government
officials detailed to work in federal agencies are subject to
the same standards of official conduct that apply to other
federal employees.
Section 1107--Limitation on Premium Pay
This section would amend section 5547 of title 5, United
States Code, to change the period used for limiting the amount
of overtime pay an employee may earn from a biweekly to an
annual basis, permitting more flexibility in scheduling
overtime across the federal government.
Section 1108--Use of Common Occupational and Health Standards as a
Basis for Differential Payments Made as a Consequence of Exposure to
Asbestos
This section would amend sections 5343 and 5545 of title 5,
United States Code, to establish a common standard for payment
of hazardous duty differential pay for reason of exposure to
asbestos for prevailing rate and general schedule federal
employees.
Section 1109--Authority for Designated Civilian Employees Abroad to Act
as a Notary
This section would amend section 1044a of title 10, United
States Code, to authorize certain Department of Defense
civilian employees serving abroad to act as notaries. This
change will provide better legal assistance services for
military members, civilian employees, and their families
assigned overseas.
Section 1110--``Monroney Amendment'' Restored to its Prior Form
This section would amend section 5343 of title 5, United
States Code, to require the Department of Defense to establish
wage schedules and rates for prevailing wage employees based on
the nearest wage area that is most similar to the wage area for
which wage rates are being established when there are
insufficient positions in the local industry upon which to
establish wage schedules and rates.
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 1201--Clarification of Authority to Furnish Nuclear Test
Monitoring Equipment to Foreign Governments
This section would amend section 2565 of title 10, United
States Code, to authorize the transfer of title to foreign
governments of U.S. nuclear test monitoring equipment on the
territory of other countries.
Section 1202--Acquisition of Logistical Support for Security Forces
This section would amend the Multinational Force and
Observers (MFO) Participation Resolution (Public Law 97-132)
that authorizes the United States to deploy peacekeepers and
observers to the Sinai to assist Egypt and Israel fulfill the
Camp David Accords. This section would authorize the President
to approve contracting out the logistical and aviation support
for the MFO mission currently performed by United States
soldiers. This section would also provide that U.S. sponsored
contract support could be provided to the MFO mission without
reimbursement by the MFO organization if the President
determines that such action enhances or supports the national
security of the United States. The committee believes that
approving contract support for the MFO will enhance the
operational capabilities of the MFO force. The committee
intends that the replacement of U.S. forces by contractors
should not be viewed as a lessening of U.S. support for the MFO
mission.
Currently, administrative and technical support is provided
by the Army's 1st Support Battalion pursuant to international
agreements with both Israel and Egypt. The agreements stipulate
the type of unit functions to be performed by the MFO in order
to comply with its treaty verification mission, particularly
aviation and logistical support. Ninety-nine U.S. soldiers
flying ten UH-1H helicopters provide aviation support for the
MFO. One hundred and fifty soldiers assigned to the U.S.
Logistical Support Unit provide general logistical support. The
United States Army intends to retire all UH-1H helicopters
during fiscal year 2003. Procuring and operating UH-60
Blackhawk helicopters would significantly increase the cost of
conducting the MFO mission and no replacement helicopters are
currently in the Army's future year defense plan for the MFO.
Approving contractor support for the MFO will allow that
mission to continue to operate UH-1H helicopters at reduced
cost without any impact in mission accomplishment.
Section 1203--Report on the Sale and Transfer of Military Hardware,
Expertise, and Technology from States of the Former Soviet Union to the
People's Republic of China
This section would amend section 1202 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-
65) to require the Secretary of Defense to submit, as part of
the existing report requirement, a one-time report to the
Congress no later than March 1, 2002 on the transfer of
equipment, expertise, and technology from former Soviet states
to the People's Republic of China.
The committee notes the strengthening political and
military relationship between Russia and China and is concerned
that growing military cooperation between these two countries
may adversely affect U.S. national security interests. The
committee is also troubled by reports regarding the
proliferation of military technologies from other former Soviet
states.
Accordingly, the committee believes it important for the
Secretary to assess the nature and scope of military
cooperation between China and the states of the former Soviet
Union and to assess the impact of such cooperation on the
ability of China's People's Liberation Army to modernize and
strengthen its military capabilities and to pose a threat to
U.S. national security interests, particularly in Asia.
Section 1204--Limitation on Funding for Joint Data Exchange Center
This section would prohibit the obligation or expenditure
of fiscal year 2002 funds for activities associated with the
Joint Data Exchange Center in Moscow, Russia, until 30 days
after the Secretary of Defense submits to Congress the
agreement required by section 1231 of the Floyd D. Spence
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public
Law 106-398) and an agreement exempting the United States from
Russian taxes and liability.
The committee is concerned by Russia's apparent
unwillingness to move forward expeditiously with this project
by agreeing to the same kinds of tax and liability exemptions
that apply to other U.S.-Russia cooperative programs. The
committee urges the Department of Defense to redouble its
efforts to seek Russia's agreement to such exemptions.
Section 1205--Extension of Authority to Provide Assistance Under
Weapons of Mass Destruction Act for Support of United Nations-Sponsored
Efforts to Inspect and Monitor Iraqi Weapons Activities
This section would extend the authority under section 1505
of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Control Act of 1992 (section
5859a of title 22, United States Code) for the Department of
Defense to expend up to $15.0 million in fiscal year 2002 in
support of the United Nations organization established for the
purpose of comprehensively accounting for all Iraqi weapons of
mass destruction items, facilities, and capabilities. The
section would also change the requirement for quarterly reports
by the Department of Defense under section 1505 to an annual
report.
Section 1206--Repeal of Requirement for Reporting to Congress on
Military Deployments to Haiti
This section would repeal the report required by section
1232 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2000 (Public Law 106-65) concerning military deployments to
Haiti.
Section 1207--Report by Comptroller General on Provision of Defense
Articles, Services, and Military Education and Training to Foreign
Countries and International Organizations
This section would require the Comptroller General of the
United States to study the benefits, costs, and readiness
impact to U.S. Armed Forces with regard to defense articles,
services, or military education and training provided under the
authority of sections 506, 516, and 552 of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961 (sections 2318, 2321j, 2348a of title
22, United States Code) or any similar provision of law. The
provision would require the Comptroller General to submit to
Congress an interim report no later than April 15, 2002, and a
final report by August 1, 2002, on the findings of the study.
The committee is concerned with the increasing amount of
foreign assistance provided by the Department of Defense under
sections 506, 516, and 552 of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 (sections 2318, 2321j, 2348a of title 22, United States
Code) and other statutory drawdown authorities that furnish
defense articles, services, and education and training to
foreign countries or international organizations. The committee
understands that the Department has executed 45 drawdowns from
1992 to 1999 with a total cost to the Department of $1.0
billion. While the committee recognizes the Department must
continue to support legitimate emergency assistance through the
drawdown process, the committee is concerned with the trend of
annual drawdowns compensating for a diminished foreign military
financing (FMF) program. The committee believes that a
comprehensive assessment and report to Congress by the
Comptroller General on the topic will provide insight as to the
merit of the various drawdown activities.
Section 1208--Limitation on Number of Military Personnel in Colombia
This section would restrict funds available to the
Department of Defense to support or maintain more than 500 U.S.
military personnel on duty in Colombia at any time. This
section would exclude from the numerical limitation any U.S.
military personnel who are in Colombia for a period of not more
than 30 days, unless expressly authorized by law, for the
purpose of rescuing or retrieving U.S. military or governmental
personnel. This section would also exempt from the limitation
U.S. military personnel assigned to the U.S. Embassy in
Colombia as an attache, as part of the security assistance
office, or the Marine Corps security contingent; service
members participating in natural disaster relief efforts; and
non-operational transient military personnel.
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE FORMER
SOVIET UNION
OVERVIEW
The budget request contained $403.0 million for cooperative
threat reduction (CTR) activities, representing a decrease of
$39.7 million from the amounts appropriated for fiscal year
2001. The request included $246.9 million for destruction and
dismantlement, $65.5 million for fissile materials and nuclear
weapons safety and storage, $41.7 million for plutonium reactor
shutdown activities in Russia, $17.0 million for biological
weapons proliferation prevention in the former Soviet Union,
$18.7 million for defense and military contacts, and $13.2
million for other program support, including administrative and
management costs.
The committee recommends the budget request.
The committee has traditionally supported the overriding
goal of the CTR program to reduce the threat to the United
States posed by the former Soviet Union's residual weapons of
mass destruction. Nevertheless, in recent years the committee
has raised numerous concerns. These include: the expansion in
the program's scope; the Department's willingness--especially
in the absence of prior congressional consultation--to absorb
project costs that Russia, in particular, has not funded; the
difficulty in determining whether assistance provided is
accomplishing intended objectives; the lack of appropriate
transparency agreements; the challenge of ensuring that
assistance provided is not directly or indirectly facilitating
the process of arms modernization; possible duplication and
redundancies in similar projects executed by multiple federal
agencies; and whether CTR activities are more appropriately
funded outside the Department of Defense.
The committee continues to believe that the focus of the
CTR program should be the elimination of those weapons that
pose the most serious and direct threat to U.S. security--first
and foremost, strategic nuclear weapons and associated
infrastructure. The committee notes that the CTR program was
originally envisioned as a short-term emergency effort to
reduce the threat posed to the United States by the thousands
of nuclear weapons and their delivery vehicles left behind
after the demise of the Soviet Union. However, the original
focus of the CTR program has expanded significantly in scope
since its inception. As a result, some CTR activities fall more
appropriately outside the purview of the Department of Defense,
particularly those activities that serve a broader
nonproliferation or foreign policy goal. Two years ago, in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public
Law 106-65), Congress restricted the obligation of fiscal year
2000 CTR funds pending a report by the Secretary of Defense on
whether DOD is the appropriate executive agency to implement
various CTR projects and, if not, to propose a plan for
migrating responsibility for those projects to other agencies.
The committee has yet to receive this report.
With this in mind, the committee believes it is time to
take a fresh look at the CTR program and how to execute it. As
a DOD program, CTR activities compete for scarce resources with
the numerous other, more traditional, defense programs pursued
by the Department. In light of this competition, the committee
believes the Department must provide a rationale for the
execution of CTR programs under DOD and options for
transitioning responsibility for these programs to another
federal agency or agencies, as appropriate. Accordingly, the
committee recommends a provision (section 1308) that would
require the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to Congress
no later than March 15, 2002, explaining the rationale for
DOD's oversight and management of the CTR program; providing
justification for each CTR project that the Department believes
should remain within the funding and management responsibility
of DOD; and detailing the various transition options and how
the Department proposes to implement them, as appropriate.
If the Department of Defense is to retain funding and
management responsibility for the overall CTR program or any of
the projects contained within, the committee believes the
Secretary must seek to ensure that the program is subject to
the same kinds of stringent management, accountability, and
results-oriented standards that apply to other defense
programs. The committee believes that the oversight provided by
Congress since the program's inception has served to improve
the overall management of the program and to increase its
effectiveness. Nevertheless, the committee remains troubled
that the Department has not complied with the various reporting
requirements mandated by law that are designed to enhance
congressional visibility and oversight of the CTR program. In
particular, the committee is troubled by the Department's
failure to submit a number of reports required by title XIII of
the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398). The committee recalls
that last year Congress agreed to consolidate a variety of
reporting requirements into a single report on the basis of DOD
assurances that the consolidated report would be submitted to
Congress in a timely manner and in accordance with the
statutory mandate. The committee has not yet received this
report. Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision (sec.
1303) that would prohibit the obligation or expenditure of
fiscal year 2002 CTR funds until 30 days after the consolidated
report is submitted.
The committee's support for the CTR program has been
predicated upon a belief that the assistance provided would
produce the desired national security benefits. Unfortunately,
in an increasing number of cases, the achievement of these
benefits is difficult or impossible to quantify. Moreover, as a
June 2001 General Accounting Office report concluded, the CTR
program now provides a significantly greater percentage of
assistance in the form of services rather than equipment.
Therefore, the Department's traditional audit and examination
procedures are insufficient to assist Congress in determining
whether this assistance is being used as intended and achieving
the desired objectives. In addition, a March 2001 report by the
DOD Inspector General found that the lack of adequate
performance goals for the CTR program meant that program
managers ``could not successfully demonstrate that the CTR
Directorate was executing the CTR program efficiently and
effectively or identifying opportunities to improve program
effectiveness.'' Consequently, the committee recommends a
provision (sec. 1307) that would amend section 1308 of the
Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398) to provide for more complete and
effective oversight of the CTR program.
Finally, the committee understands that, with the change in
Administrations and the delay in staffing key policy positions
within DOD, the Department has had little opportunity to focus
on and evaluate many of the policy assumptions underpinning the
programmatic decisions reflected in the Department's fiscal
year 2002 CTR proposal.Consequently, many of the proposals
contained in the Department's budget submission are essentially
unchanged from those of the previous Administration. The committee
expects the Department to consider carefully and fully the concerns the
committee has identified with respect to the CTR program as the
Department prepares its budget and program request for fiscal year
2003.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Arms Elimination Projects in Russia
The budget request contained $133.4 million for strategic
offensive arms elimination projects in Russia, a 33 percent
decrease from the fiscal year 2001 appropriated amount of
$177.8 million. The committee recommends the budget request.
The committee remains concerned that Russia may convert SS-
18 ICBM silos to support the deployment of modern SS-27
``Topol'' ICBMs and that SS-18 missile elimination activities
may facilitate Russia's ability to convert these silos. Last
year, the committee directed the Secretary of Defense ``to
focus the Department's SS-18 elimination effort at locations
where missile silos are to be eliminated, not converted, to
ensure that CTR assistance is not used in support of Russia's
strategic modernization program.'' Although DOD policy does not
support conversion activities, the CTR program has assisted in
the removal of SS-18 ICBMs from silos at locations where the
silos may be converted. The committee reiterates its view that
CTR assistance should be targeted at those sites where SS-18
missiles, silos, and related infrastructure will be eliminated.
The committee also notes that the March 2001 report on the
CTR program by the DOD Inspector General concluded that more
than $64.5 million in program funds was used ``to facilitate
the removal of weapons of mass destruction by enhancing the
value of salvageable materials and developing commercial by-
products for Russia and Ukraine.'' The report notes, ``As a
result of those efforts, Russia and Ukraine could generate
revenue of about $72.8 million without agreements on how the
revenue should be used.'' The committee believes the Department
should seek to negotiate agreements regarding the use of these
revenues in order to prevent them from being used for purposes
that run contrary to the objectives of the CTR program.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision (section
1304) that would require the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report on DOD's plans for monitoring the use of such revenues.
Arms Elimination Projects in Ukraine
The budget request contained $51.5 million for strategic
offensive arms elimination projects in Ukraine, a 77 percent
increase from the fiscal year 2001 appropriated amount of $29.1
million. The committee recommends the budget request.
The committee notes the successful completion of the Tu-26
Blackjack bomber elimination project and the initiation of
efforts to eliminate Tu-22 Backfire bombers. The committee
supports these efforts, along with accelerated efforts to
eliminate Ukraine's remaining ICBMs, silos, and associated
infrastructure.
Biological Weapons Proliferation Prevention
The budget request contained $17.0 million for biological
weapons proliferation prevention activities in the former
Soviet Union, a 42 percent increase from the fiscal year 2001
appropriated level of $12.0 million. The committee recommends
the budget request.
Although generally supportive of efforts to prevent the
proliferation of biological weapons expertise, the committee
remains concerned over the lack of transparency with respect to
Russia's biological weapons programs, the risks that
collaborative research on ``defensive'' biotechnology can be
applied to offensive weapons purposes, the perpetuation of a
knowledge and skills base among Russian scientists that may
increase their attractiveness to foreign states seeking to
develop biological weapons, the difficulty of verifying that
assistance provided is not being diverted to illicit purposes,
and the lack of an ``exit strategy'' for this activity. The
committee does not believe DOD should finance the activities of
former Soviet biological weapons scientists on a permanent
basis, and calls upon the Department to establish criteria for
the completion of this program.
Chemical Weapons Destruction in Russia
The budget request contained $50.0 million for chemical
weapons elimination activities in Russia, including $15.0
million for the elimination of chemical weapons production
facilities and $35.0 million for construction of a chemical
weapons destruction facility in Shchuch'ye, Russia. The request
also contained a provision that would repeal section 1305 of
Public Law 106-65, which prohibits any funding for activities
related to the Shchuch'ye facility. This is the second
consecutive year the Department has requested a repeal of the
existing prohibition and a restart of funding for this
activity.
The committee recommends the budget request.
Although the committee approves the budget request for
activities related to the construction of a chemical weapons
destruction facility in Russia, the committee remains concerned
about the relative priority of this project within the overall
CTR program. Moreover, the committee continues to have serious
reservations about the wisdom of proceeding with the Shchuch'ye
project in light of ongoing cost, schedule, and other concerns.
The committee recognizes Russia's declared intention to
place greater priority on its chemical weapons elimination
effort, in accordance with its commitments under the Chemical
Weapons Convention, and Russia's effort to increase its
financial commitment to this effort. In addition, the committee
notes that Russia is seeking to make it possible to use the
Shchuch'ye facility to eliminate nerve agents currently stored
at other stockpile sites. However, the committee notes that
under section 1309 of Public Law 106-398 the Department was
required to submit a report in January 2001, regarding Russian
and international funding for chemical weapons elimination
activities in Russia. This report has not yet been provided.
The committee notes that U.S. commitments to date have
involved funding for the construction of the Shchuch'ye pilot
destruction facility, not for its scale-up, operation, or
maintenance. These costs are to be assumed by Russia. However,
the committeeremains skeptical regarding Russia's ability to
absorb these costs. In the view of the committee, the United States
will likely be compelled to absorb additional costs, beyond the nearly
$900 million estimated for the U.S. share of funding, to eliminate
chemical weapons at Shchuch'ye if Russia is unwilling or unable to do
so.
With this in mind, the committee believes that U.S. funding
for this activity should be conditioned on a variety of actions
that demonstrate Russia's commitment to the elimination of its
chemical weapons stockpile. Accordingly, the committee
recommends a provision (sec. 1309) that would require the
Secretary of Defense to certify to Congress that Russia: (1)
has made a full and accurate disclosure of its chemical weapons
stockpile; (2) has committed to invest at least $25.0 million
annually in chemical weapons elimination; (3) has developed a
practical plan for chemical weapons elimination; (4) has
provided legal authority for the elimination of all nerve
agents at a single site; and (5) has agreed to destroy its
chemical weapons production facilities at Volgograd and
Novocheboksarsk.
The committee acknowledges that the National Security
Council (NSC)--after conducting a review of U.S.
nonproliferation assistance programs with Russia--has
recommended moving ahead with the Shchuch'ye project. The
committee believes the NSC's recommendation is based, in part,
on commitments to the project made to Russia by the prior
Administration. The committee notes that political commitments
by the Executive Branch to support projects in Russia must be
premised on congressional approval and funding. For this
reason, the committee is troubled by the fact that the
Department concluded an agreement with Russia in November 2000
reiterating its commitment to the Shchuch'ye project after
Congress had prohibited funding for it in 1999 and reaffirmed
this prohibition earlier in 2000. The committee believes the
Department's action was inappropriate and contrary to the
clearly expressed position of Congress.
The committee is also aware of the Department's desire to
use unobligated fiscal year 1999 CTR funds to initiate
construction of the Shchuch'ye facility and understands that a
DOD notification to this effect has been prepared for
transmittal to Congress. The committee does not support using
prior year funds to initiate an action, the completion of which
is precluded by existing law, unless and until the existing
prohibition is lifted or modified.
Defense and Military Contacts
The budget request contained $18.7 million for defense and
military contacts with the states of the former Soviet Union, a
108 percent increase over the fiscal year 2001 appropriated
level of $9.0 million. The committee recommends the budget
request.
Last year, the CTR program funded approximately 350 defense
and military contacts with the states of the former Soviet
Union. This year's budget request would support 500 events.
However, the committee believes the utility of these activities
is difficult to quantify and expects the Department to address
this issue in the report required by section 1308 of this
title.
Elimination of Plutonium Production in Russia
The budget request contained $41.7 million for the
elimination of plutonium production in Russian nuclear
reactors, a 30 percent increase from the fiscal year 2001
appropriated level of $32.1 million. The committee recommends
the budget request, subject to the prohibition described below.
The committee notes that the Department has decided to
abandon its support for core conversion. The Department
believes the goal of eliminating weapons-grade plutonium
production is best served by the construction of fossil fuel
plants, including the refurbishment of coal-burning boilers, as
a less expensive substitute for the energy needs of the local
communities in Russia. Although the committee supports the goal
of shutting down Russia's nuclear power plants, the committee
believes this goal serves broader U.S. nonproliferation and
foreign policy objectives and should be funded through sources
external to the Department of Defense. In addition, the
committee notes that the budget request would be targeted
exclusively for the building and refurbishment of fossil fuel
plants and not for any activities directly related to shutting
down Russia's plutonium producing nuclear reactors. The
committee does not believe that the construction of fossil fuel
plants in Russia is an activity appropriate for DOD to fund.
This view led Congress to pass section 1307 of Public Law 106-
398, which prohibited fiscal year 2001 CTR funds from being
used for this activity. Accordingly, the committee recommends a
provision (sec. 1306) that would make permanent the fiscal year
2001 prohibition on using CTR funds for this purpose.
The committee is also troubled by the Department's failure
to submit the report required by section 1307 of Public Law
106-398 that would identify the costs of building fossil fuel
plants, as well as other non-CTR funding sources that could be
used for carrying out this activity. Consequently, the
committee lacks the requisite information to determine how the
Department arrived at its conclusion regarding the comparative
costs of core conversion vis-a-vis fossil fuel plants and the
reasons why DOD believes it should be involved in this
activity.
Fissile Material Processing and Packaging
The budget request did not contain funding for this
activity. The committee understands that Russia, after
initially requesting U.S. assistance in the dismantlement and
processing of fissile material removed from nuclear warheads,
refused to agree to the necessary safeguards to ensure the
material could not be re-fabricated for use in other nuclear
weapons. Consequently, this project has been terminated. The
committee understands that unobligated prior year funds for
this activity have been re-obligated for other projects.
Fissile Material Storage Facility
The budget request did not contain funding for this
activity. The committee notes that Russia is no longer seeking
assistance to build a second wing at the Mayak storage facility
and that sufficient funds remain to complete activity on the
first wing. Accordingly, the committee supports the
Department's action in refusing to seekadditional funds for
this activity and recommends a provision (section 1306) that would
prohibit CTR funds from being used for the design, planning, or
construction of a second wing. The committee notes that Russia has
consistently refused to agree to transparency measures that would allow
the United States to verify that the fissile material stored at the
facility in Mayak, Russia, is from dismantled nuclear weapons and
reiterates its view that the Department should continue to seek an
agreement with Russia on this issue.
Nuclear Weapons Storage Security in Russia
The budget request contained $56.0 million for nuclear
weapons storage security in Russia, a 38 percent decrease from
the fiscal year 2001 appropriated level of $89.7 million. The
committee recommends the budget request, but reiterates the
need for the Secretary of Defense to seek an agreement with
Russia allowing appropriate U.S. access to nuclear weapons
storage sites for which CTR assistance is provided.
Nuclear Weapons Transportation Security
The budget request contained $9.5 million for nuclear
weapons transportation security in Russia, a 32 percent
decrease from the fiscal year 2001 appropriated level of $14.0
million. The committee recommends the budget request. The
committee notes that these costs were previously paid by Russia
and again urges the Department to seek an agreement that would
once again shift the burden of financial responsibility for
this activity back to Russia.
Other Assessments and Administrative Support
The budget request contained $13.2 million for other
program support, including management and administrative costs,
project development, and audits and examinations, a slight
increase over the fiscal year 2001 appropriated level of $13.0
million. The committee recommends the budget request.
The committee notes that a portion of these funds has
traditionally been applied to new initiatives in the concept
development stage. The committee understands that Russia has
proposed various initiatives for CTR consideration, including
initiatives involving conventional weapons or delivery
platforms. The committee believes that the statutory language
of section 1303 of Public Law 106-398, which prohibits the use
of CTR funds for conventional elimination purposes--including,
for example, general purpose submarines--should be strictly
adhered to and that CTR funds should not be expended on concept
development studies designed to assess the viability of
elimination projects specifically prohibited under the
statutory prohibition.
Weapons of Mass Destruction Infrastructure Elimination in Kazakhstan
The budget request contained $6.0 million for weapons of
mass destruction infrastructure elimination activities in
Kazakhstan. This would include funding for activities related
to the elimination of facilities used to support the deployment
and operation of weapons of mass destruction, including
infrastructure at former bomber bases. The committee recommends
the budget request.
Weapons of Mass Destruction Infrastructure Elimination in Ukraine
The budget request contained $6.0 million for weapons of
mass destruction infrastructure elimination activities in
Ukraine. This would include funding for activities related to
the elimination of facilities used to support the deployment
and operation of weapons of mass destruction, including
facilities for storage and maintenance of nuclear weapons. The
committee recommends the budget request.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction Program and
Funds
This section would specify the kinds of programs to be
funded under this title and would make fiscal year 2002
Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) funds available for
obligation for three years.
Section 1302--Funding Allocations
This section would allocate fiscal year 2002 funding for
various CTR purposes and activities.
Section 1303--Prohibition Against Use of Funds Until Submission of
Reports
This section would prohibit the obligation or expenditure
of fiscal year 2002 CTR funds until 30 days after reports
required by section 1308 of the Floyd D. Spence National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-
398) are submitted.
Section 1304--Report on Use of Revenue Generated by Activities Carried
Out Under Cooperative Threat Reduction Programs
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report describing plans to monitor the use of revenue
generated by CTR activities in Russia and Ukraine.
Section 1305--Prohibition Against Use of Funds for Second Wing of
Fissile Material Storage Facility
This section would prohibit the use of CTR funds for the
design, planning, or construction of a second wing for the
fissile material storage facility in Mayak, Russia.
Section 1306--Prohibition on Use of Funds for Construction or
Refurbishment of Fossil Fuel Energy Plants
This section would prohibit the use of CTR funds for
construction or refurbishment of fossil fuel energy plants in
Russia.
Section 1307--Reports on Activities and Assistance Under Cooperative
Threat Reduction Programs
This section would amend section 1308 of the Floyd D.
Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
(Public Law 106-398) to modify the report on activities and
assistance under CTR programs in order to provide for more
complete and effective oversight of the CTR program.
Section 1308--Report on Responsibility for Carrying Out Cooperative
Threat Reduction Programs
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report containing an assessment of CTR projects
currently under the auspices of DOD and describing options for
transferring responsibility for CTR projects to other agencies,
as appropriate.
Section 1309--Chemical Weapons Destruction
This section would modify the existing prohibition on the
use of CTR funds for construction of a chemical weapons
destruction facility in Russia by requiring the Secretary of
Defense to certify that Russia has met various requirements
prior to the obligation or expenditure of funds for this
activity.
TITLE XIV--DEFENSE SPACE REORGANIZATION
OVERVIEW
The committee commends the efforts of the Commission to
Assess United States National Security Space Management and
Organization, and has reviewed the contents of the report to
Congress as required by section 1623 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65). The
committee believes that many of the recommendations contained
in the commission report are significant and should be
considered for implementation. The committee believes,
therefore, that the President and the Secretary of Defense
should have specific discretionary authority to impose new
organizational and programmatic arrangements with regard to
space matters.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 1401--Short Title
This section would refer to this title as the ``Defense
Space Reorganization Act of 2001.''
Section 1402--Authority to Establish Position of Under Secretary of
Defense for Space, Intelligence, and Information
This section would authorize the President, through
December 31, 2003, to establish the position of Under Secretary
of Defense for Space, Intelligence, and Information with
specific duties as prescribed by the Secretary of Defense.
Section 1403--Authority to Designate Under Secretary of the Air Force
as Acquisition Executive for Space of the Department of Defense
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
designate the Under Secretary of the Air Force as the
acquisition executive for all space-related programs in the
Department of Defense.
Section 1404--Major Force Program Category for Space Programs
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
create a major force program category for space under section
221 of title 10, United States Code.
Section 1405--Comptroller General Assessment of Implementation of
Recommendations of Space Commission
This section would require the Comptroller General of the
United States to assess the actions taken by the Secretary of
Defense to implement the recommendations of the Commission to
Assess United States National Security Space Management and
Organization and report to Congress by February 15 in both 2002
and 2003.
Section 1406--Commander of Air Force Space Command
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
require that the officer serving as commander of Air Force
Space Command not serve simultaneously as commander of United
States Space Command or as commander of the United States
element of the North American Air Defense Command.
Section 1407--Authority to Establish Separate Career Field in the Air
Force for Space
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force
to establish a separate career field for officers in space
doctrine, space operations, and management of space systems for
the Air Force.
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
PURPOSE
The purpose of Division B is to provide military
construction authorizations and related authority in support of
the military departments during fiscal year 2002. As approved
by the committee, Division B would authorize appropriations in
the amount of $10,324,712,000 for construction in support of
the active forces, reserve components, defense agencies for
fiscal year 2002.
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION OVERVIEW
The Department of Defense requested authorization of
appropriations of $5,904,795,000 for fiscal year 2002 for
military construction, including $532,200,000 for activities
associated with base closure and realignment, and
$4,066,517,000 for family housing construction and support. The
committee recommends $6,359,343,000 for military construction,
including $532,200,000 for activities associated with base
closure and realignment, and $3,965,369,000 for family housing
construction and support for fiscal year 2002.
The committee remains concerned about the condition of the
Nation's military installations and facilities and their effect
on military readiness. The committee is pleased, however, that
the Administration's fiscal year 2002 budget request contained
a 13 percent increase from the program enacted by Congress for
fiscal year 2001 and contained a 24.5 percent increase in the
amount requested by the previous Administration for fiscal year
2001. The committee is encouraged that the fiscal year 2002
budget request would begin to reverse the trend of underfunding
critical military infrastructure and expects it to represent
sustained investment rather than a momentary spike. The
committee recommends an increase in new budget authority for
these programs of $353,400,000.
In an effort to continue to improve the quality of life for
military personnel and their families, the committee reiterates
its support for the authorities provided in subchapter IV,
chapter 169 of title, 10, United States Code. The Military
Housing Privatization Initiative remains a central component of
the ultimate resolution of the military housing crisis. The
committee recommends permanent authority for this program.
A tabular summary of the authorizations provided in
Division B for fiscal year 2002 follows:
TITLE XXI--ARMY
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $1,760,541,000 for Army
military construction and $1,400,533,000 for family housing for
fiscal year 2002. The committee recommends authorization of
$1,686,601,000 for military construction and $1,321,357,000 for
family housing for fiscal year 2002.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Planning and Design
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Army complete
planning and design activities for the following projects:
$225,000 for a training center at Tobyhanna Army Depot,
Pennsylvania.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section contains the list of authorized Army
construction projects for fiscal year 2002. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Section 2102--Family Housing
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Army for fiscal year
2002.
Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units
This section would authorize improvements to existing units
of family housing for fiscal year 2002.
Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each line item contained in the Army's budget for fiscal year
2002. This section also provides an overall limit on the amount
the Army may spend on military construction projects.
Section 2105--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal
Year 2001 Project
This section would amend the table in section 2101 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
(division B of Public Law 106-398) to provide for an increase
in the amounts authorized for military construction at Fort
Leonard Wood, Missouri, at Fort Drum, New York, and at Fort
Hood Texas.
TITLE XXII--NAVY
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $1,071,408,000 for Navy
military construction and $1,222,495,000 for family housing for
fiscal year 2002. The committee recommends authorization of
$1,159,654,000 for military construction and $1,233,351,000 for
family housing for fiscal year 2002.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Improvements to Military Family Housing
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for improvements to military family housing and facilities, the
Secretary of the Navy execute the following projects:
$11,840,000 for Whole-site Revitalization (69 units) at Pacific
Missile Range Facility Barking Sands, Hawaii, and $6,940,000
for Whole House Revitalization (124 units) at Westover Air
Reserve Base, Massachusetts.
Planning and Design
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Navy complete
planning and design activities for the following project:
$420,000 for an undersea network centric laboratory at Naval
Underwater Systems Newport, Rhode Island.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section contains the list of authorized Navy
construction projects for fiscal year 2002. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Section 2202--Family Housing
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Navy for fiscal year
2002.
Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units
This section would authorize improvements to existing units
of family housing for fiscal year 2002.
Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each line item in the Navy's budget for fiscal year 2002. This
section also provides an overall limit on the amount the Navy
may spend on military construction projects.
Section 2205--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal Year 2000
Project
This section would amend the table in section 2201 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000
(division B of Public Law 106-65) to provide for an increase in
the amounts authorized for military construction at Camp H.M.
Smith, Hawaii.
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $1,068,250,000 for Air Force
military construction and $1,387,358,000 for family housing for
fiscal year 2002. The committee recommends authorization of
$1,171,504,000 for military construction and $1,354,530,000 for
family housing for fiscal year 2002.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Improvements to Military Family Housing
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for improvements to military family housing and facilities, the
Secretary of the Air Force execute the following project:
$18,000,000 for Whole Neighborhood Revitalization (164 units)
at Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section contains the list of authorized Air Force
construction projects for fiscal year 2002. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.
Section 2302--Family Housing
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Air Force for fiscal
year 2002.
Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units
This section would authorize improvements to existing units
of family housing for fiscal year 2002.
Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each line item in the Air Force's budget for fiscal year 2002.
This section also would provide an overall limit on the amount
the Air Force may spend on military construction projects.
Section 2305--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal
Year 2001 Project
This section would amend the table in section 2301 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
(division B of Public Law 106-398) to provide for an increase
in the amounts authorized for military construction at McGuire
Air Force Base, New Jersey.
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $694,558,000 for defense
agencies military construction and $250,000, for family housing
construction for fiscal year 2002. The committee recommends
authorization of $838,957,000 for military construction and
$250,000 for family housing for fiscal year 2002.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects
This section contains the list of authorized defense
agencies construction projects for fiscal year 2002. The
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The state list contained in this report is
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects
authorized at each location.
Section 2402--Energy Conservation Projects
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
carry out energy conservation projects
Section 2403--Authorization Of Appropriations, Defense Agencies
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each line item in the Defense Agencies' budget for fiscal year
2002. This section also would provide an overall limit on the
amount the Defense Agencies may spend on military construction
projects.
Section 2404--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal Year 2001
Project
This section would amend the table in section 2401 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
(division B of Public Law 106-398) to provide for an increase
in the amounts authorized for construction at Marine Corps
Base, Camp Pendleton, California.
Section 2405--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal Year 2000
Project
This section would amend the table in section 2401 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000
(division B of Public Law 106-65) to provide for an increase in
the amounts authorized for construction at Naval Air Station,
Whidbey Island, Washington.
Section 2406--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal Year 1999
Project
This section would amend the table in section 2401 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999
(division B of Public Law 105-261) to provide for an increase
in the amounts authorized for military construction projects to
support chemical weapons and munitions destruction at Aberdeen
Proving Ground, Maryland.
Section 2407--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal Year 1995
Project
This section would amend the table in section 2401 of the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995
(division B of Public Law 103-337), as amended to provide for
an increase in the amounts authorized for military construction
projects to support chemical weapons and munitions destruction
at Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas.
Section 2408--Prohibition on Expenditures to Develop Forward Operating
Location on Aruba for United States Southern Command Counter-Drug
Detection and Monitoring Flights
This section would prohibit funds appropriated in chapter 3
of title III of the Emergency Supplemental Act, 2000 (Public
Law 106-246) to be used by the Secretary of Defense to develop
any forward operating location of the island of Aruba.
TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION INFRASTRUCTURE
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $162,600,000 for the NATO
infrastructure fund (NATO Security Investment Program) for
fiscal year 2002. The committee recommends $162,600,000 for the
NATO infrastructure fund for fiscal year 2002.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land Acquisition
Projects
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
make contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
security investment program in an amount equal to the sum of
the amount specifically authorized in section 2502 of this bill
and the amount of recoupment due to the United States for
construction previously financed by the United States.
Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO
This section would authorize appropriations of $162,600,000
as the U.S. contribution to the NATO security investment
program.
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES
SUMMARY
The budget request contained $615,238,000 for fiscal year
2002 for guard and reserve facilities. The committee recommends
authorization for fiscal year 2002 of $807,827,000 to be
distributed as follows:
Army National Guard..................................... $304,915,000
Air National Guard...................................... 197,472,000
Army Reserve............................................ 173,017,000
Naval and Marine Corps Reserve.......................... 53,291,000
Air Force Reserve....................................... 79,132,000
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total............................................. 807,827,000
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Planning and Design, Air National Guard
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Air Force execute
the following project: $1,331,000 for a joint headquarters
building at McEntire Air National Guard Base, South Carolina.
Unspecified Minor Construction, Army National Guard
The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts
for unspecified minor construction, the Secretary of the Army
execute the following project: $500,000 for security
improvements at Johnstown Airport, Pennsylvania.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2601--Authorized Guard and Reserve Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects
This section would authorize appropriations for military
construction for the guard and reserve by service component for
fiscal year 2002. The state list contained in this report is
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects
authorized at each location.
TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2701--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts Required To Be
Specified by Law
This section would provide that authorizations for military
construction projects, repair of real property, land
acquisition, family housing projects and facilities,
contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
infrastructure program, and guard and reserve projects will
expire on October 1, 2004 or the date of enactment of an Act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2005, whichever is later. This expiration would not apply to
authorizations for which appropriated funds have been obligated
before October 1, 2004 or the date of enactment of an Act
authorizing funds for these projects, whichever is later.
Section 2702--Extensions of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 1999
Projects
This section would provide for selected extension of
certain fiscal year 1998 military construction authorizations
until October 1, 2001, or the date of the enactment of an Act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2003, whichever is later.
Section 2703--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 1998
Projects
This section would provide for selected extension of
certain fiscal year 1998 military construction authorizations
until October 1, 2002, or the date of the enactment of the Act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2003, whichever is later.
Section 2704--Effective Date
This section would provide that Titles XXI, XXII, XXIII,
XXIV, and XXVI of this bill shall take effect on October 1,
2001, or the date of the enactment of this Act, whichever is
later.
TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing
Changes
Section 2801--Increase in Certain Unspecified Minor Military
Construction Project Thresholds
This section would amend section 2805 of title 10, United
States Code, to increase the threshold for notice and wait
requirements for unspecified minor construction from $500,000
to $750,000.
Section 2802--Exclusion of Unforeseen Environmental Hazard Remediation
From Limitation on Authorized Cost Variations
This section would amend section 2853 of title 10, United
States Code, to exclude legally required remediation of certain
environmental hazards from limitations on authorized cost
variations.
Section 2803--Repeal of Annual Reporting Requirement on Military
Construction and Military Family Housing Activities
This section would amend section 2861 of title 10, United
States Code, to repeal the annual reporting requirement on
military construction and military family housing activities.
Section 2804--Permanent Authorization for Alternative Authority for
Acquisition and Improvement of Military Housing
This section would amend section 2885 of title 10, United
States Code, to make permanent the authorities contained in
subchapter 169 of title 10, United States Code.
Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration
Section 2811--Use of Military Installations for Certain Recreational
Activities
This section would amend section 2671 of title 10, United
States Code, to permit certain recreation activities on
military installations. This section would provide flexibility
to military installation commanders to manage resources without
adhering to State law, when necessary, if determined to be in
interest of public safety.
Section 2812--Base Efficiency Project at Brooks Air Force Base, Texas
This section would amend section 136 of the Military
Construction Appropriations Act, 2001 (division A of Public Law
106-246) to authorize the Secretary of the Air Force to provide
environmental indemnification to the San Antonio community and
other persons. No indemnification may be provided unless the
person or entity making the claim provides certain
documentation. This section would authorize the Secretary to
settle or defend a claim if it is determined that the
Department of Defense may be required to make indemnification
payments.
Subtitle C--Defense Base Closure and Realignment
Section 2821--Lease Back of Base Closure Property
This section would amend section 204 of the Defense
Authorization Amendments and Base Closure and Realignment Act
(Public Law 100-526) and section 2905 of the Defense Base
Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (Part A of Title XXIX of
Public Law 101-510) to authorize the secretary concerned to
transfer real property at a closed or realigned military
installation to the redevelopment authority for the
installation if the redevelopment authority agrees, directly
upon transfer, to lease one or more portions of the property
transferred to the secretary or to the head of another
department or agency of the Federal Government. Such leases
shall not exceed 50 years and may not require rental payments
by the United States. This section would permit the use of the
leased property by the same or another department or agency of
the Federal Government if the original department concerned
ceases requiring the use of the lease.
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances Generally
Part I--Army Conveyances
Section 2831--Transfer of Jurisdiction, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois
This section would amend section 2832 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (division B
of Public Law 106-398) by authorizing the Secretary of the Army
to transfer a parcel of real property approximately .513 acres
to the City. As consideration for the transfer, the City would
convey to the Secretary, a parcel of real property
approximately .063 acres to construct a new access ramp for the
Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois.
Section 2832--Modification of Land Conveyance, Fort Dix, New Jersey
This section would amend section 2835 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (division B
of Public Law 105-85) to authorize the exchange between the
Borough of Wrightstown and the New Hanover Board of Education,
without the consent of the Secretary, of all or any portion of
the property conveyed so long as the property continues to be
used for economic or educational purposes.
Section 2833--Lease Authority, Fort Derussy, Hawaii
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
enter into a lease with the City of Honolulu, Hawaii, for the
purpose of making available to the City a parcel of real
property for the construction of a parking facility.
Section 2834--Land Exchange and Consolidation, Fort Lewis, Washington
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
convey two parcels of real property, with improvements,
consisting of approximately 138 acres at Fort Lewis,
Washington, to the Nisqually Tribe. As consideration for the
exchange, the Tribe shall acquire from Thurston County,
Washington, several parcels of real property consisting of
approximately 416 acres and convey fee title to the Secretary.
This section would also authorize the Secretary to convey to
the Bonneville Power Administration a right-of-way to permit
the Administration to use the real property at Fort Lewis as a
route for the Grand Coulee-Olympia and Olympia-White River
electrical transmission lines. The cost of any survey shall be
borne by the recipient of the property.
Section 2835--Land Conveyance, Whittier-Anchorage Pipeline Tank Farm,
Anchorage, Alaska
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
convey, without consideration, two adjoining parcels of real
property, including improvements, of approximately 48 acres and
known as the Whittier-Anchorage Pipeline Tank Farm, to the Port
of Anchorage, an entity of the Municipality of Anchorage,
Alaska. The cost of any survey shall be borne by the recipient
of the real property.
Part II--Navy Conveyances
Section 2841--Transfer of Jurisdiction, Centerville Beach Naval
Station, Humboldt County, California
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
transfer, without reimbursement, to the administrative
jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior the real property
with improvements consisting of the closed Centerville Beach
Naval Station, Humboldt County, California, for the purpose of
permitting the Secretary of the Interior to manage the real
property as open space or for other public purposes. The cost
of any survey necessary for the transfer would be borne by the
Secretary of the Interior.
Section 2842--Land Conveyance, Naval Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant,
Toledo, Ohio
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
convey, without consideration, a parcel of real property,
consisting of approximately 29 acres comprising the Naval
Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant, Toledo, Ohio, to the Toledo-
Lucas County Port Authority. Until the property is conveyed,
the Secretary may lease the real property, together with any
improvements, facilities, equipment, fixtures, and other
personal property, to the Port Authority in exchange for
security services, and maintenance services provided by the
Port Authority. The conveyance and any lease shall be subject
to certain specified conditions. The cost of any survey shall
be borne by the Port Authority.
Section 2843--Modification of Authority for Conveyance of Naval
Computer and Telecommunications Station, Cutler, Maine
This section would amend section 2853 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (division B
of Public Law 106-398) by inserting ``any or'' before ``all
right'' in order to permit the Department of the Navy to convey
parcels of the real property to recently identified federal
entities.
Section 2844--Modification of Land Conveyance, Former United States
Marine Corps Air Station, Eagle Mountain, Texas
This section would amend section 5 of Public Law 85-258, to
permit the Texas Military Facilities Commission to use funds
acquired through the leasing of Eagle Mountain Lake National
Guard Training Site for other Texas National Guard facilities.
Section 2845--Land Transfer and Conveyance, Naval Security Group
Activity, Winter Harbor, Maine
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
transfer, without consideration, a parcel of real property,
including improvements, of approximately 26 acres to the
Secretary of the Interior. The transfer would occur concurrent
with the reversion of administrative jurisdiction of a parcel
of real property consisting of approximately 71 acres from the
Secretary of the Navy to the Secretary of the Interior as
authorized by Public Law 80-260. This section would authorize
the Secretary of the Navy to convey, without consideration, any
of the parcels of real property, including improvements, of
approximately 485 acres and comprising the former facilities of
the Naval Security Group Activity, Winter Harbor, Maine to the
State of Maine, any subdivision of the State of Maine, or any
tax-supported agency of the State of Maine. The Secretary of
the Navy would transfer, without consideration, certain
personal property associated with such real property. The
Secretary of the Navy would maintain any real property until
the earlier of the date of conveyance or September 30, 2003.
The Secretary of the Navy may lease such parcels to certain
persons or entities. The Secretary of the Navy may require each
recipient of real property to reimburse the Secretary for
certain costs. The cost of any survey shall be borne by the
recipient or the real property.
Part III--Air Force Conveyances
Section 2851--Water Rights Conveyance, Andersen Air Force Base, Guam
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force
to convey water rights related to the Air Force properties Andy
South, also known as the Andersen Administrative Annex,
Marianas Bonis Base Command, and Andersen Water Supply Annex,
also known as the Tumon Water Well or the Tumon Maui Well,
located on Guam. The Secretary may exercise authority under
certain specified conditions. This section would authorize the
Secretary to require that the United States have the primary
right to all water produced from Andy South and Anderson Water
Supply Annex until a replacement water system is in working
condition satisfactory to the Secretary. The Secretary may
authorize the conveyee of the water system to sell to public or
private entities such water from Andersen Air Force Base as the
Secretary determines to be excess to the needs of the United
States.
Section 2852--Reexamination of Land Conveyance, Lowry Air Force Base,
Colorado
This section would direct the Secretary of the Air Force to
reevaluate the terms and conditions of the pending negotiated
sale agreement at Lowry Air Force Base, Colorado, with the
Lowry Redevelopment Authority for certain real property in
light of changed circumstances regarding the property. The
reexamination shall determine whether changed circumstances
warrant a reduction in the amount of consideration otherwise
required under the agreement or other modifications to the
agreement.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Section 2861--Transfer of Jurisdiction for Development of Armed Forces
Recreational Facility, Park City, Utah
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Interior
to transfer, without reimbursement, the administrative
jurisdiction of a parcel of real property, including
improvements, consisting of approximately 35 acres located in
Park City, Utah and designated as parcel 3 by the Bureau of
Land Management to the Secretary of the Air Force. The transfer
would be completed no later than one year after the date of the
enactment of this Act. This section would authorize the
Secretary of the Air Force to use the real property as the
location for an armed forces recreational facility to be
developed using non-appropriated funds. The Secretary of the
Air Force may return the transferred property to the
administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior
upon certifying that development of the recreational facility
would not be in the best interest of the United States. In lieu
of developing the recreational facility, the Secretary of the
Air Force may convey or lease the property to certain entities
under certain specific alternative development authority. The
cost of any survey shall be borne by the Secretary of the Air
Force.
Section 2862--Selection of Site for United States Air Force Memorial
and Related Land Transfers for the Improvement of Arlington Cemetery,
Virginia
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
offer, within 60 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, to the Air Force Memorial Foundation, an option to use,
without reimbursement, up to three acres of the Arlington Naval
Annex as the site within which the Foundation will construct
the Air Force Memorial. Within 90 days after the date on which
the Secretary of Defense makes the offer, the Foundation shall
provide written notice to the Secretary of the decision of the
Foundation to accept or decline the offer. If the Foundation
accepts the offer, the Foundation shall relinquish all claims
to the previously approved location of the memorial. If the
Foundation declines the offer, the Foundation may resume its
efforts to construct the memorial on the Arlington Ridge tract
from the farthest point of progress. Not later than two years
after the date on which the Foundation accepts the offer, and
has made sufficient funds available to construct the memorial,
the Secretary, in coordination with the Foundation, shall
remove all structures and prepare the Arlington Naval Annex for
use to permit construction and access of the memorial. Upon
removal of structures and preparation of the property for use,
the Secretary of Defense shall permit the Foundation to
commence construction. This section would authorize the
Secretary of Defense exclusive authority in all matters
relating to the approval of the siting, design, and
construction of the memorial. Within 30 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall
transfer, without reimbursement, to the Secretary of the Army
administrative jurisdiction over the Arlington Ridge tract.
This section would amend section 2902 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (division B
of Public Law 106-65) to prohibit consideration of the
Arlington Naval Annex property as a possible site for a
national military museum.
Section 2863--Management of the Presidio of San Francisco
This section would amend the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands
Management Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-333) to authorize the
Trust to make available to lease certain housing units to
persons designated by the Secretary of the Army, within the
Presidio of San Francisco, California. The monthly amount
charged by the Trust for the lease of a housing units,
including utilities and municipal services, shall not exceed
the monthly rate of the basic allowance for housing. This
section would also increase the borrowing authority authorized
by section 104 of Public Law 104-333 from $50,000,000 to
$150,000,000.
Section 2864--Effect of Limitation on Construction of Roads or
Highways, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, California
This section would amend section 2851 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (division B
of Public Law 105-261), as amended, to limit the effect of
State law enacted after January 1, 2001, that would directly or
indirectly prohibit or restrict the construction or approval of
a road or highway within the easements granted under this
section at Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, California.
Section 2865--Establishment of World War II Memorial at Additional
Location on Guam
This section would amend section 2886 of the Military
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (division B
of Public Law 106-398) by authorizing the establishment of an
additional World War II Memorial on Federal lands near Yigo,
Guam.
TITLE XXIX--FORT IRWIN MILITARY LAND WITHDRAWAL
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 2901--Short Title
This section would designate Title XXIX of this Act as the
``Fort Irwin Military Land Withdrawal Act of 2001''.
Section 2902--Withdrawal and Reservation of Lands for National Training
Center
This section would authorize the transfer of approximately
110,000 acres in San Bernardino, California to the Secretary of
the Army for certain specific purposes.
Section 2903--Map and Legal Description
This section would require the Secretary of the Interior to
publish in the Federal Register a notice containing the legal
description of the lands withdrawn and reserved by this title.
This section requires the Secretary to file a map and legal
description of the lands withdrawn and reserved by this title
with the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the
Senate and the Committee on Resources of the House of
Representatives. Copies of the map and legal description shall
be available at certain specific offices. The Secretary of the
Army would reimburse the Secretary of the Interior for the
costs incurred by implementing this section.
Section 2904--Management of Withdrawn and Reserved Lands
This section would require the Secretary of the Army,
during the period of the withdrawal and reservation, to manage
the lands withdrawn and reserved for the purposes specified in
section 2902. This section would prohibit military use of the
lands withdrawn and reserved that result in ground
disturbances, as determined by the Secretary of the Army and
the Secretary of the Interior until the Secretary of the Army
and the Secretary of the Interior certify to Congress that
there has been full compliance with respect to certain
specified laws. This section would authorize the Secretary of
the Army to post appropriate warning notices and take other
steps as necessary to close any road, trail, or other portion
of the lands withdrawn and reserved. This section would require
the Secretary of the Army to prepare and implement an
integrated natural resources management plan for the lands
withdrawn and reserved.
Section 2905--Water Rights
This section would prohibit the establishment of a
reservation in favor of the United States with respect to any
water or water right on the lands withdrawn or reserved. This
section would not affect any water rights acquired or reserved
by the United States before the date of enactment of this Act.
Section 2906--Environmental Compliance and Environmental Response
Requirements
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army and
the Secretary of the Interior to enter into such agreements
concerning the environment and public health as necessary,
appropriate, and in the public interest to carry out the
purposes of this title. This section would also provide that
nothing in this section shall be construed to alter the rights,
responsibilities, and obligations of the Secretary of the Army
and the Secretary of the Interior under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980
or any other environmental laws applicable to the lands
withdrawn and reserved by this title.
Section 2907--West Mojave Coordinated Management Plan
This section would urge the Secretary of the Interior to
complete the West Mojave Coordinated Management Plan not later
than two years after the date of enactment of this Act. This
section would require the Secretary of the Interior to consult
with the Secretary of the Army and the Administrator of the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration on the
development of the plan.
Section 2908--Release of Wilderness Study Areas
This section would authorize that Congress finds and
directs that lands withdrawn and reserved have been adequately
studied for wilderness designation pursuant to the Federal Land
Policy and Management Act of 1976.
Section 2909--Training Activity Separation From Utility Corridors
This section would require all military ground activity
training on the lands withdrawn and reserved remain at least
500 meters from any utility system in Utility Corridor D.
Section 2910--Duration of Withdrawal and Reservation
This section would, unless determined otherwise, terminate
the withdrawal and reservation made by this title 25 years
after the enactment of this Act. This section would, at the
time of termination of the withdrawal and reservation, require
the Secretary of the Interior to publish in the Federal
Register an appropriate order that would state the date upon
which the lands shall be restored to the public domain and
open.
Section 2911--Extension of Initial Withdrawal and Reservation
This section would require the Secretary of the Army, no
later than three years before the termination date, to notify
Congress and the Secretary of the Interior concerning the
military needs of the Army. If the Secretary of the Army
determines that there will be a continuing military need, the
Secretary would file with the Secretary of the Interior, within
one year after the notification, an application for extension
of the withdrawal and reservation. This section would authorize
the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of the Army to
submit to Congress a legislative proposal for the extension of
the withdrawal and reservation made by this title.
Section 2912--Termination and Relinquishment
This section authorizes that if the Secretary of the Army
determines within the first 22 years of the withdrawal and
reservation that there is no continuing military need, the
Secretary would submit to the Secretary of the Interior a
notice of intent to relinquish jurisdiction over the lands. If
the Secretary of the Interior accepts jurisdiction over any of
the lands, the Secretary would publish in the Federal Register
an appropriate order. All function under this section would be
made on a parcel-by-parcel basis.
Section 2913--Delegation of Authority
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army and
the Secretary of the Interior to delegate such functions
determined appropriate to carry out this title.
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AND AUTHORIZATION
AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
OVERVIEW
The budget request contained $13,355.2 million for the
national security activities of the Department of Energy. Of
this amount, $6,776.8 million is for the programs of the
National Nuclear Security Administration and $6,578.4 million
for defense environmental management and other defense
activities. The committee recommends $13,355.2 million, the
requested amount. The following table summarizes the budget
request and the committee recommendations:
Environmental and Other Defense Activities
Overview
The budget request contained $6,578.4 million for
environmental and other defense activities. The committee
recommends $6,635.3, an increase of $56.9 million.
Items of Special Interest
Defense Environmental Management Privatization
The budget request contained $141.5 million for Defense
Environmental Management Privatization. This amount included
funds for two new starts: $13.3 million for the Paducah
Disposal Facility Privatization, Paducah, Kentucky; and $2.0
million for the Portsmouth Disposal Facility, Portsmouth, Ohio.
Both of these projects are for nuclear waste disposal at
gaseous diffusion plants leased from the Department of Energy
by the United States Enrichment Corporation.
The committee notes that environmental management
activities at the nation's three gaseous diffusion plants is
carried out under the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and
Decommissioning Fund, which was established in 1992 to address
the cleanup liabilities at those plants attributable to
historical Department of Energy operations for weapons and
commercial fuel production. The committee also notes that the
Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund is
not budgeted within the national defense budget function.
Therefore, the committee recommends no funds for these two new
starts, a decrease of $15.3 million for Defense Environmental
Management Privatization, since it believes they should be
accomplished using the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and
Decommissioning Fund.
Hanford site operations, Richland, Washington
The budget request contained $500.0 million for the Waste
Treatment and Immobilization Plant Construction project within
the Office of River Protection, Richland, Washington. The
committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in order to
meet compliance deadlines. While the budget request for this
project represents an increase from fiscal year 2001, the
committee is concerned that it is insufficient to meet the
contractual obligations contained in the Tri-Party Agreement.
The committee continues to support full funding for this
project in order to insure that the federal government meets
its legally binding commitment to the State of Washington and
urges the Department of Energy to provide adequate funding in
future years to ensure that the schedule for the River
Protection projects is maintained.
The committee also supports the proposal by the Richland
Operations Office to move forward with an accelerated river
protection project as set forth in the Hanford Site Columbia
River Corridor Cleanup Report. The committee urges the
Department of Energy to focus its efforts on moving forward
with a closure contract in fiscal year 2002 with a goal of
completing critical work by fiscal year 2012. The committee
believes thatadherence to this schedule will allow for the
overall reduction in the size of the Hanford site and ultimately save
the federal government hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
Plutonium stabilization and packaging
The budget request contained $4.0 million for Project
Engineering and Design work on the 235-F Packaging and
Stabilization project at the Savannah River Site, Aiken, South
Carolina. The project was to design the modification of
Building 235-F for the installation of stabilization furnaces
and packaging equipment to stabilize and package plutonium at
the Savannah River Site. The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety
Board (DNFSB) has placed a high priority on stabilizing,
packaging, and safely storing these legacy materials while they
await final disposition.
In mid-June 2001, the Department of Energy informed the
committee that the budget request for Project Engineering and
Design work on the 235-F project would not be required, because
the project was being terminated due to a projected,
unaffordable cost. Subsequently, the Department has decided to
stabilize and package the plutonium by processing it within the
FB-Line at Savannah River.
To accomplish this new project, the committee recommends
the establishment of a construction line, 02-D-420, FB Line
Plutonium Stabilization and Packaging, and recommends $20.0
million for the project. The committee hopes this new project
will move expeditiously to complete stabilization and packaging
of all plutonium at Savannah River by June 2008 in accordance
with the Department's commitment to the DNFSB.
Post 2006 completion
The budget request contained $586.0 million for post 2006
environmental cleanup activities at the Savannah River Site,
Aiken, South Carolina, $116.7 million less than was enacted for
fiscal year 2001. The committee is disturbed by this situation
and the disruption it will cause to current cleanup schedules.
Consequently, the committee recommends $667.0 million, an
increase of $81.0 million, for post 2006 cleanup activities at
the Savannah River Site.
National Nuclear Security Administration
Overview
The budget request contained $6,776.8 million for the
National Nuclear Security Administration for fiscal year 2002.
The committee recommends $6,859.9 million, an increase of $83.1
million.
Items of Special Interest
Budget structure of the National Nuclear Security Administration
The committee notes that section 3253 of the Floyd D.
Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000
(Public Law 106-65), as amended by section 3154 of the National
Defense Authorization Act of 2001 (Public Law 106-398),
requires the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security
Administration to submit to Congress each year, at or about the
time of the Department of Energy's budget submission to
Congress, a future years nuclear security program. The future
years program shall cover the fiscal year for which the budget
is submitted and at least the four succeeding years and shall
specify proposed budget authority and describe in detail how
the funds will be used to support the mission of the NNSA. The
committee observes that it has still not received the future
years nuclear security program that was to have been submitted
with the fiscal year 2002 budget request, although it
understands that such a document has been prepared. The
committee expects to receive this document not later than the
submission date of the fiscal year 2003 budget request.
Computer security
The committee recommends $448.9 million, the budget
request, for Safeguards and Security. The authorization
includes $30.0 million for the Integrated Cyber Security
Initiative (ICSI) program, which when combined with the base
program, doubles funding for cyber security over the fiscal
year 2001 level. At the same time, the committee notes the
Administrator's concern that the current budget does not allow
the National Nuclear Security Administration to address the
long-term solutions set forth in the ICSI plan submitted to
Congress in March 2001. The committee understands the need to
prioritize requirements, but given events of the past several
years, is highly sensitized to computer security issues, and
intends to closely monitor this topic in future budget cycles.
Critical weapons components
The committee understands that certain materials and
components are absolutely critical to the functioning of
nuclear weapons, that these items have little or no application
outside the nuclear weapons complex, and that it is therefore
incumbent upon the Department of Energy to take all steps
necessary to ensure their future availability in sufficient
quantity and quality to meet the needs of the enduring
stockpile. Of special interest are tritium, which has not been
produced since 1988, and plutonium pits, which have not been
manufactured since 1989. To a significant extent, the success
of the National Nuclear Security Administration will hinge on
its ability to solve these long-standing deficiencies.
The committee recommends $139.5 million for the tritium
readiness campaign. This includes an increase of $15.0 million
to support preliminary design activities and engineering
development and demonstration work for the back-up technology,
accelerator production of tritium (APT). The committee urges
the NNSA to complete these APT activities as soon as possible
to make resources available for other critical needs.
Using the primary technology, the tritium campaign appears
on schedule to begin irradiation of tritium-producing rods in
commercial light water reactors in fiscal year 2003 and to
begin production extraction in fiscal year 2006. If the
Strategic Defense Review does not lead to new reductions in the
nuclear weapons stockpile, the committee notes that this
schedule may lead to a one-year draw down in the five-year
tritiumreserve. However, the committee believes replenishment
of this reserve can be made up in future production.
Production and certification of plutonium pits remain
congressional interest items. For the pit manufacturing and
certification campaign, the committee recommends the budget
request of $128.5 million, including $122.5 million for W88 pit
manufacturing and certification, $4.0 million to begin the task
of understanding manufacturing and certification requirements
for other stockpile warheads, and $2.0 million to support pre-
conceptual design activities in support of a modern pit
facility.
The committee understands that only one W88 warhead
surveillance pit remains for destructive testing purposes but
notes good progress toward establishing a limited manufacturing
capability at Los Alamos National Laboratory, with production
of certifiable pits scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2003.
In contrast, W88 pit certification has slipped from fiscal
year 2007 to fiscal year 2009, with no commitment to meeting
the latter date. The committee understands both the difficulty
of certifying a pit with extremely high confidence in the
absence of nuclear testing, as well as the potential national
security consequences of a failure in this area. The committee
is concerned that the budget request woefully under funds this
important activity and urges the NNSA to place higher priority
on pit certification in future budget submissions.
Finally, the committee notes that it still has not received
the report required by the conference report accompanying the
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year
2001 (H. Rept. 106-907), which contains current project
schedules and cost estimates for production and certification
of W88 pits. The committee understands that the report is
complete and requests its expeditious submission.
Defense Nuclear Counterintelligence budget
The budget request contained $46.4 million for the
Department of Energy's counterintelligence activities. The
committee notes that section 3232 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65)
established the Office of Defense Nuclear Counterintelligence
within the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). The
committee also notes that section 3251 of Public Law 106-65
required that the budget request for offices of the NNSA be set
forth separately from other elements of the Department. The
committee expects that the Department will comply with section
3251 of Public Law 106-65 in the future and that budget
requests for the NNSA's Office of Defense Nuclear
Counterintelligence will be set forth separately from the
requests for the Department's Office of Counterintelligence.
Directed stockpile work
Of the various activities performed by the National Nuclear
Security Administration, directed stockpile work has arguably
the most immediate impact on maintaining the safety,
reliability, and performance of the enduring nuclear weapons
stockpile. The committee recommends the budget request of
$1,043.8 million for this important effort.
The committee notes the continuing progress of the W87
Peacekeeper intercontinental ballistic missile warhead life
extension program, the first major retrofit of a nuclear
warhead in a decade. The committee further notes that
preparatory activities leading up the to the refurbishment of
the B61 gravity bomb are on schedule for a first production
unit in fiscal year 2004.
The committee is somewhat concerned, however, that the
budget request does not support the scope and schedule of
refurbishment activities on the W76 submarine launched
ballistic missile warhead and the W80 cruise missile warhead
that were agreed in the Nuclear Weapons Council in fiscal year
2000. The committee expects to be apprised of the
Administration's preferred path forward as the results of the
ongoing Strategic Defense Review are finalized.
Facilities and infrastructure
The committee notes that almost half of the structures in
the nuclear weapons complex are more than 50 years old and
understands the magnitude of the problem to revitalize the
complex as currently sized. The committee is aware of the
Department of Energy's ongoing assessment and planning
activities to address this problem but, given the total funding
requirement, is concerned that the Department is not yet
prepared to efficiently execute this infrastructure
revitalization effort. The committee directs the Administrator
of the Nuclear National Security Administration to provide a
semi-annual report to Congress on the status of the facilities
and infrastructure program. The report should include the
current priority list of proposed facilities and infrastructure
projects, including cost and schedule requirements. For each
site, the report should include: a current 10-year site plan
that demonstrates the reconfiguration of its facilities and
infrastructure to meet its missions and to address its long-
term operational costs and return on investment; the current
budget for all facilities and infrastructure funding in this
program as well as all funding for maintenance and
infrastructure upgrades funded through other parts of the
budget; and the current status of each facilities and
infrastructure project compared to the original baseline cost,
schedule, and scope.
The committee recommends $50.6 million to establish a new
program line for infrastructure maintenance and re-
capitalization. In order to ensure the future operational
readiness of the weapons complex, the committee directs that
these funds should be used to begin to the revitalization of
the Pantex and Y12 plants in the amounts of $40.0 million and
$10.6 million, respectively.
International nuclear safety
The committee is aware that the International Nuclear
Safety program is designed to improve the safety of the
Chernobyl-generation, Russian-designed nuclear reactors located
in the countries of the former Soviet Union. The program is
funded by the U.S. Department's of Energy and State with
contributions by European countries located in proximity to the
states of the former Soviet Union.
The committee believes that it would be more appropriate
for the International Nuclear Safety program to be funded as a
foreign assistance effort by the Department of State.
Consequently, the committee recommends that the funding
responsibility for theInternational Nuclear Safety program be
assumed by the Department of State in the budget for fiscal year 2003.
If Department of State officials require Department of Energy technical
assistance, such assistance should be provided as ``work for others''
and funded by the Department of State.
Initiatives for proliferation prevention and the Nuclear Cities
Initiative
The budget request contained $22.1 million for the
Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention (IPP) and $6.6 million
for the Nuclear Cities Initiatives (NCI). The objective of each
of these programs is to provide gainful employment in the
commercial sector for former Russian nuclear weapons
scientists, engineers, and technicians to avert the risk of
these scientists accepting employment offers by nuclear
programs of countries of proliferation concern. NCI is also
designed to assist the Russian Ministry of Atomic Energy
(MINATOM) in the restructuring and closure of portions of the
Russian nuclear complex through local economic development.
In May 2001, the General Accounting Office (GAO) reported
on these programs and found that the NCI program insufficiently
reviewed potential projects for commercial viability and
sustainability. GAO reported that too often the NCI programs
were directed to community development and infrastructure
improvement instead of economic development designed to employ
former nuclear scientists. Conversely, GAO reports that the IPP
program has a strengthened project review and selection process
that focuses on the commercialization of projects and job
creation. GAO recommended that since IPP and NCI share a common
goal and, in many cases, are implementing similar types of
projects, the National Nuclear Security Administration should
consider consolidating them into one effort. The committee
agrees with this recommendation and directs such consolidation
in section 3133.
In addition, the committee is concerned that, according to
GAO, only 30 percent of the NCI funds have been spent for
projects and activities in Russia and that two-thirds of NCI
funds were spent at the Department's national laboratories. Of
that amount, 34 percent paid for labor at the laboratories, and
41 percent was spent on overhead costs. The committee believes
that the Administrator of the NNSA should work to reduce the
portion of funds spent on overhead at the national laboratories
for these nonproliferation activities and transfer that funding
to the projects in Russia that the programs are designed to
support.
National Ignition Facility
The budget request contained $467.9 million for the
Inertial Confinement Fusion and High Yield campaign: $222.9
million for operations and maintenance (O&M) and $245.0 million
for National Ignition Facility (NIF) construction (96-D-111).
