(a) There is a Secretary of Defense, who is the head of the Department of Defense, appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. A person may not be appointed as Secretary of Defense within seven years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a regular component of an armed force.
(b) The Secretary is the principal assistant to the President in all matters relating to the Department of Defense. Subject to the direction of the President and to this title and section 2 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401), he has authority, direction, and control over the Department of Defense.
(c)(1) The Secretary shall report annually in writing to the President and the Congress on the expenditures, work, and accomplishments of the Department of Defense during the period covered by the report, together with—
(A) a report from each military department on the expenditures, work, and accomplishments of that department;
(B) itemized statements showing the savings of public funds, and the eliminations of unnecessary duplications, made under sections 125 and 191 of this title; and
(C) such recommendations as he considers appropriate.
(2) At the same time that the Secretary submits the annual report under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall transmit to the President and Congress a separate report from the Reserve Forces Policy Board on on 1 any reserve component matter that the Reserve Forces Policy Board considers appropriate to include in the report.
(d) Unless specifically prohibited by law, the Secretary may, without being relieved of his responsibility, perform any of his functions or duties, or exercise any of his powers through, or with the aid of, such persons in, or organizations of, the Department of Defense as he may designate.
(e)(1) The Secretary shall include in his annual report to Congress under subsection (c)—
(A) a description of the major military missions and of the military force structure of the United States for the next fiscal year;
(B) an explanation of the relationship of those military missions to that force structure; and
(C) the justification for those military missions and that force structure.
(2) In preparing the matter referred to in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall take into consideration the content of the annual national security strategy report of the President under section 108 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 404a) for the fiscal year concerned.
(f) When a vacancy occurs in an office within the Department of Defense and the office is to be filled by a person appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, the Secretary of Defense shall inform the President of the qualifications needed by a person serving in that office to carry out effectively the duties and responsibilities of that office.
(g)(1) The Secretary of Defense, with the advice and assistance of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall provide annually to the heads of Department of Defense components written policy guidance for the preparation and review of the program recommendations and budget proposals of their respective components. Such guidance shall include guidance on—
(A) national security objectives and policies;
(B) the priorities of military missions; and
(C) the resource levels projected to be available for the period of time for which such recommendations and proposals are to be effective.
(2) The Secretary of Defense, with the approval of the President and after consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall provide to the Chairman written policy guidance for the preparation and review of contingency plans, including plans for providing support to civil authorities in an incident of national significance or a catastrophic incident, for homeland defense, and for military support to civil authorities. Such guidance shall be provided every two years or more frequently as needed and shall include guidance on the specific force levels and specific supporting resource levels projected to be available for the period of time for which such plans are to be effective.
(h) The Secretary of Defense shall keep the Secretaries of the military departments informed with respect to military operations and activities of the Department of Defense that directly affect their respective responsibilities.
(i)(1) The Secretary of Defense shall transmit to Congress each year a report that contains a comprehensive net assessment of the defense capabilities and programs of the armed forces of the United States and its allies as compared with those of their potential adversaries.
(2) Each such report shall—
(A) include a comparison of the defense capabilities and programs of the armed forces of the United States and its allies with the armed forces of potential adversaries of the United States and allies of the United States;
(B) include an examination of the trends experienced in those capabilities and programs during the five years immediately preceding the year in which the report is transmitted and an examination of the expected trends in those capabilities and programs during the period covered by the future-years defense program submitted to Congress during that year pursuant to section 221 of this title;
(C) include a description of the means by which the Department of Defense will maintain the capability to reconstitute or expand the defense capabilities and programs of the armed forces of the United States on short notice to meet a resurgent or increased threat to the national security of the United States;
(D) reflect, in the overall assessment and in the strategic and regional assessments, the defense capabilities and programs of the armed forces of the United States specified in the budget submitted to Congress under section 1105 of title 31 in the year in which the report is submitted and in the five-year defense program submitted in such year; and
(E) identify the deficiencies in the defense capabilities of the armed forces of the United States in such budget and such five-year defense program.
(3) The Secretary shall transmit to Congress the report required for each year under paragraph (1) at the same time that the President submits the budget to Congress under section 1105 of title 31 in that year. Such report shall be transmitted in both classified and unclassified form.
(j)(1) Not later than April 8 of each year, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives a report on the cost of stationing United States forces outside of the United States. Each such report shall include a detailed statement of the following:
(A) The costs incurred outside the United States in connection with operating, maintaining, and supporting United States forces outside the United States, including all direct and indirect expenditures of United States funds in connection with such stationing.
(B) The amount of direct and indirect support for the stationing of United States forces provided by each host nation.
(2) In this subsection, the term “United States”, when used in a geographic sense, includes the territories and possessions of the United States.
(k) The Secretary of Defense, with the advice and assistance of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall provide annually to the Secretaries of the military departments and to the commanders of the combatant commands written guidelines to direct the effective detection and monitoring of all potential aerial and maritime threats to the national security of the United States. Those guidelines shall include guidance on the specific force levels and specific supporting resources to be made available for the period of time for which the guidelines are to be in effect.
(l)(1) The Secretary shall include in the annual report to Congress under subsection (c) the following:
(A) A comparison of the amounts provided in the defense budget for support and for mission activities for each of the preceding five fiscal years.
(B) A comparison of the following for each of the preceding five fiscal years:
(i) The number of military personnel, shown by major occupational category, assigned to support positions or to mission positions.
(ii) The number of civilian personnel, shown by major occupational category, assigned to support positions or to mission positions.
(iii) The number of contractor personnel performing support functions.
(C) An accounting for each of the preceding five fiscal years of the following:
(i) The number of military and civilian personnel, shown by armed force and by major occupational category, assigned to support positions.
(ii) The number of contractor personnel performing support functions.
(D) An identification, for each of the three workforce sectors (military, civilian, and contractor) of the percentage of the total number of personnel in that workforce sector that is providing support to headquarters and headquarters support activities for each of the preceding five fiscal years.
(2) Contractor personnel shall be determined for purposes of paragraph (1) by using contractor full-time equivalents, based on the inventory required under section 2330a of this title.
(m)
(1) What clear and distinct objectives guide the activities of United States forces in the operation.
(2) What the President has identified on the basis of those objectives as the date, or the set of conditions, that defines the endpoint of the operation.
(Added Pub. L. 87–651, title II, §202, Sept. 7, 1962, 76 Stat. 517, §133; amended Pub. L. 96–513, title V, §511(3), Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2920; Pub. L. 97–252, title XI, §1105, Sept. 8, 1982, 96 Stat. 739; Pub. L. 97–295, §1(1), Oct. 12, 1982, 96 Stat. 1287; renumbered §113 and amended Pub. L. 99–433, title I, §§101(a)(2), 102, 110(b)(2), (d)(2), title III, §301(b)(2), title VI, §603(b), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 994, 996, 1002, 1022, 1075; Pub. L. 100–26, §7(d)(1), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 280; Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title XII, §1214, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1157; Pub. L. 100–370, §1(o)(1), July 19, 1988, 102 Stat. 850; Pub. L. 100–456, div. A, title VII, §731, title XI, §1101, Sept. 29, 1988, 102 Stat. 2003, 2042; Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title XVI, §1622(c)(1), Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1604; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIII, §1322(a)(1), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1671; Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title III, §341, Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1343; Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title X, §1070(a)(1), title XVI, §1671(c)(2), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2855, 3014; Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title XV, §§1501(a)(8)(B), 1502(a)(3), 1503(a)(1), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 495, 502, 510; Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title XII, §1255(c), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2698; Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title IX, §903, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1854; Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title IX, §915(a), title XII, §1212(b), Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2101, 2152; Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1067(1), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 774; Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title IX, §903(a), title XVIII, §1815(e), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 273, 500; Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title V, §514(b), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4213; Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title IX, §933(a), title X, §1064(1), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1543, 1586.)
| Revised section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
|---|---|---|
| 133(a) 133(b) 133(c) 133(d) |
5:171(a) (last 10 words). 5:171a(a). 5:171a(b). 5:171a(d). 5:171a–1. 5:171a(f). 5:171n(a) (as applicable to 5:171a(f)). |
July 26, 1947, ch. 343, §§201(a) (last 10 words), 202(a),(b); restated Aug. 10, 1949, ch. 412, §§4 (last 10 words of 1st par.), 5 (1st and 2d pars.), 63 Stat. 579, 580. |
| [Uncodified: 1953 Reorg. Plan No. 6, §5, eff. June 30, 1953, 67 Stat. 639]. 5:171n(a). |
July 26, 1947, ch. 343, §202(d); added Apr. 2, 1949, ch. 47, §1; restated Aug. 10, 1949, ch. 412, §5 (9th par.); restated Aug. 6, 1958, Pub. L. 85–599, §3(b), 72 Stat. 516. | |
| July 26, 1947, ch. 343, §202(f); added Aug. 10, 1949, ch. 412, §5 (11th par.), 63 Stat. 581. | ||
| July 26, 1947, ch. 343, §308(a) (as applicable to §202(f)), 61 Stat. 509. | ||
| July 9, 1952, ch. 608, §257(e), 66 Stat. 497; Sept. 3, 1954, ch. 1257, §702(c), 68 Stat. 1189. | ||
| 1953 Reorg. Plan No. 6, §5, eff. June 30, 1953, 67 Stat. 639. |
In subsection (a), the last sentence is substituted for 5 U.S.C. 171a(a) (proviso).
In subsection (b), the words “this title and section 401 of title 50” are substituted for 5 U.S.C. 171a(b) (13th through 30th words of last sentence), since those words merely described the coverage of this title and section 401 of title 50.
In subsection (c), the words “during the period covered by the report” are inserted for clarity. The following substitutions are made: “under section 125 of this title” for “pursuant to the provisions of this Act” since 125 of this title relates to the duty of the Secretary of Defense to take action to save public funds and to eliminate duplication in the Department of Defense; and the last 22 words of clause (3) for 5 U.S.C. 171a–1 (last 13 words).
In subsection (d), section 5 of 1953 Reorganization Plan No. 6 is omitted as covered by 5 U.S.C. 171a(f).
| Revised section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
|---|---|---|
| 133(e) | 10:133 (note). | Oct. 7, 1975, Pub. L. 94–106, §812, 89 Stat. 540. |
The words “prepare and” are omitted as surplus.
Subsection (k) is based on Pub. L. 100–202, §101(b) [title VIII, §8042], 101 Stat. 1329–69.
Section 8042 of the FY88 Defense Appropriations Act (Public Law 100–202) established a requirement for the Secretary of Defense to submit an annual report on the cost of stationing United States forces overseas. Under that section, the annual report is to be sent to the Committees on Appropriations of the two Houses. In codifying that section as section 113(k) of title 10, the committee added the two Armed Services Committees as committees to be sent the annual report. This minor change from the source law does not change the nature of the report to be submitted.
The committee notes that the source section does not specify the period of time to be covered by the report. In the absence of statutory language specifying the period to be covered by the report, it would seem reasonable to conclude that the report should cover the previous fiscal year. The committee notes, however, that the report of the Senate Appropriations Committee on its FY88 defense appropriations bill (S. Rpt. 100–235) states that this new annual report “should cover the budget years and the 2 previous fiscal years” (page 54). The committee believes that such a requirement may be unnecessarily burdensome and in any case, if such a requirement is intended, should be stated in the statute. In the absence of clear intent, the provision is proposed to be codified without specifying the period of time to be covered by the annual report.
In codifying this provision, the committee also changed the term “United States troops” in the source law to “United States forces” for consistency in usage in title 10 and as being preferable usage. No change in meaning is intended. The committee also changed “overseas” to “outside the United States” and defined “United States” for this purpose to include the territories and possessions of the United States. The committee was concerned that the term “overseas” read literally could include Hawaii or Guam, an interpretation clearly not intended in enacting section 8042. The committee notes that the Senate report referred to above states “For the purposes of this report [meaning the new DOD annual report], U.S. forces stationed overseas are considered to be those outside of the United States and its territories.”. The committee extrapolates from this statement that provisions in the report requirement relating to expenditures “overseas” and costs incurred “overseas” are also to be construed as relating to matters outside the United States and its territories and has prepared the codified provision accordingly.
2011—Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 111–383 substituted “on any reserve component matter” for “the reserve programs of the Department of Defense and on any other matters”.
Subsec. (j)(1)(A) to (C). Pub. L. 112–81, §1064(1)(A), added subpar. (B), redesignated former subpar. (B) as (A), and struck out former subpars. (A) and (C) which read as follows:
“(A) Costs incurred in the United States and costs incurred outside the United States in connection with the stationing of United States forces outside the United States.
“(C) The effect of such expenditures outside the United States on the balance of payments of the United States.”
Subsec. (j)(2), (3). Pub. L. 112–81, §1064(1)(B), (C), redesignated par. (3) as (2) and struck out former par. (2) which read as follows: “Each report under this subsection shall be prepared in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce.”
Subsec. (l). Pub. L. 112–81, §933(a), amended subsec. (l) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (l) related to contents of the Secretary's annual report to Congress under subsec. (c).
2008—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 110–181, §903(a), substituted “seven” for “10”.
Subsec. (g)(2). Pub. L. 110–181, §1815(e), substituted “contingency plans, including plans for providing support to civil authorities in an incident of national significance or a catastrophic incident, for homeland defense, and for military support to civil authorities” for “contingency plans”.
1999—Subsec. (j)(1). Pub. L. 106–65 substituted “and the Committee on Armed Services” for “and the Committee on National Security” in introductory provisions.
1998—Subsec. (l). Pub. L. 105–261, §915(a), added subsec. (l).
Subsec. (m). Pub. L. 105–261, §1212(b), added subsec. (m).
1997—Subsec. (g)(2). Pub. L. 105–85 struck out “annually” after “Staff, shall provide” and inserted “be provided every two years or more frequently as needed and shall” after “Such guidance shall”.
1996—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 104–201, §1255(c)(2)–(5), inserted “(1)” after “(c)”, redesignated former pars. (1), (2), and (4) as subpars. (A), (B), and (C), respectively, inserted “and” at end of subpar. (B), and added par. (2).
Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 104–201, §1255(c)(1), struck out par. (3) which read as follows: “a report from the Reserve Forces Policy Board on the reserve programs of the Department of Defense, including a review of the effectiveness of chapters 51, 337, 361, 363, 549, 573, 837, 861 and 863 of this title, as far as they apply to reserve officers; and”.
Pub. L. 104–106, §1501(a)(8)(B), made technical correction to directory language of Pub. L. 103–337, §1671(c)(2). See 1994 Amendment note below.
Subsec. (i)(2)(B). Pub. L. 104–106, §1503(a)(1), substituted “the period covered by the future-years defense program submitted to Congress during that year pursuant to section 221” for “the five years covered by the five-year defense program submitted to Congress during that year pursuant to section 114(g)”.
Subsec. (j)(1). Pub. L. 104–106, §1502(a)(3), substituted “Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on National Security and the Committee on Appropriations of the” for “Committees on Armed Services and Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and”.
1994—Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 103–337, §1671(c)(2), as amended by Pub. L. 104–106, §1501(a)(8)(B), which directed the substitution of “1219 and 1401 through 1411 of this title” for “51, 337, 361, 363, 549, 573, 837, 861 and 863 of this title, as far as they apply to reserve officers”, effective Oct. 1, 1996, could not be executed because of the intervening amendment by Pub. L. 104–201, §1255(c)(1). See 1996 Amendment note above.
Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 103–337, §1070(a)(1), substituted “section 108” for “section 104”.
1991—Subsec. (i)(2)(C) to (E). Pub. L. 102–190 added subpar. (C) and redesignated former subpars. (C) and (D) as (D) and (E), respectively.
1990—Subsecs. (i) to (l). Pub. L. 101–510 redesignated subsecs. (j) to (l) as (i) to (k), respectively, and struck out former subsec. (i) which read as follows: “The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a written report, not later than February 15 of each fiscal year, recommending the amount of funds to be appropriated to the Department of Defense for the next fiscal year for functions relating to the formulation and carrying out of Department of Defense policies on the control of technology transfer and activities related to the control of technology transfer. The Secretary shall include in that report the proposed allocation of the funds requested for such purpose and the number of personnel proposed to be assigned to carry out such activities during such fiscal year.”
1989—Subsec. (j)(2)(B). Pub. L. 101–189 substituted “five-year defense program” for “Five-Year Defense Program”.
1988—Subsec. (j). Pub. L. 100–456, §731, designated existing provisions as par. (1), struck out provision requiring that each report be transmitted in both a classified and an unclassified form, and added pars. (2) and (3).
Subsec. (k). Pub. L. 100–370 added subsec. (k).
Subsec. (l). Pub. L. 100–456, §1101, added subsec. (l).
1987—Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 100–26 inserted “(50 U.S.C. 404a)” after “National Security Act of 1947”.
Subsec. (j). Pub. L. 100–180 added subsec. (j).
1986—Pub. L. 99–433, §110(d)(2), struck out “: appointment; powers and duties; delegation by” at end of section catchline.
Subsecs. (a) to (e). Pub. L. 99–443, §101(a)(2), redesignated subsecs. (a) to (e) of section 133 of this title as subsecs. (a) to (e) of this section.
Pub. L. 99–433, §301(b)(2), substituted “sections 125 and 191” for “section 125” in subsec. (c)(2).
Pub. L. 99–433, §603(b), amended subsec. (e) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (e) read as follows: “After consulting with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives before February 1 of each year a written report on—
“(1) the foreign policy and military force structure for the next fiscal year;
“(2) the relationship of that policy and structure to each other; and
“(3) the justification for the policy and structure.”
