[House Report 104-131]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


From the House Reports Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]


104th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                
 1st Session                                                    104-131
_______________________________________________________________________




                   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT

                          FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                     COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                   on

                               H.R. 1530

                             together with

                     ADDITIONAL, SUPPLEMENTAL, AND

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TONGRESS.#13


  June 1, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed


                  HOUSE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY

                      One Hundred Fourth Congress

               FLOYD D. SPENCE, South Carolina, Chairman
                                     RONALD V. DELLUMS, California
BOB STUMP, Arizona                   G.V. (SONNY) MONTGOMERY, 
DUNCAN HUNTER, California                Mississippi
JOHN R. KASICH, Ohio                 PATRICIA SCHROEDER, Colorado
HERBERT H. BATEMAN, Virginia         IKE SKELTON, Missouri
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah                NORMAN SISISKY, Virginia
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania            JOHN M. SPRATT, Jr., South 
ROBERT K. DORNAN, California             Carolina
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado                SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
JIM SAXTON, New Jersey               OWEN PICKETT, Virginia
RANDY ``DUKE'' CUNNINGHAM,           LANE EVANS, Illinios
    California                       JOHN TANNER, Tennessee
STEVE BUYER, Indiana                 GLEN BROWDER, Alabama
PETER G. TORKILDSEN, Massachusetts   GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi
TILLIE K. FOWLER, Florida            NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York             CHET EDWARDS, Texas
JAMES TALENT, Missouri               FRANK TEJEDA, Texas
TERRY EVERETT, Alabama               MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland         ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
HOWARD ``BUCK'' McKEON, California   JANE HARMAN, California
RON LEWIS, Kentucky                  PAUL McHALE, Pennsylvania
J.C. WATTS, Jr., Oklahoma            PETE GEREN, Texas
MAC THORNBERRY, Texas                PETE PETERSON, Florida
JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana          WILLIAM J. JEFFERSON, Louisiana
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia             ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut
VAN HILLEARY, Tennessee              MIKE WARD, Kentucky
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida             PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North 
    Carolina
JAMES B. LONGLEY, Jr., Maine
TODD TIAHRT, Kansas
RICHARD ``DOC'' HASTINGS, 
    Washington
                    Andrew K. Ellis, Staff Director


                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Explanation of the Committee Amendment...........................     1
Purpose..........................................................     1
Relationship of Authorization and Appropriations.................     2
Summary of Authorization in the Bill.............................     2
Summary Table of Authorizations..................................     2
Rationale for the Committee Bill.................................     6
Hearings.........................................................    12
Division A--Department of Defense Authorization..................    12
Title I--Procurement:
    Aircraft Procurement, Army...................................    15
        Overview.................................................    15
        Items of special interest................................    17
    Missile Procurement, Army....................................    17
        Overview.................................................    17
         Items of special interest...............................    19
     Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army...................    20
         Overview................................................    20
         Items of special interest...............................    22
     Ammunition Procurement, Army................................    23
         Overview................................................    23
         Items of special interest...............................    25
     Other Procurement, Army.....................................    25
         Overview................................................    25
         Items of special interest...............................    29
     Aircraft Procurement, Navy..................................    29
         Overview................................................    29
         Items of special interest...............................    31
     Weapons Procurement, Navy...................................    31
         Overview................................................    31
     Ammunition Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps...................    34
         Overview................................................    34
         Items of special interest...............................    36
     Other Procurement, Navy.....................................    43
         Overview................................................    43
         Items of special interest...............................    48
     Procurement, Marine Corps...................................    49
         Overview................................................    49
         Items of special interest...............................    52
     Aircraft Procurement, Air Force.............................    52
         Overview................................................    52
         Items of special interest...............................    55
     Ammunition Procurement, Air Force...........................    57
         Overview................................................    57
     Missile Procurement, Air Force..............................    59
         Overview................................................    59
         Items of special interest...............................    62
     Other Procurement, Air Force................................    63
         Overview................................................    63
     Procurement, Defense-Wide...................................    67
         Overview................................................    67
         Items of special interest...............................    70
     National Guard and Reserve Equipment........................    71
         Overview................................................    71
     Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense..........    73
         Overview................................................    73
     Legislative Provisions:
         Section 131--repeal of prohibition on backfit of trident 
          submarines.............................................    75
         Section 141--repeal of limitations......................    75
         Section 151--repeal of requirement to proceed 
          expeditiously with chemical demilitarization 
          cryofracture facility at Tooele Army Depot, Utah.......    75
         Section 152--sense of Congress regarding cost growth in 
          program for destruction of the existing stockpile of 
          lethal chemical agents and munitions...................    75
Title II--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E)....    75
         Overview................................................    75
     Defense-Wide Programs.......................................    77
         Special considerations..................................    77
     Army RDT&E..................................................    85
         Overview................................................    85
         Items of special interest...............................    89
     Navy RDT&E..................................................    96
         Overview................................................    96
         Items of special interest...............................   100
     Air Force RDT&E.............................................   114
         Overview................................................   114
         Items of special interest...............................   118
     Defense Agencies RDT&E......................................   122
         Overview................................................   122
         Items of special interest...............................   132
     Legislative Provisions......................................   142
         Section 203--modifications to strategic environmental 
          research and development program.......................   142
         Section 211--space launch modernization.................   142
         Section 212--maneuver variant unmanned aerial vehicle...   143
         Section 213--tactical manned reconnaissance.............   143
         Section 214--advanced lithography program...............   143
         Section 215--enhanced fiber optic guided missile (EFOG-
          M).....................................................   143
         Section 216--joint advanced strike technology program...   143
     Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense Act of 1995...........   143
         Section 231--short title................................   143
         Section 232--ballistic missile defense policy of the 
          United States..........................................   143
         Section 233--implementation of policy...................   143
         Section 234--follow-on technologies research and 
          development............................................   144
         Section 235--policy on compliance with the ABM Treaty...   144
         Section 236--ballistic missile defense program 
          accountability.........................................   144
         Section 237--ABM Treaty defined.........................   144
        Section 238--repeal of Missile Defense Act of 1991.......   144
    Subtitle D--Other Ballistic Missile Defense Provisions.......   144
        Section 241--ballistic missile defense funding for fiscal 
          year 1996..............................................   144
        Section 242--policy concerning ballistic missile defense.   144
        Section 243--testing of theater missile defense 
          interceptors...........................................   144
        Section 244--repeal of missile defense provisions........   145
        Section 251--allocation of funds for medical 
          countermeasures against biowarfare threats.............   145
        Section 252--basic research..............................   145
        Section 253--awards of grants and contracts to colleges 
          and universities: requirements of competition..........   145
        Section 254--university research initiative support 
          program................................................   145
        Section 255--advanced field artillery system (Crusader)..   145
        Section 256--command, control, communications, and 
          intelligence interoperability..........................   146
        Section 257--federally funded research and development 
          centers................................................   146
        Section 258--manufacturing technology program............   146
        Section 259--laboratory test and evaluation strategic 
          plan...................................................   146
        Section 260--aeronautical research and test capabilities 
          assessment.............................................   146
        Section 261--T-38 avionics upgrade.......................   147
        Section 262--dual use technology programs................   147
Title III--Operation and Maintenance.............................   147
    Overview.....................................................   147
    Items of Special Interest....................................   148
        Assessing readiness......................................   148
        Readiness funding........................................   149
        Real property maintenance................................   151
        Reserve readiness........................................   151
        Mobility infrastructure enhancement......................   152
        B1-B repair and maintenance improvements.................   152
        Chemical and biological terrorism........................   152
        Joint warfighting center.................................   152
        Joint deployment and transportation center...............   152
        Conversion of military positions to civilian positions...   153
        UH-1 refurbishment policy................................   153
        Condition of M1 tank fleet...............................   153
        Strategic command ``bulwark bronze'' exercise............   154
    Depot Maintenance Issues.....................................   154
        Core logistics capability................................   154
        Depot maintenance workload carryover.....................   155
        Navy ordnance............................................   155
        Ship repair subcontractors...............................   156
        DOD Financial Management.................................   156
        Cash management..........................................   157
        Prior year losses........................................   158
        Financial systems........................................   158
        DBOF prices should include the full cost of military 
          personnel..............................................   158
        Capital assets...........................................   159
        Overpayment collection demonstration.....................   159
        Offsetting collections...................................   159
        Emergency and extraordinary expenses.....................   160
    Information Technology.......................................   161
        Performance measures.....................................   161
        Off-the-shelf systems....................................   161
    Defense Support Services Reform..............................   161
        Reengineering transportation.............................   162
        Reengineering household moves............................   163
        Travel processing........................................   163
        Outsourcing travel.......................................   164
        Property disposal outsourcing............................   164
        Contracting-out..........................................   164
        Inventories..............................................   165
        Inventory management consolidation.......................   165
        Depot level repairable consolidation.....................   165
        Fuel management..........................................   166
        Electricity..............................................   166
        Contract management oversight............................   166
        General Services Administration added costs..............   166
        Prime vendor delivery....................................   166
        Two-year operation and maintenance funding...............   167
        DFAS consolidation.......................................   167
        Logistics outsourcing....................................   167
        Outsourcing payroll......................................   168
        DOD printing operations..................................   168
        Outsourcing printing.....................................   169
        Outsourcing expertise....................................   169
    Civilian Employees...........................................   169
        DOD civilian employee management.........................   169
        Army civilian personnel management.......................   170
        Overseas allowances......................................   170
    IG and Audits................................................   171
        Inspectors General.......................................   171
        Consolidation of procurement fraud within the DOD IG.....   172
        Unnecessary audits.......................................   172
    Environmental Issues of Concern..............................   173
    Morale, Welfare and Recreation Issues........................   173
        PX and commissary transportation.........................   173
        Credit...................................................   174
        Unified resources demonstration..........................   174
        Europe exchange drawdown.................................   175
        Military resale and MWR efficiencies.....................   175
        Commissary construction..................................   176
        Distilled spirits distribution...........................   176
        United Services Organization.............................   176
    Other Issues.................................................   176
        Norway prepositioning program............................   176
        Impact aid...............................................   177
        Military clothing sales stores, replacement sales........   177
        Navy enlisted storage space..............................   177
        Pilot project to improve economic adjustment planning....   178
        Contractor operated parts stores (COPARS)................   178
        Air Force automated maintenance data systems.............   178
    Legislative Provisions.......................................   201
Title IV--Military Personnel Authorizations......................   211
    Subtitle A--Active Forces....................................   211
        Section 401--end strengths for active forces.............   211
        Section 402--temporary variations in DOPMA authorized end 
          strength limitations for active duty Navy and Air Force 
          officers in certain grades.............................   211
    Subtitle B--Reserve Forces...................................   211
        Section 411--end strengths for selected reserve..........   211
        Section 412--end strengths for reserves on active duty in 
          support of the reserves................................   212
        Section 413--counting of active component personnel 
          assigned in support of reserve component training......   212
    Subtitle C--Military Training Student Loads..................   212
        Section 421--authorization of training student loads.....   212
    Subtitle D--Authorization of Appropriations..................   212
        Section 431--authorization for appropriations for 
          military personnel.....................................   212
        Section 432--authorization for increases in active duty 
          end strengths..........................................   213
Title V--Military Personnel Policy...............................   213
    Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy.........................   213
        Section 501--authority to extend transition period for 
          officers selected for early retirement.................   213
    Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Reserve Components...........   214
        Section 511--military technician full-time support 
          program for Army and Air Force reserve components......   214
        Section 512--military leave for military reserve 
          technicians for certain duty overseas..................   214
        Section 513--revisions to Army guard combat reform 
          initiative to include Army Reserve under certain 
          provisions and make certain revisions..................   214
        Section 514--ROTC scholarships for the National Guard....   215
        Section 515--report on feasibility of providing education 
          benefits protection insurance for service academy and 
          ROTC scholarship students who become medically unable 
          to serve...............................................   215
        Section 516--active-duty officers detailed to ROTC duty 
          at senior military colleges to serve as commandant and 
          assistant commandant of cadets and as tactical officers   215
        Section 517--mobilization income insurance program for 
          members of the ready reserve...........................   215
    Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Force Levels.................   216
        Section 521--floor on end strengths......................   216
        Section 522--Army officer manning levels.................   216
        Section 523--comptroller general review of proposed Army 
          end strength allocations...............................   216
        Section 524--manning status of highly deployable support 
          units..................................................   217
        Section 525--sense of Congress concerning personnel tempo 
          rates..................................................   217
    Subtitle D--Amendments to the Uniform Code of Military 
      Justice....................................................   217
        Section 541--references to Uniform Code of Military 
          Justice................................................   217
        Section 542--forfeiture of pay and allowances during 
          confinement by sentence of court-martial...............   218
        Section 543--refusal to testify before court-martial.....   218
        Section 544--flight from apprehension....................   218
        Section 545--carnal knowledge............................   218
        Section 546--time after accession for initial instruction 
          in the Uniform Code of Military Justice................   218
        Section 547--persons who may appear before the United 
          States Court of Appeals for the armed forces...........   218
        Section 548--discretionary representation by government 
          appellate defense counsel in petitioning Supreme Court 
          for writ of certiorari.................................   219
        Section 549--repeal of termination of authority for Chief 
          Justice of the United States to designate article III 
          judges for temporary service on Court of Appeals for 
          the Armed Forces.......................................   219
        Section 550--technical amendment.........................   220
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   220
        Section 551--equalization of accrual of service credit 
          for officers and enlisted members......................   220
        Section 552--extension of expiring personnel authorities.   220
        Section 553--increase in educational assistance allowance 
          with respect to skills or specialties for which there 
          is a critical shortage of personnel....................   220
        Section 554--amendments to education loan repayment 
          programs...............................................   220
        Section 555--recognition by states of living wills of 
          members, certain former members, and their dependents..   220
        Section 556--transition compensation for dependents of 
          members of the armed forces separated for dependent 
          abuse..................................................   220
        Section 557--Army ranger training........................   220
        Section 558--repeal of certain civil-military programs...   222
        Section 559--eligibility for armed forces expeditionary 
          medal based upon service in El Salvador................   222
        Section 560--revision and codification of Military Family 
          Act and Military Child Care Act........................   223
        Section 561--discharge of members of the armed forces who 
          have the HIV-1 virus...................................   223
        Section 562--authority to appoint Brigadier General 
          Charles E. Yeager, United States Air Force (retired), 
          to the grade of Major General on the retired list......   223
        Section 563--determination of whereabouts and status of 
          missing persons........................................   223
        Section 564--nominations to service academies from 
          Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands...........   224
    Items of Special Interest....................................   224
        Additional funds for recruiting..........................   224
        Enlistment propensity....................................   224
        Family advocacy program and new parent support program...   225
        Recruiting equity for general education development (GED) 
          certificates...........................................   225
        Air national guard fighter and airlift force structure 
          Revitalization of the reserve forces...................   226
        Army active component and reserve component offsite 
          agreement..............................................   227
        Air national guard support to the United States antarctic 
          program................................................   227
        Simultaneous membership program..........................   228
        Service academy admission acceptance decision point......   228
        Decorations for heroic acts..............................   228
Title VI--Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits..............   229
    Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances...............................   229
        Section 601--military pay raise for fiscal year 1996.....   229
        Section 602--limitation on basic allowance for 
          subsistence for members without dependents residing in 
          government quarters....................................   229
        Section 603--authorization of payment of basic allowance 
          for quarters to additional members assigned to sea duty   230
        Section 604--establishment of minimum amounts of variable 
          housing allowance for high housing cost areas and 
          additional limitation on reduction of allowance for 
          certain members........................................   230
        Section 605--clarification of limitation on receipt of 
          family separation allowance............................   230
    Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays...........   230
        Section 611--extension of certain bonuses for reserve 
          forces.................................................   230
        Section 612--extension of certain bonuses and special pay 
          for nurse officer candidates, registered nurses, and 
          nurse anesthetists.....................................   230
        Section 613--extension of authority relating to payment 
          of other bonuses and special pays......................   231
        Section 614--codification and extension of special pay 
          for critically short wartime health specialists in the 
          selected reserves......................................   231
        Section 615--change in eligibility requirements for 
          continuous monthly aviation incentive pay..............   231
        Section 616--continuous entitlement to career sea pay for 
          crewmembers of ships designated as tenders.............   231
        Section 617--increase in maximum rate of special duty 
          assignment pay for enlisted members serving as 
          recruiters.............................................   231
    Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances.............   231
        Section 621--authorization of return to United States of 
          formerly dependent children who attain age overseas....   231
        Section 622--authorization of dislocation allowance for 
          moves in connection with base realignments and closures   232
    Subtitle D--Other Matters....................................   232
        Section 631--elimination of unnecessary annual reporting 
          requirements regarding compensation matters............   232
        Section 632--study of joint process for determining the 
          location of recruiting stations........................   232
        Section 633--fiscal year 1996 cost-of-living adjustment 
          for military retirees..................................   232
Title VII--Health Care Provisions................................   233
    Subtitle A--Health Care Services.............................   233
        Section 701--modification of requirements regarding 
          routine physical examinations and immunizations under 
          CHAMPUS................................................   233
        Section 702--correction of inequities in medical and 
          dental care and death and disability benefits for 
          certain reservists.....................................   233
        Section 703--medical and dental care for members of the 
          selected reserve.......................................   233
    Subtitle B--TRICARE Program..................................   234
        Section 711--priority use of military treatment 
          facilities for persons enrolled in managed care 
          initiatives............................................   234
        Section 712--staggered payment of enrollment fees for 
          TRICARE................................................   234
        Section 713--requirement of budget neutrality for TRICARE 
          to be based on entire program..........................   234
        Section 714--training in health care management and 
          administration for TRICARE lead agents.................   235
        Section 715--evaluation and report on tricare 
          effectiveness..........................................   235
    Subtitle C--Uniformed Services Treatment Facilities..........   235
        Section 721--limitation on expenditures to support 
          uniformed services treatment facilities and limitation 
          on number of participants in USTF managed care plans...   235
        Section 722--application of federal acquisition 
          regulation to participation agreements with uniformed 
          services treatment facilities..........................   235
        Section 723--development of plan for integrating 
          uniformed services treatment facilities in managed care 
          programs of department of defense......................   236
        Section 724--equitable implementation of uniform cost 
          sharing requirements for uniformed services treatment 
          facilities.............................................   236
    Subtitle D--Other Changes to Existing Laws Regarding Health 
      Care Management............................................   236
        Section 731--maximum allowable payments to individual 
          health care providers under CHAMPUS....................   236
        Section 732--expansion of existing restriction on use of 
          defense funds for abortion.............................   237
        Section 734--redesignation of military health care 
          account as defense health program account and two-year 
          availability of certain account funds..................   237
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   237
        Section 741--termination of program to train and utilize 
          military psychologists to prescribe psychotropic 
          medications............................................   237
        Section 742--waiver of collection of payments due from 
          certain persons unaware of loss of champus eligibility.   237
        Section 743--notification of certain champus-covered 
          beneficiaries of loss of champus eligibility...........   238
        Section 744--demonstration program to train military 
          medical personnel in civilian shock trauma units.......   238
        Section 745--study regarding Department of Defense 
          efforts to determine appropriate force levels of 
          wartime medical personnel..............................   238
        Section 746--study regarding expanded mental health 
          services for certain covered beneficiaries.............   239
        Section 747--report on improved access to military health 
          care for covered beneficiaries entitled to medicare....   239
    Items of Special Interest....................................   239
        Medicare reimbursement to the defense health program for 
          care provided to medicare-eligible beneficiaries.......   239
        Formation of veteran's wing within naval hospital Guam...   240
        Health-care sharing agreement between Department of 
          Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense.............   240
Title VIII--Acquisition Policy, Acquisition Management, and 
  Related Matters................................................   241
        Legislative Provisions...................................   241
        Section 801--repeals of certain procurement provisions...   241
        Section 802--fees for certain testing services...........   241
        Section 803--testing of defense acquisition programs.....   241
        Section 804--coordination and communication of defense 
          research activities....................................   241
        Section 805--addition of certain items to domestic source 
          limitation.............................................   241
        Section 806--revisions to procurement notice provisions..   241
        Section 807--international competitiveness...............   241
        Section 808--encouragement of use of leasing authority...   242
    Items of Special Interest....................................   242
        Implementation of the federal acquisition streamlining 
          act....................................................   242
        Management responsibility for acquisition policy.........   243
        Machine tool industrial base.............................   243
Title IX--Department of Defense Organization and Management......   243
    Legislative Provisions.......................................   243
        Section 901--reorganization of office of the Secretary of 
          Defense................................................   243
        Section 902--restructuring of Department of Defense 
          acquisition organization and workforce.................   244
        Section 903--plan for incorporation of department energy 
          national security functions in Department of Defense...   245
        Section 904--change in titles of certain Marine Corps 
          general officer billets resulting from reorganization 
          of the headquarters, Marine Corps......................   245
        Section 905--inclusion of the information resources 
          management college in the national defense university..   246
        Section 906--employment of civilians at the Asia-Pacific 
          center for security analysis...........................   246
        Section 907--continued operation of uniformed services 
          university of the health sciences......................   246
        Section 908--redesignation of advanced research projects 
          agency.................................................   246
    Items of Interest............................................   247
        Growth in legislative liaison operations.................   247
Title X--General Provisions......................................   247
    Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................   247
        Section 1001--transfer authority.........................   247
        Section 1002--incorporation of classified annex..........   248
        Section 1003--improved funding mechanisms for unbudgeted 
          operations.............................................   248
        Section 1004--designation and liability of disbursing and 
          certifying officials...................................   249
        Section 1005--authority for obligation of certain 
          unauthorized fiscal year 1995 defense appropriations...   249
        Section 1006--authorization of prior emergency 
          supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 1995.......   249
        Section 1007--prohibition on incremental funding of 
          procurement issues.....................................   249
    Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards......................   250
        Section 1021--contract options for LSMR vessels..........   250
        Section 1022--vessels subject to repair under phased 
          maintenance contracts..................................   250
        Section 1023--clarification of requirements relating to 
          repairs of vessels.....................................   250
        Section 1024--naming of naval vessel.....................   250
        Section 1025--transfer of riverine patrol craft..........   250
    Subtitle C--Other Matters....................................   250
        Section 1031--termination and modification of authorities 
          regarding national defense technology and industrial 
          base, defense reinvestment, and defense conversion.....   250
        Section 1032--repeal of miscellaneous provisions of law..   250
    Items of Special Interest....................................   251
        Counter-drug activities..................................   251
        Chemical-biological warfare defense program..............   251
        Army experimental force..................................   254
        Integration of national security space programs..........   254
        Report on nuclear command, control, communications, and 
          intelligence...........................................   255
        Federal emergency management agency funding..............   255
Title XI--Cooperative Threat Reduction With States of the Former 
  Soviet Union...................................................   255
    Section 1101--specification of cooperative threat reductions.   255
    Section 1102--fiscal year 1996 authorization.................   256
    Section 1103--repeal of demilitarization enterprise fund 
      authority..................................................   257
    Section 1104--prohibition on use of funds for peacekeeping 
      exercises and related activities with Russia...............   258
    Section 1105--revision to authority for assistance for 
      weapons destruction........................................   258
    Section 1106--prior notice to Congress on obligation of funds   258
    Section 1107--report on accounting for United States 
      assistance.................................................   258
Title XII--Matters Relating to Other Nations.....................   259
    Subtitle A--Peacekeeping Provisions..........................   259
        Section 1201--limitation on expenditure of Department of 
          Defense funds for United States forces placed under 
          United Nations command or control......................   259
        Section 1202--limitation on use of Department of Defense 
          funds for United States share of costs of United 
          Nations peacekeeping activities........................   260
    Subtitle B--Humanitarian Assistance Programs.................   261
        Section 1211--overseas humanitarian, disaster, and civic 
          aid programs...........................................   261
        Section 1212--humanitarian assistance....................   261
        Section 1213--landmine clearance program.................   261
    Subtitle C--Other Matters....................................   261
        Section 1221--revision of definition of landmine for 
          purposes of landmine export moratorium.................   261
        Section 1222--extension and amendment of 
          counterproliferation authorities.......................   261
        Section 1223--prohibition on use of funds for activities 
          associated with the United States-People's Republic of 
          China joint defense conversion commission..............   261
        Section 1224--defense export loan guarantees.............   262
        Section 1225--accounting for burdensharing contributions.   262
        Section 1226--authority to accept contributions for 
          expenses of relocation within host nation of United 
          States armed forces overseas...........................   262
        Section 1227--sense of Congress on ABM treaty violations.   262
    Items of Special Interest....................................   262
        Report on North Korean military power....................   262
        African center for security studies......................   262
        Sharing of intelligence with the United Nations..........   263
Division B--Military Construction Authorizations.................   263
Purpose..........................................................   263
Overview.........................................................   265
    Quality of Housing, Installations, and Facilities............   265
    Base Closure and Realignment.................................   265
    NATO Security Investment Program.............................   272
Authorization For Military Construction..........................   272
Title XXI--Army..................................................   272
    Summary......................................................   272
    Legislative Provisions.......................................   272
        Section 2101--authorized Army construction and land 
          acquisition projects...................................   272
        Section 2102--family housing.............................   272
        Section 2103--improvements to military family housing 
          units..................................................   272
        Section 2104--authorization of appropriations, Army......   272
    Items of Special Interest....................................   273
        Repair and maintenance, Army.............................   273
        Improvements of military family housing..................   273
        Fort Dix, New Jersey.....................................   273
Title XXII--Navy.................................................   273
    Summary......................................................   273
    Legislative Provisions.......................................   274
        Section 2201--authorized Navy construction and land 
          acquisition projects...................................   274
        Section 2202--family housing.............................   274
        Section 2203--improvements to military family housing 
          units..................................................   274
        Section 2204--authorization of appropriations, Navy......   274
    Items of Special Interest....................................   274
        Repair and maintenance, Navy.............................   274
        Unspecified minor construction...........................   274
        Planning and design......................................   274
        Improvements of military family housing..................   275
        Power plant upgrade, public works center, Guam...........   275
        Navy SEAL facility, Guam.................................   275
        Ordnance storage needs of Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, 
          Arizona................................................   275
Title XXIII--Air Force...........................................   276
    Summary......................................................   276
    Legislative Provisions.......................................   276
        Section 2301--authorized Air Force construction and land 
          acquisition projects...................................   276
        Section 2302--family housing.............................   276
        Section 2303--improvements to military family housing 
          units..................................................   276
        Section 2304--authorization of appropriations, Air Force.   276
        Section 2305--retention of accrued interest on funds 
          deposited for construction of family housing, Scott Air 
          Force base, Illinois...................................   276
    Items of Special Interest....................................   277
        Improvements of military family housing..................   277
        Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida..........................   277
Title XXIV--Defense Agencies.....................................   277
    Summary......................................................   277
    Legislative Provisions.......................................   277
        Section 2401--authorized defense agencies construction 
          and land acquisition projects..........................   277
        Section 2402--family housing private investment..........   277
        Section 2403--improvements to military family housing 
          units..................................................   277
        Section 2404--energy conservation projects...............   277
        Section 2405--authorization of appropriations, defense 
          agencies...............................................   278
        Section 2406--modification of authority to carry out 
          fiscal year 1995 projects..............................   278
        Section 2407--limitation on expenditures for construction 
          project at Umatilla Army Depot, Oregon.................   278
Title XXV--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Infrastructure.....   278
    Summary......................................................   278
    Legislative Provisions.......................................   278
        Section 2501--authorized NATO construction and land 
          acquisition projects...................................   278
        Section 2502--authorization of appropriations, NATO......   278
Title XXVI--Guard and Reserve Forces Facilities..................   278
    Summary......................................................   278
    Legislative Provisions.......................................   279
        Section 2601--authorized guard and reserve construction 
          and land acquisition projects..........................   279
        Section 2602--correction in authorized uses of funds for 
          Army National Guard Projects in Mississippi............   279
Title XXVII--Expiration and Extension of Authorizations..........   279
        Section 2701--expiration of authorizations and amounts 
          required to be specified by law........................   279
        Section 2702--extension of authorizations of certain 
          fiscal year 1993 projects..............................   279
        Section 2703--extension of authorizations of certain 
          fiscal year 1992 projects..............................   279
        Section 2704--effective date.............................   280
Title XXVIII--General Provisions.................................   280
    Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family 
      Housing Changes............................................   280
        Section 2801--alternative means of acquiring and 
          improving family housing and supporting facilities for 
          the armed forces.......................................   280
        Section 2802--inclusion of other armed forces in Navy 
          program of limited partnerships with private developers 
          for military housing...................................   280
        Section 2803--special unspecified minor construction 
          thresholds for projects to correct life, health, and 
          safety deficiencies and clarification of unspecified 
          minor construction authority...........................   280
        Section 2804--disposition of amounts recovered as a 
          result of damage to real property......................   281
        Section 2805--rental of family housing in foreign 
          countries..............................................   281
        Section 2806--pilot program to provide interest rate buy 
          down authority on loans for housing within housing 
          shortage areas at military installations...............   281
    Items of Special Interest....................................   281
        Impediments to reform of military family housing.........   281
        Measurement of housing deficiencies......................   281
    Subtitle B--Defense Base Closure and Realignment.............   282
        Section 2811--authority to transfer property at military 
          installations to be closed to persons who construct or 
          provide military family housing........................   282
        Section 2812--deposit of proceeds from leases of property 
          located at installations being closed or realigned.....   282
        Section 2813--agreements for certain services at 
          installations being closed.............................   282
    Items of Special Interest....................................   282
        Management of excess military lands for certain 
          recreational purposes..................................   282
    Subtitle C--Land Conveyances Generally.......................   283
        Section 2821--transfer of jurisdiction, Fort Sam Houston, 
          Texas..................................................   283
        Section 2822--land acquisition or exchange, Shaw Air 
          Force Base, Sumter, South Carolina.....................   283
         Section 2823--transfer of certain real property at Naval 
          Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant, Calverton, New York, 
          for use as National Cemetery...........................   283
        Section 2824--land conveyance, Fort Ord, California......   283
        Section 2825--land conveyance, Indiana Army Ammunition 
          Plant, Charlestown, Indiana............................   283
        Section 2826--land conveyance, Naval Air Station, 
          Pensacola, Florida.....................................   284
        Section 2827--land conveyance, Avon Park Air Force Range, 
          Sebring, Florida.......................................   284
        Section 2828--land conveyance, Parks Reserve Forces 
          Training Area, Dublin, California......................   284
        Section 2829--land conveyance, Holston Army Ammunition 
          Plant, Mount Carmel, Tennessee.........................   284
        Section 2830--land conveyance, Naval Weapons Industrial 
          Reserve Plant, Mcgregor, Texas.........................   284
        Section 2831--transfer of jurisdiction and land 
          conveyance, Fort Devens Military Reservation, 
          Massachusetts..........................................   285
        Section 2832--land conveyance, Elmendorf Air Force Base, 
          Alaska.................................................   285
        Section 2833--land conveyance alternative to existing 
          lease authority, Naval Supply Center, Oakland, 
          California.............................................   285
    Subtitle D--Land Conveyances Involving Utilities.............   286
        Section 2841--conveyance of resource recovery facility, 
          Fort Dix, New Jersey...................................   286
        Section 2842--conveyance of water and wastewater 
          treatment plants, Fort Gordon, Georgia.................   286
        Section 2843--conveyance of electrical distribution 
          system, Fort Irwin, California.........................   286
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   286
        Section 2851--expansion of authority to sell electricity.   286
        Section 2852--authority for Mississippi State Port 
          Authority to use navy property at naval construction 
          battalion center, Gulfport, Mississippi................   287
        Section 2853--prohibition on joint civil aviation use of 
          Naval Air Station Miramar, California..................   287
        Section 2854--report regarding army water craft support 
          facilities and activities..............................   287
    Items of Special Interest....................................   287
        Wargaming infrastructure and facilities..................   287
Division C--Department of Energy National Security Authorizations 
  and Other Authorizations.......................................   298
Title XXXI--Department of Energy National Security Programs......   298
    Purpose......................................................   298
    Overall Concerns.............................................   298
    Subtitle A--National Security Program Authorizations.........   298
        Summary of committee changes.............................   298
        Section 3101--weapons activities.........................   301
        Section 3102--defense environmental restoration and waste 
          management.............................................   301
        Section 3103--payment of civil penalties.................   302
        Section 3104--other defense activities...................   302
        Section 3105--defense nuclear waste disposal.............   302
    Subtitle B--Legislative Provisions...........................   302
        Section 3121--reprogramming..............................   302
        Section 3122--limits on general plant projects...........   302
        Section 3123--limits on construction projects............   302
        Section 3124--fund transfer authority....................   302
        Section 3125--authority for conceptual and construction 
          design.................................................   303
        Section 3126--authority for emergency planning, design, 
          and construction activities............................   303
        Section 3127--funds available for all national security 
          programs of the department of energy...................   303
        Section 3128--availability of funds......................   303
    Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................   303
        Section 3131--authority to conduct program relating to 
          fissile materials......................................   303
        Section 3132--national ignition facility.................   303
         Section 3133--tritium production........................   304
     Subtitle D--Other Matters...................................   305
         Section 3141--report on foreign tritium purchases.......   305
         Section 3142--study on nuclear test readiness postures..   305
         Section 3143--master plan on warheads in the enduring 
          stockpile..............................................   306
         Section 3144--prohibition on international inspections 
          of Department of Energy facilities unless protection of 
          restricted data is certified...........................   306
     Items of Interest...........................................   306
         Enhanced surveillance...................................   306
         Accelerated strategic computing initiative..............   306
         Dual revalidation.......................................   307
         Advanced manufacturing..................................   307
         Stockpile management activities.........................   308
         Dual-axis radiographic hydrodynamic test facility.......   308
         Technology transfer.....................................   308
         National resource center for plutonium..................   308
         Emergency management....................................   309
         Merger of capital equipment and general plant project 
          funding................................................   309
         International center for applied research...............   309
         Nevada test site........................................   310
         Reporting requirement for the total project costs for 
          construction activities................................   310
         Commission on management of environmental restoration 
          and waste management program contracts at Department of 
          Energy sites...........................................   310
Title XXXII--Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 
  Authorization..................................................   325
     Legislative Provision.......................................   325
         Section 3201--authorization.............................   325
Title XXXIII--National Defense Stockpile.........................   325
     National Defense Stockpile Issues...........................   325
     Legislative Provisions......................................   325
         Section 3301--fiscal year 1996 authorized use of 
          stockpile funds........................................   325
         Section 3302--preference for domestic upgraders in 
          disposal of chromite and manganese ores and chromium 
          ferro and manganese metal electrolytic.................   325
        Section 3303--restrictions on disposal of manganese ferro   326
         Section 3304--titanium initiative to support battle tank 
          upgrade program........................................   326
Title XXXIV--Naval Petroleum Reserve.............................   326
     Naval Petroleum & Oil Shale Reserves........................   326
     Legislative Provisions......................................   327
         Section 3401--authorization of appropriations...........   327
         Section 3402--price requirement on sale of certain 
          petroleum during fiscal year 1996......................   327
         Section 3403--sale of naval petroleum reserve numbered 1 
          (Elk Hills)............................................   327
         Section 3304--study regarding future of naval petroleum 
          reserves (other than naval petroleum reserve numbered 
          1).....................................................   327
Title XXXV--Panama Canal Commission..............................   327
     Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................   327
     Subtitle B--Reconstitution of Commission as Government 
      Corporation................................................   328
Departmental Data................................................   328
Department of Defense Authorization Request......................   329
Military Construction Authorization Request......................   329
Committee Position...............................................   330
Communications From Other Committees.............................   330
Fiscal Data......................................................   333
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................   333
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................   333
     Authorization of Appropriations.............................   338
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................   346
Inflation-Impact Statement.......................................   346
Oversight Findings...............................................   346
Roll Call Votes..................................................   347
Changes in Existing Law Mode by the Bill, as Reported............   373
Additional Views of Herbert H. Bateman...........................   645
Additional Views of Robert K. Dornan.............................   648
Additional Views of Chet Edwards.................................   650
Dissenting Views of Ronald V. Dellums, Patricia Schroeder, Lane 
  Evans and Martin T. Meehan.....................................   652
Dissenting Views of Rep. Lane Evans..............................   656
Dissenting Views on the Provisions Requiring the Immediate 
  Separation of HIV-Positive Personnel and Banning Abortions in 
  Military Hospitals Overseas of Jane Harman, Rosa DeLauro, 
  Ronald Dellums, Pat Schroeder, Lane Evans, Neil Abercrombie, 
  Martin Meehan, Mike Ward.......................................   657
Additional and Dissenting Views of Patrick J. Kennedy............   659


104th Congress                                                   Report
                       HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
 1st Session                                                    104-131

======================================================================



 
        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996

                                _______
                                

  June 1, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Spence, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

             ADDITIONAL, SUPPLEMENTAL, AND DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 1530]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

                 Explanation of the Committee Amendment

    The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute during the consideration of H.R. 1530. The remainder 
of the report discusses the bill, as amended.

                                Purpose

    The bill would--
          (1) Authorize appropriations for fiscal years 1996 
        through 2000 for procurement and for research, 
        development, test and evaluation (RDT&E);
          (2) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1996 for 
        operation and maintenance (O&M) and working capital 
        funds;
          (3) Authorize for fiscal year 1996: (a) the personnel 
        strength for each active duty component of the military 
        departments; (b) the personnel strength for the 
        Selected Reserve for each reserve component of the 
        armed forces; (c) the military training student loads 
        for each of the active and reserve components of the 
        military departments;
          (4) Modify various elements of compensation for 
        military personnel and impose certain requirements and 
        limitations on personnel actions in the defense 
        establishment;
          (5) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1996 for 
        military construction and family housing;
          (6) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1996 for 
        the Department of Energy National Security Programs;
          (7) Modify provisions related to the National Defense 
        Stockpile; and
          (8) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1996 for 
        the operation of the Panama Canal Commission.

            Relationship of Authorization and Appropriations

    Importantly, the bill does not generally provide budget 
authority. The bill authorizes appropriations. Subsequent 
appropriation Acts provide budget authority. The bill addresses 
the following categories in the Department of Defense budget: 
procurement; research, development, test and evaluation; 
operation and maintenance; working capital funds; military 
personnel; and military construction and family housing. The 
bill also addresses Department of Energy National Security 
Programs.
    Active duty and reserve personnel strengths authorized in 
this bill and legislation affecting compensation for military 
personnel determine the remaining appropriation requirements of 
the Department of Defense; however, this bill does not provide 
authorization of specific dollar amounts for personnel.

                  Summary of Authorization in the Bill

    The President requested budget authority of $257.6 billion 
for the National Defense budget function for fiscal year 1996. 
Of this amount, the President requested $245.8 billion for the 
Department of Defense (including $10.7 billion for military 
construction and family housing) and $11.2 billion for 
Department of Energy National Security Programs and the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.
    The committee recommends an overall level of $267.3 billion 
in budget authority. This amount is an increase of 
approximately $9.7 billion from the amount requested for the 
National Defense function by the President. Overall, the 
committee's recommendation is largely consistent with the 
amounts established in the House-passed Budget Resolution for 
fiscal year 1996.

                    SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATIONS

    The following table provides a summary of the amounts 
requested and that would be authorized for appropriation in the 
bill and (in the column labeled ``Budget Authority Implication 
of Committee Recommendation'') the committee's estimate of how 
the committee's recommendations relate to the budget totals for 
the National Defense function in the Budget Resolution. For 
purposes of estimating the budget authority implications of 
committee action, the table reflects the numbers contained in 
the President's budget for proposals not in the committee's 
legislative jurisdiction.

    Offset Folios 26 to 28 Insert here



                    RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL

    The committee's action on the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 acknowledges the 
evolving nature of the post-Cold War strategic order: worldwide 
power balances have shifted, and geopolitical structures that 
have held regional hatreds and rivalries in check have 
disintegrated. While the United States no longer faces an 
immediate global challenge from a competing superpower, it now 
faces a multiplicity of challenges to its ability to protect 
and promote its national interests around the globe. The 
collapse of the Soviet Union has by no means meant the end of 
discord and conflict among nation states.
    This bill establishes the course for what the committee 
believes is the beginning of an important revitalization of 
America's armed forces to better meet these challenges. 
Maintaining American strength and presence in the chaos and 
confusion of the post-Cold War world will not be possible 
without a properly sized, trained and equipped military. As a 
nation with global interests, the United States must be able to 
respond decisively across the entire spectrum of military 
conflict--from unconventional to increasingly high-technology 
conventional and ultimately to strategic nuclear warfare. As a 
nation, we can ill afford to let our capabilities in any of 
these areas erode. However, defense budgets and military force 
structure have dramatically declined over the last ten years. 
This bill decisively halts this decade-long slide, establishing 
a floor from which to stabilize U.S. military capabilities as 
well as reinvigorate long-term defense investment.
    Clearly, however, freezing the defense budget after a ten-
year decline will not fully provide the necessary resources to 
support the Clinton administration's expansive, albeit 
ambiguous national security strategy. In a clear shift from 
America's Cold War policy of containment, the administration 
has embarked upon an ambitious policy of ``engagement'' and 
``enlargement.'' While these are principles, they are certainly 
not policies, with the predictable result that U.S. military 
power is increasingly dissipated upon missions of ambiguous 
purpose and of mere peripheral relation to vital national 
interests.
    Moreover, the Administration has chosen to regard these 
missions, and the expanding roster of so-called ``peace 
operations'' they mandate, as an assumed subset of the major 
regional contingencies (MRC) that form the fundamental building 
block for our national military strategy and planning. However, 
it is increasingly clear that the Administration remains 
unwilling to devote the resources necessary not only to support 
its own two-MRC strategy, but also the additional resources 
necessary to carry out extensive operations other than war.
    Consequently, a dangerous inconsistency has arisen between 
America's announced strategic intentions and the reality of 
maintaining the military forces required to act decisively on 
those intentions. Because the potential threats to our national 
interests continue to multiply, we can no longer rely 
exclusively upon nuclear deterrence to accomplish our larger 
strategic objectives, as done during the Cold War. Under 
current conditions, the growing gap between declared strategy 
and actual capability will have swifter and surer consequences 
across a wide range of regional crises.
    This strategy-forces-resources mismatch has also had 
profound consequences for the readiness of U.S. military 
forces. The shortage of funds, coupled with the higher 
operating tempos required by multiple peace operations other 
than war, has resulted in deteriorating readiness for front-
line, active-duty units. The Administration's attempt to 
address this near-term problem within the context of a 
declining budget has resulted in the virtual elimination of 
whatever modest planning previously existed to prepare for 
future challenges to U.S. national security interests. 
Modernization, by most accounts the key to long-term readiness, 
has been over-mortgaged by the Administration in a desperate 
attempt to bolster near-term readiness requirements.
    In response, the committee's bill represents an attempt to 
reorder spending priorities to better address both near- and 
long-term readiness, modernization and other core defense 
needs. The shifting strategic landscape demands not merely 
rapid response to current threats, but prudent planning today 
for tomorrow's challenges. Unless preparations to address both 
immediate and future challenges are properly balanced within 
the context of strategic decision-making, the United States 
will find itself unable to effectively respond to emerging 
global competitors or new military capabilities in the hands of 
regional powers.
    Shortfalls and shortcomings in the Administration's budget, 
estimated in the hundreds, not tens of billions, make 
revitalizing and reshaping U.S. military capabilities an urgent 
task. Clinging to past successes--even those as recent as the 
Persian Gulf War--is no substitute for keeping an eye on the 
future by making difficult choices in the present.
    An uncertain but violent world also places an increasingly 
important premium on a more agile Department of Defense. 
Inefficient and outdated practices will detract directly from 
our military's ability to meet its mission in a resource-
constrained environment. The Pentagon bureaucracy will have to 
be as responsive as the forces it supports.
    This new measure of agility must reflect more than the 
result of aggressive acquisition and bureaucratic reform. It 
must also manifest itself in a Department more singularly 
focused on issues of national defense--non-defense initiatives, 
in many cases worthwhile cases, will have to play a lesser role 
in the budgets of a leaner Department of Defense. While 
creating and encouraging more efficient defense practices, the 
Department must return to basics: it is the only way the 
American taxpayer and, more importantly, those in uniform, will 
get the most defense out of every defense dollar.

                         Addressing Shortfalls

    The thrust of the committee's actions in adjusting the 
President's fiscal year 1996 defense request was aimed at 
addressing near- and long-term shortfalls in three of the 
critical components that make up military readiness; quality of 
life, core readiness and modernization. In addition, the bill 
includes a host of structure and process reforms intended to 
produce a more efficient, and more effective Department of 
Defense. As an intended consequence, such reforms will also 
generate savings that are essential to a politically and 
financially sustainable approach to maintaining a military 
capability that remains second-to-none.

                            Quality of Life

    The committee remains concerned that the quality of 
military life continues to erode. As dollars decline, critical 
services are being cut back. As deployments--and family 
separations--lengthen and increase in cost, spending for 
construction and maintenance of family housing, troop barracks 
and other essential infrastructure is being deferred. The 
committee has recommended a range of initiatives to begin 
stabilizing and hopefully restoring the quality of life owed 
those who serve in the nation's armed forces.
    First, the committee has approved the administration's 
request for a pay raise as required by law. The committee 
welcomes the Administration's belated recognition of the 
importance of a pay raise after two years during which the 
President's budget proposed to freeze or substantially reduce 
military pay. To more fully address deficiencies in troop and 
family housing, the committee funded a series of expanded and 
accelerated housing improvements to address shortfalls not 
currently budgeted by the Administration. The committee also 
recommended a series of steps in the areas of basic allowances 
for quarters and the variable housing allowance to ease the 
severe financial strain on many of our military personnel and 
their families.
    Prompted by indications that the Administration was 
considering further reductions in personnel below the already 
low Bottom Up Review levels, the bill would also establish in 
law personnel endstrength ``floors'' for each service. The 
committee's action is based on the need to ensure, in the 
administration's own words, the minimum forces necessary to 
implement the national strategy. In addition, the committee has 
also recommended additional funds to increase endstrengths 
above those requested by the Administration. The committee 
believes that a small but targeted endstrength increase will 
help to lower personnel tempos in certain high demand units 
that are disproportionally bearing the brunt of the 
Administration's deployment of military forces around the 
world.
    Other recommended initiatives range from the mundane--
assuring that Navy enlisted personnel assigned to surface ships 
are provided with adequate storage space ashore--to those which 
are the pillars of military quality of life programs--ensuring 
the long-term viability of the commissary and exchange system 
and morale, recreation and welfare benefits. Each is intended 
to calm the growing turbulence of service life during an 
extended downsizing--a turbulence that has been exacerbated by 
the Administration's heavy reliance on the military for 
operations other than war.