The committee recommends the budget request for NIF
construction and $232.9 million for O&M, an increase of $10.0
million, to be used to compensate for funding shortfalls in the
NIF demonstration program, which supports risk reduction and
technology development activities. The committee notes
significant improvements in NIF program oversight, management,
and planning but is concerned about the remaining technical
challenges the program faces. The committee expects to be
expeditiously informed of any further schedule delays or cost
overruns.
Although NIF provides exciting opportunities in basic and
applied research for a broader user community, the committee
believes that its primary focus must be meeting the
requirements of the Stockpile Stewardship Program to guarantee
the safety, reliability, and performance of the nuclear weapons
stockpile, and that it should be managed accordingly.
National Nuclear Security Administration's planning, programming, and
budgeting system
The committee notes that several independent observers have
criticized the lack of a unified planning, programming, and
budgeting process within the nuclear weapons complex. The
committee further notes that the Administrator of the National
Nuclear Security Administration has pledged to implement such a
system and to begin developing multiyear budgets and program
plans. However, the committee is concerned that the
Administrator has delayed his target date for implementing such
a system until the fiscal year 2004 budget cycle and urges him
to take steps necessary to ensure that there are no further
delays in implementing this system.
National Nuclear Security Administration's reorganization plan
The committee notes that section 3153 of the Floyd D.
Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
(Public Law 106-398) required the Administrator for Nuclear
Security to submit by May 1, 2001, a plan for assigning roles
and responsibilities among the National Nuclear Security
Administration's headquarters and field units. The report
should describe any downsizing, consolidations, or eliminations
of headquarters and field elements needed to enhance the
Administration's efficiency. The committee observes that
independent reviewers have criticized the defense nuclear
complex's fragmented lines of authority, confused roles and
responsibilities, and reliance on a large federal workforce to
oversee its contractors.
The committee notes that on May 3, 2001, the Administrator
submitted an ``initial'' report outlining plans to realign the
Administration's headquarters units into programmatic and
support components and to transfer responsibility for the field
elements to a newly-created support component. The committee is
concerned that the report did not: (1) define field element
roles and responsibilities; (2) describe in detail how field
elements would interact with realigned headquarters units; or
(3) describe potential consolidations or eliminations, as
called for by section 3153 of Public Law 106-398. The committee
is also concerned that the new organization would not be
demonstrably flatter than the Administration's current
structure and that it might create new sources of confusion by
requiring field elements to report to a support office while
overseeing projects for a program office. Consequently, the
committee urges the Administrator to comply fully with section
3153 of Public Law 106-398 and submit, as soon as possible, a
detailed plan for redefining and streamlining the
Administration's entire organization.
Naval Reactors Program
The committee recommends the budget request of $688.0
million for the Naval Reactors program. The committee notes
that the Navy currently operates 102 nuclear reactors, nearly
identical to the number of U.S. commercial power generating
reactors, and that over 40 percent of major combatants rely on
nuclear propulsion. The committee continues to be impressed by
the professional execution of the Naval Reactors program, as
well as its remarkable safety record and overall value to the
nation.
Recruitment and retention
The committee is acutely aware of the problem of recruiting
and retaining a properly skilled work force that the National
Nuclear Security Administration faces in both the contractor
and the federal work forces. The complex is losing talent at a
steady rate through the retirement of senior scientists,
engineers, and technicians with underground test experience, as
well as through the separation of mid-career professionals
leaving for other opportunities. In addition, the Report of the
US Commission on National Security/21st Century (known commonly
as the Hart-Rudman Report) recently ``. . . found broad
consensus that the [national] labs are no longer competitive in
attracting and keeping new scientific talent'', citing a
combination of factors that include lack of a compelling post
Cold War sense of mission, the negative impact on morale of
recent highly public controversies, and superior private sector
opportunities. The committee strongly advises the Department of
Energy to make retention a top priority.
In part, the recruitment problem stems from the dwindling
pool of new university graduates trained in disciplines
relevant to stockpile stewardship that also meet security
clearance requirements for positions of great trust. The
committee strongly supports programs at our nation's
universities that endeavor to reverse the decline of U.S.
leadership in a number critical science and engineering fields,
including high energy density physics, plasma physics, high
field physics, the science of extreme ultraviolet/soft x-ray
light sources, pulsed power engineering, and inertial
confinement fusion research. University programs in these areas
support, in a cost effective manner, the research and training
of our national laboratories' future stockpile stewards.
However, the committee believes that the Department should
pursue innovative approaches to recruitment, such as offering
graduate scholarships in critical science and engineering
disciplines in exchange for a commitment to a period of
national service, as suggested in the Hart-Rudman Report.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations
Section 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration
This section would authorize funds for the National Nuclear
Security Administration for fiscal year 2002.
Section 3102--Defense Environmental Restoration and Waste Management
This section would authorize funds for environmental
restoration and waste management activities of the Department
of Energy for fiscal year 2002.
Section 3103--Other Defense Activities
This section would authorize funds for other defense
activities of the Department of Energy for fiscal year 2002.
Section 3104--Defense Environmental Management Privatization
This section would authorize funds for defense
environmental management privatization activities of the
Department of Energy for fiscal year 2002.
Section 3105--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal
This section would authorize funds for defense nuclear
waste disposal activities of the Department of Energy for
fiscal year 2002.
Subtitle B--Recurring General Provisions
Section 3121--Reprogramming
This section would prohibit the reprogramming of funds in
excess of the amount authorized for the program until the
Secretary of Energy has notified the congressional defense
committees and a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date
on which the notification is received.
Section 3122--Limits on General Plant Projects
This section would limit the initiation of general plant
projects if the current estimated cost for any project exceeds
$5.0 million and would require the Secretary of Energy to
notify the congressional defense committees in the event the
estimated cost of any project exceeds $5.0 million and the
reasons for the cost variation.
Section 3123--Limits on Construction Projects
This section would permit the initiation and continuation
of any construction project only if the estimated cost for the
project does not exceed 125 percent of the higher of: (1) the
amount authorized for the project; or (2) the most recent total
estimated cost presented to Congress as justification for such
project. To exceed this limit, the Secretary of Energy must
report in detail the reason therefore to the congressional
defense committees and the report must be before the committees
for 30 legislative days. Thissection would also specify that
the 125 percent limitation would not apply to projects estimated to
cost under $5.0 million.
Section 3124--Fund Transfer Authority
This section would authorize the Secretary of Energy to
transfer funds to other agencies of the government for
performance of work for which the funds were authorized and
appropriated. The provision would permit the merger of such
funds with the funds made available to the agency to which they
are transferred.
Section 3125--Authority for Conceptual and Construction Design
This section would require the Secretary of Energy to
certify that a conceptual design for a construction project has
been completed prior to requesting funding for that project,
except in the case of emergencies.
Section 3126--Authority for Emergency Planning, Design and Construction
Activities
This section would authorize the Secretary of Energy to
perform planning and design for construction activities
utilizing available funds for any Department of Energy national
security program construction project whenever the Secretary
determines that the design must proceed expeditiously to
protect the public health and safety, to meet the needs of
national defense, or to protect property.
Section 3127--Funds Available for All National Security Programs of the
Department of Energy
This section would authorize, subject to section 3121 of
this Act, amounts appropriated for management and support
activities and for general plant projects to be made available
for use in connection with all national security programs of
the Department of Energy.
Section 3128--Availability of Funds
This section would allow funds authorized for the various
activities of the National Nuclear Security Administration and
environmental management activities of the Department of Energy
to remain available until expended, except for program
direction funds, which would remain available until the end of
fiscal year 2003.
Section 3129--Transfers of Defense Environmental Management Funds at
Field Offices of the Department of Energy
This section would provide the manager of each field office
of the Department of Energy with limited authority to transfer
defense environmental management funds from a program or
project under the jurisdiction of the office to another such
program or project.
Section 3130--Transfers of Weapons Activities Funds at National
Security Laboratories and Nuclear Weapons Production Facilities
This section would provide the head of each national
security laboratory and each nuclear weapons production
facility with limited authority to transfer weapons activities
funds from a program under the jurisdiction of the national
security laboratory or production facility to another such
program of the national security laboratory or production
facility.
Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations
Section 3131--Termination Date of Office of River Protection, Richland,
Washington
This section would extend the statutory termination date of
the Office of River Protection, Richland Washington, from
September 30, 2004, to the later of September 30, 2010, or upon
the determination that continuation of the Office is no longer
necessary to carry out the Department's responsibilities under
the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order
entered into among the Department of Energy, the Environmental
Protection Agency, and the State of Washington Department of
Ecology.
Section 3132--Organizational Modifications for National Nuclear
Security Administration
This section would establish, within the National Nuclear
Security Administration, a Principal Deputy Administrator who
would be appointed by the President with the advice and consent
of the Senate to perform such duties as the Administrator of
the National Nuclear Security Administration may prescribe and
act for the Administrator when the Administrator is disabled or
the office of the Administrator is vacant. This section would
also eliminate: (1) a statutory requirement that the heads of
the national security laboratories and nuclear weapons
production facilities report to the Administration's Deputy
Administrator for Defense Programs; and (2) a duplicative
statutory prohibition on the ability of non-Administration
employees of the Department to serve concurrently in the
Administration.
Section 3133--Consolidation of Nuclear Cities Initiative Program with
Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention Program
This section would require the Administrator for Nuclear
Security to consolidate the Nuclear Cities Initiative program
with the Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention program not
later than July 1, 2002, as described elsewhere in this report.
Section 3134-Disposition of Surplus Defense Plutonium at Savannah River
Site, Aiken, South Carolina
This section would require the Secretary of Energy to
consult with the Governor of South Carolina on any decisions or
plans regarding the disposition of surplus defense plutonium at
the Savannah River Site and to submit a plan to Congress by
February 1, 2002, for the disposal of surplus defense plutonium
currently located at the site, as well as for defense plutonium
that may be shipped there in the future. The plan shall review
each option considered for such disposal, identify the
preferred option, and state the cost of construction and
operation of the facilities required by the Department's Record
of Decision dated January 14, 1997. The plan shall also specify
a schedule for the expeditious construction of such facilities
and the means by which all such plutonium will be removed from
the Savannah River Site. This section would further require the
Secretary to modify the design of the Mixed Oxide Fuel
Fabrication facility to provide immobilization capability if
the Secretary determines that construction of the Plutonium
Immobilization facility at the Savannah River site is not
feasible. If the plan is not submitted by February 1, 2002, the
Secretary would be prohibited from shipping plutonium to the
Savannah River Site from that date forward until the plan is
submitted.
Section 3135-Support for Public Education in the Vicinity of Los Alamos
National Laboratory, New Mexico
This section would authorize the Secretary of Energy to pay
$5.0 million to the Los Alamos National Laboratory Foundation
and an $8.0 million extension of the contract between the
Department of Energy and the Los Alamos Public Schools. For
fiscal year 2003, the section would authorize the Secretary of
Energy to take similar actions subject to the availability of
appropriations.
The section would also require the Secretary to submit to
the congressional defense committees, no later than March 1,
2002, an evaluation of the need for continued payments beyond
fiscal year 2003.
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 3201-Authorization
This section would authorize $18.5 million for the Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board for fiscal year 2002.
TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 3301-Definitions
This section would provide the definitions used in this
title.
Section 3302-Authorized Uses Of Stockpile Funds
This section would authorize $65.2 million from the
National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund for the operation
and maintenance of the National Defense Stockpile for fiscal
year 2002. The provision would also permit the use of
additional funds for extraordinary or emergency conditions 45
days after a notification to Congress
Section 3303--Disposal of Excess Materials from the National Defense
Stockpile
This section would provide authorization for the Department
of Defense to dispose of materials in the National Defense
Stockpile that are no longer needed for national security
purposes.
Section 3304--Expedited Implementation of Authority to Dispose of
Cobalt From National Defense Stockpile
This section would amend section 3305(a)(1) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-
85) to permit the sale of cobalt from the National Defense
Stockpile during fiscal year 2002.
TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 3401--Authorization of Appropriations
This section would authorize $17.4 million for fiscal year
2002 for the operation of the Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale
Reserves.
TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Merchant Marine Academy
The budget request contained $47.8 million for the U.S.
Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA). The committee remains
concerned that health and safety hazards to the cadets and
staff continue due to the appalling condition of the physical
plant and infrastructure at the institution. The budget request
included $13.0 million for needed capital improvements. This
funding level will begin to buy down the backlog of deferred
maintenance and facilities replacement. The committee urges the
Maritime Administration to pursue aggressively funding levels
that will insure that the physical plant at the Academy is
brought up to safe and appropriate commercial standards as
quickly as practicable.
Ship Scrapping
The budget request contained $10.0 million for the disposal
of three obsolete vessels. Section 3502 of the Floyd D. Spence
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public
Law 106-398) required the Administrator of the Maritime
Administration to dispose of all vessels in the National
Defense Fleet that are not assigned to the Ready Reserve Force
or otherwise designated for a specific purpose by September 30,
2006. The committee understands that the Maritime
Administration will need to scrap over 30 vessels per year to
meet the goal of scrapping 140 vessels by the statutorily
imposed deadline. The cost to accomplish this goal will exceed
$350.0 million based on current estimates. While $10.0 million
may be sufficient to develop an initial disposal program in
fiscal year 2002, the committee notes that substantial
additional resources must be provided in future years to meet
the deadlines. The committee strongly urges the Maritime
Administration to present funding levels in the next fiscal
years for this program that are more appropriate to the task
facing the agency. The committee notes that the Navy has had a
ship disposal program since 1999 and has made a number of
refinements in that program that enhance efficiency and at the
same time protect health, safety, and the environment. The
committee expects the Maritime Administration to administer its
ship disposal program in a way that obtains the best value to
the government while providing the same level of protection for
health, safety, and the environment as the Navy program.
Finally, the committee expects that there will be no
discrimination among domestic scrapping facilities and that
domestic scrapping facilities are selected based on criteria
that will result the scrapping of vessels at the least cost to
the government, in a timely way, and in a manner that provides
the requisite level of protection for health, safety, and the
environment.
Title XI Loan Guarantee Program
The budget request contained $3.9 million to fund
administrative expenses associated with the management of the
title XI loan guarantee program. The budget request contained
no funds for costs, as defined in section 502 of the Federal
Credit Reform Act of 1990 (Public Law 93-344). The committee
recommends $103.9 million for the Title XI program, an increase
of $100.0 million above the budget request.
Transfer of the Maritime Security Program to the Department of Defense
The committee notes the proposal of the administration to
transfer the funding and management of the Maritime Security
Program from the Department of Transportation to the Department
of Defense. The committee has not received sufficient
justification to transfer a program that by all accounts is
managed effectively and efficiently at the Department of
Transportation, nor has the committee received any information
that would suggest that DOD operational requirements
necessitate a transfer. In addition, the committee has not been
presented with any evidence that such a transfer would result
in cost savings. The committee is therefore not recommending a
transfer of the Maritime Security Program to the Department of
Defense's National Defense Sealift Fund. To reflect this
decision, the committee has transferred $98.7 million from the
National Defense Sealift Fund (budget function 051) to the
Maritime Administration within the Department of Transportation
(budget function 054).
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Section 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2002
This section would authorize a total of $203.0 million for
fiscal year 2002, an increase of $100 million above the budget
request, for the Maritime Administration. Of the funds
authorized, $89.0 million would be for operations and training
programs, $100.0 million would be for the costs as defined in
section 502 of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (Public
Law 93-344), of loan guarantees authorized by Title XI of the
Merchant Marine Act, 1936, as amended, $3.9 million would be
for administrative expenses related to providing these loan
guarantees, and $10.0 million would be for the disposal of
obsolete ships in the National Defense Reserve Fleet.
Section 3502--Define ``War Risks'' to Vessels to Include Confiscation,
Expropriation, Nationalization, and Deprivation of the Vessels
This section would clarify and expand the authority of the
Maritime Administration to issue war risk insurance coverage
for losses from hostile acts including confiscation,
expropriation, nationalization, and deprivation. As a result of
several recent seizures, commercially available insurance has
become unreasonably expensive, particularly as it relates to
salvage ships. Without insurance, private salvage operators
under contract to the Navy are unable to fulfill their
obligations. This change also expands the coverage to
circumstances that might arguably not fall within the context
of a traditionally defined ``war risk.''
Section 3503--Holding Obligor's Cash as Collateral Under Title XI of
Merchant Marine Act, 1936
This section would amend Title XI of the Merchant Marine
Act, 1936, as amended by establishing a new section that will
allow the Maritime Administration to hold and invest cash
collateral derived from Title XI proceeds in the U.S. Treasury.
It will further relieve obligors and the Maritime
Administration from spending substantial time and money
associated with negotiating depository agreements and preparing
legal opinions in Title XI transactions.
DEPARTMENTAL DATA
The Department of Defense requested legislation, in
accordance with the program of the President, as illustrated by
the correspondence set out below:
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION REQUEST
Department of Defense,
Office of General Counsel,
Washington, DC, June 29, 2001.
Hon. J. Dennis Hastert,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Speaker: The Department of Defense proposes the
enclosed draft legislation, ``To authorize appropriations for
fiscal year 2002 for military activities of the Department of
Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal
year 2002, and for other purposes.''
This legislative proposal is part of the Department of
Defense Legislative Program for the First Session of the 107th
Congress and is necessary to carry out the President's budget
plans for fiscal year 2002. The Office of Management and Budget
advises that there is no objection to the presentation of this
proposal to the Congress, and that its enactment would be in
accord with the program of the President.
Sincerely,
William J. Haynes II,
General Counsel.
Enclosures.
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION REQUEST
Department of Defense,
Office of General Counsel,
Washington, DC, August 16, 2001.
Hon. J. Dennis Hastert,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Speaker: The Department of Defense proposes the
enclosed legislation relating to the operation and management
of the Department of Defense. These proposals are part of the
legislative program for the Department of Defense for the First
Session of the 107th Congress and we urge their enactment.
Enclosed is legislation to authorize military construction
and facility management for the military departments, the
defense agencies, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Security Investment program, and the National Guard and Reserve
components. We propose that the successful pilot program, the
alternative authority for acquisition and improvement of
military housing, be made permanent. We seek your authority to
authorize the Secretaries of the military departments to convey
surplus property, when appropriate, to state or local
governments for conservation of natural resources. We propose a
pilot program in which we can assign certain private sector
personnel to the Department for a limited period so that we can
take advantage of their skills while providing them knowledge
of our processes and methods. We also propose that limitations
on contracting for fire fighting and security guard services be
eliminated so that the Department may contract for such support
when appropriate for our military installations.
We seek the repeal of any limitations on the retirement or
dismantlement of strategic nuclear delivery systems. This will
enhance the President's flexibility to set strategic force
structure for the defense of the United States. We propose the
inclusion of government contractors in chemical weapons
inspections at government-owned facilities under the Chemical
Weapons Convention. We also request authority for the Secretary
of a military department to promote fully-qualified officers to
the grade of captain in the Army, Air Force or Marine Corps or
Lieutenant in the Navy without convening a selection board.
The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is
no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's
program, to the presentation of these initiatives for your
consideration and the consideration of the Congress.
Sincerely,
Daniel J. Dell'Orto,
Principal Deputy General Counsel.
Enclosures.
COMMITTEE POSITION
On August 1, 2001 the Committee on Armed Services, a quorum
being present, approved H.R. 2586, as amended, by a vote of.
58-1.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES
House of Representatives,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC, August 14, 2001.
Hon. Bob Stump,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: This letter concerns the jurisdictional
interest of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
in H.R. 2586, the Department of Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002.
H.R. 2586, as ordered reported by the Committee on Armed
Services, contains many provisions over which the Committee on
transportation and Infrastructure has jurisdiction. As in
previous bills, these include all sections that affect the pay,
benefits, and personnel of the United States Coast Guard and
the United States Coast Guard Reserve.
Our committee recognizes the importance of H.R. 2586 and
the need for this legislation to move expeditiously. While we
have a valid claim to jurisdiction over a number of provisions
in the bill, including many that affect the United States Coast
Guard, I do not intend to request a sequential referral of the
bill. This is, of course, conditional on our mutual
understanding that nothing in this legislation waives or
affects the jurisdiction of the Transportation Committee, that
every effort will be made to include any agreements worked out
by our staffs as the bill is taken to the Floor, and that a
copy of this letter and your response will be included in the
Committee Report and as part of the record during consideration
of the bill by the House.
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure also
requests to be included as conferees on the provisions over
which we have jurisdiction.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Don Young, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, August 29, 2001.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter of August 14,
2001 regarding H.R. 2586, the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2002.
I agree that the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure has valid jurisdictional claims to certain
provisions in this important legislation, and I am most
appreciative of your decision not to request such a referral in
the interest of expediting consideration of the bill. I agree
that by foregoing a sequential referral, the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure is not waiving its
jurisdiction. Further, as you requested, this exchange of
letters will be included in the Committee report on the bill.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Bob Stump, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Education and the Workforce,
Washington, DC, August 28, 2001.
Hon. Bob Stump,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for working with me in your
development of H.R. 2586, the ``National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2002,'' specifically:
1. Section 341, ``Assistance to Local Educational
Agencies the Benefit Dependents of Members of the Armed
Forces and Department of Defense Civilian Employees;
2. Section 342, ``Availability of Auxiliary Services
of Defense Dependents Education System for Dependents
who are Home School Students'';
3. Section 343, ``Report Regarding Compensation for
Teachers Employed in Teaching Positions in Overseas
Schools Operated by the Department of Defense'';
4. Section 509, ``One-year Extension of Expiration
Date for Certain Force Management Authorities'';
5. Section 584, ``Clarification of Military Recruiter
Access to Secondary School Directory Information About
Students.''
As you know, these provisions are within the jurisdiction
of the Education and the Workforce Committee. While I do not
intend to seek sequential referral of H.R. 2586, the Committee
does hold an interest in preserving its future jurisdiction
with respect to issues raised in the aforementioned provisions
and its jurisdictional prerogatives should the provisions of
this bill or any Senate amendments thereto be considered in a
conference with the Senate. We would expect to be appointed as
conferees on these provisions should a conference with the
Senate arise.
Again, I thank you for working with me in developing the
amendments to H.R. 2586 and look forward to working with you on
these issues in the future.
Sincerely,
John Boehner, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC, August 31, 2001.
Hon. Bob Stump,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for working with me regarding
H.R. 2586, the ``National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2002,'' which was referred to the Committee on Armed
Services. As you know, the Committee on the Judiciary has a
jurisdictional interest in this legislation, and I appreciate
your acknowledgement of that jurisdictional interest. While the
bill would be sequentially referred to the Judiciary Committee,
I understand the desire to have this legislation considered
expeditiously by the House; therefore, I do not intend to hold
a hearing or markup on this legislation.
In agreeing to waive consideration by our Committee, I
would expect you to agree that this procedural route should not
be construed to prejudice the Committee on the Judiciary's
jurisdictional interest and prerogatives on this or any similar
legislation and will not be considered as precedent for
consideration of matters of jurisdictional interest to my
Committee in the future. The Committee on the Judiciary takes
this action with the understanding that the Committee's
jurisdiction over the provisions within the Committee's
jurisdiction is in no way diminished or altered, and that the
Committee's right to the appointment of conferees during any
conference on the bill is preserved. I would also expect your
support in my request to the Speaker for the appointment of
conferees from my Committee with respect to matters within the
jurisdiction of my Committee should a conference with the
Senate be convened on this or similar legislation.
Again, thank you for your cooperation on this important
matter. I would appreciate your including our exchange of
letters in your Committee's report to accompany H.R. 2586.
Sincerely,
F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, August 31, 2001.
Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter of August 31,
2001 regarding H.R. 2586, the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2002.
I agree that the Committee on the Judiciary has valid
jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important
legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to
request such a referral in the interest of expediting
consideration of the bill. I agree that by foregoing a
sequential referral, the Committee on the Judiciary is not
waiving its jurisdiction. Further, as you requested, this
exchange of letters will be included in the Committee report on
the bill.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Bob Stump, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Resources,
Washington, DC, August 31, 2001.
Hon. Bob Stump,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for an opportunity to review
the text of H.R. 2586,the National Defense Authorization Act of
2002, for provisions which are within the jurisdiction of the Committee
on Resources. Among these provisions are those dealing with benefits
for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Corps,
environmental review, public lands, and territories of the United
States.
Because of the continued cooperation and consideration you
have afforded me and my staff in developing these provisions, I
will not seek a sequential referral of H.R. 2586 based on their
inclusion in the bill. Of course, this waiver is not intended
to prejudice any future jurisdictional claims over these
provisions or similar language. I also reserve the right to
seek to have conferees named from the Committee on Resources on
these provisions, should such a conference become necessary.
Once again, I appreciate working with you and your staff on
these matters, and look forward to urging my colleagues to
support and pass H.R. 2586.
Sincerely,
James V. Hansen, Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Washington, DC, September 4, 2001.
Hon. Bob Stump,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: On August 1, 2001, the Committee on
Armed Services ordered reported H.R. 2586, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002. As ordered reported by
the Committee on Armed Services, this legislation contains a
number of provisions that fall within the jurisdiction of the
Committee on Energy and Commerce. These provisions include the
following:
Section 509, one-year extension of expiration date
for certain force management authorities.
Section 514, improved disability benefits for certain
reserve component members.
Subtitle A of title 6--Pay and Allowances.
Section 611, one-year extension of certain bonus and
special pay authorities for reserve forces.
Section 612, one-year extension of certain bonus and
special pay authorities for nurse officer candidates,
registered nurses, and nurse anesthetists.
Section 2906, environmental compliance and
environmental response requirements.
Section 3131, termination date of Office of River
Protection, Richland, Washington.
Section 3132, organizational modifications for
National Nuclear Security Administration.
Section 3201, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
Authorization.
I understand that two provisions within my jurisdiction
that are in the bill as ordered reported will be deleted in the
reported version of H.R. 2586: (1) section 316, concerning the
authority of the Department of Defense to accept and store
mercury and (2) section 712, listing requirements regarding a
Presidential task force. Further, I understand that section
3134, dealing with the disposition of surplus plutonium at the
Savannah River Site in Aiken, South Carolina, will be modified
to make clear that it only deals with military surplus
plutonium, and therefore will not fall within my Committee's
jurisdiction.
Recognizing your interest in bringing this legislation
before the House expeditiously, the Committee on Energy and
Commerce agrees not to seek a sequential referral of the bill
based on the provisions listed above. By agreeing not to seek a
sequential referral, the Committee on Energy and Commerce does
not waive its jurisdiction over these provisions or any other
provisions of the bill that may fall within its jurisdiction.
In addition, the Committee on Energy and Commerce reserves its
right to seek conferees on any provisions within its
jurisdiction which are considered in the House-Senate
conference, and asks for your support in being accorded such
conferees.
I request you include this letter as part of the report on
H.R. 2586 and as part of the Record during consideration of
this bill by the House.
Sincerely,
W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Chairman.
FISCAL DATA
Pursuant to clause 3(d) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the committee attempted to ascertain
annual outlays resulting from the bill during fiscal year 2002
and the following four years. The results of such efforts are
reflected in the cost estimate prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, which is included in this
report pursuant to clause 3(c)(3).
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE
In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the House
of Representatives, the cost estimate prepared by the
Congressional Budget Office and submitted pursuant to section
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is as follows:
August 22, 2001.
Hon. Bob Stump,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2586, the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002.
The CBO staff contact is Kent Christensen. If you wish
further details on this estimate, we will be pleased to provide
them.
Sincerely,
Dan L. Crippen.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
Summary: H.R. 2586 would authorize appropriations totaling
$343 billion for fiscal year 2002 for the military functions of
the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Department of Energy.
It also would prescribe personnel strengths for each active
duty and selected reserve component of the U.S. armed forces.
CBO estimates that appropriation of the authorized amounts for
2002 would result in additional outlays of $338 billion over
the 2002-2006 period.
The bill also contains provisions that would raise the
costs of discretionary defense programs over the 2003-2006
period. CBO estimates that those provisions would require
appropriations of $9 billion over those four years.
The bill contains provisions that would reduce direct
spending, primarily through revised payment rates for some
services offered under the Tricare for Life program and certain
asset sales. We estimate that the direct spending savings
resulting from provisions of H.R. 2586 would total $384 million
over the 2002-2006 period and $355 million over the 2002-2011
period. Those totals include estimated net receipts from asset
sales of $44 million over the next five years and $20 million
over 10 years. Because it would affect direct spending, the
bill would be subject to pay-as-you-go procedures.
The bill contains several intergovernmental mandates as
defined by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). CBO
estimates, however, that the costs of complying with those
mandates would not be significant and would not exceed the
threshold as specified in UMRA. The bill also contains
provisions that affect DoD's Tricare long-term care program and
would increase costs in state Medicaid programs. The remaining
provisions of the bill are either excluded under Section 4 of
UMRA, which excludes from the application of that act any
legislative provisions that are necessary for the national
security, or contain no mandates.
Estimated Cost to the Federal Government
The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 2586 is shown in
Table 1. Most of the costs of this legislation fall within
budget function 050 (national defense).
TABLE 1.--BUDGETARY IMPACT OF H.R. 2586, THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-----------------------------------------------------------
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Spending Under Current Law for Defense Programs:
Budget Authority \1\............................ 316,051 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays............................... 301,602 107,667 36,099 13,839 6,256 3,308
Proposed Changes:
Estimated Authorization Level................... 0 342,945 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays............................... 0 226,158 77,322 23,645 8,199 3,000
Spending Under H.R. 2586 for Defense Programs:
Estimated Authorization Level \1\............... 316,051 342,945 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays............................... 301,602 333,825 113,421 37,484 14,455 6,308
CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING (EXCLUDING ASSET SALES)
Estimated Budget Authority.......................... 0 9 -320 -4 -9 1
Estimated Outlays................................... 0 4 -340 -12 6 2
ASSET SALES \2\
Estimated Budget Authority.......................... 0 -22 -32 -16 -5 31
Estimated Outlays................................... 0 22 -32 -16 -5 31
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 2001 level is the amount appropriated for programs authorized by the bill.
\2\ Asset sale receipts are a credit against direct spending.
Note.--This table excludes estimated authorizations of appropriations for years after 2002. (Those additional
authorizations are shown in Table 3.)
Basis of estimate
Spending Subject to Appropriation
The bill would authorize appropriations totaling $343
billion in 2002 (see Table 2). Most of those costs would fall
within budget function 050 (national defense). H.R. 2586 also
would authorize appropriations of $100 million for the Presidio
Trust Fund (function 300--natural resources and environment),
$99 million for the Maritime Administration (function 400--
transportation), $71 million for the Armed Forces Retirement
Home (function 600--income security), and $17 million for the
Naval Petroleum Reserves (function 270--energy).
The estimate assumes that the amounts authorized for 2002
will be appropriated near the start of fiscal year 2002.
Outlays are estimated based on historical spending patterns.
The bill also contains provisions that would affect various
costs, mostly for personnel, that would be covered by the
fiscal year 2002 authorization and by authorizations in future
years. Table 3 contains estimates of those amounts. In addition
to the costs covered by the authorizations in the bill for
2002, these provisions would raise estimated costs by $9
billion over the 2003-2006 period. The following sections
describe the provisions identified in Table 3 and provide
information about CBO's cost estimates for those provisions.
Multiyear Procurement.--In most cases, purchases of weapon
systems are authorized annually, and as a result, DoD
negotiates a separate contract for each annual purchase. In a
small number of cases, the law permits multiyear procurement;
that is, it allows DoD to enter into a contract to buy
specified annual quantities of a system for up to five years.
In those cases, DoD can negotiate lower prices because its
commitment to purchase the weapons gives the contractor an
incentive to find more economical ways to manufacture the
weapon, including cost-saving investments. Funding would
continue tobe provided on an annual basis for these multiyear
contracts, but potential termination costs would be covered by an
initial appropriation.
Section 111 would authorize DoD to extend the authorization
of multiyear procurement for the Family of Medium Tactical
Vehicles by one year through 2002, if the department determines
that it is necessary to do so to prevent a break in production
of the vehicles. Currently, these vehicles are purchased under
a multiyear contract administered by the Army covering a four-
year period ending in 2001. The contract allows for an option
year in 2002 leading to a new multiyear contract. CBO estimates
that the savings from buying the vehicles under the extension
would have little or no budgetary impact because the Army
assumed that the vehicles planned for purchase in 2002 would be
bought at prices similar to prices under the existing multiyear
contract.
TABLE 2.--SPECIFIC AUTHORIZATIONS IN H.R. 2586
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
Category -------------------------------------------------
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Personnel:
Authorization Level....................................... 82,224 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays......................................... 76,995 4,605 164 82 0
Operation and Maintenance:
Authorization Level....................................... 124,357 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays......................................... 93,200 24,264 4,041 1,679 501
Procurement:
Authorization Level....................................... 62,036 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays......................................... 16,208 22,452 13,333 5,013 1,988
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation:
Authorization Level....................................... 47,660 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays......................................... 25,441 17,990 3,138 674 189
Military Construction and Family Housing:
Authorization Level....................................... 10,325 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays......................................... 2,624 3,987 2,303 776 334
Atomic Energy Defense Activities:
Authorization Level....................................... 13,514 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays......................................... 9,162 3,643 709 0 0
Other Accounts:
Authorization Level....................................... 2,746 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays......................................... 2,173 433 77 35 8
General Transfer Authority:
Authorization Level....................................... 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays......................................... 280 -60 -120 -60 -20
-------------------------------------------------
Total
Authorization Level \1\................................... 342,862 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays......................................... 226,083 77,314 23,645 8,199 3,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These amounts comprise nearly all of the proposed changes for authorizations shown in Table 1; they do not
include the estimated authorization of $83 million for the Coast Guard Reserve, which is shown in Table 3.
TABLE 3.--ESTIMATED AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR SELECTED PROVISIONS IN H.R. 2586
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
Category -------------------------------------------------
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MULTIYEAR PROCUREMENT
C-17 Aircraft................................................. 0 -117 -293 -272 -252
FORCE STRUCTURE
DoD Military Endstrengths..................................... 230 475 490 504 519
Coast Guard Reserve Endstrengths.............................. 83 0 0 0 0
Grade Structure............................................... 31 68 84 95 97
18-Month Enlistment Pilot..................................... 0 0 12 12 12
COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS (DoD)
Military Pay Raises........................................... 1,026 1,420 1,490 1,558 1,624
Expiring Bonuses and Allowances............................... 616 478 277 171 114
Travel and Transportation Allowances.......................... 51 274 351 359 367
Increase Incentive Pay and Bonuses............................ 70 99 103 109 115
Housing Allowances............................................ 0 27 36 38 39
New Officer Accession Bonus................................... 18 18 18 20 20
Subsistence Allowances........................................ 6 15 8 3 0
Uniform Allowances............................................ 4 4 4 4 4
Education and Training........................................ 1 6 8 10 13
Other Compensation Provisions................................. -25 8 3 8 7
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM
Payment Rates................................................. -144 -90 0 0 0
Long-Term Care Rules.......................................... -44 0 0 0 0
Non-Availability Statements................................... 0 0 10 10 10
Other Provisions.............................................. 8 5 6 6 6
OTHER PROVISIONS
Limitations on Workforce Reviews.............................. -11 -11 -11 1 105
Service Contracting Reform.................................... 15 26 33 27 24
National Guard Challenge Program.............................. 0 9 11 13 15
War Medals.................................................... 0 4 4 5 5
Acquisition Workforce Reduction............................... -25 -236 -246 -256 -266
Asbestos Differential Pay..................................... -110 -110 -110 -110 -110
Civilian Wage Board Schedule.................................. 3 10 10 11 11
Strategic Forces.............................................. -20 -70 -140 -200 -220
TOTAL ESTIMATED AUTHORIZATIONS
Estimated Authorization Level................................. 1,783 2,312 2,159 2,126 2,260
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--For every item in this table except the authorization for the Coast Guard, the 2002 levels are included
in the amounts specifically authorized to be appropriated in the bill. Those amounts are shown in Table 2.
Amounts shown in this table for 2003 through 2006 are not included in Table 1.
Section 122 would authorize DoD to enter into a new
multiyear procurement contract (or extend the current multiyear
contract) to buy up to 60 additional C-17 aircraft if the
Secretary of Defense certifies to the Congressional defense
committees, before the enactment of this bill, that it is in
the interest of the department to proceed with follow-on
multiyear procurement of the C-17. Under the current multiyear
contract, the Air Force will buy 15 aircraft in 2002 and
another 8 aircraft in 2003. Assuming the Secretary certifies
that it is in the interest of the department to proceed with
follow-on multiyear procurement of up to 60 additional C-17s,
CBO estimates that savings from buying 60 additional C-17s
under this contract arrangement would total $934 million or an
average of about $250 million a year over the 2003-2006 period.
Funding requirements would total just under $8.3 billion
instead of the almost $9.2 billion needed under annual
contracts. This estimate assumes that the Air Force would
purchase the 60 additional aircraft starting in 2003 at a rate
of 15 a year.
Force Structure.--The bill contains various sections that
affect endstrength, personnel grade structure, and periods of
enlistment.
Military Endstrength. The bill would authorize active and
reserve endstrengths for 2002 and would raise the minimum
endstrength authorization in permanent law. The authorized
endstrengths for active-duty personnel and personnel in the
selected reserve would total about 1,387,000 and 865,000,
respectively. Of those selected reservists, about 66,000 would
serve on active duty in support of the reserves. The bill would
specifically authorize appropriations of $82.2 billion for the
discretionary costs of military pay and allowances in 2002. The
authorized endstrength represents a net increase of 3,152
servicemembers that would boost costs for salaries and other
expenses by $230 million in the first year and about $500
million annually in subsequent years, compared to the
authorized strengths for 2001.
The bill also would authorize an endstrength of 8,000 in
2002 for the Coast Guard Reserve. This authorization would cost
about $83 million and would fall under budget function 400
(transportation).
Grade Structure. Sections 415, 423, 503, and 504 would
increase the number of service-members in certain grades.
Section 415 would change the grade structure of active-duty
personnel in support of the reserves and section 423 would
increase the number of Air Force officers in the grade of
major. Section 503 would reduce the time-in-grade required for
promotion to captain in the Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps,
and lieutenant in the Navy when service staffing needs require.
Under section 504, the number of servicemembers in pay grade E-
8 in the Navy, the Marine Corps, and the Air Force would
increase. These changes would not increase the overall
endstrength, but would result in more promotions to these
ranks. CBO estimates these provisions would cost $31 million in
2002, rising to about $100 million by 2006.
18-Month Enlistment Pilot Program. Section 589 would create
a pilot program for 18-month enlistments. CBO estimates that
implementing this section would cost $36 million over the 2004-
2006 period because of the increased recruitment and training
activities needed to accommodate the higher military personnel
turnover rate and maintain endstrength levels. CBO estimates
that implementing this section would increase turnover by
approximately 1,000 positions in the 2004-2006 period, and that
the cost to recruit and train these troops would be about
$34,000 per person.
Compensation and Benefits.--H.R. 2586 contains several
provisions that would affect military compensation and
benefits.
Military Pay Raises. Section 601 would raise basic pay by 5
percent across-the-board and authorize additional targeted pay
raises, ranging from 1 percent to 10 percent, for individuals
with specific ranks and years of service at a total cost of
about $3.1 billion in 2002. Because the pay raises would be
above those projected under current law, CBO estimates that the
incremental costs associated with the larger pay raise would be
about $1 billion in 2002 and total $7.1 billion over the 2002-
2006 period.
Expiring Bonuses and Allowances. Several sections would
extend DoD's authority to pay certain bonuses and allowances to
current personnel. Under current law, most of these authorities
are scheduled to expire in December 2001, or three months into
fiscal year 2002. The bill would extend these authorities
through December 2002. CBO estimates that the costs of these
extensions would be as follows:
Payment of reenlistment bonuses for active-duty
personnel would cost $327 million in 2002 and $174
million in 2003; enlistment bonuses for active-duty
personnel would cost $91 million in 2002 and $140
million in 2003;
Various bonuses for the Selected and Ready Reserve
would cost $64 million in 2002 and $73 million in 2003;
Special payments for aviators and nuclear-qualified
personnel would cost $52 million in 2002 and $55
million in 2003;
Retention bonuses for officers and enlisted members
with critical skills would cost $23 million in 2002 and
cost $13 million in 2003;
Authorities to make special payments to nurse officer
candidates, registered nurses, and nurse anesthetists
would cost $7 million in 2002 and $2 million in 2003;
Accession bonuses for dental officers would have no
cost in 2002 and cost $1 million in 2003. (This
provision authorizes a three-month extension of the
current authority which expires on September 30, 2002);
and
Extension of transition authorities for active and
reserve members, including temporary early retirement
authority, special separation benefit, voluntary
separation incentive, and certain other contingent
benefits would cost $52 million in 2002, and $20
million in 2003.
Most of these changes would result in additional, smaller
costs in subsequent years because payments are made in
installments.
Travel and Transportation Allowances. Sections 631 through
637 would affect travel and transportation allowances by
expanding eligibility or increasing benefits. CBO estimates
that the cost of these changes would be as follows:
Setting minimum per diem rates equal to the standard rates
established for federal civilian travel would have no cost in
2002, but would cost $142 million in 2003 and $731 million over
the 2003-2006 period;
Increasing the maximum daily payment rate from $110 to $180
for temporary subsistence allowances and expanding eligibility
to officers would cost $45 million in 2002 and $287 million
over the 2002-2006 period;
Increasing the maximum weight allowances for junior
enlisted members would have no cost in 2002, but would cost $20
million in 2003 and $98 million over the 2003-2006 period;
Raising the pet quarantine fee reimbursement from $275 to
$675 would cost $1 million in 2002 and $5 million over the
2002-2006 period;
Authorizing dislocation allowances (DLA) for married
servicemembers without dependents where the spouse is a member
of the military, would have no cost in 2002, but would cost $3
million in 2003. Expanding eligibility to receive DLA to
members moving to their first duty station would have no cost
in 2002, but would cost $39 million in 2003. Authorizing a $500
allowance to compensate members who must move for government
convenience (e.g., because of privatization or renovation)
would cost $5 million in 2002. CBO estimates that combined
these three provisions would cost $280 million over the 2002-
2006 period.
In total, these provisions affecting travel and
transportation allowances would cost $51 million in 2002 and
$1.4 billion over the 2002-2006 period. Those provisions with
no cost in 2002 reflect an effective date of January 1, 2003.
Increases in Incentive Pay and Bonuses. Sections 539, 616,
and 617 would expand eligibility for bonuses and increase pay
for personnel with special skills. Section 539 would expand the
population eligible to receive stipends under the Health
Professional Stipend Program to include medical and dental
school students. Assuming the number of participants would
increase gradually, at about 5 percent a year, CBO estimates
section 539 would cost less than $500,000 in 2002 and $7
million over the 2002-2006 period.
Under section 616, certain reservists on inactive-duty
training would be entitled to a full month of aviation career
incentive pay for performing flying duty. Under current law,
reservists receive aviation career incentive pay based on a
daily rate for only the days they perform flying duty. Section
617 would raise the maximum pay rates for servicemembers
performing submarine duty. CBO estimates these pay increases,
effective January 1, 2002, would cost $70 million in 2002 and
$489 million over the 2002-2006 period. Together, these
increases in incentive pay and bonuses would cost $70 million
in 2002 and $496 million over the 2002-2006 period.
Housing Allowances. Section 604 would expand eligibility to
receive the basic allowance for housing (BAH) to junior
enlisted members in grades E-3 and below whoare on leave or
traveling between permanent duty stations. Currently, only members in
grades E-4 and above are eligible to receive BAH under these
conditions. Using DoD's estimate of enlisted accessions, and adjusting
for losses during training, CBO expects that about 175,000 enlisted
members in grades E-3 and below would be eligible to receive BAH while
traveling between permanent duty stations. Assuming members would, on
average, be between duty stations for ten days, and applying the BAH
rates for members with and without dependents, CBO estimates the
average cost per member with and without dependents would be about $210
and $180, respectively. Based on an effective date of January 1, 2003,
CBO estimates expanding eligibility to these servicemembers would have
no cost in 2002, but would cost $27 million in 2003 and $140 million
over the 2003-2006 period.
New Officer Accession Bonus. Section 620 would authorize a
new accession bonus for officers. The amount of the bonus,
limited to $100,000, could be paid in a lump sum or
installments. Based on information from DoD, CBO expects that
the Air Force and the Navy would use this authority starting in
2002, and that the provision would cost $18 million in 2002 and
$94 million over the 2002-2006 period.
Subsistence Allowances. Section 603 would extend the
current authority to provide an additional subsistence payment
when rations-in-kind are not available. DoD plans to prescribe
this incremental subsistence allowance until payments may be
fully offset by the annual increases in basic allowance for
subsistence (BAS). CBO estimates that under DoD's plan,
additional subsistence payments would end in 2005. This section
also would delay the termination of BAS transition authority by
three months, making termination effective on January 1, 2002,
and saving an estimated $15 million in 2002. CBO estimates the
combined effects of implementing these provisions would cost $6
million in 2002 and $32 million over the 2002-2006 period,
assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts.
Uniform Allowances. Section 605 would loosen restrictions
on eligibility of officers to receive an additional $200
clothing allowance by doubling the cap on the dollar amount a
member may receive in an initial clothing allowance over the
prior two years. Under current law, officers are ineligible to
receive the additional allowance if they have received more
than $200 in an initial clothing allowance during the past two
years. Raising the cap would increase the number of officers
eligible for the additional $200 allowance. CBO estimates that
implementing this provision would cost $4 million in 2002 and
$20 million over the 2002-2006 period, subject to appropriation
of the necessary amounts. Because this provision would have an
effective date of October 1, 2000, section 605 would authorize
retroactive payments of this additional $200 allowance and
would thus increase direct spending. Those costs are discussed
later in this estimate under the heading of ``Direct
Spending.''
Education and Training. Section 529 would direct the
National Defense University (NDU) to continue its concept
validation test of joint professional military education for
the reserves and to conduct a pilot program in 2003. The scope
of the pilot program is undefined, but based on information
from NDU, CBO estimates the program will eventually involve
about 500 students at a cost of $10,500 per student per year.
CBO expects that most of the costs in 2003 would be associated
with program startup. CBO estimates minimal cost in 2002
because the validation program would still be ongoing. Overall,
CBO estimates that this section would cost $23 million over the
2002-2006 period.
Section 538 would remove the cap on the number of Junior
Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) units. The services
plan to have 3,185 units in 2002, less than the current cap of
3,500 units. Based on recent growth rates, CBO expects the
number of units would exceed 3,500 in 2005. CBO estimates
implementing section 538 would increase JROTC costs by $2
million in 2005, rising to $5 million in 2006.
Under section 535, servicemembers on regular active-duty
status could participate in the Senior Reserve Officers
Training Corps (ROTC). Under current law, participation in
Senior ROTC is limited to members of the reserves. Based on
information from the military services, CBO expects that the
Air Force and the Army would implement this new authority.
Because the Air Force indicates that it would provide the same
benefits to active-duty Senior ROTC participants as are paid to
those in the Airman Education and Commissioning Program, CBO
estimates no cost impact for the Air Force. The Army indicates,
however, that it would not pay tuition or provide stipends or
scholarships for about 200 active-duty Senior ROTC
participants. Because the Army would save the expense of
Officer Candidate School or ROTC scholarships and stipends for
members who would receive officer training under this section,
CBO estimates savings of $1 million in 2002 and $9 million over
the 2002-2006 period. CBO expects that these members would use
Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) benefits to fund their education.
Therefore, this provision would increase direct spending. Those
costs are discussed later in this estimate under the heading of
``Direct Spending.''
Section 533 would increase the number of international
students authorized to be admitted to the service academies and
would eliminate the restrictions on full tuition waivers. CBO
estimates that this section would cost $17 million over the
2002-2006 period. Removing the restrictions on tuition waivers
would allow about 70 additional international students to
receive full tuition assistance each year. This figure includes
students admitted because of the higher number of international
slots made available under this section, as well as slots that
are currently receiving only partial tuition assistance. The
current cost of tuition for an international student is about
$62,000 a year, and the annual cost of implementing this
section would be about $4 million.
Other Compensation Provisions. Section 619 would allow
servicemembers electing to receive the 15-year career status
bonus to have this bonus paid in installments. Currently this
$30,000 bonus is offered as a lump-sum payment. CBO assumes
that about 10 percent of those electing to receive the bonus
would, on average, choose to receive two payments of $15,000
spread over two years. Because these decisions would shift some
payments from one year into the next, CBO estimates section 619
would save $30 million in 2002 and about $25 million over the
2002-2006 period. The somewhat lower total savings over the
five-year period reflects small costs in some years that result
from the estimated yearly change in the number of
servicemembers with 15 years of service.
Section 507 would allow an active-duty servicemember who is
being separated from the armed services because of a physical
disability to have his separation pay based on the rank to
which he would have been promoted had he not been separated.
Based on current pay tables and information from DoD, about 17
percent of such members would have been approved for promotion
and, under section 507, would be entitled to a 17percent pay
increase in separation pay. CBO estimates implementing section 507
would increase separation pay by about 3 percent or $5 million a year.
Defense Health Program.--Title VII contains several
provisions that would affect DoD health care and benefits.
Tricare is the name of DoD's health care program and the
spending under Tricare for beneficiaries under age 65 is
subject to appropriation. Spending under Tricare for
beneficiaries age 65 and over, often called Tricare for Life
(TFL), is subject to appropriation in 2002, but beginning in
2003 this spending will be paid out of a trust fund and will
not be subject to appropriation.
Payment Rates. Under current law, DoD has the regulatory
authority to set maximum allowable rates for medical services
to limit how much the Tricare program pays to health care
providers. Although DoD has set maximum rates for many
services, it has not yet set rates for hospital outpatient
diagnostic services, including clinical lab work and radiation
services, and long-term care services such as skilled nursing
and home health care services. As a result, Tricare currently
pays 75 percent of billed charges for these services. DoD has
started the regulatory process to establish maximum rates for
the services listed here and estimates it will take upwards of
two years to implement the changes by regulation.
Section 701 would require DoD to implement these rates by
January 1, 2002. Under this provision, DoD would be able to
lower its costs for both hospital outpatient and long-term care
services over the 2002-2003 period before the regulations would
have been implemented. These savings would affect spending
subject to appropriation as well as direct spending for
retirees of the other uniformed services in 2002 and 2003 and
the TFL trust fund that starts operation in 2003. CBO estimates
that the total savings in spending subject to appropriation for
hospital outpatient and long-term care services would be about
$230 million over the 2002-2003 period, assuming appropriations
are reduced by the estimated amounts. Section 701 would affect
two different programs: Tricare (under 65) and Tricare for
Life. Those two effects are discussed below.
By lowering payment rates for hospital outpatient
diagnostic services, DoD would be able to reduce spending on
its beneficiaries under age 65. (This portion of the provision
would not affect beneficiaries age 65 and over because Medicare
is first payer for these services and TFL would only be
responsible for the Medicare deductible and copayments.) Using
data from DoD, CBO estimates that making payment rates for
hospital outpatient diagnostic services equivalent to Medicare
rates would lower Tricare spending for these services by about
30 percent. CBO estimates that lowering the payment rates for
hospital outpatient services would save about $150 million over
the 2002-2003 period, assuming appropriations are reduced by
the estimated amounts.
Under section 701, DoD also would lower the rates paid for
skilled nursing and home health care. This change would
primarily affect the TFL program since beneficiaries under age
65 do not use much long-term care (DoD spent only $10 million
on long-term care for those under 65 in 2000). Savings arise
because Tricare's skilled nursing benefit has no time limit
while Medicare's benefit expires after 100 days. The change in
payment rates would have no impact on Tricare for the first 100
days because Tricare would only be liable for the deductibles
and copayments charged under Medicare. However, this provision
would lower the amount that Tricare would pay for those
beneficiaries who need more than 100 days of skilled nursing
care. Additionally, Tricare would reduce its costs for
providing skilled nursing and home health care to those
beneficiaries who use these services without a prior hospital
stay and are thus not Medicare-eligible.
CBO estimates the savings to Tricare would initially be low
because the Tricare for Life program does not actually begin
operation until the start of fiscal year 2002 and CBO expects
that it will take about a year before all beneficiaries take
full advantage of the program. CBO estimates that lowering
payment rates for skilled nursing and home health care would
save DoD about $80 million in 2002, assuming appropriations are
reduced by the estimated amounts. (There also would be direct
spending savings of about $7 million over the 2002-2003 period
for the other uniformed services, and about $215 million in
2003 for DoD when the trust fund begins operation. CBO's
estimates of those savings is discussed below under the heading
of ``Direct Spending.'')
Long-Term Care Rules. Tricare does not currently require a
hospital stay prior to using long-term care services such as
skilled nursing and home health care. Requiring prior
hospitalizations would reduce the number of beneficiaries who
use long-term care. DoD has started the regulatory process to
require such prior hospitalizations and expects to complete the
process by the start of fiscal year 2004.
Section 704 would require DoD to structure the Tricare
long-term care program to resemble Medicare, which requires
prior hospitalization before being eligible for skilled nursing
and home health care. Under section 704, DoD would be required
to implement this provision on October 1, 2001. Requiring prior
hospitalization under Tricare's long-term care program would
reduce the benefit for those beneficiaries that would otherwise
have used long-term care and would save DoD the cost of
providing this care over the 2002-2003 period before the DoD's
the new long-term care rules would have gone into effect under
DoD's plan. CBO estimates that some of those beneficiaries
would likely be able to get a prior hospitalization before
seeking care. In those instances, Medicare would become the
first payer while a few beneficiaries would end up using
Medicaid. Thus the savings to DoD would be partially offset by
increased costs to both Medicare and Medicaid (discussed
below).
Using data from DoD and the Agency for Healthcare Research
and Quality, CBO estimates that about 3,500 beneficiaries, who
would have used skilled nursing without a hospital stay, would
be affected by these new rules along with about 24,000
beneficiaries who would have used home health care. CBO
estimates that some of those beneficiaries would pay for the
long-term care through Medicare or Medicaid, while others would
pay the costs themselves, use other insurance, or do without
the long-term care. For those beneficiaries who would be
covered by Medicare, DoD would not save the full cost because
Tricare would be liable for all deductibles and copayments.
Taking this information into account, CBO estimates that, under
section 704, Tricare spending would be reduced by about $40
million in 2002, assuming appropriations are reduced by the
estimated amounts. (There would also be direct spending savings
of about $120 million for both the trust fund and the other
uniformed services in 2003 and Medicare and Medicaid costs in
both 2002 and 2003.)
Non-Availability Statements. Under current law, users of
military health care have the option of enrolling in Tricare
Prime, an HMO-like plan that centers its provision of services
around military treatment facilities. Users who do not enroll
in Tricare Prime have the option of using Tricare Extra, a
preferred provider network, or Tricare Standard, a traditional
fee-for-service insurance plan. Beneficiaries who live within
40 miles of amilitary hospital must get a statement from the
hospital that it cannot provide the requested care before the
beneficiary may use Tricare Standard or Extra. Absent that statement,
Tricare does not have to pay for the care received at a nonmilitary
facility.
Section 702 would prohibit the requirement of such
statements beginning sometime in fiscal year 2004 (two years
after the enactment of this bill), unless the Secretary of
Defense certifies that they are still needed for each medical
procedure. Based on information from DoD, CBO expects that the
Secretary of Defense would certify that these statements are
necessary in most cases, although not in all cases. For those
cases where a statement would no longer be necessary, CBO
estimates that this provision would cost about $10 million in
2004 and $30 million over the 2004-2006 period, assuming
appropriation of the estimated amounts.
Other Defense Health Care Provisions. H.R. 2586 also
contains two proposals that would cost relatively little over
the 2002-2006 period. CBO estimates that implementing these two
additional health care provisions would cost $8 million in 2002
and $31 million over the 2002-2006 period.
Section 705 would allow DoD to reimburse the parent or
guardian of minors for travel costs associated with the minor
receiving care at a military treatment facility more than 100
miles away from the minor's home. CBO estimates that this
proposal would cost about $5 million a year.
Section 588 would allow government agencies to pay the
employee's share of the insurance premium paid under the
Federal Employee Health Benefits program, if the employee is
involuntarily called to active duty for a contingency
operation. It also would allow the agencies to reimburse past
premium payments for employees called up after December 8,
1995. CBO estimates that this provision would cost about $3
million in 2002 (primarily for reimbursements), less than
$500,000 in 2003, and $1 million a year beginning in 2004.
Limitations on Workforce Reviews.--Section 331 would limit
the ability of DoD to conduct outsourcing studies to only 3,053
civilian positions in fiscal year 2002. CBO estimates that this
section would cost about $70 million over the 2002-2006 period,
assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts.
DoD currently plans to conduct outsourcing studies on
approximately 13,000 civilian positions in 2002. Under section
331, DoD would review 10,000 fewer positions than planned.
Based on information from the General Accounting Office (GAO)
and DoD, CBO estimates that each outsourcing study takes three
years to accomplish and costs approximately $3,500 per position
studied. CBO estimates that reducing the number of positions
reviewed in 2002 would result in a savings of approximately $34
million over the 2002-2004 period. CBO also estimates that an
additional $51 million would be saved in 2005 because the
department would not have to pay the involuntary separation
costs associated with the workforce reductions resulting from
the reviews. CBO estimates that separation costs would average
$5,200 for each position studied. While actual separation costs
range between $20,000 to $25,000 for each position, the average
cost per position studied considers the fact that only half of
the civilian positions reviewed would result in job
eliminations, and that many of the civilians whose jobs were
eliminated would be transferred to other positions within the
department.
The costs associated with section 331 would result from DoD
having to reduce future savings estimates for the years 2005
and beyond. Based on information from DoD and GAO, CBO
estimates that recurring savings would be approximately $10,500
for each position studied. CBO estimates that, under it's
current plan, DoD would begin to realize savings from
outsourcing studies begun in 2002 in the second half of 2005
and that the annual savings under DoD's current plan would be
approximately $140 million in 2006 and every year thereafter.
Under the proposed limits in this provision, CBO estimates that
DoD would realize savings of only $33 million in 2006 and
thereafter. The reduction in savings for the 2005-2006 period
would be approximately $155 million.
Service Contracting Reform.--Subtitle G of title III would
extend workforce review studies to new requirements and work
previously outsourced to the private sector. CBO estimates that
implementing these sections would cost approximately $125
million over the 2002-2006 period.
Section 383 would require workforce studies on all new
requirements not previously performed by DoD or contractor
personnel that result in contracts greater than $1 million.
Based on information from DoD, CBO estimates that this
provision would affect approximately 10,000 contractor
positions each year and that the cost to review each position
would be approximately $3,500. Because the requirements of this
provision would be phased in over a four-year period so that
only 30 percent of the requirement would need to be met by
2005, CBO estimates that implementing this provision would cost
$20 million over the 2002-2006 period.
Section 385 would require DoD to subject an equivalent
number of contractor positions to workforce reviews for each
civilian position review planned. Based on information from DoD
and GAO, CBO estimates that DoD would study approximately
34,000 contractor positions at a cost of $105 million over the
2002-2006 period.
CBO estimates no significant savings as a result of these
reviews. Although some evidence suggests that subjecting
contractors to competition could reduce costs in some
instances, most estimated savings from workforce reviews are
due to reductions of government personnel and overhead. It is
also uncertain as to what extent government organizations could
organize themselves to formally compete for work currently
performed by the private sector.
National Guard Challenge Program.--Section 587 would
eliminate the spending cap on the National Guard Challenge
Program beginning in fiscal year 2003, and would also increase
the federal contributions to state programs from 60 percent to
75 percent. CBO estimates that implementing this section would
cost $48 million over the 2003-2006 period. CBO estimates that
increasing the federal contributions to 75 percent would
increase the annual cost for each space by about $1,000.
Applying this cost to the 6,600 spaces in the program and
allowing program costs to increase with inflation would result
in an average annual cost for the program of about $10 million
over the 2003-2006 period.
War Medals.--Sections 546 and 547 would establish two new
service medals. Section 546 would create a Korea Defense
service medal for those servicemembers who served in the
Republic of Korea or the adjacent waters at any time during the
period beginning July 28, 1954, and ending at a time to be
determined by the Secretary of Defense. CBO expects that on
average about 200,000 medals would be awarded each year.
Section 547 would authorize a Cold War service medal for
members who served on active duty between September 2, 1945,
and December 26, 1991. CBO estimates that about 500,000
eligible members, or their survivors, would apply each year.
CBOestimates that these provisions would have no cost in 2002,
but would cost $18 million over the 2003-2006 period. CBO estimates no
cost in 2002 to account for the delay in designing and minting these
medals, and processing applications.
Reductions in Defense Acquisition Workforce.--Section 901
would limit the size of the defense acquisition workforce by
requiring a reduction of at least 13,000 military and civilian
personnel during fiscal year 2002. Because the total number of
military personnel is determined by endstrength requirements,
CBO assumes that the provision would lead to their transfer to
other activities rather than separation from the services.
Separations of civilian personnel, who comprise about 80
percent of the acquisition workforce, would account for the
remaining reductions. Because these civilian reductions would
exceed those expected under current law, CBO estimates savings
of $25 million in 2002, $236 million in 2003, and $1 billion
over the 2002-2006 period. Savings would be relatively small
during the first year because the cost of separation payments
would offset most of the initial savings in salaries.
Asbestos Differential Pay.--Under section 1108, federal
wage-grade employees would be subject to the same standards as
general schedule employees when determining eligibility for
environmental differential pay (EDP), based on exposure to
asbestos. Under current law, general schedule employees are
entitled to 8 percent hazard differential pay if they are
exposed to asbestos that exceeds the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) permissible exposure limits. The
current EDP standard for wage-grade employees entitles them to
the same 8 percent of pay, but does not set an objective
measure for determining the level of asbestos exposure
necessary to qualify for EDP. In several instances where wage-
grade employees have sought back pay for EDP, arbitrators found
in favor of the employees when asbestos levels were below those
consistent with OSHA standards. Based on information from DoD
on prior and pending arbitration rulings, CBO expects that
implementing section 1108 would reduce the amount of back pay
federal agencies would be required to pay for EDP based on
asbestos exposure. Assuming these cases would be handled
administratively, CBO estimates establishing OSHA standards for
asbestos EDP would save $110 million in 2002 and $550 million
over the 2002-2006 period, assuming appropriations are reduced
by the estimated amounts.
DoD Civilian Wage-Grade Schedule.--Section 1110 would
establish the same guidelines for determining the pay schedule
for DoD wage-grade employees as those in place, under current
law, for non-DoD wage-grade employees when there are an
insufficient number of comparable positions in the local
private industry to generate the wage schedule. Under current
law, DoD may only consider local private-industry rates when
constructing the wage schedules for various wage areas across
the country. This section would instruct DoD to consider
private-industry rates in both the local area and a similar
wage area, with more comparable private-sector positions. Based
on information from the Office of Personnel Management, CBO
estimates that section 1110 would increase the wages of DoD
wage-grade employees in certain wage areas and would cost $3
million in 2002 and $45 million over the 2002-2006 period,
assuming appropriation of the estimated amounts. The lower cost
in the first year reflects CBO's assumption that the
adjustments to the wage schedules would occur at the same time
of year that the wage schedule would normally be adjusted.
Strategic Forces.--Section 1044 would repeal subparagraph
(D) of section 1302(a)(1) of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85), as amended by
section 1501(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65), to allow DoD to initiate
actions to retire or dismantle the Peacekeeper intercontinental
ballistic missile force. CBO estimates that the provision would
save about $600 million over the 2002-2006 period. Those
savings would come from eliminating the cost to operate the
missiles starting immediately in 2002, eventually saving about
$200 million a year. These savings would be partially offset by
the costs of removing the missiles and warheads from the silos
and the costs of monitoring the silos. CBO assumes that the
retirement process would take about three years and that the
missiles would be completely retired by the end of 2004. CBO
estimates missile retirement costs would total about $100
million over the 2002-2004 period.
Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI).--Section
2804 would permanently extend special authorities to finance
the construction and renovation of military family housing.
Those authorities, which expire on December 31, 2004, allow DoD
to use direct loans, loan guarantees, long-term leases, rental
guarantees, barter, direct government investment, and other
financial arrangements to encourage private-sector
participation in building military housing. Funding for those
activities derives from the Family Housing Improvement Fund and
consists of appropriations to the fund, transfers from other
accounts, receipts from property sales and rents, returns on
any capital, and other income from operations or transactions
connected with the program. Currently the amounts in the fund
are available to acquire housing using the various techniques
mentioned above, but the total value of budget authority for
all contracts and investments undertaken is limited to $1
billion.
Based on how the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
treated recent use of the authority, CBO does not estimate any
budgetary impact from extending the authorities. (This bill
authorizes the appropriation of $2 million to the fund for
fiscal year 2002, and that amount is included in the budget
estimates.) However, CBO believes that OMB's current accounting
for MHPI initiatives is at odds with government-wide standards
for recording obligations and outlays. Those standards call for
different treatments depending on the character of the
transaction. The OMB accounting treats certain initiatives
primarily as credit transactions that have relatively little
cost in terms of recorded obligations and outlays. In contrast,
CBO considers those initiatives as having the characteristics
of lease-purchases, which call for recording higher levels of
up-front obligations and outlays. The Administration's approach
will allow DoD to obligate significantly more federal resources
than the $1 billion limitation for such projects.
Management of the Presidio of San Francisco.--Section 2863
would increase from $50 million to $150 million the amount that
the Presidio Trust may borrow, subject to appropriation, from
the U.S. Treasury. Based on recent spending patterns of the
Trust (which is a wholly owned government corporation that
manages the Presidio in California), CBO estimates that this
money would be borrowed and spent slowly over the next five
years.
Direct Spending
The bill contains provisions that would reduce direct
spending, primarily through revision to payments rates for
certain defense health care program services and certain asset
sales from the National Defense Stockpile. The bill also
contains a few provisions with small direct spending costs. On
balance, CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 2586 would result in
net savings in direct spending totaling $384 million over the
2002-2006 period.
TABLE 4.--ESTIMATED DIRECT SPENDING FROM HEALTH CARE AND OTHER PROVISIONS IN H.R. 2586
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
--------------------------------------------
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING (EXCLUDING ASSET SALES)
Section 535--Active-Duty Participation in Senior ROTC:
Estimated Budget Authority..................................... 1 1 1 1 1
Estimated Outlays.............................................. 1 1 1 1 1
Section 605--Retroactive Uniform Allowances:
Estimated Budget Authority..................................... 3 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays.............................................. 3 0 0 0 0
Medical Care Trust Fund:
Section 701--Payment Rates:
Estimated Budget Authority................................. -2 -220 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays.......................................... -2 -220 0 0 0
Section 704--Long-Term Care Rules:
Estimated Budget Authority................................. 21 -47 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays.......................................... 21 -47 0 0 0
Section 811--Recovery Audits:
Estimated Budget Authority..................................... -11 -55 -6 -10 0
Estimated Outlays.............................................. -16 -75 -14 5 1
Section 2845--Land Conveyance of Navy Property in Maine:
Estimated Budget Authority..................................... 0 1 1 0 0
Estimated Outlays.............................................. 0 1 1 0 0
Subtotal:..........................................................
Estimated Budget Authority..................................... 9 -320 -4 -9 1
Estimated Outlays.............................................. 4 -340 -12 6 2
ASSET SALES \1\
National Defense Stockpile--New Sales:
Estimated Budget Authority..................................... -2 -2 -2 -2 -2
Estimated Outlays.............................................. -2 -2 -2 -2 -2
National Defense Stockpile--Accelerated Cobalt Sales:
Estimate Budget Authority...................................... -20 -30 -14 -3 33
Estimated Outlays.............................................. -20 -30 -14 -3 33
Subtotal:..........................................................