Subsecs. (f) to (h). Pub. L. 99–433, §102, added subsecs. (f) to (h).
Subsec. (i). Pub. L. 99–433, §§101(a)(2), 110(b)(2), successively redesignated subsec. (h) of section 138 of this title as subsec. (h) of section 114 of this title and then as subsec. (i) of this section.
1982—Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 97–295 added subsec. (e).
Subsec. (i) [formerly §138(h)]. Pub. L. 97–252, §1105, added subsec. (h). See 1986 Amendment note above.
1980—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 96–513 substituted “section 2 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401)” for “section 401 of title 50”.
Section 1501(f)(3) of Pub. L. 104–106 provided that: “The amendments made by this section [see Tables for classification] shall take effect as if included in the Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act [Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XVI] as enacted on October 5, 1994.”
Amendment by section 1671(c)(2) of Pub. L. 103–337 effective Oct. 1, 1996, see section 1691(b)(1) of Pub. L. 103–337, set out as an Effective Date note under section 10001 of this title.
Amendment by Pub. L. 96–513 effective Dec. 12, 1980, see section 701(b)(3) of Pub. L. 96–513, set out as a note under section 101 of this title.
Functions of President under various sections delegated to Secretary of Defense, see Ex. Ord. No. 10621, July 1, 1955, 20 F.R. 4759, as amended by Ex. Ord. No. 11294, Aug. 4, 1966, 31 F.R. 10601; see Ex. Ord. No. 10661, Feb. 27, 1956, 21 F.R. 1315; see Ex. Ord. No. 11390, Jan. 22, 1968, 33 F.R. 841; all set out as notes under section 301 of Title 3, The President.
For assignment of certain emergency preparedness functions to Secretary of Defense, see Parts 1, 2, and 5 of Ex. Ord. No. 12656, Nov. 18, 1988, 53 F.R. 47491, set out as a note under section 5195 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.
For order of succession during any period when the Secretary has died, resigned, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office of Secretary, see Ex. Ord. No. 13533, Mar. 1, 2010, 75 F.R. 10163, set out as a note under section 3345 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
Pub. L. 112–87, title V, §503, Jan. 3, 2012, 125 Stat. 1896, provided that:
“(a)
“(1)
“(2)
“(A) the networks that design improvised explosive devices, provide training on improvised explosive device assembly and employment, and smuggle improvised explosive device components into Afghanistan;
“(B) the persons and organizations not directly affiliated with insurgents in Afghanistan who knowingly enable the movement of commercial products and material used in improvised explosive device construction from factories and vendors in Pakistan into Afghanistan;
“(C) the financiers, financial networks, institutions, and funding streams that provide resources to the insurgency in Afghanistan; and
“(D) the links to military, intelligence services, and government officials who are complicit in allowing the insurgent networks in Afghanistan to operate.
“(b)
“(1) submit to the congressional intelligence committees [Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives] and the Committees on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the Senate a report containing the strategy established under subsection (a); and
“(2) implement such strategy.”
Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title IX, §903, Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1532, provided that: “Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 31, 2011], the Secretary of Defense shall—
“(1) designate a senior official of the Department of Defense as the official with principal responsibility for the airship programs of the Department; and
“(2) set forth the responsibilities of that senior official with respect to such programs.”
Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title XII, §1215, Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1631, provided that:
“(a)
“(1) Operations and activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq.
“(2) Operations and activities of security assistance teams in Iraq.
“(b)
“(c)
“(d)
“(e)
“(f)
“(1) A description, in unclassified form (but with a classified annex if appropriate), of any capability gaps in the security forces of Iraq, including capability gaps relating to intelligence matters, protection of Iraq airspace, and logistics and maintenance.
“(2) A description of the manner in which the programs of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq, in conjunction with other United States programs such as the Foreign Military Financing program, the Foreign Military Sales program, and joint training exercises, will address the capability gaps described in paragraph (1) if the Government of Iraq requests assistance in addressing such capability gaps.”
Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title I, §124, Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4159, provided that:
“(a)
“(1)
“(2)
“(A) identify and eliminate redundant counter-improvised explosive device initiatives;
“(B) facilitate the transition of counter-improvised explosive device initiatives from funding under the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund to funding provided by the military departments; and
“(C) notify the appropriate personnel and organizations prior to a counter-improvised explosive device initiative being funded through the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund.
“(3)
“(b)
“(1) develop appropriate means to measure the effectiveness of counter-improvised explosive device initiatives; and
“(2) prioritize the funding of such initiatives according to such means.
“(c)
Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title V, §574, Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4223, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
“(1) To thank and honor veterans of the Korean War, including members of the Armed Forces who were held as prisoners of war or listed as missing in action, for their service and sacrifice on behalf of the United States.
“(2) To thank and honor the families of veterans of the Korean War for their sacrifices and contributions, especially families who lost a loved one in the Korean War.
“(3) To highlight the service of the Armed Forces during the Korean War and the contributions of Federal agencies and governmental and non-governmental organizations that served with, or in support of, the Armed Forces.
“(4) To pay tribute to the sacrifices and contributions made on the home front by the people of the United States during the Korean War.
“(5) To provide the people of the United States with a clear understanding and appreciation of the lessons and history of the Korean War.
“(6) To highlight the advances in technology, science, and medicine related to military research conducted during the Korean War.
“(7) To recognize the contributions and sacrifices made by the allies of the United States during the Korean War.
“(d)
“(e)
“(1)
“(2)
“(3)
“(A) Amounts appropriated to the Fund.
“(B) Proceeds derived from the use by the Secretary of Defense of the exclusive rights described in subsection (c) of section 1083 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105–85; 111 Stat. 1918).
“(C) Donations made in support of the commemorative program by private and corporate donors.
“(4)
“(5)
“(f)
“(1)
“(2)
“(3)
“(g)
“(1) all of the funds deposited into and expended from the Fund;
“(2) any other funds expended under this section; and
“(3) any unobligated funds remaining in the Fund as of September 30, 2013, that are transferred to the Department of Defense Vietnam War Commemorative Fund pursuant to subsection (e)(5).
“(h)
Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title IX, §943, Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4341, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1) The extent to which the current definition of ‘information operations’ in Department of Defense Directive 3600.1 is appropriate.
“(2) The location of the office within the Department of the lead official responsible for information operations of the Department, including assessments of the most effective location and the need to designate a principal staff assistant to the Secretary of Defense for information operations.
“(3) Departmental responsibility for the development, coordination, and oversight of Department policy on information operations and for the integration of such operations.
“(4) Departmental responsibility for the planning, execution, and oversight of Department information operations.
“(5) Departmental responsibility for coordination within the Department, and between the Department and other departments and agencies of the Federal Government, regarding Department information operations, and for the resolution of conflicts in the discharge of such operations, including an assessment of current coordination bodies and decisionmaking processes.
“(6) The roles and responsibilities of the military departments, combat support agencies, the United States Special Operations Command, and the other combatant commands in the development and implementation of information operations.
“(7) The roles and responsibilities of the defense intelligence agencies for support of information operations.
“(8) The role in information operations of the following Department officials:
“(A) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs.
“(B) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict.
“(C) The senior official responsible for information processing and networking capabilities.
“(9) The role of related capabilities in the discharge of information operations, including public affairs capabilities, civil-military operations capabilities, defense support of public diplomacy, and intelligence.
“(10) The management structure of computer network operations in the Department for the discharge of information operations, and the policy in support of that component.
“(11) The appropriate use, management, and oversight of contractors in the development and implementation of information operations, including an assessment of current guidance and policy directives pertaining to the uses of contractors for these purposes.
“(c)
“(d)
“(e)
“(1) Electronic warfare.
“(2) Computer network operations.
“(3) Psychological operations.
“(4) Military deception.
“(5) Operations security.”
Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, §1054, Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4358, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1) A detailed discussion of the modernization and sustainment plans for each component of the nuclear triad over the 10-year period beginning on the date of the report.
“(2) The funding required for each platform of the nuclear triad with respect to operation and maintenance, modernization, and replacement.
“(3) Any industrial capacities that the Secretary considers vital to ensure the viability of the nuclear triad.
“(c)
Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, §1077, Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4379, provided that: “Any law applicable to Operation Iraqi Freedom shall apply in the same manner and to the same extent to the successor contingency operation known as Operation New Dawn, except as specifically provided in this Act [see Tables for classification], any amendment made by this Act, or any other law enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 7, 2011].”
Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title VIII, §807, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2404, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1) ensure that each contract or task or delivery order entered into for the construction, installation, repair, maintenance, or operation of facilities for use by military or civilian personnel of the Department complies with the policy established in subsection (a);
“(2) ensure that contracts entered into prior to the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act comply with such policy to the maximum extent practicable;
“(3) define the term ‘generally accepted standards’ with respect to fire protection, structural integrity, electrical systems, plumbing, water treatment, waste disposal, and telecommunications networks for the purposes of this section; and
“(4) provide such exceptions and limitations as may be needed to ensure that this section can be implemented in a manner that is consistent with the requirements of military operations and the best interests of the Department of Defense.”
Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title IX, §932, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2433, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1) The Deputy Chief Management Officer of the Department of Defense.
“(2) The Director of the Business Transformation Agency.
“(3) The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, or a designated representative.
“(4) The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, or a designated representative.
“(5) One representative from each of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps who is a lieutenant general or vice admiral, or a civilian equivalent.
“(6) One representative of the National Guard Bureau who is a lieutenant general or vice admiral, or a civilian equivalent.
“(7) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration, or a designated representative.
“(8) The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, or a designated representative.
“(9) Such other individuals as may be designated by the Deputy Secretary of Defense, acting in the Deputy Secretary's capacity as the Chief Management Officer.
“(c)
“(d)
“(1) Resolution of significant policy, programmatic, or budgetary issues impeding modernization or deployment of integrated personnel and pay systems for each military department, including issues relating to—
“(A) common interfaces, architectures, and systems engineering;
“(B) ensuring that developmental systems are consistent with current and future enterprise accounting and pay and personnel standards and practices; and
“(C) ensuring that developmental systems are consistent with current and future Department of Defense business enterprise architecture.
“(2) Coordination of implementation of the integrated personnel and pay system within defense organizations to ensure interoperability between all appropriate elements of the system.
“(3) Establishment of metrics to assess the following:
“(A) Business process re-engineering needed for successful deployment of the integrated pay and personnel system.
“(B) Interoperability between legacy, operational, and developmental pay and personnel systems.
“(C) Interface and systems architecture control and standardization.
“(D) Retirement of legacy systems.
“(E) Use of the enterprise information warehouse.
“(F) Any other relevant matters.
“(4) Such other responsibilities as the Secretary determines are appropriate.
“(e)
“(f)
Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title I, §144, Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4382, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1) Procurement of common payloads by vehicle class, including—
“(A) signals intelligence;
“(B) electro optical;
“(C) synthetic aperture radar;
“(D) ground moving target indicator;
“(E) conventional explosive detection;
“(F) foliage penetrating radar;
“(G) laser designator;
“(H) chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, [or] explosive detection; and
“(I) national airspace operations avionics or sensors, or both.
“(2) Commonality of ground system architecture by vehicle class.
“(3) Common management of vehicle and payloads procurement.
“(4) Ground station interoperability standardization.
“(5) Maximum use of commercial standard hardware and interfaces.
“(6) Open architecture software.
“(7) Acquisition of technical data rights in accordance with section 2320 of title 10, United States Code.
“(8) Acquisition of vehicles, payloads, and ground stations through competitive procurement.
“(9) Common standards for exchange of data and metadata.
“(c)
“(d)
“(1) the policy required by subsection (a); and
“(2) the acquisition strategy required by subsection (a).”
Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title XII, §1216, Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4633, as amended by Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title XII, §1229, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2528, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1) A detailed description of efforts by the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with senior leaders of NATO ISAF forces, including the commander of NATO ISAF forces, to modify the chain of command structure for military forces operating in Afghanistan to better coordinate and de-conflict military operations and achieve unity of command whenever possible in Afghanistan, and the results of such efforts, including—
“(A) any United States or NATO ISAF plan for improving the command and control structure for military forces operating in Afghanistan; and
“(B) any efforts to establish a headquarters in Afghanistan that is led by a commander—
“(i) with command authority over NATO ISAF forces and separate United States forces operating under Operation Enduring Freedom and charged with closely coordinating the efforts of such forces; and
“(ii) responsible for coordinating other United States and international security efforts in Afghanistan.
“(2) A description of how rules of engagement are determined and managed for United States forces operating under NATO ISAF or Operation Enduring Freedom, and a description of any key differences between rules of engagement for NATO ISAF forces and separate United States forces operating under Operation Enduring Freedom.
“(3) An assessment of how any modifications to the command and control structure for military forces operating in Afghanistan would impact coordination of military and civilian efforts in Afghanistan.
“(c)
“(d)
“(e)
“(1) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives; and
“(2) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate.”
Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title V, §598, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 141, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
“(1) To thank and honor veterans of the Vietnam War, including personnel who were held as prisoners of war or listed as missing in action, for their service and sacrifice on behalf of the United States and to thank and honor the families of these veterans.
“(2) To highlight the service of the Armed Forces during the Vietnam War and the contributions of Federal agencies and governmental and non-governmental organizations that served with, or in support of, the Armed Forces.
“(3) To pay tribute to the contributions made on the home front by the people of the United States during the Vietnam War.
“(4) To highlight the advances in technology, science, and medicine related to military research conducted during the Vietnam War.
“(5) To recognize the contributions and sacrifices made by the allies of the United States during the Vietnam War.
“(d)
“(e)
“(1)
“(2)
“(3)
“(A) amounts appropriated to the Fund;
“(B) proceeds derived from the Secretary's use of the exclusive rights described in subsection (d);
“(C) donations made in support of the commemorative program by private and corporate donors; and
“(D) funds transferred to the Fund by the Secretary from funds appropriated for fiscal year 2008 and subsequent years for the Department of Defense.
“(4)
“(5)
“(A) identify and explain any amounts expended for the commemorative program in the fiscal year preceding the budget request;
“(B) identify and explain the amounts being requested to support the commemorative program for the fiscal year of the budget request; and
“(C) present a summary of the fiscal status of the Fund.
“(f)
“(1)
“(2)
“(g)
“(1)
“(A) all of the funds deposited into and expended from the Fund;
“(B) any other funds expended under this section; and
“(C) any unobligated funds remaining in the Fund.
“(2)
“(h)
“(i)
Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title X, §1069, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 326, as amended by Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title X, §1059, Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4611; Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title X, §1073(c)(11), Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2475, provided that:
“(a)
“(1)
“(A) protocols to determine the fitness of the individual to enter an installation; and
“(B) standards and methods for verifying the identity of the individual.
“(2)
“(A) provide for expedited access to a military installation for Department of Defense personnel and employees and family members of personnel who reside on the installation;
“(B) provide for closer scrutiny of categories of individuals determined by the Secretary of Defense to pose a higher potential security risk; and
“(C) in the case of an installation that the Secretary determines contains particularly sensitive facilities, provide additional screening requirements, as well as physical and other security measures for the installation.
“(b)
“(c)
“(1)
“(2)
[Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title X, §1073(c), Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2474, provided that the amendment made by section 1073(c)(11) to section 1059 of Pub. L. 110–417, included in the credit set out above, is effective as of Oct. 14, 2008, and as if included in Pub. L. 110–417 as enacted.]
Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title X, §1074, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 330, provided that:
“(a)
“(1) Secretary of Defense.
“(2) Deputy Secretary of Defense.
“(3) Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
“(4) Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
“(5) Secretaries of the military departments.
“(6) Chiefs of the Services.
“(7) Commanders of combatant commands.
“(b)
“(1)
“(A) there is an imminent and credible threat to the safety of the individual for whom protection is to be provided; or
“(B) compelling operational considerations make such protection essential to the conduct of official Department of Defense business.
“(2)
“(A) Any official, military member, or employee of the Department of Defense.
“(B) A former or retired official who faces serious and credible threats arising from duties performed while employed by the Department for a period of up to two years beginning on the date on which the official separates from the Department.
“(C) A head of a foreign state, an official representative of a foreign government, or any other distinguished foreign visitor to the United States who is primarily conducting official business with the Department of Defense.
“(D) Any member of the immediate family of a person authorized to receive physical protection and personal security under this section.
“(E) An individual who has been designated by the President, and who has received the advice and consent of the Senate, to serve as Secretary of Defense, but who has not yet been appointed as Secretary of Defense.
“(3)
“(4)
“(5)
“(A)
“(B)
“(C)
“(6)
“(A)
“(B)
“(C)
“(c)
“(1)
“(2)
“(A) The Army Criminal Investigation Command.
“(B) The Naval Criminal Investigative Service.
“(C) The Air Force Office of Special Investigations.
“(D) The Defense Criminal Investigative Service.
“(E) The Pentagon Force Protection Agency.
“(d)
“(1)
“(2)
“(3)
Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title XII, §1208, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 367, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1)
“(2)
Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title XII, §1225, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 375, which required the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Director of National Intelligence, to submit to the Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives reports describing and assessing any support provided to anti-coalition forces in Iraq by Iran or its agents, the strategy and ambitions in Iraq of Iran, and any strategy or efforts by the United States to counter the activities of agents of Iran in Iraq, was repealed by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title XII, §1233(f)(2), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4397.
Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title XVIII, §1814, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 498, provided that:
“(a)
“(1)
“(2)
“(b)
“(c)
“(d)
“(1) Protocols for the Department of Defense, the National Guard Bureau, and the Governors of the several States to carry out operations in coordination with each other and to ensure that Governors and local communities are properly informed and remain in control in their respective States and communities.
“(2) An identification of operational procedures, command structures, and lines of communication to ensure a coordinated, efficient response to contingencies.
“(3) An identification of the training and equipment needed for both National Guard personnel and members of the Armed Forces on active duty to provide military assistance to civil authorities and for other domestic operations to respond to hazards identified in the national planning scenarios.
“(e)
“(1) Nuclear detonation, biological attack, biological disease outbreak/pandemic flu, the plague, chemical attack-blister agent, chemical attack-toxic industrial chemicals, chemical attack-nerve agent, chemical attack-chlorine tank explosion, major hurricane, major earthquake, radiological attack-radiological dispersal device, explosives attack-bombing using improvised explosive device, biological attack-food contamination, biological attack-foreign animal disease and cyber attack.
“(2) Any other hazards identified in a national planning scenario developed by the Homeland Security Council.”
Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title XVIII, §1815(a)–(d), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 499, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1)
“(A) The military-unique capabilities determined under subsection (a).
“(B) Any additional capabilities determined by the Secretary to be necessary to support the use of the active components and the reserve components of the Armed Forces for homeland defense missions, domestic emergency responses, and providing military support to civil authorities.
“(2)
“(c)
“(d)
“(1) The term ‘military-unique capabilities’ means those capabilities that, in the view of the Secretary of Defense—
“(A) cannot be provided by other Federal, State, or local civilian agencies; and
“(B) are essential to provide support to civil authorities in an incident of national significance or a catastrophic incident.
“(2) The term ‘defense budget materials’, with respect to a fiscal year, means the materials submitted to Congress by the Secretary of Defense in support of the budget for that fiscal year.”
Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title V, §564, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2222, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
“(1) The Army Wounded Warrior Support Program.
“(2) The Navy Safe Harbor Program.
“(3) The Palace HART Program of the Air Force.
“(4) The Marine for Life Injured Support Program of the Marine Corps.
“(d)
“(1)
“(2)
“(e)
Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title XIV, §1402, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2433, which required the Secretary of Defense to submit quarterly reports on incidents involving the detonation or discovery of an improvised explosive device that involved United States or allied forces in Iraq and Afghanistan and on certain efforts of the Department of Defense to counter the threat of improvised explosive devices, was repealed by Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title X, §1062(d)(5), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1585.
Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title XIV, §1406, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2436, provided that: “The Secretary of Defense shall maintain a database of emergency response capabilities that includes the following:
“(1) The types of emergency response capabilities that each State's National Guard, as reported by the States, may be able to provide in response to a domestic natural or manmade disaster, both to their home States and under State-to-State mutual assistance agreements.
“(2) The types of emergency response capabilities that the Department of Defense may be able to provide in support of the National Response Plan's Emergency Support Functions, and identification of the units that provide these capabilities.”
Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title III, §354, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3204, provided that:
“(a)
“(1) an assessment of the impact on military readiness caused by undocumented immigrants whose entry into the United States involves trespassing upon operational ranges of the Department of Defense; and
“(2) a plan for the implementation of measures to prevent such trespass.
“(b)
“(1) A listing of the operational ranges adversely affected by the trespass of undocumented immigrants upon operational ranges.
“(2) A description of the types of range activities affected by such trespass.
“(3) A determination of the amount of time lost for range activities, and the increased costs incurred, as a result of such trespass.
“(4) An evaluation of the nature and extent of such trespass and means of travel.
“(5) An evaluation of the factors that contribute to the use by undocumented immigrants of operational ranges as a means to enter the United States.
“(6) A description of measures currently in place to prevent such trespass, including the use of barriers to vehicles and persons, military patrols, border patrols, and sensors.
“(c)
“(1) The types of measures to be implemented to improve prevention of trespass of undocumented immigrants upon operational ranges, including the specific physical methods, such as barriers and increased patrols or monitoring, to be implemented and any legal or other policy changes recommended by the Secretaries.
“(2) The costs of, and timeline for, implementation of the plan.
“(d)
“(e)
Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title V, §554, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3264, provided that:
“(a)
“(1)
“(2)
“(A) an officer; or
“(B) an enlisted member in a pay grade above pay grade E–6.
“(b)
“(1) a military or other Federal law enforcement authority;
“(2) a State or local law enforcement authority; and
“(3) such other law enforcement authorities within the United States as the Secretary shall specify in the regulations prescribed pursuant to subsection (a).
“(c)
“(1)
“(A) any military or other Federal criminal law;
“(B) any State, county, municipal, or local criminal law or ordinance; and
“(C) such other criminal laws and ordinances of jurisdictions within the United States as the Secretary shall specify in the regulations prescribed pursuant to subsection (a).
“(2)
“(d)
“(e)
“(f)
“(g)
“(h)
Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title V, §563, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3269, provided that:
“(a)
“(1)
“(2)
“(3)
“(A) the experience and best practices of the military departments, including the Army Wounded Warrior Program, the Marine Corps Marine for Life Injured Support Program, the Air Force Palace HART program, and the Navy Wounded Marines and Sailors Initiative;
“(B) the recommendations of nongovernment organizations with demonstrated expertise in responding to the needs of severely wounded or injured servicemembers; and
“(C) such other matters as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate.
“(4)
“(b)
“(1) Coordination with the Severely Injured Joint Support Operations Center of the Department of Defense.
“(2) Promotion of a seamless transition to civilian life for severely wounded or injured servicemembers who are or are likely to be separated on account of their wound or injury.
“(3) Identification and resolution of special problems or issues related to the transition to civilian life of severely wounded or injured servicemembers who are members of the reserve components.
“(4) The qualifications, assignment, training, duties, supervision, and accountability for the performance of responsibilities for the personnel providing assistance to severely wounded or injured servicemembers.
“(5) Centralized, short-term and long-term case-management procedures for assistance to severely wounded or injured servicemembers by each military department, including rapid access for severely wounded or injured servicemembers to case managers and counselors.
“(6) The provision, through a computer accessible Internet website and other means and at no cost to severely wounded or injured servicemembers, of personalized, integrated information on the benefits and financial assistance available to such members from the Federal Government.
“(7) The provision of information to severely wounded or injured servicemembers on mechanisms for registering complaints about, or requests for, additional assistance.
“(8) Participation of family members.
“(9) Liaison with the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Labor in order to ensure prompt and accurate resolution of issues relating to benefits administered by those agencies for severely wounded or injured servicemembers.
“(10) Data collection regarding the incidence and quality of assistance provided to severely wounded or injured servicemembers, including surveys of such servicemembers and military and civilian personnel whose assigned duties include assistance to severely wounded or injured servicemembers.
“(c)
Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title X, §1055, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3438, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title X, §1071, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3446, provided that:
“(a)
“(1)
“(2)
“(b)
“(1)
“(2)
“(A) An assessment of any existing deficiencies in the military mail system in ensuring that mail within the military mail system is safe for delivery.
“(B) The plan required by subsection (a).
“(C) An estimate of the time and resources required to implement the plan.
“(D) A description of the delegation within the Department of Defense of responsibility for ensuring that mail within the military mail system is safe for delivery, including responsibility for the development, implementation, and oversight of improvements to the military mail system to ensure that mail within the military mail system is safe for delivery.
“(3)
“(c)
“(1)
“(A) any mail that is posted through the Military Post Offices (including Army Post Offices (APOs) and Fleet Post Offices (FPOs)), Department of Defense mail centers, military Air Mail Terminals, and military Fleet Mail Centers; and
“(B) any mail or package posted in the United States that is addressed to an unspecified member of the Armed Forces.
“(2)
Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title XII, §1221, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3462, as amended by Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title XV, §1518, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2443; Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title XII, §1233, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2531, provided that:
“(a)
“(1)
“(2)
“(A) a description of the effect of war operations on the backlog of maintenance requirements over the period of fiscal years 2003 to the time of the report; and
“(B) an examination of the extent to which war operations have precluded maintenance from being performed because equipment was unavailable.
“(3)
“(b)
“(c)
Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title XII, §1224, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3463, provided that:
“(a)
“(1)
“(2)
“(A) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Foreign Relations, and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and
“(B) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on International Relations [now Committee on Foreign Affairs], and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.
“(b)
“(1) All direct and indirect costs (including incremental costs) incurred by the Department of Defense during the preceding fiscal year in implementing or supporting any resolution adopted by the United Nations Security Council, including any such resolution calling for—
“(A) international sanctions;
“(B) international peacekeeping operations;
“(C) international peace enforcement operations;
“(D) monitoring missions;
“(E) observer missions; or
“(F) humanitarian missions.
“(2) An aggregate of all such Department of Defense costs by operation or mission and the total cost to United Nations members of each operation or mission.
“(3) All direct and indirect costs (including incremental costs) incurred by the Department of Defense during the preceding fiscal year in training, equipping, and otherwise assisting, preparing, providing resources for, and transporting foreign defense or security forces for implementing or supporting any resolution adopted by the United Nations Security Council, including any such resolution specified in paragraph (1).
“(4) All efforts made to seek credit against past United Nations expenditures.
“(5) All efforts made to seek compensation from the United Nations for costs incurred by the Department of Defense in implementing and supporting United Nations activities.
“(c)
“(d)
Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title XII, §1233, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3469, provided that:
“(a)
“(1) The effect of any new basing arrangements on the strategic mobility requirements of the Department of Defense.
“(2) The ability of units deployed to overseas locations in areas in which United States Armed Forces have not traditionally been deployed to meet mobility response times required by operational planners.
“(3) The cost of deploying units to areas referred to in paragraph (2) on a rotational basis (rather than on a permanent basing basis).
“(4) The strategic benefit of rotational deployments through countries with which the United States is developing a close or new security relationship.
“(5) Whether the relative speed and complexity of conducting negotiations with a particular country is a discriminator in the decision to deploy forces within the country.
“(6) The appropriate and available funding mechanisms for the establishment, operation, and sustainment of specific Main Operating Bases, Forward Operating Bases, or Cooperative Security Locations.
“(7) The effect on military quality of life of the unaccompanied deployment of units to new facilities in overseas locations.
“(8) Other criteria as Secretary of Defense determines appropriate.
“(b)
“(c)
“(1) Facilities categorized as Main Operating Bases.
“(2) Facilities categorized as Forward Operating Bases.
“(3) Facilities categorized as Cooperative Security Locations.
“(d)
“(e)
“(f)
Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title V, §573, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1921, provided that:
“(a)
“(1) the United States Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory has the personnel and resources to effectively process forensic evidence used by the Department of Defense within 60 days of receipt by the laboratory of such evidence;
“(2) consistent policies are established among the Armed Forces to reduce the time period between the collection of forensic evidence and the receipt and processing of such evidence by United States Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory; and
“(3) there is an adequate supply of forensic evidence collection kits—
“(A) for all United States military installations, including the military service academies; and
“(B) for units of the Armed Forces deployed in theaters of operation.
“(b)
“(1) in the use of forensic evidence collection kits; and
“(2) in the prescribed procedures to ensure protection of the chain of custody of such kits once used.”
Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title VII, §724, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1990, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title IX, §932, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2031, provided that:
“(a)
“(2) The Secretary shall provide the criteria established under paragraph (1) to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretaries of the military departments, the commanders of the unified and specified commands, the commanders of deployed forces, and such other elements of the Department of Defense as the Secretary considers necessary.
“(b)
“(1) Any incident that may result in a contingency operation, based on the incident's nature, gravity, or potential for significant adverse consequences to United States citizens, military personnel, interests, or assets, including an incident that could result in significant adverse publicity having a major strategic impact.
“(2) Any event, development, or situation that could be reasonably assumed to escalate into an incident described in paragraph (1).
“(3) Any deficiency or error in policy, standards, or training that could be reasonably assumed to have the effects described in paragraph (1).
“(c)
“(d)
Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title X, §1032, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2045, authorized the Secretary of Defense to conduct a program during fiscal year 2005 to commemorate the 60th anniversary of World War II.
Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title X, §1085, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2065, as amended by Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title III, §360(c), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 78; Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, §1075(i)(2), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4378, provided that: “The Secretary of Defense may not reduce or eliminate search and rescue capabilities at any military installation in the United States unless the Secretary, after reviewing the search and rescue capabilities report prepared by the Secretary of the Air Force under section 360(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110–181; 122 Stat. 77), first certifies to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives that equivalent search and rescue capabilities will be provided, without interruption and consistent with the policies and objectives set forth in the United States National Search and Rescue Plan entered into force on January 1, 1999, by—
“(1) the Department of Interior, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Transportation, the Federal Communications Commission, or the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; or
“(2) the Department of Defense, either directly or through a Department of Defense contract with an emergency medical service provider or other private entity to provide such capabilities.”
Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title XIV, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2094, provided that:
“Right, title, and interest of the United States in and to any United States sunken military craft—
“(1) shall not be extinguished except by an express divestiture of title by the United States; and
“(2) shall not be extinguished by the passage of time, regardless of when the sunken military craft sank.
“(a)
“(1) as authorized by a permit under this title;
“(2) as authorized by regulations issued under this title; or
“(3) as otherwise authorized by law.
“(b)
“(1) this section; or
“(2) any prohibition, rule, regulation, ordinance, or permit that applies under any other applicable law.
“(c)
“(1)
“(2)
“(A) generally recognized principles of international law;
“(B) an agreement between the United States and the foreign country of which the person is a citizen; or
“(C) in the case of an individual who is a crew member or other individual on a foreign vessel or foreign aircraft, an agreement between the United States and the flag State of the foreign vessel or aircraft that applies to the individual.
“(3)
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
“(d)
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
“(d)
“(e)
“(f)
“(1) all facts material to the right of action are known or should have been known by the Secretary concerned; and
“(2) the defendant is subject to the jurisdiction of the appropriate district court of the United States or administrative forum.
“(a)
“(b)
“(1) the reasonable costs incurred in storage, restoration, care, maintenance, conservation, and curation of any sunken military craft that is disturbed, removed, or injured in violation of section 1402 or any regulation or permit issued under this title; and
“(2) the cost of retrieving, from the site where the sunken military craft was disturbed, removed, or injured, any information of an archaeological, historical, or cultural nature.
“(a)
“(1) any activity that is not directed at a sunken military craft; or
“(2) the traditional high seas freedoms of navigation, including—
“(A) the laying of submarine cables and pipelines;
“(B) operation of vessels;
“(C) fishing; or
“(D) other internationally lawful uses of the sea related to such freedoms.
“(b)
“(c)
“(1) any United States sunken military craft, wherever located; or
“(2) any foreign sunken military craft located in United States waters.
“(d)
“(1) any United States sunken military craft without the express permission of the United States; or
“(2) any foreign sunken military craft located in United States waters without the express permission of the relevant foreign state.
“(e)
“(f)
“(g)
“(h)
“(i)
“The Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, is encouraged to negotiate and conclude bilateral and multilateral agreements with foreign countries with regard to sunken military craft consistent with this title.
“In this title:
“(1)
“(A) the equipment, cargo, and contents of a sunken military craft that are within its debris field; and
“(B) the remains and personal effects of the crew and passengers of a sunken military craft that are within its debris field.
“(2)
“(A) subject to subparagraph (B), the Secretary of a military department; and
“(B) in the case of a Coast Guard vessel, the Secretary of the Department in which the Coast Guard is operating.
“(3)
“(A) any sunken warship, naval auxiliary, or other vessel that was owned or operated by a government on military noncommercial service when it sank;
“(B) any sunken military aircraft or military spacecraft that was owned or operated by a government when it sank; and
“(C) the associated contents of a craft referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B),
if title thereto has not been abandoned or transferred by the government concerned.
“(4)
“(5)
“(6)
“(7)
Pub. L. 108–177, title III, §358, Dec. 13, 2003, 117 Stat. 2621, directed the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, not later than one year after Dec. 13, 2003, to submit preliminary and final reports to committees of Congress on information obtained by the Department of Defense and the intelligence community on the conventional weapons and ammunition obtained by Iraq in violation of applicable resolutions of the United Nations Security Council adopted since the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990.
Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title XII, §1204, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1649, directed the Secretary of Defense, not later than one year after Nov. 24, 2003, to submit to comittees of Congress a report on the acquisition by Iraq of weapons of mass destruction and associated delivery systems and the acquisition by Iraq of advanced conventional weapons.
Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title II, §216, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1418, directed the Secretary of Defense to provide for the performance of two independent studies of alternative future fleet platform architectures for the Navy and to forward the results of each study to congressional defense committees not later than Jan. 15, 2005.
Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title III, §320, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1435, provided that:
“(a)
“(1) Civilian community encroachment on those military installations and ranges whose operational training activities, research, development, test, and evaluation activities, or other operational, test and evaluation, maintenance, storage, disposal, or other support functions require, or in the future reasonably may require, safety or operational buffer areas. The requirement for such a buffer area may be due to a variety of factors, including air operations, ordnance operations and storage, or other activities that generate or might generate noise, electro-magnetic interference, ordnance arcs, or environmental impacts that require or may require safety or operational buffer areas.
“(2) Compliance by the Department of Defense with State Implementation Plans for Air Quality under section 110 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7410).
“(3) Compliance by the Department of Defense with the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.).
“(b)
“(1) A list of all military installations described in subsection (a)(1) at which civilian community encroachment is occurring.