                             Core Readiness

    The increased pace of contingency operations is 
overextending a shrinking U.S. military and consequently, the 
services are being asked to do more with less. The increased 
use of this smaller force has created short and long-term 
readiness problems. Planned training events have been deferred 
or canceled outright, spare parts have not been bought and 
necessary maintenance on both equipment and infrastructure has 
been delayed.
    The committee recognizes that readiness is a complex issue, 
consisting not only of current requirements but of future 
needs, and thus has taken a comprehensive approach to 
addressing as many of these shortfalls as possible. This bill 
mandates that the Department reconsider its readiness reporting 
procedures to better capture unit readiness over time. The 
committee was concerned to learn late last year, just weeks 
after having been assured by senior Department officials that 
force readiness was as high as it had ever been, that all 
services were suffering through severe readiness shortcomings. 
The committee believes the traditional system for measuring 
readiness is inadequate, representing only a ``snapshot'' and 
providing ambiguous predictive value of future force readiness. 
The committee has concluded that a comprehensive readiness 
system based on relevant and reliable indicators, measuring not 
only current readiness but providing warning of future 
problems, is required.
    Although the Administration responded to last fall's 
reports of declining readiness by increasing defense spending 
slightly over the five-year plan, their welcome, albeit 
belated, recognition of the problem falls far short of 
addressing a problem of this magnitude. Accordingly, the 
committee has recommended additional spending in core readiness 
accounts such as depot maintenance in order to bring backlogs 
down and get equipment back into the field, real property 
maintenance to begin addressing what is likely to be a thirty 
to fifty year problem of halting the deterioration of base 
support facilities, mobility enhancements to allow for more 
timely deployment of forces, and reserve component readiness.
    Finally, the committee has taken a two-track approach to 
addressing the problems caused by the Administration's use of 
budgeted readiness funds to pay for the costs of unbudgeted 
contingency operations. In the case of unbudgeted and unplanned 
operations, the committee bill would provide an interim 
financing authority that protects core readiness accounts in 
the early stages of such operations while the Administration 
secures supplemental funding. In the case of unbudgeted but 
planned (i.e., ongoing) operations, the committee bill would 
require that the Administration seek funds in advance of such 
operations that are expected to continue into the next fiscal 
year. Should the Administration ignore this requirement and 
Congress does not unilaterally provide supplemental funding, 
funds for the operation in question would be cut off.

                             Modernization

    The committee remains deeply concerned with the 
Department's lack of a viable long-range modernization program. 
Moreover, the committee is alarmed that the Department 
continues to exacerbate this problem by canceling or deferring 
modernization programs in order to address near-term readiness 
shortfalls. For example, the fiscal year 1996 procurement 
budget is approximately $9 billion less than was proposed for 
fiscal year 1996 by last year's budget request. The drastic 
cuts in just one year--the fiscal year 1996 procurement request 
marks a 15 percent decline over current fiscal year spending--
in the context of a decade of decline has resulted in a budget 
request representing the lowest defense procurement budget in 
45 years.
    The fiscal year 1996 procurement budget request does not 
provide for the acquisition of any new bombers, scout or attack 
helicopters, tanks or fighting vehicles, Air Force fighter 
aircraft or small arms. In fact, many programs cited by the 
Department as central to the viability of the Bottom Up Review 
strategy just 18 months ago have been deferred, canceled or 
scaled-back to a development-only status. Even the Secretary of 
Defense has publicly admitted that modernization is woefully 
lacking in the Department's long-range budgeting and planning 
priorities.
     Consequently, the committee has undertaken a number of 
initiatives to stabilize the modernization accounts and key 
elements of the defense industrial base. These include the 
procurement of F-16 and F-15E attrition reserve aircraft, 
additional precision guided munitions, small arms, ammunition, 
tactical wheeled vehicles, scout helicopters, sealift ships, a 
third DDG-51 destroyer and a LPD amphibious transport dock ship 
for the Marine Corps. Looking ahead to fiscal year 1997, the 
committee also provided long-lead funding for additional B-2 
bombers and UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters.
     The status of the research and development budget--the 
``seed corn'' essential to ensuring the U.S. military's 
technological edge twenty or thirty years from now--is only 
marginally better. The fiscal year 1996 budget request marked a 
reduction of $1.7 billion from the current fiscal year spending 
levels. Moreover, as the Administration has reduced overall 
research and development spending, it has also increasingly 
relied upon these smaller budgets to fund a range of non-
defense initiatives such as the Technology Reinvestment 
Program. This trend of declining top-line allocations and 
expanding non-defense spending has had the effect of 
``cannibalizing'' the Department's research and development 
budgets from within.
     The committee's research and development recommendations 
include an attempt to revitalize the Army's moribund 
modernization program, a renewed emphasis on the Navy's 
littoral warfare programs in anti-submarine warfare, mine 
countermeasures and naval surface fire support, as well as a 
significant boost to the Air Force's space and reusable launch 
efforts. However, the centerpiece of the committee's efforts to 
refocus defense research is found in its efforts to 
reinvigorate the ballistic missile defense program. As rogue 
nations determinedly seek to acquire weapons of mass 
destruction and the technology to deliver them over great 
distances, the United States can ill-afford not to pursue a 
more robust effort to develop and deploy effective theater and 
national missile defenses.
     The nation must not forget how a crude, conventionally-
armed Scud missile accounted for the greatest single loss of 
American lives during the Gulf War. Contrary to those who 
criticize attempts to defend U.S. troops or the American people 
from these weapons of terror, a massive SDI-like program to 
deploy exotic technologies is not envisioned. Yet it would be 
unconscionable in this emerging world of proliferating 
technology not to protect our troops abroad as well as 
Americans at home from ballistic missile attack--whether 
deliberate or accidental. Theater and national missile defense 
must once again become a national priority. To this end, the 
committee has accelerated funding for both theater and national 
missile defense programs.

                         Reforming the Pentagon

    Although military and civilian force structure has been 
downsized in recent years, the same is not true for the defense 
bureaucracy--involving either infrastructure and overhead 
reductions or improvements in inefficient and often obsolete 
business practices. Therefore, structural and process reforms 
are essential if the Department is to provide the best quality 
goods and services at the lowest cost. Moreover, aggressive 
reforms are in order to generate necessary savings to sustain 
adequate levels of funding for quality of life, core readiness 
and modernization initiatives.
     The committee has taken several initiatives to begin 
structurally reducing the Pentagon's bureaucracy. First, the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) would be reduced by at 
least 25% over four years. The committee was dismayed to learn 
that while the defense budget has declined by 34% and military 
force structure by 28% over the past decade, the size of OSD 
has actually grown by 22%. As part of the committee's 
reorganization initiatives, the number of Assistant Secretary 
positions would be reduced from the current eleven to nine. In 
order to allow the Secretary of Defense maximum flexibility to 
reorganize his own office, the committee recommends repeal of a 
number of provisions of current law that would prevent the 
Secretary from downsizing in the most orderly and efficient 
manner.
     Second, the committee would direct an accelerated 
downsizing of the bloated civilian acquisition workforce to 25% 
over four years. As a fiscal year 1996 ``downpayment,'' the 
committee would also direct an acquisition personnel reduction 
of 30,000. Approximately 50% of the Department's 867,000 
civilians are currently employed in some element of the 
acquisition bureaucracy. In tandem with the personnel 
reductions, the committee would direct the Secretary to begin 
eliminating duplicative functions among the Department's 
numerous acquisition organizations. This structural downsizing, 
in combination with additional reforms of the overly complex 
and burdensome federal and defense acquisition process are 
central components to allowing the Department to operate in a 
more cost-effective and productive manner in the future.
     While the committee considers last year's enactment of the 
Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 as a significant 
step toward a more efficient federal procurement process, it 
was nonetheless an incremental step. The committee believes 
that a more fundamental reassessment of the policies and 
principles that underlie federal acquisition policy is in order 
and has begun a comprehensive review of such policies in tandem 
with other committees of the House with jurisdiction in this 
area.
     These concerns underlie the committee's wide range of 
recommended structural and process reforms. Without dramatic 
change in the way in which the Department conducts its 
business, it will never be able to effectively respond to the 
challenges of the post Cold War world, maximize the defense 
output of every defense dollar or rebuild the taxpayer's 
confidence in the Pentagon.

                               Conclusion

     In developing the bill, the committee has taken a 
comprehensive series of steps to build a solid foundation for 
the revitalization of the U.S. military following a decade of 
decline. However, the committee recognizes that the challenges 
facing the defense establishment will require a longer-term 
sustained effort to protect core readiness, restore personnel 
quality of life and rebuild a virtually non-existent equipment 
modernization program. The committee stands prepared to 
continue this process in the years ahead to ensure that U.S. 
military capabilities are up to the difficult but certain 
challenges that an unsettled world will bring.

                                HEARINGS

     Committee consideration of the Defense authorization bill 
for fiscal year 1996 results from extensive hearings that began 
on January 18, 1995 and that were completed on May 3, 1995. The 
full committee conducted 12 sessions, including markup 
meetings. In addition, a total of 44 sessions were conducted by 
five different subcommittees and two panels of the committee on 
various titles of the bill.

            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION


                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT


                         Modernization Overview

    The committee continues to be concerned with the 
Department's anemic pace of equipment modernization, and notes 
with distress the delay or cancellation of long-term 
modernization programs to fund near-term personnel and 
readiness shortfalls. The fiscal year 1996 procurement budget 
request of $39.4 billion is $5.4 billion less than fiscal year 
1995--a 15 percent cut in one year--and $9 billion less than 
was forecast for fiscal year 1996 by the Department one year 
ago. Furthermore, this request represents, after adjusting for 
inflation, the eleventh consecutive year of decline in the 
procurement account--cumulatively totaling 71 percent since 
fiscal year 1985--and the lowest procurement budget in 45 
years.
    The committee notes that the budget request does not 
provide for the acquisition of any bombers, scout or attack 
helicopters, new tanks or fighting vehicles, amphibious 
transport dock ships, Air Force fighter aircraft, or Army small 
arms procurement. With few exceptions, equipment modernization 
has come to a virtual standstill. Moreover, certain programs 
that the Department's Bottom Up Review endorsed just 18 months 
ago have been slipped, terminated or reduced to a development-
only status. For the last year, CBO has testified that it will 
require $7-$30 billion per year, each of the first ten years of 
next century, above projected 1999 spending levels to properly 
equip and modernize the smaller Bottom Up Review force. The 
implications of this dramatic underfunded shortfall on the 
services as well as on the industrial base are obvious.
    In order to better understand the implications of the 
Department's ``procurement holiday,'' the committee held 
hearings to examine whether requirements continue to exist for 
certain programs; if so, the schedule associated with 
addressing these requirements; and the impact on the industrial 
base if either the requirements do not exist, are unfunded, or 
are sequenced such that they create production gaps. The 
committee was impressed by the testimony given by four retired 
four-star officers, whose recent assessment of current military 
capabilities and readiness concluded with the following 
admonition:

          Each generation owes the next a duty to invest in 
        their future, to ensure they will have the equipment 
        necessary to meet the challenges that will surely 
        confront them. Today we are failing utterly to make 
        that investment. Our legacy to the next generation is 
        likely to be 45-year-old training aircraft, 35-year-old 
        bombers and airlifters, 25-year-old fighters, 35-year-
        old trucks, and 40-year-old medium lift helicopters. If 
        care is not taken to ensure mid-term readiness through 
        modernization and long-term readiness through 
        investment in research and development, we will 
        eventually find ourselves facing an insurmountable bill 
        to replace entire inventories of aging equipment with 
        an industrial base unprepared for the task.

    In response to this admonition and in order to prevent the 
atrophy of critical components of the industrial base, the 
committee has added over $6 billion to various modernization 
programs in this and other titles. Highlights include:

                        [In millions of dollars]

Army:
    UH-60L advanced procurement...................................    75
    OH-58D........................................................   125
    Javelin missiles..............................................    39
    Hellfire II missiles..........................................    40
    TOW II missiles...............................................    20
    MLRS rockets & launchers......................................    59
    ATACMS missiles...............................................    18
    Small arms....................................................    77
    Ammunition....................................................   268
    Medium trucks.................................................   110
    Heavy trucks..................................................   100
    HMMWVs........................................................    39
    Communications equipment......................................    83
Navy/Marine Corps:
    AV-8B.........................................................   160
    E-2C..........................................................    70
    SLAM missiles.................................................    40
    DDG-51 Aegis destroyer........................................   650
    LPD-17........................................................   974
    ammunition....................................................   150
Air Force:
    B-2...........................................................   553
    F-15E.........................................................   250
    F-16C/D.......................................................   175
    Non-Developmental Airlift Aircraft............................    70
    AGM-130 missiles..............................................    45
    AGM-142 HAVE NAP missiles.....................................    39
    Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missiles.....................    27
Defense-Wide:
    National Guard & Reserve Equipment............................   770
    Offset Folio 42 Insert here



                       Aircraft Procurement, Army


                                overview

    The budget request contained $1,223.1 million for Aircraft 
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 1996. The committee recommends 
authorization of $1,423.1 million for fiscal year 1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folio 44 Insert here



OH-58D Armed Kiowa Warrior

    The budget request contained $71.3 million for upgrade of 
33 OH-58D helicopters to the Armed Kiowa Warrior configuration. 
While the Army currently plans for the Kiowa Warrior to provide 
critical armed reconnaissance capability on an interim basis 
until fielding the RAH-66 Comanche, the committee notes that 
the current inventory of Armed Kiowa Warriors is still well 
below the requirement for over 507 aircraft. Moveover, the 
committee observes that the Comanche program continues to 
experience program delays and currently has no Department-
approved production schedule or fielding date.
    For these reasons, the committee feels the Army should 
continue the Armed Kiowa Warrior upgrade program and recommends 
authorization of $196.3 million, an increase of $125 million, 
to fund an additional 20 aircraft. The committee recommends a 
legislative provision (sec. 111) that would modify current law 
to permit this procurement.

UH-60L helicopter

    The budget request contained $334.9 million for procurement 
of 60 Blackhawk medium lift helicopters. The committee notes 
that the Army is terminating this program after fiscal year 
1996, even though following delivery of these last 60 aircraft, 
the Blackhawk fleet will stand more than 700 helicopters short 
of the stated requirement for the 10-active-division Army. 
Moreover, the committee observes that neither the Navy, the 
Marine Corps, nor the Air Force is procuring any additional 
helicopters in the foreseeable future and that the only new 
helicopter program in development--the Army's RAH-66 Comanche--
is not funded for production.
    Given these circumstances, the committee believes there is 
a compelling need to maintain the Blackhawk production line and 
therefore recommends $75 million for advanced procurement of 36 
helicopters in fiscal year 1997. The committee urges the Army 
to fully fund these 36 aircraft in the fiscal year 1997 budget.

                       Missile Procurement, Army


                                overview

    The budget request contained $676.4 million for Missile 
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 1996. The committee recommends 
authorization of $862.8 million for fiscal year 1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folio 48 Insert Here



Hellfire missile

    The budget request contained $209.5 million, which included 
$197.5 million to procure 352 Longbow Hellfire missiles and $12 
million for post-production support for the Hellfire II 
program. The committee notes that the Army has prematurely 
stopped production of Hellfire II missiles well short of 
requirements due to budget constraints. While the Longbow 
Hellfire is sufficiently funded to enter production, this 
newest variant of the Hellfire family is not intended to fill 
all Hellfire requirements, and does not address the remaining 
requirement for over 6000 Hellfire II missiles.
    The committee is informed that an additional $40 million, 
combined with the $12 million requested for post production 
support, would enable the Army to procure 750 Hellfire II 
missiles. Accordingly, the committee recommends authorization 
of $249.5 million, of which $52 million is for procurement of 
750 Hellfire II missiles.

Stinger missile modifications

    The budget request contained $10.1 million for retrofitting 
upgrades to 650 Stinger missiles. While this enhancement to 
existing missiles provides a valuable increase in close air 
defense for Army forces, the program is currently constrained 
by a Department-directed annual funding ceiling of $10 million 
through fiscal year 1999. The committee does not agree with 
this arbitrary ceiling and understands that adding $10 million 
to the budget request will enable the Army to upgrade an 
additional 550 missiles. Therefore, the committee recommends 
authorization of $20.1 million to be used to upgrade at least 
1200 existing Stinger missiles.

Multiple launch rocket system launcher systems

    The budget request contained $48.2 million for annual 
support and fielding of the Army's Multiple Launch Rocket 
System (MLRS) launcher systems, but this amount did not include 
funding for procurement of any new launchers. While the Army 
has progressed in its plan for fielding launcher systems to 
active and reserve forces, the committee notes that the final 
MLRS fielding package does not contain sufficient launchers to 
complete equipping the last Army National Guard battalion for 
which funds have previously been provided. Therefore, the 
committee recommends authorization of $64.6 million, an 
increase of $16.4 million, to procure sufficient MLRS launcher 
units to complete the battalion.

Javelin

    The budget request contained $171.4 million for procurement 
of 557 Javelin missiles and 142 command launch units. Despite 
the Congress having added $83 million to the Army's underfunded 
fiscal year 1995 request to restore an efficient rate of 
missile production, the committee notes that the fiscal year 
1996 request is once again insufficiently funded.
    Therefore, the committee recommends authorization of $210.4 
million, an increase of $39 million, to procure an additional 
453 missiles.

               Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army


                                overview

    The budget request contained $1,299 million for procurement 
of Army weapons and tracked combat vehicles for fiscal year 
1996. The committee recommends authorization of $1,359.7 
million for fiscal year 1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folio 54 Insert Here



Bradley fighting vehicle upgrade program

    The budget request contained $138.3 million for the Bradley 
Base Sustainment program. Fiscal year 1996 is the last year 
that funding has been budgeted for the upgrade of the oldest 
configuration of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle (BFV) family--the 
A0--to the more modern and survivable A2 configuration. The 
committee is concerned that the termination of the A0 to A2 
upgrade program is premature. When the current program is 
completed, there will still be about 2,000 A0 vehicles in the 
fleet. These vehicles lack the survivability and other 
enhancements needed for the modern battlefield. Indeed, Desert 
Storm proved that commanders demanded the more modern 
configuration when faced with a real battlefield threat. Thus, 
the committee believes that the Army should seriously consider 
continuation of the A0 to A2 BFV upgrade program. Consequently, 
the committee directs the Army to submit a detailed 
modification plan, including a funding profile, for 
continuation of this program with the fiscal year 1997 budget.

Small arms industrial base

    The budget request contained no funds for procurement of 
personal defense weapons, M-16 rifles, M4 carbines, 5.56mm 
machine guns, or MK-19 40mm grenade machine guns.
    In response to congressional action in fiscal year 1994, 
the Army directed the Army Science Board (ASB) to assess the 
health of the small arms industrial base. The ASB study 
confirmed emerging industrial base problems and presented 
funding and restructuring recommendations to avoid losing 
critical industrial capability.
    However, in its fiscal year 1995 request, the Army did not 
fund any of the ASB recommendations and, instead, submitted 
another seriously underfunded small arms procurement request. 
The Congress was again compelled to provide additional funding 
for small arms and directed the Army to take seriously its 
industrial base commitment by budgeting for small arms in the 
fiscal year 1996 request. However, the results were the same as 
in prior years. The committee is disturbed by the Army's 
continuing failure to make any effort to sustain critical 
capabilities in the small arms industrial base, and the 
committee expects the Army to take appropriate action in the 
fiscal year 1997 request to address these problems.
    The committee recommends authorization of an additional 
$77.0 million for continued small arms production and directs 
the Army to provide a report to the defense committees not 
later than February 1, 1996, outlining its plans for long-term 
preservation of the small arms industrial base. Recommended 
increases to small arms programs are as follows:

                        [In millions of dollars]

M-16 rifle........................................................  13.5
5.56mm M4 carbine.................................................   6.5
Personal defense weapon...........................................   2.0
5.56mm machine gun, (SAW).........................................  28.5
40mm MK 19 grenade launcher.......................................  20.0
Medium machine gun................................................   6.5

                      Ammunition Procurement, Army


                                overview

    The budget request contained $795 million for Ammunition 
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 1996. The committee recommends 
authorization of $1,062.7 million for fiscal year 1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folio 58 Insert Here



Ammunition

    The budget request contained $590.4 million for procurement 
of ammunition.
    While the defense budget has experienced significant 
reductions in the last decade, funding for ammunition 
production has suffered a rate of decline that best 
approximates a virtual freefall. The committee is concerned by 
the fact that these large dollar reductions have led to severe 
losses of industrial capability. Of the 286 ammunition 
companies existing in 1978, only 88 remained in 1994, and only 
52 are forecasted to remain by the end of 1995. At the same 
time, all branches of the armed forces continue to report large 
shortages of ammunition.
    Congress added almost $400 million to the fiscal year 1995 
budget request ($336 million of which went to the Army) to 
shore up this decline and to redress the shortages. 
Nevertheless, the Army's fiscal year 1996 request is some $50 
million less than its fiscal year 1995 request. The committee 
recognizes the urgent need to address the shortfalls in the 
Army's procurement budget and the particularly urgent situation 
facing the ammunition account. Consequently, the committee 
recommends $858.1 for ammunition, an increase of $267.7 above 
the request, distributed as denoted in the accompanying table.

                        Other Procurement, Army


                                overview

    The budget request contained $2,256.6 million for Other 
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 1996. The committee recommends 
authorization of $2,545.6 million for fiscal year 1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 61 to 63 Insert Here



Common hardware/software

    The budget request did not contain any funds for 
procurement of common hardware/software (CHS).
    The committee continues to monitor the progress in fielding 
CHS for the five battlefield functional areas of the Army 
Tactical Command and Control Systems (ATCCS) and remains 
concerned over the ability to achieve a smooth and timely 
fielding transition between CHS-I and CHS-II. The committee 
believes it would be imprudent, given the troubled testing and 
acquisition history of the program, to begin fielding CHS-II 
hardware prior to completing all required pre-production 
testing and evaluation. However, the Army's current plan allows 
the CHS-I contract to expire prior to completion of all CHS-II 
testing, in effect guaranteeing a production break. The 
committee believes that such an interruption would be 
detrimental to the overall success of ATCCS and unnecessarily 
delay fielding of critically needed command and control 
capabilities. Consequently, the committee directs the Army to 
extend the expiring CHS-I contract for two years, a period of 
time commensurate with minimizing fielding interruptions and 
final certification of CHS-II.

                       Aircraft Procurement, Navy


                                overview

    The budget request contained $3,886.5 million for Aircraft 
Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 1996. The committee recommends 
authorization of $4,106.5 million for fiscal year 1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folio 66 Insert Here



V-22 tiltrotor aircraft

    The budget request contained $762.5 million in research and 
development, test and evaluation funds and $48 million in 
advanced procurement funds for the V-22.
    The committee notes that the Marine Corps, Navy and Air 
Force plan to acquire a total of 523 V-22 aircraft over a 
period of twenty seven years, resulting in a very low and 
inefficient production rate. Although it is technically 
feasible to accelerate that production schedule, the Department 
has placed an arbitrary $1 billion-per-year funding cap on the 
program.
    The committee is also aware that the Defense Science Board 
(DSB) has made recommendations to reduce V-22 program costs by 
treating the three low rate initial production lots as a 
package in order to permit more efficient purchasing of parts 
and materials. Accordingly, the committee directs the 
Department to report to the congressional defense committees on 
options to implement the DSB recommendations and to provide 
more efficient production rates for the V-22 program. The 
Department's findings should accompany the fiscal year 1997 
budget submission.

                       Weapons Procurement, Navy


                                overview

    The budget request contained $1,787.1 million for Weapons 
Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 1996. The committee recommends 
authorization of $1,626.4 million for fiscal year 1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    offset folios 69 to 70 insert here



Penguin anti-ship missile

    The budget request did not contain any funds for 
procurement of the Penguin missile.
    The committee is concerned that the Navy has failed to 
complete a commitment to procure 193 Penguin missiles in spite 
of an identified, ongoing requirement. The confusion that this 
issue has caused could have a significant long-term impact on 
readiness as well as future foreign military sales. The 
committee directs the Department of the Navy to review the 
Penguin missile program and report to the congressional defense 
committees on its status, the success rate of the missile under 
the mandated rules of the insensitive munition specification, 
the requirement to procure additional Penguin missiles, the 
unit cost of the missile, and the overall funding required to 
economically procure additional missiles to augment the Navy's 
current capability.

               Ammunition Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps


                                overview

    The budget request did not contain any funds for Ammunition 
Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps in fiscal year 1996. The 
committee recommends authorization of $461.8 million for fiscal 
year 1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    offset folio 173 inserts here



Ammunition

    The budget request contained $110.9 million for procurement 
of ammunition for the Marine Corps. As expressed elsewhere in 
this report, the committee is deeply concerned with the low 
level of ammunition procurement for both the Army and the 
Marine Corps in the fiscal year 1996 budget request. Marine 
Corps ammunition has been reduced to such low inventory levels 
that the Commandant identified unfunded ammunition requirements 
as his highest priority for increased procurement funding.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends authorization of 
$230.9 million for procurement of ammunition for the Marine 
Corps, an increase of $120 million to be distributed as 
follows:

                        [In millions of dollars]

7.62 mm, all types................................................  10.0
.50 cal. SLAP M903/M962...........................................  24.3
.50 cal. API M8/M20...............................................  33.8
81 mm mortar XM816................................................   6.7
155mm propellant charge M203A1....................................  32.0
Fuze, ET, XM762...................................................  10.0
Smoke grenade M18.................................................   0.7
Blasting time fuze igniter M60....................................   0.4
Demolition explosive..............................................   2.1

                   Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy


                                overview

    The budget request contained $5,051.9 million for 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy in fiscal year 1996. The 
committee recommends authorization of $6,228 million for fiscal 
year 1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    offset folio 176 inserts here



National defense sealift fund

    The budget request contained $974.2 million for the 
National Defense Sealift Fund (NDSF). Of this amount, $596.1 
million is requested for two new large medium-speed roll-on/
roll-off (LMSR) vessels that will be used for prepositioning of 
equipment and surge sealift requirements, $289 million for 
operation and maintenance of the Ready Reserve Force (RRF) 
fleet, $70 million to purchase existing roll-on/roll-off (RO/
RO) ships for the RRF, and $19.1 million to continue sealift 
development technology efforts.
    The committee recommends authorization of the requested 
amounts and an additional $600 million for the purpose of 
accelerating the acquisition of two more LMSRs. However, 
consistent with its actions last year, the committee denies 
authorization of the funds requested to purchase existing RO/
Ros for the RRF.

Roll-on/roll-off ships for the ready reserve force

    The committee believes that the $70 million requested to 
purchase used, foreign-built and -owned RO/RO ships for the RRF 
is not in the national security interest, is not cost-
effective, and would weaken the U.S. shipbuilding industrial 
base. Accordingly, the committee does not recommend 
authorization of these funds for this purpose. Instead, the 
committee recommends authorizing $70 million for the 
procurement and installation of national defense features (NDF) 
on commercial vehicle carriers built in and documented under 
the laws of the United States, as provided for in section 1024 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 
(Public Law 102-484). The committee believes an NDF program 
will provide substantially superior ships, save or create a 
significant number of jobs in the shipbuilding and supplier 
industrial base, assist U.S. shipyards in reentering the 
commercial shipbuilding market, and help preserve rapidly 
dwindling seafaring manpower and skills.
    Confirming the committee's assessment, the Department has 
submitted a report demonstrating that an active RRF, utilizing 
NDF on newly built commercial vehicle carriers, would have 
``important benefits'' and would be a cost-effective means of 
recapitalizing the aging, lower-readiness RRF fleet at the end 
of the decade. The report estimates, for example, that total 
discounted life cycle cost for a thirteen-year old, inactive 
RRF-5 day ship would be $860 per square foot, whereas a newly 
built active RRF vessel with NDF would have a net present value 
cost of $320 per square foot. The report further shows that an 
active RRF of vehicle carriers with strengthened decks and 
ramps and sufficient space to carry heavy, out-sized military 
equipment would provide fully-crewed RO/Ros within the time 
demands contemplated in an emergency.
    However, as the Department's report correctly indicated, 
securing entry into the commercial vehicle carrier market will 
be a ``critical element'' for the success of the NDF program. 
The committee considers the NDF program and, in particular, the 
entry of new U.S.-built commercial car carriers equipped with 
NDF in the U.S.-Japan trading market to be in the national 
interest. The committee therefore urges the Department of 
Defense to encourage the Government of Japan to recognize that 
cooperation to overcome flag barriers and to augment American 
participation in this trade market will advance the mutual 
defense and security interests of our two nations.
    The committee further directs the Navy to submit a detailed 
plan for executing this NDF program, including the process by 
which the Navy will review U.S. shipyard proposals and designs 
to determine their dual-use capability and the schedule for 
initiating the program. The report is to be submitted to the 
congressional defense committees no later than six months from 
the date of enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for fiscal year 1996.

Large medium-speed roll-on/roll off ship (LMSR) contract options

    The committee notes that there continues to be a shortfall 
in meeting the prepositioning and surge sealift requirements 
established by the Department's Mobility Requirements Study 
(MRS) and recently revalidated by the MRS Bottom Up Review 
Update. The acquisition of 19 LMSRs is underway to partially 
address this shortfall. Contracts have been placed for 17 of 
the LMSRs: conversions of five existing ships and 12 new 
construction vessels. Six of these new construction vessels 
have been awarded and contract option prices have been 
negotiated for the remaining six--three options each at two 
shipyards. Funding for two of the options, one at each yard, is 
requested in fiscal year 1996.
    The acquisition strategy of the final two LMSRs has not yet 
been determined by the Navy, although funding for these two 
ships is currently planned in fiscal year 1999. The committee 
received testimony that each of the two shipyards building new 
LMSRs could possibly deliver an additional LMSR before the 
current scheduled delivery of their sixth ship, if the seventh 
LMSR were awarded soon and each yard were allowed to fit the 
ship into its production schedule at the most efficient point. 
Accordingly, the committee believes that the options for these 
last two LMSRs should be added to the current contracts in 
order to allow the yards to do the necessary planning and to 
obtain material pricing options to integrate an additional ship 
into their series production process.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 1021) 
urging the Navy to negotiate an option price for the seventh 
LMSR at each of the two new-construction shipyards, assuming an 
option exercise on or before either December 31, 1995, December 
31, 1996, or December 31, 1997.

Attack submarines

    The budget request contained $1,507.5 million for 
procurement of a third Seawolf-class nuclear attack submarine 
(SSN-23). It also contained $704.5 million for advanced 
procurement of a follow-on to the Seawolf, the New Attack 
Submarine (NAS).
    The Seawolf, originally slated to replace the Los Angeles-
class submarines (SSN-688s), was designed to counter the Cold-
War, open-ocean threat posed by the Soviet navy. The first 
Seawolf (SSN-21) was funded in fiscal year 1989 and the second 
in fiscal year 1991. However, with the demise of the former 
Soviet Union, Seawolf production was terminated by the Bush 
Administration in fiscal year 1993. The Navy began preliminary 
work on the NAS in 1988 and publicly announced the program in 
1991.
    The rationale for completing construction of the SSN-23 was 
first made in the September 1993 Department of Defense Bottom 
Up Review (BUR). When the Department completed the BUR, there 
were around 90 nuclear attack submarines in the fleet. By the 
end of fiscal year 1995 there will be 82 and by the end of 
fiscal year 1999 the number will shrink to 55. This latter 
number is the upper end of the force size endorsed by the BUR 
as needed to meet both the Department's wartime and its 
peacetime presence requirements. The number judged to be 
necessary to meet only wartime requirements was 45. Therefore, 
the committee observes that there were in September 1993 and 
are now more attack submarines on hand and in the delivery 
pipeline than needed to meet the BUR force levels.
    In formulating the BUR recommendation, the Department was 
confronted with how to modernize the attack submarine fleet in 
the face of a significantly reduced requirement, while 
preserving a viable submarine production base. Unlike those 
defense industry segments that have a commercial counterpart 
for their military products, no commercial market exists for 
nuclear attack submarines. Confronted with this prospect, and 
the fact that the Navy would place no production orders until 
those for the NAS in fiscal year 1998, the BUR faced either 
shutting down one of the nuclear-certified shipyards, or 
devising an option to keep both yards open. The latter option 
was chosen.
    The BUR decision was to produce a third Seawolf in fiscal 
year 1995 or fiscal year 1996. Furthermore, construction of 
this submarine was to be directed on a sole-source basis to the 
Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics to ``bridge'' the 
projected gap in submarine production until NAS (also directed 
to be produced at Electric Boat) is to begin construction in 
fiscal year 1998. This decision assumed that much of the 
skilled submarine workforce at Newport News Shipbuilding, the 
nation's other producer of attack submarines, would be 
transferred to construction of nuclear aircraft carriers.
    Thus, the committee was faced with two issues regarding 
submarine acquisition: whether to complete funding of the third 
Seawolf and whether to provide the initial increment of 
procurement funding for the NAS. In the process of addressing 
the latter issue, the committee also had to address the 
question of who should build the NAS.
    As a result of the committee's oversight hearing on 
submarine acquisition issues, an analysis was undertaken to 
estimate the relative long-term costs to the government of two-
yard and one-yard strategies for acquisition of nuclear-powered 
warships. Under the one-yard or consolidated strategy, Newport 
News would build both submarines and aircraft carriers. This 
analysis involved input from Newport News and the Navy and was 
reviewed by the Congressional Budget Office, the Congressional 
Research Service, and the General Accounting Office.
    The results of this analysis indicated that if a decision 
between the two-yard and one-yard strategies were to be made 
solely on the basis of relative long-term costs to the 
government, the one-yard strategy would be the lower cost 
approach. Nevertheless, the committee has not opted to 
consolidate construction of nuclear-powered warships at one 
yard at this time.
    However, the committee disagrees with the Department's plan 
to determine the builder of the NAS by administrative 
allocation, without the benefit of competition. The committee 
shares the strong concerns expressed last year by the 
Appropriations Committees that the estimated procurement cost 
of the NAS must be reduced substantially--from the current 
estimated figure of $1.5 billion per submarine down to $1.2 
billion--and believes this objective can best be achieved 
through competition. But the committee rejects the idea of a 
one-time, winner-take-all competition based on paper bids by 
the two shipyards to decide the builder of the NAS. The 
committee is also concerned, in light of the potential 
performance of Russian fourth- and fifth-generation submarines, 
that the current NAS design may not be capable enough, even 
with modular upgrades for later boats in the class, to meet the 
potential Russian submarine threat of 2004, when the fiscal 
year 1998 submarine is to enter service, and the years beyond.
    Consequently, the committee recommended a modification to 
the Department's plan that avoids selecting the builder of the 
follow-on serial-production submarine design on the basis of 
administrative allocation or a competition based on paper bids, 
and that also supports the committee's objective of developing 
a submarine design for serial production that represents a 
substantial improvement in both affordability and capability 
over the current NAS design. The intent of the committee's 
action is to establish a national priority program that employs 
both a technological competition between the two submarine 
shipyards and the technical resources of the Advanced Research 
Projects Agency (ARPA) and the Department of Energy's (DOE) 
national laboratories.
    This program would provide Electric Boat and Newport News 
an opportunity to demonstrate their skills as innovative 
submarine designers and builders. It would also insure that the 
talents of both of these shipyards, as well as those of ARPA 
and the DOE laboratories, are fully focused on the high-
priority task of identifying advanced technologies for improved 
designs.
    Consequently, the committee does not authorize construction 
of the SSN-23. Rather than funding construction of a third 
Seawolf, which would be built to the same design as the first 
two submarines and would therefore not permit EB to demonstrate 
its talents as an innovative submarine designer and builder, 
the committee's plan funds the construction of two outfitted 
submarine hull sections.
    The first of these two sections will be fitted into the 
second Seawolf submarine (SSN-22) to create a lengthened, 
expanded-capability variant of the basic Seawolf design, while 
retaining its full weapons load. The second of these sections 
will be incorporated into the fiscal year 1998 submarine, to 
convert that submarine from the lead ship of a serial-
production class based on the current NAS design into an 
additional, one-of-a-kind, expanded-capability platform derived 
from the current NAS design. The Navy is authorized to contract 
separately for the construction of the hull section for the 
fiscal year 1998 submarine even though that submarine will not 
be fully funded until then. The committee authorizes $704.5 
million in advanced procurement funding, as requested by the 
Navy, for detailed design work and procurement of long-lead 
items for the fiscal year 1998 submarine. The design of this 
submarine shall be altered as necessary to accommodate the 
installation of the special hull section during the 
construction process.
    Electric Boat will design and build both of these sections 
so as to maintain a minimum core work force of skilled 
submarine construction workers. The hull sections may be 
optimized for special operations forces, mine warfare, land 
attack missiles, other missions or some combination, as 
determined by the Navy.
    The committee recommends a total of $1,554.5 million for 
this work--$550 million to design and build the hull section to 
be installed in SSN-22, $300 million for the hull section to be 
installed into the fiscal year 1998 submarine, and $704.5 
million in advanced procurement funding for the fiscal year 
1998 submarine. The committee recommends a provision (sec. 132) 
that would repeal the cost cap for SSN-22 in order to 
accommodate this approach. Unexpended prior-year funding 
available for SSN-23 construction may be used for contract 
termination liability and/or to maintain critical component 
sources.
    Rather than allowing Newport News' submarine design and 
construction skills to atrophy, the committee's plan provides 
it with an analogous opportunity to demonstrate its talents as 
an innovative submarine designer and builder. The committee 
directs the Navy to make Newport News a full consultant in the 
current submarine design effort at Electric Boat, so that 
Newport News can develop and maintain an equal understanding of 
the NAS design. To that end, the committee directs that $10 
million of the funds requested for NAS detailed design work 
shall be used only for establishing and maintaining a cadre of 
Newport News submarine designers at Electric Boat and for 
transfer of all NAS design data from Electric Boat's design 
data base to Newport News'.
    In addition, the committee recommends $150 million to be 
used only as initial funding for an effort at Newport News to 
design, develop, and build prototype versions of major 
submarine components which have the potential for achieving a 
follow-on submarine design for serial production that 
represents a substantial improvement in affordability and 
capability over the current NAS design. This effort, like the 
one at Electric Boat, shall take maximum advantage of 
technology available from ARPA and the national laboratories.
    ARPA and the national laboratories are directed to 
cooperate with both Electric Boat and Newport News in making 
available and assisting in the transition to both shipbuilders 
technologies--such as global quieting, hydrodynamic advances, 
and information and signature management--which show potential 
for achieving a follow-on submarine design for serial 
production that represents a substantial improvement in 
affordability and capability over the current NAS design.
    The committee anticipates that the efforts by both 
shipbuilders to demonstrate their skills as innovative 
submarine designers and builders will continue into fiscal year 
1997. The committee is determined to ensure that dramatic steps 
are taken to develop and deploy a highly capable and affordable 
submarine for the twenty-first century. The committee views 
such a submarine as a critical national asset. Accordingly, the 
committee directs the Navy to plan for and appropriately fund 
these efforts in its fiscal year 1997 budget request. Continued 
funding for the Newport News effort should be commensurate with 
the work proposed by the company. At the end of this two-year 
process, the results of the Electric Boat and Newport News 
efforts will provide the basis for a follow-on submarine design 
that can be competed for serial production. The committee 
recommends a provision (sec. 133) that would require this 
competition.

LPD-17

    The budget request contained no funds for construction of 
the lead ship (LPD-17) of a new amphibious transport dock 
class. The LPD program anticipates building 12 modern 
amphibious ships--critical to the support of Marine Corps lift 
requirements--to replace 41 older ships approaching 
obsolescence.
    While funding for the lead ship was planned in fiscal year 
1996, the program was slipped to fiscal year 1998 due to budget 
constraints. Since funding construction of LPD-17 in fiscal 
year 1996 makes possible a total program cost savings of 
approximately $828 million, the committee recommends 
authorization of $974 million for this purpose.

Fast patrol craft

    The budget request contained no funds for a fast patrol 
craft.
    With the Navy's new emphasis on expeditionary forces, 
coastal patrol, and interdiction, the committee is concerned 
that more emphasis should be placed on inexpensive fast patrol 
craft for use in littoral warfare, rather than placing high-
cost, high-technology capital ships in danger. The committee 
believes a high speed craft capable of carrying multiple anti-
surface missiles and significant command, control, 
communications and intelligence assets would provide a highly 
capable multimission adjunct to the service's current fleet.
    Accordingly, the committee authorizes $9.5 million for the 
procurement of a fast patrol craft.

                        Other Procurement, Navy


                                overview

    The budget request contained $2,396.1 million for Other 
Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 1996. The committee recommends 
authorization of $2,461.5 million for fiscal year 1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 86 to 89 Insert Here



Trident navigation commonality program

    The budget request did not include funds for procuring a 
Trident strategic weapon system navigation commonality program 
shipset. The committee recommends an additional $31.5 million 
to procure a fifth such shipset. Further, the committee directs 
the Secretary of the Navy to ensure that the Navy's budget 
submission for fiscal year 1997 includes funds to procure the 
sixth shipset and to install the fifth and sixth shipsets.

MK-49 ring laser gyro

    The budget did not contain any funds for the MK-49 ring 
laser gyro (RLG).
    The commanders of the Pacific and Atlantic submarine fleets 
have expressed an urgent need to expedite the introduction and 
backfit of the MK-49 RLG ship navigator into their fleets. 
According to the fleet commanders, the high failure rate of the 
current twenty-year old electrically suspended gyro navigator 
(ESGN) cost the Navy in excess of $26 million in maintenance 
funds in fiscal year 1994 alone. The low cost and high 
reliability of the new MK-49 system dictates its earliest 
possible installation. The MK-49 RLG will more than pay for 
itself in less than three years through maintenance cost 
savings alone. Accordingly, the committee denies the Navy's 
request to upgrade the old ESGN system and instead authorizes 
$10 million for the procurement and installation of the MK-49 
RLG navigator.

AN/BPS-16 submarine radar

    The budget request did not contain any funds for the AN/
BPS-16 submarine radar.
    The Navy is experiencing high failure rates and high costs 
in maintaining the 1960s era AN/BPS-15 submarine navigation 
radar, which, since spare parts are no longer in production, is 
becoming insupportable. The committee is concerned with the 
Navy's not budgeting for backfit into the fleet of the AN/BPS-
16 radar, which was designed and selected as the follow-on 
system to the AN/BPS-15. Fleet safety is at risk without this 
reliable, all-weather, state-of-the-art radar when navigating 
in and out of port and during tactical operations at sea. Thus, 
the committee authorizes $9 million for procurement of AN/BPS-
16 radar systems and directs the Navy to submit an acquisition 
plan for procurement and installation of BPS-16 radars on 
existing submarines. The plan should provide for an efficient 
rate of production to enable the Navy to most cost-effectively 
procure these systems, while ensuring that the submarine radar 
industrial base is sustained.

Safety and survivability items

    The budget request did not contain any funds for safety and 
survivability items.
    The committee is aware that the Navy's Office of Safety and 
Survivability has performed operational assessments on non-
developmental items which will improve safety and survivability 
in the fleet and Marine Corps field forces and that several of 
those items have been identified as priorities for fleet-and 
force-wide procurement. However, the committee recognizes that 
the Navy and Marine Corps currently fund only a limited number 
of them on an ad-hoc basis, and is concerned that many critical 
items remain unfunded. Consequently, the committee recommends 
$20 million to purchase non-developmental life safety items 
which have been identified by the operational commands and the 
Office of Safety and Survivability as priorities for 
procurement.

Propeller shaft composite fairwaters

    The budget request did not contain any funds for propeller 
shaft composite fairwaters.
    The committee understands that the Navy is conducting fleet 
testing of propeller shaft composite fairwaters in order to 
reduce maintenance costs and enhance combat ship readiness. 
Inspection and replacement of noisy or damaged shaft bearings 
currently requires drydocking a ship and the cutting off, 
discarding, and welding on a new set of copper-nickel 
fairwaters. By contrast, composite fairwaters can be bolted on 
and unbolted underwater, are hydrodynamically shaped to reduce 
acoustic signature, are non-fouling, and are corrosion-
resistant. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$3 million to begin backfit of composite fairwaters during the 
next four regularly scheduled overhauls of CG-47 class 
cruisers. The committee strongly endorses a continued backfit 
program for these ships and encourages the Navy to initiate a 
similar program for the destroyer fleet.

                       Procurement, Marine Corps


                                overview

    The budget request contained $474.1 million for 
Procurement, Marine Corps in fiscal year 1996. The committee 
recommends authorization of $399.2 million for fiscal year 
1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 96 to 97 Insert here



Lightweight reconnaissance/strike vehicles

    The budget request contained no funds for the lightweight 
reconnaissance/strike vehicles.
    The committee understands that there is a requirement for 
lightweight, high performance all-terrain vehicles for a number 
of critical missions, such as special operations and forward 
reconnaissance in conventional operations. Current vehicles for 
these missions are easily detected, have limited mobility, and 
are not easily transportable.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $2 million for 
procurement of light reconnaissance vehicles for the Marine 
Corps and $6 million for procurement of light strike vehicles 
for the special operations forces.

Indoor simulated marksmanship trainer

    The budget request contained $17.8 million for Marine Corps 
training devices. This amount included $6.5 million for indoor 
simulated marksmanship trainers (ISMTs) which provide 
individual weapons proficiency training for active and reserve 
Marine forces while deployed at sea or away from live fire 
range facilities. The committee understands that the ISMT is a 
high priority program for the Marine Corps but is not being 
procured in sufficient quantities due to funding constraints.
    The committee is also informed that an option exists under 
the current contract to save over $13 million by procuring the 
final 181 ISMTs in fiscal year 1996. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends authorization of $51.8 million for training devices, 
and directs the Marine Corps to use $34 million of these funds 
to complete the procurement of 181 ISMTs.

                    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force


                                overview

    The budget request contained $6,183.9 million for Aircraft 
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 1996. The committee 
recommends authorization of $7,032 million for fiscal year 
1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations. detail.
    Offset Folios 101 to 102 Insert here



Strategic airlift

    The budget request contained $2,402.5 million for 
procurement of eight C-17 aircraft in fiscal year 1996 and 
$183.8 million for advanced procurement for ``strategic 
airlift'' in fiscal year 1997. The committee notes that the use 
of the term ``strategic airlift'' permits procurement of either 
C-17 aircraft or a non-developmental airlift aircraft (NDAA). 
The committee further notes that consideration of an NDAA 
option was initiated originally out of concern that the C-17 
program was not performing well. However, the committee 
observes that there have been positive achievements of the C-17 
program within the past year. Recent deliveries of C-17s have 
been ahead of schedule, and both the quality and production 
performance have improved significantly. The committee's focus 
continues to be both on the performance of the C-17 aircraft, 
and on adequate airlift capacity for both the long and short 
term.
    The committee remains concerned with the need to modernize 
the Department's strategic airlift fleet and is pleased to note 
the continued emphasis on the importance of strategic airlift 
expressed by both theater commanders and other Department 
witnesses during committee hearings on this subject. The 
committee also notes that the requirement for strategic airlift 
modernization is further reinforced by the recently-released 
Mobility Requirements Study Bottom Up Review Update. While the 
Department has not yet determined its complete airlift 
modernization plans, the case for accelerating procurement of 
strategic airlift aircraft appears to be compelling.
    With the looming retirement of the C-141 fleet, the 
Department acknowledges a pending shortfall in strategic 
airlift capacity. The November 1995 review by the Defense 
Acquisition Board (DAB) is intended to decide the composition 
of the future strategic airlift fleet to mitigate this 
shortfall. It is not the committee's intent to prejudice or in 
any way influence the outcome of the review process. The 
committee believes that the Department's review process must 
adequately address and resolve the pending shortfall in airlift 
capacity. Air Force officials have verified that a competitive 
acquisition program for procurement of NDAA is underway, and 
could lead to procurement of aircraft in early 1996, should the 
Department opt for a mix of C-17 and NDAA to meet its future 
needs.
     The committee recommends authorization of $2,402.5 million 
for procurement of eight C-17s and $183.8 million for strategic 
airlift. Although the committee has been assured by Air Force 
officials that sufficient funds are contained within the C-17 
request, when combined with available NDAA funds from fiscal 
year 1994, to procure eight C-17s and to competitively procure 
some number of NDAA should the Department opt to do so, the 
committee is doubtful that such is the case.
    Therefore, the committee also recommends authorization of 
$70 million for NDAA, and permits the Air Force to merge these 
funds with $85 million remaining from fiscal year 1994 funds 
authorized for this purpose in order to procure at least one 
NDAA, if this option is supported by the DAB decision on 
strategic airlift later this year. If the Department's decision 
is to procure a C-17-only fleet, the funds identified for NDAA 
may be used for that purpose. The committee does not intend for 
these funds to be used to enter any lease-to-own NDAA program.
    The committee further directs that no funds for procurement 
of C-17 aircraft in fiscal year 1996 be obligated until the 
Secretary of Defense provides the congressional defense 
committees a specific plan for maintaining strategic lift 
capability for the next decade as nearly as possible to the 
current capability, while allowing for the scheduled retirement 
of the C-141 fleet. In developing this plan, the Department 
must give serious consideration to the implications that 
procurement of strategic airlift would have on the Civil 
Reserve Air Fleet.