Estimated Budget Authority..................................... -22 -32 -16 -5 31
Estimated Outlays.............................................. -22 -32 -16 -5 31
TOTAL CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING
Estimated Budget Authority......................................... -13 -352 -20 -14 32
Estimated Outlays.................................................. -18 -372 -28 1 33
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Asset sale receipts are a credit against direct spending.
Active-Duty Participation in Senior ROTC.--Section 535
would allow servicemembers to participate in the Senior Reserve
Officers Training Corps (ROTC) while on regular active-duty
status. Under current law, participation in Senior ROTC is
limited to members of the reserves. Based on information from
the military services, the Army would allow about 200 active-
duty enlisted members a year to enroll in college under this
program. While the Army would not pay for their education,
these members would continue to receive pay and benefits during
their college career. CBO expects that these members would use
Montgomery GI Bill benefits to fund their education. Under
current law, CBO assumes that half of these members would not
use their MGIB benefits. Therefore, CBO estimates that section
535 would increase MGIB outlays by $1 million a year, starting
in 2002.
Retroactive Uniform Allowances.--Section 605 would
authorize retroactive payments of an additional $200 clothing
allowance for certain officers who were ineligible during
fiscal year 2001 because they had received more than $200 in an
initial uniform allowance over the prior two-year period. CBO
estimates that these retroactive payments would cost $3 million
in 2002.
Medical Care Trust Fund.--Sections 701 and 704 would change
the way DoD administers long-term care and the way it pays for
that care under the Tricare for Life program. DoD has the
regulatory authority to make the changes that are directed in
these sections but thinks it will take upwards of two years to
implement the changes by regulation. Section 701 would require
that the changes be implemented by January 1, 2002, and section
704 would take effect on October 1, 2001. Accordingly, DoD
would save money over the roughly two-year period before the
regulations would have been implemented. The Tricare for Life
program will begin on October 1, 2001, but the trust fund will
not begin operation until one year later, so only the savings
to DoD in fiscal year 2003 would be considered direct spending
savings. There also would be some minor savings in 2002 for
retirees of the other uniformed services.
Payment Rates. Under current regulations, the Tricare for
Life program will pay all deductibles and copayments associated
with Medicare's skilled nursing benefit andwill pay for skilled
nursing care in excess of the Medicare benefit (100 days).
Additionally, Tricare will pay for skilled nursing and home health care
even if the beneficiary does not have a prior hospital admission.
(Tricare will pay 75 percent of billed charges, with no maximum charge,
until the beneficiary has paid $3,000 in out-of-pocket costs and then
will pay 100 percent of billed charges after that point.) Section 701
would require DoD to set maximum allowable charges for skilled nursing
and home health care, which would lower its cost of providing long-term
care. CBO estimates that implementing new charges based on Medicare
rates would lower what DoD pays for skilled nursing and home health
care by about 30 percent. Under section 701, CBO estimates that direct
spending from the trust fund for DoD retirees would decline by about
$215 million in 2003. (The discretionary savings for 2002 are discussed
earlier in the ``Spending Subject to Appropriation'' section under the
heading of ``Defense Health Program.'')
The Tricare for Life program also covers retired members of
the Coast Guard and retired uniformed members of the Public
Health Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. Health care spending for these retirees is
considered direct spending. Under section 701, CBO estimates
that the other uniformed services would save about $2 million
in 2002 and $5 million in 2003.
Long-Term Care Rules. Under current law, Medicare will not
pay for skilled nursing and home health care unless the
beneficiary has been hospitalized before receiving that care.
Tricare, on the other hand, will pay for long-term care without
a prior hospitalization. For those cases, Tricare becomes the
primary insurance because Medicare will not pay. Section 704
would require DoD to structure its long-term care benefit to
resemble Medicare's, which requires prior hospitalization.
Implementing this provision would lower DoD's costs because
fewer beneficiaries would be eligible for skilled nursing and
home health care. CBO estimates that under section 704, direct
spending from the trust fund would decline by about $120
million in 2003. CBO also estimates that, under section 704,
the other uniformed services would save less than $500,000 in
2002 and about $1 million in 2003. (There would also be
discretionary savings of about $40 million, as discussed
earlier.)
The Tricare for Life program would be able to lower costs
by shifting many of those costs to their beneficiaries and
other government programs, primarily Medicare. CBO estimates
that about 50 percent of individuals who would have used long-
term care without a prior hospital stay would be able to
qualify under the Medicare rules (about 1,600 for skilled
nursing and about 12,000 for home health care). CBO further
estimates that the average cost of skilled nursing is about
$250 a day, and for home health care about $2,300 for 60 days
of care, which is the Medicare benefit. Accordingly, CBO
estimates that under section 704 direct spending for Medicare
benefits would increase by $20 million in 2002 and $70 million
in 2003. In addition, a few beneficiaries would eventually
become eligible for Medicaid, which also provides long-term
care benefits. CBO estimates that Medicaid costs under section
704 would be $1 million in 2002 and $3 million in 2003.
Recovery Audits.--Subtitle B of title VIII would require
federal agencies to conduct specialized audits of those
accounts that purchase at least $500 million of goods and
services from the private sector. The goal of these audits
would be to find and recover sums erroneously paid to private
vendors. The legislation also would allow agencies to retain
and spend some of the funds recovered under certain conditions.
Recovered funds that still would be available for obligation
could be spent on the original purposes of those funds, and 25
percent of all other funds could be spent on management
improvement projects.
CBO estimates that implementing this program would reduce
net direct spending by about $100 million over the 2002-2006
period, by increasing the federal government's recovery of
erroneous payments made in prior years. For this estimate, we
assume that most agencies would audit at least three years of
such payments. Implementing the bill could yield additional
savings from payments made after 2001, but such savings would
depend on future appropriations. In addition, CBO estimates
that the Office of Management and Budget would spend less than
$500,000 a year to oversee and report on the bill's
implementation, subject to be availability of appropriated
funds. The savings from this legislation fall within multiple
budget functions.
CBO expects that the requirement to audit payments would
apply to about $60 billion in annual payments. This total
excludes those accounts that we expect to be audited under
current law and those that OMB would probably exempt from the
bill's requirements, including accounts that fund research,
testing, and procurement of military weapons, finance federal
law enforcement activities, and involve medical records. On
average, CBO assumes the federal government would recover about
0.1 percent of the $60 billion audited, or $60 million a year.
That rate takes into account the difficulty in collecting
overpayments that are more than one year old and the likelihood
that federal agencies will settle for less than full payment on
some of these debts.
CBO estimates that agencies would spend about 45 percent of
recovered funds, which is our estimate of the maximum that
could be spent under this provision. First, we assume that
agencies would spend all of the recovered funds that still
would be available for obligation (i.e., funds that were
provided under multiyear obligation authority). In addition, we
assume that agencies would spend the allowed 25 percent of all
other recovered funds (i.e., those recoveries for which the
original obligation authority has expired). Based on the
obligation authority provided in appropriations for fiscal year
2001, and accounting for certain exclusions that would be
allowed under the bill, CBO estimates that agencies could spend
at most about 45 percent of recovered funds.
Land Conveyance and Other Property Transactions.--Titles
XXVIII and XXIX would authorize a variety of property
transactions involving both large and small parcels of land.
The bill would result in direct spending by authorizing a
conveyance that would reduce offsetting receipts collected by
the federal government. Under section 2845, the Navy would be
authorized to convey 485 acres of property to the state of
Maine or other governmental jurisdictions. Under current law,
however, the Navy will declare that property excess to its
needs and transfer it to the General Services Administration
(GSA) for disposal. Under normal procedures, GSA sells property
not needed by other federal agencies or by non-federal entities
in need of property for public-use purposes such as parks or
educational facilities. Information from GSA indicates that
portions of the land will likely be sold under current law
after the entire parcel is screened for other uses in 2002. As
a result, CBO estimates that the conveyance in the bill would
result in forgone receipts totaling about $1 million in 2003
and $1 million in 2004.
Section 2861 would direct the Secretary of the Interior to
transfer administrative jurisdiction over 35 acres of federal
lands in Park City, Utah, to the Secretary of the Air Force,
for purposes of building a recreational facility. Title XXIX
also would direct the Secretary of the Interior to transfer
administrative jurisdiction over approximately 110,000 acres of
federal lands in San Bernardino County, California, to the
Secretary of the Army. Based on information from the Department
of the Interior (DOI), CBO estimates that those transfers would
not significantly affect the federal budget. According to DOI,
the lands currently generate no significant receipts, and the
agency does not expect the lands to generate significant
receipts over the next 10 years.
CBO estimates that other provisions would not result in
significant costs to the federal government because they would
either authorize DoD to exchange one piece of property for
another or would authorize DoD to convey land that under
current law is likely to be given away.
Concurrent Receipt.--Upon passage of qualifying, offsetting
legislation, section 641 would allow total or partial
concurrent payment of retirement annuities together with
veterans' disability compensation to retirees from the
military, the Coast Guard, the Public Health Service, and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration who have
service-connected disabilities. The provision also would
discontinue special compensation for certain severely disabled
uniformed services retirees.
Under current law, disabled veterans who are retired from
the uniformed services cannot receive both full retirement
annuities and disability compensation from the Department of
Veterans Affairs. Because of this prohibition on concurrent
receipt, such veterans forgo a portion of their retirement
annuity equal to the nontaxable veterans' benefit.
Section 641 would become effective only upon passage of
legislation that would fully offset its costs in each of the
first 10 fiscal years after passage of the offsetting
legislation. If qualifying, offsetting legislation were enacted
in 2001, CBO estimates that implementing this section in 2002
would increase direct spending for retirement payments and
veterans' disability compensation by about $3 billion in 2002,
$17 billion over the 2002-2006 period, and $41 billion over the
2002-2011 period. Because those effects are contingent upon
subsequent legislation, they are not included in Table 4.
In addition, the military retirement system is financed in
part by an annual payment from appropriated funds to the
military retirement trust fund, based on an estimate of the
system's accruing liabilities. If section 641 were implemented,
the yearly contribution to the military retirement trust fund
(an outlay in budget function 050) would increase to reflect
the added liability from the expected increase in annuities to
future retirees. CBO estimates that implementing this provision
would increase such payments by about $1 billion in 2002, and
$6 billion over the 2002-2006 period, assuming appropriation of
the necessary amounts.
Other Provisions.--The following provisions would have an
insignificant budgetary impact on direct spending:
Section 514 would allow officers, whose mandatory
retirement has been deferred for medical reasons, to further
postpone their retirement for up to 30 days.
Section 512 would allow the Service Secretaries to hold
special selection boards to consider reserve officers from
below the promotion zone who, through error, were either not
considered for promotion or were passed over on or after
October 1, 1996. Under current law, special selection boards
may only consider members who were in or above the promotion
zone. Because members would be entitled to back pay if they
receive retroactive promotions, enacting this provision would
increase direct spending. CBO expects the number of retroactive
promotions to be small and we estimate that outlays would
increase by less than $500,000 a year.
Section 514 would allow disability retirement for
reservists whose disability was incurred or aggravated while
remaining overnight before inactive-duty training, or between
successive periods of such training. Currently, reservists are
only covered during overnight stays for such periods if they
are outside reasonable commuting distance of their residences.
Section 515 would reduce the time-in-grade requirement for
certain reserve officers who are retired because of a non-
service-connected disability. In order to retire at a given
grade, they would have to have served six months in that grade,
rather than the three years required under current law.
Section 528 would allow the National Defense University
(NDU) to collect and spend tuition receipts for up to 10
civilian students from the private sector at any one time.
Currently, NDU accepts about 3 civilian students a year, on
average, and their tuition is paid to the Treasury. CBO
estimates this section would result in a negligible loss of
receipts to the Treasury.
Section 542 would require the military to review the
records of certain Jewish American and Hispanic American war
veterans to determine if any of these veterans should be
awarded the Medal of Honor. A $600 a month pension is available
to living Medal of Honor recipients. Based on similar reviews
in the past, CBO estimates that a small number of awards would
be presented (many posthumously), resulting in an increase in
direct spending of less than $500,000 a year.
Section 574 would allow DoD to accept voluntary legal
services as a way to provide legal help to DoD beneficiaries.
Although the service is voluntary, in the event of a legal
malpractice suit the government would be liable for any claims
against the legal volunteer. Payment of those claims is
considered direct spending, but CBO estimates that this
provision would cost less than $500,000 each year.
Section 713 would establish a pilot program to allow
certain hospitals to provide trauma and other medical care to
individuals who are not currently eligible for care at military
treatment facilities. The hospital would bill the individuals
based on private rates and would have the authority to spend
the receipts collected without the requirement for annual
appropriations. Based on information provided by DoD, CBO
estimates that the department would collect and spend less than
$500,000 a year.
Section 1104 would provide greater pension portability for
certain civilian employees who have been employed by a
Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality (NAFI) and then become
federal workers or vice versa. The provision would make it
easier for workers who move between a NAFI employer and the
civil service to transfer any accrued service credits from one
retirement system to another. Based on information from DoD
indicating relatively few workers would be affected by this
provision, CBO estimates that section 1104 would change direct
spending by less than $500,000 a year.
Asset sales
The bill would authorize DoD to sell certain materials
contained in the National Defense Stockpile that are obsolete
or excess to stockpile requirements. CBO estimates that DoD
would be able to sell the materials authorized for disposal and
achieve receipts totaling about $2 million in 2002, $10 million
over the 2002-2006 period, and $20 million over the 2002-2011
period.
The bill also would accelerate by one year the disposal of
cobalt that was previously authorized for sale in the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-
85). The 1998 bill authorized the sale of all remaining cobalt
starting in 2003. The sales of cobalt authorized for disposal
under earlier bills are projected to be completed this year.
This bill would allow all remaining cobalt to be sold starting
in 2002, thus avoiding a one-year gap in sales. CBO estimates
that DoD would be able to expedite that disposal without
impacting current market prices, resulting in more receipts
from asset sales over the next five years but no net budgetary
impact over the 2002-2011 period.
Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act sets up pay-as-you-go procedures
for legislation affecting direct spending or receipts. The net
changes in direct spending that are subject to pay-as-you-go
procedures are shown in Table 5. For the purposes of enforcing
pay-as-you-go procedures, only the effects in the current year,
the budget year, and the succeeding four years are counted.
TABLE 5.--ESTIMATED IMPACT OF H.R. 2586 ON DIRECT SPENDING AND RECEIPTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes in outlays............................................. 0 -18 -372 -28 1 33 33 -1 -1 -1 -1
Changes in receipts............................................ Not applicable
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: Section 4 of
UMRA excludes from the application of that act any legislative
provisions that are necessary for the national security. Many
of the provisions in this bill would fall under that exclusion.
Other sections of HR 2586 contain several intergovernmental
mandates, including two preemptions of state law. None of the
mandates would impose significant costs; therefore, the
threshold established by UMRA ($56 million for
intergovernmental mandates in 2001, adjusted annually for
inflation) would not be exceeded. The bill also would provide
for several land conveyances between the federal government and
state, local, and tribal governments and includes provisions
that would protect those governments from unnecessary cleanup
costs should an environmental hazard be discovered on that
land.
A provision in title 5 (Military Personnel Policy) would
require public secondary schools to provide military recruiters
with access to students and to student information in the same
manner that such access and information is provided to
employers and institutions of higher education. The requirement
to provide access and information to the military would be a
mandate as defined by UMRA. Because this information is already
provided to other parties, the costs of complying with this
mandate would be minimal.
The two preemptions in this bill deal with land management.
Section 2811 (Use of Military Installations for Certain
Recreational Activities) would amend current law to allow the
Secretary of Defense to waive compliance with state or
territorial fish and game laws at a military installation or
facility if the Secretary determines that those laws could
result in undesirable consequences for public safety or adverse
effects on morale. Under current law, the Secretary must
require each military installation or facility under the
jurisdiction of any military department to adhere to the
appropriate fish and game laws. Such a preemption of state law
would be a mandate. However, the costs of complying with this
mandate would be minimal, since the states would not be
required to take any specific action or spend any money to
comply.
Section 2864 (Effect of Limitation on Construction of Roads
or Highways, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, California)
would preempt any California state law passed after January 1,
2001, that directly or indirectly prohibits or restricts the
construction or approval of a road or highway within an
easement granted by the Secretary of the Navy on the Camp
Pendleton Marine Corps Base. The costs of complying with this
mandate also would be minimal since the state would not be
required to take any specific action or spend any money to
comply.
Finally, the changes to DoD's Tricare long-term care
program would result in additional Medicaid costs to states of
about $1 million in 2002 and over $2 million in 2003. Because
states have sufficient flexibility in the Medicaid program to
alter their programmatic and financial responsibilities, these
additional costs would not result from intergovernmental
mandates as defined in UMRA.
Previous CBO estimate: On May 22, 2001, CBO prepared a cost
estimate for S. 170 and H.R. 303, identical bills titled the
Retired Pay Restoration Act of 2001. S. 170 and H.R. 303 would
provide identical benefits to those specified in Section 641 of
H.R. 2586. If section 641 is implemented by October 1, 2001,
the costs would be identical to those estimate for S. 170 and
H.R. 303. As noted above, however, the provisions of section
641 cannot be implemented until additional legislation is
enacted (to offset the section's costs). S. 170 and H.R. 303 do
not contain such a contingency requirement.
Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Military Construction
and Other Defense: Kent Christensen; Military and Civilian
Personnel: Dawn Regan; Civilian Retirement: Geoffrey Gerhardt;
Stockpile Sales and Strategic Forces: Raymond Hall. Military
Retirement: Sarah Jennings; Health Programs: Sam Papenfuss;
Multiyear Procurement: Jo Ann Vines; Maritime Administration:
Deborah Reis; Naval Petroleum Reserves: Lisa Cash Driskill;
Operations and Maintenance: Matthew A. Schmit. Impact on State,
local, and tribal governments: Elyse Goldman. Impact on the
private sector: R. William Thomas.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE
Pursuant to clause 3(d) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the committee generally concurs with
the estimates as contained in the report of the Congressional
Budget Office.
OVERSIGHT FINDINGS
With respect to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, this legislation results from
hearings and other oversight activities conducted by the
committee pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X.
With respect to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives and section 308(a) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this legislation does not
include any new spending or credit authority, nor does it
provide for any increase or decrease in tax revenues or
expenditures. The bill does, however, authorize appropriations.
Other fiscal features of this legislation are addressed in the
estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974.
With respect to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the committee has not received a
report from the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight
pertaining to the subject matter of H.R. 2586.
GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
With respect to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, this legislation would address
several general and outcome-related performance goals and
objectives. The general goal and objective of this legislation
is to improve the quality of life for military personnel and
their families, military readiness, the modernization and
eventual transformation of the armed forces, to enhance the
development of ballistic missile defenses, and to improve the
condition of military housing and facilities.
With respect to the outcome-related goal of improving the
quality of life for military personnel and their families, the
objective of this legislation is to:
(1) ensure the largest military pay raise since
fiscal year 1982 that would provide every service
member, after pay table adjustments contained in this
legislation, with a pay raise between 5 and 10 percent
effective on January 1, 2002;
(2) reduce out-of-pocket housing costs for military
personnel to less than 12 percent;
(3) reduce the financial burden of permanent-change-
of-station moves on families by providing increased
reimbursement of temporary lodging and subsistence
expenses;
(4) eliminate unfair provisions in current law that
cause military retirees eligible for veteran's
disability compensation to have their military retired
pay reduced; and (5) satisfy $95 million of the
unfunded personnel requirements identified by the
service chiefs.
With respect to the outcome-related goal of improving
military readiness, the objective of this legislation is to:
(1) increase funding for key readiness accounts by
$7.5 billion above the fiscal year 2001 level; and (2)
improve readiness through recruitment and retention by
boosting military special pays, enhancing incentives
for individuals to join Reserve Officer Training Corps
programs, and extending numerous enlistment and
reenlistment bonuses.
With respect to the outcome-related goal of improving the
modernization and eventual transformation of the armed forces
and enhancing the development of ballistic missile defenses,
the objective of this legislation is to:
(1) increase funding for military procurement
accounts by $442.1 million;
(2) satisfy more than $250 million of the unfunded
procurement requirements identified by the service
chiefs;
(3) increase funding for military research and
development accounts by $228.5 above the budget
request, for a total increase of $6.7 billion above the
fiscal year 2001 level; and (4) support the approach of
the President's ballistic missile defense program and
to increase funding for ballistic missile defense
programs by $2.9 billion above the fiscal year 2001
level.
With respect to the outcome-related goal of improving
military housing and facilities, the objective of this
legislation is to:
(1) increase funding for military construction and
military family housing programs by $1.8 billion more
than the fiscal year 2001 level; and (2) make permanent
the authority provided by current law to privatize
military housing.
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT
Pursuant to Rule XIII, clause 3(d)(1) of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the committee finds the authority for
this legislation in Article I, Section 8 of the United States
Constitution.
STATEMENT OF FEDERAL MANDATES
Pursuant to section 423 of Public Law 104-4, this
legislation contains no federal mandates with respect to state,
local, and tribal governments, nor with respect to the private
sector. Similarly, the bill provides no federal
intergovernmental mandates.
RECORD VOTES
In accordance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, record and voice votes were taken
with respect to the committee's consideration of H.R. 2586. The
record of these votes is attached to this report.
The committee ordered H.R. 2586 reported to the House with
a favorable recommendation by a vote of 58-1, a quorum being
present.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995
* * * * * * *
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
* * * * * * *
Subtitle B--Army Programs
* * * * * * *
[SEC. 116. BUNKER DEFEAT MUNITION ACQUISITION PROGRAM.
[The Secretary of the Army, in acquiring munitions under the
bunker defeat munition weapons acquisition program--
[(1) may acquire only those munitions that are
designated as ``type classified, limited procurement
for contingency operations''; and
[(2) may not acquire more than 8,500 such munitions.]
* * * * * * *
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
* * * * * * *
Subtitle B--Professional Military Education
* * * * * * *
[SEC. 912. BOARD OF ADVISORS FOR MARINE CORPS UNIVERSITY.
[The Secretary of the Navy shall establish a board of
advisors for the Marine Corps University. The Secretary shall
ensure that the board is established so as to meet all
requirements of the appropriate regional accrediting
association.]
* * * * * * *
----------
TITLE 10, UNITED STATES CODE
* * * * * * *
Subtitle A--General Military Law
PART I--ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
Chap. Sec.
Definitions....................................................101
* * * * * * *
PART II--PERSONNEL
* * * * * * *
Department of Defense Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care1111[.]
* * * * * * *
PART IV--SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT
* * * * * * *
Space Programs................................................2271
* * * * * * *
PART I--ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 2--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 115. Personnel strengths: requirement for annual authorization
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Upon determination by the Secretary of Defense that such
action is in the national interest, the Secretary may--
(1) increase the end strength authorized pursuant to
subsection (a)(1)(A) for a fiscal year for any of the
armed forces by a number equal to not more than [1] 2
percent of that end strength;
* * * * * * *
(d) In counting active-duty personnel for the purpose of the
end-strengths authorized pursuant to subsection (a)(1), persons
in the following categories shall be excluded:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(10) Members of reserve components on active duty to
prepare for and to perform funeral honors functions for
funerals of veterans in accordance with section 1491 of
this title.
(11) Members on full-time National Guard duty to
prepare for and perform funeral honors functions for
funerals of veterans in accordance with section 1491 of
this title.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 118. Quadrennial defense review
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) CJCS Review.--(1) Upon the completion of each review
under subsection (a), the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
shall prepare and submit to the Secretary of Defense the
Chairman's assessment of the review, including the Chairman's
assessment of risk.
(2) As part of his assessment under paragraph (1), the
Chairman shall provide his assessment of the assignment of
functions (or roles and missions) to the armed forces and such
recommendations for changes thereto as the Chairman considers
necessary to achieve maximum efficiency of the armed forces. In
preparing such assessment, the Chairman shall consider (among
other matters) the following:
(A) Unnecessary duplication of effort among the armed
forces.
(B) Changes in technology that can be applied
effectively to warfare.
(3) The Chairman's assessment shall be submitted to the
Secretary in time for the inclusion of the assessment in the
report. The Secretary shall include the Chairman's assessment,
together with the Secretary's comments, in the report in its
entirety.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 119. Special access programs: congressional oversight
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g) In this section, the term ``defense committees'' means--
(1) * * *
(2) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee
on Appropriations, and the [National Security
Subcommittee] Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee
on Appropriations, of the House of Representatives.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 3--GENERAL POWERS AND FUNCTIONS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 123. Authority to suspend officer personnel laws during war or
national emergency
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Upon the termination of a suspension made under the
authority of subsection (a) of a provision of law otherwise
requiring the separation or retirement of officers on active
duty because of age, length of service or length of service in
grade, or failure of selection for promotion, the Secretary
concerned shall extend by up to 90 days the otherwise required
separation or retirement date of any officer covered by the
suspended provision whose separation or retirement date, but
for the suspension, would have been before the date of the
termination of the suspension or within 90 days of the date of
such termination.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 130c. Nondisclosure of information: certain sensitive information
of foreign governments and international
organizations
(a) * * *
(b) Information Eligible for Exemption.--For the purposes of
this section, information is sensitive information of a foreign
government only if the national security official concerned
makes each of the following determinations with respect to the
information:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) That any of the following conditions are met:
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) The information is an item of
information, or is in a category of
information, that the national security
official concerned has specified in regulations
prescribed under subsection [(f )] (g) as being
information the release of which would have an
adverse effect on the ability of the United
States Government to obtain the same or similar
information in the future.
* * * * * * *
(d) Limitations.--(1) If a request for disclosure covers any
sensitive information of a foreign government (as described in
subsection (b)) that came into the possession or under the
control of the United States Government before [the date of the
enactment of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2001] October 30, 2000, and more than 25
years before the request is received by an agency, the
information may be withheld only as set forth in paragraph (3).
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 4--OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
Sec.
131. Office of the Secretary of Defense.
* * * * * * *
[137. Director of Defense Research and Engineering.]
137. Under Secretary of Defense for Space, Intelligence, and
Information.
* * * * * * *
139a. Director of Defense Research and Engineering.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 131. Office of the Secretary of Defense
(a) * * *
(b) The Office of the Secretary of Defense is composed of the
following:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(6) The Under Secretary of Defense for Space,
Intelligence, and Information.
[(6)] (7) The Director of Defense Research and
Engineering.
[(7)] (8) The Assistant Secretaries of Defense.
[(8)] (9) The Director of Operational Test and
Evaluation.
[(9)] (10) The General Counsel of the Department of
Defense.
[(10)] (11) The Inspector General of the Department
of Defense.
[(11)] (12) Such other offices and officials as may
be established by law or the Secretary of Defense may
establish or designate in the Office.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 133a. Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Technology
(a) * * *
(b) The Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Technology [shall assist the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Technology] shall assist the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics in the
performance of the Under Secretary's duties relating to
acquisition and technology.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 137. Under Secretary of Defense for Space, Intelligence, and
Information
(a) There is an Under Secretary of Defense for Space,
Intelligence, and Information, appointed from civilian life by
the President, by and with the advice and consent of the
Senate.
(b) Subject to the authority, direction, and control of the
Secretary of Defense, the Under Secretary of Defense for Space,
Intelligence, and Information shall perform such duties and
exercise such powers relating to the space, intelligence, and
information programs and activities of the Department of
Defense as the Secretary of Defense may prescribe.
(c) The Secretary of Defense shall designate the Under
Secretary of Defense for Space, Intelligence, and Information
as the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense
under section 3506(a)(2)(B) of title 44.
(d) The Under Secretary of Defense for Space, Intelligence,
and Information takes precedence in the Department of Defense
after the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 138. Assistant Secretaries of Defense
(a) There are [nine] eleven Assistant Secretaries of Defense,
appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate.
(b)(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Not more than three of the Assistant Secretaries may be
assigned duties under the authority of the Under Secretary of
Defense for Space, Intelligence, and Information and shall
report to that Under Secretary.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 139. Director of Operational Test and Evaluation
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) The Director may communicate views on matters within the
responsibility of the Director directly to the Secretary of
Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Defense without obtaining
the approval or concurrence of any other official within the
Department of Defense. The Director shall consult closely with,
but the Director and the Director's staff are independent of,
the [Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology]
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics and all other officers and entities of the Department
of Defense responsible for acquisition.
* * * * * * *
(f) The Director shall prepare an annual report summarizing
the operational test and evaluation activities (including live
fire testing activities) of the Department of Defense during
the preceding fiscal year. Each such report shall be submitted
concurrently to the Secretary of Defense, the [Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, and the
Congress not later than 10 days after the transmission of the
budget for the next fiscal year under section 1105 of title 31.
If the Director submits the report to Congress in a classified
form, the Director shall concurrently submit an unclassified
version of the report to Congress. The report shall include
such comments and recommendations as the Director considers
appropriate, including comments and recommendations on
resources and facilities available for operational test and
evaluation and levels of funding made available for operational
test and evaluation activities. The Secretary may comment on
any report of the Director to Congress under this subsection.
* * * * * * *
Sec. [137.] 139a. Director of Defense Research and Engineering
(a) There is a Director of Defense Research and Engineering,
appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate.
(b) Except as otherwise prescribed by the Secretary of
Defense, the Director of Defense Research and Engineering shall
perform such duties relating to research and engineering as the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics may prescribe.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 5--JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF
* * * * * * *
Sec. 153. Chairman: functions
(a) * * *
[(b) Report on Assignment of Roles and Missions.--(1) Not
less than once every three years, or upon the request of the
President or the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman shall
submit to the Secretary of Defense a report containing such
recommendations for changes in the assignment of functions (or
roles and missions) to the armed forces as the Chairman
considers necessary to achieve maximum effectiveness of the
armed forces. In preparing each such report, the Chairman shall
consider (among other matters) the following:
[(A) Changes in the nature of the threats faced by
the United States.
[(B) Unnecessary duplication of effort among the
armed forces.
[(C) Changes in technology that can be applied
effectively to warfare.
[(2) The Chairman shall include in each such report
recommendations for such changes in policies, directives,
regulations, and legislation as may be necessary to achieve the
changes in the assignment of functions recommended by the
Chairman.]
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 7--BOARDS, COUNCILS, AND COMMITTEES
* * * * * * *
Sec. 171. Armed Forces Policy Council
(a) There is in the Department of Defense an Armed Forces
Policy Council consisting of--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) the [Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition
and Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics;
* * * * * * *
Sec. 176. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology
(a)(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) The Board of Governors shall consist of the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, who shall serve as
chairman of the Board of Governors, the Assistant Secretary of
Health and Human Services for Health, the Surgeons General of
the Army, Navy, and Air Force, the [Chief Medical Director]
Under Secretary for Health of the Department of Veterans
Affairs, and a former Director of the Institute, as designated
by the Secretary of Defense, or the designee of any of the
foregoing.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 179. Nuclear Weapons Council
(a) There is a Joint Nuclear Weapons Council (hereinafter in
this section referred to as the ``Council'') composed of three
members as follows:
(1) The [Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition
and Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 184. Department of Defense regional centers for security studies
(a) Advance Notification to Congress of the Establishment of
New Regional Centers.--After [the date of the enactment of this
section,] October 30, 2000, a regional center for security
studies may not be established in the Department of Defense
until--
(1) the Secretary of Defense submits to Congress a
notification of the intent of the Secretary to
establish the center, including a description of the
mission and functions of the proposed center and a
justification for the proposed center; and
(2) a period of 90 days has elapsed after the date on
which that notification is submitted.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 9--DEFENSE BUDGET MATTERS
Sec.
221. Future-years defense program: submission to Congress; consistency
in budgeting.
* * * * * * *
[223. Ballistic missile defense programs: program elements.
[224. Ballistic missile defense programs: display of amounts for
procurement.]
224. Ballistic missile defense programs: display of amounts for
research, development, test, and evaluation.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 223. Ballistic missile defense programs: program elements
[(a) Program Elements Specified.--In the budget justification
materials submitted to Congress in support of the Department of
Defense budget for any fiscal year (as submitted with the
budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31), the
amount requested for activities of the Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization shall be set forth in accordance with the
following program elements:
[(1) The Patriot system.
[(2) The Navy Area system.
[(3) The Theater High-Altitude Area Defense system.
[(4) The Navy Theater Wide system.
[(5) The Medium Extended Air Defense System.
[(6) Joint Theater Missile Defense.
[(7) National Missile Defense.
[(8) Support Technologies.
[(9) Family of Systems Engineering and Integration.
[(10) Ballistic Missile Defense Technical Operations.
[(11) Threat and Countermeasures.
[(12) International Cooperative Programs.
[(b) Treatment of Major Defense Acquisition Programs.--
Amounts requested for Theater Missile Defense and National
Missile Defense major defense acquisition programs shall be
specified in individual, dedicated program elements, and
amounts appropriated for those programs shall be available only
for Ballistic Missile Defense activities.
[(c) Management and Support.--The amount requested for each
program element specified in subsection (a) shall include
requests for the amounts necessary for the management and
support of the programs, projects, and activities contained in
that program element.]
[Sec. 224. Ballistic missile defense programs: display of amounts for
procurement]
Sec. 224. Ballistic missile defense programs: display of amounts for
research, development, test, and evaluation
(a) Requirement.--Any amount in the budget submitted to
Congress under section 1105 of title 31 for any fiscal year for
[procurement] research, development, test, and evaluation for a
Department of Defense missile defense program described in
subsection (b) shall be set forth under the account of the
Department of Defense for Defense-wide [procurement] research,
development, test, and evaluation and, within that account,
under the subaccount (or other budget activity level) for the
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.
[(b) Covered Programs.--Subsection (a) applies to the
following missile defense programs of the Department of
Defense:
[(1) The National Missile Defense Program.
[(2) Any system that is part of the core theater
missile defense program.
[(3) Any other ballistic missile defense program that
enters production after the date of the enactment of
this section and for which research, development, test,
and evaluation was carried out by the Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization.
[(c) Core Theater Ballistic Missile Defense Program.--For
purposes of this section, the core theater missile defense
program consists of the systems specified in section 234 of the
Ballistic Missile Defense Act of 1995 (10 U.S.C. 2431 note).]
(b) Covered Programs.--Subsection (a) applies to any
ballistic missile defense program for which research,
development, test, and evaluation is carried out by the
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 22--NATIONAL IMAGERY AND MAPPING AGENCY
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER III--PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Sec.
461. Management rights.
462. Undergraduate training program.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 462. Undergraduate training program
(a) Authority To Carry Out Program.--The Secretary of Defense
may authorize the Director of the National Imagery and Mapping
Agency to establish an undergraduate training program under
which civilian employees of the National Imagery and Mapping
Agency may be assigned as students at accredited professional,
technical, and other institutions of higher learning for
training at the undergraduate level in skills critical to
effective performance of the mission of the National Imagery
and Mapping Agency. Such training may lead to the award of a
baccalaureate degree.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of the program authorized by
subsection (a) is to facilitate the recruitment of individuals,
particularly minority high school students, with a demonstrated
capability to develop skills critical to the mission of the
National Imagery and Mapping Agency, including skills in
mathematics, computer science, engineering, and foreign
languages.
(c) Requirements.--(1) To be eligible for assignment under
subsection (a), an employee of the National Imagery and Mapping
Agency must agree in writing--
(A) to continue in the service of the National
Imagery and Mapping Agency for the period of the
assignment and to complete the educational course of
training for which the employee is assigned;
(B) to continue in the service of the National
Imagery and Mapping Agency following completion of the
assignment for a period of one-and-a-half years for
each year of the assignment or part thereof;
(C) to reimburse the United States for the total cost
of education (excluding the employee's pay and
allowances) provided under this section to the employee
if, before the employee's completing the educational
course of training for which the employee is assigned,
the assignment or the employee's employment with the
National Imagery and Mapping Agency is terminated
either by the National Imagery and Mapping Agency due
to misconduct by the employee or by the employee
voluntarily; and
(D) to reimburse the United States if, after
completing the educational course of training for which
the employee is assigned, the employee's employment
with the National Imagery and Mapping Agency is
terminated either by the National Imagery and Mapping
Agency due to misconduct by the employee or by the
employee voluntarily, before the employee's completion
of the service obligation period described in
subparagraph (B), in an amount that bears the same
ratio to the total cost of the education (excluding the
employee's pay and allowances) provided to the employee
as the unserved portion of the service obligation
period described in subparagraph (B) bears to the total
period of the service obligation described in
subparagraph (B).
(2) Subject to paragraph (3), the obligation to reimburse the
United States under an agreement described in paragraph (1),
including interest due on such obligation, is for all purposes
a debt owing the United States.
(3)(A) A discharge in bankruptcy under title 11, United
States Code, shall not release a person from an obligation to
reimburse the United States required under an agreement
described in paragraph (1) if the final decree of the discharge
in bankruptcy is issued within five years after the last day of
the combined period of service obligation described in
subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1).
(B) The Secretary of Defense may release a person, in whole
or in part, from the obligation to reimburse the United States
under an agreement described in paragraph (1) when, in his
discretion, the Secretary determines that equity or the
interests of the United States so require.
(C) The Secretary of Defense shall permit an employee
assigned under this section who, before commencing a second
academic year of such assignment, voluntarily terminates the
assignment or the employee's employment with the National
Imagery and Mapping Agency, to satisfy his obligation under an
agreement described in paragraph (1) by reimbursing the United
States according to a schedule of monthly payments which
results in completion of reimbursement by a date five years
after the date of termination of the assignment or employment
or earlier at the option of the employee.
(d) Disclosure Required.--(1) When an employee is assigned
under this section to an institution, the Secretary shall
disclose to the institution to which the employee is assigned
that the National Imagery and Mapping Agency employs the
employee and that the National Imagery and Mapping Agency funds
the employee's education.
(2) Efforts by the Secretary to recruit individuals at
educational institutions for participation in the undergraduate
training program established by this section shall be made
openly and according to the common practices of universities
and employers recruiting at such institutions.
(e) Appropriation of Funds Required.--The Secretary may pay,
directly or by reimbursement to employees, expenses incident to
assignments under subsection (a), in any fiscal year only to
the extent that appropriated funds are available for such
purpose.
(f) Inapplicability of Certain Laws.--Chapter 41 of title 5
and subsections (a) and (b) of section 3324 of title 31 shall
not apply with respect to this section.
(g) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense may prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary to implement this section.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 23--MISCELLANEOUS STUDIES AND REPORTS
Sec.
480. Department of Defense reports: submission in electronic form.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 480. Department of Defense reports: submission in electronic form
(a) Requirement.--Whenever the Secretary of Defense or any
other official of the Department of Defense is required by law
to submit a report to Congress (or any committee of either
House of Congress), the Secretary or other official shall
provide to Congress (or each such committee) a copy of the
report in an electronic medium.
(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) does not apply to a report
submitted in classified form.
(c) Definition.--In this section, the term ``report''
includes any certification, notification, or other
communication in writing.
* * * * * * *
PART II--PERSONNEL
Chap. Sec.
Enlistments....................................................501
* * * * * * *
Department of Defense Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care1111[.]
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 31--ENLISTMENTS
* * * * * * *
The text of existing law for section 503(c) is shown to reflect the
amendments made to that section by Public Law 106-398, effective July
1, 2002.
Sec. 503. Enlistments: recruiting campaigns; compilation of directory
information
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Access to Secondary Schools.--(1) Each local educational
agency shall (except as provided under paragraph (5)) provide
to the Department of Defense, upon a request made for military
recruiting [purposes, the same access to secondary school
students, and to directory information concerning such
students, as is provided generally to post-secondary
educational institutions or to prospective employers of those
students.] purposes--
(A) the same access to secondary school students as
is provided generally to post-secondary educational
institutions or to prospective employers of those
students; and
(B) the same access to directory information
concerning those students as is provided to a post-
secondary educational institution upon an indication by
a secondary school student that the student seeks to
enroll or intends to enroll at that institution.
* * * * * * *
(6) In this subsection:
(A) The term ``local educational agency'' means--
(i) a local educational agency, within the
meaning of that term in section 14101[(18)] of
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 8801[(18)]); and
* * * * * * *
Sec. 517. Authorized daily average: members in pay grades E-8
and E-9
(a) The authorized daily average number of enlisted members
on active duty (other than for training) in an armed force in
pay grades E-8 and E-9 in a fiscal year may not be more than [2
percent (or, in the case of the Army, 2.5 percent)] 2.5 percent
and 1 percent, respectively, of the number of enlisted members
of that armed force who are on active duty (other than for
training) on the first day of that fiscal year. In computing
the limitations prescribed in the preceding sentence, there
shall be excluded enlisted members of an armed force on active
duty (other than for training) in connection with organizing,
administering, recruiting, instructing, or training the reserve
component of an armed force.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 520c. Recruiting functions: use of funds
(a) Provision of Meals and Refreshments.--Under regulations
prescribed by the Secretary concerned, funds appropriated to
the Department of Defense for recruitment of military personnel
may be expended for small meals and refreshments during
recruiting functions for the following persons:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) Members of the armed forces and Federal employees
when attending [recruiting events] recruiting functions
in accordance with a requirement to do so.
(5) Other persons whose presence at [recruiting
efforts] recruiting functions will contribute to
recruiting efforts.
* * * * * * *
[(c) Termination of Authority.--The authority in subsection
(a) may not be exercised after September 30, 2001.]
CHAPTER 32--OFFICER STRENGTH AND DISTRIBUTION IN GRADE
Sec.
521. Authority to prescribe total strengths of officers on active duty
and officer strengths in various categories.
* * * * * * *
[528. Limitation on number of officers on active duty in grades of
general and admiral.]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 523. Authorized strengths: commissioned officers on active duty in
grades of major, lieutenant colonel, and colonel
and Navy grades of lieutenant commander, commander,
and captain
(a)(1) Except as provided in subsection (c), of the total
number of commissioned officers serving on active duty in the
Army, Air Force, or Marine Corps at the end of any fiscal year
(excluding officers in categories specified in subsection (b)),
the number of officers who may be serving on active duty in
each of the grades of major, lieutenant colonel, and colonel
may not, as of the end of such fiscal year, exceed a number
determined in accordance with the following table:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of officers who may be serving on
active duty in the grade of:
Total number of commissioned officers (excluding officers in -----------------------------------------------
categories specified in subsection (b)) on active duty: Lieutenant
Major Colonel Colonel
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army:
20,000........................................................ 6,848 5,253 1,613
* * * * * * *
Air Force:
35,000........................................................ [9,216] 9,861 7,090 2,125
40,000........................................................ [10,025] 7,478 2,306
10,727
45,000........................................................ [10,835] 7,866 2,487
11,593
50,000........................................................ [11,645] 8,253 2,668
12,460
55,000........................................................ [12,454] 8,641 2,849
13,326
60,000........................................................ [13,264] 9,029 3,030
14,192
65,000........................................................ [14,073] 9,417 3,211
15,058
70,000........................................................ [14,883] 9,805 3,392
15,925
75,000........................................................ [15,693] 10,193 3,573
16,792
80,000........................................................ [16,502] 10,582 3,754
17,657
85,000........................................................ [17,312] 10,971 3,935
18,524
90,000........................................................ [18,121] 11,360 4,115
19,389
95,000........................................................ [18,931] 11,749 4,296
20,256
100,000....................................................... [19,741] 12,138 4,477
21,123
105,000....................................................... [20,550] 12,527 4,658
21,989
110,000....................................................... [21,360] 12,915 4,838
22,855
115,000....................................................... [22,169] 13,304 5,019
23,721
120,000....................................................... [22,979] 13,692 5,200
24,588
125,000....................................................... [23,789] 14,081 5,381
25,454
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 528. Limitation on number of officers on active duty in grades of
general and admiral
[(a) Limitation.--The total number of officers on active duty
in the Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps in the grade of
general and in the Navy in the grade of admiral may not exceed
32.
[(b) Exceptions.--(1) The limitation in subsection (a) does
not apply in the case of an officer serving in the grade of
general or admiral in a position that is specifically exempted
by law from being counted for purposes of limitations by law on
the total number of officers that may be on active duty in the
grades of general and admiral or the number of officers that
may be on active duty in that officer's armed force in the
grade of general or admiral.
[(2) An officer continuing to hold the grade of general or
admiral under section 601(b)(4) of this title after relief from
the position of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Chief of
Staff of the Army, Chief of Naval Operations, Chief of Staff of
the Air Force, or Commandant of the Marine Corps shall not be
counted for purposes of this section.]
CHAPTER 33--ORIGINAL APPOINTMENTS OF REGULAR OFFICERS IN GRADES ABOVE
WARRANT OFFICER GRADES
Sec.
531. Original appointments of commissioned officers.
* * * * * * *
542. Distinguished Graduates of officer commissioning programs other
than service academies and ROTC.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 532. Qualifications for original appointment as a commissioned
officer
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(e) After September 30, 1996, no person may receive an
original appointment as a commissioned officer in the Regular
Army, Regular Navy, Regular Air Force, or Regular Marine Corps
until that person has completed one year of service on active
duty as a commissioned officer (other than a warrant officer)
of a reserve component.]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 542. Distinguished Graduates of officer commissioning programs
other than service academies and ROTC
A person who is selected for an original appointment as a
commissioned officer in the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine
Corps as a result of satisfactory completion of an officer
commissioning program other than the course of instruction at
one of the service academies named in section 541 of this title
or the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps program and who,
under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the military
department concerned, is designated or selected as a
Distinguished Graduate of that program (or the equivalent)
shall be appointed as a regular officer.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 36--PROMOTION, SEPARATION, AND INVOLUNTARY RETIREMENT OF
OFFICERS ON THE ACTIVE-DUTY LIST
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER II--PROMOTIONS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 619. Eligibility for consideration for promotion: time-in-grade
and other requirements
[(a)(1)] (a) Time-in-Grade Requirements.--(1) An officer who
is on the active-duty list of the Army, Air Force, or Marine
Corps and holds a permanent appointment in the grade of second
lieutenant or first lieutenant or is on the active-duty list of
the Navy and holds a permanent appointment in the grade of
ensign or lieutenant (junior grade) may not be promoted to the
next higher permanent grade until he has completed the
following period of service in the grade in which he holds a
permanent appointment:
(A) * * *
(B) Two years, in the case of an officer holding a
permanent appointment in the grade of first lieutenant
or lieutenant (junior grade), or such shorter period as
may be in effect under paragraph (6).
* * * * * * *
(4) The Secretary of the military department concerned may
waive paragraph (2) to the extent necessary to assure that
officers described in [clause (A)] subparagraph (A) of such
paragraph have at least two opportunities for consideration for
promotion to the next higher grade as officers below the
promotion zone.
* * * * * * *
(6)(A) When the needs of the service require, the Secretary
of the military department concerned may reduce to eighteen
months the period of service in grade applicable for purposes
of paragraph (1)(B) in the case of officers who are serving in
a position that is authorized for officers in the grade of
captain or, in the case of the Navy, lieutenant.
(B) If the Secretary of the military department concerned
uses the authority provided in subparagraph (A), the number of
captains or, in the case of the Navy, lieutenants on the
active-duty list may not exceed the number of positions for
which officers in that grade are authorized by more than one
percent.
(C) The authority under subparagraph (A) and the limitation
under subparagraph (B) expire on September 30, 2005.
[(b)(1)] (b) Continued Eligibility for Consideration for
Promotion of Officers Who Have Previously Failed of
Selection.--(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), an officer
who has failed of selection for promotion to the next higher
grade remains eligible for consideration for promotion to that
grade as long as he continues on active duty in other than a
retired status and is not promoted.
* * * * * * *
[(c)(1)] (c) Officers To Be Considered by Promotion Boards.--
(1) Each time a selection board is convened under section
611(a) of this title for consideration of officers in a
competitive category for promotion to the next higher grade,
each officer in the promotion zone (except as provided under
paragraph (2)), and each officer above the promotion zone, for
the grade and competitive category under consideration shall be
considered for promotion.
* * * * * * *
(d) Certain Officers Not To Be Considered.--A selection board
convened under section 611(a) of this title may not consider
for promotion to the next higher grade any of the following
officers:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
Sec. 619a. Eligibility for consideration for promotion: joint duty
assignment required before promotion to general or
flag grade; exceptions
(a) General Rule.--An officer on the active-duty list of the
Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps may not be appointed to
the grade of brigadier general or rear admiral (lower half)
[unless the officer has completed a full tour of duty in a
joint duty assignment (as described in section 664(f) of this
title).] unless--
(1) the officer has completed a full tour of duty in
a joint duty assignment (as described in section 664(f)
of this title); and
(2) for appointments after September 30, 2007, the
officer has been selected for the joint specialty in
accordance with section 661 of this title.
(b) Exceptions.--Subject to subsection (c), the Secretary of
Defense [may waive subsection (a) in the following
circumstances:] may waive paragraph (1) or paragraph (2) of
subsection (a), or both paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection
(a), in the following circumstances (except that paragraph (2)
of subsection (a) may not be waived by reason of paragraph
(4)):
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER IV--CONTINUATION ON ACTIVE DUTY AND SELECTIVE EARLY
RETIREMENT
* * * * * * *
Sec. 638a. Modification to rules for continuation on active duty;
enhanced authority for selective early retirement
and early discharges
(a) The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of a
military department, during the period beginning on October 1,
1990, and ending on December 31, [2001] 2002, to take any of
the actions set forth in subsection (b) with respect to
officers of an armed force under the jurisdiction of that
Secretary.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 640. Deferment of retirement or separation for medical reasons
[The Secretary of the military department concerned may defer
the retirement or separation under this title of any officer if
the evaluation of the physical condition of the officer and
determination of the officer's entitlement to retirement or
separation for physical disability require hospitalization or
medical observation that cannot be completed before the date on
which the officer would otherwise be required to retire or be
separated under this title.]
(a) If the Secretary of the military department concerned
determines that the evaluation of the physical condition of an
officer and determination of the officer's entitlement to
retirement or separation for physical disability require
hospitalization or medical observation and that such
hospitalization or medical observation cannot be completed with
confidence in a manner consistent with the member's well being
before the date on which the officer would otherwise be
required to retire or be separated under this title, the
Secretary may defer the retirement or separation of the officer
under this title.
(b) A deferral of retirement or separation under subsection
(a) may not extend for more than 30 days after completion of
the evaluation requiring hospitalization or medical
observation.
SUBCHAPTER V--ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO PROMOTION, SEPARATION,
AND RETIREMENT
* * * * * * *
Sec. 641. Applicability of chapter
Officers in the following categories are not subject to this
chapter (other than section 640 and, in the case of warrant
officers, section 628):
(1) Reserve officers--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(D) on the reserve active-status list who
are on active duty under section 12301(d) of
this title, other than as provided in
subparagraph (C), under a call or order to
active duty specifying a period of three years
or less;]
(D) on active duty under section 12301(d) of
this title, other than as provided under
subparagraph (C), if the call or order to
active duty, under regulations prescribed by
the Secretary concerned, specifies a period of
three years or less and continued placement on
the reserve active-status list;
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 38--JOINT OFFICER MANAGEMENT
* * * * * * *
Sec. 661. Management policies for joint specialty officers
(a) * * *
(b) Numbers and Selection.--(1) * * *
(2) Officers shall be selected for the joint specialty by the
Secretary of Defense with the advice of the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff. [The Secretaries of the military
departments shall nominate officers for selection for the joint
specialty. Nominations shall be made from among officers--]
Each officer on the active-duty list on the date of the
enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2002 who has not before that date been nominated for the
joint specialty by the Secretary of a military department, and
each officer who is placed on the active-duty list after such
date, who meets the requirements of subsection (c) shall
automatically be considered to have been nominated for the
joint specialty. From among those officers considered to be
nominated for the joint specialty, the Secretary may select for
the joint specialty only officers--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
Sec. 663. Education
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Duration of Principal Course of Instruction at [Armed
Forces Staff College] Joint Forces Staff College.--(1) The
duration of the principal course of instruction offered at the
[Armed Forces Staff College] Joint Forces Staff College may not
be less than three months.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 664. Length of joint duty assignments
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(i) Joint Duty Credit for Certain Joint Task Force
Assignments.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe by regulation
criteria for determining whether an officer may be granted
credit under paragraph (1) with respect to service in a
qualifying temporary joint task force assignment. The criteria
shall apply uniformly among the armed forces and shall include
the following requirements:
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(E) [The] Except as provided in subparagraph (F), the
joint task force must conduct combat or combat-related
operations in a unified action under joint or
multinational command and control.
(F) Service in a temporary joint task force
assignment not involved in combat or combat-related
operations may not be credited for the purposes of
joint duty, unless, and only if--
(i) the service of the officer and the nature
of the joint task force not only meet all
criteria of this section, except subparagraph
(E), but also any additional criteria the
Secretary may establish;
(ii) the Secretary has specifically approved
the operation conducted by the joint task force
as one that qualifies for joint service credit,
and notifies Congress upon each approval,
providing the criteria that led to that
approval; and
(iii) the operation is conducted by the joint
task force in an environment where an extremely
fragile state of peace and high potential for
hostilities coexist.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 667. Annual report to Congress
The Secretary of Defense shall include in the annual report
of the Secretary to Congress under section 113(c) of this
title, for the period covered by the report, the following
information (which shall be shown for the Department of Defense
as a whole and separately for the Army, Navy, Air Force, and
Marine Corps):
(1)(A) The number of officers selected for the joint
specialty and their education and experience.
(B) The number of officers who meet the criteria for
selection for the joint specialty but were not
selected, together with the reasons why.
[(2) The military occupational specialties within
each of the armed forces that have been designated as
critical occupational specialties under section
661(c)(2) of this title, separately identifying those
specialties for which there is a severe shortage of
trained officers, together with an explanation of how
those specialties meet the criteria for that
designation in section 661(c)(2)(B) of this title.]
(2) The number of officers with the joint specialty,
shown by grade and branch or specialty and by
education.
(3) The number of officers on the active-duty list
with a military occupational specialty designated under
section 661(c)(2) of this title as a critical
occupational specialty who--
(A) have been [nominated] selected for the
joint specialty;
(B) have been [nominated] selected for the
joint specialty and are serving in a joint duty
assignment;
* * * * * * *
(D) have completed an appropriate program at
a joint professional military education school;
and
[(E) have been selected for the joint
specialty; and]
[(F)] (E) have served, or are serving in, a
second joint duty assignment after being
selected for the joint specialty, with the
number of such officers who have served, or are
serving, in a critical joint duty assignment
shown separately for general and flag officers,
and for all other officers.
(4) For each fiscal year--
(A) the number of officers [nominated]
selected for the joint specialty and, of those,
the number who have a military occupational
specialty designated as a critical occupational
specialty; and
* * * * * * *
(14)(A) An analysis of the extent to which the
Secretary of each military department is providing
officers to fill that department's share (as determined
by law or by the Secretary of Defense) of Joint Staff
and other joint duty assignments, including the reason
for any significant failure by a military department to
fill its share of such positions and a discussion of
the actions being taken to correct the shortfall.
(B) An assessment of the extent to which the
Secretary of each military department is assigning
personnel to joint duty assignments in accordance with
this chapter and the policies, procedures, and
practices established by the Secretary of Defense under
section 661(a) of this title.
* * * * * * *
(16) The number of officers granted credit for
service in joint duty assignments under [section
664(i)] subparagraphs (E) and (F) of section 664(i)(4)
of this title and--
(A) * * *
(B) the identity of each operation for which
an officer has been granted credit pursuant to
[section 664(i)] subparagraphs (E) and (F) of
section 664(i)(4) of this title and a brief
description of the mission of the operation.
(17) With regard to each time the principal course of
instruction at the [Armed Forces Staff College] Joint
Forces Staff College is offered--
(A) * * *
(B) the number of those officers as a
percentage of all officers who attended that
course of instruction at the [Armed Forces
Staff College] Joint Forces Staff College;
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 39--ACTIVE DUTY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 691. Permanent end strength levels to support two major regional
contingencies
(a) * * *
(b) Unless otherwise provided by law, the number of members
of the armed forces (other than the Coast Guard) on active duty
at the end of any fiscal year shall be not less than the
following:
(1) * * *
(2) For the Navy, [372,000] 376,000.
* * * * * * *
(4) For the Air Force, [357,000] 358,800.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 47--UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER II--APPREHENSION AND RESTRAINT
* * * * * * *
Sec. 814. Art. 14. Delivery of offenders to civil authorities
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the
Secretaries of the military departments prescribe regulations
under subsection (a) and that those regulations are uniform
throughout the armed forces under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary of Defense. Those regulations shall--
(1) specifically provide for the delivery to the
appropriate civil authority for trial, in any
appropriate case, of a member accused by civil
authority of parental kidnapping or a similar offense,
including criminal contempt arising from any such
offense or from child custody matters; and
(2) specifically address the special needs for the
exercise of the authority contained in this section
(article) in a case in which a member of the armed
forces assigned overseas is accused of an offense by
civil authority.
SUBCHAPTER IV--COURT-MARTIAL JURISDICTION
* * * * * * *
Sec. 816. Art. 16. Courts-martial classified
The three kinds of courts-martial in each of the armed forces
are--
(1) general courts-martial, consisting of--
(A) a military judge and not less than five
members or, in a case in which the accused may
be sentenced to a penalty of death, the number
of members determined under section 825a of
this title (article 25a); or
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER V--COMPOSITION OF COURTS-MARTIAL
Sec.
Art.
822.
22.
Who may convene general courts-martial.
* * * * * * *
825a.
25a.
Number of members in capital cases.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 825a. Art. 25a. Number of members in capital cases
In a case in which the accused may be sentenced to a penalty
of death, the number of members shall be not less than 12,
unless 12 members are not reasonably available because of
physical conditions or military exigencies, in which case the
convening authority shall specify a lesser number of members
not less than five, and the court may be assembled and the
trial held with not less than the number of members so
specified. In such a case, the convening authority shall make a
detailed written statement, to be appended to the record,
stating why a greater number of members were not reasonably
available.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 829. Art. 29. Absent and additional members
(a) * * *
(b)(1) Whenever a general court-martial, other than a general
court-martial composed of a military judge only, is reduced
below [five members] the applicable minimum number of members,
the trial may not proceed unless the convening authority
details new members sufficient in number to provide not less
than [five members] the applicable minimum number of members.
The trial may proceed with the new members present after the
recorded evidence previously introduced before the members of
the court has been read to the court in the presence of the
military judge, the accused, and counsel for both sides.
(2) In this section, the term ``applicable minimum number of
members'' means five members or, in a case in which the death
penalty may be adjudged, the number of members determined under
section 825a of this title (article 25a).
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER VII--TRIAL PROCEDURE
Sec.
Art.
836.
36.
President may prescribe rules.
* * * * * * *
852a.
52a.
Right of accused to request sentencing by military judge rather than by
members.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 852a. Art. 52a. Right of accused to request sentencing by military
judge rather than by members
(a) In the case of an accused convicted of an offense by a
court-martial composed of a military judge and members, the
sentence shall be tried before and adjudged by the military
judge rather than the members if, after the findings are
announced and before evidence in the sentencing proceeding is
introduced, the accused, knowing the identity of the military
judge and after consultation with defense counsel, requests
orally on the record or in writing that the sentence be tried
before and adjudged by the military judge rather than the
members.
(b) This section shall not apply with respect to an offense
for which the death penalty may be adjudged unless the case has
been previously referred to trial as a noncapital case.
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER IX--POST-TRIAL PROCEDURE AND REVIEW OF COURTS-MARTIAL
* * * * * * *
Sec. 874. Art. 74. Remission and suspension
(a) The Secretary concerned and, when designated by him, any
Under Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Judge Advocate General,
or commanding officer may remit or suspend any part or amount
of the unexecuted part of any sentence, including all
uncollected forfeitures other than a sentence approved by the
President. However, in the case of a sentence of confinement
for life without eligibility for parole that is adjudged for an
offense committed after October 29, 2000, after the sentence is
ordered executed, the authority of the Secretary concerned
under the preceding sentence (1) may not be delegated, and (2)
may be exercised only after the service of a period of
confinement of not less than 20 years.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 49--MISCELLANEOUS PROHIBITIONS AND PENALTIES
* * * * * * *
Sec. 980. Limitation on use of humans as experimental subjects
(a) Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense may not
be used for research involving a human being as an experimental
subject unless--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(b) The Secretary of Defense may waive the prohibition in
this section with respect to a specific research project to
advance the development of a medical product necessary to the
armed forces if the research project is carried out in
accordance with all other applicable laws.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 986. Security clearances: limitations
(a) Prohibition.--After [the date of the enactment of this
section,] October 30, 2000, the Department of Defense may not
grant or renew a security clearance for a person to whom this
section applies who is described in subsection (c).
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 50--MISCELLANEOUS COMMAND RESPONSIBILITIES
* * * * * * *
Sec. 991. Management of deployments of members
(a) * * *
(b) Deployment Defined.--(1) For the purposes of this
section, a member of the armed forces shall be considered to be
deployed or in a deployment on any day on which, pursuant to
orders, the member is performing active service in a training
exercise or operation at a location or under circumstances that
make it impossible or infeasible for the member to spend off-
duty time in the housing in which the member resides when on
garrison duty at the member's permanent duty station or
homeport, as the case may be. For the purpose of applying the
preceding sentence to a member of a reserve component
performing active service, the housing in which the member
resides when on garrison duty at the member's permanent duty
station or homeport, as the case may be, shall be considered to
be either the housing the member normally occupies when on
garrison duty or the member's permanent civilian residence.
[(2) In the case of a member of a reserve component
performing active service, the member shall be considered
deployed or in a deployment for the purposes of paragraph (1)
on any day on which, pursuant to orders that do not establish a
permanent change of station, the member is performing the
active service at a location that--
[(A) is not the member's permanent training site; and
[(B) is--
[(i) at least 100 miles from the member's
permanent residence; or
[(ii) a lesser distance from the member's
permanent residence that, under the
circumstances applicable to the member's
travel, is a distance that requires at least
three hours of travel to traverse.]
[(3)] (2) For the purposes of this section, a member is not
deployed or in a deployment when the member is--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(4)] (3) The Secretary of Defense may prescribe a definition
of deployment for the purposes of this section other than the
definition specified [in paragraphs (1) and (2)] in paragraph
(1). Any such definition may not take effect until 90 days
after the date on which the Secretary notifies the Committee on
Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed
Services of the House of Representatives of the revised
standard definition of deployment.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 53--MISCELLANEOUS RIGHTS AND BENEFITS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1044a. Authority to act as notary
(a) * * *
(b) Persons with the powers described in subsection (a) are
the following:
(1) * * *
(2) All civilian attorneys serving as [legal
assistance officers] legal assistance attorneys.
* * * * * * *
(4) All other members of the armed forces, including
reserve members when not in a duty status, and, when
outside the United States, all civilian employees of
the Department of Defense, who are designated by
regulations of the armed forces or the Department of
Defense or by statute to have those powers.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1056. Relocation assistance programs
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Military Relocation Assistance Programs.--(1) * * *
(2) The Secretary shall ensure that[, not later than
September 30, 1991,] information available through each
military relocation assistance program shall be managed through
a computerized information system that can interact with all
other military relocation assistance programs of the military
departments, including programs located outside the continental
United States.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 54--COMMISSARY AND EXCHANGE BENEFITS
Sec.
1061. Survivors of certain Reserve and Guard members.
* * * * * * *
[1063. Use of commissary stores: members of Ready Reserve with at least
50 creditable points.]
1063. Use of commissary stores: members of Ready Reserve.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 1063. Use of commissary stores: members of Ready Reserve with at
least 50 creditable points
[(a) Eligibility of Members of Ready Reserve.--A member of
the Ready Reserve who satisfactorily completes 50 or more
points creditable under section 12732(a)(2) of this title in a
calendar year shall be eligible to use commissary stores of the
Department of Defense. The Secretary concerned shall authorize
the member to have 24 days of eligibility for any calendar year
that the member qualifies for eligibility under this
subsection.]
Sec. 1063. Use of commissary stores: members of Ready Reserve
(a) Eligibility.--Subject to subsection (c), the Secretary
concerned shall authorize members of the Ready Reserve
described in subsection (b) to have 24 days of eligibility to
use commissary stores of the Department of Defense for any
calendar year.
(b) Covered Members.--Subsection (a) applies with respect to
the following members of the Ready Reserve:
(1) A member of the Selected Reserve who is
satisfactorily participating in required training as
prescribed in section 10147(a)(1) of this title or
section 502(a) of title 32 in that calendar year.
(2) A member of the Ready Reserve (other than a
member described in paragraph (1)) who satisfactorily
completes 50 or more points credible under section
12732(a)(2) of this title in that calendar year.
(c) Reduced Number of Commissary Visits for New Members.--The
number of commissary visits authorized for a member of the
Selected Reserve described in subsection (b)(1) who enters the
Selected Reserve after the beginning of the calendar year shall
be equal to twice the number of full months remaining in the
calendar year.
[(b)] (d) Effect of Compensation or Type of Duty.--Subsection
(a) shall apply without regard to whether, during the calendar
year, the member receives compensation for the duty or training
performed by the member or performs active duty for training.
[(c)] (e) Regulations.--The Secretary concerned shall
prescribe regulations, subject to the approval of the Secretary
of Defense, to carry out this section.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 55--MEDICAL AND DENTAL CARE
Sec.
1071. Purpose of this chapter.
* * * * * * *
1074j. Sub-acute care program.
1074k. Long-term care insurance.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1072. Definitions
In this chapter:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(7) The term ``TRICARE program'' means the managed
health care program that is established by the
Department of Defense under the authority of this
chapter, principally section 1097 of this title, and
includes [the competitive selection of contractors to
financially underwrite] the delivery of health care
services under the Civilian Health and Medical Program
of the Uniformed Services.
(8) The term ``custodial care'' means treatment or
services, regardless of who recommends such treatment
or services or where such treatment or services are
provided, that--
(A) can be rendered safely and reasonably by
a person who is not medically skilled; or
(B) is or are designed mainly to help the
patient with the activities of daily living.
(9) The term ``domiciliary care'' means care provided
to a patient in an institution or homelike environment
because--
(A) providing support for the activities of
daily living in the home is not available or is
unsuitable; or
(B) members of the patient's family are
unwilling to provide the care.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1074a. Medical and dental care: members on duty other than active
duty for a period of more than 30 days
(a) Under joint regulations prescribed by the administering
Secretaries, the following persons are entitled to the benefits
described in subsection (b):
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Each member of the armed forces who incurs or
aggravates an injury, illness, or disease in the line
of duty while remaining overnight immediately before
the commencement of inactive-duty training, or while
remaining overnight, between successive periods of
inactive-duty training, at or in the vicinity of the
site of the inactive-duty training[, if the site is
outside reasonable commuting distance from the member's
residence].
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1074g. Pharmacy benefits program
(a) Pharmacy Benefits.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(8) In carrying out this subsection, the Secretary shall
ensure that an eligible covered beneficiary may continue to
receive coverage for any maintenance pharmaceutical that is not
on the uniform formulary and that was prescribed for the
beneficiary before [the date of the enactment of this section]
October 5, 1999, and stabilized the medical condition of the
beneficiary.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1074i. Reimbursement for certain travel expenses
In any case in which a covered beneficiary is referred by a
primary care physician to a specialty care provider who
provides services more than 100 miles from the location in
which the primary care provider provides services to the
covered beneficiary, the Secretary shall provide reimbursement
for reasonable travel expenses for the covered beneficiary. In
any case in which reimbursement of travel expenses of a covered
beneficiary who is a minor and dependent is required under this
section, the Secretary also shall provide reimbursement for
reasonable travel expenses of the parent or guardian of, or the
family member responsible for, such covered beneficiary.
Sec. 1074j. Sub-acute care program
(a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Defense shall establish
an effective, efficient, and integrated sub-acute care benefits
program under this chapter (hereinafter referred to in this
section as the ``program''). Except as otherwise provided in
this section, the types of health care authorized under the
program shall be the same as those provided under section 1079
of this title. The Secretary, after consultation with the other
administering Secretaries, shall promulgate regulations to
carry out this section.