“(2) A description and analysis of the types and degree of such civilian community encroachment at each military installation included on the list.
“(3) An analysis, including views and estimates of the Secretary of Defense, of the current and potential future impact of such civilian community encroachment on operational training activities, research, development, test, and evaluation activities, and other significant operational, test and evaluation, maintenance, storage, disposal, or other support functions performed by military installations included on the list. The analysis shall include the following:
“(A) A review of training and test ranges at military installations, including laboratories and technical centers of the military departments, included on the list.
“(B) A description and explanation of the trends of such encroachment, as well as consideration of potential future readiness problems resulting from unabated encroachment.
“(4) An estimate of the costs associated with current and anticipated partnerships between the Department of Defense and non-Federal entities to create buffer zones to preclude further development around military installations included on the list, and the costs associated with the conveyance of surplus property around such military installations for purposes of creating buffer zones.
“(5) Options and recommendations for possible legislative or budgetary changes necessary to mitigate current and anticipated future civilian community encroachment problems.
“(c)
“(1) A list of all military installations and other locations at which the Armed Forces are encountering problems related to compliance with the laws specified in such paragraphs.
“(2) A description and analysis of the types and degree of compliance problems encountered.
“(3) An analysis, including views and estimates of the Secretary of Defense, of the current and potential future impact of such compliance problems on the following functions performed at military installations:
“(A) Operational training activities.
“(B) Research, development, test, and evaluation activities.
“(C) Other significant operational, test and evaluation, maintenance, storage, disposal, or other support functions.
“(4) A description and explanation of the trends of such compliance problems, as well as consideration of potential future readiness problems resulting from such compliance problems.
“(d)
“(e)
“(1) Not later than January 31, 2004, an interim report describing the progress made in conducting the study and containing the information collected under the study as of that date.
“(2) Not later than January 31, 2006, a report containing the results of the study and the encroachment response plan required by subsection (d).
“(3) Not later than January 31, 2007, and each January 31 thereafter through January 31, 2010, a report describing the progress made in implementing the encroachment response plan.”
Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title III, §337, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1445, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(2) Civilian employee or military personnel positions of the participating organization that are part of the Business Process Reengineering initiative shall be counted toward any numerical goals, target, or quota that the Secretary concerned is required or requested to meet during the term of the pilot program regarding the number of positions to be covered by public-private competitions.
“(c)
“(1) Organizations that underwent a Business Process Reengineering initiative within the preceding five years, achieved major performance enhancements under the initiative, and will be able to sustain previous or achieve new performance goals through the continuation of its existing or completed Business Process Reengineering plan.
“(2) Organizations that have not undergone or have not successfully completed a Business Process Reengineering initiative, but which propose to achieve, and reasonably could reach, enhanced performance goals through implementation of a Business Process Reengineering initiative.
“(d)
“(2) To be eligible for selection to participate in the pilot program under subsection (c)(2), an organization described in such subsection shall identify, to the satisfaction of the Secretary concerned—
“(A) functions, processes, and measures to be studied under the Business Process Reengineering initiative;
“(B) adequate resources to carry out the Business Process Reengineering initiative; and
“(C) labor-management agreements in place to ensure effective implementation of the Business Process Reengineering initiative.
“(e)
“(f)
“(2) An organization selected to participate in the pilot program shall be given a reasonable initial period, to be determined by the Secretary concerned, in which the organization must implement the Business Process Reengineering initiative. At the end of this period, the Secretary concerned shall determine whether the organization has achieved initial progress toward designation as a high-performing organization. In the absence of such progress, the Secretary concerned shall terminate the organization's participation in the pilot program.
“(3) If an organization successfully completes implementation of the Business Process Reengineering initiative under paragraph (2), the Secretary concerned shall designate the organization as a high-performing organization and grant the organization an additional five-year period in which to achieve projected or planned efficiencies and savings under the pilot program.
“(g)
“(h)
“(1) Costs, savings, and overall financial performance of the organization.
“(2) Organic knowledge, skills or expertise.
“(3) Efficiency and effectiveness of key functions or processes.
“(4) Efficiency and effectiveness of the overall organization.
“(5) General customer satisfaction.
“(i)
“(1) The term ‘Business Process Reengineering’ refers to an organization's complete and thorough analysis and reengineering of mission and support functions and processes to achieve improvements in performance, including a fundamental reshaping of the way work is done to better support an organization's mission and reduce costs.
“(2) The term ‘high-performing organization’ means an organization whose performance exceeds that of comparable providers, whether public or private.
“(3) The term ‘Secretary concerned’ means the Secretary of a military department and the Secretary of Defense, with respect to matters concerning the Defense Agencies.”
Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title V, §517(b), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1461, directed the Secretary of Defense to submit to committees of Congress, not later than one year after Nov. 24, 2003, a description of the effects on reserve component recruitment and retention that have resulted from calls and orders to active duty and the tempo of such service, an assessment of the process for calling and ordering reserve members to active duty, preparing such members for active duty, processing such members into the force, and deploying such members, and a description of changes in the Armed Forces envisioned by the Secretary of Defense.
Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title V, §546, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1479, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title II, §243, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 51, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1)
“(2)
Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title X, §1032, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1605, as amended by Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title X, §1043, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 311, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(2) Each report under paragraph (1) shall include the following:
“(A) A description and assessment of the targets against which long-range strike assets might be directed and the conditions under which those assets might be used.
“(B) The role of, and plans for ensuring, sustainment and modernization of current long-range strike assets, including bombers, intercontinental ballistic missiles, and submarine-launched ballistic missiles.
“(C) A description of the capabilities desired for advanced long-range strike assets and plans to achieve those capabilities.
“(D) A description of the capabilities desired for advanced conventional munitions and the plans to achieve those capabilities.
“(E) An assessment of advanced nuclear concepts that could contribute to the prompt global strike mission.
“(F) An assessment of the command, control, and communications capabilities necessary to support prompt global strike capabilities.
“(G) An assessment of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities necessary to support prompt global strike capabilities.
“(H) A description of how prompt global strike capabilities are to be integrated with theater strike capabilities.
“(I) An estimated schedule for achieving the desired prompt global strike capabilities.
“(J) The estimated cost of achieving the desired prompt global strike capabilities.
“(K) A description of ongoing and future studies necessary for updating the plan appropriately.”
Pub. L. 109–13, div. A, title I, §1024(c), May 11, 2005, 119 Stat. 253, provided that:
“(1) Each semiannual report to Congress required under a provision of law referred to in paragraph (2) shall include, in addition to the matters specified in the applicable provision of law, the following:
“(A) A statement of the cumulative total of all amounts obligated, and of all amounts expended, as of the date of such report for Operation Enduring Freedom.
“(B) A statement of the cumulative total of all amounts obligated, and of all amounts expended, as of the date of such report for Operation Iraqi Freedom.
“(C) An estimate of the reasonably foreseeable costs for ongoing military operations to be incurred during the 12-month period beginning on the date of such report.
“(2) The provisions of law referred to in this paragraph are as follows:
“(A) Section 1120 of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004 (Public Law 108–106; 117 Stat. 1219; 10 U.S.C. 113 note).
“(B) Section 9010 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108–287; 118 Stat. 1008; 10 U.S.C. 113 note).”
Pub. L. 108–287, title IX, §9010, Aug. 5, 2004, 118 Stat. 1008, as amended by Pub. L. 108–324, div. B, §306, Oct. 13, 2004, 118 Stat. 1243, provided that:
“(a) Not later than April 30 and October 31 of each year, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on the military operations of the Armed Forces and the reconstruction activities of the Department of Defense in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“(b) Each report shall include the following information:
“(1) For each of Iraq and Afghanistan for the half-fiscal year ending during the month preceding the due date of the report, the amount expended for military operations of the Armed Forces and the amount expended for reconstruction activities, together with the cumulative total amounts expended for such operations and activities.
“(2) An assessment of the progress made toward preventing attacks on United States personnel.
“(3) An assessment of the effects of the operations and activities in Iraq and Afghanistan on the readiness of the Armed Forces.
“(4) An assessment of the effects of the operations and activities in Iraq and Afghanistan on the recruitment and retention of personnel for the Armed Forces.
“(5) For the half-fiscal year ending during the month preceding the due date of the report, the costs incurred for repair of Department of Defense equipment used in the operations and activities in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“(6) The foreign countries, international organizations, and nongovernmental organizations that are contributing support for the ongoing military operations and reconstruction activities, together with a discussion of the amount and types of support contributed by each during the half-fiscal year ending during the month preceding the due date of the report.
“(7) The extent to which, and the schedule on which, the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve of the Armed Forces is being involuntarily ordered to active duty under section 12302 of title 10, United States Code.
“(8) For each unit of the National Guard of the United States and the other reserve components of the Armed Forces on active duty pursuant to an order to active duty under section 12302 of title 10, United States Code, the following information:
“(A) The unit.
“(B) The projected date of return of the unit to its home station.
“(C) The extent (by percentage) to which the forces deployed within the United States and outside the United States in support of a contingency operation are composed of reserve component forces.”
Pub. L. 108–106, title I, §1120, Nov. 6, 2003, 117 Stat. 1219, provided that:
“(a) Not later than April 30 and October 31 of each year, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on the military operations of the Armed Forces and the reconstruction activities of the Department of Defense in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“(b) Each report shall include the following information:
“(1) For each of Iraq and Afghanistan for the half-fiscal year ending during the month preceding the due date of the report, the amount expended for military operations of the Armed Forces and the amount expended for reconstruction activities, together with the cumulative total amounts expended for such operations and activities.
“(2) An assessment of the progress made toward preventing attacks on United States personnel.
“(3) An assessment of the effects of the operations and activities in Iraq and Afghanistan on the readiness of the Armed Forces.
“(4) An assessment of the effects of the operations and activities in Iraq and Afghanistan on the recruitment and retention of personnel for the Armed Forces.
“(5) For the half-fiscal year ending during the month preceding the due date of the report, the costs incurred for repair of Department of Defense equipment used in the operations and activities in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“(6) The foreign countries, international organizations, and nongovernmental organizations that are contributing support for the ongoing military operations and reconstruction activities, together with a discussion of the amount and types of support contributed by each during the half-fiscal year ending during the month preceding the due date of the report.
“(7) The extent to which, and the schedule on which, the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve of the Armed Forces is being involuntarily ordered to active duty under section 12304 of title 10, United States Code.
“(8) For each unit of the National Guard of the United States and the other reserve components of the Armed Forces on active duty pursuant to an order to active duty under section 12304 of title 10, United States Code, the following information:
“(A) The unit.
“(B) The projected date of return of the unit to its home station.
“(C) The extent (by percentage) to which the forces deployed within the United States and outside the United States in support of a contingency operation are composed of reserve component forces.”
Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title II, §233, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2490, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1) Enable managers within the Department of Defense to compare the costs of carrying out test and evaluation activities in the various facilities of the military departments.
“(2) Enable the Secretary of Defense—
“(A) to make prudent investment decisions; and
“(B) to reduce the extent to which unnecessary costs of owning and operating test and evaluation facilities of the Department of Defense are incurred.
“(3) Enable the Department of Defense to track the total cost of test and evaluation activities.
“(4) Comply with the financial management architecture established by the Secretary.”
Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title III, §366, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2522, as amended by Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title III, §348, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2159; Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title X, §1063(c)(2), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 322; Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, §1075(g)(2), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4376, provided that:
“(a)
“(2) As part of the preparation of the plan, the Secretary of Defense shall conduct the following:
“(A) An assessment of current and future training range requirements of the Armed Forces.
“(B) An evaluation of the adequacy of current Department of Defense resources (including virtual and constructive training assets as well as military lands, marine areas, and airspace available in the United States and overseas) to meet those current and future training range requirements.
“(3) The plan shall include the following:
“(A) Proposals to enhance training range capabilities and address any shortfalls in current Department of Defense resources identified pursuant to the assessment and evaluation conducted under paragraph (2).
“(B) Goals and milestones for tracking planned actions and measuring progress.
“(C) Projected funding requirements for implementing planned actions.
“(D) Designation of an office in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and in each of the military departments that will have lead responsibility for overseeing implementation of the plan.
“(4) At the same time as the President submits to Congress the budget for fiscal year 2004, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report describing the progress made in implementing this subsection, including—
“(A) the plan developed under paragraph (1);
“(B) the results of the assessment and evaluation conducted under paragraph (2); and
“(C) any recommendations that the Secretary may have for legislative or regulatory changes to address training constraints identified pursuant to this section.
“(5) At the same time as the President submits to Congress the budget for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2013, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report describing the progress made in implementing the plan and any additional actions taken, or to be taken, to address training constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine areas, and airspace.
“(b)
“(c)
“(A) to identify all available operational training ranges;
“(B) to identify all training capacities and capabilities available at each training range; and
“(C) to identify training constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine areas, and airspace at each training range.
“(2) The Secretary of Defense shall submit an initial inventory to Congress at the same time as the President submits the budget for fiscal year 2004 and shall submit an updated inventory to Congress at the same time as the President submits the budget for fiscal years 2005 through 2013.
“(d) GAO
“(e)
Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title X, §1004, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2629, which required Secretary of Defense to develop a financial management enterprise architecture for all budgetary, accounting, finance, enterprise resource planning, and mixed information systems of the Department of Defense by May 1, 2003, was repealed by Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title III, §332(f), Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1856.
Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title X, §1008, Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1204, as amended by Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title X, §1052, Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1582, provided that:
“(a)
“(2) The annual report shall contain the following:
“(A) A conclusion regarding whether the policies and procedures of the Department of Defense, and the systems used within the Department of Defense, for the preparation of financial statements allow the achievement of reliability in those financial statements.
“(B) For each of the financial statements prepared for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year in which the report is submitted, a conclusion regarding the expected reliability of the financial statement (evaluated on the basis of Office of Management and Budget guidance on financial statements), together with a discussion of the major deficiencies to be expected in the statement.
“(C) A summary of the specific sections of the annual Financial Management Improvement Plan of the Department of Defense, current as of the date of the report, that—
“(i) detail the priorities, milestones, and measures of success that apply to the preparation of the financial statements;
“(ii) detail the planned improvements in the process for the preparation of financial statements that are to be implemented within 12 months after the date on which the plan is issued; and
“(iii) provide an estimate of when each financial statement will convey reliable information.
“(3) The annual report shall be submitted to the following:
“(A) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Governmental Affairs [now Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs] of the Senate.
“(B) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Government Reform [now Committee on Oversight and Government Reform] of the House of Representatives.
“(C) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget.
“(D) The Secretary of the Treasury.
“(E) The Comptroller General of the United States.
“(4) The Secretary of Defense shall make a copy of the annual report available to the Inspector General of the Department of Defense.
“(b)
“(2) With the annual budget justifications for the Department of Defense submitted to Congress each year, the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall submit, with respect to the fiscal year in which submitted, the preceding fiscal year, and the following fiscal year, the following information:
“(A) An estimate of the resources that the Department of Defense is saving or expects to save as a result of actions taken and to be taken under paragraph (1) with respect to the preparation of financial statements.
“(B) A discussion of how the resources saved as estimated under subparagraph (A) have been redirected or are to be redirected from the preparation of financial statements to the improvement of systems underlying financial management within the Department of Defense and to the improvement of financial management policies, procedures, and internal controls within the Department of Defense.
“(c)
“(d)
“(2) With the annual budget justifications for the Department of Defense submitted to Congress each year, the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall submit, with respect to the fiscal year in which submitted, the preceding fiscal year, and the following fiscal year, information which the Inspector General shall report to the Under Secretary, as follows:
“(A) An estimate of the resources that the Inspector General is saving or expects to save as a result of actions taken and to be taken under paragraph (1) with respect to the auditing of financial statements.
“(B) A discussion of how the resources saved as estimated under subparagraph (A) have been redirected or are to be redirected from the auditing of financial statements to the oversight and improvement of systems underlying financial management within the Department of Defense and to the oversight and improvement of financial management policies, procedures, and internal controls within the Department of Defense.
“(e)
“(f)
Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title X, §1043, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2646, provided that:
“(a)
“(2) Each report under this section shall be prepared in consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the commander of the United States Central Command, the Director of Central Intelligence, and such other officials as the Secretary considers appropriate.
“(3) Each such report shall be submitted in both a classified form and an unclassified form, as necessary.
“(b)
“(1) A discussion of the command, control, coordination, and support relationship between United States special operations forces and Central Intelligence Agency elements participating in Operation Enduring Freedom and any lessons learned from the joint conduct of operations by those forces and elements.
“(2) Recommendations to improve operational readiness and effectiveness of these forces and elements.
“(c)
“(1) The political and military objectives of the United States.
“(2) The military strategy of the United States to achieve those political and military objectives.
“(3) The concept of operations, including any new operational concepts, for the operation.
“(4) The benefits and disadvantages of operating with local opposition forces.
“(5) The benefits and disadvantages of operating in a coalition with the military forces of allied and friendly nations.
“(6) The cooperation of nations in the region for overflight, basing, command and control, and logistic and other support.
“(7) The conduct of relief operations both during and after the period of hostilities.
“(8) The conduct of close air support (CAS), particularly with respect to the timeliness, efficiency, and effectiveness of such support.
“(9) The use of unmanned aerial vehicles for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and combat support to operational forces.
“(10) The use and performance of United States and coalition military equipment, weapon systems, and munitions.
“(11) The effectiveness of reserve component forces, including their use and performance in the theater of operations.
“(12) The importance and effectiveness of the International Security Assistance Force.