Fighter aircraft

    The budget request contained no funds for procurement of 
new fighter aircraft for the Air Force.
    The committee notes that the production base for F-15Es and 
F-16s is currently sustained largely by foreign sales and that 
no additional U.S. procurement of these aircraft is forecast. 
However, senior Air Force officials have confirmed that both 
the F-15E and the F-16 will need to be retained in the 
inventory much longer than originally planned and have 
concluded that a need exists for additional F-15Es and F-16s to 
maintain minimum attrition reserve requirements to sustain a 
twenty fighter-wing-equivalent force structure. Also, industry 
witnesses have testified that at least a nominal U.S. 
production rate of current fighters should be sustained, absent 
any Administration effort to lift restrictive export policies 
which prohibit fighter aircraft manufacturers from competing 
for business worldwide, in order to preserve critical elements 
of the fighter aircraft industrial base.
    In order to address both the attrition reserve requirement 
and fighter aircraft industrial base concerns, the committee 
recommends authorization of $250 million for procurement of six 
F-15Es and $175 million for procurement of six F-16s. The 
committee observes that ongoing production of F-15Es and F-16s 
for foreign sales allows a limited opportunity to address these 
requirements at more affordable aircraft unit costs. The six F-
15Es are intended to fill training base shortfalls and can be 
procured without complete combat equipment packages, thereby 
further reducing the cost of each aircraft.

B-2 stealth bomber

    The budget request contained $279.9 million for continued 
production-related activities for the B-2 stealth bomber. The 
request did not include funds for long-lead materials necessary 
to produce additional aircraft beyond the twenty combat-capable 
aircraft previously approved by Congress.
    The committee does not support terminating the B-2 program 
at 20 aircraft. Numerous studies indicate that the United 
States will require more than 20 B-2 bombers to support the 
U.S. national military strategy. Most independent analyses 
identify a force of between 30-40 B-2 bombers as the minimum 
effective number necessary to prosecute two nearly simultaneous 
major regional contingencies (MRCs).
    The committee has received testimony from senior military 
leaders that the Department's so-called bomber ``swing'' 
strategy is untested and entails enormous risk. This strategy 
would have bombers swing from an initial MRC to a second MRC, 
while the first conflict was still underway. The committee 
rejects this ``swing'' strategy, which is dictated by the 
current, inadequate bomber force structure, as well as the 
Department's plans for having no bomber production capacity for 
the foreseeable future. Indeed, the committee is disturbed that 
the B-2 bomber industrial base is rapidly approaching final 
shutdown.
    For these reasons, the committee recommends an additional 
$553 million to begin the process of reestablishing those 
elements of the B-2 production line that have already been laid 
away and for procurement of long-lead items for additional 
aircraft. In addition, the committee directs that all funds 
remaining from the $125 million appropriated in the Department 
of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 
103-335) for the B-2 bomber industrial base preservation or 
next-generation bomber studies be merged with the $553 million 
and used for the same purposes.

B-1B repair and maintenance improvements

    The budget request contained $216 million for procurement 
of common aircraft ground equipment. As a result of prior 
congressional direction, the Air Force conducted an Operational 
Readiness Assessment (ORA) of the B-1B bomber to determine the 
extent to which the provision of planned spares, manpower, and 
logistics support would enable the B-1B force to achieve the 
planned mission capable rate (MCR) of 65 percent.
    Positive test results validated both the inherent 
capabilities of the B-1B aircraft and the Air Force's models 
and planning assumptions as to the spares, manpower, and 
support needed to sustain the B-1B force. However, as a result 
of the test, the Air Force identified several repair and 
maintenance improvements that should permit the B-1B's 
fleetwide MCR to reach 75 percent. The committee recommends an 
additional $11.1 million for this purpose, allocated as 
follows: $7.2 million for B-1 ORA modifications and $3.9 
million in operations and maintenance, Air Force.

                   Ammunition Procurement, Air Force


                                overview

    The budget request did not contain any funds for Ammunition 
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 1996. The committee 
recommends authorization of $321.3 million for fiscal year 
1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Insert Table 109 RIGHT HERE



                     Missile Procurement, Air Force


                                overview

    The budget request contained $3,647.7 million for Missile 
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 1996. The committee 
recommends authorization of $3,430.1 million for fiscal year 
1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Insert Table 111 thru 112 RIGHT HERE, also



Intercontinental ballistic missile guidance replacement program

    The budget request did not contain procurement funds for 
the intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) guidance 
replacement program. The committee recognizes the importance of 
maintaining a viable ICBM force of 450-500 missiles, as called 
for in the Department's Nuclear Posture Review. Accordingly, 
the committee recommends an additional $10 million to initiate 
production of this program.

Precision guided munitions

    The budget request contained no funds for procurement of 
AGM-130 powered GBU-15 laser guided bombs, AGM-86B conventional 
air launched cruise missiles (CALCMs), or AGM-142 HAVE NAP 
medium-range tactical missiles. The committee has great concern 
over the serious shortage of standoff precision-guided 
munitions (PGMs) currently available to the services. The force 
multiplier effect of PGMs was clearly demonstrated in Desert 
Storm, and the Department has relied heavily on this enhanced 
capability in determining that its modernized Bottom Up Review 
force can fight and win two nearly-simultaneous major regional 
contingencies (MRCs). Elsewhere in the report the committee has 
expressed its reservations with the Department's assertion that 
a smaller bomber force will be able to operationally support 
two MRCs. The committee notes that this assertion is without 
foundation based on both inadequate bomber force levels and 
lack of sufficient one-shot-one-kill standoff PGMs.
    The committee acknowledges the Department's efforts to 
accelerate acquisition of the Joint Direct Attack Munition and 
the Joint Standoff Weapon in the wake of the termination of the 
Tri-Service Standoff Attack Missile (TSSAM). Department 
officials also have begun discussions of a follow-on 
replacement for TSSAM. However, the committee notes that all of 
these weapons are still in the development stage and address 
but a portion of the services' requirements for standoff PGMs.
    Consequently, the committee recommends authorization of an 
additional $40 million for procurement of 100 AGM-130 powered 
GBU-15 laser guided bombs for the Air Force F-15 fighter. 
Additionally, the committee recommends authorization of $5 
million to be added to PE 64733F in Title II of this report in 
order to develop B-52H modifications which would enable a 
portion of the B-52 fleet to be armed with AGM-130s.
    The committee further recommends authorization of $27.2 
million for conversion of 200 AGM-86B nuclear-capable air 
launched cruise missiles to a conventional configuration and 
$39 million for procurement of 54 HAVE NAP electro-optical/
infrared guided missiles. These two standoff PGMs will provide 
near-term capability for the bomber fleet, while awaiting 
future Department decisions on standoff weapons.

                      Other Procurement, Air Force


                                overview

    The budget request contained $6,804.7 million for Other 
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 1996. The committee 
recommends authorization of $6,784.8 million for fiscal year 
1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 116 to 118 Insert here



                       Procurement, Defense-Wide


                                overview

    The budget request contained $2,179.9 million for 
Procurement, Defense-Wide in fiscal year 1996. The committee 
recommends authorization of $2,205.9 million for fiscal year 
1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folios 120 to 121 Insert here



Composite health care system

    The committee continues to support the acquisition of an 
automated system for the Department's health care facilities, 
but is concerned over delays to procure the Composite Health 
Care System (CHCS). The committee supports the Department's 
recent decision to increase the availability of technical 
alternatives, engineering talent and commercial off-the-shelf 
(COTS) products available to meet CHCS requirements by moving 
to a multiple contract approach. The committee encourages the 
integration of COTS products to accelerate completion of the 
automated system, to prevent unnecessary developmental 
expenditures and to meet the needs of the Department's health 
care facilities. The committee notes that the PACEMEDNET 
telecommunications testbed program is nearing completion and 
encourages the Department to consider the results of this 
effort in acquisition decisions for the CHCS.

Automated document conversion

    The budget request did not contain any funds for an 
automated document conversion system (ADCS).
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 
(Public Law 103-160) requires the Department to acquire and 
test an ADCS for the purpose of converting archival drawings 
and systems specifications into forms of data that support 
high-level intelligent usage. The Defense Logistics Agency was 
selected to coordinate the test, and the Defense Printing 
Service was selected to execute testing at field printing 
plants.
    The committee is very pleased with the results of the test. 
According to the test analysis report, the test confirmed that 
there is a ``genuine requirement for conversion of legacy 
engineering technical documents and drawings to revisable 
vector formats.'' In addition, the test confirmed that 
``potential savings in labor expenditures are available from 
the use of automation-assisted conversions of legacy raster 
engineering graphical data to formats suitable for a CAD 
environment.''
    Funds were appropriated in fiscal year 1995 to provide the 
necessary software to sites which have a need to convert raster 
files to an intelligent format. The committee is concerned 
because the Department has moved very slowly in spending these 
funds. The committee directs the Department to expedite the 
obligation of these funds. In addition, the committee 
authorizes $20 million in fiscal year 1996 to continue 
providing conversion software.

Air National Guard

    The committee notes the increased reliance of the Air Force 
on National Guard units and is concerned that the Guam Air 
National Guard should have a clearly defined role as part of 
the Air Force presence in the Western Pacific. Therefore, the 
committee requests that the Secretary of the Air Force report 
to the congressional defense committees on an enhanced role of 
the Guam Air National Guard for weather reconnaissance, 
airlift, and search and rescue missions.

                  National Guard and Reserve Equipment


                                overview

    The budget request did not contain any funds for National 
Guard and Reserve Equipment for fiscal year 1996. The committee 
recommends authorization of $770 million for fiscal year 1996.
    Offset Folio 126 Insert here



           Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense


                                overview

    The budget request contained $746.7 million for Chemical 
Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense for fiscal year 1996. 
The committee recommends authorization of $746.7 million for 
fiscal year 1996.
    The committee recommends approval of the request except for 
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless 
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and 
based on affordability considerations.
    Offset Folio 128 Insert here



  section 131--repeal of prohibition on backfit of trident submarines

    This section would repeal the provision of law that 
prohibits the backfit of Trident II (D-5) missiles into Trident 
I (C-4) missile-carrying submarines. The committee notes that 
the Department of Defense Nuclear Posture Review endorsed a 
strategic nuclear force structure that includes 14 strategic 
missile-carrying submarines, all outfitted with Trident II (D-
5) missiles. The committee endorses an all-D-5 submarine-
launched ballistic missile force.

                   section 141--repeal of limitations

    This section would repeal limitations on the total program 
cost of the B-2 stealth bomber program, the number of B-2 
aircraft, and the obligation of funds authorized for enhanced 
bomber capabilities.

   section 151--repeal of requirement to proceed expeditiously with 
 chemical demilitarization cryofracture facility at Tooele Army Depot, 
                                  Utah

    This section would repeal an obsolete provision of law that 
requires developing a chemical demilitarization cryofracture 
facility at Tooele Army Depot, Utah.

  section 152--sense of congress regarding cost growth in program for 
  destruction of the existing stockpile of lethal chemical agents and 
                               munitions

    This section expresses the sense of Congress regarding the 
growth in the estimated cost of demilitarizing the United 
States chemical munitions stockpile and other general concerns 
regarding the program. Prior to the conference between the 
defense authorizing committees on the Fiscal Year 1996 Defense 
Authorization Act (H.R. 1530) the committee intends to hold a 
hearing that would address the current status of the chemical 
demilitarization program and measures that could be considered 
to reduce overall cost, while minimizing total risk and 
ensuring the maximum protection for the environment, the 
general public, and the personnel involved in the destruction 
of lethal chemical agents and munitions. The committee could 
then address matters of interest raised at the hearing during 
the conference.

         TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 1996 for research, 
development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) included $34,331.953 
million. This represents a $1,737.724 million decrease from the 
amount authorized for fiscal year 1995.
    The committee recommends authorization of $35,934.447 
million, an increase of $1,602.494 million, for fiscal year 
1996.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 1996 
RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major issues 
are discussed following the table.
    Offset Folio 134    insert here



                         Defense-Wide Programs


                         special considerations

Cruise missile defense

    Along with the threat posed by ballistic missiles, the 
committee is concerned about the growing threat posed by cruise 
missiles. Cruise missiles, particularly those capable of land-
attack roles, could quickly become as equally threatening to 
deployed U.S. forces as ballistic missiles.
    The committee believes that certain prudent steps should be 
taken to prepare for the day when U.S. and allied forces could 
face an enhanced cruise missile threat.
            Improving battle management command, control and 
                    communications (C3)
    The committee endorses the Defense Science Board's call for 
enhancing existing air defenses through improved connectivity 
among the military services' varied sensor and ``shooter'' 
assets. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
insure such connectivity among the C3 capabilities of the Navy 
(Cooperative Engagement Capability), Air Force (Joint Tactical 
Information Distribution System/Link 16), and Army (``Digitized 
Battlefield''). The committee requests that the Secretary 
provide a report to the congressional defense committees on the 
Department's actions to insure connectivity in this area by May 
1, 1996.
            Selective upgrade of existing sensors and ``shooters''
    The committee recommends an increased authorization of $8 
million each to the Army, Navy, and Air Force in fiscal year 
1996. Details of this recommendation are contained in the 
classified annex.
            Long-range airborne surveillance
    Compared to a fixed-wing aircraft option, the committee 
understands that an aerostat solution may provide more 
endurance as a surveillance platform and be significantly less 
costly. The committee encourages the Department of Defense to 
evaluate the aerostat concept in an Advanced Concept Technology 
Demonstrator (ACTD) and recommends an additional $9 million in 
PE 63009A for aerostat ACTD risk reduction to be conducted 
jointly by the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) and the 
Army. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report 
back on progress towards funding such an ACTD by May 1, 1996. 
Further details of this recommendation are contained in the 
classified annex.
            Continued advanced research and development
    The impact of cruise missiles on the battlefield will 
likely grow with time. While the above efforts are excellent 
first steps to meet most first and second generation systems 
requirements and are ideal for regional contingencies, ARPA 
should continue its fundamental mission of pursuing advanced 
sensor and system concepts, as well as understanding and 
countering critical gaps through special studies. The committee 
recommends an additional $35 million in PE 63226E for these 
purposes.
            Consolidated management
    The committee is also aware of organizational problems in 
the area of cruise missile defense. Various organizations 
ranging from the military services to ARPA and the Office of 
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology 
to the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, are pursuing 
programs and have management responsibility for cruise missile 
defense. Such diffusion of effort clearly undermines the 
ability of the Department to achieve timely results in 
developing systems that are capable of countering the cruise 
missile threat.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to review the existing organizational and management structure 
for cruise missile defense-related activities to achieve 
program consolidation. The committee urges the Secretary to 
review the recommendations of the Defense Science Board 
regarding the appropriate management structure for pursuing an 
effective cruise missile program for the Department. The 
Secretary shall report the results of the review to the 
congressional defense committees not later than February 15, 
1996.

Dual-use technology programs

    The committee believes dual-use programs can be of great 
benefit to the core mission of the Department of Defense when 
they are used to leverage commercial technologies and processes 
to achieve specific military purposes. However, the committee 
notes that the fiscal year 1996 request for the Department's 
dual-use technology programs is approximately 90 percent 
greater than the fiscal year 1993 request and 12 percent higher 
than the fiscal year 1995 program. Given the major reductions 
that have been been made in many core research and development 
programs of the military services, the committee believes 
increases of this magnitude are excessive. While the committee 
supports competitive, cost-shared, partnership programs to the 
greatest extent possible, the committee has several concerns 
with regard to dual-use program management within the 
Department:
          (1) In too many cases ``dual-use'' has been pursued 
        as an end in itself, at the expense of adequately 
        funding national security programs. The Department's 
        fiscal year 1996 request for acquisition programs is $9 
        billion to $10 billion less than projected for fiscal 
        year 1996 when the Department provided the Congress its 
        fiscal year 1995 budget request. This reduction 
        resulted in a costly, inefficient restructuring of many 
        national security programs. Yet dual-use programs were 
        unaffected by these reductions. In fact, as previously 
        noted, the request for fiscal year 1996 for dual use 
        programs is 90 percent higher than the fiscal year 1993 
        request for such programs.
          (2) The Department's primary program for dual-use 
        projects, PE 63570E, Defense Reinvestment, provides the 
        Congress virtually no before-the-fact oversight of the 
        technologies to be pursued through dual-use efforts;
          (3) A significant amount of the funds for these 
        programs has gone toward technology initiatives of 
        marginal or questionable benefit to the military 
        services;
          (4) Dual-use programs are executed through a wide 
        variety of partnership structures and solicitation 
        processes, making it difficult for businesses of any 
        size, particularly those that have not routinely worked 
        with the Department of Defense, to understand how to 
        best respond to and apply for participation in dual-use 
        programs;
          (5) The scheduling of some dual-use solicitations and 
        evaluations is highly inefficient, particularly the 
        Technology Reinvestment Project (TRP); and
          (6) The process fails to provide an architectural 
        road map indicating long-term dual-use technology goals 
        and objectives for the Department.
    Therefore, the committee recommends no authorization for 
Defense Reinvestment for fiscal year 1996. Instead, the 
committee encourages the Department to:
          (1) Support a balanced dual-use program that reflects 
        overall military requirements. Major increases in dual-
        use program funding at the expense of proper execution 
        of on-going weapons development programs cannot be 
        justified;
          (2) Reorient the focus of dual-use programs to 
        primarily address military requirements, rather than as 
        an ancillary benefit;
          (3) Use the authorities provided in sections 2371, 
        2501, and 2511 of title 10, United States Code and the 
        funds authorized for specific technology programs 
        elsewhere in this title to continue meritorious dual-
        use projects of significant military benefit previously 
        funded through PE 63570E and through the Department's 
        other dual-use technology programs;
          (4) Establish a minimal number of partnership and 
        cost-shared processes through which solicitations are 
        made, evaluated and executed so that those businesses 
        seeking to participate in dual-use programs can better 
        focus on and invest in substance rather than process;
          (5) Leverage funding available for dual-use programs 
        by making cost sharing an element of solicitation 
        criteria to be considered in making project selections.
          (6) Incorporate dual-use solicitations into the 
        normal technology project solicitation process so their 
        evaluation and project implementation can be 
        accommodated without having to divert extraordinary 
        personnel resources for once- or twice-a-year 
        solicitation evaluations; and
          (7) Appoint an individual, reporting directly to the 
        Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
        Technology, to oversee all of the Department's dual-use 
        programs, including the military services, and conduct 
        outreach activities for communicating to the business 
        community those technologies and processes associated 
        with the Department's program.

Federally funded research and development centers (FFRDCs)

    The committee is disappointed that the recently released 
Defense Science Board (DSB) study on the role of FFRDCs failed 
to offer any innovative alternatives to redefine and rebalance 
the workload of the centers. The report noted however, that 
private sector capabilities in systems engineering (SE) and 
systems integration (SI) have grown dramatically and that there 
is general agreement, inside and outside of government, that 
current private sector capabilities in SE and SI are more than 
sufficient to meet the Department's needs for these services. 
Therefore, the committee believes that steps should be taken to 
phase out a significant portion of FFRDC activity through 
competitive contracting. The committee recommends a legislative 
provision (sec. 257) that would require the Department to 
subject future FFRDC SE and SI work to open competition.
    The committee also notes that the Department has decreased 
funding for FFRDCs that perform studies and analyses less than 
5 percent in actual funding since 1991. The committee believes 
the FFRDC capability must be rebalanced with additional 
efficiencies achieved in studies and analysis as well as a 
reevaluation of its FFRDC laboratory functions. The committee 
recognizes that the Lincoln Laboratory as well as other 
university affiliated research centers that serve the military 
under long-term ``FFRDC-like'' arrangements offer vital bridges 
from university discovery to potential military products. The 
committee recommends that this valuable FFRDC function be 
recognized for its important contribution and be factored into 
subsequent defense technology planning.
    The committee believes additional reductions can and should 
be made in certain FFRDCs and limits FFRDC funding by the 
Department in fiscal year 1996 to $1.15 billion, a reduction of 
$100 million from the projected requirement, of which $9.903 
million is for the Lincoln Laboratory research program in PE 
62234D.
    The committee directs that the Institute for Defense 
Analysis and the Software Engineering Institute level of 
funding shall not be reduced from the Department planned fiscal 
year 1996 activity.

Joint advanced strike technology (JAST) program

     The committee is disappointed that the Department has not 
been able to better define its plan for the future fighter/
attack aircraft force structure. Although approximately $3 
billion in additional funding is planned for the Joint Advanced 
Strike Technology (JAST) program through the Future Years' 
Defense Program (FYDP), there is no apparent willingness or 
commitment by the Department to examine future needs from a 
joint, affordable, and integrated warfighting perspective.
     The Department formed the JAST office to focus and 
rationalize the varying tactical aircraft requirements existing 
at the time among the military services. Yet, since 
organization of the JAST program, the Department seems willing 
to permit each military service to seek to justify its future 
needs without regard to the joint warfighting requirement or 
the ultimate cost, even though affordability is likely to be a 
major issue. The Department's senior leadership and the Joint 
Staff through the Joint Warfighting Capabilities Assessment and 
Joint Requirements Oversight Council process have failed to 
provide the JAST program manager the necessary support to make 
difficult choices. Instead of rationalizing competing 
requirements, the current approach seeks to accommodate all of 
the diverse, unrealistic, unaffordable, and unnecessary 
``requirements'' of each of the military services involved.
     The committee understands that there are a number of on 
going studies within the Department that should examine the 
aggregate or ``joint'' fighter and attack aircraft requirements 
for the two major regional contingency scenario. The committee 
is hopeful that these various assessments will address the 
committee's issues and concerns noted below. Therefore, the 
committee recommends a provision (sec. 216) that would direct 
the Secretary of Defense to address these issues in a report to 
the congressional defense committees and place a limitation on 
fiscal year 1996 JAST obligations until the report is provided.
     Over $250 million has been appropriated for the JAST-
ASTOVL program to date. Another $331.156 million is included in 
the budget request for fiscal year 1996, with a total of 
approximately $3 billion included in the FYDP. The stated 
intent of the program is for the initial JAST candidate 
aircraft to enter engineering and manufacturing development 
(EMD) in fiscal year 2000. The committee is concerned about the 
realism of the development funds requested for the JAST 
program. For example, the funding projected for the program for 
the latter years of the FYDP trends downward. This is 
inconsistent with historical experience for previous aircraft 
development programs entering EMD.
     In preparing the report required by section 216 of the 
bill, the Department should address the following issues:
          (1) What is the total joint requirement, under the 
        two major regional contingency (MRC) scenario, for 
        numbers of tactical combat aircraft and the 
        characteristics required of those aircraft in terms of 
        capabilities, range, and observability/stealthiness; 
        surface and air launched standoff precision guided 
        munitions; cruise missiles; and ground based systems 
        such as Extended Range-Multiple Launch Rocket System 
        and the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) for joint 
        warfighting capability?
          (2) What are the MRC warning time assumptions and 
        what is the effect on future tactical fighter/attack 
        aircraft requirements using other warning time 
        assumptions?
          (3) What requirements exist for JAST that justify an 
        additional $3 billion development investment over the 
        FYDP that cannot be met by existing or modifications to 
        existing aircraft or by those aircraft in development?
          (4) What is the Department's long range plan for 
        rationalization of the current three approaches--STOVL, 
        helicopters, and fixed-wing aircraft--to providing 
        close air support for ground troops?
    Once the Department addresses these issues it may be able 
to address the committee's concerns, including:
          (1) The Department appears to be committed to a JAST 
        level-of-effort program without having determined what 
        the manned tactical aircraft component requirement is 
        to meet the total joint warfighting requirement for 
        tactical aircraft, cruise missiles, and air and ground 
        launched standoff precision guided munitions for the 
        deep strike, interdiction, and close air support 
        missions;
          (2) The JAST program is pursuing as its first 
        priority the least required warfighting capability: a 
        follow-on close air support (CAS) aircraft as a 
        replacement for the Marine Corps AV-8 Harrier. As 
        reflected in Desert Storm results and likely future 
        warfighting scenarios, the manned tactical fixed-wing 
        requirement to meet the CAS mission is relatively 
        small. This, combined with the ``From the Sea'' 
        maritime strategy, which allows the commitment of major 
        maritime-based aviation assets to the land battle, 
        makes even more aircraft available for this mission 
        area. In addition, it does not appear that Marine Corps 
        and Army attack helicopter force structure is being 
        adequately considered. Further, the ``Bottom Up 
        Review'' conducted by the Department of Defense 
        reflected these considerations, where it excluded the 
        AV-8 in its future tactical aircraft force requirements 
        and planning assumptions.
          (3) The Navy canceled the A-12 and later canceled the 
        A/F-X. The Navy currently states the requirement for 
        JAST is to perform as a first-day-survivable (FDS) 
        strike fighter. If there is no need to pursue an A-12 
        or A/F-X capability now, and if the Navy will do 
        without this capability for 10-15 years, why is the 
        capability required in 2005-2010? How many FDS strike 
        fighters would the Joint Forces Commanders require 
        prior to the achievement of air supremacy in the two 
        MRC scenario?
          (4) The Air Force claims it needs an F-16 replacement 
        yet is unable to demonstrate why additional F-16s 
        cannot affordably meet its requirement given the 
        capabilities the F-22, F-117, standoff precision guided 
        munitions, and cruise missiles would provide the Joint 
        Forces Commander.
          (5) Warning times assumed in MRC scenarios used to 
        justify ``requirements'' need to be realistically 
        established.
    The committee supports the focus that the JAST program 
management provides for the advanced technology demonstrations 
it is conducting and the need to place emphasis on the 
maturation of propulsion systems. But the committee believes 
that a number of other initiatives are premature since many 
relevant questions about what needs to be developed when, have 
not yet been addressed. The committee also believes that some 
portions of the development effort duplicate activities in 
other programs. Accordingly, the committee recommends a 
reduction in funding from the requested $331.156 million to 
$280.156 million, a reduction in PE 63800N and PE 63800F of 
$25.5 million each. The committee recommends the following 
specific adjustments to the ``JAST Program Fiscal Year 1996 
Investment Plan'': line 21, increase $10 million; line 29, 
decrease $6 million; line 32-35, decrease $20 million; and line 
40, decrease $35 million. The committee supports completion of 
the current phase of the ASTOVL development more out of concern 
for the industrial base than as an endorsement of the 
``requirement'' for such an aircraft.

Justification of estimates

     The committee has in past years noted the Department's 
lack of attention to detail and timeliness in providing its 
annual budget materials to the congressional defense 
committees. The committee notes that again this year that 
budget materials were not provided until two-to-three months 
after the President's budget was presented to the Congress. 
Once provided, the materials were found to be less than 
satisfactory. As an example, a great deal of the data provided 
in the Air Force RDT&E budget materials was wrong and 
internally inconsistent. In addition, numerous program element 
numbers for all of the military services' requests fail to 
correctly describe the status of specific programs (e.g., the 
Air Force program element number for the Tri-Service Standoff 
Attack Missile (TSSAM) reflects the status of TSSAM as having 
been an operational system). The committee cannot emphasize too 
strongly to the Department the need to provide accurate and 
timely justification materials to the Congress if it expects 
full and favorable consideration of the Department's request.

Manufacturing technology (MANTEC)

    The committee is concerned that the military services are 
not focusing MANTEC research and development on key 
manufacturing cost drivers in weapon systems. The potential now 
exists through the use of the available talent pool in 
industry, academic and government consortia, or through the use 
of several centers of excellence to address manufacturing 
applications that could have significant cost reduction impact 
now and in the future.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to place the 
highest priority of the manufacturing technology program 
(MANTEC) on funding areas that address near-term manufacturing 
problems and to maintain a lesser portion of the program aimed 
toward longer term technologies.
    The committee recommends transfer of the MANTEC program 
from advanced development to production support to accomplish 
this primary purpose. The committee directs a formal liaison 
with the Director, Defense Research and Engineering (DDR&E) as 
the technology coordinator for infusion of advanced technology 
into the process.
    The committee reiterates the importance of industrial 
participation and competition in awarding grants and contracts. 
National industrial associations and consortia shall be 
considered by all services for participation in program 
activity.
    Finally, the committee believes that since the MANTEC 
program has been significantly reduced in funding over prior 
years, infrastructure savings (including new facility 
construction) can be achieved by consolidation of its centers 
of excellence and re-assigning future work activities within 
the remaining centers. The committee recommends that 25 percent 
of the program shall have cost sharing greater than two to one.
    The committee recommends the following program adjustments:
    PE 63771A--decrease $17.776 million.
    PE 78045A--increase $27.776 million ($6 million for 
composite technology for the instrumented factory for gear 
development, $4 million for PAN fibers), and $1.5 million of 
the core program shall be used for industrial--academic 
partnerships for repair technology development and insertion 
for rotary winged aircraft.
    PE 63771N--decrease $41.251 million.
    PE 78011N--increase $51.251 million ($10 million for the 
Navy to initiate partnerships with industry, government 
laboratories and other research organizations that will allow 
the development of manufacturing technologies which support 
optoelectronic devices and components).
    PE 63771F--decrease $53.332 million.
    PE 78011F--increase of $53.332 million.
    PE 63771S--decrease $7.007 million.
    PE 78011S--increase $17.007 million ($10 million to conduct 
demonstrations and pre-production development for military sewn 
products and to continue the machine tool program).

Precision guided munitions

    The Department is spending billions of dollars to acquire 
sophisticated precision guided munitions (PGMs). These weapons 
are expected to impact future force levels and number of 
platforms required to defeat battlefield threats.
    The General Accounting Office (GAO) recently reviewed all 
military services PGM programs and determined that the 
Department has procured or plans to develop and procure 33 
types of PGMs. The military services estimate they will have 
spent about $58.7 billion for these PGMs, $30.4 billion for 19 
munition types they now have in limited numbers in the 
inventory and about $28.3 billion for 14 munition types in 
development. These figures do not include the yet-to-be-defined 
program to replace the recently terminated Tri-Service Standoff 
Attack Missile (TSSAM). In addition, these costs do not include 
integration into platforms, or the electronic and mechanical 
interfaces required. The GAO found that:
          (1) The military services will have multiple PGM 
        options to counter targets in the same classes (when 
        current inventory deficiencies are corrected and 
        developmental programs are complete);
          (2) The military services may have additional 
        opportunities for joint procurement which are not being 
        pursued; and
          (3) Acquisition practices are inefficient.
    The committee questions: (1) how many PGM types the 
services need to be effective against different target classes, 
(2) what quantities are needed, (3) whether joint programs are 
feasible, and (4) whether PGMs in production and development 
are still cost effective?
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to perform 
an analysis of the full range of PGMs in production and in 
research, development, test, and evaluation to determine:
          (1) The numbers and types of PGMs needed to provide a 
        complementary capability in each target class;
          (2) The feasibility of developing and procuring 
        additional munition types jointly;
          (3) The feasibility of integrating a given weapon on 
        multiple service platforms; and
          (4) The economy and effectiveness of continuing 
        acquisition of munitions that are characterized as 
        ``interim'' or whose quantity requirements have 
        decreased significantly such that unit costs have 
        increased beyond 50 percent.
    The Secretary shall include a section in the report which 
details the process by which the Department approves the 
development of new PGMs, avoids service duplication and 
redundancy, retires less effective systems, establishes out-
year cost rationalization within the total out-year 
modernization planned funding, and identifies by name and 
function that person responsible for approving each new PGM 
permitted to enter the formal acquisition process.
    The report shall be provided to the congressional defense 
committees not later than February 1, 1996.

                               Army RDT&E


                                overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 1996 included $4,444.175 
million for Army RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization 
of $4,774.947 million, an increase of $330.772 million, for 
fiscal year 1996.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 1996 Army 
RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes 
to the Army request are discussed following the table.
    Offset Folios 147 to 149 insert here



                       items of special interest

Army modernization shortfalls

    Through the course of its evaluation of the proposed 
Department of the Army budget, the committee has learned of a 
number of key fiscal year 1996 funding shortfalls that are 
vital to ensuring future Army readiness. The committee believes 
these shortfalls could be satisfied by redirecting or 
postponing longer-range programs to pay for near-term needs and 
requirements. As an example, the Army advanced concept 
demonstration for the rapid force projection initiative is 
assessed to be inadequately planned with reliance on weapons 
with marginal utility and should be postponed and its planned 
funding applied to higher priority needs in other Army RDT&E 
accounts that have been fully certified by the Army as bona 
fide key modernization shortfalls. Therefore significant 
reductions to the missile and rocket advanced technology 
program element (PE 63313A) have been made in order to fund 
these other program elements within the Army RDT&E account 
where shortfalls have been identified.
    The committee recommends the following funding adjustments:
    PE 64741A: +$10 million for tactical operation center.
    PE 63313A: +$5 million for Multiple Launch Rocket System 
(MLRS) low-cost guidance.
    PE 65712A: +$1.5 million for joint warfighter 
interoperability demonstration.
    PE 23740A: +$13 million for maneuver control system.
    PE 23726A: +$6.2 million for advanced field artillery 
tactical data system.
    PE 64768A: +$7 million for Army tactical missile system/
brilliant anti-armor submunition risk reduction.
    PE 63778A: +$3.7 million for MLRS improved launch 
mechanical system.
    PE 64804A: +$2 million for 3KW tactical quiet generator.
    PE 63001A: +$3.1 million for ammunition logistics 
packaging, safety and advanced technology.
    PE 64201A: +$11 million for prototype Army airborne command 
and control system for task force XXI.
    The committee reduces funding for the rapid force 
projection initiative in PE 63313A (not including project D496) 
as a partial offset.

Advanced artillery propellant development

    The budget request included $10.846 million in PE 63640A to 
continue development of an advanced solid propellant system and 
52-caliber cannon as a backup for the Crusader liquid 
propellant (LP) armament system and for potential use in other 
field artillery systems.
    As a hedge against potential failure of LP and to enhance 
existing systems, the committee recommends an increased 
authorization of $19.6 million to continue development of the 
XM297 advanced 52-caliber cannon for Crusader, including 
integration of a bolt-in/bolt-out gun mount for the M109A6 
Palladin and type classification of the advanced solid 
propellant in standard 39-caliber artillery cannons.

Advanced battery technology

    The committee recommends an additional $3 million for non-
metallic lithium and low cost reusable alkaline battery 
development in PE 62705A and $500,000 in PE 62314N for advanced 
seal delivery vehicle batteries.

Advanced individual weapon anti-armor technology

    The budget request included $5.114 million in PE 62623A and 
$4.487 million in PE 63607A for the Joint Service Small Arms 
Program. The committee strongly supports the development of 
technology for advanced individual weapon systems for the 21st 
Century as outlined in the Joint Services Small Arms Master 
Plan. The capability for defeating a wide range of armored 
fighting vehicles and other battlefield targets incorporated in 
an advanced individual weapon system could significantly 
increase the combat effectiveness of the individual soldier or 
marine on the modern battlefield. The committee recommends an 
increase of $2 million in PE 63607A for the advanced technology 
demonstration of lightweight, medium-caliber, multi-shot, anti-
armor weapon technology, and believes that a successful 
demonstration could lead to early application of the technology 
in a next-generation objective individual combat weapon system 
for the Army and the Marine Corps.

Advanced missile system-heavy (AMS-H)

    The budget request included $995,000 for a new anti-tank 
weapon program in PE 64325A. The committee denies the Army's 
request for new start funding for yet another tank killer 
program.

Advanced solid state dye lasers

    The committee recommends an additional $4 million in PE 
62307A for continued research into advanced solid state dye 
lasers.

Aircrew protection

    The committee recommends an additional $6 million in PE 
63801A for advanced common helmet development for helicopter 
aircrew members.

Armored systems modernization

    The committee recommends the following adjustments to the 
Department's budget request:
    PE 64645A/D413: armored gun system, increase $5.36 million.
    PE 63649A/DG24: CMS/Grizzly, increase $4.5 million.
    PE 64649A/DG25: CMS/Grizzly, increase $9.922 million.
    PE 64649A/DC26: CMS/Wolverine, increase $4.231 million.
    PE 23735A/D330: ABRAMS tank, increase $1.309 million.
    These additions shall be offset by a reduction in the 
procurement section of this act of $25.322 million from the 
ABRAMS tank modification line (BLIN #19/FA0770).

Automatic test equipment development

    The committee recommends an additional $10 million in PE 
64746A for continued development of software to support the 
integrated family of test equipment (IFTE).

Battlefield combat identification system (BCIS)

    The committee is pleased with the Army's successful testing 
to date of the Battlefield Combat Identification System (BCIS) 
which is designed to prevent friendly fire casualties through 
positive electronic interrogation and identification of 
potential targets as ``friend or foe.'' The committee considers 
inclusion of BCIS in the upcoming Army Task Force XXI test/
demonstration vital to validating the overall effectiveness and 
future production potential of this critical anti-fratricide 
system. Further, the committee directs the Army to ensure that 
a sufficient number of BCIS units are fielded for a realistic 
test of the system for Task Force XXI and to continue plans to 
fully equip a contingency force division as soon as soon as 
practicable.

Battlefield tissue replacement

    The committee recommends an additional $5 million in PE 
62787A for continuation of the combat care laser-biologic 
tissue fusion and replacement program.

Biotechnologies

    The committee continues to support the research and 
development efforts of the Departments of Defense and 
Agriculture conducted by the Army in PE 62720A. The committee 
expects the Director, Defense Research and Engineering to 
provide guidance to this important program. In particular, the 
committee strongly recommends efforts directed at development 
of advanced materials from renewable resources and the 
development and demonstration of cost-effective bioremediation 
technologies for contaminated soil and related resources.

Brilliant antiarmor submunition (BAT)

    The committee believes there is benefit to expanding the 
use of the Department of the Army's BAT submunition into other 
platforms and carriers. The committee directs the Secretaries 
of the Air Force and Navy in coordination with the Secretary of 
the Army to perform a cost and operational effectiveness 
analysis (COEA) of Air Force and Navy participation in the BAT 
development program for possible use in fixed wing and cruise 
missile carriers. The Secretaries shall submit the results of 
the COEA to the congressional defense committees not later than 
120 days after passage of this act.

Comanche helicopter (RAH-66)

    The committee agrees with the new philosophy of the RAH-66 
Comanche helicopter program which focuses on fielding multiple 
prototype aircraft for use by regular Army forces in the field 
to determine the full range of warfighting advantages offered 
by the system. The committee also believes that both 
reconnaissance and attack/weapons packages for the Comanche 
should be field tested as soon as possible in order to fully 
maximize the system's future combat potential.
    However, the committee is concerned over the apparent lack 
of full support within both the Army and Department of Defense 
to move more rapidly towards production and integration of the 
Comanche into the rapidly emerging digitized brigades. The 
committee reminds the Department that continual program 
reduction and restructuring is wasteful and demonstrates the 
Army's lack of commitment and the Department's lack of 
leadership in prioritizing and appropriately funding its higher 
priority modernization programs. These programs, like Comanche, 
fully employ emerging revolutionary technology, offer decisive 
force advantages, and drastically reduced operations and 
maintenance cost. The extended development periods caused by 
the continual restructuring of the Comanche program inflate 
development costs, stagnate industrial potential for full scale 
production, and leave the Army without a vital future combat 
capability.
    The committee remains concerned that, based upon recent 
events, including the loss of an unarmed, non-stealthy OH-58A 
scout helicopter over North Korea, the Army requirement for an 
advanced armed reconnaissance helicopter is more pressing than 
ever, and serious consideration should be given to accelerating 
rather than delaying the Army's choice to fulfill this 
requirement, the RAH-66 Comanche.
    The Secretary of Defense is reminded that the Comanche is 
the Department's only research and development program for 
helicopters and requires serious and dedicated management 
attention to ensure its success. The committee considers 
appropriate future funding, and an elevated Department 
priority, as essential to integrating this revolutionary weapon 
system into the modern battlefield as soon as possible.
    Further, the committee believes the Comanche should become 
and remain a prime candidate for any additional modernization 
funding that is made available to either the Department of 
Defense or the U.S. Army.
    The committee therefore recommends an increase of $100 
million in PE 64223A and directs the Secretary of Defense and 
the Secretary of the Army to immediately reconsider the 
priority given to the Comanche and to examine alternatives that 
would provide accelerated outyear funding profiles that 
challenge the industry to successfully conduct the prototype 
program and guarantee full scale production prior to 2004.

Ductile iron

    The committee recognizes the cost and weight savings of 
ductile iron and understands the benefits to the Army and the 
other military services if problems in welding and shaping can 
be solved. The committee encourages the Secretary of the Army 
to continue the ductile iron program. The committee also 
recommends that ductile iron be a part of the Advanced Research 
Projects Agency's specialty metals program, described in the 
Defense Agencies' section of this report.

Electric gun technology

    The committee continues to support electric gun technology 
development for potential future weapons applications, but 
recommends that the effort be re-focused on the most promising 
concepts. The committee recommends an additional $6 million in 
PE 62618A, project H-80, to complete data gathering and 
assessment by the research teams.

Enhanced fiber optic guided missile (EFOG-M)

    The committee is concerned that the Army is pursuing a 
weapon system which provides questionable value and possesses 
known fiscal risk. The EFOG-M was canceled by the Assistant 
Secretary of the Army, Research Development and Acquisition 
because of cost overruns and poor performance. The program was 
resurrected by proponents in the Army and in the Department in 
fiscal year 1995.
    The committee's primary concern for this program, above its 
apparent marginal need, is that planned funding for the EFOG-M 
may not match the development activity and product delivery of 
300 missiles and 12 fire units for planned test and evaluation. 
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 215) that 
would require the Secretary of the Army to certify that a 
requirement exists for the EFOG-M. The provision also limits 
the expenditure of funds for the EFOG-M program to that 
identified in the current program plan only and denies 
continuation of the program beyond fiscal year 1998 if contract 
obligations are not met.

Environmental technology

    The committee recommends $4 million of the amount requested 
in PE 62720A for continued support for bioremediation education 
science and technology with applications only for defense-
related environmental problems.

Hardened materials

    The committee recommends an additional $4 million in PE 
62105A to continue the unfunded portions of the hardened 
materials program.

Heavy vehicle support

    The committee recommends an additional $1.9 million in PE 
64622A for water heater/chiller development for the Army's 
XM1098 water tank semitrailer and an additional $845,000 in PE 
64622A for a palletized loading system technology 
demonstration.

Intelligence fusion analysis demonstration

    The budget request included $2.937 million in PE 63745A for 
the Intelligence Fusion Analysis Demonstration program. The 
committee recommends an increase of $3 million for development 
and evaluation in Army Warfighter Experiments and the joint 
precision strike demonstration program of advanced large 
screen, automated graphical displays which would provide 
enhanced situational awareness for tactical commanders.

Joint precision strike demonstration program

    The budget request included $34.104 million in PE 63238A 
for the joint air-land-sea precision strike demonstration 
(JPSD) program. The committee is encouraged by the progress 
that the Army has made in addressing key issues for defeating 
time critical targets at extended ranges and in demonstrating 
concepts for joint capabilities. The committee strongly 
supports the objectives of the precision/rapid counter-multiple 
rocket launcher advanced concept and technology demonstration 
in the fiscal year 1996 program. The committee believes that in 
the future; increased participation by the other military 
services in the JPSD could capitalize on developments in the 
Warbreaker program and elsewhere and contribute to the 
development of joint procedures, tactics, and techniques to 
increase the effectiveness and capability of fixed wing 
aircraft and other systems in the attack of time critical 
targets. To this end, the committee directs that the JPSD 
program, which has been designated as Army lead, be expanded 
into a jointly manned program with full participation by all 
military services. The committee recommends an increase of $4 
million and requests a report on the status of implementing 
this requirement no later than June 30, 1996, and submission by 
September 30, 1996, of a five-year plan for executing a fully 
coordinated and jointly manned JPSD program.

Land mine neutralization program

    The committee believes there is a need for a central 
authority to plan, oversee, and coordinate the research, 
development, and acquisition of the technology applicable to 
area ordnance clearance. Accordingly, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a plan to the committee by 
February 15, 1996, that defines research and development 
priorities, program management and cooperative activity with 
international programs. Since the committee intended for the 
Department to institute a program that would lead to viable 
systems, the committee recommends continuing the effort in 
subsequent years. The committee recommends an additional $10 
million in PE 63606A.
    The Secretary of Defense shall provide an annual status 
report to the congressional defense committees by June 1, 1996 
on the program activity and plans.

Laser radar for obstacle avoidance

    The committee supports development of high accuracy laser 
radar obstacle avoidance system for low-flying helicopters in 
all-weather, night operations as well as laser warning 
equipment for combat vehicles. The committee recommends an 
additional $5 million in PE 63710A for testing and avionics 
integration for helicopter obstacle avoidance and $3.1 million 
in PE 64740A to develop laser warning equipment for combat 
vehicles.

Low cost autonomous attack submunition (LOCAAS)

    The committee believes there is cost saving potential in 
continuing research and advanced development in the Army and 
Air Force on LOCAAS. The committee recommends $2.5 million in 
PE 63313A, project D493, in the Army and $2.5 million in PE 
63601F in the Air Force.

MK 19 weapon system soft mount

    The committee recommends an additional $2.7 million in PE 
64802A to complete type classification of a soft mount for the 
MK19 weapon system initiated by congressional action in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public 
Law 103-337).

Objective individual combat weapon (OICW)

    The committee supports development of the OICW but is 
concerned that funds requested for fiscal year 1996 are 
inadequate to effectively conduct this advanced technology 
program. The committee encourages the Secretary of the Army to 
examine the current development strategy for OICW to support 
the joint small arms master plan and request a reprogramming of 
funds to adequately carry out the master plan.

Optoelectronics

    The committee recognizes the importance of optoelectronics 
technologies for modernization of its forces. Accordingly, the 
committee encourages the Army to maintain a strong technology 
base program that involves and strengthens this sector of the 
industrial base.

Passive millimeter camera

    The committee recommends an additional $6 million in PE 
62120A to complete development and field test both the first 
and second generation modular, concept validation cameras.

Personnel training

    The committee recognizes and supports the concept of 
transitioning technology resulting from DOD funded research for 
a specific purpose to applications in non-military areas. As an 
example, the lessons learned in aviation crew coordination 
training may have possible application to emergency medical 
team training. The Army is encouraged to investigate the 
potential for technology transfer in this area in a manner that 
does not divert defense resources from their principal purpose.