(b) Benefits.--(1) The program shall include a uniform
skilled nursing facility benefit that shall be provided in the
manner and under the conditions described in section 1861(h)
and (i) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(h) and
(i)), except that the limitation on the number of days of
coverage under section 1812(a) and (b) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1395d(a) and (b)) shall not be applicable under the program.
Skilled nursing facility care for each spell of illness shall
continue to be provided for as long as medically necessary and
appropriate.
(2) In this subsection:
(A) The term ``skilled nursing facility'' has the
meaning given such term in section 1819(a) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395i-3(a)).
(B) The term ``spell of illness'' has the meaning
given such term in section 1861(a) of such Act (42
U.S.C. 1395x(a)).
(3) The program shall include a comprehensive, intermittent
home health care benefit that shall be provided in the manner
and under the conditions described in section 1861(m) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(m)).
Sec. 1074k. Long-term care insurance
Provisions regarding long-term care insurance for members and
certain former members of the uniformed services and their
families are set forth in chapter 90 of title 5.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1076. Medical and dental care for dependents: general rule
(a)(1) * * *
(2) A dependent referred to in paragraph (1) is a dependent
of a member of a uniformed service described in one of the
following subparagraphs:
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) A member who died from an injury, illness, or
disease incurred or aggravated in the line of duty
while the member remained overnight immediately before
the commencement of inactive-duty training, or while
the member remained overnight between successive
periods of inactive-duty training, at or in the
vicinity of the site of the inactive-duty training[, if
the site was outside reasonable commuting distance from
the member's residence].
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1079. Contracts for medical care for spouses and children: plans
(a) To assure that medical care is available for dependents,
as described in subparagraphs (A), (D), and (I) of section
1072(2) of this title, of members of the uniformed services who
are on active duty for a period of more than 30 days, the
Secretary of Defense, after consulting with the other
administering Secretaries, shall contract, under the authority
of this section, for medical care for those persons under such
insurance, medical service, or health plans as he considers
appropriate. The types of health care authorized under this
section shall be the same as those provided under section 1076
of this title, except as follows:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(17)(A) The Secretary of Defense may establish a
program for the individual case management of a person
covered by this section or section 1086 of this title
who has extraordinary medical or psychological
disorders and, under such a program, may waive benefit
limitations contained in paragraphs (5) and (13) of
this subsection or section 1077(b)(1) of this title and
authorize the payment for comprehensive home health
care services, supplies, and equipment if the Secretary
determines that such a waiver is cost-effective and
appropriate.
[(B) The total amount expended under subparagraph (A)
for a fiscal year may not exceed $100,000,000.]
* * * * * * *
[(d) Under joint regulations to be prescribed by the
administering Secretaries, in the case of a dependent, as
described in subparagraph (A), (D), or (I) of section 1072(2)
of this title, of a member of the uniformed services on active
duty for a period of more than 30 days, who is moderately or
severely mentally retarded or who has a serious physical
handicap, the plans covered by subsection (a) shall, with
respect to the retardation or handicap of such dependent,
include the following:
[(1) Diagnosis.
[(2) Inpatient, outpatient, and home treatment.
[(3) Training, rehabilitation, and special education.
[(4) Institutional care in private nonprofit, public
and State institutions and facilities and, when
appropriate, transportation to and from such
institutions and facilities.
[(e) Members shall be required to share in the cost of any
benefits provided their dependents under subsection (d) as
follows:
[(1) Except as provided in clause (3), members in the
lowest enlisted pay grade shall be required to pay the
first $25 incurred each month and members in the
highest commissioned pay grade shall similarly be
required to pay $250 per month. The amounts to be
similarly paid by members in all other pay grades shall
be determined under joint regulations to be prescribed
by the administering Secretaries.
[(2) Except as provided in clause (4), the
Government's share of the cost of any benefits provided
in a particular case under subsection (d) shall not
exceed $1,000 per month.
[(3) Members shall also be required to pay each month
that amount, if any, remaining after the Government's
maximum share has been reached.
[(4) A member who has more than one dependent
incurring expenses in a given month under a plan
covered by subsection (d) shall not be required to pay
an amount greater than he would be required to pay if
he had but one such dependent.
[(f) To qualify for the benefits provided by subsection (d),
members shall be required to use public facilities to the
extent they are available and adequate as determined under
joint regulations of the administering Secretaries.]
(d)(1) The Secretary of Defense shall establish a program to
provide extended benefits for eligible dependents, which may
include the provision of comprehensive health care services,
including case management services, to assist in the reduction
of the disabling effects of a qualifying condition of an
eligible dependent. Registration shall be required to receive
the extended benefits.
(2) The Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the
other administering Secretaries, shall promulgate regulations
to carry out this subsection.
(3) In this subsection:
(A) The term ``eligible dependent'' means a dependent
of a member of the uniformed services on active duty
for a period of more than 30 days, as described in
subparagraph (A), (D), or (I) of section 1072(2) of
this title, who has a qualifying condition.
(B) The term ``qualifying condition'' means the
condition of a dependent who is moderately or severely
mentally retarded, has a serious physical disability,
or has an extraordinary physical or psychological
condition.
(e) Extended benefits for eligible dependents under
subsection (d) may include comprehensive health care services
with respect to the qualifying condition of such a dependent,
and include, to the extent such benefits are not provided under
provisions of this chapter other than under this section, the
following:
(1) Diagnosis.
(2) Inpatient, outpatient, and comprehensive home
health care supplies and services.
(3) Training, rehabilitation, and special education.
(4) Institutional care in private nonprofit, public,
and State institutions and facilities and, if
appropriate, transportation to and from such
institutions and facilities.
(5) Custodial care, notwithstanding the prohibition
in section 1077(b)(1) of this title.
(6) Respite care for the primary caregiver of the
eligible dependent.
(7) Such other services and supplies as determined
appropriate by the Secretary, notwithstanding the
limitations in subsection (a)(13).
(f) Members shall be required to share in the cost of any
benefits provided to their dependents under subsection (d) as
follows:
(1) Members in the lowest enlisted pay grade shall be
required to pay the first $25 incurred each month, and
members in the highest commissioned pay grade shall be
required to pay the first $250 incurred each month. The
amounts to be paid by members in all other pay grades
shall be determined under regulations to be prescribed
by the Secretary of Defense in consultation with the
administering Secretaries.
(2) A member who has more than one dependent
incurring expenses in a given month under a plan
covered by subsection (d) shall not be required to pay
an amount greater than would be required if the member
had only one such dependent.
* * * * * * *
(h)(1) * * *
(2) The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the other
administering Secretaries, shall prescribe regulations to
provide for such exceptions to the payment limitations under
paragraph (1) as the Secretary determines to be necessary to
assure that covered beneficiaries retain adequate access to
health care services. Such exceptions may include the payment
of amounts higher than the amount allowed under paragraph (1)
when enrollees in managed care programs obtain covered services
from nonparticipating providers. To provide a suitable
transition from the payment methodologies in effect before [the
date of the enactment of this paragraph] February 10, 1996, to
the methodology required by paragraph (1), the amount allowable
for any service may not be reduced by more than 15 percent
below the amount allowed for the same service during the
immediately preceding 12-month period (or other period as
established by the Secretary of Defense).
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1095c. TRICARE program: facilitation of processing of claims
(a) * * *
(b) Requirement to Provide Start-Up Time For Certain
Contractors.--(1) [The] Except as provided in paragraph (3),
the Secretary of Defense shall not require that a contractor
described in paragraph (2) begin to provide managed care
support pursuant to a contract to provide such support under
the TRICARE program until at least nine months after the date
of the award of the [contract. In such case the contractor may
begin to provide managed care support pursuant to the contract
as soon as practicable after the award of the] contract, but in
no case later than one year after the date of such award.
* * * * * * *
(3) The Secretary may reduce the nine-month start-up period
required under paragraph (1) if--
(A) the Secretary--
(i) determines that a shorter period is
sufficient to ensure effective implementation
of all contract requirements; and
(ii) submits notification to the Committees
on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives and the Senate of the
Secretary's intent to reduce the nine-month
start-up period; and
(B) 60 days have elapsed since the date of such
notification.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1097a. TRICARE Prime: automatic enrollments; payment options
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) No Copayment for Immediate Family.--No copayment shall be
charged a member for care provided under TRICARE Prime to a
dependent of a member of the uniformed services described in
subparagraph (A), (D), or (I) of section [1072] 1072(2) of this
title.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 56--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE
FUND
Sec.
[1111. Establishment and purpose of Fund; definitions.]
1111. Establishment and purpose of Fund; definitions; authority to
enter into agreements.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 1111. Establishment and purpose of Fund; definitions]
Sec. 1111. Establishment and purpose of Fund; definitions; authority to
enter into agreements
(a) There is established on the books of the Treasury a fund
to be known as the Department of Defense Medicare-Eligible
Retiree Health Care Fund ([hereafter] hereinafter in this
chapter referred to as the ``Fund''), which shall be
administered by the Secretary of the Treasury. The Fund shall
be used for the accumulation of funds in order to finance on an
actuarially sound basis liabilities of the Department of
Defense under designated Department of Defense retiree health
care programs for medicare-eligible beneficiaries.
[(b) In this chapter:
[(1) The term ``Department of Defense retiree health
care programs for medicare-eligible beneficiaries''
means the provisions of this title or any other
provision of law creating entitlement to health care
for a medicare-eligible member or former member of the
uniformed services entitled to retired or retainer pay,
or a medicare-eligible dependent of a member or former
member of the uniformed services entitled to retired or
retainer pay.
[(2) The term ``medicare-eligible'' means entitled to
benefits under part A of title XVIII of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395c et seq.).
[(3) The term ``dependent'' means a dependent (as
such term is defined in section 1072 of this title)
described in section 1076(b)(1) of this title.]
(b) In this chapter:
(1) The term ``Department of Defense retiree health
care programs'' means the provisions of this title or
any other provision of law creating an entitlement to
or eligibility for health care under a Department of
Defense or uniformed services program for a member or
former member of a participating uniformed service who
is entitled to retired or retainer pay, and an eligible
dependent under such program.
(2) The term ``designated Department of Defense
health care program'' means a program described in
paragraph (1) of this subsection that is designated
under section 1113(c).
(3) The term ``eligible dependent'' means a dependent
(as such term is defined in section 1072(2)) described
in section 1076(a)(2) (other than a dependent of a
member on active duty), 1076(b), 1086(c)(2), or
1086(c)(3)).
(4) The term ``medicare-eligible'', with respect to
any person, means entitled to benefits under part A of
title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395c
et seq.).
(5) The term ``participating uniformed service''
means the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps, and
any other uniformed service that is covered by an
agreement entered into under subsection (c).
(c) The Secretary of Defense may enter into an agreement with
any other administering Secretary for participation in the Fund
by a uniformed service under the jurisdiction of that
Secretary. Any such agreement shall require that Secretary to
make contributions to the Fund on behalf of the members of the
uniformed service under the jurisdiction of that Secretary
comparable to the contributions to the Fund made by the
Secretary of Defense under section 1116.
Sec. 1112. Assets of Fund
There shall be deposited into the Fund the following, which
shall constitute the assets of the Fund:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) Amounts paid into the Fund pursuant to section
1111(c).
Sec. 1113. Payments from the Fund
[(a) There shall be paid from the Fund amounts payable for
Department of Defense retiree health care programs for
medicare-eligible beneficiaries.]
(a) There shall be paid from the Fund amounts payable for the
costs of designated Department of Defense retiree health care
programs for the benefit of members or former members of a
participating uniformed service who are entitled to retired or
retainer pay and are medicare-eligible, and eligible dependents
described in section 1111(b)(3) who are medicare-eligible.
* * * * * * *
(c) For purposes of payments from the Fund under subsection
(a), the Secretary of Defense shall designate the program
authorized by section 1086 of this title.
Sec. 1114. Board of Actuaries
(a)(1) There is established in the Department of Defense a
Department of Defense Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care
Board of Actuaries ([hereafter] hereinafter in this chapter
referred to as the ``Board''). The Board shall consist of three
members who shall be appointed by the Secretary of Defense from
among qualified professional actuaries who are members of the
Society of Actuaries.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1115. Determination of contributions to the Fund
(a) The Board shall determine the amount that is the present
value (as of October 1, 2002) of future benefits payable from
the Fund that are attributable to service in the participating
uniformed services performed before October 1, 2002. That
amount is the original unfunded liability of the Fund. The
Board shall determine the period of time over which the
original unfunded liability should be liquidated and shall
determine an amortization schedule for the liquidation of such
liability over that period. Contributions to the Fund for the
liquidation of the original unfunded liability in accordance
with such schedule shall be made as provided in section 1116(b)
of this title.
(b)(1) The Secretary of Defense shall determine each year, in
sufficient time for inclusion in budget requests for the
following fiscal year, the total amount of Department of
Defense contributions to be made to the Fund during that fiscal
year under section 1116(a) of this title. That amount shall be
the sum of the following:
(A) The product of--
(i) * * *
(ii) the expected average force strength
during that fiscal year for members of the
uniformed services under the jurisdiction of
the Secretary of Defense on active duty (other
than active duty for training) and full-time
National Guard duty (other than full-time
National Guard duty for training only).
(B) The product of--
(i) * * *
(ii) the expected average force strength
during that fiscal year for members of the
Ready Reserve of the uniformed services under
the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense
(other than members on full-time National Guard
duty other than for training) who are not
otherwise described in subparagraph (A)(ii).
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1116. Payments into the Fund
(a) The Secretary of Defense shall pay into the Fund at the
end of each month as the Department of Defense contribution to
the Fund for that month the amount that is the sum of the
following:
(1) The product of--
(A) * * *
(B) the total end strength for that month for
members of the uniformed services under the
jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense on
active duty (other than active duty for
training) and full-time National Guard duty
(other than full-time National Guard duty for
training only).
(2) The product of--
(A) * * *
(B) the total end strength for that month for
members of the Ready Reserve of the uniformed
services under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary of Defense other than members on
full-time National Guard duty (other than for
training) who are not otherwise described in
paragraph (1)(B). Amounts paid into the Fund
under this subsection shall be paid from funds
available for the Defense Health Program.
(b)(1) * * *
(2) At the beginning of each fiscal year the Secretary of
Defense shall determine the sum of the following:
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(D) The amount (including any negative amount) for
that year under the most recent amortization schedule
determined by the Secretary of Defense under section
[111(c)(4)] 1115(c)(4) of this title for the
amortization of any cumulative actuarial gain or loss
to the Fund resulting from actuarial experience.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 57--DECORATIONS AND AWARDS
Sec.
1121. Legion of Merit: award.
* * * * * * *
1134. Cold War service medal.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1134. Cold War service medal
(a) Medal Authorized.--The Secretary concerned shall, upon
application, issue the Cold War service medal to a person
eligible to receive that medal. The Cold War service medal
shall be of an appropriate design approved by the Secretary of
Defense, with ribbons, lapel pins, and other appurtenances.
(b) Eligibility.--(1) A person is eligible to receive the
Cold War service medal if the person--
(A) served on active duty during the Cold War;
(B) has not been released from active duty with a
characterization of service less favorable than
honorable and has not received a discharge less
favorable than an honorable discharge; and
(C) except as provided under paragraph (3), meets the
service requirements of paragraph (2).
(2) The service requirements of this paragraph are--
(A) in the case of a person who served on active duty
during the Cold War as an enlisted member, that the
person have completed that person's initial term of
enlistment and after the end of that initial term of
enlistment have reenlisted for an additional term of
enlistment or have been appointed as an officer; and
(B) in the case of a person who served on active duty
during the Cold War as an officer, that the person have
completed that person's initial service obligation as
an officer and have served in the armed forces after
completing that initial service obligation.
(3) The Secretary concerned, under regulations prescribed
under this section, may waive the service requirements of
paragraph (2)--
(A) in the case of any person discharged or released
from active duty for a disability incurred or
aggravated in line of duty;
(B) in the case of any person discharged for hardship
under section 1173 of this title; and
(C) under any other circumstance for which the
Secretary determines that such a waiver is warranted.
(c) One Award Authorized.--Not more than one Cold War service
medal may be issued to any person.
(d) Issuance to Representative of Deceased.--If a person who
is eligible for the Cold War service medal dies before being
issued that medal, the medal may, upon application, be issued
to the person's representative, as designated by the Secretary
concerned.
(e) Replacement.--Under regulations prescribed by the
Secretary concerned, a Cold War service medal that is lost,
destroyed, or rendered unfit for use without fault or neglect
on the part of the person to whom it was issued may be replaced
without charge.
(f) Uniform Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall
ensure that regulations prescribed by the Secretaries of the
military departments under this section are uniform so far as
is practicable.
(g) Cold War Defined.--In this section, the term ``Cold War''
means the period beginning on September 2, 1945, and ending at
the end of December 26, 1991.
CHAPTER 58--BENEFITS AND SERVICES FOR MEMBERS BEING SEPARATED OR
RECENTLY SEPARATED
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1144. Employment assistance, job training assistance, and other
transitional services: Department of Labor
(a) In General.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) The Secretaries referred to in paragraph (1) shall enter
into a detailed agreement to carry out this section. [The
agreement shall be entered into no later than 60 days after the
date of the enactment of this section.]
* * * * * * *
[(e) Funding.--(1) There is authorized to be appropriated to
the Department of Labor to carry out this section $11,000,000
for fiscal year 1993 and $8,000,000 for each of fiscal years
1994 and 1995.
[(2) There is authorized to be appropriated to the Department
of Veterans Affairs to carry out this section $6,500,000 for
each of fiscal years 1993, 1994, and 1995.]
Sec. 1145. Health benefits
(a) Transitional Health Care.--(1) For the applicable time
period described in paragraph (2), a member of the armed forces
who is involuntarily separated from active duty during the
period beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on December 31,
[2001] 2002 (and the dependents of the member), shall be
entitled to receive--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Health Care For Certain Separated Members Not Otherwise
Eligible.--(1) Consistent with the authority of the Secretary
concerned to designate certain classes of persons as eligible
to receive health care at a military medical facility, the
Secretary concerned should consider authorizing, on an
individual basis in cases of hardship, the provision of that
care for a member who is separated from the armed forces during
the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on December
31, [2001] 2002, and is ineligible for transitional health care
under subsection (a) or does not obtain a conversion health
policy (or a dependent of the member).
* * * * * * *
(e) Coast Guard.--The provisions of this section shall apply
to members of the Coast Guard (and their dependents)
involuntarily separated from active duty during the period
beginning on October 1, 1994, and ending on December 31, [2001]
2002. The Secretary of Transportation shall implement this
section for the Coast Guard.
Sec. 1146. Commissary and exchange benefits
The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations to allow
a member of the armed forces who is involuntarily separated
from active duty during the period beginning on October 1,
1990, and ending on December 31, [2001] 2002, to continue to
use commissary and exchange stores during the two-year period
beginning on the date of the involuntary separation of the
member in the same manner as a member on active duty. The
Secretary of Transportation shall implement this provision for
Coast Guard members involuntarily separated during the period
beginning on October 1, 1994, and ending on December 31, [2001]
2002.
Sec. 1147. Use of military family housing
(a) Transition for Involuntarily Separated Members.--(1) The
Secretary of a military department may, pursuant to regulations
prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, permit individuals who
are involuntarily separated during the period beginning on
October 1, 1990, and ending on December 31, [2001] 2002, to
continue for not more than 180 days after the date of such
separation to reside (along with other members of the
individual's household) in military family housing provided or
leased by the Department of Defense to such individual as a
member of the armed forces.
(2) The Secretary of Transportation may prescribe regulations
to permit members of the Coast Guard who are involuntarily
separated during the period beginning on October 1, 1994, and
ending on December 31, [2001] 2002, to continue for not more
than 180 days after the date of such separation to reside
(along with others of the member's household) in military
family housing provided or leased by the Coast Guard to the
individual as a member of the armed forces.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1150. Affiliation with Guard and Reserve units: waiver of certain
limitations
(a) Preference for Certain Persons.--A person who is
separated from the armed forces during the period beginning on
October 1, 1990, and ending on December 31, [2001] 2002, and
who applies to become a member of a National Guard or Reserve
unit within one year after the date of such separation shall be
given preference over other equally qualified applicants for
existing or projected vacancies within the unit to which the
member applies.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 59--SEPARATION
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1174a. Special separation benefits programs
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(h) Termination of Program.--(1) Except as provided in
paragraph (2), the Secretary concerned may not conduct a
program pursuant to this section after December 31, [2001]
2002.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1175. Voluntary separation incentive
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d)(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) After December 31, [2001] 2002, the Secretary may not
approve a request.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 61--RETIREMENT OR SEPARATION FOR PHYSICAL DISABILITY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1204. Members on active duty for 30 days or less or on inactive-
duty training: retirement
Upon a determination by the Secretary concerned that a member
of the armed forces not covered by section 1201, 1202, or 1203
of this title is unfit to perform the duties of his office,
grade, rank, or rating because of physical disability, the
Secretary may retire the member with retired pay computed under
section 1401 of this title, if the Secretary also determines
that--
(1) * * *
(2) the disability--
(A) * * *
(B) is a result of an injury, illness, or
disease incurred or aggravated in line of duty
after September 23, 1996--
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
(iii) while remaining overnight,
immediately before the commencement of
inactive-duty training, or while
remaining overnight between successive
periods of inactive-duty training, at
or in the vicinity of the site of the
inactive-duty training[, if the site of
the inactive-duty training is outside
reasonable commuting distance of the
member's residence]; or
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1206. Members on active duty for 30 days or less or on inactive-
duty training: separation
Upon a determination by the Secretary concerned that a member
of the armed forces not covered by section 1201, 1202, or 1203
of this title is unfit to perform the duties of his office,
grade, rank, or rating because of physical disability, the
member may be separated from his armed force, with severance
pay computed under section 1212 of this title, if the Secretary
also determines that--
(1) * * *
(2) the disability is a result of an injury, illness,
or disease incurred or aggravated in line of duty--
(A) * * *
(B) while the member--
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
(iii) remained overnight at or in the
vicinity of that place immediately
before so serving[, if the place is
outside reasonable commuting distance
from the member's residence];
* * * * * * *
(5) the disability is less than 30 percent under the
standard schedule of rating disabilities in use by the
Department of Veterans Affairs at the time of the
determination, and, in the case of a disability
incurred before [the date of the enactment of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2000,] October 5, 1999, was the proximate result of
performing active duty or inactive-duty training or of
traveling directly to or from the place at which such
duty is performed.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1212. Disability severance pay
(a) Upon separation from his armed force under section 1203
or 1206 of this title, a member is entitled to disability
severance pay computed by multiplying (1) his years of service,
but not more than 12, computed under section 1208 of this
title, by (2) the highest of the following amounts:
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) Twice the amount of monthly basic pay to which he
would be entitled if serving (i) on active duty on the
date when his name was placed on the temporary
disability retired list or, if his name was not carried
on that list, on the date when he is separated, and
(ii) in the permanent regular or reserve grade to which
he would have been promoted had it not been for the
physical disability for which he is separated and which
was found to exist as a result of a physical
examination [for promotion].
(D) Twice the amount of monthly basic pay to which he
would be entitled if serving (i) on active duty on the
date when his name was placed on the temporary
disability retired list or, if his name was not carried
on that list, on the date when he is separated, and
(ii) in the temporary grade or rank to which he would
have been promoted had it not been for the physical
disability for which he is separated and which was
found to exist as a result of a physical examination
[for promotion], if his eligibility for promotion was
required to be based on cumulative years of service or
years in grade.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 69--RETIRED GRADE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1370. Commissioned officers: general rule; exceptions
(a) Rule for Retirement in Highest Grade Held
Satisfactorily.--(1) * * *
(2)(A) In order to be eligible for voluntary retirement under
any provision of this title in a grade above major or
lieutenant commander, a commissioned officer of the Army, Navy,
Air Force, or Marine Corps must have served on active duty in
that grade for not less than three years, except that the
Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of a military
department to reduce such period to a period not less than two
years in the case of retirements effective during the period
beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on December 31, [2001]
2002.
* * * * * * *
(d) Reserve Officers.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3)(A) * * *
[(B) A person covered by subparagraph (A) who has completed
at least six months of satisfactory service in grade and is
transferred from an active status or discharged as a reserve
commissioned officer solely due to the requirements of a
nondiscretionary provision of law requiring that transfer or
discharge due to the person's age or years of service may be
credited with satisfactory service in the grade in which
serving at the time of such transfer or discharge,
notwithstanding failure of the person to complete three years
of service in that grade.]
(B) A person covered by subparagraph (A) who has completed at
least six months of satisfactory service in grade may be
credited with satisfactory service in the grade in which
serving at the time of transfer or discharge, notwithstanding
failure of the person to complete three years of service in
that grade, if that person--
(i) is transferred from an active status or
discharged as a reserve commissioned officer solely due
to the requirements of a nondiscretionary provision of
law requiring that transfer or discharge due to the
person's age or years of service; or
(ii) is retired under chapter 1223 of this title
because the person no longer meets the qualification
for membership in the Ready Reserve solely because of a
physical disability, as determined, at a minimum, by a
medical evaluation board.
* * * * * * *
(5) The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of a
military department to reduce the 3-year period required by
paragraph (3)(A) to a period not less than 2 years in the case
of retirements effective during the period beginning on October
17, 1998, and ending on December 31, [2001] 2002. The number of
reserve commissioned officers of an armed force in the same
grade for whom a reduction is made during any fiscal year in
the period of service-in-grade otherwise required under this
paragraph may not exceed the number equal to 2 percent of the
strength authorized for that fiscal year for reserve
commissioned officers of that armed force in an active status
in that grade.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 71--COMPUTATION OF RETIRED PAY
Sec.
1401. Computation of retired pay.
* * * * * * *
1414. Members eligible for retired pay who have service-connected
disabilities: payment of retired pay and veterans' disability
compensation; contingent authority.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1405. Years of service
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Exclusion of Time Required To Be Made Up or Excluded.--
(1) Time required to be made up by an enlisted member of the
Army or Air Force under section 972(a) of this title, or
required to be made up by an enlisted member of the Navy,
Marine Corps, or Coast Guard under that section with respect to
a period of time after [the date of the enactment of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995,]
October 5, 1994, may not be counted in determining years of
service under subsection (a).
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1407. Retired pay base for members who first became members after
September 7, 1980: high-36 month average
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Exception for Enlisted Members Reduced in Grade and
Officers Who Do Not Serve Satisfactorily in Highest Grade
Held.--
(1) * * *
(2) Affected members.--A member or former member
referred to in paragraph (1) is a member or former
member who by reason of conduct occurring after [the
date of the enactment of this subsection--] October 30,
2000--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1408. Payment of retired or retainer pay in compliance with court
orders
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Payments by Secretary Concerned to (or for Benefit of)
Spouse or Former Spouse.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(6) In the case of a court order for which effective service
is made on the Secretary concerned on or after [the date of the
enactment of this paragraph] August 22, 1996, and which
provides for payments from the disposable retired pay of a
member to satisfy the amount of child support set forth in the
order, the authority provided in paragraph (1) to make payments
from the disposable retired pay of a member to satisfy the
amount of child support set forth in a court order shall apply
to payment of any amount of child support arrearages set forth
in that order as well as to amounts of child support that
currently become due.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1413. Special compensation for certain severely disabled uniformed
services retirees
(a) Authority.--The Secretary concerned shall pay to each
eligible disabled uniformed services retiree a monthly amount
determined under subsection (b). If the provisions of
subsection (a) of section 1414 of this title become effective
in accordance with subsection (f) of that section, payments
under this section shall be terminated effective as of the
month beginning on the effective date specified in subsection
(e) of that section.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1414. Members eligible for retired pay who have service-connected
disabilities: payment of retired pay and veterans'
disability compensation; contingent authority
(a) Payment of Both Retired Pay and Compensation.--Subject to
subsection (b), a member or former member of the uniformed
services who is entitled to retired pay (other than as
specified in subsection (c)) and who is also entitled to
veterans' disability compensation is entitled to be paid both
without regard to sections 5304 and 5305 of title 38, subject
to the enactment of qualifying offsetting legislation as
specified in subsection (f).
(b) Special Rule for Chapter 61 Career Retirees.--The retired
pay of a member retired under chapter 61 of this title with 20
years or more of service otherwise creditable under section
1405 of this title at the time of the member's retirement is
subject to reduction under sections 5304 and 5305 of title 38,
but only to the extent that the amount of the member's retired
pay under chapter 61 of this title exceeds the amount of
retired pay to which the member would have been entitled under
any other provision of law based upon the member's service in
the uniformed services if the member had not been retired under
chapter 61 of this title.
(c) Exception.--Subsection (a) does not apply to a member
retired under chapter 61 of this title with less than 20 years
of service otherwise creditable under section 1405 of this
title at the time of the member's retirement.
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``retired pay'' includes retainer pay,
emergency officers' retirement pay, and naval pension.
(2) The term ``veterans' disability compensation''
has the meaning given the term ``compensation'' in
section 101(12) of title 38.
(e) Effective Date.--If qualifying offsetting legislation (as
defined in subsection (f)) is enacted, the provisions of
subsection (a) shall take effect on--
(1) the first day of the first month beginning after
the date of the enactment of such qualifying offsetting
legislation; or
(2) the first day of the fiscal year that begins in
the calendar year in which such legislation is enacted,
if that date is later than the date specified in
paragraph (1).
(f) Effectiveness Contingent on Enactment of Offsetting
Legislation.--(1) The provisions of subsection (a) shall be
effective only if--
(A) the President, in the budget for any fiscal year,
proposes the enactment of legislation that, if enacted,
would be qualifying offsetting legislation; and
(B) after that budget is submitted to Congress, there
is enacted qualifying offsetting legislation.
(2) For purposes of this subsection:
(A) The term ``qualifying offsetting legislation''
means legislation (other than an appropriations Act)
that includes provisions that--
(i) offset fully the increased outlays to be
made by reason of the provisions of subsection
(a) for each of the first 10 fiscal years
beginning after the date of the enactment of
such legislation;
(ii) expressly state that they are enacted
for the purpose of the offset described in
clause (i); and
(iii) are included in full on the PayGo
scorecard.
(B) The term ``PayGo scorecard'' means the estimates
that are made by the Director of the Congressional
Budget Office and the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget under section 252(d) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of
1985 (2 U.S.C. 902(d)) with respect to the ten fiscal
years following the date of the enactment of the
legislation that is qualifying offsetting legislation
for purposes of this section.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 75--DECEASED PERSONNEL
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER II--DEATH BENEFITS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1481. Recovery, care, and disposition of remains: decedents
covered
(a) The Secretary concerned may provide for the recovery,
care, and disposition of the remains of the following persons:
(1) * * *
(2) A member of a reserve component of an armed force
who dies while--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(D) remaining overnight immediately before
the commencement of inactive-duty training, or
remaining overnight, between successive periods
of inactive-duty training, at or in the
vicinity of the site of the inactive-duty
training[, if the site is outside reasonable
commuting distance from the member's
residence];
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1491. Funeral honors functions at funerals for veterans
(a) * * *
(b) Composition of Funeral Honors Details.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) A member of the Army National Guard of the United States
or the Air National Guard of the United States who serves as a
member of a funeral honors detail while in a duty status
authorized under State law shall be considered to be a member
of the armed forces for the purposes of the first sentence of
paragraph (2).
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 76--MISSING PERSONS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1506. Personnel files
(a) * * *
(b) Classified Information.--(1) * * *
(2)(A) If classified information withheld under this
subsection refers to one or more unnamed missing persons, the
Secretary shall ensure that notice of that withheld
information, and notice of the date of the most recent review
of the classification of that withheld information, is made
reasonably accessible to the primary next of kin, members of
the immediate family, and the previously designated person[.]
of all missing persons from the conflict or period of war to
which the classified information pertains.
(B) For purposes of subparagraph (A), information shall be
considered to be made reasonably available if placed in a
separate and distinct file that is available for review by
persons specified in subparagraph (A) upon the request of any
such person either to review the separate file or to review the
personnel file of the missing person concerned.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1511. Return alive of person declared missing or dead
(a) * * *
(b) Effect on Gratuities Paid as a Result of Status.--
Subsection (a) shall not be interpreted to invalidate or
otherwise affect the receipt by any person of a death gratuity
or other payment from the United States on behalf of a person
referred to in subsection (a) before [the date of the enactment
of this chapter.] February 10, 1996.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 80--MISCELLANEOUS INVESTIGATION REQUIREMENTS AND OTHER DUTIES
Sec.
1561. Complaints of sexual harassment: investigation by commanding
officers.
* * * * * * *
1566. Voting assistance: compliance assessments and assistance.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1566. Voting assistance: compliance assessments and assistance
(a) Inspector General Assessments.--(1) The Department of
Defense Inspector General shall each calendar year conduct a
random and unannounced assessment at a minimum of 15 Department
of Defense installations of the compliance at those
installations with--
(A) the requirements of the Uniformed and Overseas
Citizens Absentee Voting Act (42 U.S.C. 1973ff et
seq.);
(B) Department of Defense regulations regarding that
Act and the Federal Voting Assistance Program carried
out under that Act; and
(C) other requirements of law regarding voting by
members of the armed forces.
(2) Each assessment under paragraph (1) shall include a
review of such compliance--
(A) within units to which are assigned, in the
aggregate, not less than 20 percent of the personnel
assigned to duty at that installation;
(B) within a representative survey of members of the
armed forces assigned to that installation and their
dependents; and
(C) within unit voting assistance officers to measure
program effectiveness.
(b) Regular Military Department Assessments.--The Secretary
of each military department shall include in the set of issues
and programs to be reviewed during any management effectiveness
review or inspection an assessment of compliance with the
Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (42 U.S.C.
1973ff et seq.) and with Department of Defense regulations
regarding the Federal Voting Assistance Program.
(c) Voting Assistance Officers.--Voting assistance officers
appointed or assigned under Department of Defense regulations
regarding the Federal Voting Assistance Program shall be
appointed or assigned with the expectation of serving in that
capacity for a minimum of 30 months. A member of the armed
forces assigned to such a position may not be assigned other
duties that would not be considered part of the member's
primary military duties, except when a unit commander
determines that insufficient personnel are available to fulfill
all additional duty requirements. Performance evaluation
reports pertaining to a member who has been assigned to serve
as a voting assistance officer shall comment on the performance
of the member as a voting assistance officer.
(d) Delivery of Mail From Overseas Preceding Federal
Elections.--(1) During the four months preceding a general
Federal election month, the Secretary of Defense shall
periodically conduct surveys of all overseas locations and
vessels at sea with military units responsible for collecting
mail for return shipment to the United States and all port
facilities in the United States and overseas where military-
related mail is collected for shipment to overseas locations or
to the United States. The purpose of each survey shall be to
determine if voting materials are awaiting shipment at any such
location and, if so, the length of time that such materials
have been held at that location. During the fourth and third
months before a general Federal election month, such surveys
shall be conducted biweekly. During the second and first months
before a general Federal election month, such surveys shall be
conducted weekly.
(2) The Secretary shall ensure that voting materials are
transmitted expeditiously by military postal authorities at all
times.
(3) In this section, the term ``general Federal election
month'' means November in an even-numbered year.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 81--CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1581. Foreign National Employees Separation Pay Account
(a) * * *
(b) Deposits Into Account.--[(1) The Secretary of the
Treasury shall deposit into the account all amounts that were
obligated by the Secretary of Defense before December 5, 1991,
and that remain unexpended for separation pay for foreign
nationals referred to in subsection (e).
[(2) The Secretary of Defense shall deposit] The Secretary of
Defense shall deposit into the account from applicable
appropriations all amounts obligated [on or after December 5,
1991,] for separation pay for foreign nationals referred to in
subsection (e).
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1588. Authority to accept certain voluntary services
(a) Authority To Accept Services.--Subject to subsection (b)
and notwithstanding section 1342 of title 31, the Secretary
concerned may accept from any person the following services:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(5) Voluntary legal assistance services under section
1044 of this title.
* * * * * * *
(d) Status of Persons Providing Services.--(1) Subject to
paragraph (3), while providing voluntary services accepted
under subsection (a) or receiving training under subsection
(c), a person, other than a person referred to in paragraph
(2), shall be considered to be an employee of the Federal
Government only for purposes of the following provisions of
law:
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(E) Section 1054 of this title (relating to defense
of certain suits arising out of legal malpractice), in
the case of persons providing voluntary legal
assistance services under subsection (a)(5).
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 83--CIVILIAN DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE EMPLOYEES
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER I--DEFENSE-WIDE INTELLIGENCE PERSONNEL POLICY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1611. Postemployment assistance: certain terminated intelligence
employees
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Duration of Assistance.--Assistance may not be provided
under this section in the case of any individual after the end
of the five-year period beginning on the date of the
termination of the employment of the individual [with] in a
defense intelligence position.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 87--DEFENSE ACQUISITION WORKFORCE
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER I--GENERAL AUTHORITIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Sec.
1701. Management policies.
[1702. Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology:
authorities and responsibilities.]
1702. Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics: authorities and responsibilities.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 1702. Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology:
authorities and responsibilities]
Sec. 1702. Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics: authorities and responsibilities
Subject to the authority, direction, and control of the
Secretary of Defense, the [Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics shall carry out all
powers, functions, and duties of the Secretary of Defense with
respect to the acquisition workforce in the Department of
Defense. The Under Secretary shall ensure that the policies of
the Secretary of Defense established in accordance with this
chapter are implemented throughout the Department of Defense.
The Under Secretary shall prescribe policies and requirements
for the educational programs of the defense acquisition
university structure established under section 1746 of this
title.
Sec. 1703. Director of Acquisition Education, Training, and Career
Development
The [Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics shall appoint a Director of
Acquisition Education, Training, and Career Development within
the office of the Under Secretary to assist the Under Secretary
in the performance of his duties under this chapter.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1707. Personnel in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and in
the Defense Agencies
(a) Policies.--The Secretary of Defense, acting through the
[Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology]
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics, shall establish and implement, in such manner as the
Secretary considers appropriate, policies and procedures for
the effective management, including accession, education,
training, and career development, of persons serving in
acquisition positions in the Office of the Secretary of Defense
and the Defense Agencies. Such policies and procedures shall
include (1) the establishment of one or more Acquisition Corps
with respect to such persons, and (2) the establishment of an
acquisition career program board (and any appropriate
subordinate board structure) with respect to such persons. The
Secretary shall ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable,
such policies and procedures are as uniform as practicable with
the policies established under this chapter for the military
departments.
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER II--DEFENSE ACQUISITION POSITIONS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1722. Career development
(a) Career Paths.--The Secretary of Defense, acting through
the [Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology]
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics, shall ensure that appropriate career paths for
civilian and military personnel who wish to pursue careers in
acquisition are identified in terms of the education, training,
experience, and assignments necessary for career progression of
civilians and members of the armed forces to the most senior
acquisition positions. The Secretary shall make available
published information on such career paths.
(b) Limitation on Preference for Military Personnel.--(1) * *
*
(2)(A) * * *
(B) Not later than December 15 of each year, the [Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology] Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
shall submit to the Secretary a report that lists each
acquisition position that is restricted to members of the armed
forces under such policy and the recommendation of the Under
Secretary as to whether such position should remain so
restricted.
* * * * * * *
[(e) Management of Workforce.--The Secretary of Defense shall
ensure that the acquisition workforce is managed such that, for
each fiscal year from October 1, 1991, through September 30,
1996, there is a substantial increase in the proportion of
civilians (as compared to armed forces personnel) serving in
critical acquisition positions in general, in program manager
positions, and in division head positions over the proportion
of civilians (as compared to armed forces personnel) in such
positions on October 1, 1990.]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1724. Contracting positions: qualification requirements
[(a) Contracting Officers.--The Secretary of Defense shall
require that in order to qualify to serve in an acquisition
position as a contracting officer with authority to award or
administer contracts for amounts above the simplified
acquisition threshold referred to in section 2304(g) of this
title, a person must--]
(a) Contracting Officers.--The Secretary of Defense shall
require that, in order to qualify to serve in an acquisition
position as a contracting officer with authority to award or
administer contracts for amounts above the simplified
acquisition threshold referred to in section 2304(g) of this
title, an employee of the Department of Defense or member of
the armed forces (other than the Coast Guard) must, except as
provided in subsections (c) and (d)--
(1) have completed all [mandatory] contracting
courses required for a contracting officer [at the
grade level, or in the position within the grade of the
General Schedule (in the case of an employee), that the
person is serving in;] (A) in the case of an employee,
serving in the position within the grade of the General
Schedule in which the employee is serving, and (B) in
the case of a member of the armed forces, in the
member's grade;
* * * * * * *
(3)(A) have received a baccalaureate degree from an
accredited educational institution authorized to grant
baccalaureate degrees, and (B) have completed at least
24 semester credit hours (or the equivalent) of study
from an accredited institution of higher education in
any of the following disciplines: accounting, business,
finance, law, contracts, purchasing, economics,
industrial management, marketing, quantitative methods,
and organization and management; and
* * * * * * *
[(b) GS-1102 Series Positions and Similar Military
Positions.--The Secretary of Defense shall require that a
person meet the requirements set forth in paragraph (3) of
subsection (a), but not the other requirements set forth in
that subsection, in order to qualify to serve in a position in
the Department of Defense in--
[(1) the GS-1102 occupational series; or
[(2) a similar occupational specialty if the position
is to be filled by a member of the armed forces.
[(c) Exception.--The requirements imposed under subsection
(a) or (b) shall not apply to a person for the purpose of
qualifying to serve in a position in which the person is
serving on September 30, 2000.
[(d) Waiver.--The acquisition career program board of a
military department may waive any or all of the requirements of
subsections (a) and (b) with respect to an employee or member
of that military department if the board certifies that the
employee or member possesses significant potential for
advancement to levels of greater responsibility and authority,
based on demonstrated job performance and qualifying
experience. With respect to each waiver granted under this
subsection, the board shall set forth in a written document the
rationale for its decision to waive such requirements. The
document shall be submitted to and retained by the Director of
Acquisition Education, Training, and Career Development.]
(b) GS-1102 Series Positions and Similar Military
Positions.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall require that in
order to qualify to serve in a position in the Department of
Defense that is in the GS-1102 occupational series an employee
or potential employee of the Department of Defense meet the
requirements set forth in paragraph (3) of subsection (a). The
Secretary may not require that in order to serve in such a
position an employee or potential employee meet any of the
requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) of that subsection.
(2) The Secretary of Defense shall require that in order for
a member of the armed forces to be selected for an occupational
specialty within the armed forces that (as determined by the
Secretary) is similar to the GS-1102 occupational series a
member of the armed forces meet the requirements set forth in
paragraph (3) of subsection (a). The Secretary may not require
that in order to be selected for such an occupational specialty
a member meet any of the requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2)
of that subsection.
(c) Exceptions.--The qualification requirements imposed by
the Secretary of Defense pursuant to subsections (a) and (b)
shall not apply to an employee of the Department of Defense or
member of the armed forces who--
(1) served as a contracting officer with authority to
award or administer contracts in excess of the
simplified acquisition threshold on or before September
30, 2000;
(2) served, on or before September 30, 2000, in a
position either as an employee in the GS-1102 series or
as a member of the armed forces in similar occupational
specialty;
(3) is in the contingency contracting force; or
(4) is described in subsection (e)(1)(B).
(d) Waiver.--The acquisition career program board concerned
may waive any or all of the requirements of subsections (a) and
(b) with respect to an employee of the Department of Defense or
member of the armed forces if the board certifies that the
individual possesses significant potential for advancement to
levels of greater responsibility and authority, based on
demonstrated job performance and qualifying experience. With
respect to each waiver granted under this subsection, the board
shall set forth in a written document the rationale for its
decision to waive such requirements. Such document shall be
submitted to and retained by the Director of Acquisition
Education, Training, and Career Development.
(e) Developmental Opportunities.--(1) The Secretary of
Defense may--
(A) establish or continue one or more programs for
the purpose of recruiting, selecting, appointing,
educating, qualifying, and developing the careers of
individuals to meet the requirements in subparagraphs
(A) and (B) of subsection (a)(3);
(B) appoint individuals to developmental positions in
those programs; and
(C) separate from the civil service after a three-
year probationary period any individual appointed under
this subsection who, as determined by the Secretary,
fails to complete satisfactorily any program described
in subparagraph (A).
(2) To qualify for any developmental program described in
paragraph (1)(A), an individual shall have--
(A) been awarded a baccalaureate degree from an
accredited institution of higher education authorized
to grant baccalaureate degrees; or
(B) completed at least 24 semester credit hours or
the equivalent of study from an accredited institution
of higher education in any of the disciplines of
accounting, business, finance, law, contracts,
purchasing, economics, industrial management,
marketing, quantitative methods, or organization and
management.
(f) Contingency Contracting Force.--The Secretary shall
establish qualification requirements for the contingency
contracting force consisting of members of the armed forces
whose mission is to deploy in support of contingency operations
and other operations of the Department of Defense, including--
(1) completion of at least 24 semester credit hours
or the equivalent of study from an accredited
institution of higher education or similar educational
institution in any of the disciplines of accounting,
business, finance, law, contracts, purchasing,
economics, industrial management, marketing,
quantitative methods, or organization and management;
or
(2) passage of an examination that demonstrates
skills, knowledge, or abilities comparable to that of
an individual who has completed at least 24 semester
credit hours or the equivalent of study in any of the
disciplines described in paragraph (1).
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER III--ACQUISITION CORPS
Sec.
1731. Acquisition Corps: in general.
* * * * * * *
[1736. Applicability.]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1732. Selection criteria and procedures
(a) Selection Criteria and Procedures.--Selection for
membership in an Acquisition Corps shall be made in accordance
with criteria and procedures established by the Secretary of
Defense. [Such criteria and procedures shall be in effect on
and after October 1, 1993.]
* * * * * * *
(c) Exceptions.--(1) * * *
(2) The requirements of subsections (b)(2)(A) and (b)(2)(B)
shall not apply to any employee who is serving in an
acquisition position on October 1, 1991, and who does not have
10 years of experience as described in paragraph (1) if the
employee passes an examination considered by the Secretary of
Defense to demonstrate skills, knowledge, or abilities
comparable to that of an individual who has completed at least
24 semester credit hours (or the equivalent) of study from an
accredited institution of higher education from among the
following disciplines: accounting, business, finance, law,
contracts, purchasing, economics, industrial management,
marketing, quantitative methods, and organization and
management. The Secretary of Defense shall submit examinations
to be given to civilian employees under this paragraph to the
Director of the Office of Personnel Management for approval. If
the Director does not disapprove an examination within 30 days
after the date on which the Director receives the examination,
the examination is deemed to be approved by the Director.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1734. Career development
(a) * * *
(b) Assignment Period for Program Managers.--(1) The
Secretary of Defense shall prescribe in regulations--
(A) * * *
(B) a requirement that, [on and after October 1,
1991,] to the maximum extent practicable, a program
manager who is the replacement for a reassigned program
manager arrive at the assignment location before the
reassigned program manager leaves.
Except as provided in subsection (d), the Secretary concerned
may not reassign a program manager or deputy program manager
from such an assignment until after such major milestone has
occurred.
* * * * * * *
(e) Rotation Policy.--(1) * * *
(2) The Secretary of Defense shall establish a procedure
under which the assignment of each person assigned to a
critical acquisition position shall be reviewed on a case-by-
case basis, by the acquisition career program board of the
department concerned, for the purpose of determining whether
the Government and such person would be better served by a
reassignment to a different position. Such a review shall be
carried out with respect to each such person not later than
five years after that person is assigned to a critical
position. [Reviews under this subsection shall be carried out
after October 1, 1995, but may be carried out before that
date.]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1735. Education, training, and experience requirements for
critical acquisition positions
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Program Executive Officers.--Before being assigned to a
position as a program executive officer, a person--
(1) must have completed the program management course
at the Defense Systems Management College or a
management program at an accredited educational
institution in the private sector determined to be
comparable by the Secretary of Defense, acting through
the [Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics;
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 1736. Applicability
[(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsections (b) and
(c), the qualification requirements prescribed pursuant to
section 1735 shall apply to all critical acquisition positions
not later than October 1, 1992.
[(b) Program Managers.--The qualification requirements
prescribed pursuant to section 1735 shall apply with respect to
program manager positions not later than October 1, 1991.
[(c) Exceptions.--The qualification requirements prescribed
pursuant to sections 1733(a) and 1735(a) shall not apply--
[(1) to an employee who is serving in a critical
acquisition position on October 1, 1992, for purposes
of qualifying to continue to serve in such position; or
[(2) to a person who is serving in a program manager
position on October 1, 1991, for purposes of qualifying
to continue to serve in such position.]
Sec. 1737. Definitions and general provisions
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Waiver.--(1) The Secretary of each military department
(acting through the service acquisition executive for that
department) or the Secretary of Defense (acting through the
[Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology]
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics) for Defense Agencies and other components of the
Department of Defense may waive, on a case-by-case basis, the
requirements established under this subchapter with respect to
the assignment of an individual to a particular critical
acquisition position. Such a waiver may be granted only if
unusual circumstances justify the waiver or if the Secretary
concerned (or official to whom the waiver authority is
delegated) determines that the individual's qualifications
obviate the need for meeting the education, training, and
experience requirements established under this subchapter.
(2) The authority to grant such waivers may be delegated--
(A) * * *
(B) in the case of the [Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics,
only to the Director of Acquisition Education,
Training, and Career Development.
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER IV--EDUCATION AND TRAINING
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1741. Policies and programs: establishment and implementation
(a) * * *
(b) Funding Levels.--The [Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics each year shall
recommend to the Secretary of Defense the funding levels to be
requested in the defense budget to implement the education and
training programs under this subchapter. The Secretary of
Defense shall set forth separately the funding levels requested
for such programs in the Department of Defense budget
justification documents submitted in support of the President's
budget submitted to Congress under section 1105 of title 31.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1746. Defense acquisition university structure
(a) Defense Acquisition University Structure.--The Secretary
of Defense, acting through the [Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, shall establish and
maintain a defense acquisition university structure to provide
for--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER V--GENERAL MANAGEMENT PROVISIONS
Sec.
1761. Management information system.
* * * * * * *
[1762. Report to Secretary of Defense.]
* * * * * * *
[1764. Authority to establish different minimum experience
requirements.]
Sec. 1761. Management information system
(a) * * *
(b) Minimum Information.--The management information system
shall, at a minimum, provide for--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) collection of the information necessary for the
[Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics and the Secretary of Defense
to comply with the requirements of section 1762 for the
years in which that section is in effect.
[Sec. 1762. Report to Secretary of Defense
[(a) Report of Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Technology.--Each year the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Technology shall transmit to the Secretary of
Defense a report on the status of the defense acquisition
workforce. Each annual report shall include, for each military
department and Defense Agency and the Office of the Secretary
of Defense, information on each category of information
referred to in subsection (c).
[(b) Inclusion of Information in Annual Report.--The
Secretary of Defense shall include in the annual report of the
Secretary to Congress under section 113(c) of this title the
information in the report transmitted to the Secretary under
subsection (a).
[(c) Information.--The following information shall be
included in the report transmitted to the Secretary under
subsection (a) for the period covered by the report (which
shall be shown for the Department of Defense as a whole and,
with respect to paragraphs (1) through (12), separately for the
Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Defense Agencies, and
Office of the Secretary of Defense):
[(1) The number of acquisition positions specified
under the policy established under section 1722(b)(2)
of this title as being available, as of December 1 of
the period covered by the report, only to members of
the armed forces, set forth separately under each
criterion established in the policy, together with a
discussion of the types of positions that are so
specified.
[(2) The total number of persons serving in the
Acquisition Corps as of December 1 of the period
covered by the report, set forth separately for members
of the armed forces and civilian employees, by grade
level and by functional specialty.
[(3) The total number of critical acquisition
positions held as of December 1 of the period covered
by the report, set forth separately for members of the
armed forces and civilian employees, by grade level and
by other appropriate categories (including by program
manager, deputy program manager, and division head
positions). For each such category, the report shall
specify the number of civilians holding such positions
compared to the total number of positions filled.
[(4)(A) The promotion rate for officers in an
acquisition corps considered for promotion from within
the promotion zone, compared with the promotion rate
for other officers considered for promotion from within
the promotion zone in the same pay grade, shown for all
officers of the same armed force and for all line (or
the equivalent) officers of the same armed force.
[(B) The promotion rate for officers in an
acquisition corps considered for promotion from below
the promotion zone, compared in the same manner as
specified in subparagraph (A).
[(C) If the promotion rates fail to meet the
objective of section 1731(b) of this title, the
Secretary of Defense shall notify Congress of such
failures and of what actions the Secretary has taken or
plans to take in reaction to such failures.
[(5) The number of employees who met the requirement
of section 1724(a)(3) or section 1724(b) of this title
by passing an exam as described in section
1724(a)(3)(C), set forth separately for contracting
officers and persons in the GS-1102 occupational
series.
[(6) The number of employees to whom the requirements
of subsections (b)(2)(A) and (b)(2)(B) of section 1732
of this title did not apply because of the exceptions
provided in paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 1732(c)
of this title, set forth separately by type of
exception.
[(7) The number of employees certified by an
acquisition career program board under section
1732(b)(2)(A)(ii) of this title.
[(8) The number of program managers and deputy
program managers who were reassigned after completion
of a major milestone occurring closest in time to the
date on which the person has served in the position for
four years (as required under section 1734(b) of this
title), and the proportion of those reassignments to
the total number of reassignments of program managers
and deputy program managers, set forth separately for
program managers and deputy program managers. The
Secretary also shall include the average length of
assignment served by program managers and deputy
program managers so reassigned.
[(9) The number of persons, excluding those reported
under paragraph (8), in critical acquisition positions
who were reassigned after a period of three years or
longer (as required under section 1734(a) of this
title), and the proportion of those reassignments to
the total number of reassignments of persons, excluding
those reported under paragraph (8), in critical
acquisition positions.
[(10) The number of times a waiver authority was
exercised under section 1724(d), 1732(d), 1734(d), or
1736(c) of this title or any other provision of this
chapter (or other provision of law) which permits the
waiver of any requirement relating to the acquisition
workforce, and in the case of each such authority, the
reasons for exercising the authority. The Secretary may
present the information provided under this paragraph
by category or grouping of types of waivers and
reasons.
[(11) The number of persons reviewed for reassignment
pursuant to section 1734(e)(2) of this title and the
number of persons reassigned as a result of such
reviews, together with a discussion of the criteria
used to determine reassignments.
[(12) The number of persons participating in each of
the programs described in sections 1742 through 1745 of
this title, as of December 1 of the period covered by
the report.
[(13) The number of persons paid a bonus under
section 317 of title 37 and the number of years of
service agreed to, for each such bonus, by category.
[(14) Such other information and comparative data as
the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate to
demonstrate the performance of the Department of
Defense and the performance of each military department
in carrying out this chapter.
[(d) Effective Date.--The requirements of this section shall
apply to the years 1991 through 1998.]
Sec. 1763. Reassignment of authority
The Secretary of Defense may assign the responsibilities
under this chapter of the [Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to any other civilian
official in the Office of the Secretary of Defense who is
appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent
of the Senate. If the Secretary takes action under the
preceding sentence, he may authorize the Secretaries of the
military departments to assign the responsibilities of a senior
acquisition executive under this chapter to any other civilian
official in the military department who is appointed by the
President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
[Sec. 1764. Authority to establish different minimum experience
requirements
[(a) Authority.--During the six-year period beginning on
October 1, 1992, and ending on September 30, 1998, the
Secretary of Defense may prescribe a different minimum number
of years of experience to be required for eligibility for
appointment to an acquisition position referred to in
subsection (b) than is required for such position under or
pursuant to any provision of this chapter. Any requirement
prescribed under this section for a position referred to in any
paragraph of subsection (b) shall be applied uniformly to all
positions referred to in such paragraph.
[(b) Applicability.--This section applies to the following
acquisition positions in the Department of Defense:
[(1) Contracting officer.
[(2) Program executive officer.
[(3) Senior contracting official.
[(c) OPM Approval.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit any
requirement with respect to civilian employees that is
prescribed under this section to the Director of the Office of
Personnel Management for approval if the Director does not
disapprove the requirement within 30 days after the date on
which the Director receives the requirement, the requirement is
deemed to be approved by the Director.
[(d) Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall notify Congress
of each requirement prescribed under subsection (a) together
with his reasons for prescribing such requirement.]
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 88--MILITARY FAMILY PROGRAMS AND MILITARY CHILD CARE
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER I--MILITARY FAMILY PROGRAMS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1782. Surveys of military families
[(a) Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may conduct surveys
of members of the armed forces on active duty or in an active
status, members of the families of such members, and retired
members of the armed forces to determine the effectiveness of
Federal programs relating to military families and the need for
new programs.]
(a) Authority.--The Secretary of Defense, in order to
determine the effectiveness of Federal programs relating to
military families and the need for new programs, may conduct
surveys of--
(1) members of the armed forces who are on active
duty, in an active status, or retired;
(2) family members of such members; and
(3) survivors of retired members.
* * * * * * *
(c) Federal Recordkeeping Requirements.--With respect to such
surveys, [family members of members of the armed forces and
reserve and retired members of the armed forces] persons
covered by subsection (a) shall be considered to be employees
of the United States for purposes of section 3502(3)(A)(i) of
title 44.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1784. Employment opportunities for military spouses
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Space-Available Use of Facilities for Spouse Training
Purposes.--Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of
Defense, the Secretary of a military department may make
available to a non-Department of Defense entity space in non-
excess facilities controlled by that Secretary for the purpose
of the non-Department of Defense entity providing employment-
related training for military spouses.
(e) Employment by Other Federal Agencies.--The Secretary of
Defense shall work with the Director of the Office of Personnel
Management and the heads of other Federal departments and
agencies to expand and facilitate the use of existing Federal
programs and resources in support of military spouse
employment.
(f) Private-Sector Employment.--The Secretary of Defense--
(1) shall seek to develop partnerships with firms in
the private sector to enhance employment opportunities
for spouses of members of the armed forces and to
provide for improved job portability for such spouses,
especially in the case of the spouse of a member of the
armed forces accompanying the member to a new
geographical area because of a change of permanent duty
station of the member; and
(2) shall work with the United States Chamber of
Commerce and other appropriate private-sector entities
to facilitate the formation of such partnerships.
(g) Employment With DOD Contractors.--The Secretary of
Defense shall examine and seek ways for incorporating hiring
preferences for qualified spouses of members of the armed
forces into contracts between the Department of Defense and
private-sector entities.
* * * * * * *
PART III--TRAINING AND EDUCATION
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 102--JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICERS' TRAINING CORPS
Sec.
2031. Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps.
* * * * * * *
[2033. Contingent funding increase.]
Sec. 2031. Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps
(a)(1) The Secretary of each military department shall
establish and maintain a Junior Reserve Officers' Training
Corps, organized into units, at public and private secondary
educational institutions which apply for a unit and meet the
standards and criteria prescribed pursuant to this section.
[The total number of units which may be established and
maintained by all of the military departments under authority
of this section, including those units already established on
October 13, 1964, may not exceed 3,500.] The President shall
promulgate regulations prescribing the standards and criteria
to be followed by the military departments in selecting the
institutions at which units are to be established and
maintained and shall provide for the fair and equitable
distribution of such units throughout the Nation, except that
more than one such unit may be established and maintained at
any military institute.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2033. Contingent funding increase
[If for any fiscal year the amount appropriated directly to
the Secretary of Defense for the National Guard Challenge
Program under section 509 of title 32 is in excess of
$62,500,000, the Secretary of Defense shall (notwithstanding
any other provision of law) make the amount in excess of
$62,500,000 available for the Junior Reserve Officers' Training
Corps program under section 2031 of this title, and such excess
amount may not be used for any other purpose.]
CHAPTER 103--SENIOR RESERVE OFFICERS' TRAINING CORPS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2104. Advanced training; eligibility for
(a) * * *
(b) To be eligible for continuation, or initial enrollment,
in the program for advanced training, a person must--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) enlist in [a reserve component of] an armed force
under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the military
department concerned for the period prescribed by the
Secretary;
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2106. Advanced training; commission on completion
(a) Upon satisfactorily completing the academic and military
requirements of the program of advanced training, a member of
the program who was selected for advanced training under
section 2104 of this title may be appointed as a regular or
reserve officer in the appropriate armed force in the grade of
second lieutenant or ensign, even though he is under 21 years
of age. However, a member of the program selected for an
appointment under this section who, under regulations
prescribed by the Secretary of the military department
concerned, is designated or selected as a Distinguished
Graduate (or the equivalent) shall be appointed as a regular
officer.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2107. Financial assistance program for specially selected members
(a) The Secretary of the military department concerned may
appoint as a cadet or midshipman, as appropriate, in the
reserve of an armed force under his jurisdiction any eligible
member of the program who will be under [27 years of age on
June 30] 35 years of age on December 31 of the calendar year in
which he is eligible under this section for appointment as an
ensign in the Navy or as a second lieutenant in the Army, Air
Force, or Marine Corps, as the case may be[, except that the
age of any such member who has served on active duty in the
armed forces may exceed such age limitation on such date by a
period equal to the period such member served on active duty,
but only if such member will be under 30 years of age on such
date].
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2107a. Financial assistance program for specially selected
members: Army Reserve and Army National Guard
(a)(1) The Secretary of the Army may appoint as a cadet in
the Army Reserve or Army National Guard of the United States
any eligible member of the program who is enrolled in the
Advanced Course of the Army Reserve Officers' Training Corps at
a military college, military junior college, or civilian
institution and who will be under [27 years of age on June 30]
35 years of age on December 31 of the calendar year in which he
is eligible under this section for appointment as a second
lieutenant in the Army Reserve or Army National Guard[, except
that the age of any such member who has served on active duty
in the armed forces may exceed such age limitation on such date
by a period equal to the period such member served on active
duty, but only if such member will be under 30 years of age on
such date].
* * * * * * *
(b)(1) To be eligible for appointment as a cadet under this
section, a member of the program must--
[(1)] (A) be a citizen of the United States;
[(2)] (B) be specially selected for the financial
assistance program under this section under procedures
prescribed by the Secretary of the Army;
[(3)] (C) enlist in a reserve component of the Army
for the period prescribed by the Secretary of the Army;
[(4)] (D) contract, with the consent of his parent or
guardian if he is a minor, with the Secretary of the
Army to serve for the period required by the program;
[(5)] (E) agree in writing that he will accept an
appointment, if offered, as a commissioned officer in
the Army Reserve or the Army National Guard of the
United States; and
[(6)] (F) agree in writing that he will serve in a
troop program unit of the Army Reserve or Army National
Guard for not less than eight years.
(2) Performance of duty under an agreement under this
subsection shall be under such terms and conditions as the
Secretary of the Army may prescribe and may include periods of
active duty, active duty for training, and other service in an
active or inactive status in the reserve component in which
appointed.
(3) In the case of a cadet under this section at a military
junior college, the Secretary may, at any time and with the
consent of the cadet concerned, modify an agreement described
in paragraph (1)(F) submitted by the cadet to reduce or
eliminate the troop program unit service obligation specified
in the agreement and to establish, in lieu of that obligation,
an active duty service obligation. Such a modification may be
made only if the Secretary determines that it is in the best
interests of the United States to do so.
* * * * * * *
(h) The Secretary of the Army shall appoint not more than 208
cadets each year under this section, to include not less than
10 cadets at each military junior college at which there are
not less than 10 members of the program eligible under
subsection (b) for such an appointment. At any [military
college] military junior college at which in any year there are
fewer than 10 such members, the Secretary shall appoint each
such member as a cadet under this section.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 104--UNIFORMED SERVICES UNIVERSITY OF THE HEALTH SCIENCES
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2112. Establishment
(a) There is hereby authorized to be established within 25
miles of the District of Columbia a Uniformed Services
University of the Health Sciences (hereinafter in this chapter
referred to as the ``University''), at a site or sites to be
selected by the Secretary of Defense, with authority to grant
appropriate advanced degrees. It shall be so organized as to
graduate not less than 100 medical students annually[, with the
first class graduating not later than September 21, 1982].
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 105--ARMED FORCES HEALTH PROFESSIONS FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
PROGRAMS
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER II--NURSE OFFICER CANDIDATE ACCESSION PROGRAM
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2130a. Financial assistance: nurse officer candidates
(a) Bonus Authorized.--(1) A person described in subsection
(b) who, during the period beginning on November 29, 1989, and
ending on December 31, [2001] 2002, executes a written
agreement in accordance with subsection (c) to accept an
appointment as a nurse officer may, upon the acceptance of the
agreement by the Secretary concerned, be paid an accession
bonus of not more than $5,000. The bonus shall be paid in
periodic installments, as determined by the Secretary concerned
at the time the agreement is accepted, except that the first
installment may not exceed $2,500.
(2) In addition to the accession bonus payable under
paragraph (1), a person selected under such paragraph shall be
entitled to a monthly stipend of not more than $500 for each
month the individual is enrolled as a full-time student in an
accredited baccalaureate degree program in nursing at a
civilian educational institution [that does not have a Senior
Reserve Officers' Training Program established under section
2102 of this title]. The continuation bonus may be paid for not
more than 24 months.
(b) Eligible Students.--A person eligible to enter into an
agreement under subsection (a) is a person who--
(1) is enrolled as a full-time student in an
accredited baccalaureate degree program in nursing at a
civilian educational institution that does not have a
Senior Reserve Officers' Training Program established
under section 2102 of this title or that has a Senior
Reserve Officers' Training Program for which the
student is ineligible;
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 108--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SCHOOLS
Sec.
2161. Joint Military Intelligence College: academic degrees.
* * * * * * *
2167. National Defense University: admission of private sector
civilians to professional military education program.
2168. Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center: degree of
Associate of Arts in foreign language.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2162. Preparation of budget requests for operation of professional
military education schools
(a) * * *
(b) Preparation of Budget Requests.--(1) * * *
(2) As executive agent for funding professional development
education at the National Defense University, including the
Joint Forces Staff College, the Secretary of Defense, with the
advice of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall
prepare the annual budget for professional development
education operations at the National Defense University and set
forth that request as a separate budget request in the
materials submitted to Congress in support of the budget
request for the Department of Defense. Nothing in the preceding
sentence affects policies in effect on the date of the
enactment of this paragraph with respect to budgeting for the
funding of logistical and base operations support for
components of the National Defense University through the
military departments.
[(2)] (3) The Secretary of a military department preparing a
budget request for a professional military education school
shall carefully consider the views of the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, particularly with respect to the amount of the
request for the operation of the schools of the National
Defense University and the joint professional military
education curricula of the other professional military
education schools.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2165. National Defense University: component institutions
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Source of Funds for Professional Development Education
Operations.--Funding for the professional development education
operations of the National Defense University shall be provided
from funds made available to the Secretary of Defense from the
annual appropriation ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-
wide''.
Sec. 2166. Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Board of Visitors.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(9) The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. [2]),
other than section 14 (relating to termination after two
years), shall apply to the Board.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2167. National Defense University: admission of private sector
civilians to professional military education
program
(a) Authority for Admission.--The Secretary of Defense may
permit eligible private sector employees who work in
organizations relevant to national security to receive
instruction at the National Defense University in accordance
with this section. No more than 10 full-time equivalent private
sector employees may be enrolled at any one time. Upon
successful completion of the course of instruction in which
enrolled, any such private sector employee may be awarded an
appropriate diploma or degree under section 2165 of this title.
(b) Eligible Private Sector Employees.--For purposes of this
section, an eligible private sector employee is an individual
employed by a private firm that is engaged in providing to the
Department of Defense or other Government departments or
agencies significant and substantial defense-related systems,
products, or services or whose work product is relevant to
national security policy or strategy. A private sector employee
admitted for instruction at the National Defense University
remains eligible for such instruction only so long as that
person remains employed by the same firm.