“(13) The importance and effectiveness of United States civil affairs forces.
“(14) The anticipated duration of the United States military presence in Afghanistan.
“(15) The most critical lessons learned that could lead to long-term doctrinal, organizational, and technological changes.
“(d)
“(1) The Committee on Armed Services and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate.
“(2) The Committee on Armed Services and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives.”
[Reference to the Director of Central Intelligence or the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Director's capacity as the head of the intelligence community deemed to be a reference to the Director of National Intelligence. Reference to the Director of Central Intelligence or the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Director's capacity as the head of the Central Intelligence Agency deemed to be a reference to the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. See section 1081(a), (b) of Pub. L. 108–458, set out as a note under section 401 of Title 50, War and National Defense.]
Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title XIV, §1402, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2675, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1) Identification of long-term goals and objectives for improving the preparedness of military installations for preventing and responding to terrorist attacks.
“(2) Identification of budget and other resource requirements necessary to achieve those goals and objectives.
“(3) Identification of factors beyond the control of the Secretary that could impede the achievement of those goals and objectives.
“(4) A discussion of the extent to which local, regional, or national military response capabilities are to be developed, integrated, and used.
“(5) A discussion of how the Secretary will coordinate the capabilities referred to in paragraph (4) with local, regional, or national civilian and other military capabilities.
“(c)
“(1) A reasonable schedule, with milestones, for achieving the goals and objectives of the strategy under subsection (b).
“(2) Performance criteria for measuring progress in achieving those goals and objectives.
“(3) A description of the process, together with a discussion of the resources, necessary to achieve those goals and objectives.
“(4) A description of the process for evaluating results in achieving those goals and objectives.
“(d)
“(e)
“(f)
“(2) Each such report shall include—
“(A) a discussion of any revision that the Secretary has made in the comprehensive plan developed under subsection (a) since the last report under this subsection or, in the case of the first such report, since the plan was submitted under subsection (d); and
“(B) an assessment of the progress made in achieving the goals and objectives of the strategy set forth in the plan.
“(3) If the Secretary includes in the report for 2004 or 2005 under this subsection a declaration that the goals and objectives of the preparedness strategy set forth in the comprehensive plan have been achieved, no further report is required under this subsection.”
Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [[div. A], title V, §552], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–125, provided that:
“(a)
“(1) affords any individual who, in connection with the investigation of a reported crime, is designated (by name or by any other identifying information) as a suspect in the case in any official investigative report, or in a central index for potential retrieval and analysis by law enforcement organizations, an opportunity to obtain a review of that designation; and
“(2) requires the expungement of the name and other identifying information of any such individual from such report or index in any case in which it is determined the entry of such identifying information on that individual was made contrary to Department of Defense requirements.
“(b)
Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [[div. A], title V, §576], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–138, directed the Secretary of Defense to conduct a three-year test program to determine the most effective peacetime structure and operational employment of reserve component intelligence assets and to establish a means to coordinate and transition the peacetime intelligence support network into use for meeting wartime needs, and to submit to Congress interim and final reports on such program not later than Dec. 1, 2004.
Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [[div. A], title XI, §1105], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–311, directed the Secretary of Defense to conduct a study to assess the manner in which personnel services were provided for civilian personnel in the Department of Defense and to submit a report on such study to committees of Congress not later than Jan. 1, 2002.
Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [[div. A], title XI, §1111], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–312, directed the Secretary of Defense to carry out a three-year pilot program to improve processes for the resolution of equal employment opportunity complaints by civilian employees of the Department of Defense, and directed the Comptroller General to submit to Congress a report on such program not later than 90 days following the end of the first and last full or partial fiscal years during which such program had been implemented.
Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [[div. A], title XI, §1112], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–313, as amended by Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title III, §363, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2520, directed the Secretary of Defense to carry out a defense employees work safety demonstration program under which work safety models used by employers in the private sector would be adopted and any improvement to work safety records would be assessed, directed that such program would terminate on Sept. 30, 2003, and required the Secretary to submit interim and final reports on such program to committees of Congress not later than Dec. 1, 2003.
Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [[div. A], title XII, §1223], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–328, directed the Comptroller General to conduct a study assessing the benefits and costs to the United States and United States national security interests of the engagement of United States forces in Europe and of United States military strategies used to shape the international security environment in Europe and to submit to committees of Congress a report on the results of such study not later than Dec. 1, 2001.
Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title III, §366, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 578, provided that:
“(a)
“(1) the level of spare parts that the units must have on hand; and
“(2) similar logistics and sustainment needs of the units.
“(b)
“(1) The unit's wartime mission, as reflected in the war-fighting plans of the relevant combatant commanders.
“(2) An assessment of the likely requirement for sustained operations under each such war-fighting plan.
“(3) An assessment of the likely requirement for that unit to conduct sustained operations in an austere environment, while drawing exclusively on its own internal logistics capabilities.
“(c)
“(d)
“(e)
“(f)
Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title III, §373(a)–(g), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 580, 581, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
“(A) Department-wide interoperability standards for use of Smart Card technology; and
“(B) a plan to exploit Smart Card technology as a means for enhancing readiness and improving business processes.
“(2) The senior coordinating group shall be chaired by a representative of the Secretary of the Navy and shall include senior representatives from each of the Armed Forces and such other persons as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate.
“(3) Not later than March 31, 2000, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report containing a detailed discussion of the progress made by the senior coordinating group in carrying out its duties.
“(d)
“(e)
“(f)
“(1) shall allocate such amounts as may be necessary, but not to exceed $30,000,000, to ensure that significant progress is made toward complete implementation of the use of Smart Card technology in the Department of the Navy; and
“(2) may allocate additional amounts for the conversion of paper-based records to electronic media for records systems that have been modified to use Smart Card technology.
“(g)
“(1) The term ‘Smart Card’ means a credit card-size device, normally for carrying and use by personnel, that contains one or more integrated circuits and may also employ one or more of the following technologies:
“(A) Magnetic stripe.
“(B) Bar codes, linear or two-dimensional.
“(C) Non-contact and radio frequency transmitters.
“(D) Biometric information.
“(E) Encryption and authentication.
“(F) Photo identification.
“(2) The term ‘Smart Card technology’ means a Smart Card together with all of the associated information technology hardware and software that comprise the system for support and operation.”
Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title V, §526, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 600, required Secretary of Defense to review process used by the Army to develop estimates of annual authorizations and appropriations required for civilian personnel of Department of the Army generally and for National Guard and Army Reserve technicians in particular and to report on results of review to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives not later than Mar. 31, 2000.
Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title V, §581, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 633, directed the Secretary of Defense to develop and implement a survey on attitudes toward military service to be completed by all members of the Armed Forces who had been voluntarily discharged or separated or transferred from a regular to a reserve component between Jan. 1, 2000, and June 30, 2000, and to submit a report to Congress on the results of such survey not later than Oct. 1, 2000.
Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1025, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 748, which required the Secretary of Defense to submit an annual report regarding the deployments and assignments of the United States Armed Forces in Colombia, was repealed by Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title X, §1062(j)(2), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1585.
Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1039, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 756, as amended by Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title X, §1031(h)(3), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1605, provided findings of Congress relating to the Defense Capabilities Initiative.
Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1053, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 764, as amended by Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title X, §1048(g)(7), Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1228, established a commission to review and make recommendations regarding the celebration of victory in the Cold War, directed the President to transmit to Congress a report on the content of a Presidential proclamation and a plan for appropriate ceremonies and activities, and authorized funds.
Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title XII, §1202, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 781, as amended by Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title XII, §1221, Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1252; Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title XII, §1263, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 407; Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title XII, §1246(a)–(c), Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2544, 2545; Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title X, §1066(e)(1), title XII, §1238(a), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1589, 1642, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1) The goals and factors shaping Chinese security strategy and military strategy.
“(2) Trends in Chinese security and military behavior that would be designed to achieve, or that are inconsistent with, the goals described in paragraph (1).
“(3) The security situation in the Taiwan Strait.
“(4) Chinese strategy regarding Taiwan.
“(5) The size, location, and capabilities of Chinese strategic, land, sea, and air forces, including detailed analysis of those forces facing Taiwan.
“(6) Developments in Chinese military doctrine and training.
“(7) Efforts, including technology transfers and espionage, by the People's Republic of China to develop, acquire, or gain access to information, communication, space and other advanced technologies that would enhance military capabilities or otherwise undermine the Department of Defense's capability to conduct information assurance. Such analyses shall include an assessment of the damage inflicted on the Department of Defense by reason thereof.
“(8) An assessment of any challenges during the preceding year to the deterrent forces of the Republic of China on Taiwan, consistent with the commitments made by the United States in the Taiwan Relations Act (Public Law 96–8) [22 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.].
“(9) Developments in China's asymmetric capabilities, including efforts to acquire, develop, and deploy cyberwarfare capabilities. Such analyses shall include an assessment of the nature of China's cyber activities directed against the Department of Defense and an assessment of the damage inflicted on the Department of Defense by reason thereof. Such cyber activities shall include activities originating or suspected of originating from China and shall include government and non-government activities believed to be sanctioned or supported by the Government of China.
“(10) In consultation with the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of State, developments regarding United States-China engagement and cooperation on security matters.
“(11) The current state of United States military-to-military contacts with the People's Liberation Army, which shall include the following:
“(A) A comprehensive and coordinated strategy for such military-to-military contacts and updates to the strategy.
“(B) A summary of all such military-to-military contacts during the period covered by the report, including a summary of topics discussed and questions asked by the Chinese participants in those contacts.
“(C) A description of such military-to-military contacts scheduled for the 12-month period following the period covered by the report and the plan for future contacts.
“(D) The Secretary's assessment of the benefits the Chinese expect to gain from such military-to-military contacts.
“(E) The Secretary's assessment of the benefits the Department of Defense expects to gain from such military-to-military contacts, and any concerns regarding such contacts.
“(F) The Secretary's assessment of how such military-to-military contacts fit into the larger security relationship between the United States and the People's Republic of China.
“(G) The Secretary's certification whether or not any military-to-military exchange or contact was conducted during the period covered by the report in violation of section 1201(a) [10 U.S.C. 168 note].
“(12) Other military and security developments involving the People's Republic of China that the Secretary of Defense considers relevant to United States national security.
“(c)
“(1) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate.
“(2) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on International Relations [now Committee on Foreign Affairs] of the House of Representatives.
“(d)
“(2) The report shall include analysis and forecasts of the following matters related to military cooperation between selling states and the People's Republic of China:
“(A) The extent in each selling state of government knowledge, cooperation, or condoning of sales or transfers of military hardware, expertise, or technology to the People's Republic of China.
“(B) An itemization of significant sales and transfers of military hardware, expertise, or technology from each selling state to the People's Republic of China that have taken place since 1995, with a particular focus on command, control, communications, and intelligence systems.
“(C) Significant assistance by any selling state 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.
“(D) The extent to which arms sales by any selling state 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.”
[Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title XII, §1238(b), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1642, provided that: “The amendments made by this section [amending section 1202 of Pub. L. 106–65, set out above] shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 31, 2011], and shall apply with respect to reports required to be submitted under subsection (a) of section 1202 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 [Pub. L. 106–65], as so amended, on or after that date.”]
[Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title XII, §1246(e), Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2545, provided that:
[“(1)
[“(2)
Pub. L. 106–65, div. C, title XXXI, §3163(d), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 945, provided that:
“(1) The Secretary of Defense shall develop and implement a plan to ensure the continued reliability of the capability of the Department of Defense to carry out its nuclear deterrent mission.
“(2) The plan shall do the following:
“(A) Articulate the current policy of the United States on the role of nuclear weapons and nuclear deterrence in the conduct of defense and foreign relations matters.
“(B) Establish stockpile viability and capability requirements with respect to that mission, including the number and variety of warheads required.
“(C) Establish requirements relating to the contractor industrial base, support infrastructure, and surveillance, testing, assessment, and certification of nuclear weapons necessary to support that mission.
“(3) The plan shall take into account the following:
“(A) Requirements for the critical skills, readiness, training, exercise, and testing of personnel necessary to meet that mission.
“(B) The relevant programs and plans of the military departments and the Defense Agencies with respect to readiness, sustainment (including research and development), and modernization of the strategic deterrent forces.”
Pub. L. 105–262, title VIII, §8119, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2331, as amended by Pub. L. 110–234, title IV, §4002(b)(1)(B), (D), (E), (2)(K), May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1096, 1097; Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title IV, §4002(b)(1)(B), (D), (E), (2)(K), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 1857, 1858, directed the Secretary of Defense to submit to committees of Congress, at the same time that materials relating to Department of Defense funding for fiscal year 2001 were to be submitted, a report on supplemental nutrition assistance program benefits assistance for members of the Armed Forces.
Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title IX, §924, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 726, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
Pub. L. 105–262, title VIII, §8147, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2341, provided that: “The Secretary of Defense shall establish, through a revised Defense Integrated Military Human Resources System (DIMHRS), a defense reform initiative enterprise pilot program for military manpower and personnel information: Provided, That this pilot program should include all functions and systems currently included in DIMHRS and shall be expanded to include all appropriate systems within the enterprise of personnel, manpower, training, and compensation: Provided further, That in establishing a revised DIMHRS enterprise program for manpower and personnel information superiority the functions of this program shall include, but not be limited to: (1) an analysis and determination of the number and kinds of information systems necessary to support manpower and personnel within the Department of Defense; and (2) the establishment of programs to develop and implement information systems in support of manpower and personnel to include an enterprise level strategic approach, performance and results based management, business process improvement and other non-material solutions, the use of commercial or government off-the-shelf technology, the use of modular contracting as defined by Public Law 104–106 [see 41 U.S.C. 2308], and the integration and consolidation of existing manpower and personnel information systems: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense shall re-instate fulfillment standards designated as ADS–97–03–GD, dated January, 1997: Provided further, That the requirements of this section should be implemented not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 17, 1998].”
Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title III, §344, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 1977, as amended by Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title III, §373(h), title X, §1067(3), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 581, 774, directed the Secretary of the Navy to allocate up to $25,000,000 of fiscal year 1999 funds for the purpose of making progress toward the issuance and use of Smart Cards throughout the Navy and the Marine Corps and to equip with Smart Card technology at least one carrier battle group, one carrier air wing, and one amphibious readiness group in each of the United States Atlantic and Pacific Commands not later than June 30, 1999, and directed the Secretary of Defense, not later than Mar. 31, 1999, to submit to congressional defense committees a plan for the use of Smart Card technology by each military department.
Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title III, §377, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 1993, as amended by Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [[div. A], title III, §387], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–88, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
“(d)
“(e)
Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title IX, §915(b), Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2102, directed the Secretary of Defense, not later than 90 days after Oct. 17, 1998, to submit to committees of Congress a report setting forth the definitions of the terms “support” and “mission” to use for purposes of the report requirement under subsec. (l) of this section.
Section 392 of Pub. L. 105–85, as amended by Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title III, §374, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 1992, provided that: “The Secretary of Defense shall maintain a specific coordinated program for the investigation of evidence of fraud, waste, and abuse within the Department of Defense, particularly fraud, waste, and abuse regarding finance and accounting matters and any fraud, waste, and abuse occurring in connection with overpayments made to vendors by the Department of Defense, including overpayments identified under section 354 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104–106; 10 U.S.C. 2461 note).”
Subtitle F of title V of div. A of Pub. L. 105–85, as amended by Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title V, §524, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2014; Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1066(c)(2), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 773, established a Commission on Military Training and Gender-Related Issues to review requirements and restrictions regarding cross-gender relationships of members of the Armed Forces, to review the basic training programs of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps, and to make recommendations on improvements to those programs, requirements, and restrictions, and further provided for composition, powers, and duties of Commission, administrative matters, funding, an interim report to Congress not later than Oct. 15, 1998, and a final report to Congress not later than Mar. 15, 1999, and for termination of Commission 60 days after submission of final report.
Section 907 of Pub. L. 105–85 provided that:
“(a)
“(2) The heads of the military department criminal investigative organizations shall meet on a regular basis to determine the manner in which and the extent to which the military department criminal investigative organizations will be able to share resources.
“(b)
“(2) The heads of the defense auditing organizations shall meet on a regular basis to determine the manner in which and the extent to which the defense auditing organizations will be able to share resources.
“(c)
“(d)
“(1) The term ‘military department criminal investigative organizations’ means—
“(A) the Army Criminal Investigation Command;
“(B) the Naval Criminal Investigative Service; and
“(C) the Air Force Office of Special Investigations.
“(2) The term ‘defense auditing organizations’ means—
“(A) the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Defense;
“(B) the Defense Contract Audit Agency;
“(C) the Army Audit Agency;
“(D) the Naval Audit Service; and
“(E) the Air Force Audit Agency.”
Section 1052 of Pub. L. 105–85 provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1) identify the additional troop protection equipment, if any, required to equip a division (or the equivalent of a division) with adequate troop protection equipment for peace operations; and
“(2) establish procedures to facilitate the exchange or transfer of troop protection equipment among units of the Armed Forces.
“(c)
“(1) ensuring the appropriate allocation of troop protection equipment among the units of the Armed Forces engaged in peace operations; and
“(2) monitoring the availability, status or condition, and location of such equipment.
“(d)
“(e)
“(1) A description of the programs designed to carry out antiterrorism activities of the Department of Defense, any deficiencies in those programs, and any actions taken by the Secretary to improve implementation of such programs.
“(2) An assessment of the current policies and practices of the Department of Defense with respect to the protection of members of the Armed Forces overseas against terrorist attack, including any modifications to such policies or practices that are proposed or implemented as a result of the assessment.