Projectile detection and cueing

    The committee supports the projectile detection and cueing 
program funded for Army evaluation in PE 62308A. The committee 
directs the Secretary of the Army to make available appropriate 
funding to support evaluation in the Army's ACT II program and 
to seek a reprogramming of funds where inadequacies exist.
    The committee further directs the Secretary of the Army to 
report to the congressional defense committees on the results 
of the projectile detection and cueing phase I demonstration 
tests together with the Army's planned course of action as a 
result of the tests. The report shall be provided not later 
than 120 days after the conclusion of the demonstration tests.

Space applications technology program

    The budget request included $16.819 million in PE 63006A 
for command, control, and communications advanced technology, 
including $498,000 for the Army's space application technology 
program. The committee is aware of the program's success in 
demonstrating global positioning system and Wrasse weather data 
receivers during Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm and other 
space technology applications such as the location of high 
value targets using hyperspectral sensing techniques, high data 
rate satellite communications on the move, and down link 
weather satellite technology. The committee encourages the Army 
to consider reprogramming funds to provide additional support 
for the space applications technology program.

Starstreak air to air evaluation

    The committee reiterates and reinforces its desire to 
evaluate the Starstreak missile on the AH-64 Apache helicopter 
as authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337). The committee believes 
the planned United States/United Kingdom evaluation program 
will provide a cost effective means to prove the feasibility of 
air-to-air defense capability for the Apache. The committee 
however directs that the test program include warhead lethality 
in realistic combat scenarios including incoming, crossing and 
maneuvering high speed targets in clear and adverse weather. 
The committee recommends an increase of $6.5 million in PE 
63003A for both phases of the program and understands that 
prior year funding is available to complete this program.

Stinger missile improvements

    The committee recommends an additional $9.8 million in PE 
23801A for sustaining and accelerating the block 2 Stinger 
program.

Tactical mobility

    The committee notes shortfalls in tactical mobility 
identified in testimony provided by the Army. The committee 
recommends an additional $10 million to initiate the 
development of technologies and concept designs in PE 63003A 
focused on replacement of the CH-47 heavy lift helicopter.

Weapons and munitions

    The committee recommends an additional $1.6 million in PE 
64802A to continue development of the 120mm full range practice 
cartridge XM-931 training round that will lead to a lower cost 
substitute for standard rounds.

Weapons and munitions advanced technology

    The committee recommends an additional $2 million in PE 
63004A for completion of the XM-982 155mm projectile 
development.

                               Navy RDT&E


                                overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 1996 contained 
$8,204.530 million for Navy RDT&E. The committee recommends 
authorization of $8,516.509 million, an increase of $311.979 
million, for fiscal year 1996.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 1996 Navy 
RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes 
to the Navy request are discussed following the table.
    Offset Folios 165 to 167 insert here



                       items of special interest

Advanced amphibious assault vehicle

    The budget request included $32.366 million in PE 63611M 
for demonstration/validation of the advanced amphibious assault 
vehicle (AAAV). The committees understands that selection of 
the appropriate engine for the AAAV is a pacing item in the 
AAAV program and directs the Secretary of the Navy to ensure 
that the engine qualification test program previously mandated 
by the Congress is completed as currently planned. The 
committee understands that decisions made during final 
development of the budget request resulted in a slip of 
approximately 26 months in the initial operating capability of 
the AAAV and directs the Secretary of the Navy to identify the 
additional funding required to restore the original schedule 
with the submission of the fiscal year 1997 budget request. The 
committee recommends an increase of $6 million to the fiscal 
year 1996 budget request for engine development and system 
technical risk reduction.

Advanced submarine technology development

    The budget request included $18.392 million in PE 62121N 
for exploratory development of submarine systems technology and 
$30.860 million in PE 63561N for advanced submarine system 
development. Coupled with the reduction in the budget request 
for the Advanced Research Projects Agency's advanced submarine 
technology program (PE 63569E) to $7.473 million, the total 
request for development of advanced submarine technology 
represents a reduction of almost $57 million from the fiscal 
year 1995 level. The committee is deeply concerned about the 
Navy's commitment to the long-term submarine research and 
development required to assure that current and future 
submarine designs take advantage of advanced technology. The 
committee understands that near term requirements for the New 
Attack Submarine (NAS) have led the Navy to place increased 
emphasis on the maturation of advanced technologies that could 
be incorporated in that submarine. Nevertheless, the sharp 
reduction in funding for advanced submarine technology, 
particularly at the advanced development level, raises serious 
concerns about the modular approach to design of the NAS and 
the Navy's stated intent to incorporate advanced technologies 
into subsequent hulls of the NAS as the technology is matured.
    The committee believes that the overall reduction in 
submarine research and development funding reflected in the 
president's budget is inadequate to support the type of long-
term research necessary for future submarine design. If this 
long term investment is not made, the Navy cannot be in a 
position to assure the availability of advanced technologies 
for use in a future submarine, or that the next submarine 
design will be the best and most economical design capable of 
maintaining the superior technological capability that has 
characterized the U.S. submarine force. The committee directs 
the Secretary of Defense to develop a plan for long term 
submarine research and development aimed at ensuring U.S. 
technological superiority and report this plan to the 
congressional defense committees with the submission of the 
fiscal year 1997 budget request.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10 million in PE 
62121N and $20 million in PE 63561N to maintain the Navy's 
advanced submarine technology program at approximately the 
fiscal year 1995 level. Of the additional amount provided in PE 
62121N, $7 million is to continue the transfer to the Navy of 
the technology for actively controlling machinery platforms 
demonstrated in the ARPA Project M.

Advanced tactical air command central

    The budget request included $8.349 million in PE 64719M to 
continue development of the advanced tactical air command 
central (ATACC) for the Marine Corps. Marked growth in program 
costs for fiscal year 1996 and succeeding years, changes in the 
acquisition strategy, and significant revisions in the program 
schedule lead the committee to question whether the operational 
requirement is well defined and the system should continue in 
engineering and manufacturing systems development, or whether a 
demonstration-validation program is more appropriate. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends a reduction of $5 million 
in the budget request and directs that the details of the 
operational requirement and revised program plan be provided 
with the fiscal year 1997 budget request.

AEGIS combat systems engineering

    The fiscal year 1996 budget request included $90.026 
million in PE 64307N for continued development of improvements 
in the AEGIS combat system, an increase of $25.168 million over 
that projected for fiscal year 1996 when the fiscal year 1995 
budget request was submitted. The committee understands that 
among the reasons for the increase was the deferred release of 
$15.8 million in fiscal year 1995 funding. To compensate for 
the deferral, the Navy increased the budget request and has 
embarked on a phased strategy for development of the AEGIS 
baseline 6 which will increase development concurrency and 
program risk. The committee does not believe that this is a 
prudent strategy, particularly when considering other ongoing 
developments to the AEGIS program such as the cooperative 
engagement capability and Navy theater ballistic missile 
defense. Accordingly, the committee recommends a reduction of 
$15.8 million to the budget request.

AH-1W integrated weapons system upgrade

    The budget request included $14.908 million in PE 64212N 
for engineering and manufacturing development of upgrades to 
the AH-1W Cobra attack helicopter for the Marine Corps. The 
committee understands that the Marine Corps has decided to 
suspend development of the integrated weapon system, which is a 
part of the upgrade, pending a further review of the 
requirements for the helicopter. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends a reduction of $11.628 million in the budget 
request.

Aircrew adaptive automation technology

    The budget request included $74.849 million in PE 62233N 
for exploratory development to support Navy advanced weapon and 
platform system concepts and needs in the areas of materials, 
electronics, and computer technology. The committee recommends 
an increase of $2.7 million to continue development of 
adaptable automation technology for management of air crew 
workloads.

Aircrew protective clothing and devices

    The budget request included $1.719 million in PE 63216N for 
demonstration and validation of aircrew protective clothing and 
devices. The committee recommends an increase of $7.4 million 
to the budget request to continue development of the advanced 
integrated life support system and for an advanced technology 
escape system for aircrews. The committee directs that the Navy 
provide to the congressional defense committees by March 2, 
1996 a report describing the program plan for these two 
programs and the coordination of each with programs which may 
be under consideration in the Air Force and the Army.

Air systems advanced technology development

    The Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) that 
evolved from a Small Business Innovative Research program could 
provide a critical capability to meet Marine Corps suppression 
of enemy air defense requirements.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to proceed 
with this development program and provides $35 million for 
fiscal year 1996 in PE 63217N to transition from a ``bread 
board'' missile seeker development program to an all-up level 
missile development program and $10 million in PE 27136F to 
leverage AARGM to define, design, and build a breadboard 
seeker, guidance and control unit for broader application of 
the technology for preemptive suppression of enemy air defenses 
(SEAD). This latter concept will provide an integrated 
targeting and weapon delivery system for an end-to-end solution 
for the SEAD program. The committee directs that use of these 
funds by the Navy and Air Force be limited to design reviews 
and support test and evaluation. The committee also encourages 
the Secretaries of the Navy and Air Force to fund the fiscal 
year 1997 requirement for these projects.

Aircrew systems development

    The budget request included $9.788 in PE 64264N for the 
aircrew systems development of aviation life support systems. 
The committee recommends an increase of $7.9 million to 
transition the Navy's Day/Night/All Weather Helmet Mounted 
Display to operational evaluation in F/A-18 and AV-8B aircraft; 
to upgrade current escape systems; and to develop crashworthy 
troop seats in the H-1, H-3, and H-46 helicopters.

AN/ALR-67(V) Electronic Warfare Program

    The committee notes the Department of Defense's clear and 
concise report related to the soundness of the Navy's AN/ALR-
67(V)3 acquisition strategy and the tests to determine the 
operational effectiveness and suitability of the system. Should 
the test results remain positive, the Department is encouraged 
to accelerate the acquisition and fielding of the system in 
order to correct deficiencies in the fleet at the earliest time 
possible. The Department should examine strategies for 
achieving economic quantity buys in order to ensure the cost 
effective acquisition of the AN/ALR-67(V)3.

Anti-submarine warfare program

    Recent events detailed in the classified annex raise the 
committee's concern that the reduction in anti-submarine 
warfare (ASW) program priority may have gone too far and that 
the Navy should place renewed emphasis on its ASW program.
    Elsewhere in this report, the committee has recommended 
several measures to improve U.S. ASW capabilities and to place 
higher priority on the development of advanced submarine 
technologies for the Navy. The committee directs the Secretary 
of Defense to assess the current and projected U.S. anti-
submarine warfare program and report to the congressional 
defense committees by July 1, 1996, the long range plan for 
improvement in U.S. anti-submarine warfare program capabilities 
against the emerging threat in both littoral and open ocean 
areas.

AV-8B Harrier weapon system improvements

    The budget request included $11.309 million in PE 64214N 
for integration and testing of weapons and aircraft 
improvements for the AV-8B Harrier aircraft. The committee 
understands that the AV-8B production memorandum of 
understanding between the United States, Spain, and Italy 
provides for the integration of the Advanced Medium Range Air-
to-Air Missile (AMRAAM), that the most cost-effective way to 
achieve this is the concurrent integration of the AMRAAM and 
the 1760 data bus, and that a shared funding plan has been 
developed. Incorporation of the 1760 data bus during 
remanufacture of the day-only AV-8As to the AV-8B radar 
configuration would also permit incorporation of the capability 
for the Joint Stand-off Weapon (JSOW) and Joint Direct Attack 
Munition (JDAM) systems on the AV-8B at a later date. The 
committee recommends an increase of $15.6 million to the budget 
request for the U.S. share of fiscal year 1996 integration 
costs with the understanding that the Marine Corps will budget 
for the balance of $11.7 million as a part of the fiscal year 
1997 budget request.

BOL chaff evaluation

    The committee is advised that the Navy has completed a 
successful evaluation of BOL chaff as a wing mounted electronic 
countermeasure on the F/A-18C/D aircraft. The committee 
encourages the Navy to evaluate the use of BOL chaff on the F/
A-18E/F at the appropriate point in the development of that 
aircraft.

Communications technology

    The budget request included $9.229 million in PE 62232N to 
continue development of key communications technologies for 
air, ship, and submarine platforms. The committee recommends an 
increase of $4 million for support of wireless and satellite 
communications research in the areas of integrated antenna 
systems, communications hardware design, communication 
algorithm development and high-frequency device modeling and 
measurements.

Cooperative engagement capability

    The budget request included $245.620 million in PE 63755N 
for ship self-defense advanced technology development, 
including $180.049 million for the cooperative engagement 
capability (CEC). The budget request is an increase of 
approximately $78 million over the projected fiscal year 1996 
amount contained in the fiscal year 1995 defense budget request 
and represents a decision on the part of the Department of 
Defense to accelerate demonstration and fielding of the CEC. 
The committee is aware of the very positive demonstration of 
the CEC deployed as a part of the Eisenhower Battle Group in 
the Atlantic and operational experience gained with the system 
gained in support of NATO operations in the Adriatic Sea off 
the former Yugoslavia.
    The committee believes strongly that when deployed with the 
fleet, the CEC must be operationally effective and suitable, 
must meet the required degree of mission accomplishment when 
operated by representative personnel in the expected 
operational environment, and must be supportable in the fleet. 
Based on a Department of Defense Inspector General report, 
``Hotline Complaint on Management of the Cooperative Engagement 
Capability Program,'' (DOD IG Report No. 95-143), the committee 
is concerned that the level of developmental testing and 
independent operational testing required to provide that 
assurance is not present in the CEC program, and cannot agree 
to the acceleration of the CEC program until such assurance is 
present. Therefore, of the fiscal year 1996 funds provided for 
the CEC program, the committee directs that not more than $102 
million may be obligated until the Secretary of Defense 
notifies the congressional defense committees that the Test and 
Evaluation Master Plan providing for the performance of a 
dedicated, independent operational test and evaluation of the 
CEC program has been approved by the Director, Operational Test 
and Evaluation.

Cryptologic system trainer

    The budget request included $7.005 million in PE 24571N to 
continue development and evaluation of the Navy's Surface 
Tactical Team Trainer. The committee recommends an increase of 
$3 million for integration and evaluation of the cryptologic 
systems trainer in the Battle Force Tactical Training system 
and the development of related information warfare/command and 
control warfare shipboard training systems.

Embedded sensors

    The budget request included $74.849 million in PE 62234N 
for exploratory development in the areas of materials, 
electronics, and computer technology for support of Navy 
advanced weapon and platform systems. The committee recommends 
an increase of $3 million to complete the exploratory 
development of embedded, remotely queried micro-
electromechanical sensors in thick composites suitable for use 
in submarine, ships, and armored vehicles.

Enhanced modular signal processor

    The budget request included $8.342 million in PE 64507N for 
development and risk mitigation testing of the AN/UYS-2 
enhanced modular signal processor (EMSP) and software 
development, integration, testing, and critical engineering 
design support in the airborne low-frequency sonar (ALFS), 
surveillance towed array sensor system (SURTASS), AN/SQQ-89 
surface combat system, and AN/BSY-2 submarine combat system. 
The committee understands that the Navy is considering 
development of a commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) variant of the 
EMSP. If adopted, this action would maximize the benefit 
received from investment in the development of the AN/UYS-2 and 
would significantly reduce program life cycle costs. The 
committee further understands that the Navy is considering 
accomplishing the development from currently programmed funds 
and does not require any additional funding in fiscal year 1996 
for this purpose. The committee encourages the Navy to identify 
any additional funds required for the EMSP COTS development in 
its fiscal year 1997 budget request.

Fixed Distributed System--Deployable (FDS-D)

    The budget request included $93.507 million in PE 64784N 
for the Fixed Distributed Surveillance System. The committee 
recommends an increase of $10 million to refurbish and extend 
the capability of the FDS-D prototype and provide an interim 
deployable undersea surveillance capability until the Advanced 
Deployable System becomes available.

Flat panel, helmet-mounted display

    The budget request included $7.020 million in PE 62122N for 
exploratory development of air vehicle technology. The 
committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million to continue 
development of flat panel, helmet-mounted displays for aircrew 
helmets.

Geosat follow-on program

    Section 258 of the Department of Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337) required NASA and the 
Navy to report their findings regarding Geosat Follow-On (GFO) 
TOPEX/Poseidon Follow-On (TPFO) convergence issues by February 
15, 1995. When the two agencies failed to meet that deadline, 
it was extended until April 14. Both agencies failed to meet 
this deadline as well. Although a draft report is in 
circulation, the report still has not been formally transmitted 
to the committee. Given the lack of reliable information about 
convergence and its impact on defense requirements, the 
committee directs that no DOD funds may be obligated or 
expended for activities associated with TPFO during fiscal year 
1996.

Intercooled recuperated gas turbine

    In the budget request, the Department has transferred the 
program for development of the intercooled recuperated (ICR) 
gas turbine engine (the engine for the next generation naval 
surface combatant and for late construction DDG-51) from the 
Advanced Surface Machinery (ASM) demonstration/validation 
program to PE 63508N in the technology base. The committee is 
concerned that the transfer destroys the relationship between 
the program for development of the new engine and other 
elements of the ASM program and raises the issue of whether or 
not a new, fuel-efficient power plant will ever be developed 
for the Navy. The committee directs the transfer of $25.558 
million requested in PE 63508N for ICR development to PE 63573N 
to restore the integrity of the ASM program. The committee 
recommends an increase of $21.5 million to support conduct of 
ICR engine test at the Navy's land-based test site and directs 
that the Navy proceed with a second 500 hour engine system test 
and other testing at the site as projected in the revised ICR 
development plan.

Joint air-to-surface stand-off missile

    The Bottom-Up Review identified advanced precision guided 
weapons as a key enabler required for U.S. forces to execute 
the national military strategy. The regional warfighting 
commanders-in-chief repeatedly endorsed the requirement during 
their testimony before the committee. Although the Navy and the 
Air Force are jointly developing the shorter range Joint Direct 
Attack Munition (JDAM) and Joint Stand-Off Weapon (JSOW), the 
recent cancellation of the Tri-Service Stand-off Attack Missile 
(TSSAM) forfeits the major joint program for development of 
long range, air-delivered stand-off precision guided weapons 
and severely limits the future capability of U.S. bomber and 
attack fighter forces for stand-off attack. The committee 
considers this a critical deficiency that must be addressed 
immediately by the Department of Defense.
    The budget request included $40.517 million in PE 64603N 
for development of the Stand-off Land Attack Missile--Enhanced 
Response (SLAM-ER) by the Navy as an interim replacement for 
the canceled TSSAM. The committee understands that the TSSAM 
cancellation occurred too late in the budget cycle for the Air 
Force to address the requirement for a TSSAM replacement in the 
fiscal year 1996 budget request, but that a proposed joint 
requirement is under review and that such a program is being 
considered for fiscal year 1997 as a separate Air Force 
program.
    The committee believes that the Department must establish a 
joint program in the Navy and the Air Force for development of 
an interim replacement for the canceled TSSAM at the earliest 
possible date. In establishing the joint program maximum use 
should be sought from the lessons learned in the TSSAM program 
with regard to the joint service operational requirement and 
the program development plan, including issues relating to low 
and very low observability/stealth. Performance criteria 
specified in the operational requirement must be evaluated in 
terms of the urgency of fielding a near term replacement for 
TSSAM. In the committee's opinion, development of separate 
systems by the Navy and the Air Force is probably not the most 
cost-effective or operationally prudent solution.
    The committee is aware that there are a number of candidate 
weapon system and sub-munition concepts which could contribute 
to the TSSAM replacement desired by both services. The 
committee believes that the variety of missile mainframe, 
components, and sub-munition systems available provides the 
opportunity to select the most promising system concepts and 
then develop and demonstrate such a joint capability on an 
accelerated basis.
    The committee recommends the budget request of $40.517 
million for the SLAM-ER program, but directs that of this 
amount no more than $10 million may be obligated without 
specific approval by the congressional defense authorizing 
committees. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
immediately establish a joint program for accelerated 
development and evaluation of candidate joint air-to-surface 
stand-off missile (JASSM) systems as a near-term replacement 
for TSSAM, and recommends an additional authorization of $37.5 
million in PE 64312N and $37.5 million in PE 27160F for this 
purpose. The committee further directs the Secretary of Defense 
to report to the congressional defense committees within 60 
days of the enactment of this Act, the Department's plan to 
address near term Navy and Air Force requirements for an 
interim TSSAM replacement and how the Department plans to 
satisfy these requirements, and the long term plan for 
development of a TSSAM replacement that will satisfy the 
requirements of both military services.

Light strike/light reconnaissance vehicle

    The budget request included $3.915 million in PE 26624M for 
improvements in Marine Corps combat service support equipment 
and $101.602 million in PE 1160404BB for special operations 
tactical systems development. The committee recommends an 
additional $3 million in PE 26624M and $1.5 million in PE 
1160404BB to initiate a program for development of a follow-on 
all-terrain reconnaissance/light strike vehicle, capable of 
meeting the requirements of the light strike/light 
reconnaissance mission for the Marine Corps, special 
operations, and other light forces, and as a replacement of 
all-terrain reconnaissance/light strike systems now in service 
in selected special operations capable units.

Light-weight 155mm howitzer

    The budget request included $10.9 million in PE 63635M for 
the light-weight 155mm howitzer, a joint Army-Marine Corps 
program for development of an advanced, light-weight towed 
howitzer with increased tactical and strategic mobility as a 
replacement for the M198 howitzer. The committee recommends an 
increase of $4.2 million to the budget request to accelerate 
required technical testing; assess reliability; availability 
and maintainability; growth potential; and for advanced fire 
control requirements analysis and development.

Long-range guided projectile technology

    In the statement of managers (H.Rept. 103-701) accompanying 
the conference report on the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337), the conferees 
endorsed the importance of advanced, long-range precision 
guided munitions in meeting the requirements for range, 
accuracy, and payload for Navy surface fire support and Army 
long-range artillery and expressed the belief that the Army and 
the Navy should jointly capitalize on the development of 
technologies for this purpose.
    The committee is aware of rapid progress that is being 
demonstrated in the development of advanced global positioning 
system/inertial navigation system (GPS/INS) technology in the 
low cost competent munition and other programs and the promise 
this technology holds for significant improvements in the 
accuracy of existing and future gun-fired projectiles, 
missiles, and rockets. The committee is also aware of the 
potential for the establishment of a cooperative technology 
program between Departments of the Army and the Navy for 
development and demonstration of these technologies at the 
component and system level and recommends that such a program 
be established. In order to capitalize on ongoing programs 
within the Army and the Navy and what the committee believes is 
an excellent opportunity to accelerate the development and 
demonstration of these technologies, the committee recommends 
the following increases in the program elements indicated:

                        [In millions of dollars]

Army
    PE 62618A increase............................................     1
    PE 62624A increase............................................     2
Navy
    PE 62111N increase............................................     2
    PE 62131M increase............................................     1
    PE 63792N increase............................................     3

Low-low frequency acoustics (LLFA)

    The Congress has supported the assessment of LLFA 
technology for the detection of submarines operating in both 
open ocean and littoral regions. The committee understands that 
of the funds authorized and appropriated in fiscal years 1994 
and 1995 for the LLFA technology program, approximately $30 
million remain available and are sufficient to continue the 
program through fiscal year 1996. The committee also 
understands that the fiscal year 1996 program will focus on 
issues raised relative to the concept of operations, technical 
performance, command and control, environmental considerations, 
and transition of the technology to existing fleet platforms. 
Pending the results of these efforts, the committee defers 
consideration of additional funding for LLFA technology program 
until the fiscal year 1997 budget request.

Maritime avionics subsystems and technology program

    The budget request did not include specific funding for the 
maritime avionics subsystems and technology (MAST) program, a 
fiscal year 1995 new start, which focuses on the development of 
scaleable, open, fault-tolerant and common avionics 
architectures. The committee encourages the Navy and the Air 
Force to pursue the technology objectives of the MAST program 
under their respective avionics technology development programs 
(PE 62122N, PE 62204F, and PE 63253F) and under the Joint 
Advanced Strike Technology (JAST) program (PE 63800N and PE 
63800F), and to consider requirements for additional funding 
for the MAST program as a part of the fiscal year 1997 budget 
request.

Medium tactical vehicle remanufacture

    The budget request included $3.915 million in PE 26624M for 
the Marine Corps's Medium Tactical Vehicle Remanufacture (MTVR) 
program. The program will provide multi-purpose medium tactical 
trucks capable of meeting the logistical and tactical 
requirements of Marine forces and will replace the current 
medium tactical vehicle fleet which reaches its maximum life 
beginning in fiscal year 2001. The committee understands that 
the program will also be coordinated with the Army's plans for 
development of a five-ton truck remanufacture program. The 
committee recommends an increase of $9.4 million for evaluation 
of additional MTVR program variants for potential use by the 
Marine Corps and the Army.

Mine counter-measures program

    The budget request included a total of approximately $191 
million for the Navy's mine counter-measures program, an 
increase of approximately $51 million above that requested in 
fiscal year 1995. The committee notes that the Joint 
Countermine advanced concept technology demonstration will 
integrate Army, Navy, and Marine Corps technology developments 
and fielded systems in an evaluation of the capability for 
conducting seamless amphibious MCM operations from the sea to 
the land. The committee expresses its strong support for this 
demonstration and for the maintenance of a robust MCM 
acquisition program. The Navy must continue to place a high 
priority on the MCM program and ensure the development and 
fielding of enhanced MCM systems at the earliest possible date.

MK 66 rocket motor improvements

    The committee remains concerned about the shipboard safety 
of the current inventory of MK 66 rocket motors. Although the 
Army is the lead service for 2.75 inch rockets, it has placed 
insufficient priority on providing the military services with 
insensitive munition (IM) compatible rocket motors. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends a total increase of $3 
million in PE 25601N, project W2211, $1.5 million to shorten 
the development time of IM motors, and $1.5 million for IM 
upgrades to existing 2.75 warheads that are compatible among 
all military services to provide earlier ``system level'' 
safety compliance.

Mobile off-shore base (MOBS)

    The budget request includes $14.743 million in PE 63238N 
for engineering studies of the mobile off-shore base (MOBS) 
concept. MOBS would be a floating island composed of six 
aircraft carrier sized modules and capable of storing an 
armored division's equipment set, which could be moved to the 
potential site of a crisis to provide an off-shore, 
prepositioned storage site in areas where the United States 
does not have land basing rights. Approximately $35 million has 
been provided to date for investigation of the MOBS concept. 
The next potential step being considered in the MOBS program is 
an advanced concept technology demonstration that could total 
$700 million. The potential cost of a single MOBS system has 
been estimated at approximately $2 billion.
    In the statement of managers (H. Rept. 103-701) 
accompanying the conference report on S. 2182, the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-
337), the conferees directed that no further funds beyond 
fiscal year 1995 could be expended for either the MOBS project 
or the Landing Ship Quay/Causeway (LSQ/C) until the Joint 
Requirements Oversight Council validated the operational 
requirement for MOBS, the Defense Science Board had reviewed 
the program for technological feasibility, and the Secretary of 
Defense had certified that a funded program had been 
established for MOBS. The committee notes that the Department 
has failed to comply with this guidance. Accordingly, the 
committee directs that fiscal year 1996 funds which are 
authorized and appropriated for MOBS or for LSQ/C may not be 
obligated until the Department provides the reports and 
certification previously directed by the Congress.

Molecular design research

    The committee recommends an additional $6 million in PE 
61153N for continuation of the molecular design program 
initiated in fiscal year 1994 and urges the Secretary of the 
Navy to include sustainment of this critical research activity, 
until concluded, in subsequent annual requests.

Naval surface fire support

    During its review of the budget request for fiscal year 
1996, the committee was briefed on a revised naval surface fire 
support (NSFS) program, which focuses on near term improvements 
to NSFS systems: demonstration and development of a long range 
guided projectile which would incorporate advanced, low cost 
global positioning system/inertial navigation system (GPS/INS) 
guidance technology; improvements in the existing Mk 45 5-inch 
naval gun; and demonstration of the Army's tactical missile 
system (ATACMS) and other missile systems for NSFS 
applications.
    The committee was disappointed to learn that funding for 
the NSFS program was sharply reduced during the Navy's budget 
formulation process, understands that the revised near-term 
program is underfunded by over $160 million, and that far-term 
requirements for advanced NSFS weapon systems have been 
addressed inadequately, if at all.
    As noted elsewhere in this report, the committee has 
recommended increases to the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps 
technology base to accelerate the development and demonstration 
of GPS/INS technology for long-range guided projectiles and for 
current munitions. The committee recommends an increase of $25 
million in PE 63795N and notes the need for the Navy to put 
increased emphasis on satisfying long term requirements for 
advanced gun systems in addition to the near term focus on 
modification of the Mark 45 five inch gun. The committee 
understands that the overall program shortfall will be 
addressed by the Department of the Navy during its Program 
Review 97 process.

Non-acoustic antisubmarine warfare program

    The budget request included $25.923 million in PE 63714D 
for the advanced sensor applications program in support of the 
Department of Defense program in non-acoustic anti-submarine 
warfare (NAASW) technology. The committee has repeatedly 
asserted and supported the need for two viable, independent, 
but coordinated NAASW programs, one in the Navy and one in the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), which complemented 
one another and which shared information on program plans and 
research results. The committee notes, however, that no funds 
were requested for the Navy's NAASW program, PE 63528N, in the 
fiscal year 1996 budget request. As discussed in the classified 
annex, the committee strongly believes that the Navy's shift 
from open ocean to littoral operations and the potential threat 
posed by submarine operations in the shallower seas of the 
world's littoral regions places a renewed emphasis on the need 
for both the Navy and the OSD NAASW programs. The committee 
recommends an authorization of $23.2 million in PE 63528N to 
reestablish the Navy's NAASW program as a separate program on 
par with the OSD advanced sensor applications program.

P-3 sensor integration

    The budget request of $1.945 million in PE 64221N for the 
P-3 modernization program represents a reduction of $12 million 
from that projected for fiscal year 1996 in the fiscal year 
1995 budget request. This redirection results in a program cost 
increase and a delay of three years in the initial operational 
capability for integration of Improved Extended Echo Ranging 
(IEER) in the P-3C maritime patrol aircraft. Coupled with the 
anti-submarine warfare improvement program (AIP) and the P-3 
Update III improvements to active and reserve maritime patrol 
aircraft (MPA), these enhanced capabilities would mitigate the 
shortfall in the Navy's ability to meet regional warfighting 
MPA requirements, resulting from the planned reduction in the 
number of active and reserve MPA squadrons, and would provide 
an enhanced capability for Anti Submarine Warfare (ASW) 
operations in littoral regions. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends an increase of $12 million for the P-3 sensor 
integration program to restore the schedule for integration of 
IEER and AIP capabilities and $3 million for upgrade of P-3 
stores management to permit integration of advanced weapon 
system. The committee expects the Navy to include the increased 
funding necessary to complete these efforts in future budget 
submissions, and to prove sufficient quantities of the AIP and 
update III kits to appropriately outfit the active and reserve 
MPA force.

Polar Ozone Aerosol Monitor III

    Polar Ozone Aerosol Monitor (POAM) III continues a program 
for measurement and monitoring of the earth's polar atmosphere. 
For fiscal year 1994, the Congress provided $5 million to begin 
fabrication of the POAM III payload and interface and 
integration of the payload with the SPOT 4 spacecraft. The 
committee recommends an increase of $5 million in PE 62435N to 
complete engineering, integration and test of the POAM III 
payload on the SPOT 4, leading to system launch in 1997.

Power control electronics

    The committee recommends an additional $6 million in PE 
62121N for power electronics building block (PE2B) development 
based on metal oxide semiconductor (MOS) control thyristors for 
high speed switching of high power systems. The committee 
recommends academic participation to ensure that the wide range 
of advanced technology required for the PE2B development is 
assured.

Rapid acquisition of manufactured parts

    The budget request included $12 million for the rapid 
acquisition of manufactured parts (RAMP) program, $2 million in 
PE 63712N and $10 million in Navy operations and maintenance. 
The RAMP program continues to demonstrate and validate flexible 
manufacturing technology that provides all of the military 
services required out of production parts at greatly reduced 
leadtime to deliveries. The committee recommends an additional 
$12 million in PE 63712N to further the Department's strategy 
of rapidly transitioning this capability to the commercial 
sector.

Remote controlled minehunting systems

    The budget request included $7.605 million in PE 63502N for 
development and demonstration of improvements in minehunting 
sonars and remotely controlled minehunting systems. The 
committee is aware of the mine detection and location 
capability demonstrated by the remote minehunting operational 
prototype (RMOP) during a recent exercise and recommends an 
increase of $1.65 million to accelerate the RMOP development 
program and provide an interim operational capability to the 
fleet.

S-3B Project Gray Wolf

    Project Gray Wolf is a proof-of-concept demonstration of 
the ability of an S-3B aircraft equipped with a multi-mode 
synthetic aperture radar to provide real time stand-off 
surveillance, targeting, and strike support for littoral 
operations. The committee is aware of the success that has been 
achieved in limited demonstration of the system's capability in 
fleet exercises and in the ``Roving Sands'' experiment at White 
Sands Missile Range. The committee recommends an increase of 
$15 million in PE 64217N for continued evaluation of the system 
and potential establishment of advanced concept technology 
demonstration for the system.

Safety and survivability enhancements

    The Secretary of the Navy's Office of Safety and 
Survivability (OSS) non-developmental item (NDI) program was 
begun to permit procurement of limited numbers of off-the-shelf 
NDI items for operational assessment. This program has yielded 
significant savings and provided life saving equipment for the 
fleet much faster than would have otherwise been the case. 
Further, the Advanced Research and Projects Agency (ARPA) has 
identified high leverage technologies for fire fighting and 
personnel protection. Accordingly, the committee recommends an 
additional $2 million in PE 65864N for the OSS to supplement 
on-going operational assessments of NDI and $2 million in PE 
63226E for the ARPA program. The committee also strongly 
encourages the Departments of the Army and Air Force to 
establish similar offices to pursue NDI programs to address 
operational safety requirements.

Sensor integration and decision support systems

    The budget request included $1.074 million in PE 63707N for 
air human factors engineering. The committee recommends an 
increase of $1.5 million to the budget request for development 
and evaluation of intelligent multi-source, multi-platform 
sensor integration and cockpit decision support systems.

Ship self-defense program

    The budget request included $165.997 million in PE 64755N 
for the ship self defense program. The defense authorizing 
committees have strongly supported the program and repeatedly 
emphasized the need for both ship self defense and the 
cooperative engagement capability program to be managed as 
major defense acquisitions with program baselines established 
for each class of ship and for stable and realistic funding to 
be provided by the Navy (H. Rept. 103-200 and H. Rept. 103-
357). The committee notes that it has yet to receive any 
information in its annual review of the ship self defense 
program that provides a performance and management baseline 
against which program progress can be measured.
    The fiscal year 1996 budget did not include funding to 
continue development of either the IRST system or the ``Nulka'' 
decoy, despite the apparently high priority given to these 
programs by the Navy in the past. The committee is concerned 
that the lack of an analytical rationale for the deletion of 
these programs, despite their previous support by the Navy 
leadership, raises further questions about the existence of 
program management baselines in the ship self defense program.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide 
to the congressional defense committees as a part of the annual 
update of the ``Ship Anti-Air Warfare (AAW) Defense Report,'' 
an assessment of progress in establishing program baselines for 
the ship self defense program and the degree to which these 
baselines are being met.

SSBN security and survivability program

    The budget request of $25.078 million in PE 11224N 
represents a reduction of $4.7 million from the SSBN security 
and survivability program from that was projected for fiscal 
year 1996 in the fiscal year 1995 defense budget request and a 
reduction of over $50 million from the fiscal year 1993 
program. Program reductions have forced cancellation of major 
experiments and evaluation of anti-submarine warfare 
technologies that could pose a threat to SSBN security. The 
committee recommends an increase of $9.5 million to the budget 
request and directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide to the 
congressional defense committees within 60 days of the 
enactment of this Act with an assessment of the potential 
threat to the U.S. SSBN force and analysis of the required SSBN 
security program to counter that threat.

Submarine combat system

    The budget request included $43.302 million in PE 64524N 
for development of the AN/BSY-2 submarine combat system. The 
committee recommends a reduction of $6.151 million, the amount 
requested for delivery of the BSY-2 system for the SSN-23.

Submarine tactical warfare system

    The budget request included $38.479 million in PE 64562N 
for development of improvements in submarine tactical warfare 
control systems. The request represents an increase of $17.992 
million over that projected for the fiscal year 1996 program in 
the fiscal year 1995 budget request. Based upon its review of 
the program, the committee does not understand the reason for 
the growth in the program and recommends a reduction of $17.992 
million.

Telemedicine

    The committee commends the Navy for its efforts to 
incorporate asyncronous transfer mode (ATM) telemedicine 
technology into its medical program to deliver better health 
care at an affordable cost to its military personnel. The 
committee encourages the Navy to make use of commercially 
available ATM telemedicine technology to provide this 
capability to the maximum number of medical sites when it can 
be demonstrated that cost effective benefits can be achieved. 
The Navy will ensure that all ATM telemedicine research and 
development is coordinated with the ARPA program.

                            Air Force RDT&E


                                overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 1996 contained 
$12,598.439 million for Air Force RDT&E. The committee 
recommends authorization of $13,184.102 million, an increase of 
$585.663 million, for fiscal year 1996.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 1996 Air 
Force RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major 
changes to the Air Force request are discussed following the 
table.
    Offset Folios 193 to 195 insert here



                       items of special interest

Adaptive optics

    The committee recommends an additional $5 million in PE 
61102F for adaptive optics research.

Aerospace propulsion

    The committee recognizes the promising results demonstrated 
in on-going research on thermally stable jet fuels derived from 
carbonized phyto-feedstocks which permit higher engine 
operating temperatures without forming damaging carbon 
deposits, while reducing engine stress and improving engine 
reliability. Accordingly, the committee recommends an 
additional $3 million in PE 62203F to further this effort on 
thermally stable jet fuels.

Aircraft ejection seats

    The committee is concerned that inadequate emphasis is 
being placed on aircrew protection for light-weight crew 
members and for ejections at higher air speeds. The committee 
is also concerned about the sustainment of the U.S. aircraft 
ejection seat industrial base during this period of virtually 
no aircraft procurement.
    The committee therefore provides an additional $3 million 
in PE 63231F and directs the Air Force to conduct tests on 
existing Navy, USMC, and Air Force front-line trainer and 
tactical aircraft ejection seats for the purpose of verifying 
their predicted performance and identifying problems and 
required corrective action. Testing should be conducted at the 
most economical and readily available government or commercial 
test facility. In conducting these tests, high priority shall 
be given to the sustainment of the U.S. ejection seat 
industrial base.
    Testing should be completed prior to October 1, 1996 with a 
report being provided to the congressional defense committees 
no later than March 1, 1997.

B-1B bomber

    The budget request contained $173.8 million in PE 64226F 
for research and development of the B-1B bomber. The committee 
continues to strongly support a modern, capable long-range 
bomber force, and recognizes that the B-1B will serve as the 
workhorse of such a force well into the 21st century. In order 
to enhance the warfighting capabilities of the B-1B, the 
committee recommends an additional $21 million to initiate a B-
1B ``Virtual Umbilical'' program to provide an interim, near-
precision munitions capability using existing Mark 82 bombs.

Command, control, and communications technology

    The budget request included $98.477 million in PE 62702F 
for exploratory development of new concepts, feasibility 
demonstrations, and advanced technology for Air Force command, 
control, and communications. The committee recommends a 
reduction of $5 million to the budget request, and strongly 
recommends that the Air Force put increased emphasis on the 
development of information technologies for real-time battle 
management and command and control for time-critical air 
operations in support of the joint force commander.

Computer security

    The committee recommends an additional $3 million in PE 
62702F to evaluate voice recognition security systems to 
enhance the security of the Department's command and control 
system. The technology should be user-friendly, inexpensive, 
tolerant to environmental changes, provide a high degree of 
accuracy, and use commercial standards.

Intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) demonstration/validation

    The budget request included $20.265 million in PE 63851F 
for projects designed to address concerns identified in the 
Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) and to study means to implement 
arms control provisions. However, the request for ICBM Command 
Control, project 1024, did not include pre-milestone 0 study 
funds for the command signal decoder/missile or for the 
modified miniature receive terminal for launch control centers, 
as directed by the NPR. The committee recommends an additional 
$2 million to begin these two studies.
    The request for ICBM Reentry Vehicle Applications, project 
1022, did not include milestone 0 study funds to complete the 
acquisition phase 0 studies necessary for the safety enhanced 
reentry vehicle effort. The committee directs that these 
studies be completed expeditiously and strongly urges the 
Secretary of Defense to promptly decide to equip some or all of 
the Minuteman III force with Mark 21 reentry vehicles. The 
committee recommends an additional $2.2 million to complete the 
safety enhanced reentry vehicle phase 0 efforts and 
documentation.
    The request for ICBM Guidance Applications, project 1020, 
did not include pre-milestone 0 study funds for inertial 
measurement modifications. The committee recommends the 
addition of $1 million to complete these studies and initiate 
acquisition phase 0 studies. The committee also recommends the 
addition of $9.3 million to conduct missile guidance technology 
experiments.
    The committee is concerned that pre-milestone 0 and 
acquisition phase 0 studies are not being adequately planned 
and funded. This could result in the inappropriate and 
unauthorized use of funds to conduct the necessary studies. The 
committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees identifying all 
pre-milestone 1 ICBM acquisition programs currently funded or 
planned to begin by 2001. The report should identify the effort 
by name, list all approved requirements and acquisition 
documents, identify all planned requirements and acquisition 
documents for a milestone 1 acquisition decision, and provide 
the office of primary responsibility, estimated cost, and 
estimated completion dates for all documentation necessary for 
the milestone 1 decision. The report shall be due not later 
than February 1, 1996.

Intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) engineering and manufacturing 
        development

     The budget request included $192.719 million in PE 64851F 
to complete the Rapid Execution and Combat Targeting Program 
and to continue the Propulsion and Guidance Replacement 
Programs. However, the Guidance Replacement Program request 
fails to fund the initial design and test of the capability to 
integrate the Mark 21 warhead on the new Minuteman guidance 
set. In a March 23, 1995 report to Congress, the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology wrote, 
``The use of Mark 21 on Minuteman III is feasible and 
operationally effective, and it would be fully compliant with 
arms control treaties and initiatives.'' The committee 
recommends an additional $8 million to fund the initial design 
and test of the capability to integrate the Mark 21 warhead on 
the new guidance set.

Low-cost expendable launch vehicles

    The committee believes technologies being developed by 
small expendable launch vehicle companies hold promise for low-
cost launch of small commercial payloads and military tactical 
satellites. The committee recommends $7.5 million in PE 63401F, 
to be used only for evaluation of low cost expendable launch 
vehicle concept hardware.

NATO air-ground surveillance system

    NATO recently established an air-ground surveillance office 
to evaluate potential candidates to provide the alliance an 
airborne ground surveillance capability to complement the NATO 
Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS). The committee 
recommends an additional $14 million in PE 64770F to support 
the U.S. contingent in the NATO office.

National polar-orbitting operational environmental satellite system

    The budget request included $23.9 million in PE 63434F for 
the National Polar-orbitting Operational Environmental 
Satellite System (NPOESS). Based on a slower than expected 
start-up of the program office and a delay in the planned dates 
of the demonstration and validation phase of NPOESS, funding is 
reduced by $5 million.

Range tracking and safety

    The committee recommends an additional $5.7 million in PE 
63311F for suborbital flight testing of Minuteman class range 
tracking and safety equipment based on existing global 
positioning system equipment developments.

Reusable launch vehicles

    The committee is surprised to note that given the 
administration's support for dual-use technologies, the 
Department has failed to adequately support the potential 
``triple-use'' benefit of reusable launch vehicles to the 
military, civil, and commercial space launch capability and 
associated sectors of the U.S. industrial base. The committee 
supports a NASA-DOD-industry team effort for a reusable launch 
vehicle program by recommending an additional $100 million in 
PE 63401F for fiscal year 1996.

Robotics corrosion inspection system

    The committee understands that there are technologies 
available for dual-use, non-contact robotic corrosion 
inspection of aircraft that could save the Department hundreds 
of millions of dollars and reduce environmental problems 
associated with current inspection procedures. The committee 
recommends an additional $8 million in PE 62102F to conduct a 
competitive program to demonstrate the feasibility of non-
contact robotic aircraft inspection for the detection of hidden 
corrosion and metal fatigue. The objective is to demonstrate 
the feasibility to reduce cargo and fighter aircraft inspection 
and repair costs by 25 percent annually. The Air Force shall 
coordinate this effort with the other miliary services, direct 
Air Combat Command to conduct the program, consider dual-use 
and private-government cost sharing in making a competitive 
selection and use commercial business practices in the conduct 
of this demonstration.

Rocket propulsion technology

    The budget request included $47.531 million for rocket 
propulsion technology in support of the Integrated High Payoff 
Rocket Technology Initiative Program. The committee recommends 
an additional $13 million to be authorized as follows: $6 
million for PE 62601F, project 1011; $5 million for PE 63302F, 
project 4373; and $2 million for PE 62111N. This initiative 
would involve the Department of Defense, NASA, and the space 
launch industry in joint, cost shared, coordinated research and 
development to meet national requirements for rocket propulsion 
technology. The additional authorization shall only be used for 
direct support costs of these technology projects.

Space-based infrared system

    The budget request included $130.744 million in PE 63441F 
for Space-Based Infrared System (SBIRS) demonstration/
validation, and $152.219 million in PE 64441F for SBIRS High 
Element engineering and manufacturing development (EMD).
    The committee reaffirms its strong support for fielding an 
improved capability to provide the nation's political and 
military leaders with timely and effective missile warning 
information. The committee recommends several actions intended 
to accelerate the Department's plans for fielding such a 
system. With respect to PE 63441F:
          (1) $249.8 million is recommended for the Space and 
        Missile Tracking System (SMTS), an increase of $135 
        million, and $15.9 million, the requested amount, is 
        recommended for the ``Cobra Brass'' space experiment;
          (2) the schedule for launching the SMTS flight 
        demonstration satellites should be accelerated as much 
        as practical;
          (3) deployment of SMTS operational satellites shall 
        begin not later than the fourth quarter of fiscal year 
        2003; and
          (4) a long-wave infrared (LWIR) sensor shall be 
        tested on at least one of the two flight demonstration 
        satellites.
    In PE 64441F, $9.4 million is recommended for the Miniature 
Sensor Technology Integration and $152.8 million, an increase 
of $10 million, for the SBIRS High Element EMD. The committee 
encourages the Department, in light of efforts to accelerate 
SMTS, to review the appropriate mix of capabilities between the 
high and low earth orbit components of SBIRS and to communicate 
the results of this analysis to the congressional defense 
committees by no later than September 1, 1995.
    The committee commends the Air Force for adopting 
innovative acquisition streamlining measures for the SBIRS 
program, and urges that these processes and procedures remain 
in effect for the duration of the program.

Ultra high frequency satellite communications

    The budget request included $15.6 million in PE 33606F for 
engineering and manufacturing development of the Ultra High 
Frequency (UHF) Satellite Communications (SATCOM) program. 
Based on a reduction in the number of contracts for the 
development of the network control stations from two to one, 
funding is reduced by $2.5 million.