(c) Annual Certification by Secretary of Defense.--Private
sector employees may receive instruction at the National
Defense University during any academic year only if, before the
start of that academic year, the Secretary of Defense
determines, and certifies to the Committee on Armed Services of
the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives, that providing instruction to private sector
employees under this section during that year will further
national security interests of the United States.
(d) Program Requirements.--The Secretary of Defense shall
ensure that--
(1) the curriculum for the professional military
education program in which private sector employees may
be enrolled under this section is not readily available
through other schools and concentrates on national
security relevant issues; and
(2) the course offerings at the National Defense
University continue to be determined solely by the
needs of the Department of Defense.
(e) Tuition.--The President of the National Defense
University shall charge students enrolled under this section a
rate--
(1) that is at least the rate charged for employees
of the United States outside the Department of Defense,
less infrastructure costs, and
(2) that considers the value to the school and course
of the private sector student.
(f) Standards of Conduct.--While receiving instruction at the
National Defense University, students enrolled under this
section, to the extent practicable, are subject to the same
regulations governing academic performance, attendance, norms
of behavior, and enrollment as apply to Government civilian
employees receiving instruction at the university.
(g) Use of Funds.--Amounts received by the National Defense
University for instruction of students enrolled under this
section shall be retained by the university to defray the costs
of such instruction. The source, and the disposition, of such
funds shall be specifically identified in records of the
university.
Sec. 2168. Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center: degree
of Associate of Arts in foreign language
(a) Subject to subsection (b), the Commandant of the Defense
Language Institute may confer an Associate of Arts degree in a
foreign language upon any graduate of the Foreign Language
Center of the Institute who fulfills the requirements for that
degree.
(b) A degree may be conferred upon a student under this
section only if the Provost of the Center certifies to the
Commandant that the student has satisfied all the requirements
prescribed for the degree.
(c) The authority provided by subsection (a) shall be
exercised under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of
Defense.
* * * * * * *
PART IV--SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT
Chap. Sec.
Planning and Coordination.....................................2201
* * * * * * *
Space Programs................................................2271
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 131--PLANNING AND COORDINATION
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2218. National Defense Sealift Fund
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Deposits.--There shall be deposited in the Fund the
following:
(1) All funds appropriated to the Department of
Defense [for fiscal years after fiscal year 1993] for--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 135--SPACE PROGRAMS
Sec.
2271. Executive agent.
Sec. 2271. Executive agent
(a) Secretary of the Air Force.--The Secretary of the Air
Force may be designated as the executive agent of the
Department of Defense--
(1) for the planning of the acquisition programs,
projects, and activities of the Department that relate
to space; and
(2) for the execution of those programs, projects,
and activities.
(b) Acquisition Executive.--The Secretary may designate the
Under Secretary of the Air Force as the acquisition executive
of the Air Force for the programs, projects, and activities
referred to in subsection (a).
CHAPTER 137--PROCUREMENT GENERALLY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2302c. Implementation of electronic commerce capability
(a) Implementation of Electronic Commerce Capability.--(1) *
* *
(2) The Secretary of Defense shall act through the [Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology] Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
to implement the capability within the Department of Defense.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2304. Contracts: competition requirements
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the head of an
agency may not award a contract using procedures other than
competitive procedures unless--
(A) * * *
(B) the justification is approved--
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
(iii) in the case of a contract for an amount
exceeding $50,000,000, by the senior
procurement executive of the agency designated
pursuant to section 16(3) of the Office of
Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C.
414(3)) (without further delegation) or in the
case of the [Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics, acting in his capacity as the senior
procurement executive for the Department of
Defense, the Under Secretary's delegate
designated pursuant to paragraph (6)(B); and
* * * * * * *
(6)(A) * * *
(B) The authority of the [Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics under paragraph
(1)(B)(iii) may be delegated only to--
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2311. Assignment and delegation of procurement functions and
responsibilities
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Approval of Terminations and Reductions of Joint
Acquisition Programs.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall
prescribe regulations that prohibit each military department
participating in a joint acquisition program approved by the
[Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology]
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics from terminating or substantially reducing its
participation in such program without the approval of the Under
Secretary.
(2) The regulations shall include the following provisions:
(A) * * *
(B) A provision that authorizes the [Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition and Technology] Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics to require a military department whose
participation in a joint acquisition program has been
approved for termination or substantial reduction to
continue to provide some or all of the funding
necessary for the acquisition program to be continued
in an efficient manner.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2323. Contract goal for small disadvantaged businesses and certain
institutions of higher education
(a) Goal.--(1) Except as provided in subsection (d), a goal
of 5 percent of the amount described in subsection (b) shall be
the objective of the Department of Defense, the Coast Guard,
and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in each
fiscal year for the total combined amount obligated for
contracts and subcontracts entered into with--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) minority institutions (as defined in section
[1046(3)] 365(3) of the Higher Education Act of 1965
([20 U.S.C. 1135d-5(3)] 20 U.S.C. 1067k))[, which, for
the purposes of this section, shall include Hispanic-
serving institutions (as defined in section 316(b)(1)
of such Act (20 U.S.C. 1059c(b)(1)))].
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 138--COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS WITH NATO ALLIES AND OTHER
COUNTRIES
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER II--OTHER COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2350a. Cooperative research and development projects: allied
countries
(a) * * *
(b) Requirement That Projects Improve Conventional Defense
Capabilities.--(1) * * *
(2) The authority of the Secretary to make a determination
under paragraph (1) may only be delegated to the Deputy
Secretary of Defense or the [Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.
* * * * * * *
(e) Cooperative Opportunities Document.--(1)(A) In order to
ensure that opportunities to conduct cooperative research and
development projects are considered at an early point during
the formal development review process of the Department of
Defense in connection with any planned project of the
Department, the [Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics shall prepare an arms cooperation
opportunities document with respect to that project for review
by the Defense Acquisition Board at formal meetings of the
Board.
* * * * * * *
(2) An arms cooperation opportunities document referred to in
paragraph (1) shall include the following:
(A) * * *
(B) If a project similar to the one under
consideration by the Department of Defense is in
development or production by one or more major allies
of the United States or NATO organizations, an
assessment by the [Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics as to
whether that project could satisfy, or could be
modified in scope so as to satisfy, the military
requirements of the project of the United States under
consideration by the Department of Defense.
* * * * * * *
(f) Reports to Congress.--(1) Not later than March 1 of each
year, the [Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics shall submit to the Speaker of the
House of Representatives and the Committees on Armed Services
and Appropriations of the Senate a report on cooperative
research and development projects under this section. Each such
report shall include--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 139--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2366. Major systems and munitions programs: survivability and
lethality testing required before full-scale
production
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Waiver Authority.--(1) The Secretary of Defense may waive
the application of the survivability and lethality tests of
this section to a covered system, munitions program, missile
program, or covered product improvement program if the
Secretary, before the system or program enters [engineering and
manufacturing development] system development and
demonstration, certifies to Congress that live-fire testing of
such system or program would be unreasonably expensive and
impractical.
(2) In the case of a covered system (or covered product
improvement program for a covered system), the Secretary may
waive the application of the survivability and lethality tests
of this section to such system or program and instead allow
testing of the system or program in combat by firing munitions
likely to be encountered in combat at components, subsystems,
and subassemblies, together with performing design analyses,
modeling and simulation, and analysis of combat data. Such
alternative testing may not be carried out in the case of any
covered system (or covered product improvement program for a
covered system) unless the Secretary certifies to Congress,
before the system or program enters [engineering and
manufacturing development] system development and
demonstration, that the survivability and lethality testing of
such system or program otherwise required by this section would
be unreasonably expensive and impracticable.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 140--PROCUREMENT OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2375. Relationship of commercial item provisions to other
provisions of law
(a) * * *
(b) List of Laws Inapplicable to Contracts for the
Acquisition of Commercial Items.--No contract for the
procurement of a commercial item entered into by the head of an
agency shall be subject to any law properly listed in the
Federal Acquisition Regulation (pursuant to section 34 of the
Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 430)).
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2376. Definitions
In this chapter:
(1) The terms ``commercial item'', ``nondevelopmental
item'', ``component'', and ``commercial component''
have the meanings provided in section 4 of the Office
of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 403).
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 141--MISCELLANEOUS PROCUREMENT PROVISIONS
Sec.
2381. Contracts: regulations for bids.
2382. Contracts for services to be performed outside the United States.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2382. Contracts for services to be performed outside the United
States
The Secretary of Defense may enter into contracts to employ
individuals or organizations to perform services in countries
other than the United States without regard to laws regarding
the negotiation, making, and performance of contracts and
performance of work in the United States. Individuals employed
by contract to perform such services shall not by virtue of
such employment be considered to be employees of the United
States Government for purposes of any law administered by the
Office of Personnel Management, but the Secretary may determine
the applicability to such individuals of any other law
administered by the Secretary concerning the employment of such
individuals in countries other than the United States.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2399. Operational test and evaluation of defense acquisition
programs
(a) * * *
(b) Operational Test and Evaluation.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) The Director shall submit each report under paragraph (2)
to the Secretary of Defense, the [Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, and the congressional
defense committees. Each such report shall be submitted to
those committees in precisely the same form and with precisely
the same content as the report originally was submitted to the
Secretary and Under Secretary and shall be accompanied by such
comments as the Secretary may wish to make on the report.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2400. Low-rate initial production of new systems
(a) Determination of Quantities To Be Procured for Low-Rate
Initial Production.--(1) In the course of the development of a
major system, the determination of what quantity of articles of
that system should be procured for low-rate initial production
(including the quantity to be procured for preproduction
verification articles) shall be made--
(A) when the milestone [II] B decision with respect
to that system is made; and
* * * * * * *
(2) In this section, the term ``milestone [II] B decision''
means the decision to approve the [engineering and
manufacturing development] system development and demonstration
of a major system by the official of the Department of Defense
designated to have the authority to make that decision.
* * * * * * *
(4) The quantity of articles of a major system that may be
procured for low-rate initial production may not be less than
one operationally configured production unit unless another
quantity is established at the milestone [II] B decision.
(5) The Secretary of Defense shall include a statement of the
quantity determined under paragraph (1) in the first SAR
submitted with respect to the program concerned after that
quantity is determined. If the quantity exceeds 10 percent of
the total number of articles to be produced, as determined at
the milestone [II] B decision with respect to that system, the
Secretary shall include in the statement the reasons for such
quantity. For purposes of this paragraph, the term ``SAR''
means a Selected Acquisition Report submitted under section
2432 of this title.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2410f. Debarment of persons convicted of fraudulent use of ``Made
in America'' labels
(a) If the Secretary of Defense determines that a person has
been convicted of intentionally affixing a label bearing a
``Made in America'' inscription, or another inscription with
the same meaning, to any product sold in or shipped to the
United States that is not made in America, the Secretary shall
determine, not later than 90 days after determining that the
person has been so convicted, whether the person should be
debarred from contracting with the Department of Defense.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 144--MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2432. Selected Acquisition Reports
(a) * * *
(b)(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3)(A) The Secretary of Defense may waive the requirement for
submission of Selected Acquisition Reports for a program for a
fiscal year if--
(i) the program has not entered [engineering and
manufacturing development] system development and
demonstration;
* * * * * * *
(c)(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) In addition to the material required by paragraphs (1)
and (2), each Selected Acquisition Report for the first quarter
of a fiscal year shall include the following:
(A) A full life-cycle cost analysis for each major
defense acquisition program included in the report that
is in the [engineering and manufacturing development]
system development and demonstration stage or has
completed that stage. The Secretary of Defense shall
ensure that this subparagraph is implemented in a
uniform manner, to the extent practicable, throughout
the Department of Defense.
* * * * * * *
(h)(1) Total program reporting under this section shall apply
to a major defense acquisition program when funds have been
appropriated for such and the Secretary of Defense has decided
to proceed to [engineering and manufacturing development]
system development and demonstration of such program. Reporting
may be limited to the development program as provided in
paragraph (2) before a decision is made by the Secretary of
Defense to proceed to [engineering and manufacturing
development] system development and demonstration if the
Secretary notifies the Committee on Armed Services of the
Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives of the intention to submit a limited report
under this subsection not less than 15 days before a report is
due under this section.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2434. Independent cost estimates; operational manpower
requirements
(a) Requirement for Approval.--The Secretary of Defense may
not approve the [engineering and manufacturing development]
system development and demonstration, or the production and
deployment, of a major defense acquisition program unless an
independent estimate of the full life-cycle cost of the program
and a manpower estimate for the program have been considered by
the Secretary.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2435. Baseline description
(a) * * *
(b) Funding Limit.--No amount appropriated or otherwise made
available to the Department of Defense for carrying out a major
defense acquisition program may be obligated after the program
enters [engineering and manufacturing development] system
development and demonstration without an approved baseline
description unless such obligation is specifically approved by
the [Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology]
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics.
(c) Schedule.--A baseline description for a major defense
acquisition program shall be prepared under this section--
(1) before the program enters [demonstration and
validation] system development and demonstration;
(2) before the program enters [engineering and
manufacturing development] production and deployment;
and
(3) before the program enters [production and
deployment] full rate production.
(d) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe
regulations governing the following:
(1) * * *
(2) The submission to the Secretary of the military
department concerned and the [Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
by the program manager for a program for which there is
an approved baseline description under this section of
reports of deviations from the baseline of the cost,
schedule, performance, supportability, or any other
factor of the program.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 146--CONTRACTING FOR PERFORMANCE OF CIVILIAN COMMERCIAL OR
INDUSTRIAL TYPE FUNCTIONS
Sec.
2460. Definition of depot-level maintenance and repair.
[2461. Commercial or industrial type functions: required studies and
reports before conversion to contractor performance.]
2461. Commercial or industrial type functions: required studies and
reports before conversion to, or initiation of, contractor or
civilian employee performance.
* * * * * * *
2461b. Use of private sector to perform commercial or industrial type
function: contractor reporting requirements.
* * * * * * *
[2468. Military installations: authority of base commanders over
contracting for commercial activities.]
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2461. Commercial or industrial type functions: required studies
and reports before conversion to contractor
performance]
Sec. 2461. Commercial or industrial type functions: required studies
and reports before conversion to, or initiation of,
contractor or civilian employee performance
(a) Reporting and Analysis Requirements as Precondition to
[Change in Performance.--] Change in or Initiation of
Performance.--(1) A commercial or industrial type function of
the Department of Defense that, as of October 1, 1980, was
being performed by Department of Defense civilian employees may
not be changed to performance by the private sector until the
Secretary of Defense fully complies with the reporting and
analysis requirements specified in subsections (b) and (c).
(2) In the case of a commercial or industrial type function
of the Department of Defense not previously performed by
Department of Defense civilian employees or a contractor, the
performance of the function by the private sector may not be
initiated until--
(A) the Secretary of Defense conducts a cost
comparison examination that employs the most efficient
organization process described in Office of Management
and Budget Circular A-76, and its supplemental handbook
or any successor administrative regulation or policy;
and
(B) a determination is made that performance of the
function by the private sector would be less costly
over the term of the contract than performance by
Department of Defense civilian employees during that
same period.
(3) This subsection does not apply to the following
contracts:
(A) A contract between the Department of Defense and
the private sector for work with a contract value of
less than $1,000,000 so long as the work was not
divided, modified, or in any way changed for the
purpose of avoiding the requirements of this section.
(B) A contract for special studies and analyses,
construction services, architectural services,
engineering services, medical services, scientific and
technical services related to (but not in support of)
research and development, and depot-level maintenance
and repair services.
(4) The Secretary of Defense may waive the applicability of
this section if--
(A) the written waiver is prepared by the Secretary
of Defense, or the relevant Assistant Secretary or
agency head; and
(B) the written waiver is accompanied by a detailed
determination that--
(i) there is no reasonable expectation that
civilian employees would win a public-private
competition for the function; and
(ii) the issuance of a waiver would not serve
to reduce significantly the level of or quality
of competition in the future award or
performance of work.
(5) The Secretary of Defense shall publish a copy of the
waiver in the Federal Register.
(b) Notification and Elements of Analysis.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(5)(A) A commercial or industrial type function of the
Department of Defense may not be changed to performance by the
private sector unless, as a result of the cost comparison
examination required under paragraph (3)(A), that employed the
most efficient organization process described in Office of
Management and Budget Circular A-76 or any successor
administrative regulation or policy, at least a 10-percent cost
savings would be achieved by performance of the function by the
private sector over the term of the contract.
(B) The cost savings requirement specified in subparagraph
(A) does not apply to any contracts for special studies and
analyses, construction services, architectural services,
engineering services, medical services, scientific and
technical services related to (but not in support of) research
and development, and depot-level maintenance and repair
services.
(C) The Secretary of Defense may waive the cost savings
requirement if--
(i) the written waiver is prepared by the Secretary
of Defense, or the relevant Assistant Secretary or
agency head; and
(ii) the written waiver is accompanied by a detailed
determination that national security interests are so
compelling as to preclude compliance with the
requirement for a cost comparison examination.
(D) The Secretary of Defense shall publish a copy of the
waiver in the Federal Register.
* * * * * * *
[(d) Waiver for Small Functions.--Subsections (a) through (c)
and subsection (g) shall not apply to a commercial or
industrial type function of the Department of Defense that is
being performed by 50 or fewer Department of Defense civilian
employees.]
(d) Equity in Public-Private Competition.--(1) For any fiscal
year in which commercial or industrial type functions of the
Department of Defense performed by Department of Defense
civilian employees are studied for possible change to private
sector performance, the Secretary of Defense shall subject
approximately the same number of positions held by non-Federal
employees under contracts with the Department of Defense to the
same cost comparison examination described in subsection
(b)(3), subject to the completion of the terms of those
contracts.
(2) To the extent possible, the Secretary of Defense should,
in complying with this subsection, select those contract
positions held by non-Federal employees under contracts with
the Department of Defense that are associated with commercial
or industrial type functions that are, or have been, performed
at least in part by Department of Defense civilian employees at
any time on or after October 1, 1980.
(3) Notwithstanding any limitation on the number of
Department of Defense civilian employees established by law,
regulation, or policy, the Department of Defense may continue
to employ, or may hire, such civilian employees as are
necessary to perform functions acquired through the public-
private competitions required by this subsection or any other
provision of this section.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2461a. Development of system for monitoring cost savings resulting
from workforce reductions
(a) Workforce Review Defined.--In this section, the term
``workforce review'', with respect to a function of the
Department of Defense performed by Department of Defense
civilian employees, means a review conducted under Office of
Management and Budget Circular A-76 (or any successor
administrative regulation or policy), the Strategic Sourcing
Program Plan of Action (or any successor Department of Defense
guidance or directive), or any other authority to determine
whether the function--
(1) * * *
(2) should be reorganized or otherwise reengineered
to improve the [effeciency] efficiency or effectiveness
of the performance of the function, with a resulting
decrease in the number of Department of Defense
civilian employees performing the function.
(b) System for Monitoring Performance.--(1) The Secretary of
Defense shall establish a system for monitoring the
performance, including the cost of performance, of each
function of the Department of Defense that, after [the date of
the enactment of this section,] October 30, 2000, is the
subject of a workforce review.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2461b. Use of private sector to perform commercial or industrial
type function: contractor reporting requirements
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Contractor.--The term ``contractor'' includes a
subcontractor.
(2) Secretary concerned.--The term ``Secretary
concerned'' includes the Secretary of Defense with
respect to matters concerning the Defense Agencies.
(b) General Reporting Requirement.--The Secretary concerned
shall require each defense contractor to report to secure
websites established and maintained by the Defense Agencies and
military departments the same contractor direct and indirect
manhour and cost information collected by the Department of the
Army pursuant to part 668 of title 32, Code of Federal
Regulations, as in effect on December 26, 2000, in terms of
functions performed, appropriations funding the contract, and
identification of the subordinate organizational elements
within the Defense Agency or military department directly
overseeing the contractor performance. The indirect information
reported may comprise annualized rates for an entire company,
which are not apportioned by specific contracts.
(c) Assignment of Reporting Responsibility.--The Defense
Agency or military department containing the major
organizational element receiving or reviewing the work
performed by a defense contractor shall be responsible for
collecting the data required by this section, even where all or
part of the contracted work is funded by appropriations not
controlled by the Secretary concerned. If the Defense Agency or
military department containing the major organizational element
receiving or reviewing the work performed by the contractor is
different from the Defense Agency or military department
containing the contracting activity, the Secretary concerned
shall ensure that the contractor reports the required
information to the Defense Agency or military department
containing the major organizational element receiving or
reviewing the work performed by the contractor.
(d) Timing of Contractor Reporting to Assure Data Quality.--
The Secretary concerned shall require contractors to report the
information described in subsection (c) to the secure web-site
contemporaneous with submission of a request for payment (for
example, voucher, invoice, or request for progress payment) or
not later than quarterly.
(e) Contract Requirement Effective Date.--The Secretary
concerned shall include the reporting requirement described in
this section in each contract solicitation issued, contract
awarded, and bilateral modification of an existing contract
executed, by the Secretary concerned after October 1, 2001.
(f) Contractor Self-Exemption.--The Secretary concerned shall
exempt a contractor from the data collection requirement
imposed by this section if the contractor certifies in writing
that the contractor does not have an internal system for
aggregating billable hours in the direct or indirect pools, or
an internal payroll accounting system, and does not otherwise
have to ever provide this information to the Government. A
contractor may not claim an exemption on the sole basis that
the contractor is a foreign contractor, that services are
provided pursuant to a firm fixed price or time and materials
contract or similar instrument, that the payroll system of the
contractor is performed by another person, or that the
contractor has too many subcontractors. The validity of this
certification is the only requirement in this section subject
to audit and verification by the Secretary concerned.
(g) Report to Congress and Comptroller General Actions.--The
Secretary concerned shall submit the information collected
under subsection (c) to Congress not later than October 1 of
each year for the prior fiscal year. Not later than April 1 of
each year, the Comptroller General will review the information
submitted for the prior fiscal year to assess compliance with
this section and the effectiveness of Department of Defense
initiatives to integrate this information into its budgeting
process.
(h) Publication of Reports.--After completion of the
Comptroller General review under subsection (h), the Secretary
concerned shall take steps to make the nonproprietary
compilations of the data public on web sites, using the
publication standard expressed by the Department of the Army in
part 668 of title 32, Code of Federal Regulations.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2464. Core logistics capabilities
(a) Necessity for Core Logistics Capabilities.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) The core logistics capabilities identified under
paragraphs (1) and (2) shall include those capabilities that
are necessary to maintain and repair the weapon systems and
other military equipment (including mission-essential weapon
systems or materiel not later than four years after achieving
initial operational capability, but excluding systems and
equipment under special access programs, [nuclear aircraft
carriers] nuclear refueling of aircraft carriers, and
commercial items described in paragraph (5)) that are
identified by the Secretary, in consultation with the Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as necessary to enable the armed
forces to fulfill the strategic and contingency plans prepared
by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under section
153(a) of this title.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2467. Cost comparisons: inclusion of retirement costs;
consultation with employees; waiver of comparison
(a) Requirement To Include Retirement Costs.--(1) * * *
(2) The retirement system costs of the Department of Defense
shall include (to the extent applicable) the following:
(A) The cost of the Federal Employees' Retirement
System, valued by using the normal-cost percentage (as
defined by section 8401(23) of title 5[, United States
Code]).
(B) The cost of the Civil Service Retirement System
under subchapter III of chapter 83 of [such] title 5.
(C) The cost of the thrift savings plan under
subchapter III of chapter 84 of [such] title 5.
* * * * * * *
(b) Requirement To Consult DOD Employees.--(1) * * *
(2)(A) In the case of employees represented by a labor
organization accorded exclusive recognition under section 7111
of title 5, [United States Code,] consultation with
representatives of that labor organization shall satisfy the
consultation requirement in paragraph (1).
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2468. Military installations: authority of base commanders over
contracting for commercial activities
[(a) Authority of Base Commander.--The Secretary of Defense
shall direct that the commander of each military installation
shall have the authority and the responsibility to enter into
contracts in accordance with this section for the performance
of a commercial activity on the military installation.
[(b) Yearly Duties of Base Commander.--To enter into a
contract under subsection (a) for a fiscal year, the commander
of a military installation shall--
[(1) prepare an inventory for that fiscal year of
commercial activities carried out by Government
personnel on the military installation;
[(2) decide which commercial activities shall be
reviewed under the procedures and requirements of
Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 (or any
successor administrative regulation or policy); and
[(3) conduct a solicitation for contracts for the
performance of those commercial activities selected for
conversion to contractor performance under the Circular
A-76 process.
[(c) Limitations.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall
prescribe regulations under which the commander of each
military installation may exercise the authority and
responsibility provided under subsection (a).
[(2) The authority and responsibility provided under
subsection (a) are subject to the authority, direction, and
control of the Secretary.
[(d) Assistance to Displaced Employees.--If the commander of
a military installation enters into a contract under subsection
(a), the commander shall, to the maximum extent practicable,
assist in finding suitable employment for any employee of the
Department of Defense who is displaced because of that
contract.
[(e) Military Installation Defined.--In this section, the
term ``military installation'' means a base, camp, post,
station, yard, center, or other activity under the jurisdiction
of the Secretary of a military department which is located
within the United States, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or
Guam.
[(f) Termination of Authority.--The authority provided to
commanders of military installations by subsection (a) shall
terminate on September 30, 1995.]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2474. Centers of Industrial and Technical Excellence: designation;
public-private partnerships
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Availability of Excess Equipment to Private-Sector
Partners.--Equipment or facilities of a Center of Industrial
and Technical Excellence may be made available for use by a
private-sector entity under this section only if--
(1) * * *
(2) the private-sector entity agrees--
(A) * * *
(B) to hold harmless and indemnify the United
States from--
(i) any claim for damages or injury
to any person or property arising out
of the use of the equipment or
facilities, except [in a case of
willful conduct or gross negligence]
under the circumstances described in
section 2563(c)(3) of this title; and
* * * * * * *
(g) Pilot Project for the Exclusion of Certain Expenditures
From Limitation on Private Sector Performance of Depot-Level
Maintenance.--
(1) Amounts excluded.--Amounts expended out of funds
described in paragraph (2) for the performance of a
depot-level maintenance and repair workload by non-
Federal Government personnel at a Center of Industrial
and Technical Excellence named in paragraph (4) shall
not be counted for the purposes of section 2466(a) of
this title if the personnel are provided by private
industry pursuant to a public-private partnership
undertaken by the Center under subsection (b).
(2) Funds for fiscal years 2002 through 2006.--The
funds referred to in paragraph (1) are funds available
to the Air Force for depot-level maintenance and repair
workloads for fiscal year 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, or
2006, and shall not exceed 10 percent of the total
funds available in any single year.
(3) Reporting requirements.--All funds covered by
paragraph (1) shall be included as a separate item in
the reports required under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3)
of section 2466(e) of this title.
(4) Covered centers.--(A) The Centers of Industrial
and Technical Excellence referred to in paragraph (1)
are the following:
(i) Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center,
Oklahoma.
(ii) Ogden Air Logistics Center, Utah.
(iii) Warner-Robins Air Logistics Center,
Georgia.
(B) The Secretary of the Air Force shall designate as
a Center of Industrial and Technical Excellence under
this section any of the air logistics centers named in
subparagraph (A) that have not previously been so
designated and shall specify the core competencies for
which the designation is made.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 148--NATIONAL DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY AND INDUSTRIAL BASE, DEFENSE
REINVESTMENT, AND DEFENSE CONVERSION
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER II--POLICIES AND PLANNING
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2503. National defense program for analysis of the technology and
industrial base
(a) * * *
(b) Supervision of Program.--The Secretary of Defense shall
carry out the program through the [Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition] Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics. In carrying out the program, the
Under Secretary shall consult with the Secretary of Energy, the
Secretary of Commerce, and the Secretary of Labor.
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER IV--MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2521. Manufacturing Technology Program
(a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Defense shall establish
a Manufacturing Technology Program to further the national
security objectives of section 2501(a) of this title through
the development and application of advanced manufacturing
technologies and processes that will reduce the acquisition and
supportability costs of defense weapon systems and reduce
manufacturing and repair cycle times across the life cycles of
such systems. The Secretary shall use the joint planning
process of the directors of the Department of Defense
laboratories in establishing the program. The [Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics shall
administer the program.
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER V--MISCELLANEOUS TECHNOLOGY BASE POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
Sec.
2531. Defense memoranda of understanding and related agreements.
* * * * * * *
2533a. Requirement to buy certain articles from American sources;
exceptions.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2533a. Requirement to buy certain articles from American sources;
exceptions
(a) Requirement.--Except as provided in subsections (c)
through (g), funds appropriated or otherwise available to the
Department of Defense may not be used for the procurement of an
item described in subsection (b) if the item is not grown,
reprocessed, reused, or produced in the United States.
(b) Covered Items.--An item referred to in subsection (a) is
any of the following:
(1) An article or item of--
(A) food;
(B) clothing;
(C) tents, tarpaulins, parachutes, or covers;
(D) cotton and other natural fiber products,
woven silk or woven silk blends, spun silk yarn
for cartridge cloth, synthetic fabric or coated
synthetic fabric (including all textile fibers
and yarns that are for use in such fabrics),
canvas products, or wool (whether in the form
of fiber or yarn or contained in fabrics,
materials, or manufactured articles); or
(E) any item of individual equipment
manufactured from or containing such fibers,
yarns, fabrics, or materials.
(2) Specialty metals, including stainless steel
flatware.
(3) Hand or measuring tools.
(c) Exception.--The Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of
the military department concerned may waive the requirement in
subsection (a) if--
(1) such Secretary determines that satisfactory
quality and sufficient quantity of any such article or
item described in subsection (b)(1) or specialty metals
(including stainless steel flatware) grown,
reprocessed, reused, or produced in the United States
cannot be procured as and when needed at United States
market prices;
(2) such Secretary has provided notice to the public
regarding the waiver;
(3) such Secretary has notified the Committees on
Appropriations, Armed Services, and Small Business of
the House of Representatives and the Senate regarding
the waiver and provided a justification to such
committees for the waiver; and
(4) 30 days have elapsed since the date of the
notification of such committees.
(d) Exception for Certain Procurements Outside the United
States.--Subsection (a) does not apply to the following:
(1) Procurements outside the United States in support
of combat operations.
(2) Procurements by vessels in foreign waters.
(3) Emergency procurements or procurements of
perishable foods by an establishment located outside
the United States for the personnel attached to such
establishment.
(e) Exception for Specialty Metals and Chemical Warfare
Protective Clothing.--Subsection (a) does not preclude the
procurement of specialty metals or chemical warfare protective
clothing produced outside the United States if--
(1) such procurement is necessary--
(A) to comply with agreements with foreign
governments requiring the United States to
purchase supplies from foreign sources for the
purposes of offsetting sales made by the United
States Government or United States firms under
approved programs serving defense requirements;
or
(B) in furtherance of agreements with foreign
governments in which both such governments
agree to remove barriers to purchases of
supplies produced in the other country or
services performed by sources of the other
country; and
(2) any such agreement with a foreign government
complies, where applicable, with the requirements of
section 36 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C.
2776) and with section 2457 of this title.
(f) Exception for Certain Foods.--Subsection (a) does not
preclude the procurement of foods manufactured or processed in
the United States.
(g) Exception for Small Purchases.--Subsection (a) does not
apply to purchases for amounts not greater than the simplified
acquisition threshold referred to in section 2304(g) of this
title.
(h) Applicability to Contracts and Subcontracts for
Procurement of Commercial Items.--This section is applicable to
contracts and subcontracts for the procurement of commercial
items notwithstanding section 34 of the Office of Federal
Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 430).
(i) Geographic Coverage.--In this section, the term ``United
States'' includes the commonwealths, territories, and
possessions of the United States.
(j) Exception for Commissaries, Exchanges, and Other
Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities.--Subsection (a) does
not apply to items purchased for resale purposes in
commissaries, military exchanges, or nonappropriated fund
instrumentalities operated by the military departments or the
Department of Defense.
Sec. 2534. Miscellaneous limitations on the procurement of goods other
than United States goods
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(i) Implementation of Certain Waiver Authority.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) The waiver authority described in paragraph (2) may not
be delegated below the [Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Technology] Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2535. Defense Industrial Reserve
(a) Declaration of Purpose and Policy.--It is the [intent of
Congress] intent of Congress--
(1) to provide a comprehensive and continuous program
for the future safety and for the defense of the United
States by providing adequate measures whereby an
essential nucleus of Government-owned industrial plants
and an industrial reserve of machine tools and other
industrial manufacturing equipment may be assured for
immediate use to supply the needs of the [Armed Forces]
armed forces in time of national emergency or in
anticipation thereof;
(2) that such Government-owned plants and such
reserve shall not exceed in number or kind the minimum
requirements for immediate use in time of national
emergency, and that any such items which shall become
excess to such requirements shall be disposed of as
expeditiously as possible;
(3) that to the maximum extent practicable, reliance
will be placed upon private industry for support of
defense production; and
(4) that machine tools and other industrial
manufacturing equipment may be held in plant equipment
packages or in a general reserve to maintain a high
state of readiness for production of critical items of
defense materiel, to provide production capacity not
available in private industry for defense materiel, or
to assist private industry in time of national
disaster.
(b) Powers and Duties of the Secretary of Defense.--(1) To
execute the policy set forth [in this section, the Secretary is
authorized and directed to--] in subsection (a), the Secretary
of Defense shall--
(A) determine which industrial plants and
installations (including machine tools and other
industrial manufacturing equipment) should become a
part of the [defense industrial reserve] Defense
Industrial Reserve;
* * * * * * *
(c) Definitions.--In this section:
[(1) The term ``Secretary'' means Secretary of
Defense.]
[(2)] (1) The term ``Defense Industrial Reserve''
[means] means--
(A) a general reserve of industrial
manufacturing equipment, including machine
tools, selected by the Secretary of Defense for
retention for national defense or for other
emergency use;
(B) those industrial plants and installations
held by and under the control of the Department
of Defense in active or inactive status,
including Government-owned/Government-operated
plants and installations and Government-owned/
contractor-operated plants and installations
which are retained for use in their entirety,
or in part, for production of military weapons
systems, munitions, components, or supplies;
and
(C) those industrial plants and installations
under the control of the Secretary which are
not required for the immediate need of any
department or agency of the Government and
which should be sold, leased, or otherwise
disposed of.
[(3)] (2) The term ``plant equipment package'' means
a complement of active and idle machine tools and other
industrial manufacturing equipment held by and under
the control of the Department of Defense and approved
by the Secretary for retention to produce particular
defense materiel or defense supporting items at a
specific level of output in the event of emergency.
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER VII--CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION LOAN GUARANTEES
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2541c. Transferability, additional limitations, and definition
The following provisions of [subtitle] subchapter VI of this
chapter apply to guarantees issued under this [subtitle]
subchapter:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 152--ISSUE OF SUPPLIES, SERVICES, AND FACILITIES
Sec.
2551. Equipment and barracks: national veterans' organizations.
* * * * * * *
[2557. Excess nonlethal supplies: humanitarian relief.]
2557. Excess nonlethal supplies: availability for homeless veteran
initiatives and humanitarian relief.
* * * * * * *
2564. Provision of support for certain sporting events.
[2555.] 2565. Nuclear test monitoring equipment: furnishing to foreign
governments.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2554. Equipment and other services: Boy Scout Jamborees
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) The Secretary of Defense is hereby authorized under such
regulations as he may prescribe, to provide, without expense to
the United States Government, transportation from the United
States or military commands overseas, and return, on vessels of
the Military Sealift Command or aircraft of the [Military
Airlift Command] Air Mobility Command for (1) those Boy Scouts,
Scouters, and officials certified by the Boy Scouts of America,
as representing the Boy Scouts of America at any national or
world Boy Scout Jamboree, and (2) the equipment and property of
such Boy Scouts, Scouters, and officials and the property
loaned to the Boy Scouts of America, by the Secretary of
Defense pursuant to this section to the extent that such
transportation will not interfere with the requirements of
military operations.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2555. Transportation services: international Girl Scout events
(a) The Secretary of Defense is authorized, under such
regulations as he may prescribe, to provide, without expense to
the United States Government, transportation from the United
States or military commands overseas, and return, on vessels of
the Military Sealift Command or aircraft of the [Military
Airlift Command] Air Mobility Command for (1) those Girl Scouts
and officials certified by the Girl Scouts of the United States
of America as representing the Girl Scouts of the United States
of America at any International World Friendship Event or
Troops on Foreign Soil meeting which is endorsed and approved
by the National Board of Directors of the Girl Scouts of the
United States of America and is conducted outside of the United
States, (2) United States citizen delegates coming from outside
of the United States to triennial meetings of the National
Council of the Girl Scouts of the United States of America, and
(3) the equipment and property of such Girl Scouts and
officials, to the extent that such transportation will not
interfere with the requirements of military operations.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2557. Excess nonlethal supplies: humanitarian relief]
Sec. 2557. Excess nonlethal supplies: availability for homeless veteran
initiatives and humanitarian relief
(a)(1) The Secretary of Defense may make available for
humanitarian relief purposes any nonlethal excess supplies of
the Department of Defense.
(2) The Secretary of Defense may make excess clothing, shoes,
sleeping bags, and related nonlethal excess supplies available
to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for distribution to
homeless veterans and programs assisting homeless veterans. The
transfer of nonlethal excess supplies to the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs under this paragraph shall be without
reimbursement.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2563. Articles and services of industrial facilities: sale to
persons outside the Department of Defense
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Conditions for Sales.--(1) A sale of articles or services
may be made under this section only if--
(A) * * *
(B) the purchaser agrees to hold harmless and
indemnify the United States, except [in any case of
willful misconduct or gross negligence] as provided in
paragraph (3), from any claim for damages or injury to
any person or property arising out of the articles or
services;
* * * * * * *
(3) Paragraph (1)(B) does not apply in any case of willful
misconduct or gross negligence or in the case of a claim by a
purchaser of articles or services under this section that
damages or injury arose from the failure of the Government to
comply with quality, schedule, or cost performance requirements
in the contract to provide the articles or services.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2555.] Sec. 2565. Nuclear test monitoring equipment: furnishing
to foreign governments
(a) Authority To [Convey or] Transfer Title to or Otherwise
Provide Nuclear Test Monitoring Equipment.--Subject to
subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense may--
(1) [convey] transfer title or otherwise provide to a
foreign government (A) equipment for the monitoring of
nuclear test explosions, and (B) associated equipment;
[and]
(2) as part of any such conveyance or provision of
equipment, install such equipment on foreign territory
or in international waters[.]; and
(3) inspect, test, maintain, repair, or replace any
such equipment.
(b) Agreement Required.--Nuclear test explosion monitoring
equipment may be [conveyed or otherwise provided] provided to a
foreign government under subsection (a) only pursuant to the
terms of an agreement between the United States and the foreign
government receiving the equipment in which the recipient
foreign government agrees--
(1) to provide the United States with timely access
to the data produced, collected, or generated by the
equipment; and
(2) to permit the Secretary of Defense to take such
measures as the Secretary considers necessary to
inspect, test, maintain, repair, or replace that
equipment, including access for purposes of such
measures[; and].
[(3) to return such equipment to the United States
(or allow the United States to recover such equipment)
if either party determines that the agreement no longer
serves its interests.]
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 153--EXCHANGE OF MATERIAL AND DISPOSAL OF OBSOLETE, SURPLUS, OR
UNCLAIMED PROPERTY
Sec.
2571. Interchange of property and services.
* * * * * * *
2582. Military equipment identified on United States munitions list:
annual report of public sales.
[2582.] 2583. Military working dogs: transfer and adoption at end of
useful working life.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2572. Documents, historical artifacts, and condemned or obsolete
combat materiel: loan, gift, or exchange
(a) The Secretary concerned may lend or give items described
in subsection (c) that are not needed by the military
department concerned (or by the Coast Guard, in the case of the
Secretary of Transportation), to any of the following:
(1) A municipal corporation, county, or other
political subdivision of a State.
(2) A [soldiers' monument] servicemen's monument
association.
* * * * * * *
(4) An incorporated museum or memorial that is
operated and maintained for educational purposes only
and the charter of which denies it the right to operate
for profit.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2582.] Sec. 2583. Military working dogs: transfer and adoption at
end of useful working life
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 157--TRANSPORTATION
Sec.
2631. Supplies: preference to United States vessels.
* * * * * * *
2647. Transportation to annual meeting of next-of-kin of persons
unaccounted for from conflicts after World War II.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2634. Motor vehicles: transportation or storage for members on
change of permanent station or extended deployment
(a) * * *
(b)(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) Storage costs payable under this subsection may be paid
in advance.
* * * * * * *
(h) In this section:
(1) The term ``change of permanent station'' means
the transfer or assignment of a member of the armed
forces from a permanent station inside the continental
United States to a permanent station outside the
continental United States or from a permanent station
outside the continental United States to another
permanent station. It also includes an authorized
change in home port of a vessel, or a transfer or
assignment between two permanent stations in the
continental United States when the member cannot,
because of injury or the conditions of the order, drive
the motor vehicle between the permanent duty stations
or when the Secretary concerned determines that the
transport of a vehicle upon such a transfer is
advantageous and cost-effective to the United States.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2647. Transportation to annual meeting of next-of-kin of persons
unaccounted for from conflicts after World War II
The Secretary of Defense may provide transportation for the
next-of-kin of persons who are unaccounted for from the Korean
conflict, the Cold War, Vietnam War era, or the Persian Gulf
War to and from an annual meeting in the United States. Such
transportation shall be provided under such regulations as the
Secretary of Defense may prescribe.
CHAPTER 159--REAL PROPERTY; RELATED PERSONAL PROPERTY; AND LEASE OF
NONEXCESS PROPERTY
Sec.
2661. Miscellaneous administrative provisions relating to real
property.
* * * * * * *
[2693. Conveyance of certain property.]
2693. Conveyance of certain property: Department of Justice
correctional options program.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2671. Military reservations and facilities: hunting, fishing, and
trapping
(a) * * *
(b) Subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to all or
certain specified hunting, fishing, or trapping at a military
installation or facility if the Secretary of Defense determines
that the application of the State or Territory fish and game
laws to such hunting, fishing, or trapping without modification
could result in undesirable consequences for public safety or
adverse effects on morale, welfare, or recreation activities at
the installation or facility. The Secretary may not waive or
modify the requirements under subsection (a)(2) regarding a
license for such hunting, fishing, or trapping or any fee
imposed by a State or Territory to obtain such a license.
* * * * * * *
[(b)] (e) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe
regulations to carry out this section.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2685. Adjustment of or surcharge on selling prices in commissary
stores to provide funds for construction and
improvement of commissary store facilities
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Reimbursement for Noncommissary Use of Commissary
Facilities.--(1) If the Secretary concerned uses for
noncommissary purposes a commissary facility whose construction
was financed (in whole or in part) using the proceeds of
adjustments or surcharges authorized by subsection (a) or
revenues referred to in subsection (e), the Secretary concerned
shall reimburse the commissary surcharge account for the
depreciated value of the investment made with such proceeds and
revenues.
(2) In paragraph (1), the term ``construction'' has the
meaning given such term in subsection (d)(2).
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2692. Storage, treatment, and disposal of nondefense toxic and
hazardous materials
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d)(1) * * *
(2) In the case of storage under this section authorized
because of an imminent danger, the storage provided shall be
temporary and shall cease once the imminent danger no longer
exists. In the case of the storage of mercury under subsection
(b)(12), the storage provided shall cease as soon as
practicable after the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency certifies to the Secretary of Defense that a
disposal method for mercury satisfying the criteria specified
in such subsection has been developed. In all other cases of
storage or disposal authorized under this section, the storage
or disposal authorized shall be terminated as determined by the
Secretary.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2693. Conveyance of certain property]
Sec. 2693. Conveyance of certain property: Department of Justice
correctional options program
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b), before any real
property or facility of the United States that is under the
jurisdiction of any department, agency, or instrumentality of
the Department of Defense is determined to be excess to the
needs of such department, agency, or instrumentality, the
Secretary of Defense shall--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) if the Attorney General certifies to the
Secretary of Defense that a determination has been made
by the Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance
within the Department of Justice to utilize the real
property or facility under the correctional options
program carried out under section 515 of title I of the
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42
U.S.C. 3762a), convey the real property or facility,
without reimbursement, [to the public agencies referred
to in section 515(a)(1) or 515(a)(3) of title I of such
Act] to a public agency referred to in paragraph (1) or
(3) of subsection (a) of such section for such
utilization.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 160--ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION
Sec.
2701. Environmental restoration program.
* * * * * * *
2710. Former military ranges: inventory of explosive risk sites; use of
inventory; public safety issues.
2711. Environmental impact statements and environmental assessments:
evaluation of national security impacts of proposed action and
alternatives.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2706. Annual reports to Congress
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(c) Report on Contractor Reimbursement Costs.--(1) The
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Congress each year,
not later than 45 days after the date on which the President
submits to the Congress the budget for a fiscal year, a report
on payments made by the Secretary to defense contractors for
the costs of environmental response actions.
[(2) Each such report shall include, for the fiscal year
preceding the year in which the report is submitted, the
following:
[(A) An estimate of the payments made by the
Secretary to any defense contractor (other than a
response action contractor) for the costs of
environmental response actions at facilities owned or
operated by the defense contractor or at which the
defense contractor is liable in whole or in part for
the environmental response action.
[(B) A statement of the amount and current status of
any pending requests by any defense contractor (other
than a response action contractor) for payment of the
costs of environmental response actions at facilities
owned or operated by the defense contractor or at which
the defense contractor is liable in whole or in part
for the environmental response action.]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2710. Former military ranges: inventory of explosive risk sites;
use of inventory; public safety issues
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``former military range'' means a
military range presently located in the United States
that--
(A) is or was owned by, leased to, or
otherwise possessed or used by the Federal
Government;
(B) is designated as a closed, transferred,
or transferring military range (rather than as
an active or inactive range); or
(C) is or was used as a site for the disposal
of military munitions or for the use of
military munitions in training or research,
development, testing, and evaluation.
(2) The term ``abandoned military munitions'' means
unexploded ordnance and other abandoned military
munitions, including components thereof and chemical
weapons materiel, that pose a threat to human health or
safety.
(3) The term ``State'' includes the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the
territories and possessions.
(4) The term ``United States'', in a geographic
sense, includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the
territories and possessions.
(b) Inventory Required.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall
develop and maintain an inventory of former military ranges
that are known or suspected to contain abandoned military
munitions.
(2) The information for each former military range in the
inventory shall include, at a minimum, the following:
(A) A unique identifier for the range and its current
designation as either a closed, transferred, or
transferring range.
(B) An appropriate record showing the location,
boundaries, and extent of the range, including
identification of the State and political subdivisions
of the State in which the range is located and any
Tribal lands encompassed by the range.
(C) Known persons and entities, other than a military
department, with any current ownership interest or
control of lands encompassed by the range.
(D) Any restrictions or other land use controls
currently in place that might affect the potential for
public and environmental exposure to abandoned military
munitions.
(c) Site Prioritization.--(1) With respect to each former
military range included on the inventory, the Secretary of
Defense shall assign the range a relative priority for response
activities based on the overall conditions at the range. The
level of response priority assigned the range shall be included
with the information required by subsection (b)(2) to be
maintained for the range.
(2) In assigning the response priority for a former military
range, the Secretary of Defense shall primarily consider
factors relating to safety and environmental hazard potential,
such as the following:
(A) Whether there are known, versus suspected,
abandoned military munitions on all or any portion of
the range and the types of munitions present or
suspected to be present.
(B) Whether public access to the range is controlled,
and the effectiveness of these controls.
(C) The potential for direct human contact with
abandoned military munitions at the range and evidence
of people entering the range.
(D) Whether a response action has been or is being
undertaken at the range under the Formerly Used Defense
Sites program or other programs.
(E) The planned or mandated dates for transfer of the
range from military control.
(F) The extent of any documented incidents involving
abandoned military munitions at or from the range. In
this subparagraph, the term ``incidents'' means any or
all of the following: explosions, discoveries,
injuries, reports, and investigations.
(G) The potential for drinking water contamination or
the release of weapon components into the air.
(H) The potential for destruction of sensitive
ecosystems and damage to natural resources.
(d) Updates and Availability.--(1) The Secretary of Defense
shall annually update the inventory and site prioritization
list to reflect new information that becomes available. The
inventory shall be available in published and electronic form.
(2) The Secretary of Defense shall work with adjacent
communities to provide information concerning conditions at the
former military range and response activities, and shall
respond to inquiries. At a minimum, the Secretary shall notify
immediately affected individuals, appropriate State, local,
tribal, and Federal officials, and, when appropriate, civil
defense or emergency management agencies.
Sec. 2711. Environmental impact statements and environmental
assessments: evaluation of national security
impacts of proposed action and alternatives
(a) Agency Action.--Whenever an environmental impact
statement or environmental assessment is required under section
102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4332) to be prepared in connection with a proposed Department
of Defense action, the Secretary of Defense shall include as a
part of the environmental impact statement or environmental
assessment a detailed evaluation of the impact of the proposed
action, and each alternative to the proposed action considered
in the statement or assessment, on national security, including
the readiness, training, testing, and operations of the armed
forces.
(b) Agency Input.--The Secretary of Defense shall also
include the evaluation required by subsection (a) in any input
provided by the Department of Defense as a cooperating agency
to a lead agency preparing an environmental impact statement or
environmental assessment.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 169--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER I--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2805. Unspecified minor construction
(a) * * *
(b)(1) An unspecified minor military construction project
costing more than [$500,000] $750,000 may not be carried out
under this section unless approved in advance by the Secretary
concerned. This paragraph shall apply even though the project
is to be carried out using funds made available to enhance the
deployment and mobility of military forces and supplies.
* * * * * * *
(c)(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), the
Secretary concerned may spend from appropriations available for
operation and maintenance amounts necessary to carry out an
unspecified minor military construction project costing not
more than--
(A) [$1,000,000] $1,500,000, in the case of an
unspecified minor military construction project
intended solely to correct a deficiency that is life-
threatening, health-threatening, or safety-threatening;
or
(B) [$500,000] $750,000, in the case of any other
unspecified minor military construction project.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2814. Special authority for development of Ford Island, Hawaii
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(j) Inapplicability of Certain Property Management Laws.--
Except as otherwise provided in this section, transactions
under this section shall not be subject to the following:
(1) * * *
(2) Section 501 of the [Stewart B. McKinney Homeless
Assistance Act] McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act
(42 U.S.C. 11411).
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER II--MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2832. Homeowners assistance program
[(a)] The Secretary of Defense may exercise the authority
provided in section 1013 of the Demonstration Cities and
Metropolitan Development Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 3374).
[(b)(1) Subject to paragraph (2) and notwithstanding
subsection (i) of section 1013 of the Act referred to in
subsection (a)--
[(A) the Secretary of Defense may transfer not more
than $31,000,000 from the Department of Defense Base
Closure Account, established by section 207 of the
Defense Authorization Amendments and Base Closure and
Realignment Act (Public Law 100-526; 102 Stat. 2627),
to the fund established pursuant to subsection (d) of
such section 1013 for use as part of such fund; and
[(B) any funds so transferred shall be available for
obligation and expenditure for the same purposes that
funds appropriated to such fund are available, except
that such funds may not be obligated after September
30, 1991.
[(2) Amounts may be transferred under paragraph (1) only
after the date on which the appropriate committees of Congress
receive from the Secretary written notice of, and justification
for, the transfer.]
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER III--ADMINISTRATION OF MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND MILITARY
FAMILY HOUSING
Sec.
2851. Supervision of military construction projects.
* * * * * * *
[2861. Annual report to Congress.]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2853. Authorized cost variations
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(d) The limitation on cost increases in subsection (a) does
not apply to the settlement of a contractor claim under a
contract.]
(d) The limitation on cost increases in subsection (a) does
not apply--
(1) to the settlement of a contractor claim under a
contract; or
(2) to the costs associated with the required
remediation of an environmental hazard in connection
with a military construction project or military family
housing project, such as asbestos removal, radon
abatement, lead-based paint removal or abatement, or
any other legally required environmental hazard
remediation, if the required remediation could not have
reasonably been anticipated at the time the project was
approved originally by Congress.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2854a. Conveyance of damaged or deteriorated military family
housing; use of proceeds
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Inapplicability of Certain Property Disposal Laws.--The
following provisions of law do not apply to the conveyance of a
family housing facility under this section:
(1) * * *
(2) Title V of the [Stewart B. McKinney Homeless
Assistance Act] McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act
(42 U.S.C. 11411 et seq.).
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2861. Annual report to Congress
[(a) The Secretary of Defense shall submit a report to the
appropriate committees of Congress each year with respect to
military construction activities and military family housing
activities. Each such report shall be submitted at the same
time that the annual request for military construction
authorization is submitted for that year. Except where
otherwise provided in this section, information required by
this section to be provided in the report shall be provided for
the two most recent fiscal years and for the fiscal year for
which the budget request is made.
[(b) Each report under subsection (a) shall include the
following:
[(1) A statement of the construction status and a
fiscal summary of the military construction projects
undertaken under, and the amounts authorized and
appropriated for, contingency construction under
section 2804 of this title.
[(2) Information to enable the committees to evaluate
the relationships between budget requests for
appropriations for unspecified minor construction
projects under section 2805 of this title and
obligations of appropriated funds for projects under
such section. Such information shall include
comparisons of budget requests and obligations using
military construction appropriations and using
operations and maintenance appropriations, maintenance
and repair backlog, and obligations for maintenance and
repair.
[(3) Information to enable the committees to monitor
trends in construction started using funds contributed
by the United States under section 2806 of this title
to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security
Investment program and the status of recoupments under
that program.
[(4) Information to enable the committees to evaluate
trends in contracting for architect and engineering
services and construction design, and trends in
accomplishing design of construction projects by
Government employees, under the authority of section
2807 of this title.
[(5) Information to enable the committees to evaluate
trends in supervision, inspection, and overhead costs
for the dollar amount of military construction
accomplished during a fiscal year by a military
construction department or agency under the authority
of section 2851 of this title.
[(6) A summary of military construction projects
(other than a military construction project for an
amount less than the amount specified by section
2805(a)(1) of this title as the maximum amount for a
minor military construction project) placed under
contract during the preceding fiscal year with respect
to which a cost variation or scope reduction report was
supplied to the appropriate committees of Congress
under section 2853 of this title. There shall also be
included an analysis to indicate whether the cost
variation was the result of a lack of competition,
quality of plans and specifications, or quality of
budget estimates, or of other factors.
[(7) Information to enable the committees to evaluate
the use of the authority provided under section 2858 of
this title to expedite a military construction project
when such expediting is required to protect the
national interest.
[(8) Information in sufficient detail to enable the
committees to monitor trends in design, construction,
performance goals, and progress.
[(9) With respect to each contract awarded during the
preceding fiscal year on other than a competitive basis
to the lowest responsible bidder, the name of the
contractor, the original amount of the contract, and
the reason for the award of the contract on other than
a competitive basis.]
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER IV--ALTERNATIVE AUTHORITY FOR ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENT OF
MILITARY HOUSING
Sec.
2871. Definitions.
* * * * * * *
[2885. Expiration of authority.]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2878. Conveyance or lease of existing property and facilities
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Inapplicability of Certain Property Management Laws.--The
conveyance or lease of property or facilities under this
section shall not be subject to the following provisions of
law:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) Section 501 of the [Stewart B. McKinney Homeless
Assistance Act] McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act
(42 U.S.C. 11411).
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2885. Expiration of authority
[The authority to enter into a contract under this subchapter
shall expire on December 31, 2004.]
* * * * * * *
Subtitle B--Army
PART I--ORGANIZATION
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 303--DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3014. Office of the Secretary of the Army
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f)(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) The total number of general officers assigned or detailed
to permanent duty in the Office of the Secretary of the Army
and on the Army Staff may not exceed [the number equal to 85
percent of the number of general officers assigned or detailed
to such duty on the date of the enactment of this subsection.]
67.
* * * * * * *
PART II--PERSONNEL
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 333--ENLISTMENTS
Sec.
3251. Definition.
* * * * * * *
3264. 18-month enlistment pilot program.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3264. 18-month enlistment pilot program
(a) During the pilot program period, the Secretary of the
Army shall carry out a pilot program with the objective of
increasing participation of prior service persons in the
Selected Reserve and providing assistance in building the pool
of participants in the Individual Ready Reserve.
(b) Under the program, the Secretary may, notwithstanding
section 505(c) of this title, accept persons for original
enlistment in the Army for a term of enlistment consisting of
18 months service on active duty, to be followed by three years
of service in the Selected Reserve and then service in the
Individual Ready Reserve to complete the military service
obligation.
(c) No more than 10,000 persons may be accepted for
enlistment in the Army through the program under this section.
(d) A person enlisting in the Army through the program under
this section is eligible for an enlistment bonus under section
309 of title 37, notwithstanding the enlistment time period
specified in subsection (a) of that section.
(e) For purposes of the program under this section, the pilot
program period is the period beginning on October 1, 2003, and
ending on December 31, 2007.
(f) Not later than December 31, 2007, and December 31, 2012,
the Secretary of the Army shall submit to the Committee on
Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed
Services of the House of Representatives a report on the
program under this section. In each such report, the Secretary
shall set forth the views of the Secretary on the success of
the program in meeting the objectives stated in subsection (a)
and whether the program should be continued and, if so, whether
it should be modified or expanded.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 357--DECORATIONS AND AWARDS
Sec.
3741. Medal of honor: award.
* * * * * * *
3754. Medal of honor: duplicate medal.
3755. Korea Defense Service Medal.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3747. Medal of honor; distinguished-service cross; distinguished-
service medal; silver star: replacement
Any medal of honor, distinguished-service cross,
distinguished-service medal, or silver star, or any bar,
ribbon, rosette, or other device issued for wear with or in
place of any of them, that is [lost or destroyed] stolen, lost,
or destroyed, or becomes unfit for use, without fault or
neglect of the person to whom it was awarded, shall be replaced
without charge.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3754. Medal of honor: duplicate medal
A person awarded a medal of honor shall, upon written
application of that person, be issued, without charge, one
duplicate medal of honor with ribbons and appurtenances. Such
duplicate medal of honor shall be marked, in such manner as the
Secretary of the Army may determine, as a duplicate or for
display purposes only.
Sec. 3755. Korea Defense Service Medal
(a) The Secretary of the Army shall issue a campaign medal,
to be known as the Korea Defense Service Medal, to each person
who while a member of the Army served in the Republic of Korea
or the waters adjacent thereto during the KDSM eligibility
period and met the service requirements for the award of that
medal prescribed under subsection (c).
(b) In this section, the term ``KDSM eligibility period''
means the period beginning on July 28, 1954, and ending on such
date after the date of the enactment of this section as may be
determined by the Secretary of Defense to be appropriate for
terminating eligibility for the Korea Defense Service Medal.
(c) The Secretary of the Army shall prescribe service
requirements for eligibility for the Korea Defense Service
Medal. Those requirements shall not be more stringent than the
service requirements for award of the Armed Forces
Expeditionary Medal for instances in which the award of that
medal is authorized.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 367--RETIREMENT FOR LENGTH OF SERVICE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3911. Twenty years or more: regular or reserve commissioned
officers
(a) * * *
(b) The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of
the Army, during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and
ending on December 31, [2001] 2002, to reduce the requirement
under subsection (a) for at least 10 years of active service as
a commissioned officer to a period (determined by the Secretary
of the Army) of not less than eight years.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 373--CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES
* * * * * * *
Sec. 4021. Army War College and United States Army Command and General
Staff College: civilian faculty members
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Application to Certain Faculty Members.--(1) Except as
provided in paragraph (2), this section shall apply with
respect to persons who are selected by the Secretary for
employment as professors, instructors, and lecturers at the
Army War College or the United States Army Command and General
Staff College after the end of the 90-day period beginning on
[the date of the enactment of this section.] November 29, 1989.
* * * * * * *
PART III--TRAINING
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 403--UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 4337. Chaplain
There shall be a chaplain at the Academy, who must be a
clergyman, appointed by the President for a term of four years.
[The chaplain is entitled to the same allowances for public
quarters as are allowed to a captain, and to fuel and light for
quarters in kind.] Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
the chaplain is entitled to the same basic allowance for
housing allowed to a lieutenant colonel, and to fuel and light
for quarters in kind. The chaplain may be reappointed.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 4344. Selection of persons from foreign countries
(a)(1) The Secretary of the Army may permit not more than
[40] 60 persons at any one time from foreign countries to
receive instruction at the Academy. Such persons shall be in
addition to the authorized strength of the Corps of the Cadets
of the Academy under section 4342 of this title.
* * * * * * *
(b)(1) * * *
(2) Each foreign country from which a cadet is permitted to
receive instruction at the Academy under this section shall
reimburse the United States for the cost of providing such
instruction, including the cost of pay, allowances, and
emoluments provided under paragraph (1) unless a written waiver
of some or all reimbursement is granted by the Secretary of
Defense. The Secretary of the Army shall prescribe the rates
for reimbursement under this paragraph, except that the
reimbursement rates may not be less than the cost to the United
States of providing such instruction, including pay,
allowances, and emoluments, to a cadet appointed from the
United States.
[(3) The amount of reimbursement waived under paragraph (2)
may not exceed 50 percent of the per-person reimbursement
amount otherwise required to be paid by a foreign country under
such paragraph, except in the case of not more than 20 persons
receiving instruction at the Academy under this section at any
one time.]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 4353. Cadets: degree and commission on graduation
(a) * * *
[(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a cadet who
completes the prescribed course of instruction may, upon
graduation, be appointed a second lieutenant in the Regular
Army under section 531 of this title.]
(b) A cadet who completes the prescribed course of
instruction, is qualified for an original appointment in a
regular component under section 532 of this title, and meets
such other criteria for appointment as a commissioned officer
in the Army as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Army
shall, upon graduation, be appointed a second lieutenant in the
Regular Army under section 531 of this title, unless appointed
under that section in a regular component of one of the other
armed forces in accordance with section 541 of this title.
* * * * * * *
Subtitle C--Navy and Marine Corps
PART I--ORGANIZATION
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 503--DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 5014. Office of the Secretary of the Navy
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f)(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) The total number of general and flag officers assigned or
detailed to permanent duty in the Office of the Secretary of
the Navy, the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, and the
Headquarters, Marine Corps, may not exceed [the number equal to
85 percent of the number of general and flag officers assigned
or detailed to such duty on the date of the enactment of this
subsection.] 74.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 505--OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 5038. Director for Expeditionary Warfare
(a) One of the Directors within the [Office of the Deputy
Chief of Naval Operations for Resources, Warfare Requirements,
and Assessments] office of the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations
with responsibility for warfare requirements and programs shall
be the Director for Expeditionary Warfare who shall be detailed
from officers on the active-duty list of the Marine Corps.
* * * * * * *
PART II--PERSONNEL
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 565--BANDS
Sec.
[6221. United States Navy Band.]
6221. United States Navy Band; officer in charge.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 6221. United States Navy Band
[There is a Navy band known as the United States Navy Band.]
Sec. 6221. United States Navy Band; officer in charge
(a) There is a Navy band known as the United States Navy
Band.
(b) An officer of the Navy designated for limited duty under
section 5589 or 5596 of this title who is serving in a grade
not below lieutenant commander may be detailed by the Secretary
of the Navy as Officer in Charge of the United States Navy
Band. While so serving, an officer so detailed shall hold the
grade of captain if recommended by the Secretary of the Navy
for appointment to that grade and appointed to that grade by
the President, by and with the advice and consent of the
Senate. Such an appointment may be made notwithstanding section
5596(d) of this title.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 567--DECORATIONS AND AWARDS
Sec.
6241. Medal of honor.
* * * * * * *
6256. Medal of honor: duplicate medal.
6257. Korea Defense Service Medal.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 6253. Replacement
The Secretary of the Navy may replace without charge any
medal of honor, Navy cross, distinguished-service medal, silver
star medal, or Navy and Marine Corps Medal, or any associated
bar, emblem, or insignia awarded under this chapter that is
[lost or destroyed] stolen, lost, or destroyed or becomes unfit
for use without fault or neglect on the part of the person to
whom it was awarded.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 6256. Medal of honor: duplicate medal
A person awarded a medal of honor shall, upon written
application of that person, be issued, without charge, one
duplicate medal of honor with ribbons and appurtenances. Such
duplicate medal of honor shall be marked, in such manner as the
Secretary of the Navy may determine, as a duplicate or for
display purposes only.
Sec. 6257. Korea Defense Service Medal
(a) The Secretary of the Navy shall issue a campaign medal,
to be known as the Korea Defense Service Medal, to each person
who while a member of the Navy or Marine Corps served in the
Republic of Korea or the waters adjacent thereto during the
KDSM eligibility period and met the service requirements for
the award of that medal prescribed under subsection (c).
(b) In this section, the term ``KDSM eligibility period''
means the period beginning on July 28, 1954, and ending on such
date after the date of the enactment of this section as may be
determined by the Secretary of Defense to be appropriate for
terminating eligibility for the Korea Defense Service Medal.
(c) The Secretary of the Navy shall prescribe service
requirements for eligibility for the Korea Defense Service
Medal. Those requirements shall not be more stringent than the
service requirements for award of the Armed Forces
Expeditionary Medal for instances in which the award of that
medal is authorized.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 571--VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT
* * * * * * *
Sec. 6323. Officers: 20 years
(a)(1) * * *
(2) The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of
the Navy, during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and
ending on December 31, [2001] 2002, to reduce the requirement
under paragraph (1) for at least 10 years of active service as
a commissioned officer to a period (determined by the
Secretary) of not less than eight years.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 6328. Computation of years of service: voluntary retirement
(a) Enlisted Members.--Time required to be made up under
section 972(a) of this title after [the date of the enactment
of this section] February 10, 1996, may not be counted in
computing years of service under this chapter.
* * * * * * *
PART III--EDUCATION AND TRAINING
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 603--UNITED STATES NAVAL ACADEMY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 6957. Selection of persons from foreign countries
(a)(1) The Secretary of the Navy may permit not more than
[40] 60 persons at any one time from foreign countries to
receive instruction at the Academy. Such persons shall be in
addition to the authorized strength of the midshipmen under
section 6954 of this title.
* * * * * * *
(b)(1) * * *
(2) Each foreign country from which a midshipman is permitted
to receive instruction at the Academy under this section shall
reimburse the United States for the cost of providing such
instruction, including the cost of pay, allowances, and
emoluments provided under paragraph (1) unless a written waiver
of some or all reimbursement is granted by the Secretary of
Defense. The Secretary of the Navy shall prescribe the rates
for reimbursement under this paragraph, except that the
reimbursement rates may not be less than the cost to the United
States of providing such instruction, including pay,
allowances, and emoluments, to a midshipman appointed from the
United States.
[(3) The amount of reimbursement waived under paragraph (2)
may not exceed 50 percent of the per-person reimbursement
amount otherwise required to be paid by a foreign country under
such paragraph, except in the case of not more than 20 persons
receiving instruction at the Naval Academy under this section
at any one time.]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 6967. Degree on graduation
(a) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the
Navy, the Superintendent of the Naval Academy may confer the
degree of bachelor of science upon graduates of the Academy.
(b) A midshipman who completes the prescribed course of
instruction, is qualified for an original appointment in a
regular component under section 532 of this title, and meets
such other criteria for appointment as a commissioned officer
in the naval service as may be prescribed by the Secretary of
the Navy shall, upon graduation, be appointed an ensign in the
Regular Navy or a second lieutenant in the Regular Marine Corps
under section 531 of this title, unless appointed under that
section in a regular component of one of the other armed forces
in accordance with section 541 of this title.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 609--PROFESSIONAL MILITARY EDUCATION SCHOOLS
Sec.