“(3) An assessment of the procedures of the Department of Defense for determining accountability, if any, in the command structure of the Armed Forces in instances in which a terrorist attack results in the loss of life at an overseas military installation or facility.
“(4) A detailed description of the roles of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretaries of the military departments, and the combatant commanders in providing guidance and support with respect to the protection of members of the Armed Forces deployed overseas against terrorist attack (both before and after the November 1995 bombing in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) and how these roles have changed since the June 25, 1996, terrorist bombing at Khobar Towers in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.
“(5) A description of the actions taken by the Secretary of Defense under subsections (a), (b), and (c) to provide adequate troop protection equipment for units of the Armed Forces engaged in a peace operation.”
Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title X, §1072, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1898, required the Secretary of Defense to provide for a study to be conducted by the National Academy of Public Administration of the policies, procedures, and practices of the military criminal investigative organizations for the conduct of investigations of complaints of sex crimes and other criminal sexual misconduct arising in the Armed Forces, required the Academy to submit a report to the Secretary not later than one year after Nov. 18, 1997, and directed the Secretary to submit the report and comments on the report to Congress not later than 30 days afterwards.
Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title X, §1083, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1918, as amended by Pub. L. 105–129, §1(b)(1), Dec. 1, 1997, 111 Stat. 2551; Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title X, §1067(a), (c), Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2134; Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1052(a), (b)(1), (c), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 764; Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title X, §1048(g)(6), (i)(1), Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1228, 1229; Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title X, §1069, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2660, authorized the Secretary of Defense to conduct a program to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Korean War during fiscal years 2000 through 2004, provided that up to $10,000,000 of funds appropriated for the Army for such fiscal years be made available for the program, and directed the Secretary to submit to Congress a report containing an accounting not later than 60 days after completion of all activities and ceremonies.
Section 1309 of Pub. L. 105–85 provided that:
“(a)
“(1) The United States has stated its support for a ban on antipersonnel landmines that is global in scope and verifiable.
“(2) On May 16, 1996, the President announced that the United States, as a matter of policy, would eliminate its stockpile of non-self-destructing antipersonnel landmines, except those used for training purposes and in Korea, and that the United States would reserve the right to use self-destructing antipersonnel landmines in the event of conflict.
“(3) On May 16, 1996, the President also announced that the United States would lead an effort to negotiate an international treaty permanently banning the use of all antipersonnel landmines.
“(4) The United States is currently participating at the United Nations Conference on Disarmament in negotiations aimed at achieving a global ban on the use of antipersonnel landmines.
“(5) On August 18, 1997, the administration agreed to participate in international negotiations sponsored by Canada (the so-called ‘Ottawa process’) designed to achieve a treaty that would outlaw the production, use, and sale of antipersonnel landmines.
“(6) On September 17, 1997, the President announced that the United States would not sign the antipersonnel landmine treaty concluded in Oslo, Norway, by participants in the Ottawa process because the treaty would not provide a geographic exception to allow the United States to stockpile and use antipersonnel landmines in Korea or an exemption that would preserve the ability of the United States to use mixed antitank mine systems which could be used to deter an armored assault against United States forces.
“(7) The President also announced a change in United States policy whereby the United States—
“(A) would no longer deploy antipersonnel landmines, including self-destructing antipersonnel landmines, by 2003, except in Korea;
“(B) would seek to field alternatives by that date, or by 2006 in the case of Korea;
“(C) would undertake a new initiative in the United Nations Conference on Disarmament to establish a global ban on the transfer of antipersonnel landmines; and
“(D) would increase its current humanitarian demining activities around the world.
“(8) The President's decision would allow the continued use by United States forces of self-destructing antipersonnel landmines that are used as part of a mixed antitank mine system.
“(9) Under existing law (as provided in section 580 of Public Law 104–107; 110 Stat. 751), on February 12, 1999, the United States will implement a one-year moratorium on the use of antipersonnel landmines by United States forces except along internationally recognized national borders or in demilitarized zones within a perimeter marked area that is monitored by military personnel and protected by adequate means to ensure the exclusion of civilians.
“(b)
“(1) the United States should not implement a moratorium on the use of antipersonnel landmines by United States Armed Forces in a manner that would endanger United States personnel or undermine the military effectiveness of United States Armed Forces in executing their missions; and
“(2) the United States should pursue the development of alternatives to self-destructing antipersonnel landmines.
“(c)
“(1) The military utility of the continued deployment and use by the United States of antipersonnel landmines.
“(2) The effect of a moratorium on the production, stockpiling, and use of antipersonnel landmines on the ability of United States forces to deter and defend against attack on land by hostile forces, including on the Korean peninsula.
“(3) Progress in developing and fielding systems that are effective substitutes for antipersonnel landmines, including an identification and description of the types of systems that are being developed and fielded, the costs associated with those systems, and the estimated timetable for developing and fielding those systems.
“(4) The effect of a moratorium on the use of antipersonnel landmines on the military effectiveness of current antitank mine systems.
“(5) The number and type of pure antipersonnel landmines that remain in the United States inventory and that are subject to elimination under the President's September 17, 1997, declaration on United States antipersonnel landmine policy.
“(6) The number and type of mixed antitank mine systems that are in the United States inventory, the locations where they are deployed, and their effect on the deterrence and warfighting ability of United States Armed Forces.
“(7) The effect of the elimination of pure antipersonnel landmines on the warfighting effectiveness of the United States Armed Forces.
“(8) The costs already incurred and anticipated of eliminating antipersonnel landmines from the United States inventory in accordance with the policy enunciated by the President on September 17, 1997.
“(9) The benefits that would result to United States military and civilian personnel from an international treaty banning the production, use, transfer, and stockpiling of antipersonnel landmines.”
Section 571(a), (b) of Pub. L. 104–201 provided that:
“(a)
“(2) The Secretary of Defense shall also ensure that unit commanders are aware of their responsibilities in ensuring that impermissible activity based upon discriminatory motives does not occur in units under their command.
“(b)
Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title X, §1041, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2640, required the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress a report on Operation Provide Comfort and Operation Enhanced Southern Watch not later than Mar. 1 of each year and provided for the termination of the requirement with respect to each operation upon the termination of United States involvement in that operation.
Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title X, §1042, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2642, as amended by Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1067(5), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 774, directed Secretary of Defense to submit to Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on emerging operational concepts not later than March 1 of each year through 2000, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title II, §241(b), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 550.
Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title X, §1065, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2653, as amended by Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title X, §1031(f)(2), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1604; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title IX, §903(c)(2), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3399, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a member of the Marshall Center Board of Visitors may not be required to register as an agent of a foreign government solely by reason of service as a member of the Board.
“(3) Notwithstanding section 219 of title 18, United States Code, a non-United States citizen may serve on the Marshall Center Board of Visitors even though registered as a foreign agent.”
Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XIII, §1306, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2892, as amended by Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title XII, §1223, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1652; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title IX, §903(c)(1), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3399, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title X, §1070, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2656, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
Pub. L. 104–193, title III, §363(a), Aug. 22, 1996, 110 Stat. 2247, as amended by Pub. L. 107–296, title XVII, §1704(e)(1)(A), Nov. 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 2315, provided that:
“(1)
“(2)
“(A)
“(B)
“(i) who is permanently assigned overseas, to a vessel, or to a routinely deployable unit; or
“(ii) with respect to whom the Secretary concerned makes a determination that the member's residential address should not be disclosed due to national security or safety concerns.
“(3)
“(4)
Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, §262, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 236, directed the Secretary of Defense, not later than 90 days after Feb. 10, 1996, to request the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a two-year review of current and planned service and defense-wide programs for command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence, and required the Secretary to provide that the Council submit interim reports and a final report on the review to the Department of Defense and committees of Congress.
Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title III, §366, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 275, directed the Secretary of Defense to develop a strategy for the development or modernization of automated information systems for the Department of Defense and to submit to Congress a report on the development of such strategy not later than Apr. 15, 1996.
Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title V, §551, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 318, directed the Secretary of Defense to establish an advisory committee to consider issues relating to the appropriate forum for judicial review of Department of Defense administrative personnel actions, required the committee to submit a report to the Secretary of Defense not later than Dec. 15, 1996, required the Secretary to transmit the committee's report to Congress not later than Jan. 1, 1997, and provided for the termination of the committee 30 days after the date of the submission of its report to Congress.
Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title III, §381, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2738, provided that:
“(a)
“(A) determine whether each automated information system described in paragraph (2) meets the requirements set forth in subsection (b); and
“(B) take appropriate action to end the modernization or development by the Department of Defense of any such system that the Secretary determines does not meet such requirements.
“(2) An automated information system referred to in paragraph (1) is an automated information system—
“(A) that is undergoing modernization or development by the Department of Defense;
“(B) that exceeds $50,000,000 in value; and
“(C) that is not a migration system, as determined by the Enterprise Integration Executive Board of the Department of Defense.
“(b)
“(1) contribute to the achievement of Department of Defense strategies for the use of automated information systems;
“(2) as determined by the Secretary, provide an acceptable benefit from the investment in the system or make a substantial contribution to the performance of the defense mission for which the system is used;
“(3) comply with Department of Defense directives applicable to life cycle management of automated information systems; and
“(4) be based on guidance developed under subsection (c).
“(c)
“(1) Directives of the Office of Management and Budget applicable to returns of investment for such systems.
“(2) A sound, functional economic analysis.
“(3) Established objectives for the Department of Defense information infrastructure.
“(4) Migratory assessment criteria, including criteria under guidance provided by the Defense Information Systems Agency.
“(d)
“(2) If the Secretary exercises the waiver authority provided in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall include the following in the next report required by subsection (f):
“(A) The reasons for the failure of the automated information system to meet all of the requirements of subsection (b).
“(B) A determination of whether the system is expected to meet such requirements in the future, and if so, the date by which the system is expected to meet the requirements.
“(e)
“(2) The activities referred to in paragraph (1) are the following:
“(A) Accelerated implementation of migration systems.
“(B) Establishment of data standards.
“(C) Process improvement.
“(f)
“(1) the automated information systems that, as determined under subsection (a), meet the requirements of subsection (b);
“(2) the automated information systems that, as determined under subsection (a), do not meet the requirements of subsection (b) and the action taken by the Secretary to end the use of such systems; and
“(3) the automated information systems that, as determined by the Enterprise Integration Executive Board, are migration systems.
“(g)
“(1) The progress made by the Department of Defense in achieving the goals of the corporate information management program of the Department.
“(2) The progress made by the Secretary of Defense in establishing the performance measures and management controls referred to in subsection (e)(1).
“(3) The progress made by the Department of Defense in using automated information systems that meet the requirements of subsection (b).
“(4) The report required by subsection (f) to be submitted in 1995.
“(h)
“(1) The term ‘automated information system’ means an automated information system of the Department of Defense described in the exhibits designated as ‘IT-43’ in the budget submitted to Congress by the President for fiscal year 1995 pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code.
“(2) The term ‘migration system’ has the meaning given such term in the document entitled ‘Department of Defense Strategy for Acceleration of Migration Systems and Data Standards’ attached to the memorandum of the Department of Defense dated October 13, 1993 (relating to accelerated implementation of migration systems, data standards, and process improvement).”
Section 830 of Pub. L. 104–201, as amended by Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title I, §101(f) [title VIII, §808(c)], Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–314, 3009–394, provided that Secretary of Defense was to include in report submitted in 1997 under section 381(f) of Pub. L. 103–337 [set out above] a discussion of progress made in implementing div. E of Pub. L. 104–106 [§§5001–5703, see Tables for classification] and strategy for development or modernization of automated information systems for Department of Defense, and plans of Department of Defense for establishing an integrated framework for management of information resources within the Department, and provided further specifications of the elements to be included in the discussion.
Section 533 of Pub. L. 103–337 provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1) The numbers of members of the Armed Forces temporarily and permanently nondeployable and rates of temporary and permanent nondeployability, displayed by cause of nondeployability, rank, and gender.
“(2) The numbers and rates of complaints and allegations within the Armed Forces that involve gender and other unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment, and the rates of substantiation for those complaints and allegations.
“(3) The numbers and rates of disciplinary proceedings, displayed (A) by offense or infraction committed, (B) by gender, rank, and race, and (C) by the categories specified in paragraph (2).
“(4) The retention rates, by gender, rank, and race, with an analysis of factors influencing those rates.
“(5) The propensity of persons to enlist, displayed by gender and race, with an analysis of the factors influencing those propensities.
“(c)
“(d)
Section 534 of Pub. L. 103–337 provided that:
“(a)
“(2) Programs referred to in paragraph (1) are the following:
“(A) Victim and witness assistance programs.
“(B) Family advocacy programs.
“(C) Equal opportunity programs.
“(3) In the case of the Department of the Navy, separate victims’ advocates programs shall be established for the Navy and the Marine Corps.
“(b)
“(1) Crime.
“(2) Intrafamilial sexual, physical, or emotional abuse.
“(3) Discrimination or harassment based on race, gender, ethnic background, national origin, or religion.
“(c)
“(2) The Secretary of each military department shall establish similar interdisciplinary councils within that military department as appropriate to ensure the fullest coordination and effectiveness of the victims’ advocates program of that military department. To the extent practicable, such a council shall be established at each significant military installation.
“(d)
“(2) Services under such a program in the case of an individual who is a victim of family violence (including intrafamilial sexual, physical, and emotional abuse) shall be provided principally through the family advocacy programs of the military departments.
“(e)
“(f)
“(g)
Section 1031 of Pub. L. 103–337 provided that:
“(a)
“(1) for the immediate family members (or their designees) of any unaccounted-for Korean conflict POW/MIA; and
“(2) for the immediate family members (or their designees) of any unaccounted-for Cold War POW/MIA.
“(b)
“(1) with the procedures the family members may follow in their search for information about the unaccounted-for Korean conflict POW/MIA or unaccounted-for Cold War POW/MIA, as the case may be;
“(2) in learning where they may locate information about the unaccounted-for POW/MIA; and
“(3) in learning how and where to identify classified records that contain pertinent information and that will be declassified.
“(c)
“(d)
“(e)
“(1) The term ‘unaccounted-for Korean conflict POW/MIA’ means a member of the Armed Forces or civilian employee of the United States who, as a result of service during the Korean conflict, was at any time classified as a prisoner of war or missing-in-action and whose person or remains have not been returned to United States control and who remains unaccounted for.
“(2) The term ‘unaccounted-for Cold War POW/MIA’ means a member of the Armed Forces or civilian employee of the United States who, as a result of service during the period from September 2, 1945, to August 21, 1991, was at any time classified as a prisoner of war or missing-in-action and whose person or remains have not been returned to United States control and who remains unaccounted for.
“(3) The term ‘Korean conflict’ has the meaning given such term in section 101(9) of title 38, United States Code.”
Pub. L. 112–74, div. A, title VIII, §8068, Dec. 23, 2011, 125 Stat. 822, provided that: “Section 8106 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1997 (titles I through VIII of the matter under subsection 101(b) of Public Law 104–208; 110 Stat. 3009–111; 10 U.S.C. 113 note) shall continue in effect to apply to disbursements that are made by the Department of Defense in fiscal year 2012.”
Similar provisions were contained in the following prior appropriation acts:
Pub. L. 112–10, div. A, title VIII, §8070, Apr. 15, 2011, 125 Stat. 73.
Pub. L. 111–118, div. A, title VIII, §8073, Dec. 19, 2009, 123 Stat. 3445.
Pub. L. 110–329, div. C, title VIII, §8073, Sept. 30, 2008, 122 Stat. 3637.
Pub. L. 110–116, div. A, title VIII, §8076, Nov. 13, 2007, 121 Stat. 1332.
Pub. L. 109–289, div. A, title VIII, §8074, Sept. 29, 2006, 120 Stat. 1291.
Pub. L. 109–148, div. A, title VIII, §8083, Dec. 30, 2005, 119 Stat. 2717.
Pub. L. 108–287, title VIII, §8091, Aug. 5, 2004, 118 Stat. 992.
Pub. L. 108–87, title VIII, §8092, Sept. 30, 2003, 117 Stat. 1094.
Pub. L. 107–248, title VIII, §8098, Oct. 23, 2002, 116 Stat. 1559.
Pub. L. 107–117, div. A, title VIII, §8118, Jan. 10, 2002, 115 Stat. 2273.
Pub. L. 106–259, title VIII, §8137, Aug. 9, 2000, 114 Stat. 704.
Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title I, §101(b) [title VIII, §8106], Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–71, 3009–111, as amended by Pub. L. 105–56, title VIII, §8113, Oct. 8, 1997, 111 Stat. 1245; Pub. L. 105–277, div. C, title I, §143, Oct. 21, 1998, 112 Stat. 2681–609; Pub. L. 106–79, title VIII, §8135, Oct. 25, 1999, 113 Stat. 1268, provided that:
“(a) The Secretary of Defense shall require each disbursement by the Department of Defense in an amount in excess of $500,000 be matched to a particular obligation before the disbursement is made.
“(b) The Secretary shall ensure that a disbursement in excess of the threshold amount applicable under section (a) is not divided into multiple disbursements of less than that amount for the purpose of avoiding the applicability of such section to that disbursement.”
[Section 8113 of Pub. L. 105–56 provided that the amendment made by that section [amending section 101(b) [title VIII, §8106] of Pub. L. 104–208] set out above, is effective June 30, 1998.]