                            DEFENSE AGENCIES


                                overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 1996 contained 
$9,084.809 million for Defense Agencies RDT&E. The committee 
recommends authorization of $9,548.986 million, an increase of 
$464.177 million, for fiscal year 1996.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 1996 
Defense Agencies RDT&E program are identified in the table 
below. Major changes to the Defense Agencies request are 
discussed following the table.
    OFFSET FOLIOS 204 to 207 INSERT HERE



             overview of ballistic missile defense programs

    The budget request contained $2,442.2 million in research, 
development, test, and evaluation, $453.7 million for 
procurement, and $17.009 million for military construction, for 
a total budget request of $2,912.9 million for ballistic 
missile defense (BMD).
    The proliferation of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass 
destruction poses a significant threat to the United States, 
U.S. military forces, and U.S. global interests. The committee 
is concerned, however, that current Department of Defense 
policies and programs are not aggressive enough in responding 
to this threat.
    For example, although the Secretary of Defense's February 
1995 ``Annual Report to the President and the Congress'' noted 
that ``ballistic missiles are clearly becoming a common 
battlefield weapon,'' the President's budget request for 
theater missile defense (TMD) is approximately thirty percent 
less than spending levels recommended by the previous 
Administration. As a result, several of the most promising TMD 
concepts, such as the Navy's ``Upper Tier'' program and the 
Army's Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, have 
been delayed.
    The Administration's program for national missile defense--
a defense of the American homeland--is even more worrisome. 
There is currently no commitment to deploy a national missile 
defense. In fact, the Department presently plans to spend over 
eighty percent less for national missile defense programs than 
the previous Administration--approximately $500 million per 
year over the next five years.
    The Administration's decision to abandon plans to deploy a 
national missile defense is particularly disturbing in light of 
the range of present and potential missile threats to the 
United States. Both Russia and China today maintain and are 
aggressively modernizing nuclear forces capable of destroying 
American cities. For Russia this includes production of follow-
ons to the SS-25 intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) and 
SS-N-20 sea-launched ballistic missile (SLBM). China is 
producing two types of long-range ICBMs with ranges of 
approximately 7,000 kilometers and 10,000 kilometers 
respectively, as well as other strategic systems. Moreover, 
various ``rogue regimes'' are seeking a capability to attack 
the United States using ballistic missiles.
    According to senior U.S. intelligence officials, it may not 
take long for an outlaw regime to acquire such a capability. 
For instance, on January 10, 1995, the Defense Intelligence 
Agency Director, Lieutenant General James Clapper, testified 
that North Korean missiles now under development probably have 
sufficient range to reach targets in Alaska. On January 18, 
1995, the then-Acting Director of Central Intelligence, Admiral 
William Studeman, testified that the proliferation of 
technology will lead to missiles ``that can reach the United 
States toward the end of this decade and the beginning of [the 
next] century. ``Former Director of Central Intelligence R. 
James Woolsey has testified that the covert purchase of 
missiles would provide a ``shortcut approach'' that may lessen 
the time it takes to place the United States directly at risk. 
In addition, he stated that ``the acquisition of key production 
technologies and technical expertise would speed up ICBM 
development.''
    Today, more than 25 countries have or are developing 
weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear, chemical, and 
biological weapons. More than 15 countries now possess 
ballistic missiles, which can be used to deliver these weapons 
to their targets hundreds or thousands of miles away.
    Because of their perceived military and political 
importance, ballistic missiles are also becoming a valuable 
export commodity. It is reasonable to assume that the desire to 
acquire ballistic missiles has been enhanced by the inability 
to defend against them. Effective theater and national 
ballistic missile defenses can raise the cost and lower the 
attraction of ballistic missiles to a would-be proliferant by 
reducing their effectiveness. Missile defenses also provide a 
hedge against the use of such weapons in the event traditional 
nonproliferation efforts (e.g., arms control, export controls, 
sanctions) fail to prevent proliferation. By providing an 
``insurance policy'' against the use of these weapons, missile 
defenses could dampen incentives to act (or react) 
precipitously in a crisis and could promote the formation of 
regional defensive alliances that reduce the risk that 
individual member states will be ``held hostage'' to the threat 
of attack.
    In addition, the committee is concerned about the possible 
indigenous development or sale to third parties of space launch 
vehicles, which can be rapidly converted with little or no 
warning and minor modifications to ICBMs capable of delivering 
nuclear, chemical or biological warheads against American 
cities. According to a 1992 statement by Lawrence Gershwin, CIA 
national intelligence officer for strategic programs, ``India, 
Israel, and Japan have developed space launch vehicles that, if 
converted to surface-to-surface missiles, are capable of 
reaching targets in the United States.''
    Any booster with the capability to lift a payload into 
orbit can also be used to deliver weapons of mass destruction 
on targets thousands of miles away. Through the purchase of 
space launch vehicles, a nation can acquire a threatening 
ballistic missile capability under the guise of peaceful 
activity. In this regard, the committee notes with concern 
continuing reports that Russia is attempting to market its 
``Start-1'' and ``Start-2'' systems, which are modified 
versions of the SS-25 ICBM, as space launch vehicles. The 
purchase of space launch vehicles is one route by which 
proliferant states may seek to circumvent existing controls on 
the transfer of missile technology.
    Given the growing ballistic missile threat, the committee 
is convinced that deployment of affordable, effective theater 
and national missile defense systems is an essential objective 
of a defense modernization program that adequately supports the 
requirements of the national military strategy. The committee's 
views on missile defense as an element of broader U.S. 
counterproliferation policy, and ballistic missile defense and 
strategic stability are contained in section 236 of the bill.
    In response to the concerns outlined above, the committee 
recommends several provisions, as well as the following 
guidance, to strengthen the U.S. response to the missile 
proliferation threat.

Funding

    The committee supports increased investment in BMD in order 
to deal with present and postulated ballistic missile threats 
in a more timely manner. Specifically, the committee recommends 
a total of $3,540.9 million for activities of the Ballistic 
Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) in fiscal year 1996, an 
increase of $628 million over the request of $2,912.9 million.

Missile defense and acquisition reform

    In order to ensure the timely and affordable development 
and deployment of effective U.S. missile defense capabilities, 
the committee directs the Secretary to implement streamlined 
acquisition processes and procedures for the following programs 
and projects: National Missile Defense (NMD), THAAD, Navy Upper 
and Lower Tier systems, and Patriot. The Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition and Technology is directed to prepare 
and submit a report to the congressional defense committees 
describing the steps taken to meet this requirement, along with 
the estimated cost savings and schedule accelerations that 
would result from these measures. The report shall be due not 
later than February 1, 1996.

Theater missile defense

    The committee supports accelerating development and 
deployment of advanced TMD systems. For this reason, the 
committee recommends a provision (sec. 232) that would 
establish policy for the deployment of advanced TMD systems.
    The committee is concerned about the long-term 
affordability of U.S. TMD programs and projects. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff to jointly review U.S. TMD plans, 
programs, and budgets, and to report to the Congressional 
defense committees by March 15, 1996, on the long-term 
affordability and need for the various TMD programs currently 
being pursued. In particular, the Secretary and Chairman should 
provide a prioritized listing of TMD systems and should make 
recommendations on down-selecting among competing TMD systems. 
Additional TMD program-specific guidance is provided below.

Thaad

    The committee notes and reaffirms the previous 
Congressional endorsement of the User Operational Evaluation 
System (UOES) concept, and urges that a THAAD UOES system be 
delivered no later than mid-FY 1998. In this regard, the 
committee endorses a decision to acquire 40 THAAD UOES 
demonstration/validation (dem/val) prototype missiles. The 
committee urges the Director of the BMDO to review the THAAD 
acquisition plan to ensure a smooth transition from the dem/val 
phase of development to the engineering and manufacturing 
development (EMD) and low-rate initial production (LRIP) 
phases. This review should also consider the merits of 
producing additional missiles for contingency use before the 
year 2000 and of initiating LRIP concurrently with the testing 
of EMD missiles once initial tests have verified that 
performance has not been degraded by any EMD design changes. 
The Director of BMDO is directed to prepare and submit a report 
to the committee not later than March 15, 1996, on the results 
of his review. Finally, the committee expects the Director of 
BMDO to initiate development of all battle management software 
for the THAAD system, including that necessary to receive cuing 
information from external sensors.

Navy upper tier

    The committee urges prompt completion of the Upper Tier 
cost and operational effectiveness analysis (COEA), but 
emphasizes that a fair and impartial assessment is imperative. 
The committee will closely scrutinize the COEA to ensure that 
all relevant technological approaches were considered.

Navy lower tier

    Given the importance of Navy Lower Tier to the Navy's 
ability to defend the fleet against cruise missile attacks, the 
committee directs the Secretary to review the management and 
funding responsibilities for Navy Lower Tier, including the 
possibility of transferring such responsibilities from BMDO to 
the Navy. The results of the Secretary's review should be 
communicated to the congressional defense committees not later 
than February 15, 1996.

Arrow

    The committee directs that none of the funds authorized for 
Arrow may be obligated until the Secretary has certified in 
writing to the congressional defense committees that a U.S.-
Israeli Memorandum of Agreement governing the next phase of 
U.S.-Israeli cooperation on missile defense has been signed. 
Along with such certification, the Secretary shall also include 
a report on the annual U.S. and Israeli funding necessary to 
implement, and any cost-sharing arrangements contained in the 
agreement.

Russian-american observational satellites (RAMOS)

    The committee commends the Department for providing 
increased funding in fiscal year 1995 for the RAMOS project. 
The committee continues to strongly support this cooperative 
research and development effort and recommends not more than 
$10 million for this program in fiscal year 1996 in PE 63173C.

Boost phase intercept (BPI)

    To maximize defense effectiveness, ballistic missiles armed 
with early-release submunitions need to be attacked early in 
their flight trajectory. This represents a significant 
challenge for the defense, however. While generally supportive 
of the concept of boost phase intercept, the committee notes 
that the BPI program is at present unfocussed, with no workable 
system design yet defined. As a result, the committee 
recommends a reduction of $20 million to the request.

National missile defense (NMD)

    The committee believes that the NMD program should be 
structured to support an initial deployment at the earliest 
practical date as a matter of national priority. The committee 
recommendation of an increase in funding for NMD of $450 
million, would provide a total authorization of $820.6 million 
for fiscal year 1996. This recommendation is intended to 
significantly accelerate the development and integrated testing 
of ``critical path'' elements of an objective NMD system, 
including the ground-based interceptor (GBI), the NMD-ground 
based radar (NMD-GBR), upgrades to existing early warning 
radars, and associated battle management, command control and 
communications (BMC3) in fiscal year 1996. The committee 
recognizes that the budget for the NMD-GBR has been cut 
dramatically in recent years, and therefore strongly urges the 
Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) 
to provide sufficient funding to ensure significant 
acceleration of the NMD-GBR schedule. To reduce risk in the NMD 
program, the Director of BMDO is strongly urged to maintain 
competition in the development of an exoatmospheric kill 
vehicle (EKV) through flight testing. Furthermore, the 
committee expects that a significant fraction of the NMD budget 
will be used to accelerate research involving discrimination, 
phenomenology, component miniaturization, focal plane arrays, 
signal processing, countermeasures to submunitions, and kinetic 
kill vehicle (KKV) lethality activities.

Policy on anti-ballistic missile treaty compliance

    The committee is deeply concerned about the 
Administration's apparent efforts to turn the 1972 Anti-
Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty into a new, multilateral ``ABM-
TMD Treaty'' in its arms control talks with Russia and others. 
Current U.S. proposals would impose specific design limitations 
on U.S. systems and result in a significantly compromised U.S. 
TMD capability.
    The committee believes that U.S. forces overseas should be 
deployed with the most modern and capable systems available to 
protect them in the event of conflict. Theater missile defenses 
are no exception to this rule. Artificially constraining the 
capabilities of U.S. TMD systems risks more than good relations 
with the Russians--it risks American lives. The committee notes 
that the single greatest number of American deaths in the Gulf 
War resulted from the launch of one Iraqi Scud missile against 
a U.S. barracks in Saudi Arabia.
    The committee therefore recommends a provision (sec. 235) 
that would prohibit the obligation or expenditure of funds for 
the purpose of applying the ABM treaty, or any limitation or 
obligation under that Treaty, to the research, development, 
testing or deployment of a theater missile defense system, 
upgrade, or component. The standard used to define the 
demarcation between anti-ballistic missile defenses which are 
limited by the ABM Treaty, and theater missile defenses which 
are not, is similar to the one used by the Administration at 
the beginning of the negotiations among the United States, 
Russia, and other nations. This definition would provide that a 
missile defense system which is covered by the ABM Treaty is 
defined as one which has been flight-tested against a ballistic 
missile which, in that flight test, exceeded, first, a range of 
more than 3,500 kilometers, or, second, a maximum velocity of 
more than 5 kilometers per second. Put simply, if a missile 
defense system has not been flight-tested in an ABM mode--and 
therefore has not demonstrated a flight-tested capability to 
counter intercontinental ballistic missiles--it should not be 
limited in any way by the ABM Treaty.
    The committee also recommends a provision (sec. 236) that 
would strongly urge the President to pursue high-level 
discussions with Russia to amend the ABM Treaty, and to seek to 
foster international cooperation in the development, deployment 
and operation of BMD systems.
    Finally, it is the committee's understanding that all the 
elements of an NMD system architecture listed in section 233 
can be developed and deployed under the ABM Treaty. The Treaty 
limits only the number of ground-based interceptors and the 
number of ABM sites, and may affect the ability of sensors 
other than ABM radars to contribute efficiently to the 
performance of the overall NMD system.

                       items of special interest

Advanced electronic technologies

    The detailed descriptive material provided by the 
Department to support the budget request for PE 63739E, project 
MT-07, is inconsistent with the project name: ``advanced 
electronic technologies.'' The committee denies the $23.642 
million request.

Advanced SEAL delivery system

    The budget request included $24.607 million in PE 1160404BB 
to complete fabrication and integration of the first Advanced 
SEAL Delivery System and begin system-level testing. The 
committee recommends an increase of $4 million to complete 
evaluation of the ASDS employed from the SSN-688 class 
submarine.

Advanced sensor applications program

    The budget request included $17.382 million in PE 63714D 
for the advanced sensor applications program. The committee has 
monitored the pursuit by the Navy and the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense Advanced Sensor Applications Program (OSD 
ASAP) of different approaches to laser radar anti-submarine 
warfare (LIDAR ASW) systems--the former as an operational 
prototype, the latter as an alternative system concept offering 
the potential for future improvements in LIDAR ASW. The 
committee recommends an increase of $5 million to develop a 
research prototype and an increase of $5 million for the Navy 
ATD-111 system. Comparative testing of the two approaches 
should provide a basis for establishing the requirement for a 
follow-on system. The committee requests the Navy and OSD to 
jointly develop at the earliest practicable date a plan for 
completing the testing of the two alternative approaches to 
LIDAR ASW and to provide the plan to the congressional defense 
committees by March 1, 1996.

Advanced submarine technology development

    The budget request included $7.473 million in PE 63569E for 
the Advanced Research Projects Agency's advanced submarine 
technology program. The Navy's research and development 
emphasis on development of the New Attack Submarine (NAS) is 
understandable; however, a longer-term view of advanced 
submarine research and development by the Department of Defense 
is required to enhance the operational capability of submarines 
operating in the littoral against proliferating quiet diesel 
submarines and other anti-submarine warfare threats. As 
discussed in the classified annex, the committee believes that 
the planned investment in submarine research and development is 
below that required to maintain technological superiority. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends an additional $23 million 
for the Advanced Submarine Technology Program managed by the 
Advanced Research Projects Agency to pursue innovative 
technologies for submarine operations in littoral regions, 
continue work in new concepts for structural acoustics and 
management of submarine signatures, and enhancement of multi-
mission capability.

Aeronautical research and test capabilities assessment

    The committee is aware that the Department has conducted or 
participated in numerous prior studies associated with 
aeronautical facilities for research, development, test and 
evaluation. However, the committee remains concerned over the 
viability of the Department's role in this area and its part in 
shaping the overall vision and framework that will serve U.S. 
national security and international competitive interests in 
military and civil aeronautics over the long term. Accordingly, 
the committee recommends a provision (sec. 260) which would 
direct the Secretary of Defense to conduct a comprehensive 
review of aeronautical research and test capabilities to 
identify appropriate long-term options for developing and 
sustaining such capabilities, to include actions which can be 
taken within the Department and in concert with other federal 
agencies, academic institutions, and private industry. The 
committee further expects that the Department's action plan 
would specifically emphasize current and proposed future wind 
tunnel facilities, to include subsonic and transonic wind 
tunnels. In developing its report and action plan, the 
committee encourages the Department to consult with the 
Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board of the National 
Research Council.

AIRMS application program

    The committee recognizes the technical success achieved by 
the Advanced Research Project Agency's (ARPA) Airborne Infrared 
Measurement System (AIRMS) in investigation of the capabilities 
of infrared sensors for long range surveillance, detection, 
targeting, and pointing. The committee understands that the 
ARPA AIRMS experiment is coming to an end and is concerned that 
the technical capability represented by the system not be lost. 
The committee believes that the system is a national asset and 
has a number of potential applications in surveillance, anti-
submarine warfare, surface mine countermeasures, cruise 
missile, theater air defense, and naval fire support. The 
committee understands that discussions are underway in which 
the airplane, sensor, and all support services and funding to 
support the program through March 31, 1996, would transition 
from ARPA to the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office, or 
some other defense agency, for further investigation of 
potential applications of the technical capability. The 
committee wishes to see the significant investment in this 
program returned in successful user applications and would 
encourage a request for reprogramming by the receiving agency 
to continue support for the program in fiscal year 1996.

Computing system and communication technology

    The committee has received the final report from the 
National Academy of Sciences on the High Performance Computing 
and Communications Initiative (HPCCI) study required by the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public 
Law 103-160). The committee directs the Director, Advanced 
Research Projects Agency to submit to the congressional defense 
committees of the Senate and House of Representatives 120 days 
after enactment of this act, a report on what steps have been 
taken to implement the recommendations of that study. Further, 
the committee notes an unsubstantiated growth in this program 
and directs prioritizing and control over the large number of 
program facets. The committee reduces PE 62301E by $25 million. 
This reduction shall not apply to software engineering 
technology (project ST-22).

Cruise missile defense advanced concept technology demonstration

    The budget request included $7 million in PE 63750D for 
support of the cruise missile defense advanced concept and 
technology demonstration (ACTD). The committee understands that 
the Department of Defense has increased the priority of cruise 
missile defense in order to develop and deploy cruise missile 
defenses as a complement to ballistic missile defenses in an 
integrated theater air defense architecture. The committee 
recommends an increase of $8 million for simulation and 
analysis of cruise missile defense options being demonstrated 
in this ACTD in support of the Joint Staff and Office of the 
Secretary of Defense tradeoff examinations of how best to 
defend deployed U.S. forces against cruise missile attack.

Cryogenic electronics

    The committee is aware of recent breakthrough technologies 
in higher transition temperature superconducting materials as 
well as the potential pay off in electrical circuit efficiency, 
size and capacity if low temperature circuits such as precision 
band pass filters can be cost-effectively developed, 
manufactured, and operated.
    The committee recommends an additional $5 million in PE 
62712E, project MPT-06, for this purpose.

Defense experimental program to stimulate competitive research 
        (DEPSCoR)

    The committee recommends continuation of the DEPSCoR 
program to strengthen infrastructure, enhance research, and 
develop human resources to assist the EPSCoR states to become 
more competitive for regular research and training grants. The 
committee recommends an additional $20 million in PE 61103D.

Defense laboratory partnership program

    The budget request included $16.106 million in PE 63570D to 
support unspecified technologies and a dual-use process. The 
committee views this program as redundant to defense laboratory 
cooperative research and development agreements and an 
unnecessary layering of dual-use processes. The committee 
recommends no authorization for fiscal year 1996.

Defense research science

    The committee recommends a reduction to the defense 
research sciences of $5 million in PE 61101E, projects CCS-02 
and ES-01.

Demilitarization of conventional munitions and explosives

    The budget request included $16.799 million in PE 63225D 
for the joint DOD-DOE munition technology development program. 
The committee recommends an increase of $15 million only for 
the cooperative development and demonstration by the Department 
of Defense and the Department of Energy of environmentally-
compliant processes for the demilitarization and disposal of 
unserviceable, obsolete, or non-treaty-compliant munitions, 
rocket motors, and explosives. The committee believes there are 
a number of potential technologies that could be considered, 
including (but not limited to) super-critical water oxidation, 
molten metal pyrolisis, plasma arc, catalytic fluidized-bed 
oxidation, molten salt oxidation, incineration, and underground 
contained burning. The committee believes that the Department 
of Defense must develop a plan to address the growing backlog 
of conventional munitions and explosives awaiting 
demilitarization and disposal, and directs that the Secretary 
of Defense provide a report on the requirements for such a 
conventional munitions and explosives demilitarization program 
to the congressional defense committees by July 1, 1996.

Electronics manufacturing and packaging technology

    The committee continues to seek ways to substantially 
reduce the cost and increase the performance of advanced 
military electronics systems. Seamless high off-chip 
connectivity (SHOCC) provides an innovative opportunity to 
achieve these goals through increased manufacturing yields of 
highly complex electronic circuits. Likewise, the use of non-
woven aramide fibers for printed circuit boards will provide 
three dimensional packaging that will provide reduced weight, 
reduced defects and compactness. The committee recommends an 
additional $7.5 million and $10 million for SHOCC and non-woven 
aramide fiber packaging, respectively, in PE 62712E to 
investigate these technologies.

Electro-thermal gun technology

    The budget request included $10.5 million in PE 62715H for 
development of electric armaments technology. The committee 
recommends an increase to the budget request of $4 million for 
the development of electrothermal gun technology in support of 
Navy surface fire support and Army advanced gun propulsion 
technology development programs.

Framing sensors

    The committee is encouraged by the successes of electro 
optical (EO) framing sensors with on-chip forward motion 
compensation (FMC) and recognizes the unique characteristics of 
EO framing technology. The committee recommends continued 
development and evaluation of EO framing sensor and the 
development of infrared and multi-spectral framing technology, 
both with on-chip FMC for precision targeting.

Free Electron Laser

    The committee directs that the Advanced Research Projects 
Agency evaluate continuous wave, superconducting radio 
frequency free electron laser (FEL) technology for defense 
utility and potential for dual use program funding. The 
Director, Advanced Research Projects Agency shall report his 
findings and recommendations to the congressional defense 
committees no later than March 1, 1996.

Fuel cells

    Of the funds authorized to be appropriated in PE 63226E, 
the committee directs the Advanced Research Projects Agency to 
complete the two megawatt direct fuel cell power plant for 
fixed military base applications.

Global command and control architecture

    The committee notes the progress achieved in development of 
the global command and control system (GCCS) architecture and 
strongly encourages the Secretary of Defense to eliminate 
routine bureaucratic constraints, take advantage of streamlined 
program management, and expedite the development and deployment 
of GCCS without delay. The antiquated and costly world-wide 
military command and control system (WWMCCS) should be phased 
out and shut down as soon as possible so that the Department 
can realize the savings and combat efficiencies of the GCCS. 
The committee recommends that WWMCCS savings be used for 
continued evolution of GCCS and insure its worldwide deployment 
without delay.
    There are existing and developmental command and control 
systems in the Department of Defense which presently are not or 
will not be fully compatible with the common operating 
environment of the GCCS. Some of these systems presently have 
no clear migration strategy to achieve the necessary level of 
compatibility or interoperability for use in joint operations. 
These systems should be identified and modified to achieve 
compatibility or interoperability at the earliest possible 
time. The committee further believes that GCCS is the proper 
way to accomplish goal.

Global grid communications

    The budget request included $45.188 million in PE 63226E 
for the Global Grid Communications program. The program is 
developing and demonstrating the advanced communications and 
information processing technologies needed for defense and 
intelligence operations in a geographically dispersed staff--
technologies that will be used in future versions of the Global 
Command and Control System. The committee recommends an 
increase of $5 million to accelerate the program for 
development and demonstration of more robust system services in 
an object based joint task force reference architecture.

High altitude endurance unmanned aerial vehicle

    The Department originally had intended that two contractor 
teams would be funded in a phase two development effort for the 
Tier II-plus unmanned aerial vehicle, leading to a flight 
demonstration competitive fly-off after the 27-month 
development effort. The current plan calls for only one 
contractor team to enter the 27-month development effort. The 
committee believes that to maintain a competitive program two 
contractor teams must be retained in phase two through at least 
critical design review and recommends an additional $60 million 
in PE 35154D for this purpose.

High growth rate diamond materials

    The committee continues its interest in synthetic diamond 
materials for high density electronic packaging applications. 
The committee recommends an additional $3 million for chemical 
vapor deposition (CVD) and an additional $2 million for 
chemical vapor composite (CVC) deposition in PE 62712E. The 
Director, Advanced Research Projects Agency shall determine the 
most promising process for continued out year funding.

High modulus polcrylonitrile (PAN) carbon fiber

    High modulus polycrylonitrile (PAN) carbon fiber is a 
critical component of the Theater High Altitude Air Defense 
(THAAD) system's kinetic kill interceptor. The committee 
understands that, currently only one company in the world, 
located in Japan, will be able to meet THAAD production 
requirements. The committee believes that the United States 
should not be totally dependent on a foreign producer for this 
critical THAAD component. Accordingly, the committee has 
included an additional total of $4 million in PE 78045A to 
support the development of a domestic source for this material.

High performance computing modernization (HPCM) program

    The committee approves the HPCM program and directs the 
Secretary of Defense to ensure that system software is being 
developed within the science and technology program that allows 
full and immediate utilization of HPCM hardware being made 
available to Department users. In addition, software for common 
user support applications shall be a paramount activity in the 
HPCM program even at the expense of postponing new hardware 
acquisitions for deliveries to new sites. The Director, Defense 
Research and Engineering shall take direct and immediate action 
to realign the program to accommodate this activity. In 
addition, the Secretary is reminded that the HPCM program is a 
Department of Defense activity and no hardware system shall be 
placed in activities other than the Department of Defense.

Historically black colleges and universities and minority institutions

    The committee recognizes the contributions of historically 
black colleges and universities and minority institutions 
(HBCU&MIs) in enabling persons from under-represented 
backgrounds in the sciences and engineering profession to 
obtain graduate degrees. The committee supports continued focus 
on science and engineering programs and encourages the 
Department to use the authorized funding of $15.095 million to 
support within the HBCU&MI system, programs which encourage 
students to pursue combined studies in critical languages and 
international affairs and advanced science and engineering 
degrees.

Integrated bridge system for MK V special operations craft

    The budget request included $13.288 million in PE 1160402BB 
for special operations advanced technology development. The 
committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million for 
development of a prototype maritime integrated bridge system 
for the MK V special operations craft to demonstrate the 
potential for advanced display and control technologies to 
enhance mission performance.

Joint technology insertion program

    The budget request included $4.976 million in PE 63726D for 
a new three-year program to build a conceptual computer model 
of the joint mission space for all DOD operational missions. 
The committee believes that if this program is of sufficient 
priority within the Department it can be accommodated within 
the $23.3 million requested increase in fiscal year 1996 for 
Joint Simulation Management in PE 63832D. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends no authorization for fiscal year 1996.

Lithography

    The committee is concerned that efforts on the part of the 
Congress to establish a realistic program in lithography are 
not fiscally supported by the Department. The committee reminds 
the Department of its obligation to conduct a goal oriented 
program as detailed in section 216 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337).
    The committee recommends an increase to PE 63739E of $25 
million, of which $15 million shall be used for technologies 
leading to feature sizes below 100 nanometers and shall 
include, but not be limited to, mask-less and resist-less 
technologies, extreme ultraviolet (EVU) lithography, and 
support nanometer metrologies. In addition, the committee also 
expects continuation of investigation to show the potential of 
ion beam lithography and continuation of the laser plasma point 
source x-ray demonstration. The committee recommends that the 
balance of any funding required by the Advanced Research 
Projects Agency to conduct the codified program cited above, be 
divested from the Department's contribution to the SEMATECH 
program. The committee is concerned that the Department of 
Defense investment strategy for the Advanced Lithography 
program preferred by the Advanced Research Projects Agency 
(ARPA) may be in conflict with the industrial road-maps 
proposed and recommendations made by the Semiconductor 
Industries Association (SIA) and/or the Semiconductor 
Technology Council (STC) for funding advanced lithography.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 214) 
that would permit the Director, Advanced Research Projects 
Agency to consider the SIA and STC recommendations as advisory 
only.

Littoral undersea tactical reconnaissance

    The budget request included $16.502 million in PE 63226E 
for development and demonstration of advanced technologies for 
littoral anti-submarine warfare operations. Newly developed and 
maturing multi-static acoustic, electro-magnetic, and electro-
optic technologies, integrated into existing aircraft, ship, 
and submarine platforms, could provide a means of countering 
the wide range of littoral undersea threats ranging in size 
from mines to submarines. The committee believes that ARPA and 
the Navy should begin an assessment of how to combine existing 
and emerging sensors and platforms so as to provide the joint 
amphibious operational commander an integrated picture of the 
littoral maritime environment. The committee recommends an 
increase of $7 million to begin a program to assess the 
effectiveness of such an integrated system of sensors. The 
committee believes that as the system concept matures an 
evaluation in an advanced concept and technology demonstration 
could complement the ongoing mine countermeasures ACTD and 
should be considered in the development of future budget 
requests.

Maneuver variant unmanned aerial vehicle

    The budget request included $36.8 million in PE 35154D for 
the Maneuver Variant Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (MVUAV). No funds 
were authorized for this program in fiscal years 1994 or 1995 
because the Department failed to provide a joint operational 
requirements document (JORD) or cost and operational 
effectiveness analysis (COEA). Availability of both of these 
documents to the congressional defense committees had been 
promised in August 1994. Yet neither has been provided. In 
addition, the Department has failed to provide the plan for the 
contribution the multitude of unmanned aerial vehicles is 
intended to provide the warfighter. The committee recommends no 
authorization for this program for fiscal year 1996.

Mobile detection assessment response systems (MDARS)

    The committee recommends an increase of $7 million in PE 
63228D, physical security equipment, and an additional $10 
million in PE 63709D, the advanced robotics program, to avoid 
delays in the MDARS development.

Multiple-object tracking sensor system (MOTSS)

    The committee believes accurate tracking of submunitions 
being dispensed from missiles and projectiles requires an 
accurate observation of the kinematic performance to resolve 
submunition collision problems and evaluate disbursement 
patterns. In addition, defensive weapon intercept problems also 
require accurate tracking. These requirements currently exceed 
test range capabilities. Therefore, the committee recommends an 
additional $7 million in PE 62702E for a high resolution, 
mobile multiple-object tracking system.

Multi-function self aligned gate technology

    The committee recommends an additional $12 million in PE 
35154D to complete development and flight test of the multi-
function self aligned gate (MSAG) technology for unmanned 
aerial vehicles.

Nuclear detection systems

    The committee believes it is imperative that the 
development of improved nuclear detection and forensic analysis 
capabilities be accelerated because of increased international 
terrorism as well as attempted acquisition of weapons-grade 
nuclear materials by criminal groups. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends an additional $11 million in PE 62301E, 
project ST 23, for such purposes.

Operations other than war

    The committee does not understand the need for the Advanced 
Research Projects Agency to conduct simulation and modeling 
studies for operations other than war. The Secretary shall 
redirect this activity for coordination and development within 
the military services, which will perform those functions.
    The committee recommends a reduction of $4.3 million in PE 
62702E, project T-04.

Quiet Knight advanced concept and technology demonstration

    The budget request included $101.602 million in PE 
1160404BB for Special Operations tactical systems development. 
The committee understands that of this amount the Special 
Operations Command has planned $10 million to support Phase I 
(component development and demonstration) of an advanced 
concept technology demonstration of Quiet Knight for both fixed 
and rotary wing aircraft, and considers this amount sufficient 
to support the program during fiscal year 1996. The committee 
strongly supports this effort and its continuation to a Phase 
II full scale demonstration and flight test of the integrated 
Quiet Knight capability. The committee expects that the Special 
Operations Command and the Office of the Secretary of Defense 
will address funding requirements for completion of the Phase 
II Quiet Knight advanced concept and technology demonstration 
in the fiscal year 1997 budget request.

Research goals for historically black colleges, universities and 
        minority institutions (HBUC/MI)

    Section 2323 of title 10, United States Code, sets forth 
goals for the Department for contracts and grants with HBCU/M 
institutions. The committee believes that clarification is 
necessary on how goal achievement shall be determined for the 
Department's research program. Those departments or entities in 
the Department of Defense which conduct research programs 
through grants, contracts or other official arrangements shall 
determine goal achievement for HBCU/MI by calculation of the 
entire contract value in sum for that department or entity 
only. For example, programs in 6.1 (research) shall compute the 
HBCU/MI goal based upon the total academic research obligations 
in the 6.1 (research) program only.

Senior year electro-optical reconnaissance sensor program

    The committee recommends an additional $14 million in PE 
35154D to upgrade all Senior Year Electro-optical 
reconnaissance sensor program sensors to the newest 
configuration, upgrade existing ground stations, and effect 
preplanned product geolocational accuracy improvements.

Specialty metals

    The committee is pleased to see that the Advanced Research 
Projects Agency has budgeted for specialty metals development 
such as beryllium-aluminum alloys, ductile iron, and titanium 
through advanced material partnerships and other technology 
development arrangements. The committee understands that not 
less than $20 million is planned for specialty metals in PE 
62712E.

Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP)

    The committee recommends a reduction in the request for the 
SERDP program of $3 million for the joint Department of 
Defense-Department of Energy atmospheric remote sensing and 
assessment program for global climate change, a reduction of 
$500,000 for low energy model installation, and a reduction of 
$780,000 for energy conservation/renewable resources activities 
for a total reduction in PE 63716D of $4.28 million. The 
committee recognizes the benefit to the Navy from the Acoustic 
Thermometry of Ocean Climate (ATOC) and recommends continuation 
of the U.S./Russian Arctic component in cooperation with the 
Office of Naval Research.

Synthetic theater of war

    The budget request included $79.065 million in PE 63226E 
for the Advanced Distributed Simulation program. The committee 
is aware of reductions in fiscal year 1995 funding for the 
program which would adversely affect the ability to demonstrate 
and transition the Joint Synthetic Theater of War (STOW) in the 
STOW-97 advanced concept technology demonstration. Accordingly, 
the committee recommends an increase of $6.8 million to the 
budget request to maintain the STOW-97 demonstration program.

Tactical landing system

    The committee recommends an additional $7 million in PE 
62702E to complete the current development and testing of a 
tactical landing system (previously know as the advanced 
landing system), integrate and evaluate miniaturization and 
other technology to meet military requirements, and 
manufacture, install and test prototypes.

Tactical technology

    The committee is aware of the rapid developments in 
simulation based design and the importance of electronic 
linkages to reduce design to product time and cost. The 
committee supports the electronic commerce resource centers 
programs that facilitate the design and manufacturing processes 
in the defense industry. The committee approves the 
Department's request for these programs.

Warbreaker/attack of critical mobile targets

    The budget request included $117.759 million in PE 63226E, 
Experimental Evaluation of Major Innovative Technologies, for 
the Advanced Research Project Agency's WAR BREAKER program to 
develop and demonstrate advanced technologies and systems to 
enable the detection, identification and prosecution of a wide 
range of high value, time-critical fixed and mobile targets. 
The committee has strongly supported the WAR BREAKER project 
from the focus of its predecessor programs on advanced 
technologies that addressed the problem of the mobile SCUD 
threat experienced during Operation Desert Storm to the present 
program which deals with a much more comprehensive target set. 
The committee notes, however, that as the target set has 
expanded, the focus of the project has been defused; the 
original objective of dealing with the mobile SCUD threat has 
been largely set aside; and the WAR BREAKER project has become 
more general with the objective of maturing and integrating a 
wide range of advanced technologies and developing and 
demonstrating systems concepts for prosecuting a range of 
targets. While there are tasks and experiments under the 
overall WAR BREAKER umbrella that have specifically 
identifiable payoffs and pose potential solutions to individual 
and joint service requirements, the overall WAR BREAKER program 
appears to have become open-ended, with a funding level growing 
to $148 million by fiscal year 2001, and having no perceivable 
end.
    The committee understands that the Director, ARPA intends 
to review the WAR BREAKER program and other programs within the 
overall Experimental Evaluation of Major Innovative 
Technologies program element with a view to sharpening program 
focus, relevance to service requirements, and the application 
of advanced technology to meeting those requirements. The 
committee endorses and looks forward to the results of this 
review. The committee believes that those ARPA programs have 
been most successful in transitioning advanced technology and 
system concepts to the military services that had clearly 
defined objectives aimed at satisfying service requirements, 
close association between the potential user and ARPA program 
management, and successful development and demonstration over a 
relatively limited period of time.

                         Legislative Provisions


  section 203--modifications to strategic environmental research and 
                          development program

    This section would make a number of modifications to 
chapter 172 of title 10, United States Code, which governs the 
Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program. These 
changes, which are designed to streamline and simplify program 
activities, would reorient the program's focus toward the 
identification and support of basic and applied research, 
development and demonstration in technologies useful for the 
Department of Defense and Department of Energy defense 
facilities, eliminate the annual report on the five-year 
strategic environmental research development plan, and place 
control of the program more squarely within the responsibility 
of the Secretary of Defense.

                section 211--space launch modernization

    This section would provide $100 million for the Air Force 
for reusable rocket technology and $7.5 million for evaluation 
of prototype hardware of low cost expendable launch vehicles. 
Obligation of the funds for the reusable launch vehicle program 
would be limited to no more than that allocated for the 
reusable launch vehicle technology program for the National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration.

         section 212--maneuver variant unmanned aerial vehicle

    This section would prohibit the obligation of funds for the 
research, development, test, or evaluation of the maneuver 
variant unmanned aerial vehicle.

              section 213--tactical manned reconnaissance

    This section would prohibit the obligation of funds by the 
Secretary of the Air Force for research, development, test, or 
evaluation for a replacement aircraft, pod, or sensor payload 
for the tactical reconnaissance mission.

               section 214--advanced lithography program

    This section would permit the Director, Advanced Research 
Projects Agency to consider the SIA and STC recommendations as 
advisory and would allow him to establish priorities and 
funding levels consistent with the best interests of national 
security.

       section 215--enhanced fiber optic guided missile (EFOG-M)

    This section would limit funding for the enhanced fiber 
optic guided missile (EFOG-M) program if test and operational 
missiles and associated fire units are not delivered on time 
and within current cost estimates.

         section 216--joint advanced strike technology program

    This section would reduce the fiscal year authorization 
request for the Joint Advanced Strike Technology program by $51 
million and require a report by the Secretary of Defense 
detailing the architecture for tactical combat aircraft, cruise 
missiles, standoff precision guided missiles, and surface to 
surface precision guided munitions. The provision would further 
limit fiscal year 1996 expenditures until 30 days after the 
submission of the required report.

           Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense Act of 1995


                        section 231--short title

    This section would designate this subtitle as the ``Missile 
Defense Act of 1995.''

   section 232--ballistic missile defense policy of the united states

    This section would establish the ballistic missile defense 
policy of the United States.

                 section 233--implementation of policy

    This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to take 
certain actions to implement the policy established in section 
232, and to issue a report to Congress setting forth the 
Secretary's plan for implementing that guidance. Further, the 
section would direct that the report include a revised five-
year funding plan for National Missile Defense (NMD), 
consistent with the guidance contained in the provision. The 
Secretary's report would specify projected time-lines and costs 
for deploying advanced Theater Missile Defense (TMD) systems 
and an NMD system. Furthermore, the report would state whether 
or when ABM Treaty constraints would have the effect of 
constraining the deployment and efficient operation of a 
highly-effective NMD system.

      section 234--follow-on technologies research and development

    This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to 
pursue research and development of follow-on technologies and 
systems for national and theater missile defense, and state an 
exclusion from the initial deployment architecture.

         section 235--policy on compliance with the abm treaty

    This section would establish policy concerning systems 
subject to the ABM Treaty, state certain prohibitions, and 
define an ABM-qualifying flight test.

     section 236--ballistic missile defense program accountability

    This section would require an annual report describing 
technical milestones, schedules, and cost of various Ballistic 
Missile Defense (BMD) programs.

                    section 237--abm treaty defined

    This section would define the term ``ABM Treaty''.

           section 238--repeal of missile defense act of 1991

    This section would repeal the Missile Defense Act of 1991.

         Subtitle D--Other Ballistic Missile Defense Provisions


  section 241--ballistic missile defense funding for fiscal year 1996

    This section would authorize funding for ballistic missile 
defense research, development, testing, and evaluation 
activities for fiscal year 1996.

        section 242--policy concerning ballistic missile defense

    This section would state congressional views on the 
relationship between U.S. ballistic missile defense and counter 
proliferation activities and U.S. ballistic missile defense 
activities and strategic stability, and urge the President to 
initiate discussions with other nations on various subjects 
related to ballistic missile defense.

      section 243--testing of theater missile defense interceptors

    This section would amend section 237 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-
160) regarding testing of theater missile defense interceptors.

           section 244--repeal of missile defense provisions

    This section would repeal six provisions of law with 
respect to missile defense.

 section 251--allocation of funds for medical countermeasures against 
                           biowarfare threats

    This section would amend section 2370a of title 10, United 
States Code to permit up to 50 percent of the funds provided 
for the medical component of the Biological Defense Research 
Program of the Department of Defense to be used for product 
development or for research, development, test, or evaluation 
of medical countermeasures against mid-term or far-term 
validated biowarfare threat agents. The potential for 
proliferation of biological warfare capabilities (including 
their potential use in terrorist attacks) and for development 
of new agents through genetic engineering dictates that 
increased attention should be given to research and development 
of medical countermeasures to potential mid-term or far-term 
biowarfare threat agents.

                      section 252--basic research

    This section directs the Secretary of Defense to provide 
the equivalent of a cost and operational effectiveness study 
for the consolidation of the individual services' basic 
research accounts to determine potential infrastructure 
savings.

      section 253--awards of grants and contracts to colleges and 
               universities: requirements of competition

    This section would amend section 2361 of title 10, United 
States Code to change the annual reporting requirements on the 
use of competitive procedures for awards of research and 
development contracts, and the award of construction contracts, 
to colleges and universities from each preceding ``calendar'' 
year to each preceding ``fiscal'' year.

      section 254--university research initiative support program

    This section would amend section 802 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-
160) to change the university research initiative support 
program from a mandatory program to a voluntary program and 
provide for improved review procedures. The purpose of this 
amendment is to provide flexibility in administering the 
university research initiative program and to better ensure 
defense relevance.

        section 255--advanced field artillery system (crusader)

    This section would impose spending authority limitations on 
the Secretary of the Army unless certain technical performance 
is achieved by August 1, 1996 in the Crusader program. The 
provision would permit the Secretary to significantly alter the 
Crusader acquisition plan for the cannon propellant if it is 
required to achieve the objectives of the Advanced Field 
Artillery System (AFAS), provided notification is given to the 
defense committees of the Senate and House of Representative.
    The provision would also require that an assessment of AFAS 
technology maturity to meet the Army requirements be provided 
to the defense committees of the Senate and House of 
Representatives by March 30, 1996.

    section 256--command, control, communications, and intelligence 
                            interoperability

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
request the National Research Council of the National Academy 
of Science to conduct a comprehensive study of defense-wide 
communications, and intelligence systems. The committee is 
concerned that the substantial investment in these systems may 
not have appropriate management control to ensure compatibility 
and interoperability of hardware and software associated with 
the command, control, communication, computers and intelligence 
(C4I) systems in inventory and in acquisition, and that 
sufficient justification information exists on which to gauge 
the validity of the Department's annual request.

     section 257--federally funded research and development centers

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense and the 
Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force to reevaluate the 
functions of Federally Funded Research and Development Centers 
(FFRDCs) and to achieve certain reductions, consolidations and 
management goals. The provision would limit FFRDC funding to 
$1.15 billion. This provision would also reduce FFRDC funding 
by $90.097 million.

             section 258--manufacturing technology program

    This section would reflect changes to the manufacturing 
science and technology program by eliminating the technology 
base focus on the program and providing new emphasis on near 
term cost reduction applications. In addition, the provision 
would require larger non-federal government cost share for 25 
percent of the program appropriation and eliminate cost share 
for academic institutions.

       section 259--laboratory test and evaluation strategic plan

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
prepare a five year strategic plan to consolidate and 
restructure the Department's Research and Development 
laboratories and test and evaluation centers.

  section 260--aeronautical research and test capabilities assessment

    This section would require that the Secretary of Defense 
assess aeronautical research and test facilities and 
capabilities of the United States and provide a report to the 
congressional defense committees and detail the findings and 
recommendations of the review.

                   section 261--t-38 avionics upgrade

    This section would require that the Department of the Air 
Force only consider foreign companies for the award of the 
contract for the T-38 avionics upgrade if such companies are 
headquartered in countries that allow equal access to U.S. 
companies for such contracts.

               section 262--dual-use technology programs

    This section would cross reference sections 2358(a)(2)(B) 
and 2371(a) with section 2501 of title 10, United States Code, 
to encourage the use of dual-use technology programs in defense 
research and technology programs.

                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE


                                Overview

    Through careful study, hearings, and analysis, the 
committee has determined that the readiness problems 
experienced by the military services in fiscal year 1994, and 
most acutely in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 1994, were 
the inevitable result of declining defense budgets, a 
significantly reduced force structure, and an increased pace of 
contingency operations.
    During 1994, training was canceled or deferred, planned and 
funded maintenance of weapons, equipment and real property was 
not accomplished, purchases of critical spare parts stopped and 
the quality of life for service members suffered. Many Army 
divisions reported degraded readiness levels and Navy surface 
combatant training readiness declined from the previous year. 
Navy and Marine Corps aviation squadrons had to be grounded 
with planes ``bagged,'' or placed in temporary storage, the 
first time in memory of many senior Navy personnel that such an 
action was taken. In the Air Force, crews in 13 of 21 of its 
flying weapons systems exceeded the Air Force standard of 120 
days on temporary duty away from their home base.
    The United States armed forces are the best trained and 
equipped force in the world. Nevertheless, readiness is a 
perishable commodity which demands constant vigilance. 
Accurately measuring readiness is a complex task. In addition 
to tank miles, flying hours and steaming days, there are many 
other factors which impact on overall readiness--personnel 
tempo, maintenance backlogs, troop morale, quality of life 
programs, base operations support, equipment modernization, 
recruiting and retention.
    In recognition of the complexity of addressing these 
challenges, the committee's strategy for maintaining readiness 
has five main components: (1) providing the necessary resources 
to ensure that the problems experienced in fiscal year 1994 are 
not repeated; (2) increased scrutiny over the disposition of 
those funds; (3) increased oversight on force readiness 
assessments; (4) the establishment of improved mechanisms to 
fund contingency operations, both planned and unplanned, so 
that funds are not diverted from critical readiness accounts; 
and (5) infrastructure reforms to free additional resources for 
critical readiness activities and force modernization--the key 
to future readiness.