7101. Naval War College: master of arts in national security and
strategic studies.
[7102. Marine Corps University: master of military studies.]
7102. Marine Corps University: masters degrees; board of advisors.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 7102. Marine Corps University: master of military studies]
Sec. 7102. Marine Corps University: masters degrees; board of advisors
(a) Authority.--Upon the recommendation of the Director and
faculty of the Command and Staff College of the Marine Corps
University, the President of the Marine Corps University may
confer the degree of master of military studies [upon graduates
of the college who fulfill the requirements for the degree.]
upon graduates of the Command and Staff College who fulfill the
requirements for that degree.
(b) Marine Corps War College.--Upon the recommendation of the
Director and faculty of the Marine Corps War College of the
Marine Corps University, the President of the Marine Corps
University may confer the degree of master of strategic studies
upon graduates of the Marine Corps War College who fulfill the
requirements for that degree.
[(b)] (c) Regulations.--The authority provided by [subsection
(a)] subsections (a) and (b) shall be exercised under
regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Navy.
(d) Board of Advisors.--The Secretary of the Navy shall
establish a board of advisors for the Marine Corps University.
The Secretary shall ensure that the board is established so as
to meet all requirements of the appropriate regional
accrediting association.
* * * * * * *
PART IV--GENERAL ADMINISTRATION
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 633--NAVAL VESSELS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 7307. Disposals to foreign nations
(a) [Larger or Newer] Certain Combatant Vessels.--[A naval
vessel] Except as provided in subsection (b), a combatant naval
vessel that is in excess of 3,000 tons or that is less than 20
years of age may not be disposed of to another nation (whether
by sale, lease, grant, loan, barter, transfer, or otherwise)
unless the disposition of that vessel is [approved by law
enacted after August 5, 1974] specifically approved by law. A
lease or loan of such a vessel under such a law may be made
only in accordance with the provisions of chapter 6 of the Arms
Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2796 et seq.) or chapter 2 of
part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2311
et seq.).
(b) Treatment of Vessels Held by Foreign Nations by Loan or
Lease.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to the disposal to
another nation of a vessel described in that subsection that,
at the time of the disposal, is held by the nation to which the
disposal is to be made pursuant to a loan or lease arrangement
made under section 61 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C.
2796) or any other provision of law.
[(b)] (c) Other Vessels.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Inapplicability of Vessel Disposals to Aggregate Annual
Value Limitations.--The value of a vessel transferred to
another country under an applicable provision of law as
described in subsection (c) shall not be counted for the
purposes of any aggregate limit on the value of articles
transferred to other countries under that provision of law
during any year (or other applicable period of time).
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 641--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES
* * * * * * *
Sec. 7430. Disposition of products
(a) * * *
(b)(1) * * *
(2) The Secretary may not sell any part of the United States
share of petroleum produced from Naval Petroleum Reserves
Numbered 2 and 3 [at a price less than the higher of--
[(A) the current sales price] at a price less than
the current sales price, as estimated by the Secretary,
of comparable petroleum in the same area[; or].
[(B) the price of petroleum being purchased for the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve, minus the cost of
transporting petroleum from the naval petroleum reserve
concerned to the nearest storage area of the Strategic
Petroleum Reserve, with adjustments for the difference
in the quality of the petroleum being purchased for the
Strategic Petroleum Reserve and petroleum being
produced from the naval petroleum reserve concerned.]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 7439. Certain oil shale reserves: transfer of jurisdiction and
petroleum exploration, development, and production
(a) Transfer Required.--(1) * * *
(2) Not later than [one year after the date of the enactment
of this section,] November 18, 1998, the Secretary of Energy
shall transfer to the Secretary of the Interior administrative
jurisdiction over those public domain lands included within the
developed tract of Oil Shale Reserve Numbered 3, which consists
of approximately 6,000 acres and 24 natural gas wells, together
with pipelines and associated facilities.
* * * * * * *
(b) Authority To Lease.--(1) Beginning on [the date of the
enactment of this section,] November 18, 1997, or as soon
thereafter as practicable, the Secretary of the Interior shall
enter into leases with one or more private entities for the
purpose of exploration for, and development and production of,
petroleum (other than in the form of oil shale) located on or
in public domain lands in Oil Shale Reserves Numbered 1 and 3
(including the developed tract of Oil Shale Reserve Numbered
3). Any such lease shall be made in accordance with the
requirements of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.)
regarding the lease of oil and gas lands and shall be subject
to valid existing rights.
(2) Notwithstanding the delayed transfer of the developed
tract of Oil Shale Reserve Numbered 3 under subsection (a)(2),
the Secretary of the Interior shall enter into a lease under
paragraph (1) with respect to the developed tract before [the
end of the one-year period beginning on the date of the
enactment of this section.] November 18, 1998.
* * * * * * *
(f) Treatment of Receipts.--(1) * * *
(2) The period referred to in this subsection is the period
beginning on [the date of the enactment of this section]
November 18, 1997, and ending on the date on which the
Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of the Interior jointly
certify to Congress that the sum of the moneys deposited in the
Treasury under paragraph (1) is equal to the total of the
following:
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 647--DISPOSAL OF OBSOLETE OR SURPLUS MATERIAL
* * * * * * *
Sec. 7545. Obsolete material and articles of historical interest: loan
or gift
(a) [Subject to regulations under section 205 of the Federal
Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C.
486), the Secretary of the Navy, under regulations prescribed
by him,] Authority To Make Loans and Gifts.--The Secretary of
the Navy may lend or give, without expense to the United
States, [captured, condemned, or obsolete ordnance material,
books, manuscripts, works of art, drawings, plans, and models,
other condemned or obsolete material, trophies, and flags, and
other material of historic interest not needed by the
Department of the Navy, to--] items described in subsection (b)
that are not needed by the Department of the Navy to any of the
following:
(1) [a] A State, Territory, Commonwealth, or
possession of the United States, or political
subdivision or municipal corporation thereof[;].
(2) [the] The District of Columbia[;].
(3) [a] A library[;].
(4) [a] A historical society[;].
(5) [an] An educational institution whose graduates
or students fought in [World War I or World War II;] a
foreign war.
(6) [a soldiers' monument] A servicemen's monument
association[;].
(7) [a] A State museum[;].
(8) [a] A museum or memorial operated and maintained
for educational purposes only, whose charter denies it
the right to operate for profit[;].
(9) [a] A post of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the
United States[;].
(10) [a] A post of the American Legion[;].
(11) [any] Any other recognized war veterans'
association[; or].
(12) [a] A post of the Sons of Veterans Reserve.
(b) Items Eligible for Disposal.--This section applies to the
following types of property held by the Department of the Navy:
(1) Captured, condemned, or obsolete ordnance
material.
(2) Captured, condemned, or obsolete combat or
shipboard material.
(c) Regulations.--A loan or gift made under this section
shall be subject to regulations prescribed by the Secretary of
the Navy and to regulations under section 205 of the Federal
Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C.
486).
[(b)] (d) Maintenance of the Records of the Government.--
Records of the Government as defined in section 3301 of title
44 may not be disposed of under this section.
[(c)] (e) Alternative Authorities To Make Gifts or Loans.--If
any disposition is authorized by this section and section 2572
of this title, the Secretary may make the gift or loan under
either section.
(f) Authority To Transfer a Portion of a Vessel.--The
Secretary may lend, give, or otherwise transfer any portion of
the hull or superstructure of a vessel stricken from the Naval
Vessel Register and designated for scrapping to a qualified
organization specified in subsection (a). The terms and
conditions of an agreement for the transfer of a portion of a
vessel under this section shall include a requirement that the
transferee will maintain the material conveyed in a condition
that will not diminish the historical value of the material or
bring discredit upon the Navy.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 653--CLAIMS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 7622. Admiralty claims against the United States
(a) The Secretary of the Navy may settle, or compromise, and
pay in an amount not more than [$1,000,000] $15,000,000 an
admiralty claim against the United States for--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(b) If a claim under this section is settled or compromised
for more than [$1,000,000] $15,000,000, the Secretary shall
certify it to Congress.
(c) In any case where the amount to be paid is not more than
[$100,000] $1,000,000, the Secretary may delegate his authority
under this section to any person designated by him.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 7623. Admiralty claims by the United States
(a) The Secretary of the Navy may settle, or compromise, and
receive payment of a claim by the United States for damage to
property under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Navy
or property for which the Department has assumed an obligation
to respond for damage, if--
(1) * * *
(2) the net amount to be received by the United
States is not more than [$1,000,000] $15,000,000.
* * * * * * *
(c) In any case where the amount to be received by the United
States is not more than [$100,000] $1,000,000, the Secretary
may delegate his authority under this section to any person
designated by him.
* * * * * * *
Subtitle D--Air Force
PART I--ORGANIZATION
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 803--DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 8014. Office of the Secretary of the Air Force
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f)(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) The total number of general officers assigned or detailed
to permanent duty in the Office of the Secretary of the Air
Force and on the Air Staff may not exceed [the number equal to
85 percent of the number of general officers assigned or
detailed to such duty on the date of the enactment of this
subsection.] 60.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 807--THE AIR FORCE
Sec.
8061. Regulations.
* * * * * * *
8063. Contracts for space launches: responsibility of Air Force for all
Department of Defense elements.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 8063. Contracts for space launches: responsibility of Air Force
for all Department of Defense elements
The Secretary of the Air Force shall ensure that contracts
for space launch vehicles and space launch services for all
elements of the Department of Defense are prepared, negotiated,
executed, and managed in a manner that maximizes launch
effectiveness, minimizes cost of launch services, provides
clear visibility to all elements into contract costs and
functions, and, where practicable, takes advantage of
commercial space launch capabilities.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 8074. Commands: territorial organization
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(c) The Military Air Transport Service is redesignated as
the Military Airlift Command.]
* * * * * * *
PART II--PERSONNEL
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 845--RANK AND COMMAND
Sec.
8572. Rank: commissioned officers serving under temporary appointments.
* * * * * * *
8584. Commander of Air Force Space Command.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 8584. Commander of Air Force Space Command
The Secretary of Defense may require that the officer serving
as commander of the Air Force Space Command not serve
simultaneously as commander of the United States Space Command
(or any successor combatant command with responsibility for
space) or as commander of the United States element of the
North American Air Defense Command.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 857--DECORATIONS AND AWARDS
Sec.
8741. Medal of honor: award.
* * * * * * *
8754. Medal of honor: duplicate medal.
8755. Korea Defense Service Medal.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 8747. Medal of honor; Air Force cross; distinguished-service
cross; distinguished-service medal; silver star:
replacement
Any medal of honor, Air Force cross, distinguished-service
cross, distinguished-service medal, or silver star, or any bar,
ribbon, rosette, or other device issued for wear with or in
place of any of them, that is [lost or destroyed] stolen, lost,
or destroyed, or becomes unfit for use, without fault or
neglect of the person to whom it was awarded, shall be replaced
without charge.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 8754. Medal of honor: duplicate medal
A person awarded a medal of honor shall, upon written
application of that person, be issued, without charge, one
duplicate medal of honor with ribbons and appurtenances. Such
duplicate medal of honor shall be marked, in such manner as the
Secretary of the Air Force may determine, as a duplicate or for
display purposes only.
Sec. 8755. Korea Defense Service Medal
(a) The Secretary of the Air Force shall issue a campaign
medal, to be known as the Korea Defense Service Medal, to each
person who while a member of the Air Force served in the
Republic of Korea or the waters adjacent thereto during the
KDSM eligibility period and met the service requirements for
the award of that medal prescribed under subsection (c).
(b) In this section, the term ``KDSM eligibility period''
means the period beginning on July 28, 1954, and ending on such
date after the date of the enactment of this section as may be
determined by the Secretary of Defense to be appropriate for
terminating eligibility for the Korea Defense Service Medal.
(c) The Secretary of the Air Force shall prescribe service
requirements for eligibility for the Korea Defense Service
Medal. Those requirements shall not be more stringent than the
service requirements for award of the Armed Forces
Expeditionary Medal for instances in which the award of that
medal is authorized.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 867--RETIREMENT FOR LENGTH OF SERVICE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 8911. Twenty years or more: regular or reserve commissioned
officers
(a) * * *
(b) The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of
the Air Force, during the period beginning on October 1, 1990,
and ending on December 31, [2001] 2002, to reduce the
requirement under subsection (a) for at least 10 years of
active service as a commissioned officer to a period
(determined by the Secretary of the Air Force) of not less than
eight years.
* * * * * * *
PART III--TRAINING
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 903--UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 9344. Selection of persons from foreign countries
(a)(1) The Secretary of the Air Force may permit not more
than [40] 60 persons at any one time from foreign countries to
receive instruction at the Academy. Such persons shall be in
addition to the authorized strength of the Air Force Cadets of
the Academy under section 9342 of this title.
* * * * * * *
(b)(1) * * *
(2) Each foreign country from which a cadet is permitted to
receive instruction at the Academy under this section shall
reimburse the United States for the cost of providing such
instruction, including the cost of pay, allowances, and
emoluments provided under paragraph (1) unless a written waiver
of some or all reimbursement is granted by the Secretary of
Defense. The Secretary of the Air Force shall prescribe the
rates for reimbursement under this paragraph, except that the
reimbursement rates may not be less than the cost to the United
States of providing such instruction, including pay,
allowances, and emoluments, to a cadet appointed from the
United States.
[(3) The amount of reimbursement waived under paragraph (2)
may not exceed 50 percent of the per-person reimbursement
amount otherwise required to be paid by a foreign country under
such paragraph, except in the case of not more than 20 persons
receiving instruction at the Air Force Academy under this
section at any one time.]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 9353. Cadets: degree and commission on graduation
(a) * * *
[(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a cadet who
completes the prescribed course of instruction may, upon
graduation, be appointed a second lieutenant in the Regular Air
Force under section 531 of this title.]
(b) A cadet who completes the prescribed course of
instruction, is qualified for an original appointment in a
regular component under section 532 of this title, and meets
such other criteria for appointment as a commissioned officer
in the Air Force as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the
Air Force shall, upon graduation, be appointed a second
lieutenant in the Regular Air Force under section 531 of this
title, unless appointed under that section in a regular
component of one of the other armed forces in accordance with
section 541 of this title.
* * * * * * *
PART IV--SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 949--REAL PROPERTY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 9783. Johnston Atoll: reimbursement for support provided to civil
air carriers
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``civil air carrier'' means an air
carrier (as defined in section [40101(a)(2)]
40102(a)(2) of title 49) that is issued a certificate
of public convenience and necessity under section 41102
of such title.
* * * * * * *
Subtitle E--Reserve Components
PART I--ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 1013--BUDGET INFORMATION AND ANNUAL REPORTS TO CONGRESS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 10541. National Guard and reserve component equipment: annual
report to Congress
[(a) The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Congress
each year, not later than February 15, a written report
concerning the equipment of the National Guard and the reserve
components of the armed forces for each of the three succeeding
fiscal years.
[(b) Each report under this section shall include the
following:
[(1) Recommendations as to the type and quantity of
each major item of equipment which should be in the
inventory of the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve
of each reserve component of the armed forces.
[(2) A statement of the quantity and average age of
each type of major item of equipment which is expected
to be physically available in the inventory of the
Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve of each reserve
component as of the beginning of each fiscal year
covered by the report.
[(3) A statement of the quantity and cost of each
type of major item of equipment which is expected to be
procured for the Selective Reserve of the Ready Reserve
of each reserve component from commercial sources or to
be transferred to each such Selected Reserve from the
active-duty components of the armed forces.
[(4) A statement of the quantity of each type of
major item of equipment which is expected to be
retired, decommissioned, transferred, or otherwise
removed from the physical inventory of the Selected
Reserve of the Ready Reserve of each reserve component
and the plans for replacement of that equipment.
[(5) A listing of each major item of equipment
required by the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve
of each reserve component indicating--
[(A) the full war-time requirement of that
component for that item, shown in accordance
with deployment schedules and requirements over
successive 30-day periods following
mobilization;
[(B) the number of each such item in the
inventory of the component;
[(C) a separate listing of each such item in
the inventory that is a deployable item and is
not the most desired item;
[(D) the number of each such item projected
to be in the inventory at the end of the third
succeeding fiscal year; and
[(E) the number of nondeployable items in the
inventory as a substitute for a required major
item of equipment.
[(6) A narrative explanation of the plan of the
Secretary concerned to provide equipment needed to fill
the war-time requirement for each major item of
equipment to all units of the Selected Reserve,
including an explanation of the plan to equip units of
the Selected Reserve that are short of major items of
equipment at the outset of war.
[(7) For each item of major equipment reported under
paragraph (3) in a report for one of the three previous
years under this section as an item expected to be
procured for the Selected Reserve or to be transferred
to the Selected Reserve, the quantity of such equipment
actually procured for or transferred to the Selected
Reserve.
[(8) A statement of the current status of the
compatibility of equipment between the Army reserve
components and active forces of the Army, the effect of
that level of incompatibility on combat effectiveness,
and a plan to achieve full equipment compatibility.
[(c) Each report under this section shall be expressed in the
same format and with the same level of detail as the
information presented in the annual Five Year Defense Program
Procurement Annex prepared by the Department of Defense.]
(a) Requirement.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit to
Congress each year, not later than March 1, a written report
concerning the equipment of the National Guard and the reserve
components of the armed forces. Each such report shall cover
the current fiscal year and the three succeeding years.
(b) Matters To Be Included in Report.--Each report under this
section shall include the following (shown in the aggregate and
separately for each reserve component):
(1) A list of major items of equipment required and
on-hand in the inventories of the reserve components.
(2) A list of major items of equipment that are
expected to be procured from commercial sources or
transferred from the active component to the reserve
components.
(3) A statement of major items of equipment in the
inventories of the reserve components that are
substitutes for a required major item of equipment.
(4) A narrative explanation of the plan of the
Secretary concerned to equip each reserve component,
including an explanation of the plan to equip units of
the reserve components that are short major items of
equipment at the outset of war or a contingency
operation.
(5) A narrative discussing the current status of the
compatibility and interoperability of equipment between
the reserve components and the active forces and the
effect of that level of compatibility or
interoperability on combat effectiveness, together with
a plan to achieve full equipment compatibility and
interoperability.
(6) A narrative discussing modernization shortfalls
and maintenance backlogs within the reserve components
and the effect of those shortfalls on combat
effectiveness.
(7) A narrative discussing the overall age and
condition of equipment currently in the inventory of
the reserve components.
(c) Major Items of Equipment.--In this section, the term
``major items of equipment'' includes ships, aircraft, combat
vehicles, and key combat support equipment.
(d) Format and Level of Detail.--Each report under this
section shall be expressed in the same format and with the same
level of detail as the information presented in the Future-
Years Defense Program Procurement Annex prepared by the
Department of Defense.
* * * * * * *
PART II--PERSONNEL GENERALLY
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 1201--AUTHORIZED STRENGTHS AND DISTRIBUTION IN GRADE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 12011. Authorized strengths: reserve officers on active duty or on
full-time National Guard duty for administration of
the reserves or the National Guard
[(a) The number of reserve officers of the Army, Air Force,
and Marine Corps who may be on active duty or full-time
National Guard duty in each of the grades of major, lieutenant
colonel, and colonel, and of the Navy who may be on active duty
in each of the grades of lieutenant commander, commander, and
captain, as of the end of any fiscal year for duty described in
subclauses (B) and (C) of section 523(b)(1) of this title or
full-time National Guard duty (other than for training) under
section 502(f) of title 32 may not exceed the number for that
grade and armed force in the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Marine
[Grade Army Navy Force Corps
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Major or Lieutenant Commander....... 3,316 1,071 948 140
Lieutenant Colonel or Commander..... 1,759 520 852 90
Colonel or Navy Captain............. 529 188 317 30
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(b) Whenever the number of officers serving in any grade is
less than the number authorized for that grade under this
section, the difference between the two numbers may be applied
to increase the number authorized under this section for any
lower grade.
[(c) Whenever under section 527 of this title the President
may suspend the operation of any provision of section 523, 525,
or 526 of this title, the Secretary of Defense may suspend the
operation of any provision of this section. Any such suspension
shall, if not sooner ended, end in the manner specified in
section 527 for a suspension under that section.
[(d) Upon increasing under subsection (c)(2) of section 115
of this title the end strength that is authorized under
subsection (a)(1)(B) of that section for a fiscal year for
active-duty personnel and full-time National Guard duty
personnel of an armed force who are to be paid from funds
appropriated for reserve personnel, the Secretary of Defense
may increase for that fiscal year the limitation that is set
forth in subsection (a) of this section for the number of
officers of that armed force serving in any grade if the
Secretary determines that such action is in the national
interest. The percent of the increase may not exceed the
percent by which the Secretary increases that end strength.]
(a) Limitations.--(1) Of the total number of members of a
reserve component who are serving on full-time reserve
component duty at the end of any fiscal year, the number of
those members who may be serving in each of the grades of
major, lieutenant colonel, and colonel may not, as of the end
of that fiscal year, exceed the number determined in accordance
with the following table:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of officers of that reserve component who may be
serving in the grade of:
Total number of members of a reserve component serving ---------------------------------------------------------
on full-time reserve component duty: Lieutenant
Major Colonel Colonel
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army Reserve:
10,000................................................ 1,390 740 230
11,000................................................ 1,529 803 242
12,000................................................ 1,668 864 252
13,000................................................ 1,804 924 262
14,000................................................ 1,940 984 272
15,000................................................ 2,075 1,044 282
16,000................................................ 2,210 1,104 291
17,000................................................ 2,345 1,164 300
18,000................................................ 2,479 1,223 309
19,000................................................ 2,613 1,282 318
20,000................................................ 2,747 1,341 327
21,000................................................ 2,877 1,400 336
Army National Guard:
20,000................................................ 1,500 850 325
22,000................................................ 1,650 930 350
24,000................................................ 1,790 1,010 370
26,000................................................ 1,930 1,085 385
28,000................................................ 2,070 1,160 400
30,000................................................ 2,200 1,235 405
32,000................................................ 2,330 1,305 408
34,000................................................ 2,450 1,375 411
36,000................................................ 2,570 1,445 411
38,000................................................ 2,670 1,515 411
40,000................................................ 2,770 1,580 411
42,000................................................ 2,837 1,644 411
Marine Corps Reserve:
1,100................................................. 106 56 20
1,200................................................. 110 60 21
1,300................................................. 114 63 22
1,400................................................. 118 66 23
1,500................................................. 121 69 24
1,600................................................. 124 72 25
1,700................................................. 127 75 26
1,800................................................. 130 78 27
1,900................................................. 133 81 28
2,000................................................. 136 84 29
2,100................................................. 139 87 30
2,200................................................. 141 90 31
2,300................................................. 143 92 32
2,400................................................. 145 94 33
2,500................................................. 147 96 34
2,600................................................. 149 98 35
Air Force Reserve:
500................................................... 83 85 50
1,000................................................. 155 165 95
1,500................................................. 220 240 135
2,000................................................. 285 310 170
2,500................................................. 350 369 203
3,000................................................. 413 420 220
3,500................................................. 473 464 230
4,000................................................. 530 500 240
4,500................................................. 585 529 247
5,000................................................. 638 550 254
5,500................................................. 688 565 261
6,000................................................. 735 575 268
7,000................................................. 770 595 280
8,000................................................. 805 615 290
10,000................................................ 835 635 300
Air National Guard:
5,000................................................. 333 335 251
6,000................................................. 403 394 260
7,000................................................. 472 453 269
8,000................................................. 539 512 278
9,000................................................. 606 571 287
10,000................................................ 673 630 296
11,000................................................ 740 688 305
12,000................................................ 807 742 314
13,000................................................ 873 795 323
14,000................................................ 939 848 332
15,000................................................ 1,005 898 341
16,000................................................ 1,067 948 350
17,000................................................ 1,126 998 359
18,000................................................ 1,185 1,048 368
19,000................................................ 1,235 1,098 377
20,000................................................ 1,283 1,148 380.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Of the total number of members of the Naval Reserve who
are serving on full-time reserve component duty at the end of
any fiscal year, the number of those members who may be serving
in each of the grades of lieutenant commander, commander, and
captain may not, as of the end of that fiscal year, exceed the
number determined in accordance with the following table:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of officers who may be serving in the grade of:
Total number of members of Naval Reserve serving on ---------------------------------------------------------
full-time reserve component duty Lieutenant
commander Commander Captain
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10,000................................................ 807 447 141
11,000................................................ 867 467 153
12,000................................................ 924 485 163
13,000................................................ 980 503 173
14,000................................................ 1,035 521 183
15,000................................................ 1,088 538 193
16,000................................................ 1,142 555 203
17,000................................................ 1,195 565 213
18,000................................................ 1,246 575 223
19,000................................................ 1,291 585 233
20,000................................................ 1,334 595 242
21,000................................................ 1,364 603 250
22,000................................................ 1,384 610 258
23,000................................................ 1,400 615 265
24,000................................................ 1,410 620 270.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Determinations by Interpolation.--If the total number of
members of a reserve component serving on full-time reserve
component duty is between any two consecutive numbers in the
first column of the appropriate table in paragraph (1) or (2)
of subsection (a), the corresponding authorized strengths for
each of the grades shown in that table for that component are
determined by mathematical interpolation between the respective
numbers of the two strengths. If the total number of members of
a reserve component serving on full-time reserve component duty
is more or less than the highest or lowest number,
respectively, set forth in the first column of the appropriate
table in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a), the Secretary
concerned shall fix the corresponding strengths for the grades
shown in that table at the same proportion as is reflected in
the nearest limit shown in the table.
(c) Reallocations to Lower Grades.--Whenever the number of
officers serving in any grade for duty described in subsection
(a) is less than the number authorized for that grade under
this section, the difference between the two numbers may be
applied to increase the number authorized under this section
for any lower grade.
(d) Secretarial Waiver.--(1) Upon determining that it is in
the national interest to do so, the Secretary of Defense may
increase for a particular fiscal year the number of reserve
officers that may be on full-time reserve component duty for a
reserve component in a grade referred to in a table in
subsection (a) by a number that does not exceed the number
equal to 5 percent of the maximum number specified for the
grade in that table.
(2) Whenever the Secretary exercises the authority provided
in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee
on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed
Services of the House of Representatives notice in writing of
the adjustment made.
(e) Full-Time Reserve Component Duty Defined.--In this
section, the term ``full-time reserve component duty'' means
the following duty:
(1) Active duty described in sections 10211, 10302,
10303, 10304, 10305, 12310, or 12402 of this title.
(2) Full-time National Guard duty (other than for
training) under section 502(f) of title 32.
(3) Active duty described in section 708 of title 32.
Sec. 12012. Authorized strengths: senior enlisted members on active
duty or on full-time National Guard duty for
administration of the reserves or the National
Guard
[(a) The number of enlisted members in pay grades E-8 and E-9
who may be on active duty (other than for training) or on full-
time National Guard duty under the authority of section 502(f)
of title 32 (other than for training) as of the end of any
fiscal year in connection with organizing, administering,
recruiting, instructing, or training the reserve components or
the National Guard may not exceed the number for that grade and
armed force in the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Marine
[Grade Army Navy Force Corps
------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-9................................. 764 202 502 20
E-8................................. 2,821 429 1,117 94
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[(b) Whenever the number of members serving in pay grade E-9
for duty described in subsection (a) is less than the number
authorized for that grade under subsection (a), the difference
between the two numbers may be applied to increase the number
authorized under such subsection for pay grade E-8.
[(c) Whenever under section 527 of this title the President
may suspend the operation of any provision of section 523, 525,
or 526 of this title, the Secretary of Defense may suspend the
operation of any provision of this section. Any such suspension
shall, if not sooner ended, end in the manner specified in
section 527 for a suspension under that section.
[(d) Upon increasing under subsection (c)(2) of section 115
of this title the end strength that is authorized under
subsection (a)(1)(B) of that section for a fiscal year for
active-duty personnel and full-time National Guard duty
personnel of an armed force who are to be paid from funds
appropriated for reserve personnel, the Secretary of Defense
may increase for that fiscal year the limitation that is set
forth in subsection (a) of this section for the number of
enlisted members of that armed force serving in any grade if
the Secretary determines that such action is in the national
interest. The percent of the increase may not exceed the
percent by which the Secretary increases that end strength.]
(a) Limitations.--Of the total number of members of a reserve
component who are serving on full-time reserve component duty
at the end of any fiscal year, the number of those members in
each of pay grades of E-8 and E-9 who may be serving on active
duty under section 10211 or 12310, or on full-time National
Guard duty under the authority of section 502(f) of title 32
(other than for training) in connection with organizing,
administering, recruiting, instructing, or training the reserve
components or the National Guard may not, as of the end of that
fiscal year, exceed the number determined in accordance with
the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of members of that reserve
Total number of members of a component who may be serving in the
reserve component serving on full- grade of:
time reserve component duty: --------------------------------------
E-8 E-9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army Reserve:
10,000........................... 1,052 154
11,000........................... 1,126 168
12,000........................... 1,195 180
13,000........................... 1,261 191
14,000........................... 1,327 202
15,000........................... 1,391 213
16,000........................... 1,455 224
17,000........................... 1,519 235
18,000........................... 1,583 246
19,000........................... 1,647 257
20,000........................... 1,711 268
21,000........................... 1,775 278
Army National Guard:
20,000........................... 1,650 550
22,000........................... 1,775 615
24,000........................... 1,900 645
26,000........................... 1,945 675
28,000........................... 1,945 705
30,000........................... 1,945 725
32,000........................... 1,945 730
34,000........................... 1,945 735
36,000........................... 1,945 738
38,000........................... 1,945 741
40,000........................... 1,945 743
42,000........................... 1,945 743
Naval Reserve:
10,000........................... 340 143
11,000........................... 364 156
12,000........................... 386 169
13,000........................... 407 182
14,000........................... 423 195
15,000........................... 435 208
16,000........................... 447 221
17,000........................... 459 234
18,000........................... 471 247
19,000........................... 483 260
20,000........................... 495 273
21,000........................... 507 286
22,000........................... 519 299
23,000........................... 531 312
24,000........................... 540 325
Marine Corps Reserve:
1,100............................ 50 11
1,200............................ 55 12
1,300............................ 60 13
1,400............................ 65 14
1,500............................ 70 15
1,600............................ 75 16
1,700............................ 80 17
1,800............................ 85 18
1,900............................ 89 19
2,000............................ 93 20
2,100............................ 96 21
2,200............................ 99 22
2,300............................ 101 23
2,400............................ 103 24
2,500............................ 105 25
2,600............................ 107 26
Air Force Reserve:
500.............................. 75 40
1,000............................ 145 75
1,500............................ 208 105
2,000............................ 270 130
2,500............................ 325 150
3,000............................ 375 170
3,500............................ 420 190
4,000............................ 460 210
4,500............................ 495 230
5,000............................ 530 250
5,500............................ 565 270
6,000............................ 600 290
7,000............................ 670 330
8,000............................ 740 370
10,000........................... 800 400
Air National Guard
5,000............................ 1,020 405
6,000............................ 1,070 435
7,000............................ 1,120 465
8,000............................ 1,170 490
9,000............................ 1,220 510
10,000........................... 1,270 530
11,000........................... 1,320 550
12,000........................... 1,370 570
13,000........................... 1,420 589
14,000........................... 1,470 608
15,000........................... 1,520 626
16,000........................... 1,570 644
17,000........................... 1,620 661
18,000........................... 1,670 678
19,000........................... 1,720 695
20,000........................... 1,770 712.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Determinations by Interpolation.--If the total number of
members of a reserve component serving on full-time reserve
component duty is between any two consecutive numbers in the
first column of the table in subsection (a), the corresponding
authorized strengths for each of the grades shown in that table
for that component are determined by mathematical interpolation
between the respective numbers of the two strengths. If the
total number of members of a reserve component serving on full-
time reserve component duty is more or less than the highest or
lowest number, respectively, set forth in the first column of
the table in subsection (a), the Secretary concerned shall fix
the corresponding strengths for the grades shown in the table
at the same proportion as is reflected in the nearest limit
shown in the table.
(c) Reallocations to Lower Grade.--Whenever the number of
officers serving in pay grade E-9 for duty described in
subsection (a) is less than the number authorized for that
grade under this section, the difference between the two
numbers may be applied to increase the number authorized under
this section for pay grade E-8.
(d) Secretarial Waiver.--(1) Upon determining that it is in
the national interest to do so, the Secretary of Defense may
increase for a particular fiscal year the number of reserve
enlisted members that may be on active duty or full-time
National Guard duty as described in subsection (a) for a
reserve component in a pay grade referred to in a table in
subsection (a) by a number that does not exceed the number
equal to 5 percent of the maximum number specified for that
grade and reserve component in the table.
(2) Whenever the Secretary exercises the authority provided
in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee
on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed
Services of the House of Representatives notice in writing of
the adjustment made.
(e) Full-Time Reserve Component Duty Defined.--In this
section, the term ``full-time reserve component duty'' has the
meaning given the term in section 12011(e) of this title.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 1205--APPOINTMENT OF RESERVE OFFICERS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 12205. Commissioned officers: appointment; educational requirement
(a) * * *
(b) Exceptions.--Subsection (a) does not apply to the
following:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) The appointment to a grade in the Army Reserve of
a person whose original appointment as an officer in
the Army Reserve was through the Officer Candidate
School program and who immediately before that original
appointment was an enlisted member on active duty.
[(4)] (5) The appointment to or recognition in a
higher grade of any person who was appointed to, or
federally recognized in, the grade of captain or, in
the case of the Navy, lieutenant before October 1,
1995.
[(5)] (6) Recognition in the grade of captain or
major in the Alaska Army National Guard of a person who
resides permanently at a location in Alaska that is
more than 50 miles from each of the cities of
Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau, Alaska, by paved road
and who is serving in a Scout unit or a Scout
supporting unit.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 1209--ACTIVE DUTY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 12305. Authority of President to suspend certain laws relating to
promotion, retirement, and separation
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Upon the termination of a suspension made under the
authority of subsection (a) of a provision of law otherwise
requiring the separation or retirement of officers on active
duty because of age, length of service or length of service in
grade, or failure of selection for promotion, the Secretary
concerned shall extend by up to 90 days the otherwise required
separation or retirement date of any officer covered by the
suspended provision whose separation or retirement date, but
for the suspension, would have been before the date of the
termination of the suspension or within 90 days of the date of
such termination.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 1213--SPECIAL APPOINTMENTS, ASSIGNMENTS, DETAILS, AND DUTIES
* * * * * * *
Sec. 12503. Ready Reserve: funeral honors duty
(a) Order to Duty.--A member of the Ready Reserve may be
ordered to funeral honors duty, with the consent of the member,
in preparation for or to perform funeral honors functions at
the funeral of a veteran as defined in section 1491 of this
title. Performance of funeral honors duty by a Reserve not on
active duty shall be treated as inactive-duty training
(including with respect to travel to and from such duty) for
purposes of any provision of law other than sections 206 and
435 of title 37.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 1214--READY RESERVE MOBILIZATION INCOME INSURANCE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 12533. Termination of program
(a) * * *
(b) Termination of New Enrollments.--The Secretary may not
enroll a member of the Ready Reserve for coverage under the
insurance program after [the date of the enactment of this
section.] November 18, 1997.
(c) Termination of Coverage.--(1) The enrollment under the
insurance program of insured members other than insured members
described in paragraph (2) is terminated as of [the date of the
enactment of this section.] November 18, 1997. The enrollment
of an insured member described in paragraph (2) is terminated
as of the date of the termination of the period of covered
service of that member described in that paragraph.
(2) An insured member described in this paragraph is an
insured member who on [the date of the enactment of this
section] November 18, 1997, is serving on covered service for a
period of service, or has been issued an order directing the
performance of covered service, that satisfies or would satisfy
the entitlement-to-benefits provisions of this chapter.
(d) Termination of Payment of Benefits.--The Secretary may
not make any benefit payment under the insurance program after
[the date of the enactment of this section] November 18, 1997,
other than to an insured member who on that date (1) is serving
on an order to covered service, (2) has been issued an order
directing performance of covered service, or (3) has served on
covered service before that date for which benefits under the
program have not been paid to the member.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 1223--RETIRED PAY FOR NON-REGULAR SERVICE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 12731. Age and service requirements
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) In the case of a person who completes the service
requirements of subsection (a)(2) during the period beginning
on October 5, 1994, and ending on December 31, [2001] 2002, the
provisions of subsection (a)(3) shall be applied by
substituting ``the last six years'' for ``the last eight
years''.
Sec. 12731a. Temporary special retirement qualification authority
(a) * * *
(b) Period of Authority.--The period referred to in
subsection (a)(1) is the period beginning on October 23, 1992,
and ending on December 31, [2001] 2002.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 12733. Computation of retired pay: computation of years of service
For the purpose of computing the retired pay of a person
under this chapter, the person's years of service and any
fraction of such a year are computed by dividing 360 into the
sum of the following:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) One day for each point credited to the person
under clause (B), (C), or (D) of section 12732(a)(2) of
this title, but not more than--
(A) * * *
(B) 75 days in the year of service that
includes September 23, 1996, and in any
subsequent year of service before the year of
service that includes [the date of the
enactment of the Floyd D. Spence National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2001;] October 30, 2000; and
(C) 90 days in the year of service that
includes [the date of the enactment of the
Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2001] October 30, 2000, and
in any subsequent year of service.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 12741. Retirement from active reserve service performed after
regular retirement
(a) Election of Reserve Retired Pay.--A person who, after
becoming entitled to retired or retainer pay under chapter 65,
367, 571, or 867 of this title, serves in an active status in a
reserve component is entitled to retired pay under this chapter
if--
(1) * * *
(2) the person elects under this section to
[received] receive retired pay under this chapter; and
* * * * * * *
PART III--PROMOTION AND RETENTION OF OFFICERS ON THE RESERVE ACTIVE-
STATUS LIST
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 1407--FAILURE OF SELECTION FOR PROMOTION AND INVOLUNTARY
SEPARATION
* * * * * * *
Sec. 14502. Special selection boards: correction of errors
(a) Officers Not Considered Because of Administrative
Error.--(1) In the case of an officer or former officer who the
Secretary of the military department concerned determines was
not considered for selection for promotion [from in or above
the promotion zone] by a mandatory promotion board convened
under section 14101(a) of this title because of administrative
error, the Secretary concerned shall convene a special
selection board under this subsection to determine whether such
officer or former officer should be recommended for promotion.
Any such board shall be convened under regulations prescribed
by the Secretary of Defense and shall be appointed and composed
in accordance with section 14102 of this title and shall
include the representation of competitive categories required
by that section. The members of a board convened under this
subsection shall be required to take an oath in the same manner
as prescribed in section 14103 of this title.
* * * * * * *
(3) If a special selection board convened under paragraph (1)
does not recommend for promotion an officer or former officer
in a grade below the grade of colonel or, in the case of an
officer or former officer of the Navy, captain, whose name was
referred to it for consideration for selection for promotion
from in or above the promotion zone, the officer or former
officer shall be considered to have failed of selection for
promotion.
(b) Officers Considered But Not Selected; Material Error.--
(1) In the case of an officer or former officer who was
eligible for promotion and was considered for selection for
promotion [from in or above the promotion zone under this
chapter by a selection board] by a promotion board convened
under section 14101(a) of this title but was not selected, the
Secretary of the military department concerned may, under
regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, convene a
special selection board under this subsection to determine
whether the officer or former officer should be recommended for
promotion, if the Secretary determines that--
(A) the action of the selection board that considered
the officer or former officer was contrary to law or
involved material error of fact or material
administrative error; or
(B) the selection board did not have before it for
its consideration material information.
* * * * * * *
PART IV--TRAINING FOR RESERVE COMPONENTS AND EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
PROGRAMS
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 1606--EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR MEMBERS OF THE SELECTED
RESERVE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 16133. Time limitation for use of entitlement
(a) * * *
(b)(1) In the case of a person--
(A) * * *
(B) who, on or after the date on which such person
became entitled to educational assistance under this
chapter ceases to be a member of the Selected Reserve
during the period beginning on October 1, 1991, and
ending on December 31, [2001] 2002, by reason of the
inactivation of the person's unit of assignment or by
reason of involuntarily ceasing to be designated as a
member of the Selected Reserve pursuant to section
10143(a) of this title,
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 1608--HEALTH PROFESSIONS STIPEND PROGRAM
* * * * * * *
Sec. 16201. Financial assistance: health-care professionals in reserve
components
(a) Establishment of Program.--For the purpose of obtaining
adequate numbers of commissioned officers in the reserve
components who are qualified in health professions [specialties
critically needed in wartime], the Secretary of each military
department may establish and maintain a program to provide
financial assistance under this chapter to persons engaged in
[training in such specialties] training that leads to a degree
in medicine or dentistry or training in a health professions
specialty that is critically needed in wartime. Under such a
program, the Secretary concerned may agree to pay a financial
stipend to persons engaged in [training in certain health care
specialties] health care education and training in return for a
commitment to subsequent service in the Ready Reserve.
(b) Medical and Dental School Students.--(1) Under the
stipend program under this chapter, the Secretary of the
military department concerned may enter into an agreement with
a person who--
(A) is eligible to be appointed as an officer in a
reserve component;
(B) is enrolled or has been accepted for enrollment
in an institution in a course of study that results in
a degree in medicine or dentistry;
(C) signs an agreement that, unless sooner separated,
the person will--
(i) complete the educational phase of the
program;
(ii) accept a reappointment or redesignation
within the person's reserve component, if
tendered, based upon the person's health
profession, following satisfactory completion
of the educational and intern programs; and
(iii) participate in a residency program; and
(D) if required by regulations prescribed by the
Secretary of Defense, agrees to apply for, if eligible,
and accept, if offered, residency training in a health
profession skill which has been designated by the
Secretary of Defense as a critically needed wartime
skill.
(2) Under the agreement--
(A) the Secretary of the military department
concerned shall agree to pay the participant a stipend,
in the amount determined under subsection (f), for the
period or the remainder of the period the student is
satisfactorily progressing toward a degree in medicine
or dentistry while enrolled in an accredited medical or
dental school;
(B) the participant shall not be eligible to receive
such stipend before appointment, designation, or
assignment as an officer for service in the Ready
Reserve;
(C) the participant shall be subject to such active
duty requirements as may be specified in the agreement
and to active duty in time of war or national emergency
as provided by law for members of the Ready Reserve;
and
(D) the participant shall agree to serve, upon
successful completion of the program, one year in the
Selected Reserve for each six months, or part thereof,
for which the stipend is provided. In the case of a
participant who enters into a subsequent agreement
under subsection (c) and successfully completes
residency training in a specialty designated by the
Secretary of Defense as a specialty critically needed
by the military department in wartime, the requirement
to serve in the Selected Reserve may be reduced to one
year for each year, or part thereof, for which the
stipend was provided while enrolled in medical or
dental school.
[(b)] (c) Physicians and Dentists in Critical Wartime
Specialties.--(1) Under the stipend program under this chapter,
the Secretary of the military department concerned may enter
into an agreement with a person who--
(A) * * *
(B) is eligible for appointment, designation, or
assignment as a medical officer or dental officer in
the Reserve of the armed force concerned or has been
appointed as a medical or dental officer in the Reserve
of the armed force concerned; and
* * * * * * *
(2) Under the agreement--
(A) the Secretary shall agree to pay the participant
a stipend, in an amount determined under subsection
[(e)] (f), for the period or the remainder of the
period of the residency program in which the
participant enrolls or is enrolled;
* * * * * * *
(D) the participant shall agree to serve, upon
successful completion of the program, [two years in the
Ready Reserve for each year,] one year in the Ready
Reserve for each six months, or part thereof, for which
the stipend is provided, to be served in the Selected
Reserve or in the Individual Ready Reserve as specified
in the agreement.
[(c)] (d) Registered Nurses in Critical Specialties.--(1) * *
*
(2) Under the agreement--
(A) the Secretary shall agree to pay the participant
a stipend, in an amount determined under subsection
[(e)] (f), for the period or the remainder of the
period of the nursing program in which the participant
enrolls or is enrolled;
* * * * * * *
(D) the participant shall agree to serve, upon
successful completion of the program, [two years in the
Ready Reserve for each year,] one year in the Ready
Reserve for each six months, or part thereof, for which
the stipend is provided, to be served in the Selected
Reserve or in the Individual Ready Reserve as specified
in the agreement.
[(d)] (e) Baccalaureate Students in Nursing or Other Health
Professions.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(e)] (f) Amount of Stipend.--The amount of a stipend under
an agreement under subsection (b) or (c) shall be--
(1) the stipend rate in effect for participants in
the Armed Forces Health Professions Scholarship Program
under section 2121(d) of this title, if the participant
has agreed to serve in the Selected Reserve; or
(2) one-half of that rate, if the participant has
agreed to serve in the Individual Ready Reserve.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 1609--EDUCATION LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAMS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 16302. Education loan repayment program: health professions
officers serving in Selected Reserve with wartime
critical medical skill shortages
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) The authority provided in this section shall apply only
in the case of a person first appointed as a commissioned
officer before January 1, [2002] 2003.
* * * * * * *
----------
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996
* * * * * * *
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
* * * * * * *
Subtitle E--Chemical Demilitarization Program
* * * * * * *
SEC. 152. DESTRUCTION OF EXISTING STOCKPILE OF LETHAL CHEMICAL AGENTS
AND MUNITIONS.
(a) * * *
(b) Initiation of Demilitarization Operations.--The Secretary
of Defense may not initiate destruction of the chemical
munitions stockpile stored at a site until the following
support measures are in place for that site:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) Emergency preparedness and response capabilities
have been established at the site and in the
surrounding communities to respond to emergencies
involving risks to public health or safety that are
identified by the Secretary of Defense as being risks
resulting from the storage or destruction of lethal
chemical agents and munitions at the site.
(5) The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics recommends initiation of
destruction at the site after considering the
recommendation by the board established by subsection
(g).
* * * * * * *
(g) Oversight Boards.--(1) The Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics shall convene, for each
site at which the chemical munitions stockpile is stored, an
independent oversight board composed of--
(A) the Secretary of the Army;
(B) the Director of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency;
(C) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency;
(D) the President of the National Academy of
Sciences;
(E) the Governor of the State in which the site is
located; and
(F) one individual designated by the Under Secretary
from a list of three local representatives of the area
in which the site is located, prepared jointly by the
Member of the House of Representatives who represents
the Congressional District in which the site is located
and the Senators representing the State in which the
site is located.
(2) Not later than six months after each such board is
convened, the board shall make a recommendation to the Under
Secretary whether the destruction of the chemical munitions
stockpile should be initiated at the site.
(3) The Under Secretary may not recommend initiation of
destruction of the chemical munitions stockpile at a site after
considering a negative recommendation of the board until 90
days after the Under Secretary provides notice to Congress of
the intent to recommend initiation of destruction.
* * * * * * *
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
* * * * * * *
Subtitle E--Miscellaneous Reviews, Studies, and Reports
* * * * * * *
[SEC. 552. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REVIEW OF PROPOSED ARMY END STRENGTH
ALLOCATIONS.
[(a) In General.--During fiscal years 1996 through 2001, the
Comptroller General of the United States shall analyze the
plans of the Secretary of the Army for the allocation of
assigned active component end strengths for the Army through
the requirements process known as Total Army Analysis 2003 and
through any subsequent similar requirements process of the Army
that is conducted before 2002. The Comptroller General's
analysis shall consider whether the proposed active component
end strengths and planned allocation of forces for that period
will be sufficient to implement the national military strategy.
In monitoring those plans, the Comptroller General shall
determine the extent to which the Army will be able during that
period--
[(1) to man fully the combat force based on the
projected active component Army end strength for each
of fiscal years 1996 through 2001;
[(2) to meet the support requirements for the force
and strategy specified in the report of the Bottom-Up
Review, including requirements for operations other
than war; and
[(3) to streamline further Army infrastructure in
order to eliminate duplication and inefficiencies and
replace active duty personnel in overhead positions,
whenever practicable, with civilian or reserve
personnel.
[(b) Access to Documents, Etc.--The Secretary of the Army
shall ensure that the Comptroller General is provided access,
on a timely basis and in accordance with the needs of the
Comptroller General, to all analyses, models, memoranda,
reports, and other documents prepared or used in connection
with the requirements process of the Army known as Total Army
Analysis 2003 and any subsequent similar requirements process
of the Army that is conducted before 2002.
[(c) Annual Report.--Not later than March 1 of each year
through 2002, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress
a report on the findings and conclusions of the Comptroller
General under this section.]
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 216 OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEARS
1992 AND 1993
SEC. 216. MANAGEMENT OF NAVY MINE COUNTERMEASURES PROGRAMS.
(a) Responsibility.--Subject to the authority, direction, and
control of the Secretary of Defense, the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Technology shall have the primary
responsibility for developing and testing naval mine
countermeasures systems during fiscal years 1996 through [2003]
2008.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 3701 OF TITLE 31, UNITED STATES CODE
Sec. 3701. Definitions and application
(a) * * *
(b)(1) In subchapter II of this chapter and subsection (a)(8)
of this section, the term ``claim'' or ``debt'' means any
amount of funds or property that has been determined by an
appropriate official of the Federal Government to be owed to
the United States by a person, organization, or entity other
than another Federal agency. A claim includes, without
limitation--
(A) * * *
(B) expenditures of nonappropriated funds, including
actual and administrative costs related to shoplifting,
theft detection, and theft prevention,
* * * * * * *
----------
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000
* * * * * * *
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
* * * * * * *
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
* * * * * * *
Subtitle E--Performance of Functions by Private-Sector Sources
* * * * * * *
SEC. 343. REPORT ON USE OF EMPLOYEES OF NON-FEDERAL ENTITIES TO PROVIDE
SERVICES TO DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.
[(a) Report Required.--Not later than March 1, 2001, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report
describing the use during the previous fiscal year of non-
Federal entities to provide services to the Department of
Defense.]
(a) Reporting Requirement for Department of the Army.--(1)
Not later than March 1 of each fiscal year, the Secretary of
the Army shall submit to Congress a report describing the use
during the previous fiscal year of non-Federal entities to
provide services to the Department of the Army.
(2) The data collection required to prepare the report is
deemed to be in compliance with the requirements of chapter 35
of title 44, United States Code, commonly known as the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
(3) The report required by this section is needed to comply
with sections 115a and 129a of title 10, United States Code,
and is not a procurement action.
(b) Content of Report.--To the extent practicable using
information available from existing data collection and
reporting systems available to the [Department of Defense]
Department of the Army and the non-Federal entities referred to
in subsection (a), the report shall--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Limitation on Requirement for Non-Federal Entities To
Provide Information.--For the purposes of meeting the
requirements set forth in subsection (b), the Secretary may not
require the provision of information beyond the information
that is currently provided to the Department by the non-Federal
entities referred to in subsection (a), except for the number
of direct and indirect work year equivalents associated with
[Department of Defense] Department of the Army contracts,
identified by contract number, to the extent this information
is available to the contractor from existing data collection
systems.
(d) GAO Evaluation.--Not later than 60 days after the
Secretary submits to Congress the report required under
subsection (a) for a fiscal year, the Comptroller General shall
submit to Congress an evaluation of the report.
* * * * * * *
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
* * * * * * *
Subtitle D--Service Academies
SEC. 531. STRENGTH LIMITATIONS AT THE SERVICE ACADEMIES.
(a) * * *
(b) Reenactment of Limitation; Authorized Variance.--(1) * *
*
(2) Section 6954 of such title is amended--
(A) in subsection (a), by striking the matter
preceding paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
Subtitle E--Education and Training
* * * * * * *
SEC. 549. RECODIFICATION AND CONSOLIDATION OF STATUTES DENYING FEDERAL
GRANTS AND CONTRACTS BY CERTAIN DEPARTMENTS AND
AGENCIES TO INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION THAT
PROHIBIT SENIOR ROTC UNITS OR MILITARY RECRUITING
ON CAMPUS.
(a) Recodification and Consolidation for Limitations on
Federal Grants and Contracts.--(1) * * *
(2) The item relating to section 983 in the table of sections
at the beginning of [such chapter] chapter 49 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
* * * * * * *
Subtitle I--Matters Relating to Missing Persons
* * * * * * *
SEC. 576. RECOVERY AND IDENTIFICATION OF REMAINS OF CERTAIN WORLD WAR
II SERVICEMEN LOST IN PACIFIC THEATER OF
OPERATIONS.
(a) Recovery of Remains.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Not later than September 30, 2000, the Secretary shall
submit to Congress a report setting forth the efforts made to
accomplish the objectives specified in paragraph (1). The
Secretary shall include in the report a statement of the
backlog of cases at the Central Identification Laboratory,
Hawaii, shown by conflict, and the status of the joint manning
plan required by section 566(c) of the Strom Thurmond National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-
261; 112 Stat. 2029).
* * * * * * *
Subtitle J--Other Matters
SEC. 577. AUTHORITY FOR SPECIAL COURTS-MARTIAL TO IMPOSE SENTENCES TO
CONFINEMENT AND FORFEITURES OF PAY OF UP TO ONE
YEAR.
(a) Maximum Punishments That May Be Adjudged by a Special
Court-Martial.--Section 819 of title 10, United States Code
(article 19 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), is
amended--
(1) * * *
(2) in the third sentence, by inserting after ``A
[bad conduct] bad-conduct discharge'' the following:
``, confinement for more than six months, or forfeiture
of pay for more than six months''.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 591. DEFENSE TASK FORCE ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(h) Administrative Support.--(1) Each member of the task
force who is a member of the Armed Forces or civilian officer
or employee of the United States shall serve without
compensation (other than the compensation to which entitled as
a member of the Armed Forces or an officer or employee of the
United States, as the case may be)[, but shall be allowed
travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at
rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I
of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from
the member's home or regular places of business in the
performance of services for the task force]. Other members of
the task force shall be appointed in accordance with, and
subject to, section 3161 of title 5, United States Code.
* * * * * * *
(j) Termination.--The task force shall terminate [three years
after the date of the enactment of this Act] on April 24, 2003.
* * * * * * *
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle A--Health Care Services
SEC. 701. PHARMACY BENEFITS PROGRAM.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(d) Study for Design of Pharmacy Benefit for Certain Covered
Beneficiaries.--(1) Not later than April 15, 2001, the
Secretary of Defense shall prepare and submit to Congress--
[(A) a study on a design for a comprehensive pharmacy
benefit for covered beneficiaries under chapter 55 of
title 10, United States Code, who are entitled to
benefits under part A, and enrolled under part B, of
title XVIII of the Social Security Act; and
[(B) an estimate of the costs of implementing and
operating such design.
[(2) The design described in paragraph (1)(A) shall
incorporate the elements of the pharmacy benefits program
required to be established under section 1074g of title 10,
United States Code (as added by subsection (a)).]
* * * * * * *
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle B--Other Matters
SEC. 811. MENTOR-PROTEGE PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Reports and Reviews.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3)(A) * * *
(B) The study shall include the following:
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
(v) A review of the relationship between the results
of the [Mentor-Protegee] Mentor-Protege Program and the
objectives established in section 2323 of title 10,
United States Code.
* * * * * * *
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle F--Memorial Objects and Commemorations
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1052. PROGRAM TO COMMEMORATE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE KOREAN WAR.
(a) * * *
(b) Change of Name.--(1) Subsection (c) of such section, as
amended by section 1067 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261; 112
Stat. 2134), is amended by striking `` [`The Department] the
`Department of Defense Korean War Commemoration' '' and
inserting `` `The United States of America Korean War
Commemoration' ''.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1053. COMMEMORATION OF THE VICTORY OF FREEDOM IN THE COLD WAR.
(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(5) Tens of thousands of United States soldiers,
sailors, airmen, and Marines paid the ultimate price
during the Cold War in order to preserve the freedoms
and liberties enjoyed in democratic countries.
* * * * * * *
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle A--Matters Relating to the People's Republic of China
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1202. ANNUAL REPORT ON MILITARY POWER OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF
CHINA.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Report on Sales and Transfers From States of the Former
Soviet Union to China.--(1) The report to be submitted under
this section not later than March 1, 2002, shall include in a
separate section a report describing the sales and transfer of
military hardware, expertise, and technology from states of the
former Soviet Union to the People's Republic of China. The
report shall set forth the history of such sales and transfers
since 1990, forecast possible future sales and transfers, and
address the implications of those sales and transfers for the
security of the United States and its friends and allies in
Asia.
(2) The report shall include analysis and forecasts of the
following matters related to military cooperation between
states of the former Soviet Union and the People's Republic of
China:
(A) The policy of each of those states with respect
to arms sales to, and military cooperation with, the
People's Republic of China.
(B) Any laws or regulations of those states that
could prohibit or limit such sales or cooperation.
(C) The extent in each of those states of government
knowledge, cooperation, or condoning of sales or
transfers of military hardware, expertise, or
technology to the People's Republic of China.
(D) An itemization of sales or transfers of military
hardware, expertise, or technology from any of those
states to the People's Republic of China that have
taken place since 1990, with a particular focus on
command, control, communications, and intelligence
systems.
(E) A description of any sale or transfer of military
hardware, expertise, or technology from any of those
states to the People's Republic of China that is
currently under negotiation or contemplation through
the end of 2005.
(F) Identification of Chinese defense industries in
which technicians from states of the former Soviet
Union are working and of defense industries of those
states in which Chinese technicians are working and a
description in each case of the extent and the nature
of the work performed by such technicians.
(G) The extent of assistance by any of those states
to key research and development programs of China,
including programs for development of weapons of mass
destruction and delivery vehicles for such weapons,
programs for development of advanced conventional
weapons, and programs for development of unconventional
weapons.
(H) The extent of assistance by any of those states
to information warfare or electronic warfare programs
of China.
(I) The extent of assistance by any of those states
to manned and unmanned space operations of China.
(J) The extent to which arms sales by any of those
states to the People's Republic of China are a source
of funds for military research and development or
procurement programs in the selling state.
(3) The report under paragraph (1) shall include, with
respect to each area of analysis and forecasts specified in
paragraph (2)--
(A) an assessment of the military effects of such
sales or transfers to entities in the People's Republic
of China;
(B) an assessment of the ability of the People's
Liberation Army to assimilate such sales or transfers,
mass produce new equipment, or develop doctrine for
use; and
(C) the potential threat of developments related to
such effects on the security interests of the United
States and its friends and allies in Asia.
* * * * * * *
Subtitle D--Other Matters
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1232. LIMITATION ON DEPLOYMENT OF ARMED FORCES IN HAITI DURING
FISCAL YEAR 2000 AND CONGRESSIONAL NOTICE OF
DEPLOYMENTS TO HAITI.
(a) * * *
[(b) Report.--Whenever there is a deployment of United States
Armed Forces to Haiti after May 31, 2000, the President shall,
not later than 96 hours after such deployment begins, transmit
to Congress a written report regarding the deployment. In any
such report, the President shall specify (1) the purpose of the
deployment, and (2) the date on which the deployment is
expected to end.]
* * * * * * *
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT RE-
DUCTION WITH STATES OF THE FOR-
MER SOVIET UNION
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1305. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR CHEMICAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION.
No fiscal year 2000 Cooperative Threat Reduction funds, and
no funds appropriated for Cooperative Threat Reduction programs
after the date of the enactment of this Act, may be obligated
or expended for planning, design, or construction of a chemical
weapons destruction facility in Russia until the Secretary of
Defense submits to Congress a certification that there has
been--
(1) full and accurate disclosure by Russia of the
size of its existing chemical weapons stockpile;
(2) a demonstrated annual commitment by Russia to
allocate at least $25,000,000 to chemical weapons
elimination;
(3) development by Russia of a practical plan for
destroying its stockpile of nerve agents;
(4) enactment of a law by Russia that provides for
the elimination of all nerve agents at a single site;
and
(5) an agreement by Russia to destroy its chemical
weapons production facilities at Volgograd and
Novocheboksark.
* * * * * * *
TITLE XIV--PROLIFERATION AND EXPORT CONTROLS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1402. ANNUAL REPORT ON TRANSFERS OF MILITARILY SENSITIVE
TECHNOLOGY TO COUNTRIES AND ENTITIES OF CONCERN.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Definition.--As used in this section, the term
``countries and entities of concern'' means--
(1) * * *
(2) any country that--
(A) has detonated a nuclear explosive device
(as defined in section 830(4) of the Nuclear
Proliferation Prevention Act of 1994 (22 U.S.C.
[3201 note] 6305(4))); and
* * * * * * *
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
* * * * * * *
TITLE XXIX--COMMISSION ON NATIONAL MILITARY MUSEUM
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2902. DUTIES OF COMMISSION.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Requirements for Location on Navy Annex Property.--In the
case of a recommendation under subsection (c)(1) to authorize
construction of a national military museum on the Navy Annex
property authorized for reservation for such purpose by section
[2871(b)] 2881(b), the design of the national military museum
on such property shall be subject to the following
requirements:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 1407 OF THE DEFENSE DEPENDENTS' EDUCATION ACT OF 1978
school system for dependents in overseas areas
Sec. 1407. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Continuation of Enrollment for Certain Dependents of
Members of the Armed Forces Involuntarily Separated.--(1) A
member of the Armed Forces serving on active duty on September
30, 1990, who is involuntarily separated during the period
beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on December 31, [2001]
2002, and who has a dependent described in paragraph (2) who is
enrolled in a school of the defense dependents' education
system (or a school for which tuition is provided under
subsection (b)) on the date of that separation shall be
eligible to enroll or continue the enrollment of that dependent
at that school (or another school serving the same community)
for the final year of secondary education of that dependent in
the same manner as if the member were still on active duty.
* * * * * * *
(d) Auxiliary Services Available to Home School Students.--
(1) A dependent who is educated in a home school setting, but
who is eligible to enroll in a school of the defense
dependents' education system, shall be permitted to use or
receive auxiliary services of that school without being
required to either enroll in that school or register for a
minimum number of courses offered by that school. The dependent
may be required to satisfy other eligibility requirements
applicable to students actually enrolled in that school who use
or receive the same auxiliary services.
(2) For purposes of paragraph (1), the term ``auxiliary
services'' includes registration in individual courses, use of
academic resources, access to the library of the school, after
hours use of school facilities, and participation in music,
sports, and other extracurricular and interscholastic
activities.
[(d)] (e)(1)(A) Chapter 7 of title 37, United States Code,
relating to allowances authorized for members of the uniformed
services, is amended by adding after section 428 the following
new section:
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
----------
FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001
* * * * * * *
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
* * * * * * *
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
* * * * * * *
Subtitle B--Reserve Component Personnel Policy
* * * * * * *
SEC. 525. EXTENSION OF INVOLUNTARY CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT DATE FOR
CERTAIN RESERVE TECHNICIANS.
(a) * * *
(b) Transition Provision.--(1) An individual who before the
date of the enactment of this Act was involuntarily separated
or retired from employment as an Army Reserve or Air Force
Reserve technician under section 10218 of title 10, United
States Code, and who would not have been so separated if the
provisions of [subsection (c)] subsections (a) and (b) of that
section, as amended by subsection (a), had been in effect at
the time of such separation may, with the approval of the
Secretary concerned, be reinstated to the technician status
held by that individual immediately before that separation. The
effective date of any such reinstatement is the date the
employee resumes technician status.
* * * * * * *
Subtitle G--Other Matters
* * * * * * *
SEC. 574. MANAGEMENT AND PER DIEM REQUIREMENTS FOR MEMBERS SUBJECT TO
LENGTHY OR NUMEROUS DEPLOYMENTS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Review of Management of Deployments of Individual
Members.--Not later than March 31, 2002, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the
administration of section 991 of title 10, United States Code,
during fiscal year 2001. The report shall include--
[(1) a discussion of the experience in tracking and
recording the deployments of members of the Armed
Forces; and
[(2) any recommendations for revision of such section
that the Secretary considers appropriate.]
(1) a discussion of the experience in tracking and
recording the deployments of members of the Armed
Forces and the payment of the per diem allowance for
lengthy or numerous deployments in accordance with
section 436 of title 37, United States Code;
(2) specific comments regarding the effect of section
991 of title 10, United States Code, and section 436 of
title 37, United States Code, on the readiness of the
Navy and Marine Corps given the deployment intensive
mission of these services; and
(3) any recommendations for revision of section 991
of title 10, United States Code, or section 436 of
title 37, United States Code, that the Secretary
considers appropriate.
* * * * * * *
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances
* * * * * * *
SEC. 603. REVISED METHOD FOR CALCULATION OF BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR
SUBSISTENCE.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Early Termination of BAS Transitional Authority.--
Effective [October 1, 2001] January 1, 2002, subsections (c)
through (f ) of section 602 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 37
U.S.C. 402 note) are repealed.
* * * * * * *
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle C--TRICARE Program
SEC. 721. IMPROVEMENT OF ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE UNDER THE TRICARE
PROGRAM.
(a) Waiver of Nonavailability Statement or
Preauthorization.--In the case of a covered beneficiary under
chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, who is enrolled in
TRICARE Standard, the Secretary of Defense may not require with
regard to authorized health care services (other than mental
health services) under any [new] contract for the provision of
health care services under such chapter that the beneficiary--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(c) Exceptions.--Subsection (a) shall not apply if--
[(1) the Secretary demonstrates significant costs
would be avoided by performing specific procedures at
the affected military medical treatment facilities;
[(2) the Secretary determines that a specific
procedure must be provided at the affected military
medical treatment facility to ensure the proficiency
levels of the practitioners at the facility; or
[(3) the lack of nonavailability statement data would
significantly interfere with TRICARE contract
administration.]
(c) Exceptions.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary
may provide that subsection (a) shall not apply for a period of
up to one year if--
(A) the Secretary--
(i) demonstrates significant costs would be
avoided by performing specific procedures at
the affected military medical treatment
facility or facilities;
(ii) determines that a specific procedure
must be provided at the affected military
medical treatment facility or facilities to
ensure the proficiency levels of the
practitioners at the facility or facilities; or
(iii) determines that the lack of
nonavailability statement data would
significantly interfere with TRICARE contract
administration;
(B) the Secretary provides notification of the
Secretary's intent to make an exception under this
subsection to covered beneficiaries who receive care at
the military medical treatment facility or facilities
that will be affected by the decision to make an
exception under this subsection;
(C) the Secretary provides notification to the
Committees on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives and the Senate of the Secretary's
intent to make an exception under this subsection, the
reason for making an exception, and the date that a
nonavailability statement will be required; and
(D) 60 days have elapsed since the date of the
notification described in subparagraph (C).
(2)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the Secretary
may make an exception under this subsection with respect to--
(i) one or more services performed at a military
medical treatment facility or facilities; or
(ii) one or more services performed in a TRICARE
region.
(B) With respect to maternity care, the Secretary may make an
exception under this subsection with respect to a military
medical treatment facility.
(3) In the case of health care provided in conjunction with a
graduate medical education program, the period of
nonapplicability described in paragraph (1) shall be, instead
of one year, the period for which a residency review committee
has approved the program.
(d) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on
[October 1, 2001] two years after the date of the enactment of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002.
* * * * * * *
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle B--Information Technology
SEC. 811. ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Milestone Approval for Major Automated Information
Systems.--The revised directive required by subsection (b)
shall prohibit [Milestone I] Milestone B approval, [Milestone
II] Milestone C approval, or [Milestone III] full rate
production approval (or the equivalent) of a major automated
information system within the Department of Defense until the
Chief Information Officer has determined that--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
SEC. 814. NAVY-MARINE CORPS INTRANET.
(a) * * *
(b) Phased Implementation.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) No increment of the Navy-Marine Corps Intranet that is
implemented during fiscal year [2001] 2002 may include any
activities of the [Marine Corps, the naval shipyards, or] naval
shipyards or the naval aviation depots. Funds available for
fiscal year [2001] 2002 for activities of the [Marine Corps,
the naval shipyards, or] naval shipyards or the naval aviation
depots may not be expended for any contract for the Navy-Marine
Corps Intranet.