Similar provisions were contained in the following prior appropriation acts:
Pub. L. 104–61, title VIII, §8102, Dec. 1, 1995, 109 Stat. 672.
Pub. L. 103–335, title VIII, §8137, Sept. 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 2654.
Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title V, §542, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1659, as amended by Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [[div. A], title V, §573(b)], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–136; Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title V, §591, Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1125, which generally required the Secretary of Defense to transmit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives notice of a proposed change in military personnel policies in order to make available to female members of the Armed Forces assignment to any type of combat unit, class of combat vessel, or type of combat platform that was not open to such assignments, and also required the Secretary to submit to Congress a report providing notice of certain proposed changes to the ground combat exclusion policy, was repealed and restated as section 652 of this title by Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title V, §541(a)(1), (c), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3251, 3253.
Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title V, §543, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1660, provided that:
“(a)
“(1) shall ensure that qualification of members of the Armed Forces for, and continuance of members of the Armed Forces in, that occupational career field is evaluated on the basis of common, relevant performance standards, without differential standards or evaluation on the basis of gender;
“(2) may not use any gender quota, goal, or ceiling except as specifically authorized by law; and
“(3) may not change an occupational performance standard for the purpose of increasing or decreasing the number of women in that occupational career field.
“(b)
“(2) Whenever the Secretary establishes or revises a physical requirement for an occupational specialty, a member serving in that occupational specialty when the new requirement becomes effective, who is otherwise considered to be a satisfactory performer, shall be provided a reasonable period, as determined under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, to meet the standard established by the new requirement. During that period, the new physical requirement may not be used to disqualify the member from continued service in that specialty.
“(c)
Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title X, §1041, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2842, directed the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress, not later than 90 days after the close of each of fiscal years 1995 through 2000, a report concerning the denial, revocation, or suspension of security clearances for Department of Defense military and civilian personnel, and for Department of Defense contractor employees, for that fiscal year.
Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title XI, §1183, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1774, provided that:
“(a)
“(2) Such review shall specifically consider—
“(A) whether the procedural rights provided to Department of Defense civilian employees should be enhanced to include the procedural rights available to Department of Defense contractor employees;
“(B) whether the procedural rights provided to Department of Defense civilian employees should be enhanced to include the procedural rights available to similarly situated employees in those Government agencies that provide greater rights than the Department of Defense; and
“(C) whether there should be a difference between the rights provided to both Department of Defense civilian and contractor employees with respect to security clearances and the rights provided with respect to sensitive compartmented information and special access programs.
“(b)
“(c)
Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title V, §575, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1675, directed the Secretary of Defense to develop and carry out a test program for improving foreign language proficiency in the Department of Defense through improved management and other measures and to submit a report to committees of Congress not later than Apr. 1, 1994, containing a plan for the program, an explanation of the plan, and a discussion of proficiency pay adjustments, and provided for the program to begin on Oct. 1, 1994, or 180 days after the date of submission of the report and to terminate two years later.
Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title XI, §1185, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1774, required the Secretary of Defense to review, not later than June 30, 1994, the procedures of the military departments for investigating deaths of members of the Armed Forces that may have resulted from self-inflicted causes, to submit to Congress, not later than July 15, 1994, a report on the review, and to prescribe, not later than Oct. 1, 1994, regulations governing the investigation of deaths of members of the Armed Forces that may have resulted from self-inflicted causes, required the Inspector General of the Department of Defense to review certain death investigations, and required the Secretary of Transportation to implement with respect to the Coast Guard the requirements that were imposed on the Secretary of Defense and the Inspector General of the Department of Defense.
Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title III, §378, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2387, as amended by Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title III, §382(a), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2740, authorized the Secretary of Defense, during fiscal years 1993 through 1996, to conduct a program to commemorate the 50th anniversary of World War II and to coordinate, support, and facilitate commemoration programs and activities of Federal, State, and local governments.
Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title III, §383, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2392, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title VI, §653(d), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2429, directed the Secretary of Defense to transmit a report to Congress not later than Dec. 15, 1993, on actions that had been taken and were planned to be taken in the Department of Defense to reduce or eliminate disincentives for a dependent of a member of the Armed Forces abused by the member to report the abuse.
Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title X, §1072, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2508, provided that:
“(a)
“(1)
“(2)
“(A) in any case in which the cause or circumstances surrounding the death are under investigation, are informed of that fact, of the names of the agencies within the Department of Defense conducting the investigations, and of the existence of any reports by such agencies that have been or will be issued as a result of the investigations; and
“(B) are furnished, if the family members so desire, a copy of any completed investigative report and any other completed fatality reports that are available at the time family members are provided the information described in subparagraph (A) to the extent such reports may be furnished consistent with sections 552 and 552a of title 5, United States Code.
“(3)
“(B) In any case in which an investigative report or other fatality reports cannot be released at the time family members of a service member are provided the information described in paragraph (2)(A) about the member's death because of section 552 or 552a of title 5, United States Code, the Secretary concerned shall ensure that the family members—
“(i) are informed about the requirements and procedures necessary to request a copy of such reports; and
“(ii) are assisted, if the family members so desire, in submitting a request in accordance with such requirements and procedures.
“(C) The requirement of subparagraph (B) to inform and assist family members in obtaining copies of fatality reports shall continue until a copy of each report is obtained, or access to any such report is denied by competent authority within the Department of Defense.
“(4)
“(b)
“(1)
“(A) Whether uniformity in combat fatality notification procedures among the military departments is desirable, particularly with respect to—
“(i) the use of one or two casualty notification and assistance officers;
“(ii) the use of standardized fatality report forms and witness statements;
“(iii) the use of a single center for all military departments through which combat fatality information may be processed; and
“(iv) the use of uniform procedures and the provision of a dispute resolution process for instances in which members of one of the Armed Forces inflict casualties on members of another of the Armed Forces.
“(B) Whether existing combat fatality report forms should be modified to include a block or blocks with which to identify the cause of death as ‘friendly fire’, ‘U.S. ordnance’, or ‘unknown’.
“(C) Whether the existing ‘Emergency Data’ form prepared by members of the Armed Forces should be revised to allow members to specify provision for notification of additional family members in cases such as the case of a divorced service member who leaves children with both a current and a former spouse.
“(D) Whether the military departments should, in all cases, provide family members of a service member who died as a result of injuries sustained in combat with full and complete details of the death of the service member, regardless of whether such details may be graphic, embarrassing to the family members, or reflect negatively on the military department concerned.
“(E) Whether, and when, the military departments should inform family members of a service member who died as a result of injuries sustained in combat about the possibility that the death may have been the result of friendly fire.
“(F) The criteria and standards which the military departments should use in deciding when disclosure is appropriate to family members of a member of the military forces of an allied nation who died as a result of injuries sustained in combat when the death may have been the result of fire from United States armed forces and an investigation into the cause or circumstances of the death has been conducted.
“(2)
“(c)
“(1) The term ‘fatality reports’ includes investigative reports and any other reports pertaining to the cause or circumstances of death of a member of the Armed Forces in the line of duty (such as autopsy reports, battlefield reports, and medical reports).
“(2) The term ‘family members’ means parents, spouses, adult children, and such other relatives as the Secretary concerned considers appropriate.
“(d)
“(2) With respect to deaths of members of the Armed Forces occurring before the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary concerned shall provide fatality reports to family members upon request as promptly as practicable.”
Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title X, §1082, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2516, as amended by Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title X, §1031(d)(2), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1604, provided that:
“(a)
“(1) all incremental costs of military personnel accompanying the equipment, including food, lodging, and local transportation;
“(2) all incremental transportation costs incurred in moving such equipment from its normally assigned location to the airshow or trade exhibition and return; and
“(3) any other miscellaneous incremental costs not included under paragraphs (1) and (2) that are incurred by the Federal Government but would not have been incurred had military support not been provided to the contractor or industrial association.
“(b)
“(2) The Secretary of Defense may not delegate the authority to make the determination referred to in [former] paragraph (1)(A) below the level of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.
“(c)
Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title XIII, §1302, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2545, which provided that on and after Sept. 30, 1996, no appropriated funds may be used to support an end strength level of members of the Armed Forces of the United States assigned to permanent duty ashore in nations outside the United States at any level in excess of 60 percent of the end strength level of such members on Sept. 30, 1992, with exceptions in the event of declarations of war or emergency, was repealed and restated as section 123b of this title by Pub. L. 103–337, §1312(a), (c).
Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title X, §1063, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2469, as amended by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, §1075(d)(14), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4373, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(1) how the plan supports the United States national security strategy;
“(2) how the plan supports the security commitments undertaken by the United States pursuant to any international security treaty, including the North Atlantic Treaty, the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan, and the Security Treaty Between Australia, New Zealand, and the United States of America;
“(3) how the plan addresses the current security environment in each geographic combatant command's area of responsibility, including United States participation in theater security cooperation activities and bilateral partnership, exchanges, and training exercises;
“(4) the impact that a permanent change in the basing of a unit currently stationed outside the United States would have on the matters described in paragraphs (1) through (3);
“(5) the impact the plan will have on the status of overseas base closure and realignment actions undertaken as part of a global defense posture realignment strategy and the status of development and execution of comprehensive master plans for overseas military main operating bases, forward operating sites, and cooperative security locations of the global defense posture of the United States;
“(6) any recommendations for additional closures or realignments of military installations outside of the United States; and
“(7) any comments resulting from an interagency review of the plan that includes the Department of State and other relevant Federal departments and agencies.
“(c)
“(d)
“(1)
“(2)
Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title XIII, §1304, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2546, as amended by Pub. L. 103–160, div. B, title XXIX, §2924(a), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1931; Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title XV, §1502(c)(2)(A), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 506, provided that:
“(a)
“(1) the stationing and basing plan by installation for United States military forces outside the United States;
“(2) the status of closures of United States military installations located outside the United States;
“(3) both—
“(A) the status of negotiations, if any, between the United States and the host government as to (i) United States claims for compensation for the fair market value of the improvements made by the United States at each installation referred to in paragraph (2), and (ii) any claims of the host government for damages or restoration of the installation; and
“(B) the representative of the United States in any such negotiations;
“(4) the potential savings to the United States resulting from such closures;
“(5) the cost to the United States of any improvements made at each installation referred to in paragraph (2) and the fair market value of such improvements, expressed in constant dollars based on the date of completion of the improvements;
“(6) in each case in which negotiations between the United States and a host government have resulted in an agreement for the payment to the United States by the host government of the value of improvements to an installation made by the United States, the amount of such payment, the form of such payment, and the expected date of such payment; and
“(7) efforts and progress toward achieving host nation offsets under section 1301(e) [106 Stat. 2545] and reduced end strength levels under section 1302 [set out above].
“(b)
Sections 541–550 of Pub. L. 102–190 provided for the creation of a Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces to assess the laws and policies restricting the assignment of female service members and the implications, if any, for the combat readiness of the Armed Forces of permitting female members to qualify for assignment to positions in some or all categories of combat positions, with a report to be submitted to the President no later than Nov. 15, 1992, and to the Congress no later than Dec. 15, 1992, containing recommendations as to what roles female members should have in combat and what laws and policies restricting such assignments should be repealed or modified, and further provided for powers and procedures of the Commission, personnel matters, payment of Commission expenses and other miscellaneous administrative provisions, termination of the Commission 90 days after submission of its final report, and test assignments of female service members to combat positions.
Section 832 of Pub. L. 102–190 provided that:
“(a)
“(1) compute the total value of American-made military goods and services procured each year by European governments or companies;
“(2) review defense procurement practices of European governments to determine what factors are considered in the selection of contractors and to determine whether American firms are discriminated against in the selection of contractors for purchases by such governments of military goods and services; and
“(3) establish a procedure for discussion with European governments about defense contract awards made by them that American firms believe were awarded unfairly.
“(b)
“(c)
Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title IX, §924, Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1454, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
“(1) describing the procedures prescribed under subsection (a); and
“(2) stating the assessment of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the performance in joint training exercises of the national intelligence collection systems and the Chairman's recommendations for any changes that the Chairman considers appropriate to improve that performance.”
[Reference to the Director of Central Intelligence or the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Director's capacity as the head of the intelligence community deemed to be a reference to the Director of National Intelligence. Reference to the Director of Central Intelligence or the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Director's capacity as the head of the Central Intelligence Agency deemed to be a reference to the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. See section 1081(a), (b) of Pub. L. 108–458, set out as a note under section 401 of Title 50, War and National Defense.]
Section 1083 of Pub. L. 102–190 provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
Pub. L. 102–25, title IV, Apr. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 99, directed Director of Office of Management and Budget to submit to Congress a number of reports on incremental costs associated with Operation Desert Storm and amounts of contributions made to United States by foreign countries to offset those costs, with a final report due not later than Nov. 15, 1992, and directed Secretary of State and Secretary of the Treasury to jointly submit to Congress a number of reports on contributions made by foreign countries as part of international response to Persian Gulf crisis, with a final report due not later than Nov. 15, 1992.
Pub. L. 102–25, title VI, §601, Apr. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 105, as amended by Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title X, §1063(d)(1), Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1476; Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title X, §1053(8), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2502, authorized the Secretary of Defense to provide child care assistance for families of members of the Armed Forces and the National Guard who had served on active duty during the Persian Gulf conflict in Operation Desert Storm.
Pub. L. 102–25, title VI, §602, Apr. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 106, as amended by Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title X, §1063(d)(2), Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1476, authorized the Secretary of Defense to provide assistance to families of members of the Armed Forces and National Guard who had served on active duty during the Persian Gulf conflict in Operation Desert Storm in order to ensure that they would receive educational assistance and support services necessary to meet needs.
Pub. L. 102–25, title VI, §608, Apr. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 112, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
“(d)
Pub. L. 102–396, title IX, §9070, Oct. 6, 1992, 106 Stat. 1918, provided that: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, where cost effective, all Department of Defense software shall be written in the programming language Ada, in the absence of special exemption by an official designated by the Secretary of Defense.”
Similar provisions were contained in the following prior appropriation acts:
Pub. L. 102–172, title VIII, §8073, Nov. 26, 1991, 105 Stat. 1188.
Pub. L. 101–511, title VIII, §8092, Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1896.
Pub. L. 101–511, title VIII, §8105, Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1902, as amended by Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title X, §1063(b), Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1476, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
“(d)
“(2) The President may waive the limitation in this section for any fiscal year if he declares that it is in the national interest to do so and immediately informs Congress of the waiver and the reasons for the waiver.
“(e)
Section 1455 of Pub. L. 101–510 provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(c)
“(2) It is the sense of Congress that—
“(A) all countries that share the benefits of international security and stability should, commensurate with their national capabilities, share in the responsibility for maintaining that security and stability; and
“(B) given the economic capability of Japan to contribute to international security and stability, Japan should make contributions commensurate with that capability.
“(d)
“(e)
“(2) This section may be waived by the President if the President—
“(A) declares an emergency or determines that such a waiver is required by the national security interests of the United States; and
“(B) immediately informs the Congress of the waiver and the reasons for the waiver.”
Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title IX, §901, Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1619, directed the Secretary of Defense to submit, with the Secretary's annual report to Congress during each of fiscal years 1992, 1993, and 1994, a report covering a period of at least ten years addressing threats facing the United States and strategic military plans to aid in the achievement of national objectives.
Section 211(e) of Pub. L. 101–189, which required Secretary of Defense to submit annual report to congressional defense committees on Balanced Technology Initiative, was repealed by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title X, §1061(l), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 443.
Section 661 of Pub. L. 101–189, which related to establishment by Secretary of Defense of programs to provide relocation assistance to members of Armed Forces and their families, was repealed and restated in section 1056 of this title by Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIV, §1481(c)(1), (3), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1705.
Title XV of div. A of Pub. L. 101–189, which provided that such title could be cited as the “Military Child Care Act of 1989”, and which related to funding for military child care for fiscal year 1990, child care employees, parent fees, child abuse prevention and safety at facilities, parent partnerships with child development centers, report on 5-year demand for child care, subsidies for family home day care, early childhood education demonstration program, and deadline for regulations, was repealed and restated in subchapter II (§1791 et seq.) of chapter 88 of this title by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title V, §568(a)(1), (e)(2), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 331, 336.
Section 1102 of Pub. L. 100–456, which designated the Department of Defense as the single lead agency of the Federal Government for detection and monitoring of aerial and maritime transit of illegal drugs into the United States, was repealed and restated as section 124 of this title by Pub. L. 101–189, §1202(a)(1), (b).
Section 1309 of Pub. L. 100–456 directed Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress annual reports assessing security at United States military facilities in Republic of Philippines, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title X, §1074, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2511.
Pub. L. 100–463, title VIII, §8125, Oct. 1, 1988, 102 Stat. 2270–41, as amended by Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title XVI, §1623, Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1606; Pub. L. 103–236, title I, §162(j), Apr. 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 408; Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title XV, §1502(f)(1), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 509; Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, §1067(14), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 775, provided that:
“(a)(1) Not later than March 1, 1989, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on the assignment of military missions among the member countries of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and on the prospects for the more effective assignment of such missions among such countries.
“(2) The report shall include a discussion of the following:
“(A) The current assignment of military missions among the member countries of NATO.
“(B) Military missions for which there is duplication of capability or for which there is inadequate capability within the current assignment of military missions within NATO.
“(C) Alternatives to the current assignment of military missions that would maximize the military contributions of the member countries of NATO.
“(D) Any efforts that are underway within NATO or between individual member countries of NATO at the time the report is submitted that are intended to result in a more effective assignment of military missions within NATO.