                       Items of Special Interest


                          assessing readiness

    The committee remains concerned over the admission late 
last year that three Army divisions were at a low readiness 
condition. This revelation came only weeks after a senior DOD 
official declared ``* * * that the readiness of the forces as 
[sic] high as they have ever been--higher * * * than they were 
in 1991 when we were worrying about Iraq the first time.'' 
Congress and the American people must have confidence that 
military force readiness is and will be up to standards. The 
traditional system for measuring readiness is inadequate. It is 
narrowly focused, too subjective and inconsistently applied. 
More importantly, it represents only a snapshot in time, 
providing no predictive value of future force readiness. What 
is needed is a comprehensive readiness assessment system based 
on relevant and reliable indicators that measure force 
readiness today and provide early warning of future readiness 
problems.
    The committee was encouraged to learn during testimony that 
the Department has a number of initiatives underway to improve 
readiness assessments. The committee supports these efforts and 
believes it is critical to maintain the momentum which 
currently exists. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of the Defense to complete and report to the 
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on 
National Security of the House of Representatives actions 
agreed to by the Department of Defense in response to 
recommendations made by the General Accounting Office in its 
October 1994 report, ``Military Readiness: DOD Needs to Develop 
a More Comprehensive Measurement System'' (GAO/NSIAD-95-29), 
including:
          (1) Selection of indicators identified as being 
        critical to predicting readiness and most relevant to a 
        more comprehensive readiness assessment;
          (2) Development of criteria to evaluate the selected 
        indicators;
          (3) Prescription of how often the selected indicators 
        will be reported to supplement Status of Resources and 
        Training System (SORTS) data;
          (4) Ensuring that comparable data is maintained by 
        all the military services to allow the development of 
        trends in the selected indicators.
    Additionally, the Secretary of Defense shall include in 
this report steps being taken to ensure that the various 
initiatives underway are coordinated to prevent duplication of 
effort and to ensure a sharing of lessons learned.
    Finally, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 371) 
that directs the Secretary of Defense to report quarterly to 
the congressional defense committees on force readiness based 
on regularized readiness briefings provided to senior DOD 
military and civilian leadership as part of their readiness 
oversight responsibility. Currently, such briefings include the 
monthly readiness briefings provided to the Senior Readiness 
Oversight Council and as part of the Joint Monthly Readiness 
Review. The reports should focus specifically on identified 
problems or deficiencies and planned remedial actions, and 
should include the key indicators and other relevant data 
related to the identified problem area or deficiency.

                           readiness funding

    The President's budget request for fiscal year 1996 clearly 
recognizes the critical shortfalls in readiness identified in 
fiscal year 1994. Nevertheless, the committee believes that 
additional funding is warranted in key areas. The committee 
recommends funding increases of $2.8 billion above the 
President's request of $91.6 billion for a total of $94.4 
billion. The committee's recommended increase includes $1 
billion for real property maintenance, $440 million for depot 
maintenance, $425 million for base operations support, $100 
million for reserve component readiness, and $100 million for 
mobility enhancements.
    It is the committee's strong view that resources provided 
for training, operations and maintenance be used for those 
intended purposes. The committee remains concerned, however, 
over the extent to which resources provided for training and 
maintenance are diverted for other uses and the effects on 
readiness of such diversions. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a provision (sec. 373) that would amend an existing 
reporting requirement by the Secretary of Defense requiring 
semi-annual reports on transfers of funds to and from certain 
identified readiness accounts and an explanation of the reason 
for the transfer.
    Offset Folio 240 Insert here



                       real property maintenance

    The committee is seriously concerned over the backlog 
associated with maintenance and repair of existing facilities. 
The present replacement cycles for facilities in the inventory 
of each of the military services has grown dangerously lengthy. 
Given current levels of funding, shortening the replacement 
cycles for those facilities is unlikely in the near-term. The 
committee recognizes that accelerated levels of funding for 
repair and maintenance are urgently required to begin to reduce 
the backlog of maintenance and repair that is critical to 
military readiness and the safety of military and civilian 
personnel.
    The fiscal year 1996 budget request for real property 
maintenance (RPM) was $5,053,000,000. The committee recommends 
an increase of one billion dollars, for a total of 
$6,053,000,000. The committee further recommends that the 
increase be distributed as follows:

                        [In millions of dollars]

Army.............................................................. 350.0
Army National Guard...............................................  21.0
Army Reserve......................................................  17.0
Navy.............................................................. 150.0
Navy Reserve......................................................  12.0
Marine Corps...................................................... 100.0
Marine Corps Reserves.............................................   1.5
Air Force......................................................... 320.0
Air National Guard................................................  15.0
Air Force Reserve.................................................  13.5
                                                                  ______
      Total increase.............................................1,000.0

    The committee directs the military services to apply the 
recommended increase in funding for RPM to required repair and 
maintenance of barracks and dormitories, critical health and 
safety deficiencies, and mission critical operational 
deficiencies, including the repair and maintenance of training 
ranges, airfields, railheads, and piers.

                           reserve readiness

    The recent increased use of reserve forces to augment 
active duty units experiencing excessive commitments is 
expected to continue in the years ahead. However, the budget 
contains insufficient resources for properly training, 
maintaining, and resourcing Army National Guard and Army 
Reserve units to accept equipment flowing from the active 
component. In the operating tempo (OPTEMPO) area, the budget 
request funds National Guard and Army Reserve ground OPTEMPO at 
75% of the requirement versus 96% of the requirement in fiscal 
year 1995. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$60 million to the Army National Guard and $40 million to the 
Army Reserve in operations and maintenance funding to alleviate 
these shortfalls.
    The committee has become aware that the Army National Guard 
faces possible funding shortfalls for support of six fixed-wing 
Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL) aircraft due to be delivered 
late in fiscal year 1996. The committee urges that adequate 
funding be provided to the Guard for the purposes of meeting 
this identified shortfall.

                  mobility infrastructure enhancement

    The committee recommends $100 million to improve deployment 
capability and enhance mobility through investment in en-route 
infrastructure, including runway ramp space, preservation of 
en-route base availability, and ammunition loading. The funding 
is authorized in the operation and maintenance, defense-wide 
activities account for application to high priority projects 
with the potential for multiple mobility improvements. The 
Secretary of Defense is directed to report on the expenditure 
of these funds to the congressional defense committees prior to 
allocation of these funds and should seek the view of the 
Commander in Chief, U.S. Transportation Command, in determining 
the application of these resources. The committee encourages 
the inclusion within this program of funding for the Center for 
Commercial Deployment of Transportation Technologies (CCDOTT).

                B1-B repair and maintenance improvements

    The committee recommends an additional $3.98 million for 
repairs and maintenance associated with the B1-B bomber. 
Additional details on this action may be found in Title I of 
this report.

                   chemical and biological terrorism

    The use of chemical weapons in the 1995 terrorist attacks 
in Japan underscored the volatility of the chemical and 
biological terrorist threat and the need for the United States 
to be prepared to respond to a similar attack on U.S. 
territory.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 383) 
that would require the Secretary of Defense to make available, 
upon request and on a reimbursable basis, training facilities, 
sensors, protective clothing, antidotes and other materials and 
expertise as needed to emergency response and federal and local 
law enforcement agencies.

                        joint warfighting center

    The committee has been encouraged by the establishment and 
applied utility of the Joint Warfighting Center in its mission 
of assisting the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 
combatant commanders and service chiefs in preparing for joint 
and multinational operations. The Center is not being used to 
its greatest potential, in part because of cultural and 
bureaucratic inhibitions on the part of some of the CINCs. The 
Joint Warfighting Center is an important asset in improving 
joint training. Consequently, the Secretary of Defense and the 
JCS Chairman should work with the CINCs to make them fully 
aware of the Center's utility in improving CINC training 
efforts.
    The committee urges the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff to require coordination and validation by the Joint 
Warfighting Center of all preparations for major joint and 
multinational operations.

               joint deployment and transportation center

    The National Security Strategy emphasizes power projection. 
Currently, there is no Department of Defense-wide center 
dedicated to the education and training for transportation of 
personnel and material supporting joint deployments. The 
Department of Defense should proceed with the establishment of 
its proposed Joint Deployment and Transportation Center (JDTC) 
to develop better ways to deploy and sustain forces, especially 
for joint deployments and missions.

         conversion of military positions to civilian positions

    The high pace of operations and high personnel tempo is 
highlighting shortages in certain critical high demand, low 
density units such as military police, air defense artillery 
and Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS). At the same 
time, thousands of military personnel are performing functions 
in areas such as personnel management and data processing which 
do not require military skills and could be performed by 
civilians. Military endstrength is declining, while the pace of 
operations is increasing. It is critical that military 
personnel be assigned to billets which contribute directly to 
combat readiness.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 
(Public Law 103-337) required the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report on his efforts to identify positions to which 
continued assignment of military personnel is no longer 
justified under current circumstances and assign Department of 
Defense civilian employees to replace military personnel in 
those positions. The report provided to the committee was 
unresponsive. It concluded that ``No major civilianization 
effort should be undertaken until the Defense workforce begins 
to stabilize . . .'' The committee disagrees. It is at just 
such a time of workforce restructuring that the opportunity 
should be taken to identify positions held by military 
personnel for which civilian personnel would be better suited.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 333) 
that would direct the Secretary of Defense to convert not less 
than 10,000 military positions to federal civilian positions in 
fiscal year 1996. The Secretary is also directed to report to 
the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee 
on National Security of the House of Representatives no later 
than March 31, 1996 on his plan for effecting the conversions, 
and opportunities for further conversions.

                       uh-1 refurbishment policy

    The committee report on H.R. 4301, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995, (H. Rept. 103-499), 
directed that any UH-1 helicopters sold to foreign nations be 
done so only in a refurbished condition. The committee 
reiterates that any UH-1 helicopters provided to a foreign 
nation--either by sale or other means--be done so only in a 
refurbished condition and at no cost to U.S. taxpayers.

                       condition of M1 tank fleet

    The committee is concerned about the absence of a 
procurement program for modernization of the main battle tank 
beyond upgrades of existing tank models, and the committee is 
aware of reports regarding new tank threats that are appearing 
worldwide. Also, senior military officials have testified 
before the committee that the Army currently has no long-term 
plan for maintenance of the M1 Abrams tank. In light of these 
facts, the committee questions whether current funding levels 
allow the M1 tank fleet to maintain a readiness level to meet 
the warfighting requirements of the national security strategy.
    The committee therefore requests the General Accounting 
Office (GAO) to undertake a review of the current condition and 
future projected readiness of the M1 tank fleet to respond to a 
future national security emergency and report its findings to 
the committee within 60 days of enactment of this Act. The 
review should include the condition and state of readiness of 
prepositioned tank stocks; the reliability of all maintenance 
performed on the M1 fleet, including field-, intermediate- and 
depot-level maintenance; the number of operating hours on the 
current tank fleet; and the operational ability of the tanks 
used at the National Training Center to engage soldiers in 
training situations that are realistic to battlefield 
conditions. GAO should include in its review the potential of 
programs linking the depot maintenance system with private 
industry to extend the life of the current tank fleet.
    During its review GAO should examine the impact of DBOF-
driven rates on field commanders' maintenance options and on 
the commanders' operations and support costs, and the resulting 
impact of those factors on tank readiness. GAO should also 
examine whether existing depot capabilities are being 
duplicated at the field level and at what cost.

             strategic command ``bulwark bronze'' exercise

    The commander-in-chief, U.S. Strategic Command, recently 
initiated a series of training exercises known as ``Bulwark 
Bronze,'' involving U.S. strategic forces and personnel. The 
first such exercise occurred in 1994 and revealed a number of 
issues and shortcomings that need to be resolved. The committee 
endorses the conduct of one or more ``Bulwark Bronze'' 
exercises in fiscal year 1996, and urges the Secretary of 
Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to review 
the results of these exercises and to consider expanding upon 
them as a means of bolstering nuclear deterrence.

                        Depot Maintenance Issues


                       core logistics capability

    It is the committee's strong view that a robust government 
depot capability is necessary for national security reasons. It 
is the committee's belief that eliminating the 60/40 
restrictions (as stated in sec. 2466 of title 10, United States 
Code) is not necessarily inconsistent with maintaining a strong 
depot infrastructure. Therefore, the committee recommends a 
provision (sec. 395) that would:
          (1) repeal the 60/40 restriction for depot 
        maintenance and repair effective December 31, 1996;
          (2) establish a policy for maintaining depot-level 
        maintenance and repair core logistics capability to 
        provide a ready and controlled source of technical 
        competence and resources necessary to meet DOD 
        requirements and define core logistics capabilities to 
        be maintained in Department of Defense (DOD) depots;
          (3) require the Secretary of Defense to establish 
        procedures to determine core capability requirements;
          (4) require that depot-level maintenance and repair 
        core capability requirements be identified and that 
        requisite workloads be accomplished in DOD depots to 
        maintain core capabilities and allow for movement of 
        such workloads among all of the DOD depots as may be 
        necessary and appropriate, but call for merit-based 
        criteria to be used when making such moves;
          (5) provide for performing in the private sector, 
        through competitive awards, workloads in excess of 
        those necessary to maintain core logistics capabilities 
        and provide authority for DOD depots to compete with 
        private firms when there are less than two qualified 
        bidders for the workload;
          (6) require accurate disclosure of all costs that are 
        germane to competitions and that such costs be 
        determined in compliance with applicable laws, policies 
        and standards and that any cost calculations of the 
        organic depot will be based on an estimate of the most 
        efficient and cost effective manner of accomplishing 
        the workload by the depot;
          (7) establish initial and annual core capability and 
        related planned workload reporting requirements;
          (8) repeal section 2469 of title 10, United States 
        Code, effective December 31, 1996, which requires a 
        competition for the movement of an existing workload 
        above $3 million from a depot.
    The committee believes that this new core logistics 
initiative will provide an adequate in-house capacity for the 
repair and maintenance of military equipment necessary to 
ensure the readiness of all military combat units. The 
committee will carefully review and monitor the Department's 
changes for the accomplishment of depot-level maintenance and 
repair, and fully intends to reassess this program if the 
Department fails to revise its procedures consistent with the 
direction provided by the committee.

                  depot maintenance workload carryover

    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to ensure 
that the fiscal year 1997 budget request does not include 
funding for any workload unless there is reasonable assurance 
the work will be accomplished in fiscal year 1997, or the 
workload is required in order to ensure a steady flow of work 
at the end of the fiscal year.

                             navy ordnance

    The Navy ordnance business area has lost $208 million since 
fiscal year 1992, with four of the five weapon stations losing 
money. The current Navy ordnance management structure consists 
of a headquarters operation and two divisions to manage five 
weapon stations. Considering the fiscal difficulties facing 
this operation, the committee considers this management 
structure excessive. This point is illustrated by the fact that 
general and administrative (G&A) costs represents on average 
about 37 percent of the total weapon stations fiscal year 1995 
stabilized prices. For some weapon stations, the G&A costs 
exceeds 50 percent of the stabilized price. Further, excessive 
overhead costs have had the effect of requiring reductions in 
critical maintenance and safety areas. The committee recommends 
ten million dollars to ensure that these critical areas are 
protected from reductions.
    The committee is also concerned about reports that the Navy 
may have military material handling teams at the weapons 
stations. The committee is concerned that this practice could 
lead to increased costs due to the requirement to continually 
train military personnel to perform these critical tasks and 
believes that many of the functions that are being converted to 
military personnel are more conducive to a stable, qualified 
civilian workforce. The committee directs the Navy to develop a 
plan to show weapon stations costs, especially the headquarters 
and divisional costs. This plan should be provided to the 
committee by December 15, 1995.

                       ship repair subcontractors

    The committee is concerned over continuing reports that 
Navy ship repair subcontractors are not being paid in a timely 
fashion, and in some cases not being paid at all, by prime 
contractors for work completed in the repair and maintenance of 
Navy vessels. The committee is concerned that this problem 
could increase in severity during this period of contraction in 
Navy fleet maintenance activity.
    A 1993 General Accounting Office report recommended that 
the Secretary of Defense identify circumstances under which 
contracting officers should take action to provide payment 
protection for subcontracts and also implement appropriate 
payment protection techniques. The committee believes the 
Department should pursue remedies necessary to ensure that the 
subcontractor community will be able to support the U.S. Navy 
fleet.

                        DOD Financial Management

    Over the past several years, numerous reports by the 
General Accounting Office (GAO), congressional committees, and 
the DOD Inspector General, have been critical of the Department 
of Defense's inability to provide adequate stewardship over 
hundreds of billions of dollars of public funds.
    The DOD Comptroller has also stated that the Department's 
finance and accounting system today is a ``burned-out wreckage 
of outdated and cumbersome systems.'' Severe shortcomings in 
financial operations currently preclude the Department from 
having basic accountability over vast sums of money. 
Consequently, senior DOD management and the Congress lack the 
information needed to run the Department in an efficient and 
effective manner.
    The committee believes that the Department's recognition of 
the financial management problems it faces represents a marked 
and welcome change in management philosophy. The Department 
must now take action to fix the problem and hold responsible 
individuals more directly accountable.
    According to an October 1994 GAO report, as of June 1994 
DOD's records contained at least $24.8 billion of problem 
disbursements. This amount increased to about $30 billion, as 
of February 1995. This marks an increase of nearly one quarter 
in problem disbursement transactions over an eight month 
period. Further, over $5 billion of this amount is in old 
canceled accounts, most of which were previously known as ``M'' 
accounts.
    Records in one accounting system, known as Mechanization of 
Contract Administration Services (MOCAS), at the Defense 
Finance and Accounting Service-Columbus, showed that for 2,551 
contracts, DOD had paid contractors about $1 billion more than 
the amount of the contracts. Second, hundreds of contractors 
voluntarily returned almost 4,000 checks totaling $751 million 
to DFAS-Columbus, including $305 million of overpayments. To 
correct this disbursement problem, the Department has a number 
of initiatives planned and underway.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to provide an annual report on the disbursement problem 
beginning on September 30, 1995. The report should show 
disbursement problems for the following categories: (1) 
negative unliquidated obligations, (2) unmatched disbursements, 
(3) intransit disbursements, and (4) undistributed 
disbursements. Further, the report should provide an 
explanation if the amount of the disbursement problem (for an 
individual category at the DFAS-Center) is not being reduced. 
The explanation should include why the balances are not 
decreasing and what actions DOD is taking to correct the 
problem, including the amount of funds being spent on the 
action.

                            cash management

    Since the Defense Business Operating Fund (DBOF) was 
established, its cash balance has been centrally managed by the 
Office of the Comptroller. On February 1, 1995, the Department 
of Defense returned the management of the DBOF's cash and 
related Anti-Deficiency Act (Public Law 97-258) limitations to 
the military service and DOD component level. This policy 
change is a major departure from the single cash balance 
objective the Department cited in establishing DBOF. By 
consolidating the cash balances of the old industrial and stock 
funds, DOD reduced by several billions of dollars DBOF's cash 
requirement needs. However, the policy change placing the 
management of cash at the military services and DOD component 
level could result in DBOF's cash requirements increasing by 
over $1 billion. According to the General Accounting Office 
(GAO), the change in the cash policy has resulted in the amount 
of advance billing increasing from about $3 billion to about $5 
billion.
    The committee disagrees with the Department's decision to 
place the cash management responsibility for DBOF cash back in 
the hands of the military services and DOD components. The 
management of cash at the central OSD level has proven that the 
overall cash balance can be reduced. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a provision (sec. 312) that would require the Office 
of the Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to immediately 
reverse its February 1995, decision and to centrally manage 
DBOF's cash.
    Further, the committee directs the GAO to perform a review 
of the Fund's cash management practices. The report should be 
submitted to the committee no later than March 15, 1996.

                           prior year losses

    According to the Department's pricing policy, prices 
charged DBOF customers should be increased to recover losses. 
The committee agrees with GAO that this policy is inconsistent 
with the basic tenet of DBOF--that prices should reflect the 
actual cost incurred in providing goods and services in the 
current fiscal year. Prices that reflect only the cost expected 
to be incurred for that period would enable DOD and the 
Congress to determine the cost of each year's operations and 
measure the performance of DBOF's various business areas for 
that period.
    Most of DBOF's losses pertain to the Navy. While the Army, 
Air Force, and DOD-wide components have tried to comply with 
the DBOF concept and operate on a break-even basis, the Navy 
has incurred substantial losses totalling over $1 billion. To 
finance these losses, the Navy has included $695 million in its 
fiscal year 1996 operation and maintenance budget request that 
it plans to transfer to DBOF. However, DBOF prices already have 
been increased in fiscal year 1994 and 1995 to recover losses 
incurred during fiscal years 1992 and 1993.
    Section 314 of the bill would require future budgets to 
include the amount necessary to cover prior year losses.

                           financial systems

    The Defense Business Operations Fund (DBOF) currently uses 
80 disparate, unlinked financial systems and approximately 200 
ancillary systems that provide financial data. Consequently, 
DBOF accounting data is often not complete, timely, or useful.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a 
report to the congressional defense committees identifying the 
total estimated cost to improve DBOF's information systems. 
This estimate should include the following significant costs: 
(1) improvements needed to meet the minimum technical 
requirements, (2) data conversion from the existing systems to 
the interim migratory system, (3) development of interfaces 
with nonfinancial systems, such as logistics and personnel, (4) 
training of personnel who will operate and enter data into the 
interim migratory system, and (5) replacement of the 63 
existing systems with the interim migratory systems. This 
report should be presented no later than March 1, 1996.

     dbof prices should include the full cost of military personnel

    The current DBOF policy provides that the cost of military 
personnel will be assessed at the civilian equivalent rate, not 
the actual cost of military personnel. This practice 
understates the total military personnel costs resulting from 
the 27,000 military personnel working in DBOF operations.
    Section 313 of the bill would require the use of actual 
military costs in developing DBOF's fiscal year 1997 prices 
that will be charged to the customers. The military personnel 
accounts would be reimbursed based on the levels contained in 
the budget request or authorized by Congress. This policy would 
apply only to those military personnel who are included in the 
rates charged by the industrially funded activities. This 
policy would not apply in the event that personnel are working 
in the industrial activities in a training or other capacity 
wherein it is not normally required to have their pay 
reimbursed to the industrial funds from operation and 
maintenance funds.

                             capital assets

    DOD managers continue to receive inaccurate data on DBOF's 
annual $1.4 billion capital asset program. Specifically, 
financial data on the amount of revenue earmarked for purchases 
of capital assets, capital asset obligations, and capital asset 
outlays is questionable. DBOF business areas only obligated 
about 58 percent of the capital asset authority provided to 
them. A review of the fiscal year 1994 financial reports show 
that DBOF obligated 80 percent of the 1994 capital asset 
program. This data indicates that the Department is either not 
executing the capital asset program or the data is inaccurate. 
Consequently, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for 
DOD management and the Congress to ascertain if the capital 
asset program is being executed in accordance with the budget 
presented to the Congress.
    Since the Department has not convinced this committee that 
it has gained sufficient control over the capital asset 
program, the committee directs the Secretary to apply the 
allocation of capital budgets to higher priority areas within 
the capital asset account and report on the reallocation by 
March 1, 1996.

                  overpayment collection demonstration

    The committee recommends a provision (sec. 363) that would 
authorize the Department of Defense to undertake a 
demonstration project to pay up to $5 million to a commercial 
firm to identify money due to the government because of 
underdeductions and overpayments made to vendors. Commercial 
sector data processing techniques would be used to compare 
purchase documents and agreements with vendor invoices to 
identify discrepancies in allowances, pricing, discounts, 
billback allowances, backhaul allowances, and freight routing 
instructions. The review would also search for duplicate 
payments and unauthorized invoice charges. Fees would be on a 
contingency basis at a rate of not more than 25 percent of the 
actual recoveries.

                         offsetting collections

    The Department of Defense is presently authorized to 
provide goods and services to non-federal entities, including 
individuals, businesses, political subdivisions, and foreign 
governments on a cost reimbursable basis. Monies collected from 
these non-federal sources and credited to expenditure accounts 
are referred to in the budget as ``offsetting collections from 
non-federal sources.'' As such, these amounts are deducted from 
gross budget authority and outlays in arriving at the 
Department's topline budget numbers. In recent years, these 
collections have been averaging $8 to $11 billion per year.
    The committee has a number of concerns over the potential 
for these collections to erode accountability and oversight of 
fiscal resources made available to the Department's military 
accounts. For example:
          (1) The amounts collected could be significantly 
        different from the cost incurred by DOD. Where 
        collections, or prices charged, are less than the 
        Department's true cost, DOD is effectively giving away 
        federal resources. Where collections are in excess of 
        cost, these transactions provide resources that are 
        outside congressional oversight and control.
          (2) Discrepancies in excess of $1 billion have 
        occurred in recent years between the budgeted amount of 
        offsetting collections anticipated and the actual 
        amount collected. These discrepancies raise doubts that 
        the level of actual resources available to the 
        Department is consistent with the intent of Congress.
    To address these concerns, the committee directs the 
Department of Defense to submit a report to the Congress no 
later than March 31, 1996 that addresses: (1) the extent to 
which reimbursements equal the Department's cost, (2) the 
accuracy with which the budget is able to predict actual 
offsetting collections, (3) the amounts collected by object of 
sale and purchaser, and (4) recommendations to improve or 
remedy the condition.

                  emergency and extraordinary expenses

    As part of the agreed framework reached between the United 
States and North Korea in October 1994, the U.S. agreed to 
purchase and deliver heavy oil to North Korea. This shipment of 
oil for North Korea cost approximately $5 million and was 
financed out of the Department of Defense's budget. The 
committee finds the use of scarce DOD resources for the purpose 
of providing fuel oil or other assistance to North Korea, at a 
time when severe funding shortfalls are adversely impacting 
force readiness and modernization, difficult to understand.
    The funds used for this purpose were drawn from authority 
granted under section 127 of title 10, United States Code to 
the Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military 
departments to use appropriated funds for emergency and 
extraordinary expenses for ``any emergency or extraordinary 
expense which cannot be anticipated or classified.'' The 
committee views the use of this authority for the purpose of 
providing fuel oil to North Korea as inappropriate. 
Consequently, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 372) 
that would require prior notification by the Secretary of 
Defense, or the Secretary of a military department, to the 
congressional defense committees before any funds available to 
the Department of Defense for emergency and extraordinary 
expenses may be obligated or expended in an amount of 
$1,000,000 or more for any single transaction. Under current 
law, the Secretary of Defense submits a quarterly report when 
funds are expended under this authority.

                         Information Technology


                          performance measures

    Congress requested the Department of Defense to establish 
performance measures and management controls to ensure the 
maximum benefit from its automated information systems (AISs).
    The committee believes that the Department is making an 
effort to improve its performance measures and management 
controls. However, the report required by section 381 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public 
Law 103-337) does not convince the committee that DOD is fully 
committed to either measuring the benefit or ensuring maximum 
benefit from developing, modernizing, operating, and 
maintaining AISs. Consequently, the committee directs DOD to 
immediately re-evaluate the performance measures contained in 
its report, and develop acceptable, precise performance 
measures to effectively measure the benefits, in terms of 
dollars and contribution to mission performance, of 
implementing migration systems, establishing data standards, 
and improving processes. The committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to submit the resulting new performance measures to 
Congress no later than January 15, 1996.
    The committee also directs the Secretary to report by 
January 15, 1996 on how the Department plans to manage AIS 
activities to ensure that maximum benefits are received. In 
particular, the report should: (1) elaborate on each step of 
the management control process, (2) explain how the Department 
proposes to ensure that its performance data is of high 
quality, and (3) describe controls to ensure accuracy and 
consistency among system costs reported through DOD's Planning, 
Programming and Budgeting System, to the Major Automated 
Information System Review Council, and to the Congress via the 
biennial budget estimates.

                         off-the-shelf systems

    The committee believes that certain Department of Defense 
functional processes lend themselves to the use of off-the-
shelf information technology. Two examples are functions 
performed by the Defense Printing Service and the armed 
services' public works centers. The committee directs that the 
Secretary of Defense conduct a review of using off-the-shelf 
systems for these functions and report to the committee by 
March 1, 1996 on other functional processes that can use 
existing private sector technology.

                    Defense Support Services Reform

    Over half of the defense budget--59 percent, or $160 
billion in 1994--goes to support services, including 
information technology, travel administration, financial 
management, supply, printing, maintenance and other functions. 
During this period of constrained resources, the committee is 
concerned that every dollar spent in this area be spent wisely 
and efficiently and believes that two principal areas require 
attention.
    First, while the military force structure has been reduced 
dramatically, reductions in funding for support services has 
not kept pace. For the period between fiscal years 1990 and 
1996, funding for support services will have been reduced 
approximately 13 percent, compared to a 28 percent decline in 
military end strength and a 59 percent reduction in procurement 
funding. Further reductions in support services are necessary.
    Second, many of the processes and systems for providing 
support services are outmoded. Administration of routine 
employee travel, for example, is over five times more expensive 
in the DOD than in private corporations. Private sector 
management practices need to be adopted, and in some cases 
services should be performed by the private sector rather than 
by DOD personnel.
    Reform is vitally necessary in both these areas in order to 
provide the best quality services at the lowest cost, and to 
free up funds for force modernization and readiness.

                      reengineering transportation

    Studies by DOD, various commissions, and the U.S. 
Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM) have reported that traffic 
management processes within the Department are fragmented and 
inefficient. These processes and automated systems were 
developed independently for each mode of transportation.
    USTRANSCOM finances over $5.4 billion of transportation 
expenses per year. The overhead structure supporting defense 
transportation has an annual cost of $1.9 billion--$659 million 
of which is for managing common user transportation funded 
through the Defense Business Operations Fund (DBOF). The 
current structure of separate component command headquarters 
and a worldwide field structure has remained essentially 
unchanged since the formation of USTRANSCOM.
    Transportation services that the military component 
commands have traditionally provided, such as port handling and 
intermodal transfers, are currently provided primarily by 
commercial carriers. Presently, about two-thirds of the 
Military Traffic and Management Command (MTMC) and the Military 
Sealift Command (MSC) common-user transportation personnel are 
located at headquarters and subordinate command offices 
performing primarily management support transportation 
functions. Less than one-third are located at port or terminal 
activities. Further, the MTMC offices, including headquarters, 
are co-located with or in close proximity to MSC offices whose 
shore-based staff add another 350 personnel to the overhead 
infrastructure. MTMC and MSC personnel typically do not handle 
cargo. Furthermore, the component commands frequently perform 
similar functions, albeit for the particular mode of 
transportation for which they are responsible. MTMC, MSC, and 
the Army Material Command (AMC) separately negotiate freight 
rates and process claims, often related to the same shipment. 
MTMC handles the truck or rail portion, MSC handles the ocean 
portion, and AMC handles the air portion. Duplication also 
exists among the administrative functions, such as general 
counsel, inspector general, public affairs, and civilian 
personnel.
    The overhead charged to customers through DBOF and passed 
on to customers for this defense transportation system is 
costly. For example, a military customer is charged $3,292 for 
a shipment from New Jersey to Rotterdam, Netherlands, yet a 
commercial carrier charges $1,553 for the same shipment.
    The committee believes immediate action is necessary to 
consolidate and streamline transportation operations in a 
manner that reduces the amount of transportation overhead 
passed on to transportation customers without adversely 
affecting mobilization capability. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a provision (sec. 315) that would reduce by $70 
million the amount requested from the transportation accounts 
of the Defense Business Operations Fund.

                     reengineering household moves

    Every year the Department of Defense spends $1.1 billion 
moving 650,000 shipments of servicemember household goods and 
personal property. These figures do not include the hundreds of 
millions in costs incurred to process endless paperwork and 
financial transactions, and time spent in legal review for 
claims. In addition, $100 million is spent annually for damage 
claims, a rate of 23 percent compared to the industry rate of 
below 14 percent.
    The committee is convinced that the DOD must pursue a 
higher level of service for the movement of household goods 
that begins to move toward greater reliance on commercial 
business practices. This approach must involve the use of 
simplified procedures and relieving the industry from 
government-unique terms, conditions and regulations. Despite 
the fact that military moves comprise the largest block of 
customers in the moving industry, DOD personnel continually 
receive second-class treatment.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Department of 
Defense to undertake a pilot program to implement commercial 
business practices and standards of service for its movement of 
service household goods and report on the status of 
implementation by March 1, 1996.

                           travel processing

    The Department of Defense currently spends approximately $1 
billion each year to administer temporary duty travel. For 
fiscal year 1993, Department travel processing costs were at 
least 30 percent of the direct travel cost--well above the 6 
percent rate which is the industry benchmark.
    A DOD task force has recommended various ways to improve 
travel processing, including adopting industry best practices. 
The Department has developed a model travel regulation that 
consolidates the various forms and orders currently used into a 
single ``trip record,'' increases the threshold on requiring 
receipts for reimbursements from $25 to $75, and allows the 
traveler to hold the receipts. The Department also plans to use 
a contractor-based travel arrangement system to achieve cost-
savings goals (such as reduced per diem expenses for long-term 
travel) without inflexible regulatory requirements. The 
Department expects to begin agency-wide application of its new 
travel policies and processes in fiscal year 1996.
    Further, many of the regulatory changes needed to 
reengineer travel processing will require the concurrence or 
cooperation of other Federal agencies. The committee directs 
the Secretary of Defense to: (1) seek General Services 
Administration waivers to implement a variety of changes to 
civilian travel entitlements, including increasing the receipts 
threshold, (2) seek approval from the Internal Revenue Service 
to institute new rules on expenditure receipts, (3) seek a 
waiver from the Office of Personnel Management to allow DOD to 
determine appropriate per diem for long-term travel, and (4) 
solicit the General Accounting Office's views on whether the 
new travel policies and procedures will satisfy federal 
internal control standards.
    The committee urges these agencies to give prompt attention 
to these initiatives and make every effort to assist the 
Department in removing unnecessary and costly travel policies 
and procedures.
    The committee further directs the Secretary of Defense to 
ensure that DOD travel arrangements made by contractor 
personnel (such as travel agents) are in the best interest of 
the government. In this regard, the Department should not enter 
into contracts requiring payments based on the percentage of 
the Department's travel costs--such as travel agent commissions 
determined as a percentage of passenger fares.

                           outsourcing travel

    It is increasingly common for private industry to outsource 
its travel function, particularly travel services. DOD 
travelers want a simpler approval mechanism and a way to make 
travel arrangements less time consuming and settlement of their 
travel claim before they received their charge card bill.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 365) 
that would establish a pilot program for evaluation of improved 
travel processing prototypes.

                     property disposal outsourcing

    The Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS), a 
unit of the Defense Logistics Agency, has been identified by 
the Department of Defense as a non-core, non-inherent 
government function. The DRMS has, therefore, been nominated 
for outsourcing by the Department of Defense and the National 
Performance Review. Furthermore, several studies by the General 
Accounting Office and others demonstrate that the property 
disposal functions of DRMS could benefit significantly from the 
application of ``best commercial practices.'' These benefits 
would include higher reutilization rates, additional revenue 
from property sales, and reduced costs of operation.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 361) 
that would direct the Secretary of Defense to outsource the 
DRMS function to a qualified commercial entity not later than 
July 1, 1996. The committee estimates that this action may 
yield savings from $50 million to $100 million per year if the 
similar experiences of the Department of Treasury, whose 
property disposal functions were outsourced in 1985, are 
realized.
    The Secretary is directed to provide the committee with a 
status report by January 15, 1996, on actions completed, 
underway, and planned.

                            contracting-out

    The current process used to determine the cost of DOD-
operated programs versus contracting out is cumbersome and 
inefficient. These procedures are set forth in Office of 
Management and Budget Circular A-76 and supplemented by 
internal DOD regulations. To achieve greater return on 
constrained DOD resources, the committee is convinced that this 
process must be streamlined. The committee requests that the 
Secretary of Defense examine the following: (1) providing 
authority to contract out at the installation level, (2) using 
an improved comparison process instead of the lengthy, 
expensive and formal process now used, (3) raising to at least 
50 the threshold for the number of employees affected that 
allows converting of employees to contract without placement, 
and (4) limiting the time available for administrative appeal. 
The Secretary of Defense should report to the committee by 
March 1, 1996 on the advisability of implementing these and 
other improvements to the contracting-out process.

                              inventories

    The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and service inventory 
control points are responsible with ensuring that items are 
available to the operating forces when and where needed. DLA 
and the military services maintain about 600 million cubic feet 
of warehouse space for this purpose. Two-thirds of this space 
is occupied by secondary inventory--spare and repair parts, 
clothing, medical supplies and other items that DOD uses to 
support operating forces.
    The General Accounting Office (GAO) reports that secondary 
inventory was responsible for an estimated volume of 218.8 
million cubic feet in 1994. Secondary inventory items 
accounting for 130.4 million cubic feet, or 60 percent of the 
218.8 million cubic feet, are not needed to satisfy current war 
reserve and operating requirements. While DOD has made 
significant progress in reducing secondary inventory, it still 
occupies about 360 million cubic feet and actual warehouse 
space of 420 millon cubic feet. Between fiscal years 1992 and 
1995, DOD's operation and maintenance spending for secondary 
inventory decreased a modest 2.6 percent. In contrast, military 
force structure supported by the inventory has experienced 
dramatic decreases.

                   inventory management consolidation

    Currently, DLA manages nearly four million items at three 
inventory control points, while the armed services use 18 
inventory control points to manage 600,000 items, spending 
approximately $900 million in labor costs to do so. Centralized 
purchasing of consumables could result in savings of ten to 15 
percent. Section 391 of the bill would request DOD to review 
the consolidation of all inventory control points for storage 
and handling of inventory. Additional savings could also be 
realized through broader procurement leverage.

                  depot level repairable consolidation

    Additionally, the services retain redundant capabilities 
for storing and managing repairable items. Each service has 
hundreds of millions of dollars worth of high-value depot level 
repairables in unit allowances as ``insurance stocks''. The 
national and international transportation and DLA 
infrastructure has evolved to the point where further 
consolidation of this function would result in further 
economies. Section 391 of the bill would also direct a review 
of consolidation of the depot level repairable inventory under 
the Defense Logistics Agency.

                            fuel management

    Current levels of fuel held in war reserve are excessive 
given the current National Military Strategy. During Operation 
Desert Storm, DOD did not significantly access these stocks. 
Significant changes in the management, purchasing and 
transportation of DOD fuel could allow use of war reserve 
stocks that would better take advantage of fluctuating oil 
prices. Section 392 would provide authority for DOD to access 
war reserve stocks and realize significant savings.

                              electricity

    The Department spends approximately $2 billion each year to 
purchase electricity. The potential exists for reducing these 
costs by nearly 20 percent through deregulation and management 
improvements. Section 357 of the bill would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to implement procedures to purchase 
electricity from the most efficient source.

                     contract management oversight

    The cost to conduct oversight of defense procurement is 
excessive with some estimates placing the cost at 15 to 20 
percent of the acquisition cost. The General Accounting Office 
is requested to conduct a review of these added costs and 
report to the committee by April 1, 1996 with suggestions for 
reducing these costs.

              general services administration added costs

    The General Services Administration (GSA) is the executive 
agency for purchase of many of the consumable commodities used 
by the Federal Government. Department of Defense requirements 
account for 70 percent of the purchases made by GSA. Section 
358 of the bill would authorize DOD to bypass GSA when it is 
more efficient to do so.

                         prime vendor delivery

    The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) could achieve 
significant savings by more aggressively implementing best 
inventory practices used by the private sector. Leading private 
sector companies store very few items and rely on suppliers to 
manage inventory and to deliver parts when needed. Department 
of Defense prototypes demonstrate that significant savings can 
be realized in the purchase and distribution of personnel items 
such as clothing, food, and medical supplies. DLA should adopt 
similar improved practices for the $8 billion inventory of 
hardware items. Section 360 of the bill would require that the 
Secretary of Defense apply these prototypes nationwide and 
report to the committee on other areas where prime vendor 
delivery can achieve savings. The committee recommends a 
reduction of $180 million in anticipation of expected savings 
from reduced inventory purchase requirements.

               two-year operation and maintenance funding

    Because operation and maintenance funding expires at the 
end of the fiscal year, there are significant obligations in 
the fourth quarter of the year. The Department of Defense is 
requested to report to the congressional defense committees on 
areas where operation and maintenance funding should be 
authorized for two years in order to preclude this inefficient 
practice.

                           dfas consolidation

    The Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) is 
consolidating the Department of Defense's financial operations. 
While the consolidation is expected to significantly reduce the 
workforce and the number of operating locations, it would still 
result in a larger and more costly infrastructure than 
necessary. GAO's preliminary analysis indicates that DOD could 
save an additional $3 billion (net present value) over 20 years 
by building a more appropriate smaller infrastructure. The 
smaller infrastructure would require about 3,500 fewer 
personnel and significantly reduce military construction costs 
below the planned DFAS requirements of $200 million for fiscal 
years 1997 and 1998.
    DFAS is also standardizing its finance and accounting 
systems under the Corporate Information Management initiative. 
By selecting migration systems for development and enhancement, 
DFAS hopes to reduce its many legacy systems to a smaller 
number of standard systems by late 1996. However, DFAS is 
standardizing systems and consolidating its work locations 
without first reengineering its core business processes to 
eliminate non-value added activities and to improve others. 
This approach could perpetuate inefficient and unneeded 
processes, lock DFAS into automated ways of doing business that 
may not best serve future operations, and result in a larger, 
more costly information system infrastructure. In contrast, 
successful private and public organizations have first done 
extensive planning and analysis, benchmarked performance, 
eliminated non-value added activities, and changed business 
processes to fit future needs all prior to consolidating, 
developing, and installing new computer systems. Therefore, the 
committee recommends that DOD reassess its DFAS reorganization 
to better consider process reengineering and outsourcing 
opportunities.

                         logistics outsourcing

    The Army has employed the Logistics Civil Augmentation 
Program during deployments in support of peacekeeping and 
humanitarian missions. There is potential to replace some of 
the existing logistics infrastructure rendered redundant with 
the onset of contract operations for logistics support. The 
General Accounting Office is requested to provide a report by 
March 1, 1996 on those combat support and combat service 
support functions that can be performed using contracts and 
identify current organic logistics support functions that can 
be eliminated as a result of contract logistics.

                          outsourcing payroll

    Presently, the Department of Defense is paying considerably 
more for its payroll and accounting functions than comparable 
expenses incurred in the private sector. It has been estimated 
that whereas the Department pays on the order of $14 per pay 
event, industry ``best-in-class'' payroll costs are on the 
order of $2 per pay event. As a result, the DOD Comptroller, in 
coordination with the Defense Finance and Accounting Service 
(DFAS) has been studying the efficacy of outsourcing payroll 
and accounting functions.
    For example, in 1994 DFAS undertook a study of the 
nonappropriated fund (NAF) accounting and payroll activity at 
Red River Army Arsenal for the purpose of evaluating the 
feasibility of outsourcing this function. Currently, portions 
of payroll and accounting systems such as the Navy Exchange 
payroll and the Army's NAF time and attendance system are 
performed by the private sector. Section 368 of the bill would 
require the Secretary of Defense to conduct a pilot program on 
outsourcing for nonappropriated fund payroll. Section 362 of 
the bill would require the Secretary of Defense to submit a 
plan for outsourcing civilian payroll.

                        dod printing operations

    The Defense Printing Service (DPS) is the single manager 
for printing operations within the Department of Defense (DOD). 
The General Accounting Office reported that DPS has reduced its 
initial staffing by over 36 percent (3,694 to 2,343 personnel) 
and has eliminated nearly 100 of its original 350 printing-
related facilities in an effort to achieve increased 
efficiencies.
    DPS should continually review its operational efficiencies 
and retain only a minimal core capacity in-house to cover those 
printing-related requirements which cannot be satisfactorily or 
economically fulfilled by the private sector. Dollar savings 
for certain printing-related services are achievable through 
judicious use of commercial outsourcing, particularly for those 
printing and duplicating jobs exceeding $500.
    The committee supports DPS' efforts to achieve a minimal 
in-house core capacity and to increase its commercial 
procurement of printing-related services. DPS currently 
satisfies about 50 percent of its requirements through 
commercial procurement--the remainder of the work is produced 
in-house. The committee directs that DPS increase its 
commercial procurement percentage to 70 percent in fiscal year 
1996. Through the combination of downsizing and increased 
outsourcing, the committee recommends a $10 million reduction 
to the budget request for services of the DPS.

                        [In millions of dollars]

        Service                                                Reduction
Army..............................................................    $3
Navy..............................................................     4
Air Force.........................................................     3
                                                                  ______
      Total.......................................................    10

                          outsourcing printing

    Information technology has changed a great deal in the last 
decade and the laws governing all aspects of government 
printing have become outdated. Competition in the civilian 
marketplace is significant and this has created a clear 
``buyer's market'' with distinct opportunities for savings. 
Government agencies should be able to take advantage of this 
situation to procure printing and duplicating service for much 
less than is currently possible through the Government Printing 
Office. Under the current arrangement, government customers 
frequently pay for both the services of a contracted civilian 
printing vendor and the Government Printing Office overhead.
    Section 359 of the bill would allow executive branch 
organizations to purchase printing and duplicating services 
directly from local printing vendors without going through the 
Government Printing Office. This flexibility is primarily 
intended to be used for the smaller, localized field printing 
and duplicating services that are provided the least 
economically by the Government Printing Office.

                         outsourcing expertise

    The committee recommends $10 million for the development of 
a curriculum at appropriate defense educational institutions to 
improve skills for outsourcing infrastructure support functions 
of the Department of Defense.

                           Civilian Employees


                    dod civilian employee management

    The Department of Defense (DOD) has experienced 
considerable reductions in its civilian personnel workforce. In 
fact, the Department is bearing the brunt of the federal 
civilian workforce cuts. In fiscal year 1995, 98 percent of all 
federal government-wide civilian reductions will come from the 
DOD.
    The current Full-Time Equivalents (FTE) ceilings do not 
provide the DOD with the necessary flexibility to allocate work 
based upon national security requirements and available 
funding. Commanders at the base and installation level must be 
able to react to changes in the mission as directed by DOD, 
higher headquarters and the Congress. In certain areas this 
downsizing has begun to affect vital services and functions 
such as equipment repair and maintenance. The Army's fiscal 
year 1996 budget funds Army depot maintenance at 80% of the 
requirement. According to the Army, it would have difficulty 
executing additional depot maintenance workload because the FTE 
ceilings limits the number of workyears available to perform 
depot maintenance. For fiscal year 1995, Congress increased 
Marine Corps depot maintenance funding and while the Marine 
Corps is executing this workload, it is not doing so in the 
most cost effective or efficient manner due to FTE limitations. 
Employees at Marine Corps depots are working large amounts of 
overtime--up to 28% of overtime is planned for the year.
    FTE ceilings also are affecting the ability of installation 
commanders to perform functions and provide services. The 
practice of assigning military personnel to accomplish work 
previously performed by civilian employees--what is known as 
borrowed military manpower--is increasing. Such a practice 
adversely impacts on individual and unit training, and harms 
quality of life. The Army is reporting a small rise in the 
number of units reporting adverse effects on training resulting 
from the use of military personnel in work previously performed 
by civilian employees. However, anecdotal information indicates 
that the level of special duty (which includes borrowed 
military manpower and troop diversions) may be higher than 
reported.
    It is the committee's view that the size of the 
Department's civilian workforce should be based on funded 
workload, and not arbitrary personnel ceilings. Therefore, the 
committee recommends a provision (sec. 331) that would prohibit 
the use of full-time equivalent personnel ceilings in the 
management of DOD's civilian workforce, requiring instead that 
the Secretary of Defense make reductions in FTE positions only 
as a result of a reduction in funds available to the DOD. It 
also would require the Secretary of Defense to ensure that for 
each operation and maintenance budget activity, the necessary 
number, type and skill mix of personnel are employed by the DOD 
to carry out the functions funded within each budget activity.

                   army civilian personnel management

    Last year's report on H.R. 4301, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (H. Rept. 103-499), 
directed the Army to implement recommendations of the Army 
Audit Agency concerning the Army Materiel Command (AMC) and the 
use of workload requirement techniques, based on mission 
requirements and priorities, to determine staffing 
requirements. The committee has recently received an update by 
the Assistant Secretary of the Army (M&RA) on the Army's 
implementation of these directions. The committee commends the 
Army on the progress that has been made in starting to 
implement a workload based management system for AMC.
    The committee believes that the Army should expand the 
workload based management system to all major commands and 
infrastructure functions. In addition, workload priorities and 
manpower requirements resulting from the application of 
workload based manpower requirements should be directly 
integrated with all phases of the Army's planning, programming, 
budgeting, resource allocation and accounting processes. 
Finally, annual budget submittals should be based on a total 
Army civilian workforce plan, using workload-based staffing 
level justifications that meet Army Audit Agency scrutiny. The 
committee expects the Secretary of the Army to report to the 
congressional defense committees with each year's budget 
submittal and the progress made in implementing these 
recommendations.