(c) [Prohibition on Increase of Rates Charged.--]
Prohibitions.--(1) The Secretary of the Navy shall ensure that
rates charged by a working capital funded industrial facility
of the Department of the Navy for goods or services provided by
such facility are not increased during fiscal year [2001] 2002
for the purpose of funding the Navy-Marine Corps Intranet
contract.
(2) The Navy Intranet contract may not include any activities
of the Marine Corps.
* * * * * * *
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
* * * * * * *
Subtitle B--Department of Defense Organizations
* * * * * * *
[SEC. 916. SEMIANNUAL REPORT ON JOINT REQUIREMENTS OVERSIGHT COUNCIL
REFORM INITIATIVE.
[(a) Semiannual Report.--The Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of
Staff shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the
Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives a series of five semiannual reports, as
prescribed by subsection (b), on the activities of the Joint
Requirements Oversight Council. The principal focus of each
such report shall be on the progress made on the initiative of
the Chairman to reform and refocus the Joint Requirements
Oversight Council.
[(b) Submission of Reports.--Reports under this section shall
be submitted not later than March 1, 2001, September 1, 2001,
March 1, 2002, September 1, 2002, and March 1, 2003. Each
report shall cover the half of a fiscal year that ends five
months before the date on which the report is due.
[(c) Content.--In the case of any report under this section
after the first such report, if any matter to be included is
unchanged from the preceding report, that matter may be
included by reference to the preceding report. Each such report
shall include, to the extent practicable, the following:
[(1) A listing of each of the capability areas
designated by the Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of
Staff as being within the principal domain of the Joint
Requirements Oversight Council and a justification for
each such designation.
[(2) A listing of the joint requirements developed,
considered, or approved within each of the capability
areas listed pursuant to paragraph (1).
[(3) A listing and explanation of the decisions made
by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council and, to the
extent appropriate, a listing of each of the
recommendations to the Council made by the commander of
the United States Joint Forces Command.
[(4) An assessment of--
[(A) the progress made in shifting the Joint
Requirements Oversight Council to having a more
strategic focus on future war fighting
requirements;
[(B) the progress made on integration of
requirements; and
[(C) the progress made on development of
overarching common architectures for defense
information systems to ensure that common
defense information systems are fully
interoperable.
[(5) A description of any actions that have been
taken to improve the Joint Requirements Oversight
Council.]
* * * * * * *
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle C--Counter-Drug Activities
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1022. REPORT ON DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EXPENDITURES TO SUPPORT
FOREIGN COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES.
Not later than January 1, 2001, and April 15, 2002, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report detailing the expenditure of funds by the
Secretary during [fiscal year 2000] the preceding fiscal year
in direct or indirect support of the counter-drug activities of
foreign governments. The report shall include the following for
each foreign government:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL
* * * * * * *
Subtitle F--Voluntary Separation Incentive Pay and Early Retirement
Authority
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1152. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EMPLOYEE VOLUNTARY EARLY RETIREMENT
AUTHORITY.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Conforming Amendments.--(1) * * *
(2) Section 8464(a)(1)(A)(i) of such title is amended by
striking out ``or (b)(1)(B)'' and inserting ``, (b)(1)(B), or
(d)''.
* * * * * * *
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE FORMER
SOVIET UNION
* * * * * * *
[SEC. 1304. LIMITATIONS ON USE OF FUNDS FOR FISSILE MATERIAL STORAGE
FACILITY.
[(a) Limitations.--No fiscal year 2001 Cooperative Threat
Reduction funds may be used--
[(1) for construction of a second wing for the
storage facility for Russian fissile material referred
to in section 1302(a)(5); or
[(2) for design or planning with respect to such
facility until 15 days after the date that the
Secretary of Defense submits to Congress notification
that Russia and the United States have signed a written
transparency agreement that provides for verification
that material stored at the facility is of weapons
origin.
[(b) Establishment of Funding Cap for First Wing of Storage
Facility.--Out of funds authorized to be appropriated for
Cooperative Threat Reduction programs for fiscal year 2001 or
any other fiscal year, not more than $412,600,000 may be used
for planning, design, or construction of the first wing for the
storage facility for Russian fissile material referred to in
section 1302(a)(5).]
SEC. 1304. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR FISSILE MATERIAL STORAGE
FACILITY.
Out of funds authorized to be appropriated for Cooperative
Threat Reduction programs for fiscal year 2001 or any other
fiscal year, not more than $412,600,000 may be used for
planning, design, or construction of the first wing for the
storage facility for Russian fissile material referred to in
section 1302(a)(5).
* * * * * * *
[SEC. 1307. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FOSSIL FUEL
ENERGY PLANTS; REPORT.
[(a) In General.--No fiscal year 2001 Cooperative Threat
Reduction funds may be used for the construction of a fossil
fuel energy plant intended to provide power to local
communities that already receive power from nuclear energy
plants that produce plutonium.]
SEC. 1307. PROHIBITION AGAINST USE OF FUNDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OR
REFURBISHMENT OF FOSSIL FUEL ENERGY PLANTS; REPORT.
(a) Prohibition.--No funds appropriated for Cooperative
Threat Reduction programs for any fiscal year may be used for
the construction or refurbishment of a fossil fuel energy plant
intended to provide power to local communities that receive
power from nuclear energy plants that produce plutonium.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1308. REPORTS ON ACTIVITIES AND ASSISTANCE UNDER COOPERATIVE
THREAT REDUCTION PROGRAMS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Matters To Be Included.--The report under subsection (a)
in a year shall set forth the following:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) A description of the [audits, examinations, and
other efforts, such as on-site inspections, conducted]
means (including program management, audits,
examinations, and other means) used by the United
States during the fiscal year ending in the year
preceding the year of the report to ensure that
assistance provided under Cooperative Threat Reduction
programs is fully accounted for [and that such
assistance is being used for its intended purpose],
that such assistance is being used for its intended
purpose, and that such assistance is being used
efficiently and effectively, including--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) a determination whether the assistance
described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) has been
used for its intended purpose and an assessment
of whether the assistance being provided is
being used effectively and efficiently; and
(D) a description of the [audits,
examinations, and other] efforts planned to be
carried out during the fiscal year beginning in
the year of the report to ensure that
Cooperative Threat Reduction assistance
provided during such fiscal year is fully
accounted for and is used for its intended
purpose.
* * * * * * *
TITLE XV--NAVY ACTIVITIES ON THE ISLAND OF VIEQUES, PUERTO RICO
* * * * * * *
[SEC. 1503. DETERMINATION REGARDING CONTINUATION OF NAVY TRAINING.
[(a) Referendum.--
[(1) Requirement.--Except as provided in paragraph
(2), the President shall provide for a referendum to be
conducted on the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico, to
determine by a majority of the votes cast in the
referendum by the Vieques electorate whether the people
of Vieques approve or disapprove of the continuation of
the conduct of live-fire training, and any other types
of training, by the Armed Forces at the Navy's training
sites on the island under the conditions described in
subsection (d).
[(2) Exception.--If the Chief of Naval Operations and
the Commandant of the Marine Corps jointly submit to
the congressional defense committees, after the date of
the enactment of this Act and before the date set forth
in subsection (c), their certification that the Vieques
Naval Training Range is no longer needed for training
by the Navy and the Marine Corps, then the requirement
for a referendum under paragraph (1) shall cease to be
effective on the date on which the certification is
submitted.
[(b) Prohibition of Other Propositions.--In the referendum
under this section, no proposition or option may be presented
as an alternative to the propositions of approval and of
disapproval of the continuation of the conduct of training as
described in subsection (a)(1).
[(c) Time for Referendum.--The referendum required under this
section shall be held on May 1, 2001, or within 270 days before
such date or 270 days after such date. The Secretary of the
Navy shall publicize the date set for the referendum 90 days
before that date.
[(d) Required Training Conditions.--For the purposes of the
referendum under this section, the conditions for the
continuation of the conduct of training are those that are
proposed by the Secretary of the Navy and publicized on the
island of Vieques in connection with, and for a reasonable
period in advance of, the referendum. The conditions shall
include the following:
[(1) Live-fire training.--A condition that the
training may include live-fire training.
[(2) Maximum annual days of use.--A condition that
the training may be conducted on not more than 90 days
each year.
[(e) Proclamation of Outcome.--Promptly after the referendum
is completed under this section, the President shall determine,
and issue a proclamation declaring, the outcome of the
referendum. The President's determination shall be final, and
the outcome of the referendum (as so determined) shall be
binding.
[(f ) Vieques Electorate Defined.--
[(1) Registered voters.--In this section, the term
``Vieques electorate'', with respect to a referendum
under this section, means the residents of the island
of Vieques, Puerto Rico, who, on both dates specified
in paragraph (2), are registered to vote in a general
election held for casting ballots for the election of
the Resident Commissioner of the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico.
[(2) Registration dates.--The dates referred to in
paragraph (1) are as follows:
[(A) November 7, 2000.
[(B) The date that is 180 days before the
date of the referendum under this section.
[SEC. 1504. ACTIONS IF TRAINING IS APPROVED.
[(a) Condition for Effectiveness.--This section shall take
effect on the date on which the President issues a proclamation
under subsection (e) of section 1503 declaring that the
continuation of the conduct of training (including live-fire
training) by the Armed Forces at the Navy's training sites on
the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico, under the conditions
described in subsection (d) of such section, has been approved
in the referendum conducted under such section.
[(b) Authorization of Appropriations for Additional Economic
Assistance.--There is authorized to be appropriated to the
President $50,000,000 to provide economic assistance for the
people and communities of the island of Vieques. This
authorization of appropriations is in addition to the amount
authorized to appropriated to provide economic assistance under
section 1501.
[(c) Training Range To Remain Open.--The Vieques Naval
Training Range shall remain available for the use of the Armed
Forces, including for live-fire training.
[SEC. 1505. REQUIREMENTS IF TRAINING IS NOT APPROVED OR MANDATE FOR
REFERENDUM IS VITIATED.
[(a) Conditions for Effectiveness.--This section shall take
effect on the date on which either of the following occurs:
[(1) The President issues a proclamation under
subsection (e) of section 1503 declaring that the
continuation of the conduct of training (including
live-fire training) by the Armed Forces at the Navy's
training sites on the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico,
under the conditions described in subsection (d) of
such section, has not been approved in the referendum
conducted under such section.
[(2) The requirement for a referendum under section
1503 ceases to be effective pursuant to subsection
(a)(2) of such section.
[(b) Actions Required of Secretary of Defense.--
[(1) Termination of operation.--Not later than May 1,
2003, the Secretary of Defense shall--
[(A) terminate all Navy and Marine Corps
training operations on the island of Vieques;
and
[(B) terminate all Navy and Marine Corps
operations at Naval Station Roosevelt Roads,
Puerto Rico, that are related exclusively to
the use of the training range on the island of
Vieques by the Navy and the Marine Corps.
[(2) Relocation of units.--The Secretary of Defense
may relocate the units of the Armed Forces (other than
those of the reserve components) and activities of the
Department of Defense (including nonappropriated fund
activities) at Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico, to Naval
Station Roosevelt Roads, Puerto Rico, to ensure maximum
utilization of capacity.
[(3) Closure of installations and facilities.--The
Secretary of Defense shall close the Department of
Defense installations and facilities on the island of
Vieques, other than properties exempt from conveyance
and transfer under section 1506.
[(c) Actions Required of Secretary of the Navy.--The
Secretary of the Navy shall transfer, without reimbursement, to
the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary of the
Interior--
[(1) the Live Impact Area on the island of Vieques;
[(2) all Department of Defense real properties on the
eastern side of the island that are identified as
conservation zones; and
[(3) all other Department of Defense real properties
on the eastern side of the island.
[(d) Actions Required of Secretary of the Interior.--
[(1) Retention and administration.--The Secretary of
the Interior shall retain, and may not dispose of any
of, the properties transferred under paragraphs (2) and
(3) of subsection (c) and shall administer such
properties as wildlife refuges under the National
Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16
U.S.C. 668dd et seq.) pending the enactment of a law
that addresses the disposition of such properties.
[(2) Responsibility for Live Impact Area.--Upon a
termination of Navy and Marine Corps training
operations on the island of Vieques under subsection
(b)(1), the Secretary of the Interior shall assume
responsibility for the administration of the Live
Impact Area, administer that area as a wilderness area
under the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), and
deny public access to the area.
[(3) Live Impact Area Defined.--In this section, the
term ``Live Impact Area'' means the parcel of real
property, consisting of approximately 900 acres (more
or less), on the island of Vieques that is designated
by the Secretary of the Navy for targeting by live
ordnance in the training of forces of the Navy and
Marine Corps.
[(e) GAO Review.--
[(1) Requirement for review.--The Comptroller General
shall review the requirement for the continued use of
Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico, by active Army forces and
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a
report containing--
[(A) the findings resulting from the review;
and
[(B) recommendations regarding the closure of
Fort Buchanan and the consolidation of units of
the Armed Forces to Naval Station Roosevelt
Roads, Puerto Rico.
[(2) Time for submittal of report.--The Comptroller
General shall submit the report under paragraph (1) not
later than one year after the date on which the
referendum under section 1503 is conducted or one year
after the date on which a certification is submitted to
the congressional defense committees under subsection
(a)(2) of such section, as the case may be.]
SEC. 1503. CONDITIONS ON CLOSURE OF VIEQUES NAVAL TRAINING RANGE.
(a) Required Certification.--The Secretary of the Navy may
close the Vieques Naval Training Range on the island of
Vieques, Puerto Rico, and discontinue live-fire training at
that range only if--
(1) the Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant
of the Marine Corps jointly certify that there is an
alternative training facility that provides an
equivalent or superior level of training for units of
the Navy and the Marine Corps stationed or deployed in
the eastern United States; and
(2) the new facility is available and fully capable
of supporting such training immediately upon cessation
of live-fire training on Vieques.
(b) Equivalent or Superior Level of Training Defined.--In
this section, the term ``equal or superior level of training''
refers to an ability by the Armed Forces to conduct at a single
location coordinated live-fire training, including simultaneous
large-scale tactical air strikes, naval surface fire support
and artillery, and amphibious landing operations, as was
conducted at Vieques Naval Training Range before April 19,
1999.
SEC. 1504. NAVY RETENTION OF CLOSED VIEQUES NAVAL TRAINING RANGE.
(a) Retention.--If the conditions specified in section
1503(a) are satisfied and the Secretary of the Navy terminates
all Navy and Marine Corps training operations on the island of
Vieques, the Secretary of the Navy shall retain administrative
jurisdiction over the Live Impact Area and all other Department
of Defense real properties on the eastern side of the island
for possible reactivation for training use, including live-fire
training, in the event a national emergency.
(b) Administration.--The Secretary of the Navy may enter into
a cooperative agreement with the Secretary of the Interior to
provide for management of the property described in subsection
(a), pending reactivation for training use, by appropriate
agencies of the Department of the Interior as follows:
(1) Management of the Live Impact Area as a
wilderness area under the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C.
1131 et seq.), including a prohibition on public access
to the area.
(2) Management of the remaining property as wildlife
refuges under the National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.).
(c) Live Impact Area Defined.--In this section, the term
``Live Impact Area'' means the parcel of real property,
consisting of approximately 900 acres (more or less), on the
island of Vieques that is designated by the Secretary of the
Navy for targeting by live ordnance in the training of forces
of the Navy and Marine Corps.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1507. MORATORIUM ON IMPROVEMENTS AT FORT BUCHANAN.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Termination.--This section shall cease to be effective
upon [the issuance of a proclamation described in section
1504(a) or] the enactment of a law, after the date of the
enactment of this Act, that authorizes any acquisition,
construction, conversion, rehabilitation, extension, or
improvement of any facility at Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico.
* * * * * * *
----------
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993
* * * * * * *
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle E--Defense Nuclear Workers
SEC. 3161. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES WORK FORCE
RESTRUCTURING PLAN.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Objectives.--In preparing the plan required under
subsection (a), the Secretary shall be guided by the following
objectives:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(6) The Department of Energy should provide local
impact assistance to communities that are affected by
the restructuring plan and coordinate the provision of
such assistance with--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) programs carried out by the Department of
Commerce pursuant to [title IX of the Public
Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 (42
U.S.C. 3241 et seq.)] title II of the Public
Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 (42
U.S.C. 3141 et seq.).
* * * * * * *
DIVISION D--DEFENSE CONVERSION, REINVESTMENT, AND TRANSITION ASSISTANCE
* * * * * * *
TITLE XLIV--PERSONNEL ADJUSTMENT, EDUCATION, AND TRAINING PROGRAMS
Subtitle A--Active Forces Transition Enhancements
* * * * * * *
SEC. 4403. TEMPORARY EARLY RETIREMENT AUTHORITY.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(i) Active Force Drawdown Period.--For purposes of this
section, the active force drawdown period is the period
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending
on December 31, [2001] 2002.
* * * * * * *
Subtitle B--Guard and Reserve Transition Initiatives
SEC. 4411. FORCE REDUCTION TRANSITION PERIOD DEFINED.
In this subtitle, the term ``force reduction transition
period'' means the period beginning on October 1, 1991, and
ending on December 31, [2001] 2002.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 4416. FORCE REDUCTION PERIOD RETIREMENTS.
(a) * * *
(b) Temporary Special Authority.--During the force reduction
transition period, the Secretary concerned may grant a member
of the Selected Reserve under the age of 60 years the annual
payments provided for under this section if--
(1) as of October 1, 1991, that member has completed
at least 20 years of service computed under section
1332 of title 10, United States Code, or after that
date and before the end of the [force reduction period]
force reduction transition period, such member
completes 20 years of service computed under that
section or section 12732;
* * * * * * *
Subtitle F--Job Training and Employment and Educational Opportunities
SEC. 4461. IMPROVED COORDINATION OF JOB TRAINING AND PLACEMENT PROGRAMS
FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES.
The Secretary of Defense shall consult with the Secretary of
Labor, the Secretary of Education, the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs, and the Economic Adjustment Committee to improve the
coordination of, and eliminate duplication between, the
following job training and placement programs available to
members of the Armed Forces who are discharged or released from
active duty:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(5) The Wagner-Peyser Act (29 U.S.C. 49 et seq.).
* * * * * * *
SEC. 4463. PROGRAM OF EDUCATIONAL LEAVE RELATING TO CONTINUING PUBLIC
AND COMMUNITY SERVICE.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Expiration.--The authority to grant a leave of absence
under subsection (a) shall expire on December 31, [2001] 2002.
* * * * * * *
----------
TITLE 37, UNITED STATES CODE
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 3--BASIC PAY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 203. Rates
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d)(1) The basic pay of a commissioned officer who is in pay
grade O-1, O-2, or O-3 and [who is credited with a total of
over four years' active service as warrant officer or as a
warrant officer and enlisted member] is described in paragraph
(2) shall be computed in the same manner as the basic pay of a
commissioned officer in the same pay grade who has been
credited with over four years' active service as an enlisted
member.
(2) Paragraph (1) applies with respect to a commissioned
officer in pay grade O-1, O-2, or O-3 who--
(A) is credited with a total of over four years'
active service as warrant officer or as a warrant
officer and enlisted member; or
(B) earned a total of more than 1,460 points credited
under section 12732(a)(2) of title 10 while serving as
a warrant officer or enlisted member.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 204. Entitlement
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g)(1) A member of a reserve component of a uniformed service
is entitled, to the pay and allowances provided by law or
regulation for a member of a regular component of a uniformed
service of corresponding grade and length of service whenever
such member is physically disabled as the result of an injury,
illness, or disease incurred or aggravated--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(D) in line of duty while remaining overnight
immediately before the commencement of inactive-duty
training, or while remaining overnight, between
successive periods of inactive-duty training, at or in
the vicinity of the site of the inactive-duty
training[, if the site is outside reasonable commuting
distance from the member's residence]; or
* * * * * * *
(h)(1) A member of a reserve component of a uniformed service
who is physically able to perform his military duties, is
entitled, upon request, to a portion of the monthly pay and
allowances provided by law or regulation for a member of a
regular component of a uniformed service of corresponding grade
and length of service for each month for which the member
demonstrates a loss of earned income from nonmilitary
employment or self-employment as a result of an injury,
illness, or disease incurred or aggravated--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(D) in line of duty while remaining overnight
immediately before the commencement of inactive-duty
training, or while remaining overnight, between
successive periods of inactive-duty training, at or in
the vicinity of the site of the inactive-duty
training[, if the site is outside reasonable commuting
distance from the member's residence]; or
* * * * * * *
Sec. 206. Reserves; members of National Guard: inactive-duty training
(a) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary concerned,
and to the extent provided for by appropriations, a member of
the National Guard or a member of a reserve component of a
uniformed service who is not entitled to basic pay under
section 204 of this title, is entitled to compensation, at the
rate of \1/30\ of the basic pay authorized for a member of a
uniformed service of a corresponding grade entitled to basic
pay--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) for a regular period of instruction that the
member is scheduled to perform but is unable to perform
because of physical disability resulting from an
injury, illness, or disease incurred or aggravated--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) in line of duty while while remaining
overnight immediately before the commencement
of inactive-duty training, or remaining
overnight, between successive periods of
inactive-duty training, at or in the vicinity
of the site of the inactive-duty training[, if
the site is outside reasonable commuting
distance from the member's residence].
* * * * * * *
Sec. 209. Members of precommissioning programs
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Pay While Attending Training or Practice Cruise.--Each
cadet or midshipman in the Senior Reserve Officers' Training
Corps, while he is attending training or practice cruises under
chapter 103 of title 10 if the training or cruise is of at
least four weeks duration and must be completed before the
cadet or midshipman is commissioned, and each applicant for
membership in the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps,
while he is attending field training or practice cruises to
satisfy the requirements of section 2104(b)(6)(B) of title 10
for admission to advanced training, is entitled, while so
attending, to pay at the rate prescribed for cadets and
midshipmen at the United States Military, Naval, and Air Force
Academies under section 203(c) of this title unless the cadet
or midshipman is serving on active duty.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 5--SPECIAL AND INCENTIVE PAYS
Sec.
301. Incentive pay: hazardous duty.
* * * * * * *
324. Special pay: accession bonus for new officers.
Sec. 301. Incentive pay: hazardous duty
(a) Subject to regulations prescribed by the President, a
member of a uniformed service who is entitled to basic pay is
also entitled to incentive pay, in the amount set forth in
subsection (b) or (c), for the performance of hazardous duty
required by orders. In this section, the term, ``hazardous
duty'' means duty--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(10) involving (A) the servicing of aircraft or
missiles with highly toxic fuels or propellants, (B)
the testing of aircraft or missile systems (or
components of such systems) during which highly toxic
fuels or propellants are used, or (C) the handling of
chemical munitions (or components of such munitions);
[or]
(11) involving regular participation as a member of a
team conducting visit, board, search, and seizure
operations aboard vessels in support of maritime
interdiction operations; or
[(11)] (12) involving frequent and regular
participation in aerial flight by a member who is
serving as an air weapons controller crew member (as
defined by the Secretary concerned) aboard an airborne
warning and control system aircraft (as designated by
such Secretary) and who is not entitled to incentive
pay under section 301a of this title.
* * * * * * *
(c)(1) For the performance of hazardous duty described in
clauses (2) through [(10)] (11) of subsection (a), a member is
entitled to $150 a month. However, a member performing
hazardous duty described in clause (3) of that subsection who
also performs as an essential part of such duty parachute
jumping in military free fall operations involving parachute
deployment by the jumper without the use of a static line is
entitled to $225 a month.
(2)(A) For the performance of hazardous duty described in
clause [(11)] (12) of subsection (a), a member is entitled to
monthly incentive pay based upon his years of service as an air
weapons controller as follows:
* * * * * * *
Sec. 301a. Incentive pay: aviation career
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(d) Under regulations prescribed by the President and to the
extent provided for by appropriations, when a member of a
reserve component of a uniformed service, or of the National
Guard, who is entitled to compensation under section 206 of
this title, performs, under orders, duty described in
subsection (a) for members entitled to basic pay, he is
entitled to an increase in compensation equal to \1/30\ of the
monthly incentive pay authorized by subsection (b) for the
performance of that duty by a member with corresponding years
of aviation service who is entitled to basic pay. Such member
is entitled to the increase for as long as he is qualified for
it, for each regular period of instruction, or period of
appropriate duty, at which he is engaged for at least two
hours, including that performed on a Sunday or holiday, or for
the performance of such other equivalent training, instruction,
duty or appropriate duties, as the Secretary may prescribe
under section 206(a) of this title. This subsection does not
apply to a member who is entitled to basic pay under section
204 of this title.]
(d) Members Performing Inactive-Duty Training.--Under
regulations prescribed by the President and to the extent
provided for by appropriations, in the case of a member of a
reserve component of a uniformed service, or of the National
Guard, who is entitled to compensation under section 206 of
this title, and who performs, under orders, duty described in
subsection (a), the member is also entitled to monthly
incentive pay under subsection (b) for the performance of that
duty in the same manner as a member with corresponding years of
aviation service who is entitled to basic pay. Such member is
entitled to the incentive pay for as long as the member remains
qualified for it, as provided in subsection (a). This
subsection does not apply to a member who is entitled to basic
pay under section 204 of this title.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 301b. Special pay: aviation career officers extending period of
active duty
(a) Bonus Authorized.--An aviation officer described in
subsection (b) who, during the period beginning on January 1,
1989, and ending on December 31, [2001] 2002, executes a
written agreement to remain on active duty in aviation service
for at least one year may, upon the acceptance of the agreement
by the Secretary concerned, be paid a retention bonus as
provided in this section.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 301c. Incentive pay: submarine duty
(a)(1) Subject to regulations prescribed by the President, a
member of the naval service who is entitled to basic pay, and
(A) holds (or is in training leading to) a submarine duty
designator, (B) is in and remains in the submarine service on a
career basis, and (C) meets the requirements of paragraph (3),
is entitled to continuous monthly submarine duty incentive pay
in the amount [set forth in] prescribed pursuant to subsection
(b).
(2) Subject to regulations prescribed by the President, a
member of the naval service who is entitled to basic pay but is
not entitled to continuous monthly submarine duty incentive pay
under paragraph (1) is entitled to submarine duty incentive pay
in the amount [set forth in] prescribed pursuant to subsection
(b) for any period during which such member performs frequent
and regular operational submarine duty (as defined in paragraph
(5)) required by orders.
* * * * * * *
(4) If upon completion of either 12 or 18 years of submarine
service it is determined that a member has failed to perform
the minimum prescribed operational submarine duty requirements
during the prescribed periods of time, his entitlement to
continuous monthly submarine duty incentive pay ceases. If
entitlement to continuous monthly submarine duty incentive pay
ceases upon completion of 12 years of submarine service,
entitlement to that pay may again commence upon completion of
18 years of submarine service if the minimum operational
submarine duty requirements have been met, and such pay shall
continue for the period of time prescribed in accordance with
this section. However, if entitlement to continuous monthly
submarine duty incentive pay ceases in the case of any member
at the completion of either 12 or 18 years of submarine service
or 26 years of service (as computed under section 205 of this
title, but excluding, in the case of an officer, periods as an
enlisted member before initial appointment as an officer), such
member shall be entitled to that pay in the amount [set forth
in] prescribed pursuant to subsection (b) for the performance
of subsequent operational submarine duty, or for the
performance of service as a member of a submarine operational
command staff, if such member's duties require serving on a
submarine during underway operations.
* * * * * * *
[(b) A member who meets the requirements prescribed in
subsection (a) is entitled to monthly submarine duty incentive
pay as follows:
[ENLISTED MEMBERS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Years of service computed under section 205
-------------------------------------------------------
Pay grade 2 or Over
less Over 2 Over 3 Over 4 Over 6 Over 8 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-9..................................................... $225 $225 $225 $270 $295 $310 $315
E-8..................................................... 225 225 225 250 270 295 310
E-7..................................................... 225 225 225 250 255 265 275
E-6..................................................... 155 170 175 215 230 245 255
E-5..................................................... 140 155 155 175 190 195 195
E-4..................................................... 80 95 100 170 175 175 175
E-3..................................................... 80 90 100 170 175 175 90
E-2..................................................... 75 90 90 90 90 90 90
E-1..................................................... 75 75 75 75 75 75 75
-------------------------------------------------------
Over Over Over Over Over Over Over
12 14 16 18 20 22 26
-------------------------------------------------------
E-9..................................................... $330 $345 $355 $355 $355 $355 $355
E-8..................................................... 315 330 330 345 345 345 345
E-7..................................................... 295 310 310 310 310 310 310
E-6..................................................... 265 265 265 265 265 265 265
E-5..................................................... 195 195 195 195 195 195 195
E-4..................................................... 175 175 175 175 175 175 175
E-3..................................................... 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
E-2..................................................... 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
E-1..................................................... 75 75 75 75 75 75 75
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMISSIONED OFFICERS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Years of service computed under section 205
-------------------------------------------------------
Pay grade 2 or Over
less Over 2 Over 3 Over 4 Over 5 Over 6 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O-10.................................................... $355 $355 $355 $355 $355 $355 $355
O-9..................................................... 355 355 355 355 355 355 355
O-8..................................................... 355 355 355 355 355 355 355
O-7..................................................... 355 355 355 355 355 355 355
O-6..................................................... 595 595 595 595 595 595 595
O-5..................................................... 595 595 595 595 595 595 595
O-4..................................................... 365 365 365 405 595 595 595
O-3..................................................... 355 355 355 390 595 595 595
O-2..................................................... 235 235 235 235 235 235 355
O-1..................................................... 175 175 175 175 175 175 355
-------------------------------------------------------
Over Over Over Over Over Over Over
12 14 16 18 20 22 26
-------------------------------------------------------
O-10.................................................... $355 $355 $355 $355 $355 $355 $355
O-9..................................................... 355 355 355 355 355 355 355
O-8..................................................... 355 355 355 355 355 355 355
O-7..................................................... 355 355 540 355 535 410 355
O-6..................................................... 595 595 595 595 595 595 595
O-5..................................................... 595 595 595 595 595 595 595
O-4..................................................... 595 595 595 595 595 595 595
O-3..................................................... 595 595 595 595 595 595 595
O-2..................................................... 355 355 355 355 355 355 355
O-1..................................................... 355 355 355 355 355 355 355
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WARRANT OFFICERS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Years of service computed under section 205
-------------------------------------------------------
Pay grade 2 or Over
less Over 2 Over 3 Over 4 Over 6 Over 8 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W-5..................................................... $235 $310 $310 $355 $355 $355 $355
W-4..................................................... 235 310 310 355 355 355 355
W-3..................................................... 235 310 310 355 355 355 355
W-2..................................................... 235 310 310 355 355 355 355
W-1..................................................... 235 310 310 355 355 355 355
-------------------------------------------------------
Over Over Over Over Over Over Over
12 14 16 18 20 22 26
-------------------------------------------------------
W-5..................................................... $355 $355 $355 $355 $355 $355 $355
W-4..................................................... 355 355 355 355 355 355 355
W-3..................................................... 355 355 355 355 355 355 355
W-2..................................................... 355 355 355 355 355 355 355
W-1..................................................... 355 355 355 355 355 355 355]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Monthly Rates.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2), a member
who meets the requirements prescribed in subsection (a) is
entitled to monthly submarine duty incentive pay in an amount
prescribed by the Secretary of the Navy.
(2) The monthly amount of submarine duty incentive pay may
not exceed $1,000.
* * * * * * *
(d) Under regulations prescribed by the President and to the
extent provided for by appropriations, when a member of the
Naval Reserve who is entitled to compensation under section 206
of this title, performs, under orders, duty on a submarine
during underway operations, he is eligible for an increase in
such compensation equal to one-thirtieth of the monthly
incentive pay [authorized by] prescribed pursuant to subsection
(b) for the performance of that duty by a member of a
corresponding grade and years of service who is entitled to
basic pay. Such a member is eligible for the increase for each
day served, for as long as he is qualified for it, during each
regular period of appropriate duty.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 302d. Special pay: accession bonus for registered nurses
(a) Accession Bonus Authorized.--(1) A person who is a
registered nurse and who, during the period beginning on
November 29, 1989, and ending on December 31, [2001] 2002,
executes a written agreement described in subsection (c) to
accept a commission as an officer and remain on active duty for
a period of not less than four years may, upon the acceptance
of the agreement by the Secretary concerned, be paid an
accession bonus in an amount determined by the Secretary
concerned.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 302e. Special pay: nurse anesthetists
(a) Special Pay Authorized.--(1) An officer described in
subsection (b)(1) who, during the period beginning on November
29, 1989, and ending on December 31, [2001] 2002, executes a
written agreement to remain on active duty for a period of one
year or more may, upon the acceptance of the agreement by the
Secretary concerned, be paid incentive special pay in an amount
not to exceed $15,000 for any 12-month period.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 302g. Special pay: Selected Reserve health care professionals in
critically short wartime specialties
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Termination of Agreement Authority.--No agreement under
this section may be entered into after December 31, [2001]
2002.
Sec. 302h. Special pay: accession bonus for dental officers
(a) Accession Bonus Authorized.--(1) A person who is a
graduate of an accredited dental school and who, during the
period beginning on [the date of the enactment of this section,
and ending on September 30, 2002] September 23, 1996, and
ending on December 31, 2002, executes a written agreement
described in subsection (c) to accept a commission as an
officer of the armed forces and remain on active duty for a
period of not less than four years may, upon the acceptance of
the agreement by the Secretary concerned, be paid an accession
bonus in an amount determined by the Secretary concerned.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 308. Special pay: reenlistment bonus
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g) No bonus shall be paid under this section with respect to
any reenlistment, or voluntary extension of an active-duty
reenlistment, in the armed forces entered into after December
31, [2001] 2002.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 308b. Special pay: reenlistment bonus for members of the Selected
Reserve
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Termination of Authority.--No bonus may be paid under
this section to any enlisted member who, after December 31,
[2001] 2002, reenlists or voluntarily extends his enlistment in
a reserve component.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 308c. Special pay: bonus for enlistment in the Selected Reserve
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) No bonus may be paid under this section to any enlisted
member who, after December 31, [2001] 2002, enlists in the
Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve of an armed force.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 308d. Special pay: enlisted members of the Selected Reserve
assigned to certain high priority units
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Additional compensation may not be paid under this
section for inactive duty performed after December 31, [2001]
2002.
Sec. 308e. Special pay: bonus for reserve affiliation agreement
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) No bonus may be paid under this section to any person for
a reserve obligation agreement entered into after December 31,
[2001] 2002.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 308h. Special pay: bonus for reenlistment, enlistment, or
voluntary extension of enlistment in elements of
the Ready Reserve other than the Selected Reserve
(a)(1) An eligible person who is or has been a member of an
armed force [and who], who is qualified in a skill or
speciality designated by the Secretary concerned as critically
short to meet wartime requirements, and who reenlists, enlists,
or voluntarily extends an enlistment in [a combat or combat
support skill of] an element (other than the Selected Reserve)
of the Ready Reserve of an armed force for a period of three
years, or for a period of six years, beyond any other period
the person is obligated to serve may be paid a bonus as
provided in subsection (b).
* * * * * * *
(g) A bonus may not be paid under this section to any person
for a reenlistment, enlistment, or voluntary extension of an
enlistment after December 31, [2001] 2002.
Sec. 308i. Special pay: prior service enlistment bonus
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Termination of Authority.--No bonus may be paid under
this section to any person for an enlistment after December 31,
[2001] 2002.
Sec. 309. Special pay: enlistment bonus
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Duration of Authority.--No bonus shall be paid under this
section with respect to any enlistment in the armed forces made
after December 31, [2001] 2002.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 312. Special pay: nuclear-qualified officers extending period of
active duty
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) The provisions of this section shall be effective only in
the case of officers who, on or before December 31, [2001]
2002, execute the required written agreement to remain in
active service.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 312b. Special pay: nuclear career accession bonus
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) The provisions of this section shall be effective only in
the case of officers who, on or before December 31, [2001]
2002, have been accepted for training for duty in connection
with the supervision, operation, and maintenance of naval
nuclear propulsion plants.
Sec. 312c. Special pay: nuclear career annual incentive bonus
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) For the purposes of this section, a ``nuclear service
year'' is any fiscal year beginning before December 31, [2001]
2002.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 318. Special pay: special warfare officers extending period of
active duty
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(h) Repayment.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) A discharge in bankruptcy under title 11 that is entered
less than five years after the termination of an agreement
entered into under subsection [(a)] (b) does not discharge the
officer signing the agreement from a debt arising under such
agreement or under paragraph (1).
* * * * * * *
Sec. 322. Special pay: 15-year career status bonus for members entering
service on or after August 1, 1986
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Amount of Bonus; Payment.--(1) A bonus under this section
shall be [paid in a single lump sum of] equal to $30,000.
(2) A member electing to receive the bonus under this section
shall elect one of the following payment options:
(A) A single lump sum of $30,000.
(B) Two installments of $15,000 each.
(C) Three installments of $10,000 each.
(D) Four installments of $7,500 each.
(E) Five installments of $6,000 each.
(3) If a member elects installment payments under paragraph
(2), the second installment (and subsequent installments, as
applicable) shall be paid on the earlier of the following
dates:
(A) The annual anniversary date of the payment of the
first installment.
(B) January 15 of each succeeding calendar year.
[(2) The bonus] (4) The lump sum payment of the bonus, and
the first installment payment in the case of members who elect
to receive the bonus in installments, shall be paid to an
eligible career bonus member not later than the first month
that begins on or after the date that is 60 days after the date
on which the Secretary concerned receives from the member the
election required under subsection (a)(1) and the written
agreement required under subsection (a)(2), if applicable.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 323. Special pay: retention incentives for members qualified in a
critical military skill
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(i) Termination of Bonus Authority.--No bonus may be paid
under this section with respect to any reenlistment, or
voluntary extension of an enlistment, in the armed forces
entered into after December 31, [2001] 2002, and no agreement
under this section may be entered into after that date.
Sec. 324. Special pay: accession bonus for new officers
(a) Accession Bonus Authorized.--Under regulations prescribed
by the Secretary concerned, a person who executes a written
agreement to accept a commission as an officer of the armed
forces and serve on active duty for the period specified in the
agreement may, upon acceptance of the agreement by the
Secretary concerned, be paid an accession bonus in an amount
determined by the Secretary concerned.
(b) Limitation on Amount of Bonus.--The amount of an
accession bonus under subsection (a) may not exceed $100,000.
(c) Payment Method.--Upon acceptance of a written agreement
under subsection (a) by the Secretary concerned, the total
amount of the accession bonus payable under the agreement
becomes fixed. The agreement shall specify whether the
accession bonus will be paid by the Secretary in a lump sum or
installments.
(d) Relation to Other Accession Bonus Authority.--An
individual may not receive a accession bonus under this section
and section 302d, 302h, 302j, or 312b of this title for the
same period of service.
(e) Repayment.--(1) If an individual who has entered into an
agreement under subsection (a) and has received all or part of
the accession bonus under the agreement fails to accept a
commission as an officer or to commence or complete the total
period of active duty service specified in the agreement, the
Secretary concerned may require the individual to repay the
United States, on a pro rata basis and to the extent that the
Secretary determines conditions and circumstances warrant, any
or all of the amount paid to the individual under the
agreement.
(2) An obligation to repay the United States imposed under
paragraph (1) is for all purposes a debt owed to the United
States.
(3) A discharge in bankruptcy under title 11 that is entered
less than five years after the termination of a written
agreement entered into under subsection (a) does not discharge
the individual signing the agreement from a debt arising under
such agreement or under paragraph (1).
CHAPTER 7--ALLOWANCES
* * * * * * *
Sec. 402. Basic allowance for subsistence
(a) * * *
(b) Rates of Allowance Based on Food Costs.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) For purposes of implementing paragraph (2), the monthly
rate of basic allowance for subsistence that was in effect for
an enlisted member for calendar year 2001 shall be deemed to be
$233.
* * * * * * *
[(d) Special Rule for Members Authorized to Mess
Separately.--(1) In areas prescribed by the Secretary of
Defense, and the Secretary of Transportation with respect to
the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a service in the
Navy, an enlisted member described in paragraph (2) is entitled
to not more than the pro rata allowance in effect under
paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (b) for each meal the member
buys from a source other than a messing facility of the United
States.
[(2) An enlisted member referred to in paragraph (1) is a
member who is granted permission to mess separately and whose
duties require the member to buy at least one meal from a
source other than a messing facility of the United States.]
(d) Special Rule for Enlisted Members Who Mess Separately.--
The Secretary of Defense may prescribe a basic allowance for
subsistence for enlisted members at a rate higher than the rate
provided for in subsection (b) when messing facilities of the
United States are not available for the members.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 402a. Supplemental subsistence allowance for low-income members
with dependents
(a) * * *
(b) Members Entitled to Allowance.--(1) Subject to subsection
(d), a member of the armed forces with dependents is entitled
to receive the supplemental subsistence allowance if the
Secretary concerned determines that the member's income,
together with the income of the rest of the member's household
(if any), is within the highest income standard of eligibility,
as then in effect under section 5(c) of the Food Stamp Act of
1977 (7 U.S.C. 2014(c)) and without regard to paragraph (1) of
such section, for participation in the food stamp program.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 403. Basic allowance for housing
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(i) Temporary Housing Allowance While in Travel or Leave
Status.--A member of a uniformed service [who is in a pay grade
E-4 (4 or more years of service) or above] is entitled to a
temporary basic allowance for housing (at a rate determined by
the Secretary of Defense) while the member is in a travel or
leave status between permanent duty stations, including time
granted as delay en route or proceed time, when the member is
not assigned to quarters of the United States.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 404. Travel and transportation allowances: general
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c)(1) Under uniform regulations prescribed by the
Secretaries concerned and as provided in paragraph (2), a
member who--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) is involuntarily separated from active duty
during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and
ending on December 31, [2001] 2002,
* * * * * * *
(d)(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(5) The per diem rates established under paragraph (2)(A) for
travel performed in connection with a change of permanent
station or for travel described in paragraph (2) or (3) of
subsection (a) shall be equal to the standard per diem rates
established in the Federal travel regulation for travel within
the continental United States of civilian employees and their
dependents, unless the Secretaries concerned determines that a
higher rate for members is more appropriate.
* * * * * * *
(f)(1) * * *
(2)(A) * * *
(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to a member--
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
(v) who is involuntarily separated from active duty
during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and
ending on December 31, [2001] 2002.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 404a. Travel and transportation allowances: temporary lodging
expenses
(a) Payment or Reimbursement of Subsistence Expenses.--(1) *
* *
(2) Paragraph (1) applies to the following:
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) In the case of [an enlisted member] a member who
is reporting to the member's first permanent duty
station, the change from the member's home of record or
initial technical school to that first permanent duty
station.
* * * * * * *
(e) Maximum Daily Payment.--A member may not be paid or
reimbursed more that [$110] $180 a day under this section.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 406. Travel and transportation allowances: dependents; baggage and
household effects
(a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), a member of a
uniformed service who is ordered to make a change of permanent
station is entitled to transportation in kind, reimbursement
therefor, or a monetary allowance in place of the cost of
transportation, plus a per diem, for the member's dependents at
rates prescribed by the Secretaries concerned, but not more
than the rate authorized under section 404(d) of this title.
The Secretary concerned may also reimburse the member for
mandatory pet quarantine fees for household pets, but not to
exceed [$275] $675 per change of station, when the member
incurs the fees incident to such change of station.
(2)(A) * * *
(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to a member--
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
(v) who is involuntarily separated from active duty
during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and
ending on December 31, [2001] 2002.
* * * * * * *
(b)(1)(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of
Defense, the weight allowance in pounds to which a member is
entitled under subparagraph (A) is determined in accordance
with the following table:
Without With
Pay Grade Dependents Dependents
O-10 to O-6..................................... 18,000 18,000
O-5............................................. 16,000 17,500
O-4............................................. 14,000 17,000
O-3............................................. 13,000 14,500
O-2............................................. 12,500 13,500
O-1............................................. 10,000 12,000
W-5............................................. 16,000 17,500
W-4............................................. 14,000 17,000
W-3............................................. 13,000 14,500
W-2............................................. 12,500 13,500
W-1............................................. 10,000 12,000
E-9............................................. 12,000 14,500
E-8............................................. 11,000 13,500
E-7............................................. 10,500 12,500
E-6............................................. 8,000 11,000
E-5............................................. 7,000 9,000
[E-4 \1\........................................ 7,000 8,000
[E-4 \2\........................................ 3,500 7,000
[E-3............................................ 2,000 5,000
[E-2............................................ 1,500 5,000
[E-1............................................ 1,500 5,000
[\1\ Member with more than two years of service computed under
section 205 of this title.
[\2\ Member with less than two years of service computed under
section 205 of this title.]
. . .
E-4............................................... 7,000 8,000
E-3............................................... 5,000 8,000
E-2............................................... 5,000 8,000
E-1............................................... 5,000 8,000
* * * * * * *
(g)(1) Under uniform regulations prescribed by the
Secretaries concerned, a member who--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) is involuntarily separated from active duty
during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and
ending on December 31, [2001] 2002,
* * * * * * *
Sec. 407. Travel and transportation allowances: dislocation allowance
(a) Eligibility for Primary Dislocation Allowance.--(1) * * *
(2) A member of the uniformed services referred to in
paragraph (1) is any of the following:
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(F) A member married to another member, both of whom
are without other dependents, who actually moves to a
new permanent duty station where the member is assigned
to family housing provided by the United States, except
that only one dislocation allowance may be paid to the
married couple with respect to the move.
* * * * * * *
(e) [First or Last Duty] Effect of Order From Last Duty
Station.--A member is not entitled to payment of a dislocation
allowance under this section when the member is ordered [from
the member's home to the member's first duty station or] from
the member's last duty station to the member's home.
(f) Partial Dislocation Allowance.--(1) Under regulations
prescribed by the Secretary concerned, a member ordered to
occupy or vacate family housing provided by the United States
to permit the privatization or renovation of housing or for any
other reason (other than pursuant to a permanent change of
station) may be paid a partial dislocation allowance of $500.
(2) Effective on the same date that the monthly rates of
basic pay for all members are increased under section 1009 of
this title or another provision of law, the Secretary of
Defense shall adjust the rate of the partial dislocation
allowance authorized by this subsection by the percentage equal
to the average percentage increase in the rates of basic pay.
(3) Subsections (c) and (d) do not apply to the partial
dislocation allowance authorized by this subsection.
[(f)] (g) Rule of Construction.--For purposes of this
section, a member whose dependents may not make an authorized
move in connection with a change of permanent station is
considered a member without dependents.
[(g)] (h) Advance Payment.--A dislocation allowance payable
under this section may be paid in advance.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 411b. Travel and transportation allowances: travel performed in
connection with leave between consecutive overseas
tours
(a)(1) Under uniform regulations prescribed by the
Secretaries concerned, a member of a uniformed service
stationed outside the 48 contiguous States and the District of
Columbia who is ordered to a consecutive tour of duty at the
same duty station or who is ordered to make a change of
permanent station to another duty station outside the 48
contiguous States and the District of Columbia may be paid
travel and transportation allowances in connection with
authorized leave from his last duty station to a place approved
by the Secretary concerned[, or his designee, or to a place no
farther distant than his home of record] and from that place to
his designated post of duty. Such allowances may be paid for
the member and for the dependents of the member who are
authorized to, and do, accompany him at his duty stations.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 416. Uniform allowance: officers; additional allowances
(a) * * *
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a tour of active duty
if--
(1) the officer, during that tour or within a period
of two years before entering on that tour, received,
under any law, an initial uniform reimbursement or
allowance of more than [$200] $400; or
* * * * * * *
Sec. 427. Family separation allowance
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Effect of Election to Serve Unaccompanied Tour of Duty.--
[A member] (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) or (3), a
member who elects to serve a tour of duty unaccompanied by his
dependents at a permanent station to which the movement of his
dependents is authorized at the expense of the United States
under section 406 of this title is not entitled to an allowance
under subsection (a)(1)(A).
(2) A member who elects to serve an unaccompanied tour of
duty because the movement of a dependent of the member to the
permanent station is denied for certified medical reasons is
entitled to an allowance under subsection (a)(1)(A).
(3) The Secretary concerned may waive the preceding sentence
in situations in which it would be inequitable to deny the
allowance to the member because of unusual family or
operational circumstances.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 430. Travel and transportation: dependent children of members
stationed overseas
(a) Under regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of
Defense, a member of a uniformed service who--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) has a dependent child who is under 23 years of
age attending a school in the continental United States
for the purpose of obtaining a formal education or is
attending a school outside the continental United
States, if the dependent is attending the school
outside the continental United States for less than one
year under a program approved by the school in the
continental United States at which the dependent is
enrolled,
* * * * * * *
(b)(1) A member described in subsection (a) may be paid a
transportation allowance for each unmarried dependent child,
who is under 23 years of age and is attending a school [in the
continental United States for the purpose of obtaining a formal
education] described in subsection (a)(3), of one annual trip
between the school being attended and the member's duty station
outside the continental United States and return. The allowance
authorized by this section may be transportation in kind or
reimbursement therefor, as prescribed by the Secretaries
concerned. However, the transportation authorized by this
section may not be paid a member for a child attending a school
in the continental United States for the purpose of obtaining a
secondary education if the child is eligible to attend a
secondary school for dependents that is located at or in the
vicinity of the duty station of the member and is operated
under the Defense Dependents' Education Act of 1978 (20 U.S.C.
921 et seq.).
* * * * * * *
(3) The transportation allowance under paragraph (1) for a
dependent child who is attending a school outside the
continental United States for less than one year under a
program approved by the school in the continental United States
at which the dependent is enrolled shall not exceed the
allowance the member would be paid for a trip between the
school in the continental United States and the member's duty
station outside the continental United States and return.
(c) Whenever possible, the [Military Airlift Command] Air
Mobility Command or Military Sealift Command shall be used, on
a space-required basis, for the travel authorized by this
section.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 432. Travel and transportation: members escorting certain
dependents
(a) * * *
(b) Whenever possible, the [Military Airlift Command] Air
Mobility Command or Military Sealift Command shall be used, on
a space-required basis, for the travel authorized by this
section.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 435. Funeral honors duty: allowance
(a) Allowance Authorized.--(1) The Secretary concerned may
authorize payment of an allowance to a member of the Ready
Reserve for any day on which the member performs at least two
hours of funeral honors duty pursuant to section 12503 of title
10 or section 115 of title 32.
(2) The Secretary concerned may also authorize payment of an
allowance under this section to a retired member of the armed
forces who performs at least two hours of duty preparing for or
performing honors at the funeral of a veteran.
* * * * * * *
(c) Concurrent Payment.--Notwithstanding any other provision
of law, the allowance paid to a retired member of the armed
forces under this section shall be in addition to any other
compensation to which the retired member may be entitled under
this title or titles 10 or 38.
Sec. 436. Per diem allowance for lengthy or numerous deployments
(a) Per Diem Required.--The Secretary of the military
department concerned shall pay a high-deployment per diem
allowance to a member of the armed forces under the Secretary's
jurisdiction for each day on which the member (1) is deployed,
and (2) has, as of that day, been deployed 401 or more days out
of the preceding 730 days. The Secretary shall pay the
allowance from appropriations available for operation and
maintenance for the armed force in which the member serves.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 503 OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR
1991
SEC. 503. TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES RELATING TO MEMBERS
INVOLUNTARILY SEPARATED
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Storage of Household Effects.--(1) The Secretary of a
military department shall exercise the authority provided by
section 406 of title 37, United States Code, to provide
nontemporary storage of baggage and household effects for a
period not longer than one year in the case of individuals who
are involuntarily separated during the period beginning on
October 1, 1990, and ending on December 31, [2001] 2002.
* * * * * * *
----------
TITLE 32, UNITED STATES CODE
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 1--ORGANIZATION
* * * * * * *
Sec. 115. Funeral honors duty performed as a Federal function
(a) Order to Duty.--A member of the Army National Guard of
the United States or the Air National Guard of the United
States may be ordered to funeral honors duty, with the consent
of the member, to prepare for or perform funeral honors
functions at the funeral of a veteran under section 1491 of
title 10. However, a member of the Army National Guard of the
United States or the Air National Guard of the United States
may not be ordered to perform funeral honors functions under
this section without the consent of the Governor or other
appropriate authority of the State concerned. Performance of
funeral honors duty by such a member not on active duty or
full-time National Guard duty shall be treated as inactive-duty
training (including with respect to travel to and from such
duty) for purposes of any provision of law other than sections
206 and 435 of title 37.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 5--TRAINING
* * * * * * *
Sec. 509. National Guard Challenge Program of opportunities for
civilian youth
(a) * * *
(b) Conduct of the Program.--(1) The Secretary of Defense
shall provide for the conduct of the National Guard Challenge
Program in such States as the Secretary considers to be
appropriate.
(2) The Secretary shall carry out the National Guard
Challenge Program using--
(A) funds appropriated directly to the Secretary of
Defense for the program, except that the amount of
funds appropriated directly to the Secretary and
expended for the program [in a fiscal year] in fiscal
year 2001 or 2002 may not exceed $62,500,000; and
* * * * * * *
(d) Matching Funds Required.--The amount of assistance
provided under this section to a State program of the National
Guard Challenge Program may not exceed--
[(1) for fiscal year 1998, 75 percent of the costs of
operating the State program during that year;
[(2) for fiscal year 1999, 70 percent of the costs of
operating the State program during that year;
[(3) for fiscal year 2000, 65 percent of the costs of
operating the State program during that year; and
[(4) for fiscal year 2001 and each subsequent fiscal
year, 60 percent of the costs of operating the State
program during that year.]
(1) for fiscal years 2001 and 2002, 60 percent of the
costs of operating the State program during that fiscal
year; and
(2) for fiscal year 2003 and each subsequent fiscal
year, 75 percent of the costs of operating the State
program during that fiscal year.
* * * * * * *
----------
TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 33--EXAMINATION, SELECTION, AND PLACEMENT
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER VI--ASSIGNMENTS TO AND FROM STATES
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3374. Assignments of employees from State or local governments
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) During the period of assignment, a State or local
government employee on detail to a Federal agency--
(1) is not entitled to pay from the agency, except to
the extent that the pay received from the State or
local government is less than the appropriate rate of
pay which the duties would warrant under the applicable
pay provisions of this title or other applicable
authority;
(2) is deemed an employee of the agency for the
purpose of chapter 73 of this title, the Ethics in
Government Act of 1978, section 1043 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, section 27 of the Office of
Federal Procurement Policy Act, sections 203, 205, 207,
208, 209, 602, 603, 606, 607, 643, 654, 1905, and 1913
of title 18, sections 1343, 1344, and 1349(b) of title
31, and the Federal Tort Claims Act and any other
Federal tort liability statute; and
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 53--PAY RATES AND SYSTEMS
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER II--EXECUTIVE SCHEDULE PAY RATES
* * * * * * *
Sec. 5315. Positions at level IV
Level IV of the Executive Schedule applies to the following
positions, for which the annual rate of basic pay shall be the
rate determined with respect to such level under chapter 11 of
title 2, as adjusted by section 5318 of this title:
Deputy Administrator of General Services.
* * * * * * *
Principal Deputy Administrator, National Nuclear
Security Administration.
Additional Deputy Administrators of the National
Nuclear Security Administration (3), but if the Deputy
Administrator for Naval Reactors is an officer of the
Navy on active duty, (2).
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER IV--PREVAILING RATE SYSTEMS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 5343. Prevailing rate determinations; wage schedules; night
differentials
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) The Office of Personnel Management, by regulation, shall
prescribe practices and procedures for conducting wage surveys,
analyzing wage survey data, developing and establishing wage
schedules and rates, and administering the prevailing rate
system. The regulations shall provide--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) for proper differentials, as determined by the
Office, for duty involving unusually severe working
conditions or unusually severe hazards (and for any
hardship or hazard related to asbestos, such
differentials shall be determined by applying
occupational safety and health standards consistent
with the permissible exposure limit promulgated by the
Secretary of Labor under the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970);
* * * * * * *
(d)(1) * * *
[(2) When the lead agency determines that there is a number
of comparable positions in private industry insufficient to
establish the wage schedules and rates, such agency shall--
[(A) establish the wage schedules and rates to be
applicable to prevailing rate employees other than
prevailing rate employees of the Department of Defense
on the basis of--
[(i) local private industry rates; and
[(ii) rates paid for comparable positions in
private industry in the nearest wage area that
such agency determines is most similar in the
nature of its population, employment, manpower,
and industry to the local wage area for which
the wage survey is being made; and
[(B) establish the wage schedules and rates to be
applicable to prevailing rate employees of the
Department of Defense only on the basis of local
private industry rates.]
(2) When a lead agency determines that there is a number of
comparable positions in private industry insufficient to
establish the wage schedules and rates, such agency shall
establish those schedules and rates on the basis of--
(A) local private industry rates; and
(B) rates paid for comparable positions in private
industry in the nearest wage area that such agency
determines is most similar in the nature of its
population, employment, manpower, and industry to the
local wage area for which the wage survey is being
made.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 55--PAY ADMINISTRATION
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER V--PREMIUM PAY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 5543. Compensatory time off
(a) The head of an agency may--
(1) on request of an employee, grant the employee
compensatory time off from his scheduled tour of duty
instead of payment under section 5542 or section 7 of
the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 for an equal
amount of time spent in [irregular or occasional]
overtime work; and
(2) provide that an employee whose rate of basic pay
is in excess of the maximum rate of basic pay for GS-10
(including any applicable locality-based comparability
payment under section 5304 or similar provision of law
and any applicable special rate of pay under section
5305 or similar provision of law) shall be granted
compensatory time off from his scheduled tour of duty
equal to the amount of time spent in [irregular or
occasional] overtime work instead of being paid for
that work under section 5542 of this title.
(b) The head of an agency may, on request of an employee,
grant the employee compensatory time off from the employee's
scheduled tour of duty instead of payment under section 5544 or
section 7 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 for an equal
amount of time spent in [irregular or occasional] overtime
work. An agency head may not require an employee to be
compensated for overtime work with an equivalent amount of
compensatory time-off from the employee's tour of duty.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 5545. Night, standby, irregular, and hazardous duty differential
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) The Office shall establish a schedule or schedules of pay
differentials for duty involving unusual physical hardship or
hazard (and for any hardship or hazard related to asbestos,
such differentials shall be determined by applying occupational
safety and health standards consistent with the permissible
exposure limit promulgated by the Secretary of Labor under the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970). Under such
regulations as the Office may prescribe, and for such minimum
periods as it determines appropriate, an employee to whom
chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of this title
applies is entitled to be paid the appropriate differential for
any period in which he is subjected to physical hardship or
hazard not usually involved in carrying out the duties of his
position. However, the pay differential--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
Sec. 5547. Limitation on premium pay
[(a) An employee may be paid premium pay under sections 5542,
5545 (a), (b), and (c), 5545a, and 5546 (a) and (b) of this
title only to the extent that the payment does not cause his
aggregate rate of pay for any pay period to exceed the maximum
rate for GS-15 (including any applicable locality-based
comparability payment under section 5304 or similar provision
of law and any applicable special rate of pay under section
5305 or similar provision of law). The first sentence of this
subsection shall not apply to any employee of the Federal
Aviation Administration or the Department of Defense who is
paid premium pay under section 5546a of this title.
[(b)(1) Subject to regulations prescribed by the Office of
Personnel Management, the first sentence of subsection (a)
shall not apply to an employee who is paid premium pay by
reason of work in connection with an emergency which involves a
direct threat to life or property, including a forest wildfire
emergency.
[(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), no employee referred to
in such paragraph may be paid premium pay under the provisions
of law cited in the first sentence of subsection (a) if, or to
the extent that, the aggregate of such employee's basic pay and
premium pay under those provisions would, in any calendar year,
exceed the maximum rate payable for GS-15 in effect at the end
of such calendar year.]
(a) An employee may be paid premium pay under sections 5542,
5545 (a), (b), and (c), 5545a, and 5546 (a) and (b) of this
title only to the extent that the aggregate of such employee's
basic pay and premium pay under those provisions would, in any
calendar year, exceed the maximum rate payable for GS-15 in
effect at the end of such calendar year.
(b) Subsection (a) shall not apply to any employee of the
Federal Aviation Administration or the Department of Defense
who is paid premium pay under section 5546a of this title.
(c)(1) [Subsections (a) and (b)] Subsection (a) shall not
apply to a law enforcement officer.
(2) A law enforcement officer may be paid premium pay under
the provisions of law cited in the first sentence of subsection
(a) only to the extent that the payment does not cause the
officer's aggregate rate of pay for any [pay period] calendar
year to exceed the lesser of--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 57--TRAVEL, TRANSPORTATION, AND SUBSISTENCE
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER IV--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
5751. Travel expenses of witnesses.
* * * * * * *
5757. Payment of expenses to obtain professional credentials.
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER IV--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 5757. Payment of expenses to obtain professional credentials
(a) An agency may use appropriated funds or funds otherwise
available to the agency to pay for--
(1) expenses for employees to obtain professional
credentials, including expenses for professional
accreditation, State-imposed and professional licenses,
and professional certification; and
(2) examinations to obtain such credentials.
(b) The authority under subsection (a) may not be exercised
on behalf of any employee occupying or seeking to qualify for
appointment to any position that is excepted from the
competitive service because of the confidential, policy-
determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating character of
the position.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 63--LEAVE
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER II--OTHER PAID LEAVE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 6323. Military leave; Reserves and National Guardsmen
(a)(1) Subject to paragraph (2) of this subsection, an
employee as defined by section 2105 of this title or an
individual employed by the government of the District of
Columbia, permanent or temporary indefinite, is entitled to
leave without loss in pay, time, or performance or efficiency
rating for active duty, inactive-duty training (as defined in
section 101 of title 37), funeral honors duty (as described in
section 12503 of title 10 and section 115 of title 32), or
engaging in field or coast defense training under sections 502-
505 of title 32 as a Reserve of the armed forces or member of
the National Guard. Leave under this subsection accrues for an
employee or individual at the rate of 15 days per fiscal year
and, to the extent that it is not used in a fiscal year,
accumulates for use in the succeeding fiscal year until it
totals 15 days at the beginning of a fiscal year.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 83--RETIREMENT
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER III--CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT
* * * * * * *
Sec. 8336. Immediate retirement
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) An employee who--
(1) * * *
(2) except in the case of an employee who is
separated from the service under a program carried out
under subsection [(o)] (p), while serving in a
geographic area designated by the Office of Personnel
Management, is separated from the service voluntarily
during a period in which the Office determines that--
* * * * * * *
[(o)] (p)(1) The Secretary of Defense may, during fiscal
years 2002 and 2003, carry out a program under which an
employee of the Department of Defense may be separated from the
service entitled to an immediate annuity under this subchapter
if the employee--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
Sec. 8347. Administration; regulations
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(q)(1) Under regulations prescribed by the Office of
Personnel Management, an employee who--
(A) * * *
(B) [has 5 or more years of civilian service
creditable under] is employed subject to this
subchapter; and
(2) Under regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel
Management, an employee of a nonappropriated fund
instrumentality of the Department of Defense or the Coast
Guard, described in section 2105(c), who--
(A) * * *
(B) is a [vested] participant in a retirement system
established for employees described in section
2105(c)[, as the term ``vested participant'' is defined
by such system];
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 84--FEDERAL EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER VI--GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
Sec. 8461. Authority of the Office of Personnel Management
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(n)(1) Under regulations prescribed by the Office, an
employee who--
(A) * * *
(B) [has 5 more years of civilian service creditable
under] is employed subject to this chapter; and
* * * * * * *
(2) Under regulations prescribed by the Office, an employee
of a nonappropriated fund instrumentality of the Department of
Defense or the Coast Guard described in section 2105(c), who--
(A) * * *
(B) is a [vested] participant in a retirement system
established for employees described in section
2105(c)[, as the term ``vested participant'' is defined
by such system];
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 89--HEALTH INSURANCE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 8906. Contributions
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e)(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3)(A) An employing agency may pay both the employee and
Government contributions, and any additional administrative
expenses otherwise chargeable to the employee, with respect to
health care coverage for an employee described in subparagraph
(B) and the family of such employee.
(B) An employee referred to in subparagraph (A) is an
employee who--
(i) is enrolled in a health benefits plan under this
chapter;
(ii) is a member of a reserve component of the armed
forces;
(iii) is called or ordered to active duty in support
of a contingency operation (as defined in section
101(a)(13) of title 10);
(iv) is placed on leave without pay or separated from
service to perform active duty; and
(v) serves on active duty for a period of more than
30 consecutive days.
(C) Notwithstanding the one-year limitation on coverage
described in paragraph (1)(A), payment may be made under this
paragraph for a period not to exceed 18 months.
[(f) The Government contributions for health benefits for an
employee shall be paid--]
(f) The Government contribution, and any additional payments
under subsection (e)(3)(A), for health benefits for an employee
shall be paid--
(1) in the case of employees generally, from the
appropriation or fund which is used to pay the
employee;
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 90--LONG-TERM CARE INSURANCE
* * * * * * *
Sec. 9001. Definitions
For purposes of this chapter:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Member of the uniformed services.--The term
``member of the uniformed services'' means a member of
the uniformed services, other than a retired member of
the uniformed services, who is--
(A) on active duty or full-time National
Guard duty for a period of more than 30 days;
[and] or
(B) a member of the Selected Reserve.
* * * * * * *
----------
TITLE 14, UNITED STATES CODE
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 13--PAY, ALLOWANCES, AWARDS, AND OTHER RIGHTS AND BENEFITS
Sec.
461. Remission of indebtedness of enlisted members upon discharge.
* * * * * * *
504. Medal of honor: duplicate medal.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 501. Replacement of medals
In those cases where a medal, or a bar, emblem, or insignia
in lieu thereof, awarded pursuant to this chapter has been
stolen, lost, destroyed, or rendered unfit for use without
fault or neglect on the part of the person to whom it was
awarded, such medal, or bar, emblem, or insignia in lieu
thereof, shall be replaced without charge, or, in the
discretion of the Secretary, upon condition that the Government
is reimbursed for the cost thereof.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 504. Medal of honor: duplicate medal
A person awarded a medal of honor shall, upon written
application of that person, be issued, without charge, one
duplicate medal of honor with ribbons and appurtenances. Such
duplicate medal of honor shall be marked, in such manner as the
Secretary may determine, as a duplicate or for display purposes
only.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 704 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE
Sec. 704. Military medals or decorations
(a) * * *
(b) Congressional Medal of Honor.--
(1) * * *
(2) Definitions.--(A) * * *
[(B) As used in this subsection, ``Congressional
Medal of Honor'' means a medal awarded under section
3741, 6241, or 8741 of title 10.]
(B) As used in this subsection, ``Congressional Medal
of Honor'' means--
(i) a medal of honor awarded under section
3741, 6241, or 8741 of title 10 or section 491
of title 14;
(ii) a duplicate medal of honor issued under
section 3754, 6256, or 8754 of title 10 or
section 504 of title 14; or
(iii) a replacement of a medal of honor
provided under section 3747, 6253, or 8747 of
title 10 or section 501 of title 14.
----------
SECTION 721 OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEAR 1989
[SEC. 721. REGULATIONS FOR DELIVERY OF MILITARY PERSONNEL TO CIVIL
AUTHORITIES WHEN CHARGED WITH CERTAIN OFFENSES
[(a) Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the
Secretaries of the military departments have issued uniform
regulations pursuant to section 814 of title 10, United States
Code, to provide for the delivery of members of the Armed
Forces to civilian authority when such members have been
accused of offenses against civil authority. Such regulations
shall specifically provide for the delivery of such members to
civilian authority, in appropriate cases, when such members are
accused of parental kidnapping and other similar offenses,
including criminal contempt arising from such offenses and from
child custody matters, and shall specifically address the
special needs for the exercise of the authority contained in
section 814 of title 10, United States Code, when members of
the Armed Forces assigned overseas are accused of offenses by
civilian authorities.