“(b) The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State shall (1) conduct a review of the long-term strategic interests of the United States overseas and the future requirements for the assignment of members of the Armed Forces of the United States to permanent duty ashore outside the United States, and (2) determine specific actions that, if taken, would result in a more balanced sharing of defense and foreign assistance spending burdens by the United States and its allies. Not later than August 1, 1989, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State shall transmit to Congress a report containing the findings resulting from the review and their determinations.
“[(c) Repealed. Pub. L. 103–236, title I, §162(j), Apr. 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 408.]
“(d) The President shall specify (separately by appropriation account) in the Department of Defense items included in each budget submitted to Congress under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, (1) the amounts necessary for payment of all personnel, operations, maintenance, facilities, and support costs for Department of Defense overseas military units, and (2) the costs for all dependents who accompany Department of Defense personnel outside the Unied [sic] States.
“(e) Not later than May 1, 1989, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services and on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report that sets forth the total costs required to support the dependents who accompany Department of Defense personnel assigned to permanent duty overseas.
“(f) As of September 30 of each fiscal year, the number of members of the Armed Forces on active duty assigned to permanent duty ashore in Japan and the Republic of Korea may not exceed 94,450 (the number of members of the Armed Forces on active duty assigned to permanent duty ashore in Japan and the Republic of Korea on September 30, 1987). The limitation in the preceding sentence may be increased if and when (1) a major reduction of United States forces in the Republic of the Philippines is required because of a loss of basing rights in that nation, and (2) the President determines and certifies to Congress that, as a consequence of such loss, an increase in United States forces stationed in Japan and the Republic of Korea is necessary.
“(g)(1) After fiscal year 1990, budget submissions to Congress under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, shall identify funds requested for Department of Defense personnel and units in permanent duty stations ashore outside the United States that exceed the amount of such costs incurred in fiscal year 1989 and shall set forth a detailed description of (A) the types of expenditures increased, by appropriation account, activity and program; and (B) specific efforts to obtain allied host nations’ financing for these cost increases.
“(2) The Secretary of Defense shall notify in advance the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives, through existing notification procedures, when costs of maintaining Department of Defense personnel and units in permanent duty stations ashore outside the United States will exceed the amounts as defined in the Department of Defense budget as enacted for that fiscal year. Such notification shall describe: (A) the type of expenditures that increased; and (B) the source of funds (including prior year unobligated balances) by appropriation account, activity and program, proposed to finance these costs.
“(3) In computing the costs incurred for maintaining Department of Defense personnel and forces in permanent duty stations ashore outside the United States compared with the amount of such costs incurred in fiscal year 1989, the Secretary shall—
“(A) exclude increased costs resulting from increases in the rates of pay provided for members of the Armed Forces and civilian employees of the United States Government and exclude any cost increases in supplies and services resulting from inflation; and
“(B) include (i) the costs of operation and maintenance and of facilities for the support of Department of Defense overseas personnel, and (ii) increased costs resulting from any decline in the foreign exchange rate of the United States dollar.
“(h) The provisions of subsections (f) and (g) shall not apply in time of war or during a national emergency declared by the President or Congress.
“(i) In this section—
“(1) the term ‘personnel’ means members of the Armed Forces of the United States and civilian employees of the Department of Defense;
“(2) the term ‘Department of Defense overseas personnel’ means those Department of Defense personnel who are assigned to permanent duty ashore outside the United States; and
“(3) the term ‘United States’ includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the territories and possessions of the United States.”
Pub. L. 100–202, §101(b) [title VIII, §8042], Dec. 22, 1987, 101 Stat. 1329–43, 1329–69, which required Secretary of Defense to submit annual report on full costs of stationing United States troops overseas, etc., was repealed and restated in subsec. (k) [now (j)] of this section by Pub. L. 100–370, §1(o).
Section 637 of Pub. L. 100–180 provided that: “Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 4, 1987], the Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations to establish the policy that—
“(1) the decision by a spouse of a member of the Armed Forces to be employed or to voluntarily participate in activities relating to the Armed Forces should not be influenced by the preferences or requirements of the Armed Forces; and
“(2) neither such decision nor the marital status of a member of the Armed Forces should have an effect on the assignment or promotion opportunities of the member.”
Section 638 of Pub. L. 100–180, as amended by Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title VI, §662, Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1465; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIV, §1484(l)(1), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1719, provided that the Secretary of Defense, with respect to members of the Armed Forces, and the Secretary of Transportation, with respect to members of the Coast Guard, were to carry out a test program providing for reimbursement for qualifying adoption expenses incurred by members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps for adoption proceedings inititated after September 30, 1987, and before October 1, 1990, and for qualifying adoption expenses incurred by members of the Coast Guard for adoption proceedings inititated after September 30, 1989, and before October 1, 1990.
Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title XI, §1121, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1147, as amended by Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title X, §1073(d)(5), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1906, which provided for a counterintelligence polygraph program to be carried out by the Secretary of Defense, was repealed and restated in section 1564a of this title by Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title X, §1041(a)(1),(b), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1607, 1608.
Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title VI, §612, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3878, provided that: “The Secretary of each military department shall establish procedures to ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable within operational and other military requirements, permanent change of station moves for members of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who have dependents in elementary or secondary school occur at times that avoid disruption of the school schedules of such dependents.”
Pub. L. 99–500, §101(c) [title X, §955], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–82, 1783–173, and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(c) [title X, §955], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–82, 3341–173; Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title IX, formerly title IV, §955, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3953, renumbered title IX, Pub. L. 100–26, §3(5), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 273, which provided that in preparing the defense budget for any fiscal year, the Secretary of Defense was to specifically identify each common procurement weapon system included in the budget, take all feasible steps to minimize variations in procurement unit costs for any such system as shown in the budget requests of the different armed forces requesting procurement funds for the system, and identify and justify in the budget all such variations in procurement unit costs for common procurement weapon systems, and that the Secretary of Defense carry out this section through the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), was repealed and restated in section 2217 of this title by Pub. L. 100–370, §1(d)(3).
Pub. L. 99–433, title IV, §405, Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 1032, required the Secretary of Defense to include in the Secretary's annual report to Congress under subsec. (c) of this section for each year from 1987 through 1991 a detailed report on the implementation of title IV of Pub. L. 99–433.
Pub. L. 99–433, title IV, §406(g), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 1034, required that the first report submitted by the Secretary of Defense under subsec. (c) of this section after Oct. 1, 1986, would contain as much of the information required by section 667 of this title as had been available to the Secretary at the time of its preparation.
Pub. L. 99–399, title XI, Aug. 27, 1986, 100 Stat. 894, directed the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress not later than June 30, 1987, on actions taken to review the security of each base and installation of the Department of Defense outside the United States, to improve the security of such bases and installations, and to institute a training program for members of the Armed Forces stationed outside the United States and their families concerning security and antiterrorism.
Pub. L. 99–145, title VI, §685(a), (b), (d), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 666, provided that:
“(a)
“(b)
“(d)
Pub. L. 98–94, title X, §1033, Sept. 24, 1983, 97 Stat. 672, as amended by Pub. L. 98–525, title VI, §656, Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2553, effective Oct. 1, 1985, required payment by a member of the Armed Forces of a $10 fee for veterinary services, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 99–145, title VI, §685(c), (d), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 666, effective Oct. 1, 1985.
Pub. L. 99–145, title VIII, Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 678, as amended by Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title VI, §653, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3890; Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title VI, §635, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1106; Pub. L. 100–456, div. A, title V, §524, Sept. 29, 1988, 102 Stat. 1975, which provided that such title could be cited as the “Military Family Act of 1985”, and which related to Office of Family Policy, transfer of Military Family Resource Center, surveys of military families, family members serving on advisory committees, employment opportunities for military spouses, youth sponsorship program, dependent student travel within United States, relocation and housing, food programs, reporting of child abuse, miscellaneous reporting requirements, and effective date, was repealed and restated in subchapter I (§1781 et seq.) of chapter 88 of this title by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title V, §568(a)(1), (e)(1), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 329, 336.
Pub. L. 99–145, title XII, §1212, Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 726, as amended by Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title V, §518, Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1443, provided that:
“(a) No solicitation, contract, or agreement for the provision of off-duty postsecondary education services for members of the Armed Forces of the United States, civilian employees of the Department of Defense, or the dependents of such members or employees may discriminate against or preclude any accredited academic institution authorized to award one or more associate degrees from offering courses within its lawful scope of authority solely on the basis of such institution's lack of authority to award a baccalaureate degree.
“(b) No solicitation, contract, or agreement for the provision of off-duty postsecondary education services for members of the Armed Forces of the United States, civilian employees of the Department of Defense, or the dependents of such members or employees, other than those for services at the graduate or postgraduate level, may limit the offering of such services or any group, category, or level of courses to a single academic institution. However, nothing in this section shall prohibit such actions taken in accordance with regulations of the Secretary of Defense which are uniform for all armed services as may be necessary to avoid unnecessary duplication of offerings, consistent with the purpose of this provision of ensuring the availability of alternative offerors of such services to the maximum extent feasible.
“(c)(1) The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a study to determine the current and future needs of members of the Armed Forces, civilian employees of the Department of Defense, and the dependents of such members and employees for postsecondary education services at overseas locations. The Secretary shall determine on the basis of the results of that study whether the policies and procedures of the Department in effect on the date of the enactment of the Department of Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 [probably means date of enactment of Pub. L. 101–189, Nov. 29, 1989] with respect to the procurement of such services are—
“(A) consistent with the provisions of subsections (a) and (b);
“(B) adequate to ensure the recipients of such services the benefit of a choice in the offering of such services; and
“(C) adequate to ensure that persons stationed at geographically isolated military installations or at installations with small complements of military personnel are adequately served.
The Secretary shall complete the study in such time as necessary to enable the Secretary to submit the report required by paragraph (2)(A) by the deadline specified in that paragraph.
“(2)(A) The Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the results of the study referred to in paragraph (1), together with a copy of any revisions in policies and procedures made as a result of such study. The report shall be submitted not later than March 1, 1990.
“(B) The Secretary shall include in the report an explanation of how determinations are made with regard to—
“(i) affording members, employees, and dependents a choice in the offering of courses of postsecondary education; and
“(ii) whether the services provided under a contract for such services should be limited to an installation, theater, or other geographic area.
“(3)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), no contract for the provision of services referred to in subsection (a) may be awarded, and no contract or agreement entered into before the date of the enactment of this paragraph [Nov. 29, 1989] may be renewed or extended on or after such date, until the end of the 60-day period beginning on the date on which the report referred to in paragraph (2)(A) is received by the committees named in that paragraph.
“(B) A contract or an agreement in effect on October 1, 1989, for the provision of postsecondary education services in the European Theater for members of the Armed Forces, civilian employees of the Department of Defense, and the dependents of such members and employees may be renewed or extended without regard to the limitation in subparagraph (A).
“(C) In the case of a contract for services with respect to which a solicitation is pending on the date of the enactment of this paragraph [Nov. 29, 1989], the contract may be awarded—
“(i) on the basis of the solicitation as issued before the date of the enactment of this paragraph;
“(ii) on the basis of the solicitation issued before the date of the enactment of this paragraph modified so as to conform to any changes in policies and procedures the Secretary determines should be made as a result of the study required under paragraph (1); or
“(iii) on the basis of a new solicitation.
“(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to require more than one academic institution to be authorized to offer courses aboard a particular naval vessel.”
Pub. L. 99–145, title XIV, §1407, Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 745, required reports on unobligated balances, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title XIII, §1307(b), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3981. See section 2215 of this title.
Pub. L. 99–145, title XIV, §1456, Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 762, which directed Secretary of Defense to monitor capability of domestic textile and apparel industrial base to support defense mobilization requirements and to make annual reports to Congress on status of such industrial base, was repealed and restated in section 2510 of this title by Pub. L. 101–510, §826(a)(1), (b).
Pub. L. 99–85, Aug. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 286, as amended by Pub. L. 103–199, title IV, §404(a), Dec. 17, 1993, 107 Stat. 2325, provided: “That the Secretary of Defense may provide to Russia, as provided in the Exchange of Notes Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Concerning the Direct Communications Link Upgrade, concluded on July 17, 1984, such equipment and services as may be necessary to upgrade or maintain the Russian part of the Direct Communications Link agreed to in the Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and the Soviet Union signed June 20, 1963. The Secretary shall provide such equipment and services to Russia at the cost thereof to the United States.
“
“(b) Funds received from Russia as payment for such equipment and services shall be credited to the appropriate account of Department of Defense.”
[Pub. L. 103–199, title IV, §404(b), Dec. 17, 1993, 107 Stat. 2325, provided that: “The amendment made by subsection (a)(2) [amending section 2(b) of Pub. L. 99–85, set out above] does not affect the applicability of section 2(b) of that joint resolution to funds received from the Soviet Union.”]
Pub. L. 97–252, title XI, §1110, Sept. 8, 1982, 96 Stat. 747, provided that none of funds appropriated pursuant to an authorization of appropriations could be used for purpose of consolidating any functions being performed on Sept. 8, 1982, by Military Traffic Management Command of Army, Military Sealift Command of Navy, or Military Airlift Command of Air Force with any function being performed on such date by either or both of the other commands, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 99–433, title II, §213(a), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 1018.
Pub. L. 97–86, title IX, §918, Dec. 1, 1981, 95 Stat. 1132, directed Secretary of Defense, not later than Jan. 15, 1982 and 1983, to submit to Congress reports containing recommendations to improve efficiency and management of, and to eliminate waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in, operation of Department of Defense, and to include each recommendation by Comptroller General since Jan. 1, 1979, for elimination of waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement in Department of Defense with a statement as to which have been adopted and, to extent practicable actual and projected cost savings from each, and which have not been adopted and, to extent practicable, projected cost savings from each and an explanation of why each such recommendation was not adopted.
Pub. L. 94–431, title VI, §610, Sept. 30, 1976, 90 Stat. 1365, authorized Secretary of Defense to conduct studies with regard to possible use of military installations being closed and to make recommendations with regard to such installations, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 97–86, title IX, §912(b), Dec. 1, 1981, 95 Stat. 1123. See section 2391 of this title.
Pub. L. 94–106, title VIII, §812, Oct. 7, 1975, 89 Stat. 540, which directed Secretary of Defense, after consultation with Secretary of State, to prepare and submit not later than January 31 of each year to Committees on Armed Services of Senate and House of Representatives a written annual report on foreign policy and military force structure of United States for next fiscal year, how such policy and force structure relate to each other, and justification for each, was repealed and restated as subsec. (e) of section 133 [now §113] of this title by Pub. L. 97–295, §§1(1), 6(b).
Pub. L. 94–106, title VIII, §813, Oct. 7, 1975, 89 Stat. 540, as amended by Pub. L. 95–79, title VIII, §814, July 30, 1977, 91 Stat. 337; Pub. L. 97–252, title XI, §1104, Sept. 8, 1982, 96 Stat. 739, which directed Secretary of Defense to report to Congress on any letter proposing to transfer $50,000,000 or more of defense articles, detailing impact of such a sale on readiness, adequacy of price for replacement, and armed forces needs and supply for each article, was repealed and restated as section 133b (renumbered §118 and repealed) of this title by Pub. L. 97–295, §§1(2)(A), 6(b).
Section 412 of Pub. L. 86–149, title IV, Aug. 10, 1959, 73 Stat. 322, as amended by Pub. L. 87–436, §2, Apr. 27, 1962, 76 Stat. 55; Pub. L. 88–174, title VI, §610, Nov. 7, 1963, 77 Stat. 329; Pub. L. 89–37, title III, §304, June 11, 1965, 79 Stat. 128; Pub. L. 90–168, §6, Dec. 1, 1967, 81 Stat. 526; Pub. L. 91–121, title IV, §405, Nov. 19, 1969, 83 Stat. 207; Pub. L. 91–441, title V, §§505, 509, Oct. 7, 1970, 84 Stat. 912, 913; Pub. L. 92–129, title VII, §701, Sept. 28, 1971, 85 Stat. 362; Pub. L. 92–436, title III, §302, title VI, §604, Sept. 26, 1972, 86 Stat. 736, 739, was repealed by Pub. L. 93–155, title VIII, §803(b)(1), Nov. 16, 1973, 87 Stat. 615. See sections 114 to 116 of this title.
Ex. Ord. No. 12765, June 11, 1991, 56 F.R. 27401, provided:
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, and my authority as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:
George Bush.
Memorandum of the President of the United States, May 14, 1991, 56 F.R. 23991, provided:
Memorandum for the Secretary of Defense
Consistent with section 8105(d)(2) of the Department of Defense Appropriation Act, 1991 (Public Law 101–511; 104 Stat. 1856) [set out above], I hereby waive the limitation in section 8105(b) which states that the end strength level for each fiscal year of all personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States stationed in Japan may not exceed the number that is 5,000 less than such end strength level for the preceding fiscal year, and declare that it is in the national interest to do so.
You are authorized and directed to inform the Congress of this waiver and of the reasons for the waiver contained in the attached justification, and to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.
George Bush.
In January of this year the Department of Defense signed a new Host Nation Support Agreement with the Government of Japan in which that government agreed to pay all utility and Japanese labor costs incrementally over the next five years (worth $1.7 billion). Because United States forward deployed forces stationed in Japan have regional missions in addition to the defense of Japan, we did not seek to have the Government of Japan offset all of the direct costs incurred by the United States related to the presence of all United States military personnel in Japan (excluding military personnel title costs).