[(b) Not later than 120 days after the enactment of this Act,
the Secretary of Defense shall transmit to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a
copy of all regulations promulgated under section 814 of title
10, United States Code, as a result of this section and any
recommendations that the Secretary may have concerning the need
for additional legislation related to the amenability of
members of the Armed Forces to civil authority.]
----------
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994
* * * * * * *
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
* * * * * * *
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
* * * * * * *
Subtitle D--Women in the Service
* * * * * * *
SEC. 542. NOTICE TO CONGRESS OF PROPOSED CHANGES IN COMBAT ASSIGNMENTS
TO WHICH FEMALE MEMBERS MAY BE ASSIGNED.
(a) * * *
(b) Special Rule for Ground Combat Exclusion Policy.--(1) If
the Secretary of Defense proposes to make any change described
in paragraph (2) to the ground combat exclusion policy, the
Secretary shall, [not less than 90 days] before any such change
is implemented, submit to Congress a report providing notice of
the proposed change. Such a change may then be implemented only
after the end of a period of 60 days of continuous session of
Congress (excluding any day on which either House of Congress
is not in session) following the date on which the report is
received.
* * * * * * *
(5) For purposes of this subsection, the continuity of a
session of Congress is broken only by an adjournment of the
Congress sine die.
* * * * * * *
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle E--Other Matters
* * * * * * *
SEC. 845. AUTHORITY OF THE DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY TO
CARRY OUT CERTAIN PROTOTYPE PROJECTS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Appropriate Use of Authority.--(1) The Secretary of
Defense shall ensure that no official of an agency enters into
a transaction (other than a contract, grant, or cooperative
agreement) for a prototype project under the authority of this
section unless--
(A) * * *
(B) no nontraditional defense contractor is
participating to a significant extent in the prototype
project, but at least one of the following
circumstances exists:
(i) * * *
(ii) The senior procurement executive for the
agency (as designated for the purposes of
section 16(3) of the Office of Federal
Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 414(3)))
determines in writing that exceptional
circumstances justify the use of a transaction
that provides for innovative business
arrangements or structures that would not be
feasible or appropriate under a contract.
* * * * * * *
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
* * * * * * *
TITLE XXIX--DEFENSE BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT
Subtitle A--Base Closure Community Assistance
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2915. TRANSITION COORDINATORS FOR ASSISTANCE TO COMMUNITIES
AFFECTED BY THE CLOSURE OF INSTALLATIONS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Responsibilities.--A transition coordinator designated
with respect to an installation shall--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(10) assist the Secretary of Defense in identifying
real property or personal property at the installation
that may be utilized to meet the needs of the homeless
by consulting with the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development and the local lead agency of the homeless,
if any, referred to in section 210(b) of the [Stewart
B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act] McKinney-Vento
Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11320(b)) for the
State in which the installation is located.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 8102 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001
Sec. 8102. (a) * * *
(b) Certifications as to Compliance With Clinger-Cohen Act.--
(1) During the current fiscal year, a major automated
information system may not receive [Milestone I] Milestone B
approval, [Milestone II] Milestone C approval, or [Milestone
III] full rate production approval, or their equivalent, within
the Department of Defense until the Chief Information Officer
certifies, with respect to that milestone, that the system is
being developed in accordance with the Clinger-Cohen Act of
1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.). The Chief Information Officer
may require additional certifications, as appropriate, with
respect to any such system.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 4202 OF THE CLINGER-COHEN ACT OF 1996
SEC. 4202. APPLICATION OF SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURES TO CERTAIN COMMERCIAL
ITEMS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Effective Date.--The authority to issue solicitations for
purchases of commercial items in excess of the simplified
acquisition threshold pursuant to the special simplified
procedures authorized by section 2304(g)(1) of title 10, United
States Code, section 303(g)(1) of the Federal Property and
Administrative Services Act of 1949, and section 31(a) of the
Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act, as amended by this
section, shall expire January 1, [2002] 2004. Contracts may be
awarded pursuant to solicitations that have been issued before
such authority expires, notwithstanding the expiration of such
authority.
----------
SECTION 9005 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1993
[Sec. 9005. During the current fiscal year and hereafter, no
part of any appropriation or any other funds available to the
Department of Defense, except for purchases for amounts not
greater than the simplified acquisition threshold covered by
section 2304(g) of title 10, United States Code, shall be
available for the procurement of any article or item of food,
clothing, tents, tarpaulins, covers, cotton and other natural
fiber products, woven silk or woven silk blends, spun silk yarn
for cartridge cloth, synthetic fabric or coated synthetic
fabric, canvas products, or wool (whether in the form of fiber
or yarn or contained in fabrics, materials, or manufactured
articles), or any item of individual equipment manufactured
from or containing such fibers, yarns, fabrics, or materials,
or specialty metals including stainless steel flatware, or hand
or measuring tools, not grown, reprocessed, reused, or produced
in the United States or its possessions, except to the extent
that the Secretary of the Department concerned shall determine
that satisfactory quality and sufficient quantity of any
articles or items of food, individual equipment, tents,
tarpaulins, covers, or clothing or any form of cotton or other
natural fiber products, woven silk and woven silk blends, spun
silk yarn for cartridge cloth, synthetic fabric or coated
synthetic fabric, canvas products, wool, or specialty metals
including stainless steel flatware, grown, reprocessed, reused,
or produced in the United States or its possessions cannot be
procured as and when needed at United States market prices and
except procurements outside the United States in support of
combat operations, procurements by vessels in foreign waters,
and emergency procurements or procurements of perishable foods
by establishments located outside the United States for the
personnel attached thereto: Provided, That nothing herein shall
preclude the procurement of specialty metals or chemical
warfare protective clothing produced outside the United States
or its possessions when such procurement is necessary to comply
with agreements with foreign governments requiring the United
States to purchase supplies from foreign sources for the
purposes of offsetting sales made by the United States
Government or United States firms under approved programs
serving defense requirements or where such procurement is
necessary in furtherance of agreements with foreign governments
in which both governments agree to remove barriers to purchases
of supplies produced in the other country or services performed
by sources of the other country, so long as such agreements
with foreign governments comply, where applicable, with the
requirements of section 36 of the Arms Export Control Act and
with section 2457 of title 10, United States Code: Provided
further, That nothing herein shall preclude the procurement of
foods manufactured or processed in the United States or its
possessions.]
----------
SECTION 8109 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1997
[Sec. 8109. In applying section 9005 of the Department of
Defense Appropriations Act, 1993, Public Law 102-396 (10 U.S.C.
2241 note), during the current fiscal year and thereafter--
[(1) the term ``synthetic fabric and coated synthetic
fabric'' shall be deemed to include all textile fibers
and yarns that are for use in such fabrics; and
[(2) such section shall be treated, notwithstanding
section 34 of Public Law 93-400 (41 U.S.C. 430), as
being applicable to contracts and subcontracts for the
procurement of commercial items that are articles or
items, specialty metals, or tools covered by that
section 9005.]
----------
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998
* * * * * * *
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
* * * * * * *
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle G--Other Matters
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1083. PROGRAM TO COMMEMORATE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE KOREAN WAR.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) [Names] Name and Symbols.--The Secretary of Defense shall
have the sole and exclusive right to use the name ``The United
States of America Korean War Commemoration'', and such seal,
emblems, and badges incorporating such name as the Secretary
may lawfully adopt. Nothing in this section may be construed to
supersede rights that are established or vested before the date
of the enactment of this Act.
* * * * * * *
TITLE XIII--ARMS CONTROL AND RELATED MATTERS
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1302. LIMITATION ON RETIREMENT OR DISMANTLEMENT OF STRATEGIC
NUCLEAR DELIVERY SYSTEMS.
(a) Funding Limitation.--(1) Except as provided in paragraph
(2), funds available to the Department of Defense may not be
obligated or expended for retiring or dismantling, or for
preparing to retire or dismantle, any of the following
strategic nuclear delivery systems below the specified levels:
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(D) 50 Peacekeeper intercontinental ballistic
missiles.]
* * * * * * *
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
* * * * * * *
TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE
* * * * * * *
SEC. 3305. DISPOSAL OF COBALT IN NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE.
(a) Disposal Required.--Subject to subsections (b) and (c),
the President shall dispose of cobalt contained in the National
Defense Stockpile so as to result in receipts to the United
States in amounts equal to--
(1) $20,000,000 during [fiscal year 2003] the two-
fiscal year period ending September 30, 2003;
* * * * * * *
----------
DEFENSE BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT ACT OF 1990
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2905. IMPLEMENTATION
(a) * * *
(b) Management and Disposal of Property.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4)(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(E)(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
(v) Notwithstanding clause (iii) or chapter 137 of title 10,
United States Code, if a lease under clause (i) involves a
substantial portion of the installation, the department or
agency concerned may obtain facility services for the leased
property and common area maintenance from the redevelopment
authority or the redevelopment authority's assignee as a
provision of the lease. The facility services and common area
maintenance shall be provided at a rate no higher than the rate
charged to non-Federal tenants of the transferred property.
Facility services and common area maintenance covered by the
lease shall not include--
(I) municipal services that a State or local
government is required by law to provide to all
landowners in its jurisdiction without direct charge;
or
(II) firefighting or security-guard functions.
* * * * * * *
(6)(A) Except as provided in this paragraph, nothing in this
section shall limit or otherwise affect the application of the
provisions of the [Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act]
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11301 et
seq.) to military installations closed under this part. For
procedures relating to the use to assist the homeless of
buildings and property at installations closed under this part
after the date of the enactment of this sentence, see paragraph
(7).
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2910. DEFINITIONS
As used in this part:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(11) The term ``representative of the homeless'' has
the meaning given such term in section 501(i)(4) of the
[Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act] McKinney-
Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11411(i)(4)).
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 204 OF THE DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION AMENDMENTS AND BASE CLOSURE
AND REALIGNMENT ACT
SEC. 204. IMPLEMENTATION
(a) * * *
(b) Management and Disposal of Property.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4)(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(E)(i) The Secretary may transfer real property at an
installation approved for closure or realignment under this
title (including property at an installation approved for
realignment which will be retained by the Department of Defense
or another Federal agency after realignment) to the
redevelopment authority for the installation if the
redevelopment authority agrees to lease, directly upon
transfer, one or more portions of the property transferred
under this subparagraph to the Secretary or to the head of
another department or agency of the Federal Government.
Subparagraph (B) shall apply to a transfer under this
subparagraph.
(ii) A lease under clause (i) shall be for a term of not to
exceed 50 years, but may provide for options for renewal or
extension of the term by the department or agency concerned.
(iii) A lease under clause (i) may not require rental
payments by the United States.
(iv) A lease under clause (i) shall include a provision
specifying that if the department or agency concerned ceases
requiring the use of the leased property before the expiration
of the term of the lease, the remainder of the lease term may
be satisfied by the same or another department or agency of the
Federal Government using the property for a use similar to the
use under the lease. Exercise of the authority provided by this
clause shall be made in consultation with the redevelopment
authority concerned.
(v) Notwithstanding clause (iii) or chapter 137 of title 10,
United States Code, if a lease under clause (i) involves a
substantial portion of the installation, the department or
agency concerned may obtain facility services for the leased
property and common area maintenance from the redevelopment
authority or the redevelopment authority's assignee as a
provision of the lease. The facility services and common area
maintenance shall be provided at a rate no higher than the rate
charged to non-Federal tenants of the transferred property.
Facility services and common area maintenance covered by the
lease shall not include--
(I) municipal services that a State or local
government is required by law to provide to all
landowners in its jurisdiction without direct charge;
or
(II) firefighting or security-guard functions.
[(E)] (F) The transfer of personal property under
subparagraph (A) shall not be subject to the provisions of
sections 202 and 203 of the Federal Property and Administrative
Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 483, 484) if the Secretary
determines that the transfer of such property is necessary for
the effective implementation of a redevelopment plan with
respect to the installation at which such property is located.
[(F)] (G) The provisions of section 120(h) of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9620(h)) shall apply to any
transfer of real property under this paragraph.
[(G)] (H)(i) In the case of an agreement for the transfer of
property of a military installation under this paragraph that
was entered into before April 21, 1999, the Secretary may
modify the agreement, and in so doing compromise, waive,
adjust, release, or reduce any right, title, claim, lien, or
demand of the United States, if--
(I) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(H)] (I) In the case of an agreement for the transfer of
property of a military installation under this paragraph that
was entered into during the period beginning on April 21, 1999,
and ending on the date of enactment of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, at the request of the
redevelopment authority concerned, the Secretary shall modify
the agreement to conform to all the requirements of
subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D). Such a modification may
include the compromise, waiver, adjustment, release, or
reduction of any right, title, claim, lien, or demand of the
United States under the agreement.
[(I)] (J) The Secretary may require any additional terms and
conditions in connection with a transfer under this paragraph
as such Secretary considers appropriate to protect the
interests of the United States.
* * * * * * *
(6)(A) Except as provided in this paragraph, nothing in this
section shall limit or otherwise affect the application of the
provisions of the [Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act]
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11301 et
seq.) to military installations closed under this title.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 2 OF THE BASE CLOSURE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AND HOMELESS
ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1994
SEC. 2. DISPOSAL OF BUILDINGS AND PROPERTY AT MILITARY INSTALLATIONS
APPROVED FOR CLOSURE.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Applicability to Installations Approved for Closure
Before Enactment of Act.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4)(A) The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the
Secretary of Health and Human Services shall not, during the
60-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this
Act, carry out with respect to any military installation
approved for closure under the 1988 base closure Act or the
1990 base closure Act before such date any action required of
such Secretaries under the 1988 base closure Act or the 1990
base closure Act, as the case may be, or under section 501 of
the [Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act] McKinney-
Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11411).
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 1053 OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR
1997
SEC. 1053. DISPOSAL OF TRACT OF REAL PROPERTY IN THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA.
(a) Disposal Authorized.--Notwithstanding title II the
Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40
U.S.C. 481 et seq.), title VIII of such Act (40 U.S.C. 531 et
seq.), section 501 of the [Stewart B. McKinney Homeless
Assistance Act] McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42
U.S.C. 11411), or any other provision of law relating to the
management and disposal of real property by the United States,
the Armed Forces Retirement Home Board may convey, by sale or
otherwise, all right, title, and interest of the United States
in a parcel of real property, including improvements thereon,
consisting of approximately 49 acres located in Washington,
District of Columbia, east of North Capitol Street, and
recorded as District Parcel 121/19.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 1123 OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEARS
1990 AND 1991
SEC. 1123. PROFESSIONAL MILITARY EDUCATION IN JOINT MATTERS
(a) * * *
(b) Statement of Congressional Policy.--As part of the
efforts of the Secretary of Defense to improve professional
military education, Congress urges, as a matter of policy, and
fully expects the Secretary to establish the following:
(1) * * *
(2) A two-phase approach to strengthening the focus
on joint matters, as follows:
(A) * * *
(B) Phase II instruction consisting of a
follow-on, solely joint curriculum taught at
the [Armed Forces Staff College] Joint Forces
Staff College to officers who are expected to
be selected for the joint specialty. The
curriculum should emphasize multiple ``hands
on'' exercises and must adequately prepare
students to perform effectively from the outset
in what will probably be their first exposure
to a totally new environment, an assignment to
a joint, multiservice organization. Phase II
instruction should be structured so that
students progress from a basic knowledge of
joint matters learned in Phase I to the level
of expertise necessary for successful
performance in the joint arena.
(3) A sequenced approach to joint education in which
the norm would require an officer to complete Phase I
instruction before proceeding to Phase II instruction.
An exception to the normal sequence should be granted
by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff only on a
case-by-case basis for compelling cause. Officers
selected to receive such an exception should be
required to demonstrate a basic knowledge of joint
matters and other aspects of the Phase I curriculum
that qualifies them to meet the minimum requirements
established for entry into Phase II instruction without
first completing Phase I instruction. The number of
officers selected to attend an offering of the
principal course of instruction at the [Armed Forces
Staff College] Joint Forces Staff College who have not
completed Phase I instruction should comprise only a
small portion of the total number of officers selected.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 1412 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT, 1986
SEC. 1412. DESTRUCTION OF EXISTING STOCKPILE OF LETHAL CHEMICAL AGENTS
AND MUNITIONS
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g) Periodic Reports.--(1) * * *
(2) Each annual report shall include the following:
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(C) An accounting of all funds expended (during such
fiscal year) for activities carried out under this
section, with a separate accounting for amounts
expended for--
(i) * * *
* * * * * * *
(vii) grants to State and local governments
to assist those governments in carrying out
functions relating to emergency preparedness
and response in accordance with subsection
[(c)(3)] (c)(4).
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 3695 OF TITLE 38, UNITED STATES CODE
Sec. 3695. Limitation on period of assistance under two or more
programs
(a) The aggregate period for which any person may receive
assistance under two or more of the provisions of law listed
below may not exceed 48 months (or the part-time equivalent
thereof):
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(5) Chapters 107, 1606, and [1610] 1611 of title 10.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 13 OF THE PEACE CORPS ACT
experts and consultants
Sec. 13. (a) * * *
(b) Service of an individual as a member of the Council
authorized to be established by section 12 of this Act or as an
expert or consultant under subsection (a) of this section shall
not be considered as employment or holding of office or
position bringing such individual within the provisions of
sections 3323(b) and 8344 of title 5, United States Code,
section 824 of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 or any other law
limiting the reemployment of retired officers or employees or
governing the simultaneous receipt of compensation and retired
pay or annuities[, subject to section 5532 of title 5, United
States Code].
----------
SECTION 127 OF THE TRADE DEFICIT REVIEW COMMISSION ACT
Trade Deficit Review Commission
Sec. 127. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g) Commission Personnel Matters.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(6) Applicability of certain pay [authorities.--
[(A) In general.--An individual]
authorities.--An individual who is a member of
the Commission and is an annuitant or otherwise
covered by section 8344 or 8468 of title 5,
United States Code, by reason of membership on
the Commission is not subject to the provisions
of section 8344 or 8468 (whichever is
applicable) with respect to such membership.
[(B) Uniformed service.--An individual who is
a member of the Commission and is a member or
former member of a uniformed service is not
subject to the provisions of subsections (b)
and (c) of section 5532, United States Code,
with respect to membership on the Commission.]
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 28 OF THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954
Sec. 28. Appointment of Army, Navy, or Air Force Officers.--
Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, the officer of
the Army, Navy, or Air Force serving as Assistant General
Manager for Military Application shall serve without prejudice
to his commissioned status as such officer. Any such officer
serving as Assistant General Manager for Military Application
shall receive in addition to his pay and allowances, including
special and incentive pays, for which pay and allowances the
Commission shall reimburse his service, an amount equal to the
difference between such pay and allowances, including special
and incentive pays, and the compensation established for this
position. Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, any
active or retired officer of the Army, Navy, or Air Force may
serve as Chairman of the Military Liaison Committee without
prejudice to his active or retired status as such officer. Any
such active officer serving as Chairman of the Military Liaison
Committee shall receive, in addition to his pay and allowances,
including special and incentive pays, an amount equal to the
difference between such pay and allowances, including special
and incentive pays, and the compensation fixed for such
Chairman. Any such retired officer serving as Chairman of the
Military Liaison Committee shall receive the compensation fixed
for such Chairman and his retired pay[, subject to section 201
of the Dual Compensation Act].
----------
NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION ACT
* * * * * * *
Subtitle A--Establishment and Organization
Sec. 3211. Establishment and mission.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3213A. Principal Deputy Administrator.
* * * * * * *
Subtitle A--Establishment and Organization
* * * * * * *
SEC. 3212. ADMINISTRATOR FOR NUCLEAR SECURITY.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(e)] (f) Reorganization Authority.--Except as provided by
subsections (b) and (c) of section 3291:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
SEC. 3213A. PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR.
(a) In General.--(1) There is in the Administration a
Principal Deputy Administrator, who is appointed by the
President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
(2) The Principal Deputy Administrator shall be appointed
from among persons who--
(A) have extensive background in national security,
organizational management, and appropriate technical
fields; and
(B) are well qualified to manage the nuclear weapons,
nonproliferation, and materials disposition programs of
the Administration in a manner that advances and
protects the national security of the United States.
(b) Duties.--Subject to the authority, direction, and control
of the Administrator, the Principal Deputy Administrator shall
perform such duties and exercise such powers as the
Administrator may prescribe, including the coordination of
activities among the elements of the Administration. The
Principal Deputy Administrator shall act for, and exercise the
powers of, the Administrator when the Administrator is disabled
or the position of Administrator is vacant.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 3214. DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR FOR DEFENSE PROGRAMS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(c) Relationship to Laboratories and Facilities.--The head
of each national security laboratory and nuclear weapons
production facility shall, consistent with applicable
contractual obligations, report to the Deputy Administrator for
Defense Programs.]
* * * * * * *
[SEC. 3245. PROHIBITION ON PAY OF PERSONNEL ENGAGED IN CONCURRENT
SERVICE OR DUTIES INSIDE AND OUTSIDE
ADMINISTRATION.
[(a) Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, no
funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available
for the Department of Energy may be obligated or utilized to
pay the basic pay of an officer or employee of the Department
of Energy who--
[(1) serves concurrently in a position in the
Administration and a position outside the
Administration; or
[(2) performs concurrently the duties of a position
in the Administration and the duties of a position
outside the Administration.
[(b) The provision of this section shall take effect 60 days
after the date of enactment of this section.]
----------
SECTION 5 OF THE MULTINATIONAL FORCE AND OBSERVERS PARTICIPATION
RESOLUTION
nonreimbursed costs
Sec. 5. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d)(1) The United States may use contractors to provide
logistical support to the Multinational Force and Observers
under this section in lieu of providing such support through a
logistical support unit comprised of members of the United
States Armed Forces.
(2) Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) and section 7(b),
support by a contractor under this subsection may be provided
without reimbursement, whenever the President determines that
such action enhances or supports the national security
interests of the United States.
----------
SECTION 1505 OF THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION CONTROL ACT OF 1992
SEC. 1505. INTERNATIONAL NONPROLIFERATION INITIATIVE.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(e) Quarterly Report.--(1) Not later than 30 days after the
end of each [quarter of a] fiscal year during which the
authority of the Secretary of Defense to provide assistance
under this section is in effect, the Secretary of Defense shall
transmit to the committees of Congress named in paragraph (2) a
report of the activities to reduce the proliferation threat
carried out under this section. Each report shall set forth
[(for the preceding quarter and cumulatively)] for the
preceding fiscal year--
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(f) Termination of Authority.--The authority of the Secretary
of Defense to provide assistance under this section terminates
at the close of fiscal year [2001] 2002.
----------
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001
* * * * * * *
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
* * * * * * *
TITLE XXI--ARMY
SEC. 2101. AUTHORIZED ARMY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION PROJECTS.
(a) Inside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated
pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section
2104(a)(1), the Secretary of the Army may acquire real property
and carry out military construction projects for the
installations and locations inside the United States, and in
the amounts, set forth in the following table:
Army: Inside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installation or
State location Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama........................ Redstone Arsenal. $39,000,000
Alaska......................... Fort Richardson.. $3,000,000
Arizona........................ Fort Huachuca.... $4,600,000
Arkansas....................... Pine Bluff $2,750,000
Arsenal.
California..................... Fort Irwin....... $31,000,000
Presidio, $2,600,000
Monterey.
Georgia........................ Fort Benning..... $15,800,000
Fort Gordon...... $2,600,000
Hawaii......................... Pohakoula $32,000,000
Training
Facility.
Schofield $43,800,000
Barracks.
Kansas......................... Fort Riley....... $22,000,000
Kentucky....................... Fort Knox........ $550,000
Maryland....................... Fort Meade....... $19,000,000
Missouri....................... Fort Leonard Wood [$65,400,000]
$69,400,000
New Jersey..................... Picatinny Arsenal $5,600,000
New York....................... Fort Drum........ [$18,000,000]
$21,000,000
North Carolina................. Fort Bragg....... $222,200,000
Sunny Point Army $2,300,000
Terminal.
Ohio........................... Columbus......... $1,832,000
Pennsylvania................... Carlisle Barracks $10,500,000
New Cumberland $3,700,000
Army Depot.
Texas.......................... Fort Bliss....... $26,000,000
Fort Hood........ [$36,492,000]
$39,492,000
Red River Army $800,000
Depot.
Virginia....................... Fort Evans....... $4,450,000
---------------------
Total:......... [$615,974,000]
$623,074,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2104. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, ARMY.
(a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30,
2000, for military construction, land acquisition, and military
family housing functions of the Department of the Army in the
total amount of [$1,925,344,000] $1,935,744,000, as follows:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(b) Limitation on Total Cost of Construction Projects.--
Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 2853
of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost variations
authorized by law, the total cost of all projects carried out
under section 2101 of this Act may not exceed--
(1) * * *
(2) [$22,600,000] $27,000,000 (the balance of the
amount authorized under section 2101(a) for the
construction of a Basic Training Complex at Fort
Leonard Wood, Missouri);
(3) [$10,000,000] $13,000,000 (the balance of the
amount authorized under section 2101(a) for
construction of a Multipurpose Digital Training Range
at Fort Hood, Texas);
* * * * * * *
(6) [$6,000,000] $9,000,000 (the balance of the
amount authorized under section 2101(a) for the
construction of a battle simulation center at Fort
Drum, New York); and
* * * * * * *
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE
SEC. 2301. AUTHORIZED AIR FORCE CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION
PROJECTS.
(a) Inside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated
pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section
2304(a)(1), the Secretary of the Air Force may acquire real
property and carry out military construction projects for the
installations and locations inside the United States, and in
the amounts, set forth in the following table:
Air Force: Inside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installation or
State location Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama..................... Maxwell Air Force $3,825,000
Base.
Alaska...................... Cape Romanzof....... $3,900,000
* * * * * * *
New Jersey.................. McGuire Air Force [$29,772,000]
Base. $32,972,000
* * * * * * *
Wyoming..................... F.E. Warren Air $25,720,000
Force Base.
---------------------
Total:............ [$745,755,000]
$748,955,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2304. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, AIR FORCE.
(a) * * *
(b) Limitation on Total Cost of Construction Projects.--
Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 2853
of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost variation
authorized by law, the total cost of all projects carried out
under section 2301 of this Act may not exceed--
(1) * * *
(2) [$9,400,000] $12,600,000 (the balance of the
amount authorized under section 2301(a) for the
construction of an air freight terminal and base supply
complex at McGuire Air Force Base, New Jersey).
* * * * * * *
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES
SEC. 2401. AUTHORIZED DEFENSE AGENCIES CONSTRUCTION AND LAND
ACQUISITION PROJECTS.
(a) Inside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated
pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section
2403(a)(1), the Secretary of Defense may acquire real property
and carry out military construction projects for the
installations and locations inside the United States, and in
the amounts, set forth in the following table:
Defense Agencies: Inside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installation or
Agency location Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical Demilitarization... Aberdeen Proving $3,100,000
Ground.............
* * * * * * *
TRICARE Management Activity. Edwards Air Force $17,900,000
Base, California...
Marine Corps Base, [$14,150,000]
Camp Pendleton, $15,300,000
California.........
Eglin Air Force $37,600,000
Base, Florida......
Fort Drum, New York. $1,400,000
Patrick Air Force $2,700,000
Base, Florida......
Tyndall Air Force $7,700,000
Base, Florida......
William Beaumont $4,200,000
Medical Center,
Texas..............
---------------------
Total:............ [$256,906,000]
$258,056,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances
* * * * * * *
Part II--Navy Conveyances
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2853. LAND CONVEYANCE, NAVAL COMPUTER AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
STATION, CUTLER, MAINE.
(a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Navy may
convey, without consideration, to the State of Maine, any
political subdivision of the State of Maine, or any tax-
supported agency in the State of Maine, any or all right,
title, and interest of the United States in and to a parcel of
real property, including any improvements thereon, consisting
of approximately 263 acres located in Washington County, Maine,
and known as the Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station,
Cutler, Maine.
* * * * * * *
Subtitle E--Other Matters
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2886. ESTABLISHMENT OF WORLD WAR II MEMORIAL ON GUAM.
(a) Establishment Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall
establish on Federal lands near the Fena Caves, and on Federal
lands near Yigo, in Guam a suitable memorial intended to honor
those Guamanian civilians who were killed during the occupation
of Guam during World War II and to commemorate the liberation
of Guam by the United States Armed Forces in 1944.
(b) Maintenance of [Memorial] Memorials.--The Secretary of
Defense shall be responsible for the maintenance of the
[memorial] memorials established pursuant to subsection (a).
(c) Consultation.--In designing and building the [memorial]
memorials and selecting the specific location for the
[memorial] memorials, the Secretary of Defense shall consult
with the American Battle Monuments Commission established under
chapter 21 of title 36, United States Code.
* * * * * * *
----------
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000
* * * * * * *
TITLE XXII--NAVY
SEC. 2201. AUTHORIZED NAVY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION PROJECTS.
(a) Inside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated
pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section
2204(a)(1), the Secretary of the Navy may acquire real property
and carry out military construction projects for the
installations and locations inside the United States, and in
the amounts, set forth in the following table:
Navy: Inside the United States
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Installation or location Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona....................................... Marine Corps Air Station, Yuma............ $17,020,000
Navy Detachment, Camp Navajo.............. $7,560,000
* * * * * * *
Hawaii........................................ Camp H.M. Smith........................... [$86,050,000]
$89,050,000
* * * * * * *
Washington.................................... Naval Ordnance Center Pacific Division $3,440,000
Detachment, Port Hadlock.................
Naval Undersea Warfare Center, Keyport.... $6,700,000
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Bremerton..... $15,610,000
Strategic Weapons Facility Pacific, $6,300,000
Bremerton................................
---------------------
Total................................... [$817,230,000]
$820,230,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2204. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, NAVY.
(a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30,
1999, for military construction, land acquisition, and military
family housing functions of the Department of the Navy in the
total amount of [$2,108,087,000] $2,111,087,000 as follows:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(b) Limitation on Total Cost of Construction Projects.--
Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 2853
of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost variation
authorized by law, the total cost of all projects carried out
under section 2201 of this Act may not exceed--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) [$70,180,000] $73,180,000 (the balance of the
amount authorized under section 2201(a) for the
construction of the Commander-in-Chief Headquarters,
Pacific Command, Camp H.M. Smith, Hawaii).
* * * * * * *
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES
SEC. 2401. AUTHORIZED DEFENSE AGENCIES CONSTRUCTION AND LAND
ACQUISITION PROJECTS.
(a) Inside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated
pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section
2405(a)(1), the Secretary of Defense may acquire real property
and carry out military construction projects for the
installations and locations inside the United States, and in
the amounts, set forth in the following table:
Defense Agencies: Inside the United States
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agency Installation or location Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical Demilitarization..................... Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky........... [$206,800,000]
$254,030,000
* * * * * * *
TRICARE Management Agency..................... Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland.......... $3,000,000
Cheatham Annex, Virginia.................. $1,650,000
Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona..... $10,000,000
Fort Lewis, Washington.................... $5,500,000
Fort Riley, Kansas........................ $6,000,000
Fort Sam Houston, Texas................... $5,800,000
Fort Wainwright, Alaska................... $133,000,000
Los Angeles Air Force Base, California.... $13,600,000
Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, $3,500,000
North Carolina...........................
Moody Air Force Base, Georgia............. $1,250,000
Naval Air Station, Jacksonville, Florida.. $3,780,000
Naval Air Station, Norfolk, Virginia...... $4,050,000
Naval Air Station, Patuxent River, $4,150,000
Maryland.................................
Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida..... $4,300,000
Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island, [$4,700,000]
Washington............................... $6,600,000
Patrick Air Force Base, Florida........... $1,750,000
Travis Air Force Base, California......... $7,500,000
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio..... $3,900,000
---------------------
Total................................... [$587,420,000]
$636,550,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2405. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, DEFENSE AGENCIES.
(a) * * *
(b) Limitation of Total Cost of Construction Projects.--
Notwithstanding the cost variation authorized by section 2853
of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost variations
authorized by law, the total cost of all projects carried out
under section 2401 of this Act may not exceed--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) [$184,000,000] $231,230,000 (the balance of the
amount authorized under section 2401(a) for the
construction of a chemical demilitarization facility at
Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky).
* * * * * * *
TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances
Part I--Army Conveyances
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2832. LAND EXCHANGE, ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL, ILLINOIS.
(a) Conveyance Authorized.--(1) The Secretary of the Army may
convey to the City of Moline, Illinois (in this section
referred to as the ``City''), all right, title, and interest of
the United States in and to a parcel of real property,
including improvements thereon, consisting of approximately .3
acres at the Rock Island Arsenal for the purpose of permitting
the City to construct a new entrance and exit ramp for the
bridge that crosses the southeast end of the island containing
the Arsenal.
(2) The Secretary may convey to the City all right, title,
and interest of the United States in and to an additional
parcel of real property, including improvements thereon, at the
Rock Island Arsenal consisting of approximately .513 acres.
(b) Consideration.--(1) As consideration for the conveyance
under subsection (a)(1), the City shall convey to the Secretary
all right, title, and interest of the City in and to a parcel
of real property consisting of approximately .2 acres and
located in the vicinity of the parcel to be conveyed under
subsection (a)(1).
(2) As consideration for the conveyance under subsection
(a)(2), the City shall convey to the Secretary all right,
title, and interest of the City in and to a parcel of real
property consisting of approximately .063 acres and construct
on the parcel, at the City's expense, a new access ramp to the
Rock Island Arsenal.
* * * * * * *
Subtitle F--Expansion of Arlington National Cemetery
SEC. 2881. TRANSFER FROM NAVY ANNEX, ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA.
(a) * * *
(b) Use of Land.--[(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the] The
Secretary of the Army shall incorporate the Navy Annex property
transferred under subsection (a) into Arlington National
Cemetery.
[(2) The Secretary of Defense may reserve not to exceed 10
acres of the Navy Annex property (of which not more than six
acres may be north of the existing Columbia Pike) as a site
for--
[(A) a National Military Museum, if such site is
recommended for such purpose by the Commission on the
National Military Museum established under section
2901; and
[(B) such other memorials that the Secretary of
Defense considers compatible with Arlington National
Cemetery.]
* * * * * * *
[(d) Establishment of Master Plan.--(1) The Secretary of
Defense shall establish a master plan for the use of the Navy
Annex property transferred under subsection (a).
[(2) The master plan shall take into account (A) the report
submitted by the Secretary of the Army on the expansion of
Arlington National Cemetery required at page 787 of the Joint
Explanatory Statement of the Committee of Conference to
accompany the bill H.R. 3616 of the One Hundred Fifth Congress
(House Report 105-436 of the 105th Congress), and (B) the
recommendation (if any) of the Commission on the National
Military Museum to use a portion of the Navy Annex property as
the site for the National Military Museum.
[(3) The master plan shall be established in consultation
with the National Capital Planning Commission and only after
coordination with appropriate officials of the Commonwealth of
Virginia and of the County of Arlington, Virginia, with respect
to matters pertaining to real property under the jurisdiction
of those officials located in or adjacent to the Navy Annex
property, including assessments of the effects on
transportation, infrastructure, and utilities in that county by
reason of the proposed uses of the Navy Annex property under
subsection (b).
[(4) Not later than 180 days after the date on which the
Commission on the National Military Museum submits to Congress
its report under section 2903, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to Congress the master plan established under this
subsection.
[(e) Implementation of Master Plan.--The Secretary of Defense
may implement the provisions of the master plan at any time
after the Secretary submits the master plan to Congress.
[(f) Legal Description.--In conjunction with the development
of the master plan required by subsection (d), the Secretary of
Defense shall determine the exact acreage and legal description
of the portion of the Navy Annex property reserved under
subsection (b)(2) and of the portion transferred under
subsection (a) for incorporation into Arlington National
Cemetery.]
[(g)] (d) Reports.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(h)] (e) Deadline.--The Secretary of Defense shall complete
the transfer of administrative jurisdiction required by
subsection (a) not later than the earlier of--
(1) January 1, 2010; or
(2) the date when the Navy Annex property is no
longer required (as determined by the Secretary) for
use as temporary office space due to the renovation of
the Pentagon.
* * * * * * *
TITLE XXIX--COMMISSION ON NATIONAL MILITARY MUSEUM
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2902. DUTIES OF COMMISSION.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(d) Requirements for Location on Navy Annex Property.--In
the case of a recommendation under subsection (c)(1) to
authorize construction of a national military museum on the
Navy Annex property authorized for reservation for such purpose
by section 2871(b), the design of the national military museum
on such property shall be subject to the following
requirements:
[(1) The design shall be prepared in consultation
with the Superintendent of Arlington National Cemetery.
[(2) The design may not provide for access by
vehicles to the national military museum through
Arlington National Cemetery.]
(d) Prohibition on Consideration of Arlington Naval Annex.--
The Commission may not consider any portion of the Navy Annex
property described in section 2881 as a possible site for a
national military museum.
* * * * * * *
----------
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999
* * * * * * *
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES
SEC. 2401. AUTHORIZED DEFENSE AGENCIES CONSTRUCTION AND LAND
ACQUISITION PROJECTS.
(a) Inside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated
pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section
2404(a)(1), the Secretary of Defense may acquire real property
and carry out military construction projects for the
installations and locations inside the United States, and in
the amounts, set forth in the following table:
Defense Agencies: Inside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installation or
Agency location Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical Demilitarization... Aberdeen Proving [$186,350,000]
Ground, Maryland... $223,950,000
Newport Army Depot, $191,550,000
Indiana............
* * * * * * *
Special Operations Command.. Eglin Auxiliary $7,310,000
Field 3, Florida...
Eglin Auxiliary $2,400,000
Field 9, Florida...
Fort Campbell, $15,000,000
Kentucky.
MacDill Air Force $8,400,000
Base, Florida......
Naval Amphibious $3,600,000
Base, Coronado,
California.........
Stennis Space $5,500,000
Center, Mississippi
---------------------
Total........... [$690,016,000]
$727,616,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
SEC. 2404. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, DEFENSE AGENCIES.
(a) * * *
(b) Limitation of Total Cost of Construction Projects.--
Notwithstanding the cost variation authorized by section 2853
of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost variation
authorized by law, the total cost of all projects carried out
under section 2401 of this Act may not exceed--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) [$158,000,000] $195,600,000 (the balance of the
amount authorized under section 2401(a) for the
construction of the Ammunition Demilitarization
Facility at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland).
* * * * * * *
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances
* * * * * * *
PART II--NAVY CONVEYANCES
SEC. 2851. CONVEYANCE OF EASEMENT, MARINE CORPS BASE, CAMP PENDLETON,
CALIFORNIA.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g) Limitation on Construction of Roads or Highways.--If a
State law enacted after January 1, 2001, directly or indirectly
prohibits or restricts the construction or approval of a road
or highway within the easement granted under this section, the
State law shall not be effective with respect to such
construction or approval.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 2401 OF THE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1995
SEC. 2401. AUTHORIZED DEFENSE AGENCIES CONSTRUCTION AND LAND
ACQUISITION PROJECTS.
Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of
appropriations in section 2405(a)(1), the Secretary of Defense
may acquire real property and carry out military construction
projects for the installations and locations inside the United
States, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:
Defense Agencies: Inside the United States
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agency Installation or location Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction.... Anniston Army Depot, Alabama............... $5,000,000
Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas............... [$154,400,000]
$177,400,000
Tooele Army Depot, Utah.................... $4,000,000
Umatilla Army Depot, Oregon................ $193,377,000
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
SECTION 2835 OF THE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL
YEAR 1998
SEC. 2835. LAND CONVEYANCES, FORT DIX, NEW JERSEY.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Reversion.--(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) or (2), the Borough and
Board may exchange between each other, without the consent of
the Secretary, all or any portion of the property conveyed
under subsection (a) so long as the property continues to be
used by the grantees for economic development or educational
purposes.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 136 OF THE MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001
Sec. 136. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(m) Indemnification of Transferees.--(1) With respect to the
disposal of real property under subsection (e) at the Base as
part of the Project, the Secretary shall hold harmless, defend,
and indemnify in full the Community and other persons and
entities described in paragraph (2) from and against any suit,
claim, demand or action, liability, judgment, cost or other fee
arising out of any claim for personal injury or property damage
(including death, illness, or loss of or damage to property or
economic loss) that results from, or is in any manner
predicated upon, the release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant, or petroleum or
petroleum derivative as a result of Department of Defense
activities at the Base.
(2) The persons and entities referred to in paragraph (1) are
the following:
(A) The Community (including any officer, agent, or
employee of the Community) that acquires ownership or
control of any real property at the Base as described
in paragraph (1).
(B) The State of Texas or any political subdivision
of the State (including any officer, agent, or employee
of the State or political subdivision) that acquires
such ownership or control.
(C) Any other person or entity that acquires such
ownership or control.
(D) Any successor, assignee, transferee, lender, or
lessee of a person or entity described in subparagraphs
(A) through (C).
(3) To the extent the persons and entities described in
paragraph (2) contributed to any such release or threatened
release, paragraph (1) shall not apply.
(4) No indemnification may be afforded under this subsection
unless the person or entity making a claim for
indemnification--
(A) notifies the Department of Defense in writing
within two years after such claim accrues or begins
action within six months after the date of mailing, by
certified or registered mail, of notice of final denial
of the claim by the Department of Defense;
(B) furnishes to the Department of Defense copies of
pertinent papers the entity receives;
(C) furnishes evidence or proof of any claim, loss,
or damage covered by this subsection; and
(D) provides, upon request by the Department of
Defense, access to the records and personnel of the
entity for purposes of defending or settling the claim
or action.
(5) In any case in which the Secretary determines that the
Department of Defense may be required to make indemnification
payments to a person under this subsection for any suit, claim,
demand or action, liability, judgment, cost or other fee
arising out of any claim for personal injury or property damage
referred to in paragraph (1), the Secretary may settle or
defend, on behalf of that person, the claim for personal injury
or property damage. If the person to whom the Department of
Defense may be required to make indemnification payments does
not allow the Secretary to settle or defend the claim, the
person may not be afforded indemnification with respect to that
claim under this subsection.
(6) For purposes of paragraph (4)(A), the date on which a
claim accrues is the date on which the plaintiff knew (or
reasonably should have known) that the personal injury or
property damage referred to in paragraph (1) was caused or
contributed to by the release or threatened release of a
hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant, or petroleum or
petroleum derivative as a result of Department of Defense
activities at the Base.
(7) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as
affecting or modifying in any way section 120(h) of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9620(h)).
(8) In this subsection, the terms ``facility'', ``hazardous
substance'', ``release'', and ``pollutant or contaminant'' have
the meanings given such terms in section 101 of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980, respectively (42 U.S.C. 9601).
[(m)] (n) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(9) The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of the
Air Force or the Secretary's designee[, who shall be a
civilian official of the Department appointed by the
President with the advice and consent of the Senate].
(10) The term ``State'' means the State of Texas.
[(n) Effective Date.--This section becomes effective
immediately upon enactment of this Act.]
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 5 OF THE ACT OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1957
(PUBLIC LAW 85-258)
AN ACT To direct the Secretary of the Navy or his designee to convey a
two thousand four hundred seventy-seven and forty-three one-hundredths
acre tract of land, avigation, and sewer easements in Tarrant and Wise
Counties, Texas, situated about twenty miles northwest of the city of
Fort Worth, Texas, to the State of Texas.
Sec. 5. Nothing in this Act shall prevent the State of Texas
from disposing of or salvaging buildings and improvements now
located on the land to be conveyed, or leasing, licensing or
granting easements into and on the lands and improvements,
except that the exercise of such rights shall not impair the
use of the lands and improvements for the purpose set forth in
section 4 of this Act, including preservation of the aviation
potential of the property and that any revenues derived from
such disposal, salvaging, leasing, licensing, or granting of
easements shall be expended solely by the State of Texas for
the protection, maintenance, and operation of the facility as a
training center or for the protection, maintenance, and
operation of other Texas National Guard facilities.
* * * * * * *
----------
OMNIBUS PARKS AND PUBLIC LANDS MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1996
* * * * * * *
DIVISION I
TITLE I--THE PRESIDIO OF SAN FRANCISCO
* * * * * * *
SEC. 104. DUTIES AND AUTHORITIES OF THE TRUST.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Financial Authorities.--(1) To augment or encourage the
use of non-Federal funds to finance capital improvements on
Presidio properties transferred to its jurisdiction, the Trust,
in addition to its other authorities, shall have the following
authorities subject to the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (2
U.S.C. 661 et seq.):
(A) * * *
* * * * * * *
(3) The aggregate amount of obligations issued under
[paragraph (3) of] paragraph (2) of this subsection
which are outstanding at any one time may not exceed
[$50,000,000] $150,000,000.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 107. AUTHORITY TO LEASE CERTAIN HOUSING UNITS WITHIN THE PRESIDIO.
(a) Availability of Housing Units for Army Lease.--The Trust
shall make available for lease, to those persons designated by
the Secretary of the Army, housing units specified in
subsection (b).
(b) Housing Units.--The housing units referred to in this
section are identified as follows:
(1) Liggett 715 A&B, 716 A&B, 717 A&B, 718 A&B, 719
A&B, and 720 A&B.
(2) West Washington 1401 A&B, 1403 A&B, and 1405 B.
(3) Infantry Terrace 340, 341, 342, and 343.
(4) Wright Loop 1332.
(c) Replacement of Damaged or Destroyed Housing Units.--In
the event of significant damage to or destruction of a housing
unit specified in subsection (b), the Trust shall provide a
substitute housing unit of equal size and accommodation.
(d) Lease Amount.--The monthly amount charged by the Trust
for the lease of a housing unit, including utilities and
municipal services, under this section shall not exceed the
monthly rate of the basic allowance for housing that the
occupant of the housing unit is entitled to receive under
section 403 of title 37, United States Code. The Department of
the Army shall have no other fiscal obligations with regard to
the housing units specified in subsection (b) or housing units
replaced pursuant to subsection (c).
(e) Relations to Trust Funding Limitations.--The Trust shall
comply with this section without regard to the requirement of
section 105(b) that the Trust achieve financial self-
sufficiency.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 3139 OF THE STROM THURMOND NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT
FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999
SEC. 3139. HANFORD WASTE TANK CLEANUP PROGRAM REFORMS.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(f ) Termination.--(1) The Office shall terminate 5 years
after the commencement of operations under this section unless
the Secretary determines that termination on that date would
disrupt effective management of the Hanford Tank Farm
operations.
[(2) The Secretary shall notify, in writing, the committees
referred to in subsection (d) of a determination under
paragraph (1).]
(f) Termination.--(1) The Office shall terminate on the later
to occur of the following dates:
(A) September 30, 2010.
(B) The date on which the Assistant Secretary of
Energy for Environmental Management determines, in
consultation with the head of the Office, that
continuation of the Office is no longer necessary to
carry out the responsibilities of the Department of
Energy under the Tri-Party Agreement.
(2) The Assistant Secretary shall notify, in writing, the
committees referred to in subsection (d) of a determination
under paragraph (1).
(3) In this subsection, the term ``Tri-Party Agreement''
means the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order
entered into among the Department of Energy, the Environmental
Protection Agency, and the State of Washington Department of
Ecology.
* * * * * * *
----------
MERCHANT MARINE ACT, 1936
* * * * * * *
TITLE XI--FEDERAL SHIP MORTGAGE INSURANCE
* * * * * * *
SEC. 1109. DEPOSIT FUND.
(a) Establishment of Deposit Fund.--There is established in
the Treasury a deposit fund for purposes of this section. The
Secretary may, in accordance with an agreement under subsection
(b), deposit into and hold in the deposit fund cash belonging
to an obligor to serve as collateral for a guarantee under this
title made with respect to the obligor.
(b) Agreement.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary and an obligor shall
enter into a reserve fund or other collateral account
agreement to govern the deposit, withdrawal, retention,
use, and reinvestment of cash of the obligor held in
the deposit fund established by subsection (a).
(2) Terms.--The agreement shall contain such terms
and conditions as are required under this section and
such additional terms as are considered by the
Secretary to be necessary to protect fully the
interests of the United States.
(3) Security interest of united states.--The
agreement shall include terms that grant to the United
States a security interest in all amounts deposited
into the deposit fund.
(c) Investment.--The Secretary may invest and reinvest any
part of the amounts in the deposit fund established by
subsection (a) in obligations of the United States with such
maturities as ensure that amounts in the deposit fund will be
available as required for purposes of agreements under
subsection (b). Cash balances of the deposit fund in excess of
current requirements shall be maintained in a form of
uninvested funds and the Secretary of the Treasury shall pay
interest on these funds.
(d) Withdrawals.--
(1) In general.--The cash deposited into the deposit
fund established by subsection (a) may not be withdrawn
without the consent of the Secretary.
(2) Use of income.--Subject to paragraph (3), the
Secretary may pay any income earned on cash of an
obligor deposited into the deposit fund in accordance
with the terms of the agreement with the obligor under
subsection (b).
(3) Retention against default.--The Secretary may
retain and offset any or all of the cash of an obligor
in the deposit fund, and any income realized thereon,
as part of the Secretary's recovery against the obligor
in case of a default by the obligor on an obligation.
TITLE XII--WAR RISK INSURANCE
Sec. 1201. As used in this title--
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(c) The term ``war risks'' includes to such extent as the
Secretary may determine all or any part of those losses which
are excluded from marine insurance coverage under a ``free of
capture and seizure'' clause, or analogous clauses.]
(c) The term ``war risks'' includes to such extent as the
Secretary may determine--
(1) all or any part of any loss that is excluded from
marine insurance coverage under a ``free of capture or
seizure'' clause, or under analogous clauses; and
(2) other losses from hostile acts, including
confiscation, expropriation, nationalization, or
deprivation.
* * * * * * *
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
We all have our own views on specific issues relating to
ballistic missile defense: the nature and urgency of the
threat; the technological promise of ballistic missile defense
(BMD) systems in development; the appropriate level of funding
for these BMD systems; what changes, if any, to make to the ABM
Treaty and what to do if such revisions are not agreed to
mutually by the U.S. and Russia; and other issues as well.
However, we all question the wisdom of increasing ballistic
missile defense funding nearly 60 percent when so many other
defense requirements also need to be addressed. The Service
Chiefs have identified $32.5 billion in unfunded requirements
for 2002 alone. The shipbuilding rate is about half of what it
needs to be to sustain our current naval force. The National
Guard and Reserve procurement accounts are well funded below
the level needed to equip them properly. Army readiness is
still below its objectives. Military housing across the country
needs to be upgraded and military pay needs to be raised
higher. The list goes on.
The Spratt Amendment was offered on behalf of all Democrats
to shift $985 million--one-third of the proposed $3 billion
increase and 12% of the total request--from selected ballistic
missile defense accounts and into items that meet shortfalls
for the National Guard and Army Reserve, the Navy and Marine
Corps, the Air Force, and Department of Energy nonproliferation
programs. The amendment did not affect systems that counter
theater ballistic missile threats or the ground-based national
missile defense system, and it provided funding to improve
flight testing as the Administration requested. The amendment
thus provided for a $2.0 billion (37.5 percent) increase for
BMD programs (compared to the Administration's request).
The amendment did not fund the Administration's request to
build and station five ``emergency'' interceptors at Ft. Greely
or its proposal to upgrade the Cobra Dane radar. These requests
are not related to flight testing, but rather for what appears
to be pre-deployment operational non-flight testing. Given the
early stages of development of the ground-based system and the
controversial nature of deploying a system, we consider the
request to fund these items premature.
The amendment also cut $120 million in addition to the $40
million the majority cut from space-based BMD programs, and
reduced funding to transform the Navy Theater Wide system into
a national missile defense system. The ability to sustain these
efforts beyond 2002 is seriously in doubt, and we believe the
items we identified to receive the funding cut for BMD are all
higher priority defense needs.
We are disappointed the Spratt amendment was not adopted,
but we hope to continue to work together with the majority in a
bipartisan fashion during the remainder of the legislative
process to properly balance the need to defend against
ballistic missiles with the other pressing funding requirements
faced by our men and women in uniform.
Ike Skelton.
John Spratt.
Lane Evans.
Silvestre Reyes.
Thomas H. Allen.
John B. Larson.
Loretta Sanchez.
James R. Langevin.
Rick Larsen.
Ellen O. Tauscher.
Robert E. Andrews.
Cynthia A. McKinney.
Adam Smith.
Jim Turner.
Rod R. Blagojevich.
Susan A. Davis.
Solomon P. Ortiz.
James H. Maloney.
Marty Meehan.
Vic Snyder.
Robert A. Brady.
Mike Thompson.
Neil Abercrombie.
Ciro D. Rodriguez.
Baron P. Hill.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF HON. LANE EVANS
While I voted for the Committee's mark of the FY02
Department of Defense Authorization Act, I was severely
disappointed that the Subcommittee on Military Research and
Development decided to add $5 million to the EMD phase of the
155mm Lightweight Howitzer program. Considering the extensive
mismanagement and technical difficulties this program has
experienced, it is mystifying why this Committee decided to add
funding to this program.
Earlier this year, the bipartisan, Iowa/Illinois Quad
Cities Congressional delegation called for the termination of
the program. We called for this after becoming overwhelmingly
convinced that this program will not result in the type of
quality weapon that our soldiers will need. The evidence is
overwhelming. Two consecutive GAO reports have shown that the
program is over-budget, behind schedule and beset by serious
technical problems.
For example, GAO found that all key program milestones have
slipped except one. The production milestone decision has
slipped from March 2002 to September 2002. Initial Fielding by
the USMC has slipped 8 months to July 2004 (28 months after the
originally envisioned date). The cost of the program has also
continued to grow. Due to technical problems and changes in the
contractor overseeing the program, the estimated cost of the
developmental contract has grown $20.2 million (over 50
percent) since GAO's first report. The developmental contract
has almost doubled since the start of the program (from an
initial $33.5 million target price to a current estimate of
$65.8 million.) I am especially troubled by this because the
American taxpayer will pick up the bill for any more cost
increases in developing the howitzer. This is due to the
program office restructuring the contract. Under this
agreement, BAE will only contribute $5 million towards
development of two pre-production guns. The Committee's action
will only reward mismanagement.
However, the biggest challenge of the program continues to
revolve around technical issues that have not been resolved and
may not be fixable. Proposed fixes to the three original
problems found by GAO--insufficient spade size, instability of
the saddle and faulty titanium welds--remain to be conclusively
proven effective in live fire testing. Welds have become so
problematic that BAE is now considering casting titanium parts
instead of welding them together, a major change in the
production process and one that may lead to even more problems.
Unfortunately, the second GAO review found new problems on
top of these already serious technical challenges.
Specifically, the spades cracked, could not be properly removed
from the ground, and didn't always work properly in all soil
types. In addition, the optical sight continued to break during
test firings. Problems this extensive should not be found in
the EMD stage of a major program. It is clearly a system that
is far from any production milestone decision.
The best thing we can do for our soldiers and Marines is to
take the money the committee has added to the program and
devote it to evaluating alternatives so that we may eventually
have an answer for the pressing indirect fire-support needs of
both the Army and the Marine Corps. I plan on offering an
amendment during floor consideration of the FY02 DOD
Authorization Act to do just that.
Lane Evans.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF HON. TOM ALLEN
strategic arms flexibility
I am pleased that the Committee adopted my amendment to
endorse the Administration's request for repeal of the
prohibition on the retirement of the 50 Peacekeeper (MX)
missiles that are required to be dismantled under the START II
Treaty. President Bush has called for further reductions in the
U.S. strategic arsenal and for taking nuclear weapons off high
alert status. Since this is one aspect of strategic policy
where there is general bipartisan agreement, we should give the
Administration the flexibility to implement these goals.
Even with the positive step the Committee took, I believe
it is the right policy to repeal the entire provision
prohibiting retirement of strategic nuclear delivery systems
(section 1302 of the FY1998 National Defense Authorization
Act). I am concerned that the President will be prevented from
implementing his plan to take strategic weapons off high alert
status with the rest of section 1302 in place. As we approach
conference, I hope the Committee will discuss with
Administration officials the budgetary and policy consequences
of section 1302, given the President's policy statements and
engagement with the Russians on a potential grand strategic
agreement.
dd-21 destroyer
I am pleased that the Committee provided $619 million for
the DD-21 land attack destroyer, and expressed its support for
moving forward with the program. While I was disappointed that
the Committee cut the FY2002 budget request by $25 million, I
note this action was taken by the Committee without prejudice
for the program itself. The DD-21 was the top ship platform
mentioned in the Chief of Naval Operation's testimony before
this Committee. I strongly concur with his statement that ``the
program is central to our transformational effort, including
the introduction of the Integrated Power System, the Advanced
Gun System, multi-function radar, and reduced manning concepts.
Additionally, the DD-21 is another step toward the creation of
a more integrated Navy/Marine Corps team. DD-21 will provide
significantly enhanced fire support for Marines ashore.'' I
believe the committee recognizes the importance of these
technologies and the platform itself for future mission and
fleet requirements. While the cut was explained because of the
delay in the contact award decision, I understand that the
program office would be able to execute these funds to make up
for lost schedule time, in order to keep the program on track
for planned initial production.
national missile defense
I have previously expressed my views on the various aspects
of national missile defense, and associate myself with the
additional views submitted by Mr. Spratt. I take this
opportunity to comment on the process by which the Committee
arrived at its endorsement of the Administration proposal.
Ballistic missile defense, as a concept, was a priority for
this Administration from the beginning. But we did not get the
actual defense budget request until just one month before
committee mark-up. We weren't informed of the Ft. Greely
deployment plan until three weeks before mark-up. We did not
get the detailed Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO)
budget documents until a couple of weeks before mark-up.
Traditionally, the Committee has four months to review the
budget request before it drafts the defense authorization bill.
With a spending increase of this magnitude, containing several
new start programs unfamiliar to the Committee, I believe we
did not have sufficient time to review the BMDO request and
consider the policy and budget ramifications.
The Committee held only one hearing on the BMDO budget
request. Personally, I found that Administration witnesses gave
general or evasive answers to specific questions. I felt that
the hearing record provided insufficient details and substance
for the Committee to make a sound judgment on the massive BMDO
expansion, and for the public to understand what is being
proposed. Administration officials repeatedly cited actual and
hypothetical threats to U.S. troops and allies from short- and
medium-range missiles to justify the scrapping of the ABM
Treaty, which does not constrain the development of any missile
defenses for the cited threats. It's like watching a doctor
prescribe chemotherapy to treat heart disease.
In a departure from traditional practice, this Committee
did not receive any out-year estimates for defense spending in
the Future Years Defense Plan. Likewise, we were not provided
with any long-range cost estimates for the BMDO missile defense
systems. We have no idea if the programs in the BMDO request
are affordable in the medium or long term. The BMDO increase is
too big, and too controversial, to merit a rubber stamp.
Lastly, I question whether it is appropriate for the
Committee to ratify the radical new BMDO plan, in terms of
budget, structure and policy, when every other major Pentagon
decision is being deferred until after the Quadrennial Defense
Review (QDR) process. Every time a Committee Member asked an
Defense Department witness about the status of a major program,
the answer was always: wait until the QDR. The lone exception
was BMDO. The bill approved by the Committee makes no
significant changes to any major weapons system, except BMD
programs. I believe it is premature to approve the 57 percent
increase for BMDO, given the impact this new initiative will
have on other Defense Department funding priorities, on our
national security strategy, and on our international security
relationships.
As we move forward with the budget process, I hope that the
majority and minority can work together to get resolution on
the many questions that have yet to be answered.
Tom Allen.
DISSENTING VIEWS
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to comment on
the National Defense Authorization Act of 2002. I have serious
reservations with aspects of this bill, in both the funding
levels and the policy focus. I respectively issue this dissent
to include these concerns for the record.
budget increase and comparison
The passage of H.R. 2586, the National Defense
Authorization Act of 2002, by the House Armed Service Committee
represents a near $33 billion dollar increase from fiscal year
2001, and provides a total of $343.3 billion in budget
authority to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2002.
For the sake of comparison, the House of Representatives has
passed an appropriation totaling $7.7 billion for the
Department of State for fiscal year 2002, and the appropriation
for Foreign Operations was passed by the House at $15.2
billion. The sum of these two appropriations--$22.9 billion--
representing the amount allocated to diplomacy, international
aid and peace by the United States, rises only to seventy
percent of the defense allocation increase and 6.7 percent of
the entire defense budget.
Such a budget level would be appropriate if our nation were
at war or if it still faced the captive threat of the Cold War.
However, since neither circumstance exists, budget levels for
diplomacy and war should be balanced at a more compatible
level. Moreover, with the financial mismanagement that
continues to exist within the Department of Defense, increases
should not be made to many programs until a system of financial
responsibility is instituted to prevent future overspending,
fiscal waste and the lack of accountability.
missile defense
The single largest portion of the budget increase is
dedicated to the development and proliferation of missile
defense systems.
The Committee's missile defense program is a carbon copy of
the Bush administration proposal. It would dramatically
increase the missile defense budget by $3 billion (57 percent)
to $8.3 billion. This accelerated missile defense program is
virtually certain to lead China to increase the number of
nuclear weapons pointed at U.S. cities and may discourage
Russia from making deep cuts in its arsenal. This program has
also had seriously questionable success in operational tests to
date, and functional operation of any missile defense is still
in doubt.
Expensive, high-tech weapons are no substitute for
effective diplomacy, arms control, disarmament, and
international cooperation. Cooperative international arms
control and disarmament agreements will be far more effective
in advancing peace and security in the years ahead and will
cost far less than a missile shield.
nuclear reductions
Although both Russia and the U.S. have ratified START II,
its implementation has become entangled in contradictory
conditions by the Russian Duma and the U.S. Senate over the
Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty. I have been encouraged by
President Bush's proposal to unilaterally reduce the U.S.
strategic arsenal, beginning with the 50 Peacekeeper (MX)
missiles, which contain 500 nuclear warheads.
Unfortunately, current law (Section 1302 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-
85)) prohibits the President from reducing the nuclear arsenal,
other than through START II ratification. Current law also
places unnecessary restrictions on the ability of the President
to de-alert, or take off high-alert status, our nuclear
weapons. Currently the U.S. and Russia have over 4,000 nuclear
weapons aimed at each other--poised to be launched within
minutes.
The Committee unfortunately rejected the amendment by Rep.
Tom Allen to remove the restrictions in Section 1302. It did
allow a second, narrower amendment to remove the restrictions
on the MX missile retirements. However, the Committee denied
the President the ability to negotiate deeper reductions with
Russia by defeating the first Allen amendment.
The President, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, and the Joint
Chiefs of Staff have all called for reductions in our strategic
arsenal. Yet the majority party on our Committee continues to
cling to these weapons as Cold War relics.
I was also disappointed that the Committee rejected the
amendment by Rep. Ellen Tauscher that would have de-alerted the
nuclear weapons in our arsenal that are already slated for
retirement. The first President Bush de-alerted thousands of
nuclear weapons in 1991 as the Warsaw pact disintegrated. The
current President Bush has also supported the concept of taking
nuclear weapons off hair-trigger alert. Unfortunately the
Committee again missed an opportunity to demonstrate leadership
in reducing the nuclear danger.
medical access and gender
I regret that the Committee did not support changing
current law to permit service women and female dependents who
serve or reside overseas to access military hospitals and other
facilities for the purpose of privately funded abortions.
Similar women who serve or reside within the United States have
constitutionally protected right to access to legal and safe
facilities that provide abortions. Left with no other option
than to either seek an abortion in a potentially unsafe,
foreign medical facility or to forgo an abortion altogether,
this legal provision is tantamount to gender discrimination and
should be changed. Not only does this threaten the health of
such women, such a policy is seemingly unconstitutional, and
further, it threatens retention and recruitment of soldiers. It
is my hope that this restriction will be corrected upon
consideration in Committee of the Whole, and I urge the
designated conferees from the House to support any such
changes.
vieques, puerto rico
I find it unfortunate that the Committee has sought to
reduce the likelihood of the Navy's departure from the island
of Vieques, Puerto Rico and that the Reyes amendment was
defeated. The people of Vieques were provided last year with
the opportunity to choose their own fate with regards to the
Navy range, and through a non-binding referendum on June 29,
2001, overwhelmingly issued their desire for the Navy to depart
from their island. The continued bombing erodes the safety,
environment and economy of this island and its people, and
should cease. It is my hope that the Administration is
permitted to proceed with the Navy's planned withdrawal from
Vieques in 2003, and that the unlikely discovery of another
``suitable'' alternate site not be held as prerequisite for
this departure.
domestic use of intelligence
There have been recent revelations about the use of
military intelligence for domestic issues, specifically with
respect to the surveillance of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and
Operation Lantern Spike. Evidence of such past activities give
rise today to grave constitutional issues and concern about
civil liberties. The 1975 Report written by the Select
Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to
Intelligence Activities revealed practices ``abhorrent in a
free society.'' The Church Committee, named after its Chairman,
Frank Church of Idaho, exposed that in the name of state
security a program of manipulation, infiltration, surveillance,
harassment, disruption, and murder was carried out with the
consent of those at the highest levels of the United States
government and against domestic and international law.
Proposals supporting the creation of a National Homeland
Security Agency raise a specter of the return of the most
egregious aspects of the domestic program that deprived too
many Americans of their constitutional rights and in some cases
their lives. The military has an appropriate role in protecting
the United States from foreign threats, and should remain
dedicated to preparing for those threats. Domestic uses of the
military have long been prohibited for good reason, and the
same should continue to apply to all military functions,
especially any and all military intelligence and surveillance.
international assistance and programs
The escalating war on drugs that the United States is
fighting has me increasingly concerned. Though I appreciate a
reduction of $4 million from the contributions to Peru for
counter-drug support, the events surrounding the death of
American missionary Veronica Bowers and her 7-month old
daughter highlight the role our nation and military play in
foreign affairs. Though it was private CIA contractors who were
involved in this specific incident, our military resources are
being used to train and support foreign nations in their
efforts to curb drug production and distribution. As with the
transgressions that resulted from training foreign militaries
at the School of the Americas, human rights abuses can result
from the training, arming and empowerment of developing
nations' armed forces. Further, we should be cautious that such
activity does not draw our nation into difficult regional
conflicts, and in light of the apparent failure of the war on
drugs, the entire concept of military-based drug interdiction
and it's efficacy should be reconsidered.
quality of life issues
Despite my reservations with this legislation, it includes
positive aspects that I applaud.
I would like to commend the Committee, and particularly
Personnel Subcommittee Chairman McHugh for the increase in
military pay and salaries. This is an appropriate step that not
only provides our service men and women with sufficient
compensation, but also achieves two other important goals:
furthering the profession of the military and the
responsibility inherent in the changing roles of the armed
forces; and increasing the retention of service men and women.
Similarly, increases in moving allowances, housing
expenditures, provisions permitting concurrent receipt of
retired pay and veteran's disability benefits, and efforts to
protect voting rights of personnel are praiseworthy.
Many of the nations that we perceive as a threat will
respond to the expansion and proliferation of missile defense,
the expanding role of military in drug interdiction, and
prevention of reductions in nuclear missiles. It is uncertain
how these nations will respond, but I am confident that
diplomacy and engagement will have much more positive effects
on our national security than will our expanding defense
budget. Similarly, the Department of Defense should be urged to
respond to the trust that is instilled in it by reforming its
financial management, reducing the obstruction that has plagued
its history, and by eschewing involvement in domestic issues. I
urge the Committee to prudently consider its role in developing
not only national policy, but also international relations, and
to realize that as the global leader we have a role not only in
preparing for war, but also in promoting peace.
Cynthia McKinney.