                          overseas allowances

    The committee is aware that differences in overseas living 
quarters allowance policy among the military departments 
resulted in disparate treatment of living quarters allowances 
for appropriated and nonappropriated fund (NAF) employees 
overseas.
    The DOD Inspector General has recommended that living 
quarters allowances for NAF employees be discontinued. It is 
estimated that these payments to NAF employees amount to over 
$18 million per year. Section 335 of the bill would require 
that the same procedures be used for living quarters allowances 
for appropriated fund civilians and NAF civilians. In the 
absence of this consistent policy, DOD should terminate the 
practice of paying living quarters allowances to NAF employees 
hired after the effective date of enactment of this Act and 
terminate payments for employees currently receiving this 
payment by October 1, 1996.

                             IG and Audits


                           inspectors general

    The committee report on H.R. 4301, the Fiscal Year 1995 
National Defense Authorization Act, (H. Rept. 103-499) noted 
major problems in the Navy Inspector General process and 
requested the DOD Inspector General to determine the 
effectiveness of the Air Force and Army inspectors general.
    The DOD IG found that Army IGs do not exercise their full 
investigative potential. Because Army policy restricts the use 
of IG work to support disciplinary action, significant 
allegations of noncriminal wrongdoing are usually investigated 
by Army officers outside the IG organization who lack the 
investigative training and experience of the IGs.
    The DOD IG also found that certain Air Force IG processes 
and organizations have inherent flaws that raised questions 
regarding the adequacy and impartiality of noncriminal 
investigations. The Air Force policy of ``dual-hatting'' the 
vice (or deputy) commander of an organization as the 
organization IG is of great concern to the committee. Assigning 
chain of command and IG roles to a single official raises 
conflict of interest and independence concerns that detract 
from the credibility of the Air Force IG system. Air Force 
service members hold strong negative perceptions of the ``dual-
hat'' arrangement and may, as a result, hesitate to disclose 
wrongdoing to Air Force IGs.
    Further, the Air Force IG practice of allowing 
organizations to examine allegations against themselves raises 
additional questions of investigative impartiality. 
Additionally, the Air Force IG reliance on ``augmentee'' (non-
IG) investigators to investigate noncriminal matters is 
inefficient and produces investigative work that requires 
extensive remedial effort.
    Despite statutory protection for whistleblowers, which is 
implemented by DOD and service regulations, the DOD IG found 
that Army and Air Force personnel continue to fear reprisal for 
communicating with an IG. The committee believes the services 
should strengthen efforts to educate service members and 
commanders regarding rights of and protection for those 
contacting an IG.
    The DOD Inspector General is requested to report to the 
committee not later than March 1, 1996 on actions taken to 
correct these identified shortcomings including shortcomings in 
the Navy IG process.

          consolidation of procurement fraud within the dod ig

    The consolidation of some or all of the elements of the 
Defense Criminal Investigative Organizations (DCIOs) into the 
Department of Defense, Inspector General (DOD IG) has been 
under consideration by this committee for several years. 
Currently, the Department has four DCIOs which include the Army 
Criminal Investigation Command (CID), the Naval Criminal 
Investigative Service (NCIS), the Air Force Office of Special 
Investigations (AFOSI), and the Inspector General Defense 
Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS).
    In January 1995, the Department, pursuant to the statement 
of managers language accompanying the conference report on H.R. 
5006, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1993 (House Report 102-966), issued its advisory board report 
entitled ``The Report of the Advisory Board of the 
Investigative Capability of the Department of Defense.'' That 
report recommended responsibility for procurement fraud be 
consolidated in the Office of the DOD Inspector General. The 
committee agrees with this recommendation.
    The committee believes that consolidation of the 
department's procurement fraud mission would:
          (1) Reduce costs and increase efficiency by 
        eliminating duplicative management and overhead 
        structure in accordance with the National and Defense 
        Performance Reviews.
          (2) Eliminate approximately 135 of the 473 personnel 
        spaces currently dedicated to, or in support of, the 
        Military Criminal Investigative Organizations (MCIOs) 
        major procurement fraud investigative mission at a cost 
        savings of $65 million over the next six fiscal years.
          (3) Eliminate redundancy in DOD operations by halting 
        unnecessary participation of multiple Defense Criminal 
        Investigative Organizations (DCIOs) in investigations.
          (4) Eliminate confusion for the Department of Justice 
        in coordinating investigative efforts by centralizing 
        the investigative responsibility within one DOD agency.
          (5) Save military personnel spaces by civilianizing 
        the entire major procurement fraud investigative 
        mission.
          (6) Allow the MCIOs to focus limited resources on 
        their primary missions--investigating general crimes, 
        countering drug trafficking and use, and conducting 
        installation level fraud operations, thus properly 
        supporting local commanders.
          (7) Ensure that all DOD interests are considered when 
        investigations involve multiple service and Defense 
        agency contracts.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 
382) that would direct the consolidation of the procurement 
fraud function of the MCIOs into the Office of the DOD 
Inspector General.

                           unnecessary audits

    The committee understands that $160 million is spent 
annually in conducting audits of the armed services. Many of 
these audits are not productive, yielding little savings and 
resulting in few major findings. The committee believes that 
the armed services' audit agencies should better prioritize 
their audit plans and limit their scope to high-return areas. 
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction to the auditing 
functions of the military departments. Further, the committee 
directs the DOD Inspector General to conduct a review of the 
audit functions of the DOD in order to determine whether 
further reductions can be achieved by improvements in 
prioritizing audits, whether outsourcing can be achieved for 
major financial audits, and whether consolidation of audit 
functions can yield savings and improve effectiveness.

                    Environmental Issues of Concern

    The committee notes that the Department of Defense has 
recently begun implementing a ``relative risk'' approach to 
cleaning up its contaminated sites. Under this approach, 
contamination at sites at each installation is categorized 
according to its relative risk to human health and the 
environment. Sites are characterized as posing either high, 
medium or low relative risk. High risk sites contain 
contamination at levels at least 100 times greater than the 
applicable standard. Medium risk sites contain contamination at 
least twice the applicable standard, and contamination at low 
risk sites is less than twice the acceptable standard.
    This relative risk approach affords the Department of 
Defense several benefits. Classifying sites according to their 
relative risk allows the Department of Defense to prioritize 
among its sites so that cleanup action may be focused at the 
sites with the highest relative risk first. This approach also 
permits the department to give communities a sense of the 
relative priority of sites so that they may be better informed 
about when cleanup actions at which sites may be expected. Use 
of the relative risk approach enables the department to use a 
common, readily understandable method for categorizing 
contamination at sites across bases throughout the United 
States. Finally, the relative risk concept should assist the 
department in overcoming what has been one of the chief 
criticisms of the defense environmental restoration program--
that it suffers from a lack of priority in its cleanup 
operations so that the worst sites are not necessarily cleaned 
up first.
    With the significant reduction in funding for the Defense 
Environmental Restoration Account (DERA) that occurred in 
fiscal year 1995, and with further reductions foreseeable in 
the years ahead, the department's use of innovative approaches 
to cleanup activities is of critical importance. While 
recognizing that long term solutions lie largely in reforming 
the statutory scheme governing these activities, the committee 
applauds the department's use of the relative risk approach to 
environmental restoration and looks forward to reviewing the 
results of its implementation in the years ahead.

                 Morale, Welfare and Recreation Issues


                    px and commissary transportation

    The committee estimates that approximately $100 million may 
be saved each year if commissaries and exchanges are allowed to 
contract directly using the most cost effective carriers for 
transportation of products overseas. This estimate includes 
savings in overhead costs currently paid to the Military 
Traffic Management Command (MTMC), the Military Sealift Command 
(MSC) and the Military Airlift Command and the use of foreign 
flag carriers for non-warfighting related products. Therefore, 
the committee recommends a provision (sec. 345) that would 
provide this authority.
    In order to effect these changes, the committee recommends 
$35 million in additional funding be provided to military 
exchanges and commissaries to cover the costs of implementing 
these changes and a reduction of $50 million from the second 
destination transportation authorizations of the military 
exchanges and commissaries that are currently provided to MTMC 
and MSC. In order to effect this reduction, the committee 
directs that $17.5 million be transferred from the Defense 
Business Operations Fund cash balance to the Army operation and 
maintenance account and that $7.5 million be transferred from 
the Defense Business Operations Fund cash balance to the Navy 
operation and maintenance account. The $25 million in savings 
to the Defense Commissary Agency should be used for improving 
services to commissary patrons. The Army and Air Force exchange 
service should serve as executive agent for implementing this 
initiative.

                                 credit

    The Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES), the Navy 
Exchange Services Command (NEXCOM) and the Marine Corps 
Exchange (MCX) have two credit programs. The Deferred Payment 
Plan is operated by AAFES and also used by the MCX. The NEXCARD 
credit program is operated by NEXCOM. In order to provide this 
credit, AAFES has borrowed nearly $1.2 billion from in-house 
sources and commercial banks, moving from a net invested 
position of $319 million to a net borrowed position of $731 
million, while NEXCOM has borrowed $112 million, increasing its 
net borrowed position to $125 million.
    The Department of Defense has taken positive action to 
ensure that there is proper financial oversight over this 
credit and that military patrons are not overextended in their 
amount of available credit. However, the committee believes 
that further action is required. The committee expects that, 
even with a reduced customer base, the morale, welfare and 
recreation (MWR) contribution must be maintained. To achieve 
this goal, a determined focus on maximizing the sale of goods 
and services to the exchange patron must be sustained. The 
committee is concerned that the extensive borrowing to finance 
the credit programs impedes the ability to offer a wider range 
of products and the capital required to modernize facilities.
    Section 348 of the bill would provide for a uniform 
deferred payment plan for military exchanges and would 
outsource the management and operation of these credit 
functions when the same advantages can be gained through 
private sector contracting.

                    unified resources demonstration

    Section 346 of the bill would authorize the Department of 
Defense to undertake a demonstration project to merge 
appropriated and nonappropriated funds used in support of 
morale, welfare and recreation (MWR) activities. The committee 
believes there is considerable potential to reduce costs in 
personnel, contracting, operations, and resource management by 
taking this action. Also, there is the potential to gain 
greater visibility of total program costs and greater stability 
of MWR funding over the year.

                        europe exchange drawdown

    The drawdown of U.S. forces in Europe resulted in $130 
million in costs to the Army and Air Force exchange service. 
Section 349 of the bill would provide $70 million to the Army 
and Air Force exchange service to cover these extraordinary 
expenses: $14.4 million in foreign national separation costs; 
$63 million in excess inventory; $40 million in accelerated 
depreciation; and $17 million in distribution expenses. 
Military exchanges already provide considerable offsets to 
appropriations that would otherwise have to be provided for 
military quality of life, contributing nearly $12 billion over 
the past ten years. Requiring military personnel and their 
families to pay the additional cost of the European withdrawal 
would be unfair. Without relief, military exchange patrons will 
be forced to pay higher prices for the expenses associated with 
the drawdown.

                  military resale and mwr efficiencies

    Several factors are affecting the military's resale and 
morale, welfare and recreation (MWR) programs that call for an 
examination of the potential for generating economies.
          (1) Studies have demonstrated hundreds of millions of 
        dollars can be saved by eliminating duplicate overhead 
        functions.
          (2) Force structure reductions and base closures are 
        diminishing the economies-of-scale of separate entities 
        that exist to manage the various business functions on 
        military bases.
          (3) Budget reduction alternatives could threaten the 
        levels of subsidy provided for these programs, even to 
        the extent of recommending privatization of major 
        aspects of this program. The Department of Defense 
        needs to demonstrate efficiency and insulate the 
        benefits from threats.
          (4) Private sector distribution systems and 
        advancements in information technology provide the 
        opportunity to link common functions to gain economies-
        of-scale. Also, the inception of off-base wholesalers 
        and discount clubs have diminished the savings margins 
        of these programs and action is needed to ensure that 
        these savings margins are maintained.
          (5) The resale and MWR entities perform many similar 
        business functions. However, construction, 
        distribution, employee benefits and data system 
        development systems are fragmented, duplicative and 
        wasteful. These entities pursue expensive separate and 
        incoherent parallel tracks on initiatives. And, they 
        continue to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on 
        these duplicative systems.
          (6) A number of studies have demonstrated the 
        potential to gain economies-of-scale that will maximize 
        revenue generating potential of this program that 
        currently generates annual sales of $17 billion 
        supported by approximately $2 billion in annual funding 
        authorizations, and has the potential to generate more 
        earnings to support quality of life programs.
    Section 350 of the bill would require the Secretary of 
Defense to report on efficiencies that can be gained in the 
operation of these military MWR entities through application of 
technology, increased interface and cooperation among entities 
to regain economies-of-scale that have been lost through force 
structure reductions.

                        commissary construction

    The Department of Defense Inspector General has found 
significant problems with the methods used to determine the 
scope and size of commissary stores. The committee directs the 
Defense Commissary Agency and the Inspector General to 
reconcile any differences between them and report to the 
committee by November 15, 1995 on procedures that will be used 
to validate commissary construction requirements. The Defense 
Commissary Agency should seek the services of an independent 
needs assessment firm such as that currently used by other 
entities of the DOD morale, welfare and recreation program to 
assist in validating construction requirements.

                     distilled spirits distribution

    Section 344 of the bill would require the computation of 
the full cost of the military exchanges in the distribution of 
distilled spirits. This should include but not be limited to 
product cost, freight, backhaul, credit, total handling, 
management, administration, depreciation, utilities, 
headquarters purchasing and logistics, inventory carrying, 
damages, store receiving and processing, accounting, quality 
assurance, safety and security, surcharges, and retail cost 
adjustments between receiver and shipper.

                      united services organization

    The United Services Organization (USO) which consists 
largely of volunteers, represents an efficient means by which 
to enhance the quality of life of U.S. servicemembers and their 
families, especially overseas. In 1994, at a cost of 
approximately $5.4 million of in-kind government assistance, 
the USO provided service programs in excess of $23 million, a 
multiplier of 4.3 in the application of private funds to public 
benefit. The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to 
provide to the maximum extent the amount of in-kind assistance 
provided to the USO in the performance of its mission.

                              Other Issues


                     norway prepositioning program

    The Marine Corps maintains the Norway Airlanded Marine 
Expeditionary Brigade (NALMEB), which consists of prepositioned 
combat equipment and supplies located in six separate 
facilities in Norway constructed specifically for the storage 
of an expeditionary battalion's equipment. The purpose of this 
program is to significantly reduce strategic airlift 
requirements, decrease force closure time, and to provide 
strategic options to rapidly reinforce the North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization's (NATO) northern flank. The prepositioned 
items include rations, vehicles, engineer equipment, howitzers, 
medical supplies and equipment, repair parts and aviation 
ground support equipment. The value of the equipment and 
supplies is approximately $243 million and currently costs $9.4 
million in operations and maintenance funds.
    The committee believes that this program, although 
established and maintained to support a NATO requirement 
specified during the Cold War, may no longer be cost effective. 
The committee is concerned with the shortfalls in equipment 
throughout the Marine Corps and questions whether the equipment 
stored in the NALMEB could be used to alleviate these deficits. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to 
conduct a study to determine the continued need to maintain the 
NALMEB and to what extent the current equipment stored in the 
NALMEB could be redistributed within the Marine Corps. This 
report should be provided to the congressional defense 
committees no later than December 31, 1995.

                               impact aid

    The Department of Education impact aid program provides 
supplementary funds to about 2,500 of 15,000 school districts 
nationwide. This aid is critical to the welfare of DOD families 
and the school districts that are affected by a major DOD 
presence. Proposals to eliminate impact aid payments or to 
restrict the categories of children who qualify a school 
district to receive school impact aid would have a major effect 
on the operating budgets of districts with a large number of 
eligible children.
    Section 394 of the bill would authorize $58 million for 
educational assistance to local educational agencies where the 
standard for the minimum level of education within the state 
could not be maintained because of the large number of military 
dependent students or the effects of base realignments and 
closures.

           military clothing sales stores, replacement sales

    The committee is aware that there are certain items of 
individual clothing and equipment for which service personnel 
are responsible to the government if the item is lost, damaged 
or destroyed. Such items include boots, canteens, shovels. 
Currently, the Army and Air Force have statutory authority 
under title 10, United States Code, to conduct in-kind 
replacement sales of individual equipment, but the Navy and 
Marines Corps have no such authority. Section 393 of the bill 
would provide the same statutory authority to the Navy and 
Marine Corps currently granted to the Army and Air Force, 
thereby creating parity throughout the Department of the 
Defense.

                      navy enlisted storage space

    The committee understands that Navy enlisted personnel in 
paygrades E-1 to E-6 assigned to surface ships are provided no 
barracks space when in home port and thus remain on ship in 
cramped berthing spaces with limited storage space. As a 
result, these sailors must go without the amounts of civilian 
clothing, personal belongings and recreational equipment other 
sailors not assigned ship-board duty may have available. One 
suggested solution is to provide these sailors with additional 
storage space on shore. The committee directs the Secretary of 
the Navy to report to the Committee on Armed Services of the 
Senate and the Committee on National Security of the House of 
Representatives by March 31, 1996, on recommendations for 
improving this quality of life problem for shipboard junior 
enlisted personnel. The report should specifically examine, but 
not limited to, providing additional storage space for sailors 
on shore, with specific cost estimates and plans for 
implementing these recommendations.

         pilot project to improve economic adjustment planning

    The committee is interested in the progress made to date, 
through previously authorized national pilot projects, in 
examining methods to improve the provision of economic 
adjustment and diversification assistance to adversely affected 
local governments. Five sites have already been selected and 
grants awarded to them. The committee believes that these 
efforts should continue and that worthwhile models can result 
from this initiative that will assist other communities in 
dealing with base closures or other defense economic 
dislocation. Therefore, the committee strongly urges the 
Secretary of Defense to ensure that adequate resources are 
extended to this effort so that it may yield the expected 
information to benefit other communities facing conversion and 
reuse planning challenges.

               contractor operated parts stores (copars)

    The Contractor Operated Parts Stores (COPARS) program was 
initiated in the 1960's to improve the efficiency and 
effectiveness of maintenance management, improve vehicle 
readiness, and relieve the military from maintaining large 
inventories. The COPARS contractors maintain a centralized 
parts store located on Army, Navy and Air Force bases, that 
provide off-the-shelf parts for new and rebuilt high demand 
items to the vehicle maintenance unit. In the statement of 
managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 4650, the 
Fiscal Year 1995 Defense Appropriations Act (H. Rept. 103-747), 
the General Accounting Office (GAO) was directed to conduct a 
cost comparison study of the COPARS program and alternative 
programs being considered to replace COPARS. However, rather 
than await the results of GAO's independent study of both 
approaches, the Army and the Air Force have eliminated or 
initiated efforts to eliminate COPARS.
    Therefore, the committee recommends that pending completion 
of the independent GAO study and the evaluation of the results 
by Congress:
          (1) The Army and the other military services suspend 
        any and all efforts directed toward the elimination of 
        COPARS and undertake an economic analysis to determine 
        whether the conversions were economically justified.
          (2) The Secretary of Defense should establish a clear 
        and concise policy concerning COPARS.

              air force automated maintenance data systems

    The committee is disappointed that the Administration 
failed to fund the modernization of the Air Force automated 
maintenance data system. The migration from the Core Automated 
Maintenance System/Reliability and Maintainability Information 
System (CAMS/REMIS) and the Tactical Interim CAMS/REMIS 
(TICARRS) to the Integrated Maintenance Data System (IMDS), 
facilitated by the Base Level Systems Modernization (BLSM), is 
necessary to keep certain aircraft maintained at the most 
efficient and effective rate possible. Moreover, the 
Administration failed to fund TICARRS which supports F-15 and 
F-16 aircraft.
    Pending the implementation of the migration plan and 
replacement of CAMS/REMIS/TICARRS, these systems should be 
maintained at a level of sufficiency to ensure that aircraft 
readiness is not compromised. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends the addition to the Air Force operation and 
maintenance account of $8.7 million to adequately maintain 
TICARRS without any further enhancements.
    Offset folios 281 to 301 insert here



                         Legislative Provisions


     section 311--codification of defense business operations fund

    This section would specify funds and activities to be 
included in the operation of the Defense Business Operations 
Fund (DBOF); would require separate accounting, reporting, and 
auditing of funds and activities within DBOF; specify charges 
for goods and services provided through DBOF; and establish 
procedures for accumulation of funds in DBOF.

 section 312--retention of centralized management of defense business 
      operations fund and prohibition of further expansion of fund

    This section would require the continuation of the 
centralized management of the Defense Business Operations Fund 
and would prohibit any further expansion of activities which 
are not managed through the centralized fund.

 section 313--charges for goods and services provided through defense 
 business operations fund and termination of advance billing practices

    This section would require that charges for the use of 
Department of Defense employees in the provision of goods and 
services under the Defense Business Operations Fund will 
include the pay and allowances of any military personnel and 
would exclude the costs for military personnel in designated 
critical functional areas. The section would also terminate 
advance billing practices within the Defense Business 
Operations Fund.

 section 314--annual proposed budget for operation of defense business 
                            operations fund

    This section would require that the annual proposed budget 
for the Defense Business Operations Fund include the amounts 
necessary to cover any previous year operating losses.

 section 315--reduction in requests for transportation funded through 
                    defense business operations fund

    This section would require the reduction during, fiscal 
year 1996, of $70 million from the transportation accounts of 
the Defense Business Operations Fund below the level of these 
accounts in the budget request for fiscal year 1995.

    section 321--clarification of services and property that may be 
   exchanged to benefit the historical collection of the armed forces

    Section 2572(b) of title 10, United States Code, authorizes 
the service secretaries to exchange various items that are not 
needed by the military services, such as books, manuscripts, 
works of art, and historical artifacts, for similar items held 
by public or private individuals, institutions, or agencies for 
use in search, salvage, transportation, or restoration services 
which directly benefit the historical collection of the armed 
forces. This section would amend the statute to make clear that 
the full range of modern historic preservation activity is 
included. Thus, items received by the service secretaries in 
exchange for items not needed by the military could be used for 
restoration, conservation, or preservation services, or for 
educational programs benefitting the armed forces' historical 
collection.

 section 322--addition of amounts creditable to defense operations and 
                          maintenance accounts

    This section would permit the Secretary of Defense and the 
secretaries of the military departments to credit service 
operations and maintenance accounts with funds recovered from 
parties who are liable for a portion of the costs of 
environmental restoration activities (such as contractors, 
insurers, or sureties), regardless of the legal basis and 
source of the recovery.

    section 323--repeal of certain environmental education programs

    This section would repeal sections 1333 and 1334 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public 
Law 103-160).

section 324--repeal of limitation on obligation of amounts transferred 
            from environmental restoration transfer account

    Section 2703(b) of title 10, United States Code, authorizes 
the Secretary of Defense to transfer funds in the Defense 
Environmental Restoration Account (DERA) to other accounts 
within the Department of Defense. However, current law requires 
that funds so transferred may only be obligated or expended for 
environmental restoration purposes. Section 324 would repeal 
this restriction on the use of funds transferred from the DERA 
account so that transferred funds could be used for other, 
higher priority defense purposes. In particular, the committee 
has elsewhere specifically provided that certain DERA funds 
could be available for transfer to fund contingency operations, 
provided that the Secretary of Defense submits a request for 
supplemental appropriations to replenish the account. In the 
case of other transfers of funds from the DERA account, the 
committee directs the secretary to submit to the congressional 
defense committees a formal reprogramming request for each such 
proposed transfer.

    section 325--elimination of authority for transfer amounts for 
                         toxicological profiles

    This section would amend section 2704 of title 10, United 
States Code, to preclude the Secretary of Defense from 
transferring funds from the Defense Environmental Restoration 
Account (DERA) to the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency 
for use in the preparation of certain toxicological profiles 
and health advisories. Under current law, the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services has the responsibility to prepare 
toxicological profiles with respect to hazardous substances 
identified by the Secretary of Defense on military 
installations, and the Administrator of the Environmental 
Protection Agency has the responsibility to prepare health 
advisories with respect to such hazardous substances. The 
Secretary of Defense's responsibility to furnish data and 
personnel to assist the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in 
carrying out the duty to prepare toxicological profiles and 
health advisories respectively would remain intact.

     section 326--sense of congress regarding funding for defense 
                   environmental restoration account

    This section would express the sense of Congress that by 
the end of fiscal year 1997, the Secretary of Defense should 
make every effort to limit costs within the Defense 
Environmental Restoration Account (DERA) for administrative 
support and for studies and investigations of contaminated 
sites to no more than 20 percent of total funding for the 
account.
    The committee notes that DERA funding was significantly 
reduced from the level requested during fiscal year 1995. The 
committee recommends a further reduction in fiscal year 1996 of 
$200 million below the President's request of $1.6 billion. The 
prospect is that funding for this account will continue to 
decline in the years ahead. Therefore, it is imperative that 
the department find ways to optimize cleanup efforts and 
minimize overhead and funding for studies. This section would 
encourage such efforts.

  section 331--management of department of defense civilian personnel

    This section would prohibit the use of full-time equivalent 
personnel ceilings in the management of DOD's civilian 
workforce, and would allow the Secretary of Defense to make 
reductions in the number of full-time equivalent positions in 
the Department of Defense only as a result of a reduction of 
funds. The section would also require that the necessary 
number, type and skill mix of personnel are employed by the 
Department of Defense to carry out functions funded in each of 
the Operations and Maintenance budget activity groups.

               section 332--management of depot employees

    This section would prohibit the management of civilian 
employees of the Department of Defense involved in the depot-
level maintenance and repair of material by any end strength 
constraint or limitation.

section 333--conversion to performance by civilian employees of active-
                             duty positions

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
convert not less than 10,000 military positions to performance 
by civilian employees of the Department of Defense.

 section 334--personnel actions involving employees of nonappropriated 
                         fund instrumentalities

    This section would clarify the definition of 
nonappropriated fund instrumentality employees and permit the 
direct reporting of violations by nonappropriated fund 
employees to the Department of Defense Inspector General.

  section 335--termination of overseas living quarters allowances for 
             nonappropriated fund instrumentality employees

    This section would terminate the allowance for overseas 
living quarters for nonappropriated fund employees as of 
September 30, 1998.

   section 336--overtime exemption for nonappropriated fund employees

    This section would provide the same overtime exemption for 
nonappropriated fund employees as applies to other civilian 
employees of the Department of Defense.

            section 337--continued health insurance coverage

    This section would extend continued health insurance 
coverage for certain employees affected by a force or 
realignment or installation closure under a base realignment 
and closure action.

 section 338--creditability of certain nafi service under the federal 
                      employees' retirement system

    This section would increase the number of employees 
eligible to transfer between nonappropriated fund and 
appropriated fund morale, welfare, recreation programs without 
any significant loss of benefits.

           section 341--operation of commissary store system

    This section would revise the operation of the commissary 
store system, allow contracts with other agencies, and revise 
payments to vendor agents.

     section 342--pricing policies for commissary store merchandise

    This section would reduce administrative costs in pricing 
commissary merchandise.

section 343--limited release of commissary stores sales information to 
manufacturers, distributors, and other vendors doing business with the 
                       defense commissary agency

    This section would amend the procedures for the release of 
commissary stores sales.

     section 344--economical distribution of distilled spirits by 
                 nonappropriated fund instrumentalities

    This section would amend the procedures for the 
determination of the economical distribution of distilled 
spirits.

 section 345--transportation by commissaries and exchanges to overseas 
                               locations

    This section would allow officials responsible for the 
operation of commissaries and military exchanges the authority 
to negotiate directly with private carriers for the most cost-
effective transportation of supplies by sea without relying on 
the Military Sealift Command or the Military Traffic Management 
Command.

   section 346--demonstration program for uniform funding of morale, 
  welfare, and recreation activities at certain military installations

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a demonstration program at six military installations 
under which funds appropriated for the support of morale, 
welfare, and recreation programs at the installations are 
combined with nonappropriated funds available for these 
programs and treated as nonappropriated funds.

 section 347--continued operation of base exchange mart at fort worth 
  naval air station and authority to expand base exchange mart program

    This section would permit the continued operation of the 
base exchange mart at Fort Worth Naval Air Station, Texas and 
would allow for the expansion of the Base Exchange Mart 
Program.

 section 348--uniform deferred payments program for military exchanges

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to use 
commercial banking institutions to fund and operate the 
deferred payment programs of the Army and Air Force Exchange 
Service and the Navy Exchange Service and to establish a 
uniform exchange credit program not later than January 1, 1997.

section 349--availability of funds to offset expenses incurred by army 
and air force exchange service on account of troop reductions in europe

    This section would require that the Secretary of Defense 
transfer not more than $70 million to the Army and Air Force 
Exchange Service to offset expenses incurred by the Army and 
Air Force Exchange Service on account of reductions in the 
number of military personnel in Europe.

  section 350--study regarding improving efficiencies in operation of 
military exchanges and other morale, welfare, and recreation activities 
                         and commissary stores

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a study, and report to Congress by March 1, 1996, 
regarding the manner in which greater efficiencies can be 
achieved in the operation of military exchanges, commissary 
stores, and other morale, welfare, and recreation activities.

section 351--extension of deadline for conversion of navy ships' stores 
         to operation as nonappropriated fund instrumentalities

    This section would extend, to December 31, 1996, the 
deadline for the conversion of all Navy ships's stores to 
operate as nonappropriated fund activities.

  section 357--procurement of electricity from most economical source

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
procure electricity for use on military installations from the 
most economical sources.

 section 358--procurement of certain commodities from most economical 
                                 source

    This section would permit the Secretary of Defense to 
procure supplies from sources other than the General Services 
Administration if that source can provide the supplies at a 
lower cost.

    section 359--increase in commercial procurement of printing and 
                         duplications services

    This section would allow the Defense Printing Service to 
use private printing sources for up to 70 percent of its 
printing and duplication services.

section 360--direct delivery of assorted consumable inventory items of 
                         department of defense

    This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to 
arrange for direct prime vendor delivery of food, clothing, 
medical and pharmaceutical supplies, automotive, electrical, 
fuel, and construction supplies for military installations 
throughout the United States.

 section 361--operation of defense reutilization and marketing service

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
privatize the operation of the Defense Reutilization and 
Marketing Service not later than July 1, 1996.

 section 362--private operation of payroll functions of department of 
               defense for payment of civilian employees

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a plan to Congress not later than March 1, 1996 for the 
privatization of the payroll functions for civilian employees 
of the Department of Defense and to implement the plan not 
later than October 1, 1996.

  section 363--demonstration program to identify underdeductions and 
                      overpayments made to vendors

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a demonstration program at the Defense Personnel 
Support Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to evaluate the 
feasibility of using private contractors to audit accounting 
and procurement records of the Department of Defense.

section 364--pilot program to evaluate potential for private operation 
                    of overseas dependents' schools

    This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a pilot program to assess the feasibility of using 
private contractors to operate overseas dependents' schools. 
The section would also require the Secretary to report to 
Congress the results of the pilot program and would include any 
recommendations as to which other schools in the defense 
dependents' education system should be operated by private 
contractors.

 section 365--pilot program for evaluation of improved defense travel 
                         processing prototypes

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a pilot program including two prototype tests of 
commercial travel applications to improve management of the 
Department of Defense Travel System.

   section 366--pilot program for private operation of consolidated 
       information technology functions of department of defense

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a pilot program to test and evaluate the cost savings 
and efficiencies of private operation of all information 
technology services for the Department of Defense. The 
consolidation of 194 data centers to 16 will result in an 
estimated $500 million cost reduction. The further 
consolidation to approximately 4 or 5, while providing further 
cost reduction, will not provide as dramatic a saving. The 
private sector has already undergone major information 
technology consolidation and has at its disposal data 
processing centers far larger and more capable than those of 
the DOD. The private sector could provide full services to the 
DOD at a lower cost than any government-owned and/or operated 
facility.

  section 367--report on efforts to contract out certain functions of 
                         department of defense

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit to Congress a report describing the advantages and 
disadvantages of using contractor personnel rather than 
civilian employees of the Department of Defense to perform 
functions that are not essential to warfighting missions.

    section 368--pilot program for private operation of payroll and 
     accounting functions of nonappropriated fund instrumentalities

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a pilot program to test and evaluate the cost savings 
and efficiencies of private operation of accounting and payroll 
functions of nonappropriated fund instrumentalities of the 
Department of Defense.

                section 371--quarterly readiness reports

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit to Congress a quarterly report on military readiness.

section 372--reports required regarding expenditures for emergency and 
                         extraordinary expenses

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report of expenditures for emergency and extraordinary 
expenses on a quarterly basis. The section would also require 
notification to Congress prior to an obligation or expenditure 
of $1 million or more for these purposes.

  section 373--restatement of requirement for semi-annual reports to 
   congress on transfers from high-priority readiness appropriations

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit reports to Congress on transfers of appropriated funds 
from specified budget activities.

    section 374--modification of notification regarding use of core 
                       logistics functions waiver

    This section would modify section 1584 or title 10, United 
States Code concerning a notice to Congress of foreign national 
employee salary increases, and section 2464(b) of title 10, 
United States Code concerning a notification to Congress 
regarding the use of core logistics functions waiver.

 section 375--limitations on development or modernization of automated 
    information systems of the department of defense pending report

    This section would prohibit the use of operations and 
maintenance funds to continue the modernization or development 
of an automated information system until 60 days after the 
Secretary of Defense reports to Congress on the proposed 
actions.

   section 376--report regarding reduction of costs associated with 
                     contract management oversight

    This section would require the Comptroller General of the 
United States to submit a report to Congress identifying 
methods to reduce the cost to the Department of Defense for the 
management and oversight of contracts in connection with major 
defense acquisitions programs.

    section 381--prohibition on capital lease for defense business 
                         management university

    This section would prohibit the use of Department of 
Defense funds to enter into a capital lease for the Defense 
Business Management University's Center for Financial 
Management Education and Training (CFMET). The committee 
questions DOD's non-competitive selection of this site at a 
time when suitable alternatives may be found at existing 
federal installations. The committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to conduct a competitive selection of the site for 
CFMET which includes both government and private facilities.

  section 382--authority of inspector general over investigations of 
                           procurement fraud

    This section would provide the Inspector General of the 
Department of Defense responsibility for all investigations of 
procurement fraud with the Department of Defense.

    section 383--provision of equipment and facilities to assist in 
                       emergency response actions

    This section would provide training facilities, sensors, 
protective clothing, antidotes, and other materials and 
expertise of the Department of Defense to appropriate use by a 
federal, state, or local law enforcement agency in preparing 
for an emergency involving chemical or biological agents.

      section 384--conversion of civilian marksmanship program to 
   nonappropriated fund instrumentality and activities under program

    This section would provide for the operation of the 
Civilian Marksmanship Program as a nonappropriated fund 
instrumentality after October, 1995.

  section 385--personnel services and logistical support for certain 
               activities held on military installations

    This section would allow the Department of Defense to 
provide additional services or logistical support in connection 
with preparing for, administering, and overseeing a jamboree at 
a military installation.

               section 386--retention of monetary awards

    This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to accept 
any monetary award given by a nongovernmental entity as an 
award in recognizing excellence or innovation in providing 
services or administering programs.

                  section 387--civil reserve air fleet

    This section would permit the Department of Defense to 
contract with Civil Air Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) contractors to 
grant them limited use of military airfields at time less than 
full activation of the CRAF.

section 388--permanent authority regarding use of proceeds from sale of 
      lost, abandoned, and unclaimed personal property at certain 
                             installations

    This section would make permanent a demonstration program 
for the use of proceeds from the sale of lost, abandoned, and 
unclaimed personal property. These proceeds would be used to 
administer the sale of this property.

   section 389--transfer of excess personal property to support law 
                         enforcement activities

    This section would amend the transfer of excess personal 
property for the support of counter-drug activities to include 
law enforcement activities, including counter-drug activities.

 section 390--development and implementation of innovative process to 
                   improve operation and maintenance

    This section would direct that $350 million of operations 
and maintenance funding shall be available to the Secretary of 
Defense for the development or acquisition of information 
technologies and reengineered functional processes.

   section 391--review of use of defense logistics agency to perform 
                    certain defense-wide activities

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a review of the consolidation of depot-level 
repairables programs of the military departments under the 
management of the Defense Logistics Agency.

   section 392--sale of 50 percent of current war reserve fuel stocks

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
reduce current war reserve fuel stocks of the Department of 
Defense by 50 percent.

     section 393--military clothing sales stores, replacement sales

    This section would provide to Navy and Marine Corps 
personnel the same authority that Army and Air Force personnel 
currently have to purchase replacement subsistence and other 
supplies.

  section 394--assistance to local educational agencies that benefit 
  dependents of members of the armed forces and department of defense 
                               civilians

    This section would authorize the appropriation of $58 
million for local educational agencies assistance in areas 
where there is an impact to school systems caused by dependents 
of members of the armed forces and Department of Defense 
civilians.

   section 395--core logistics capabilities at department of defense 
                                 depots

    This section would, effective December 31, 1996, repeal 
sections 2466 and 2469 of title 10, United States Code and 
would require the identification of depot-level maintenance and 
repair capabilities within the Department of Defense, require 
the determination of core depot maintenance capabilities, and 
limit the performance of core workload in Department of Defense 
depots. The section would also provide that workload above core 
would be provided by the private sector and would require a 
competition between the public depots and the private sector 
for any above core workload that has less than two qualified 
sources in the private sector. In addition, the section would 
permit the movement of core workload between the military 
departments.

              TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS


                       Subtitle A--Active Forces


              section 401--end strengths for active forces

    The following table summarizes the committee's actions with 
regard to active duty end strengths:

                                 ACTIVE FORCES END STRENGTH FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Fiscal year 1996--      Change from fiscal year--
                                              Fiscal year -----------------------------
                   Service                        1995                                 -------------------------
                                                program      Request    Recommendation      1996         1995
                                                                                          request      program
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army........................................      510,000      495,000        495,000             0     (15,000)
Navy........................................      439,200      428,000        428,000             0     (11,200)
Marine Corps................................      174,000      174,000        174,000             0           0
Air Force...................................      400,051      388,200        388,200             0     (11,851)
                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.................................    1,523,251    1,485,200      1,485,200             0     (38,051)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  section 402--temporary variations in dopma authorized end strength 
  limitations for active duty navy and air force officers in certain 
                                 grades

    This section would authorize a temporary increase in the 
number of officers who can serve on active duty in the grade of 
major within the Air Force and in the grades of lieutenant 
commander, commander, and captain within the Navy until 
September 30, 1997. The committee fully expects the Secretary 
of Defense to provide a proposal to restructure the grade 
limits currently set in law for all the services in time for 
the committee to address a permanent solution in the Defense 
authorization bill for fiscal year 1997.

                       Subtitle B--Reserve Forces


            section 411--end strengths for selected reserve

    The following table summarizes the committee's actions with 
regard to selected reserve end strengths:

                               SELECTED RESERVE END STRENGTH FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Fiscal year 1996--      Change from fiscal year--
                                              Fiscal year -----------------------------
                   Service                        1995                                 -------------------------
                                                program      request       Committee        1995         1995
                                                                        recommendation    request      program
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARNG........................................      387,000      373,000        373,000             0     (14,000)
USAR........................................      242,000      230,000        230,000             0     (12,000)
USNR........................................      100,710       98,608         98,608             0      (2,102)
USMCR.......................................       41,000       42,000         42,000             0       1,000
ANG.........................................      115,581      109,458        109,458             0      (6,123)
USAFR.......................................       78,706       73,969         73,969             0      (4,737)
Coast Guard.................................        8,000        8,000          8,000             0           0
                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.................................      972,997      935,035        935,035             0     (37,962)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 section 412--end strengths for reserves on active duty in support of 
                              the reserves

    The following table summarizes the committee's actions with 
regard to the end strengths of reserves on active duty in 
support of the reserves:

                               FULL TIME SUPPORT END STRENGTH FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Fiscal year 1996--      Change from fiscal year--
                                              Fiscal year -----------------------------
                   Service                        1995                                 -------------------------
                                                program      request       Committee        1996         1995
                                                                        recommendation    request      program
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARNG........................................       23,650       23,390         23,390             0        (260)
USAR........................................       11,940       11,575         11,575             0        (365)
USNR........................................       17,510       17,490         17,490             0         (20)
USMCR.......................................        2,285        2,285          2,285             0           0
ANG.........................................        9,098        9,817          9,817             0         719
USAFR.......................................          648          628            628             0         (20)
                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.................................       65,131       65,185         65,185             0          54
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

section 413--counting of active component personnel assigned in support 
                     of reserve component training

    This section would clarify the requirement of section 
414(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Years 1992 and 1993 (Public Law 102-190). That provision 
required the Secretary of the Army to assign at least 2,000 
active duty personnel as advisers in connection with 
organizing, administering, recruiting instructing or training 
to early deploying units of the selected reserve.
    The Army expressed concern that section 414(c) could be 
interpreted to require the direct assignment of active duty 
advisers to selected reserve units. To address the Army's 
concern, this section, as amended, would permit active duty 
personnel assigned to active duty units that had been and 
continue to be established for the principal purpose of 
providing dedicated training support to reserve component units 
to be counted toward the required number of advisers.

              Subtitle C--Military Training Student Loads


          section 421--authorization of training student loads

    The committee recommends approval of the training student 
loads contained in the President's budget.

              Subtitle D--Authorization of Appropriations


  section 431--authorization for appropriations for military personnel

    This section would authorize $68,951,663,000 to be 
appropriated for military personnel, an increase of 
$255,000,000 from the budget request.

 section 432--authorization for increases in active duty end strengths

    As discussed in section 521 of the bill, a provision to 
establish end strength floors for each of the armed services, 
the committee is concerned that declining defense budgets have 
caused military managers, both uniformed and civilian, to 
advocate end strength levels that are inadequate to fully meet 
national security requirements. The resulting force structure 
is consequently limited and unable to provide the full range of 
capability in sufficient depth to meet all the challenges 
confronting the nation. Commitment of U.S. forces to operations 
other than war over the last two years (including deployments 
to Iraq, Bosnia, Macedonia, Somalia, Rwanda, and Haiti) have 
caused operations tempo to increase for select units. When 
added to the operations and training routinely conducted during 
peacetime, there are elements of the force in each of the 
services that experience personnel tempo at a level that unduly 
stresses service members and families.
    For example, deployments within the 2d Marine Division were 
up 10.5 percent in 1994, and 60 percent of the division was 
deployed in August 1994. During 1994, it was routine for 50 
percent of the Navy to be at sea at any given point of time. 
Within the Air Force, 13 of 21 aircraft types exceeded the goal 
of limiting deployment to less than 120 days a year and both 
the A-10 and the Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) 
aircraft exceeded 180 days of deployment in 1994. Operations 
other than war resulted in increased stress on Army light 
infantry units and combat service support units with limited 
representation in the active force to include water 
purification and civil affairs units. The committee also notes 
that the Army is the only service that carries an operating 
strength deviation which would indicate a need for additional 
end strength to fulfill its minimum mission requirements.
    The committee believes that the armed services require 
authorization to apply additional end strength to select units 
and mission areas in an effort to reduce excessive personnel 
tempo rates. Accordingly, this section would authorize $112 
million in additional funds to be applied to increase military 
personnel end strengths within the Department of Defense above 
those levels requested by the President's budget. The committee 
expects the Secretary of Defense to prioritize end strength 
needs within the Department.

                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY


                  Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy


    section 501--authority to extend transition period for officers 
                     selected for early retirement

    This section would authorize the Secretaries of the 
military departments to defer the date of retirement for 
officers selected for early retirement for up to 90 days to 
avoid personal hardship or for other humanitarian reasons.

           Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Reserve Components


section 511--military technician full-time support program for army and 
                      air force reserve components

    The committee believes that military technicians are 
critical to the training and readiness of the Army and Air 
Force reserve components, as well as being crucial to an 
increased reliance on the reserve components to substitute for 
active component units being stressed by high operations 
tempos. The committee also believes that recent broad, 
unfocused reductions in Department of Defense civilian manpower 
have had a severe impact on military technicians, and therefore 
on overall readiness.
    This section, therefore, would restore military technician 
end strength to nearly the fiscal year 1995 level and require 
that the Secretary of Defense, in the future, manage military 
technicians by annual end strength. This section would also 
prohibit military technicians in certain high priority units 
and activities, but not those in management-level headquarters, 
from being subject to broad civilian personnel reductions. In 
addition, this section would require the Secretary of Defense, 
within six months of enactment, initiate measures to 
consolidate and streamline management-level headquarters at the 
National, regional, and state level in the Air Force and Army 
Reserve and National Guard. The Secretary would be permitted to 
retain up to 95 percent of any military technician positions 
declared excess to the reorganized headquarters, if those 
positions were reallocated to certain high priority units. This 
section would also require that, after the date of enactment, 
only dual-status technicians be hired.

   section 512--military leave for military reserve technicians for 
                         certain duty overseas

    This section would authorize military civilian technicians 
an additional 44 workdays of leave without loss of pay and 
other benefits for periods the member is serving on active duty 
without pay while participating in noncombat operations outside 
the United States, its territories and possessions.

   section 513--revisions to army guard combat reform initiative to 
    include army reserve under certain provisions and make certain 
                               revisions

    This section would change the requirement of section 1111 
of the Army National Guard Combat Readiness Reform Act of 1992 
(title XI of Public Law 102-484). As revised, the section would 
require the Army to provide annually at least 150 officers and 
1,000 soldiers with at least two years prior active duty 
experience to national guard units. The committee expects the 
Army to permit approximately 225 officers to separate in 1996 
and 1997 and no less than 150 officers per year thereafter to 
serve in the Army National Guard.
    This section would also expand the requirements of sections 
1112(b), 1113, 1115, 1116, and 1120 of the Army National Guard 
Combat Readiness Reform Act of 1992 to the Army selected 
reserve.

         section 514--rotc scholarships for the national guard

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
redesignate ongoing scholarships with the agreement of the ROTC 
cadet involved as scholarships provided to an individual to be 
appointed for service in the Army National Guard and make other 
technical changes.

  section 515--report on feasibility of providing education benefits 
protection insurance for service academy and rotc scholarship students 
                  who become medically unable to serve

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a study on the need and feasibility of establishing a 
no cost to the government disability insurance plan for service 
academy and Reserve Officers' Training Corps scholarship 
students. Such a plan would provide continued financial 
assistance for tuition and other educational expenses after 
becoming medically disqualified for military service.

   section 516--active-duty officers detailed to rotc duty at senior 
 military colleges to serve as commandant and assistant commandant of 
                    cadets and as tactical officers

    This section would require that, upon the request of any of 
the six senior military colleges (Texas A&M University, Norwich 
College, The Virginia Military Institute, The Citadel, Virginia 
Polytechnic Institute and State University and North Georgia 
College), the Secretary of Defense shall detail active duty 
officers to serve as the commandant or assistant commandant of 
cadets and as tactical officers at the institution.
    The committee takes this action in order to reinforce the 
longstanding special relationship that has existed between 
these schools, the Army and the other services. Recent 
modifications in policy by the Army suggest a change in that 
special relationship which is detrimental to the schools and 
the services. The committee feels strongly that active-duty 
officers serving as commandants and tactical officers not only 
provide role models for emulation by cadets, but they, as 
mentors and trainers, also directly influence in unique and 
positive ways the attitudes and ideas of cadets. The 
committee's belief in the value of an active duty officer 
serving as the commandant of cadets was reinforced by the 
testimony of the service's deputy chiefs of staff for 
personnel.

 section 517--mobilization income insurance program for members of the 
                             ready reserve

    The committee is aware of the many financial hardships 
endured by reserve members involuntarily called to active duty 
during the Persian Gulf War. The committee recognizes the need 
for income protection for mobilized reserve members.
    This section would establish an income protection insurance 
plan for ready reserve members. The plan would provide a 
$1,000-per-month base benefit to reservists involuntarily 
called to active duty in support of an operational mission 
during a period of war or national emergency as declared by the 
President. The plan would be financed by premiums paid by 
individual members. Members would be automatically enrolled for 
the base benefit unless the member declines to participate, 
selects a lower benefit of half the basic benefit, or selects a 
greater amount up to a maximum of $5,000 per month at 
additional cost.

              Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Force Levels


                  section 521--floor on end strengths

    The committee has observed with increasing alarm the 
drawdown of the armed forces since the Persian Gulf War and is 
now of the view that the current force structure is not 
adequate to fully support the national security strategy to 
fight and win two near simultaneous major regional 
contingencies as envisioned in the October 1993 Report on the 
Bottom Up Review. In addition to direct force-structure 
reductions of 30 percent to Army divisions, 32 percent to Navy 
battleforce ships, and 36 percent to Air Force attack/fighter 
aircraft, combat capability has been further eroded by 
declining defense budgets that have left funding for unit 
readiness wanting and equipment modernization wholly 
inadequate. Despite the testimony of numerous Department of 
Defense witnesses that the force cannot be reduced further, the 
committee continues to see evidence that the Secretary of 
Defense is contemplating additional force-structure reductions 
below the levels cited as the minimums necessary to support the 
strategy outlined in the Report on the Bottom Up Review. 
Accordingly, the committee believes that action must be taken 
to preempt any further reductions to the armed forces and 
thereby minimize further risk to the security of the nation.
    Therefore, this section would establish permanent end 
strength levels beginning in fiscal year 1996. The provision 
would preclude any reductions below the specified end strengths 
until the expiration of a six-month period beginning on the 
date of submission of notice of the desired lower end strengths 
and the justification for those levels. Because the committee 
considers the end strengths delineated in this section to be 
inadequate to fully meet the security interests of the nation, 
the committee recommends, in section 432 of this bill, 
additional funding to be used to increase end strength levels 
within the military departments.

                section 522--army officer manning levels

    This section would require that beginning in fiscal year 
1999 and thereafter, the annual Army end strength provide for 
sufficient officers to meet at least 90 per cent of active Army 
manpower requirements. The committee takes this action because 
it considers the 83 percent officer manning levels projected 
for fiscal year 1996 to be inadequate.

 section 523--comptroller general review of proposed army end strength 
                              allocations

    This section would require the comptroller general of the 
United States to determine the extent to which the Army is able 
to fully man the combat and support forces required to carry 
out the national security strategy and operations other than 
war for fiscal years 1996 through 2001. The committee takes 
this action because it has learned that only now, more than two 
years after the Secretary of Defense directed the Army to 
achieve the force levels specified in the Bottom Up Review 
(BUR), is the Army starting a formal analysis to structure the 
force constrained by a 495,000 active-component end strength to 
meet BUR requirements.
    In order that the committee fully understand the Army 
analytical process, known as the Total Army Analysis (TAA), the 
section would require that the Secretary of the Army provide 
the comptroller general full access to all materials used in 
the TAA even while the process is underway. In addition, 
because the committee understands that the Army has been 
directed to reduce end strength further to 475,000 by fiscal 
year 1998, the section would require the comptroller general to 
report to the committee the results of each TAA conducted 
through fiscal year 2001.

     section 524--manning status of highly deployable support units

    The General Accounting Office (GAO) identified in a March 
1995 report that the Army staffs support forces at 10 to 20 
percent below their authorized levels. The GAO expressed 
concern that the stress of peacetime operations has been 
exacerbated by the Army practice of increasing manning within 
support units with personnel from other units just prior to 
deployment to ensure minimum personnel readiness. This practice 
is referred to as cross-leveling. The committee is aware of 
similar cross-leveling practices within the Marine Corps and is 
concerned that other services may intentionally staff high-
priority support units at less than 100 percent of authorized 
strengths.
    Accordingly, this section would direct each of the 
Secretaries of the military departments to conduct a study to 
determine whether high-priority support units that would deploy 
early in a crisis are, as a matter of policy, manned at less 
than 100 percent of their authorized strengths. The provision 
would further require the Secretaries of the military 
departments to report not later than September 30, 1996 on the 
findings of their studies to include the number of high-
priority support units by type, the level of manning within 
those units, and either the justification for manning of less 
than 100 percent or the status of action to correct the manning 
deficiency.

    section 525--sense of congress concerning personnel tempo rates

    This section would express the Sense of Congress that the 
Secretary of Defense should continue to improve the 
Department's personnel tempo management techniques so that all 
personnel can expect a reasonable personnel tempo rate.

     Subtitle D--Amendments to the Uniform Code of Military Justice


      section 541--references to uniform code of military justice

    This section would clarify that amendments or repeals 
contained in this subtitle are to Chapter 47 of title 10, 
United States Code.

  section 542--forfeiture of pay and allowances during confinement by 
                       sentence of court-martial

    The committee is concerned that some military service 
members continue to receive active duty pay and allowances 
while serving extended prison sentences. This section would 
require forfeiture of pay and allowances during a period of 
confinement resulting from the sentence of a court-martial. The 
percentage of pay and allowances forfeited shall be the maximum 
percentage that the court-martial could have directed as part 
of the sentence. The provision would also authorize the 
convening authority to waive some or all of the forfeiture and 
provide such monies to dependents of the service member.

          section 543--refusal to testify before court-martial

    This section would amend section 847(b) of title 10, United 
States Code, by removing the limitation on punishments which 
may be imposed by a federal district court upon a civilian 
witness who refuses to appear or testify before a court-
martial.

                 section 544--flight from apprehension

    This section would amend section 895 of title 10, United 
States Code, to clarify that flight from apprehension is an 
offense cognizable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

                     section 545--carnal knowledge

    This section would make two minor changes to section 920 of 
title 10, United States Code. First, the section would make the 
crime of carnal knowledge gender neutral, bringing Article 120 
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice into conformity with 
the spirit of the Sexual Abuse Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-646). 
Second, this section would allow an accused charged with carnal 
knowledge to plead the affirmative defense of mistake of fact. 
This change would cause the military offense of carnal 
knowledge to more closely parallel the analogous federal 
civilian criminal statute.

   section 546--time after accession for initial instruction in the 
                    uniform code of military justice

    This section would amend section 937(a) of title 10, United 
States Code, by lengthening the time period within which 
training in the Uniform Code of Military Justice must be 
provided to new enlistees from six to fourteen days. The 
provision would thus afford the services greater flexibility in 
providing this important and necessary training.

 section 547--persons who may appear before the united states court of 
                      appeals for the armed forces

    This section would amend section 944 of title 10, United 
States Code, to provide that no person may appear before the 
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (whether on a brief or in 
person), unless that person is an attorney admitted to practice 
before the court, is authorized to appear before the court in a 
particular case, or is a third-year law student who has been 
certified for practice under a state rule for the practical 
training of law students. In the latter cases, such students 
would only be authorized to appear before the court as an 
amicus curiae.
    This provision responds to a recent case in which the Court 
of Appeals for the Armed Forces authorized undergraduate 
students to submit briefs and present oral argument before the 
court. Providing undergraduate students with educational 
experiences in the law is a laudable goal. However, the Court 
of Appeals for the Armed Forces is a federal court, and as such 
it must adhere to high judicial standards of practice and 
procedure that befit the court's stature and preserve its 
dignity. Allowing undergraduate students to appear before the 
court is inconsistent with these standards and sets an ill-
advised precedent. Section 547 would ensure that in the future 
only properly licensed attorneys and third-year law students 
who are in state-approved law school training programs may 
appear before the court.

   section 548--discretionary representation by government appellate 
  defense counsel in petitioning supreme court for writ of certiorari

    This section would amend section 870 of title 10, United 
States Code, to provide military appellate defense counsel with 
the discretion to assist an accused in the preparation of a 
petition for a writ of certiorari before the United States 
Supreme Court. Under current law, appellate defense counsel 
must represent an accused in petitioning the Supreme Court upon 
the accused's request, regardless of whether that person's case 
is free from legal error or whether the only errors are those 
specified by the accused. Appellate defense counsel are in the 
best position to make judgements about whether a case raises 
issues of sufficient import that a petition for a writ of 
certiorari is warranted, and section 548 would vest counsel 
with the discretion to submit such a petition.

 section 549--repeal of termination of authority for chief justice of 
the united states to designate article iii judges for temporary service 
                on court of appeals for the armed forces

    Section 1301 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 (Public Law 101-189) revised the 
charter of the then Court of Military Appeals, now renamed the 
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. Among other things, that 
section provided that Article III judges could sit on the Court 
of Military Appeals when a judge of the court was temporarily 
unavailable. A five year ``sunset'' provision was included to 
ensure that the provision would operate in a manner consistent 
with the Article III judiciary and to allow for further formal 
review.
    Although the instances in which Article III judges have 
served on the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces have been 
infrequent, their periodic service appears to have benefitted 
the court without unduly hindering the ability of these judges 
to fulfill their regular responsibilities. In recognition of 
this fact, section 549 would repeal the five year limitation on 
the authority of Article III judges to serve temporarily on the 
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, thus making this 
authority permanent.

                    section 550--technical amendment

    This section would amend section 866 of title 10, United 
States Code, to change an outdated reference to the Courts of 
Military Review to a proper reference to the Courts of Criminal 
Appeals.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters


section 551--equalization of accrual of service credit for officers and 
                            enlisted members

    This section would bring the criteria for accrual of 
service credit for officers in line with the criteria set in 
law for enlisted members.

        section 552--extension of expiring personnel authorities

    This section would extend authorities that provide for the 
appointment, promotion, and retirement of reserve officers and 
the promotion of certain officers on active duty in the Navy.

section 553--increase in educational assistance allowance with respect 
  to skills or specialties for which there is a critical shortage of 
                               personnel

    This section would authorize increased rates of educational 
assistance allowance for reserve members in specialties or 
skills experiencing critical shortages.

      section 554--amendments to education loan repayment programs

    This section would authorize the repayment of loans that 
were made under the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan 
Program.

section 555--recognition by states of living wills of members, certain 
                  former members, and their dependents

    This section would amend title 10, United States Code, to 
ensure that advance medical directives prepared by members of 
the armed forces, their spouses, or other persons eligible for 
legal assistance under section 1044 of title 10 are recognized 
as valid by states, even though a directive might not meet the 
precise requirements of the state where the service member, 
spouse, or other person is located at the time of 
incapacitation. Advance medical directives indicate a person's 
desire concerning medical care to be received if that person is 
incapable of making health care decisions or gives another 
person the authority to make those decisions under those 
circumstances.

 section 556--transition compensation for dependents of members of the 
               armed forces separated for dependent abuse

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
retroactively provide compensation to certain eligible 
dependents inadvertently excluded from the program.

                   section 557--army ranger training

    The committee believes that a shortage of assigned officer 
personnel contributed to the deaths of four Ranger students in 
a tragic incident that occurred February 15-16, 1995, during 
the Florida phase of the Army Ranger course.
    While the Army's report of investigation into the deaths 
did not directly acknowledge the link, the report concluded 
that failure in supervision and judgement, lack of situational 
awareness and lack of control placed Ranger students in water 
too cold, too deep and for too long to allow for safe 
operations. In addition, the report, noting that only eight of 
the 26 required officer instructor/trainers were assigned to 
the Florida phase, concluded that no officer platoon trainer 
positions were filled; that officers only occasionally 
accompanied Ranger student training in the field; and that 
officer supervision of standards and policies was limited by 
officer strength.
    Subsequent to the release of the Army investigative report, 
the committee learned that at the time of the accident the Army 
had 45 officers assigned to the Ranger training brigade, just 
37 per cent of the 122 required. This significant disparity 
between officers required and assigned resulted from drastic 
Army-wide reductions from 1990 to 1995 in the number of 
officers authorized and available to support training and 
operations. As a result, despite the fact that the numbers of 
students being trained by the brigade remained relatively 
stable from 1990 to 1995, officers went from being able in 1990 
to accompany Ranger student patrols in the field daily, to a 
situation in 1995 where it was exceptional for an officer to be 
with student patrols.
    The committee is also aware that as early as June 1993, and 
several times subsequently, the commander of Fort Benning 
elevated his concerns to the commanding general, Training and 
Doctrine Command, linking officer shortages to increased risk 
to Ranger student safety. Although these efforts resulted in 
some adjustments to the number of officers assigned, the Army 
failed to take substantive efforts to redress the officer 
shortages. As a matter of Army-wide officer allocations policy, 
Fort Benning and the Ranger Training Brigade continued to take 
a so-called ``fair share'' of officer shortages. As a matter of 
fact, the corrective action recommended by the Army 
investigative report would have required the Fort Benning 
commander to have found from his already constrained resources 
additional officers to assign to the Ranger Training Brigade.
    The committee rejects that solution, believing strongly 
that such an approach to solving the officer shortages at the 
Ranger Training Brigade would only continue the shortsighted 
``fair share'' approach without significantly reducing student 
risk or increasing training safety in what all acknowledge to 
be a high stress, high risk training situation.
    For these reasons, the committee directs that the Secretary 
of the Army assign to the brigade all the manpower required, as 
established by Army manpower documents, to carry out the 
training mission safely and effectively. To accomplish this 
goal, this section would establish a baseline number of 
officers and enlisted personnel which would have to be assigned 
to the brigade and would give the Secretary of the Army one 
year to achieve that level. This section would also require 
training safety cells be established in each of the three major 
phases of the Ranger course to advise Ranger instructors with 
regard to the potential impact of local weather and other 
conditions on the students.

         section 558--repeal of certain civil-military programs

    This section would terminate four programs established by 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 
(Public Law 102-484), namely: the Civil-Military Cooperative 
Action Program, the National Guard Youth Opportunities Pilot 
Program, the pilot outreach program to reduce demand for 
illegal drugs, as well as department support for the Civilian 
Community Corps. At the time of establishment, the underlying 
premise of all these programs was that the end of the Cold War 
would bring about a reduced operational tempo so that 
Department of Defense resources could be turned to a secondary 
mission of helping to rebuild America.
    The committee believes that the original premise of these 
civil-military programs is no longer valid, especially given 
the repeated testimony to the committee that the Department is 
struggling to find sufficient resources to meet the 
unexpectedly high operations tempo of the post Cold-War world. 
In light of new operational realities, the committee rejects 
the President's budget request which sought more than $76 
million for the four civil military programs in fiscal year 
1996.
    To meet more critical readiness needs, the committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide at least $29 
million in fiscal year 1996 to fill shortfalls in unit and 
organizational requirements for dual-status military technician 
positions, in the following priority:
          (1) first, to units of the selected reserve that are 
        scheduled to deploy no later than 90 days after 
        mobilization;
          (2) second, to units of the selected reserve that are 
        or will be deployed to relieve high rates of active-
        duty peacetime operations tempo; and
          (3) third, to those organizations which have the 
        primary mission of providing direct support surface and 
        aviation maintenance for the reserve components of the 
        Army and Air Force.
    The committee further directs that shortages of dual-status 
military technicians that exist in reserve component management 
headquarters, including national and state-level National Guard 
headquarters, in United States Property and Fiscal Offices, and 
in similar management level headquarters of the Army reserve 
and Air Force reserve, shall not be filled until after the 
first three priorities have been accomplished.
    The committee takes this action believing that funding 
military technicians contributes directly to overall National 
Guard and Reserve readiness, whereas the terminated civil-
military programs do not.

  section 559--eligibility for armed forces expeditionary medal based 
                      upon service in el salvador

    This section would designate the country of El Salvador 
during the period beginning January 1, 1981 and February 1, 
1992 as an area and a period of time in which members of the 
armed forces participated in operations in significant numbers 
and otherwise met the general requirements for award of the 
Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal.

   section 560--revision and codification of military family act and 
                        military child care act

    This section would codify in title 10, United States Code, 
updated provisions of two acts which were instrumental in 
focusing Department of Defense attention on the needs of 
military families and on the importance of effective child care 
programs. The two acts incorporated are: The Military Family 
Act of 1985 (title VII of Public Law 99-145), and The Military 
Child Care Act of 1989 (title XV, Public Law 101-189).

section 561--discharge of members of the armed forces who have the HIV-
                                1 virus

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
separate or retire service members who are identified as HIV-
positive. Such members would be separated or retired within six 
months of testing HIV-positive unless the member is within a 
two year retirement sanctuary. Members within the two year 
retirement sanctuary would be retained until reaching 
retirement eligibility. The committee has elected to recommend 
the separation of HIV-positive service members who are 
permanently nondeployable because the retention of such 
personnel degrades unit readiness and fails to protect 
deployment equity among service members.

section 562--authority to appoint brigadier general charles e. yeager, 
united states air force (retired), to the grade of major general on the 
                              retired list

    This section would authorize the President to advance 
Brigadier General Charles E. Yeager (retired), to the grade of 
major general on the retired list. The appointment would 
require the advice and consent of the United States Senate and 
would have no effect on the member's retired pay or other 
benefits.

section 563--determination of whereabouts and status of missing persons

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
centralize the oversight and policy responsibility for 
accounting for missing persons at the Department of Defense 
level. This section would codify and standardize procedures for 
accounting for members of the armed forces or civilian 
employees of the Department of Defense who become missing as a 
result of military operations. This section would also 
establish a procedure for review of cases of those who are 
missing as a result of military operations since January 1, 
1950. In addition, it would codify a process to protect the 
interests of families of missing service members. Further, it 
would provide a process to allow the concerns and questions of 
family members to be promptly addressed.
    For years, Congress has struggled to find ways to obtain 
the fullest possible accounting of American service members and 
civilians under the employment of the Department of Defense who 
were listed as missing in action or became prisoners of war. 
Under this section, a specified chain of reporting and a 
coordinated process of inquiry would be established from the 
time that a person is reported missing until the case is 
resolved. The process would protect the missing service member 
from being declared ``dead'' solely because of the passage of 
time.
    The regulated process will include a coordinated effort for 
the systematic, timely collection and analysis of all 
investigative information related to unresolved cases of 
missing personnel and prisoners of war. This information will 
be reviewed periodically by boards of inquiry. The inquiry 
process will include legal representation for the missing 
personnel and dissemination of inquiry results to immediate 
family members.
    This process will help to resolve perhaps the greatest 
recurring tragedy related to unresolved cases of missing 
service members whose families and next of kin have experienced 
both frustration and anguish in trying to obtain answers from 
an unresponsive bureaucracy.

section 564--nominations to service academies from commonwealth of the 
                        northern mariana islands

    This section would authorize the Resident Representative of 
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands to nominate 
one cadet for attendance at each of the service academies.

                       Items of Special Interest


                    additional funds for recruiting

    The committee has observed that the recruiting environment 
has grown increasingly difficult. Recruiters within all the 
military departments are responding to the changing environment 
by developing new initiatives and applying additional manpower 
and funding. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase 
of $35.5 million in recruiting advertising operations and 
maintenance funding.

                         enlistment propensity

    The committee is concerned that the propensity for 
enlistment-age men and women to consider military service has 
declined dramatically since 1991. The Department of Defense 
measures propensity annually by conducting a computer assisted 
telephone survey of 10,000 young men and women called the Youth 
Attitude Tracking Study (YATS). While the YATS survey has been 
useful in identifying trends in youth propensity, the 
Department has used focus groups to develop a better 
understanding of why attitudes have changed.
    While some generalized conclusions about the decline in 
propensity have been identified by the Department, the 
continued decline of the 16-21 year-old male propensity in just 
the last year remains conjecture. The Department has 
accordingly planned to conduct two series of focus groups 
during the summer of 1995. One series involves minority and 
non-minority adults who influence the career and lifestyle 
decisions of youth, and the second series involves high school 
seniors and recent graduates across the nation.
    The committee believes that the focus groups should explore 
a comprehensive range of potential causes for the decline in 
propensity and develop proposed solutions to be considered by 
the Department and the Congress to correct unfavorable trends. 
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a 
report to the Congress, not later than March 31, 1996, on the 
results from the focus groups and the proposed actions to 
correct unfavorable trends in enlistment propensity.

         family advocacy program and new parent support program

    The committee heard extensive testimony from Department of 
Defense witnesses regarding the strains placed on military 
families as a result of the high operations tempo being 
experienced by all services. These strains manifested 
themselves in many ways including child and spouse abuse. 
Concerns for military personnel and their families caused the 
Secretary of Defense to initiate a broad range of quality of 
life measures. The committee commends the Secretary for those 
long needed measures.
    On the other hand, while the committee understands that the 
President's fiscal year 1996 budget request increased the 
funding for the family advocacy program (FAP) over the fiscal 
year 1995 request, the FAP would still be resourced by the 
President's proposal at $29.8 million below that which was 
appropriated by Congress in fiscal year 1995. Even more 
disturbing to the committee is the fact that the budget request 
contains no money in fiscal year 1996 for the New Parent 
Support Program--funded at $20 million in fiscal year 1995.
    The committee considers both the FAP and the New Parent 
Support Program--programs designed either to prevent military 
family violence or to help the victims of it--to be crucial to 
readiness and retention of quality people. The committee, 
therefore, recommends an additional authorization in fiscal 
year 1996 of $30 million for the FAP, to be allocated among the 
services as the Secretary deems appropriate, and an additional 
$23.2 million for the New Parent Support Program, allocated as 
follows: $10 million for the Army, $3.6 million for the Air 
Force, $5.6 million for the Navy, and $4 million for the Marine 
Corps.

    recruiting equity for general education development certificates

    The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense 
does not offer the opportunity to enlist in the armed forces to 
many Americans because they possess General Education 
Development (GED) certificates and not high school diplomas. 
The committee wants to confirm that this preference is properly 
justified and that there is no alternative available to allow 
individual candidates with GED certificates to be accepted for 
enlistment on equal footing with high school graduates with 
diplomas.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to submit a report to the Congress not later than March 31, 
1996 specifying the rationale for preferring high school 
graduates with diplomas over candidates with GED certificates 
and the supporting data. The report should also include an 
assessment by the Secretary of the potential for a process to 
be developed that would allow recruit candidates with GED 
certificates to be evaluated on an individual basis for 
enlistment consideration on equal footing with high school 
graduates with diplomas.

         air national guard fighter and airlift force structure

     The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1995 (Public Law 103-337) directed the Secretary of Defense to 
review the findings of the Commission on Roles and Missions of 
the Armed Forces and report on the appropriate number of 
primary aircraft authorized (PAA) for Air National Guard 
general purpose fighter units. The provision reflected the 
concern that PAA was being reduced from 24 or 18 aircraft per 
squadron to 15.
    Even though that required report has not been rendered, the 
committee is disturbed to learn that the Department of Defense 
in fiscal year 1996 plans to further reduce the general purpose 
fighter PAA to 12 aircraft per squadron, as well as to further 
reduce the PAA of tactical airlift units. The committee 
believes that such reductions would be counterproductive to 
readiness and overall force capability. The committee, 
therefore, until it can receive and review the Secretary of 
Defense's report required by law on this issue, directs that 
the PAA of general purpose fighter units be maintained at 15 
aircraft per squadron, and that the PAA for tactical airlift 
units be maintained at current levels.

                  revitalization of the reserve forces

    The committee recognizes that the reserve components of the 
Armed Forces of the United States are a vital and integral 
element of the nation's defense. As such, the reserve 
components' roles, organization and leadership are important 
matters of national security and must be fully examined, 
especially in light of the increasing reliance being placed on 
the reserve components of the military forces.
    Among the issues which the committee believes should be 
examined are:
    1. The establishment of a separate reserve command for each 
of the armed services;
    2. The source and grade of the commander of each reserve 
command;
    3. The grade of the Vice Chief of the National Guard 
Bureau;
    4. Exemption of reserve component general/flag officer 
positions from active duty grade ceilings and restrictions;
    5. Requirements for full-time support personnel;
    6. The necessity to allow the President to activate reserve 
units to respond to natural disasters; and
    7. The necessity to encourage the employment of reserve 
component members by providing incentives to employers of 
reservists and to reserve component members.
    The committee will undertake an examination of these and 
other related issues as part of the fiscal year 1997 defense 
budget hearing cycle.

     army active component and reserve component offsite agreement

    The committee continues to recognize the unique 
contribution of the major restructuring of the Army's reserve 
components, known as the ``offsite agreement,'' announced by 
the Secretary of Defense in December 1993. This agreement 
between the active Army, the Army national guard and the Army 
reserve stabilized reserve component force structure and end 
strength through fiscal year 1999, thereby making it possible 
for the Total Army to move forward with efforts to increase 
reliance on the reserve components.
    The committee understands that the Secretary of Defense, in 
directing that the active Army end strength be reduced 20,000 
below the baseline established by the Bottom Up Review, has 
also required the Army to examine reductions of Army reserve 
component force structure and end strength below the ``offsite 
agreement'' levels. The committee fully understands the 
Department's need to study potential future reserve component 
restructuring. However, the committee remains committed to 
maintaining the ``offsite agreement'' through fiscal year 1999 
and would expect the Secretary of Defense to provide a 
compelling rationale to the committee before making substantive 
changes to the agreement.

   air national guard support to the united states antarctic program

    Beginning in fiscal year 1996, the Air National Guard 109th 
Airlift Group will begin a three-year transition that will 
result in the group assuming the mission of providing airlift 
support in the Antarctic for the National Science Foundation.
    The National Science Foundation, which has the overall 
management responsibility for the United States Antarctic 
Program (USAP), has obtained airlift support in the past by 
funding all personnel, operations and maintenance costs 
incurred by the Navy, the Department of Defense executive agent 
for USAP.
    The committee fully supports the shift in responsibility 
for USAP airlift support from the Navy to the Air National 
Guard, so long as the cost-reimbursement system currently used 
by the National Science Foundation for the Navy continues to 
directly reimburse the Air National Guard for all costs 
incurred in support of the USAP.
    The committee understands that to perform this new mission 
the 109th Airlift Group may need as many as 235 more full-time 
active guard and reserve personnel than are currently 
authorized. Preliminary assessments made in 1993 indicate that 
these additional personnel would be required in the following 
increments: fiscal year 1996, 56 personnel; fiscal year 1997, 
115 personnel; and fiscal year 1998, 54 to 64 personnel.
    Given the small number of additional personnel required by 
the Air National Guard in fiscal year 1996, the committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide that additional end 
strength to the Air National Guard from the end strength 
variation made available to the secretary by section 411(b) of 
this bill. To support the additional end strength, the 
committee has recommended an additional $2 million for fiscal 
year 1996. The committee expects that the National Science 
Foundation will subsequently reimburse the department for these 
fiscal year 1996 transition costs, as well as for all 
transition costs incurred in subsequent years.
    The committee expects that the Secretary of Defense will 
include in the fiscal year 1997 Defense Authorization Act 
request a more refined requirement for end strength additions 
to support this new mission.

                    simultaneous membership program

    The committee is aware of a program that allows Reserve 
Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) cadets to serve simultaneously 
as a member of a selected reserve unit. Under current policy, 
such participation is denied to ROTC cadets who have been 
awarded scholarships. The committee believes the simultaneous 
membership program to be an important program that serves the 
best interest of the armed forces and the cadets.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to 
the Congress, not later than March 31, 1996, on the propriety 
of authorizing ROTC cadets who have been awarded scholarships 
to participate in the simultaneous membership program. The 
report should also include a recommendation as to how cadets in 
the program should be paid for service as a member in the 
selected reserve.

          service academy admission acceptance decision point

    The committee is concerned that high quality officer 
candidates are being lost to the armed forces because the 
service academies are not completing their admissions process 
in a timely manner. The committee believes that administrators 
of Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) recruiting programs 
would benefit from a process that would provide a list of 
applicants not accepted for attendance at the service academies 
not later than April 1 of each year.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to 
the Congress, not later than March 31, 1996, on the feasibility 
of a process that would provide ROTC administrators a list of 
applicants who have not been accepted for attendance at the 
service academies. The report should include a recommended date 
for the submission of the list, or a schedule for the 
submission of a series of partial lists, as appropriate. If the 
earliest recommended date is after April 1 of each year, the 
report should include an explanation as to why the submission 
of a partial list, as a minimum, is not possible by April 1.

                      decorations for heroic acts

    The committee frequently receives requests for legislation 
to award decorations for heroism. The acts of heroism cited 
appear to merit consideration but are often not evaluated by 
the armed services because the recommendations fail to meet the 
statutory or policy requirements for timely submission. This 
has been especially true during the last five years as the 
nation celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of World War II. The 
committee has observed increasing frustration among members of 
Congress who are unable to obtain evaluations by the military 
departments on the merits of individual cases. The committee 
understands the difficulty in evaluating cases with limited 
documentation dating from periods when the criteria for 
awarding decorations was very different from the criteria used 
today. However, the committee believes that a process could be 
developed for providing the Congress an assessment as to 
whether individual recommendations thought to be uniquely 
meritorious are deserving of award.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense, in cooperation with the Secretaries of the military 
departments, to report to the Congress, not later than March 
31, 1996, on the feasibility of developing a process by which 
the Secretary could provide the Congress assessments on the 
merit of individual recommendations for decorations submitted 
after established time limits.

          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS


                     Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances


          section 601--military pay raise for fiscal year 1996

    This section would provide a 2.4 percent military pay raise 
as proposed in the President's budget. The committee has 
reservations about this level of raise because it would 
institutionally sanction a one-half of one percent lower level 
of increase than is expected within the private sector. The 
committee expects the ongoing Eighth Quadrennial Review of 
Military Compensation (QRMC) to evaluate the importance of the 
cumulative gap that exists between military and private sector 
pay levels and to reassess the process for determining the 
level of pay increases. The committee looks forward to 
receiving the recommendations of the QRMC for changes that will 
protect readiness and the ability of the armed services to 
recruit and retain quality personnel.
    The committee notes that the President's budget request 
included a provision designed to incrementally reduce the out-
of-pocket housing costs for service members, but that the 
proposal is inadequately funded to achieve the intended level 
of benefit. Accordingly, section 601 would provide a 5.2 
percent increase in the basic allowance for quarters which will 
fully fund the initiative to achieve the President's original 
objective to reduce out-of-pocket housing costs for service 
members to 19.5 percent.

section 602--limitation on basic allowance for subsistence for members 
           without dependents residing in government quarters

    This section would require the Secretaries of the military 
departments to allow no more than 12 percent of the service 
members without dependents residing in government quarters to 
receive basic allowance for subsistence (BAS). The Inspector 
General of the Department of Defense identified the process for 
authorizing BAS as requiring management attention in a 
September 1994 review.
    The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense, 
not later than March 31, 1996, to submit a report to the 
Congress confirming the current number of service members 
without dependents residing in government quarters who receive 
BAS and establishing a standard for the appropriate percentage 
of such personnel who should receive BAS. The committee 
believes that 12 percent is a proper interim standard for the 
Secretaries of the military departments to achieve until the 
report is received from the Secretary of Defense.

 section 603--authorization of payment of basic allowance for quarters 
               to additional members assigned to sea duty

    This section would authorize payment of basic allowance for 
quarters and variable housing allowance to single E-6 personnel 
assigned to shipboard sea duty.

   section 604--establishment of minimum amounts of variable housing 
  allowance for high housing cost areas and additional limitation on 
               reduction of allowance for certain members

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a minimum amount of variable housing allowance (VHA) 
to meet the cost of adequate housing in high cost areas. The 
provision would also prevent the amount of VHA paid to an 
individual from being reduced as long as the member retains 
uninterrupted eligibility to receive VHA in the housing area 
and the member's housing costs are not reduced.

     section 605--clarification of limitation on receipt of family 
                          separation allowance

     This section would authorize the payment of family 
separation allowance to service members on board a ship that is 
away from the homeport of the ship even though the service 
member has elected to remain unaccompanied by dependents at the 
permanent duty station.

           Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays


      section 611--extension of certain bonuses for reserve forces

     This section would extend the authority for the selected 
reserve reenlistment bonus, the selected reserve enlistment 
bonus, the selected reserve affiliation bonus, the ready 
reserve enlistment and reenlistment bonus, and the prior 
service enlistment bonus until September 30, 1998.

  section 612--extension of certain bonuses and special pay for nurse 
     officer candidates, registered nurses, and nurse anesthetists

     This section would extend the authority for the nurse 
officer candidate accession program, the accession bonus for 
registered nurses, and the incentive special pay for nurse 
anesthetists until September 30, 1998.

   section 613--extension of authority relating to payment of other 
                        bonuses and special pays

     This section would extend the authority for the aviation 
officer retention bonus, the reenlistment bonus for active 
members, enlistment bonuses for critical skills, special pay 
for enlisted members of the selected reserve assigned to 
certain high-priority units, special pay for nuclear-qualified 
officers extending the period of active service, and the 
nuclear career accession bonus until September 30, 1998. The 
provision would also extend the authority for repayment of 
education loans for certain health professionals who serve in 
the selected reserve and the nuclear career annual incentive 
bonus until October 1, 1998.

 section 614--codification and extension of special pay for critically 
       short wartime health specialists in the selected reserves

     This section would amend title 37, United States Code, to 
include authorization of special pay for critically short 
wartime health specialists in the selected reserves and extend 
the authority for the special pay until September 30, 1998.

section 615--change in eligibility requirements for continuous monthly 
                         aviation incentive pay

     This section would reduce the initial operational flying 
requirement for Aviation Career Incentive Pay from 9 of the 
first 12 years to eight of the first 12 years of aviation 
service.

 section 616--continuous entitlement to career sea pay for crewmembers 
                     of ships designated as tenders

     This section would authorize personnel assigned to tenders 
to receive career sea pay.

 section 617--increase in maximum rate of special duty assignment pay 
               for enlisted members serving as recruiters

     This section would authorize payment of additional special 
duty assignment pay to recruiters up to a maximum monthly rate 
of $375. The committee expects the Secretary of Defense and the 
Secretaries of the military departments to increase the special 
duty assignment pay proportionately for all recruiters to 
offset the concerns about financial hardships identified by 
recruiter surveys.

            Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances


   section 621--authorization of return to united states of formerly 
               dependent children who attain age overseas

     This section would authorize dependent children who lose 
eligibility as dependents for any reason while overseas to 
return to the United States at government expense prior to the 
sponsor receiving permanent-change-of-station orders.

   section 622--authorization of dislocation allowance for moves in 
             connection with base realignments and closures

     This section would authorize the payment of dislocation 
allowance for service members directed to move as a result of 
the closure or realignment of an installation.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters


 section 631--elimination of unnecessary annual reporting requirements 
                     regarding compensation matters

     This section would eliminate a report on dependents 
accompanying members on alignments to overseas locations and 
simplify the requirement for the President to submit to the 
Congress recommendations on military pay matters.

  section 632--study of joint process for determining the location of 
                          recruiting stations

     A December 1994 General Accounting Office report (GAO/
NSIAD 95-22) determined that the military departments are 
maintaining recruiters in offices that are relatively 
unproductive. The report also found that further savings could 
be achieved through consolidation of recruiting functions to 
include market research and analysis. The committee believes 
that the military departments would save critical resources and 
increase recruiter efficiency by employing new techniques to 
maintain a presence in remote areas and developing a joint 
strategy for locating and manning recruiting stations based on 
joint market research and analysis. The committee believes that 
a method for measuring the success of individual recruiting 
stations is essential and that information resulting from such 
a method should be reported to the Congress on a continuing 
basis to ensure the efficient use of recruiting resources.
    Accordingly, this section would require the Secretary of 
Defense to conduct a study of the feasibility of a joint 
process for determining the location and manning of recruiting 
stations that would be based on market research and analysis 
conducted jointly by the military departments. The report 
resulting from the study should include a recommended method 
for measuring the efficiency of individual recruiting stations 
utilizing recruiting station cost per accession or other 
efficiency standard, as determined by the Secretary. The report 
would be submitted to the Congress not later than March 31, 
1996.

 section 633--fiscal year 1996 cost-of-living adjustment for military 
                                retirees

     This section would conform the military retired pay cost-
of-living adjustment (COLA) payment date with the payment date 
established for federal civilian retirees by making the 
military retired pay COLA payable on March 1996 rather than 
September 1996. The committee is disappointed that the 
President's initiative within the budget request to resolve the 
disparity between the two groups of retirees was proposed in 
such a manner as to compel the committee to once again use 
scarce discretionary funds to address a mandatory spending 
initiative. Because the committee has no ability to provide a 
mandatory offset for the Administration's COLA equity 
initiative within the 050 budget function and therefore avoid a 
``PAYGO'' problem, under the Budget Enforcement Act, the 
committee has authorized $403 million in the personnel account 
to restore equity in COLA payment dates. This decision once 
again demonstrates the committee's resolve to protect the 
purchasing power of military retired pay. However, the 
committee remains committed to seeking through the budget 
process a solution that does not require funding from 
discretionary accounts.

                   TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS


                    Subtitle A--Health Care Services


 section 701--modification of requirements regarding routine physical 
              examinations and immunizations under champus

     This section would amend section 1079(a) of title 10, 
United States Code, by expanding ``well-baby visits'' and 
immunizations to dependents under the age of six, by 
authorizing immunizations at age six and above and by adding 
coverage of health promotion and disease prevention visits 
associated with immunizations, and pap smears and mammograms.
     The section would provide the Secretary of Defense the 
authority to determine the types and schedule of immunizations, 
the schedule of pap smears and mammograms, and the content of 
the associated health promotion/disease prevention visits.

 section 702--correction of inequities in medical and dental care and 
          death and disability benefits for certain reservists

     This section would authorize reservists the same death and 
disability benefits as active duty members, during off-duty 
periods between successive inactive duty training periods 
performed at locations outside the reasonable commuting 
distance from the member's residence.

   section 703--medical and dental care for members of the selected 
                                reserve

    The committee is committed to ensuring the readiness of 
reserve and national guard members. The experiences of 
Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm highlighted a need to 
address medical and dental readiness of selected reserve and 
guard members.
    This section would require the Secretary of the Army to 
provide medical and dental screenings, physical exams for 
members over 40, and the dental care required to meet dental 
readiness standards to units scheduled for deployment within 75 
days of mobilization.
    This section would also require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a demonstration program to offer members of the 
selected reserve dental readiness insurance on a voluntary 
basis, at no cost to the Department of Defense. Payment of 
premiums should be allowed through direct allotment and 
attempts should be made to directly link the program to dental 
readiness. This could be done by providing program participants 
with a dental readiness verification form to be completed by 
their dental care provider on a specified basis, such as 
annually or semi-annually, as deemed appropriate by the 
Department for ensuring dental readiness.
    In addition, this section would require the Department to 
evaluate the success of such a program in improving the dental 
readiness of selected reserve and guard members.

                      Subtitle B--TRICARE Program


section 711--priority use of military treatment facilities for persons 
                  enrolled in managed care initiatives

    This section would amend title 10, United States Code, to 
require the Secretary of Defense, as an incentive for 
enrollment, to establish reasonable priorities for services in 
military treatment facilities for TRICARE-enrolled 
beneficiaries.
    The committee believes that a managed health care program 
provides the best opportunity for the Department of Defense to 
control health care costs. Offering priority treatment in 
military treatment facilities provides a strong incentive for 
military health care beneficiaries to enroll in the 
Department's managed-care program.

     section 712--staggered payment of enrollment fees for tricare

    Section 1097(e) of title 10, United States Code, authorizes 
the Secretary of Defense to prescribe a co-payment or other 
charge for health care provided through a managed health care 
program. This section would amend section 1097(e) of title 10 
to require the Secretary of Defense to allow beneficiaries to 
pay any required enrollment fees on a monthly or quarterly 
basis, at no additional cost to the beneficiary.

 section 713--requirement of budget neutrality for tricare to be based 
                           on entire program

    During recent hearings on the Department of Defense's 
TRICARE managed health care program, the Congressional Budget 
Office reported that the statutory requirement that the health 
maintenance organization (HMO) option of the TRICARE program by 
itself be budget neutral would limit the Department's ability 
to offer the HMO option in noncatchment areas--areas with no 
military medical treatment facilities within 40 miles. Health 
care costs to the Department in these areas are likely to be 
higher than the cost of care furnished in military facilities.
    In addition, the Congressional Budget Office reported that 
removing the requirement for the HMO option to be budget 
neutral and simply requiring the TRICARE system in its entirety 
to be budget neutral would offer the Department greater 
flexibility to provide all beneficiaries with a uniform triple-
option benefit structure. This section would reaffirm the 
committee's commitment to providing a uniform health benefit to 
all Department of Defense medical beneficiaries by giving the 
Department the tools to establish an HMO option in most areas 
of the country.

section 714--training in health care management and administration for 
                          tricare lead agents

    This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to 
ensure that military medical treatment facility commanders 
selected to serve as lead agents for the Department's managed 
health-care program, TRICARE, receive appropriate training in 
health-care management and administration.
    During recent hearings on the TRICARE program, both the 
General Accounting Office and the Congressional Budget Office 
expressed concerns over whether the training received by 
medical treatment facility commanders was adequate to prepare 
them to manage a health care system of the cost, size and 
complexity of the TRICARE managed system. The committee is 
committed to ensuring the effectiveness of the TRICARE program 
and believes that a formal education program would contribute 
materially to that objective.

      section 715--evaluation and report on tricare effectiveness

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
obtain an ongoing independent evaluation of the TRICARE program 
by a federally funded research and development center and to 
provide an annual report to Congress on the results of the 
evaluation. The evaluation would seek to assess the 
effectiveness of the TRICARE program in achieving its goals of 
increasing access to and improving the quality of medical care 
provided to covered beneficiaries without increasing the total 
cost to the government or out-of-pocket costs to beneficiaries. 
Additionally, the evaluation should report on efforts to make 
TRICARE Prime, the HMO option, available in non-catchment and 
rural areas.

          Subtitle C--Uniformed Services Treatment Facilities


 section 721--limitation on expenditures to support uniformed services 
 treatment facilities and limitation on number of participants in ustf 
                           managed care plans

    This section would amend the Defense of Defense 
Authorization Act, 1984 (Public Law 98-94) to limit the amount 
authorized to be spent by the Department of Defense on the 
Uniformed Services Treatment Facilities (USTFs) managed care 
plan to $300,000,000--the amount appropriated for the USTFs in 
fiscal year 1995. In addition, this section would limit the 
number of beneficiaries enrolled in the USTF program to the 
number enrolled as of September 30, 1995.

     section 722--application of federal acquisition regulation to 
 participation agreements with uniformed services treatment facilities

    This section would amend the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510) by repealing the 
exemption from the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) granted 
the Uniformed Services Treatment Facilities (USTFs). The FAR 
was issued to promote competition and ensure that the federal 
government and its contractors are afforded the safeguards and 
controls necessary to ensure proper performance and prevent the 
fraud, waste and abuse of public revenues. This section would 
allow the Department of Defense to more effectively manage its 
military health-care system.

  section 723--development of plan for integrating uniformed services 
 treatment facilities in managed care programs of department of defense

    This section would amend section 718(c) of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-
510) to require the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress 
a plan under which the 10 Uniformed Services Treatment 
Facilities (USTFs) would be integrated into the Department of 
Defense's managed health-care program prior to September 30, 
1997.
    In addition, this section would require the Secretary to 
assess the feasibility of implementing a modified version of 
USTF option II. This option would permit the USTFs to become 
designated as Medicare-risk health maintenance organizations 
(HMOs) and to seek reimbursement from Medicare for Medicare-
covered services provided DOD beneficiaries enrolled in USTF 
health care programs. These beneficiaries also could use 
military treatment facilities for CHAMPUS-covered benefits that 
are not covered by Medicare, or the Department of Defense would 
reimburse the USTFs for these limited benefits.
    This section would express the committee's concern for 
ensuring the continued care in the military health services 
system for those beneficiaries currently enrolled in the USTF 
program.

     section 724--equitable implementation of uniform cost sharing 
        requirements for uniformed services treatment facilities

    This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to apply 
uniform cost shares to each of the 10 Uniformed Services 
Treatment Facilities (USTFs) only upon regional implementation 
of the TRICARE managed health care program in the USTF's 
service area.

   Subtitle D--Other Changes to Existing Laws Regarding Health Care 
                               Management


   section 731--maximum allowable payments to individual health care 
                        providers under champus

    This section would amend title 10, United States Code, to 
codify a provision of the Department of Defense Appropriations 
Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-335) which establishes 
a process for gradually reducing CHAMPUS maximum payment 
amounts to those limits for similar services under Medicare, 
with special consideration given to preserving access to care 
and limiting balance billing by providers.
    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
transition from its current system of prevailing charges for 
professional services to payment limits similar to the Medicare 
fee schedule. It also would provide the Secretary with the 
authority to make exceptions to the fee schedule limits to 
ensure adequate care is provided to covered beneficiaries.

section 732--expansion of existing restriction on use of defense funds 
                             for abortions

    This section would amend section 1093 of title 10, United 
States Code, to include restricting the Department of Defense 
from using medical treatment facilities or other DOD 
facilities, as well as DOD funds, to perform abortions unless 
necessary to save the life of the mother.

 section 734--redesignation of military health care account as defense 
  health program account and two-year availability of certain account 
                                 funds

    This section would amend section 1100 of title 10, United 
States Code, to allow the Secretary of Defense to carry over 
three percent of the defense health plan annual operation and 
maintenance appropriations to the end of the next fiscal year.
    The purpose of a managed care strategy is to provide high-
quality and cost-effective health care to the Department's 
beneficiaries. The single-year nature of the defense health 
program appropriation is an impediment to the effectiveness of 
incentives that can presently be employed. In all cases, 
funding authority not used during the specified appropriation 
period is lost. This precludes the use of savings generated 
from current-year management efforts to be used for investments 
in the following fiscal year. As a result, there is an 
incentive for managers to spend these funds on lower-priority 
but easily-obligated requirements, avoiding higher-priority 
requirements that require greater lead time for obligations.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters


   section 741--termination of program to train and utilize military 
          psychologists to prescribe psychotropic medications

    The Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1989 (Public 
Law 101-511) directed the Department of Defense to conduct a 
pilot demonstration project to train military psychologists to 
prescribe psychotropic drugs. This section would direct the 
Department of Defense to terminate the pilot demonstration 
program and would withdraw from psychologists who participated 
in the demonstration program the authority to prescribe 
psychotropic drugs. The committee is concerned about the cost-
effectiveness of a program that does not meet a Department of 
Defense requirement and from which only 50 percent of entering 
candidates graduate.

section 742--waiver of collection of payments due from certain persons 
                 unaware of loss of champus eligibility

    This section would authorize the secretaries of Defense, 
Transportation and Health and Human Services to waive the 
collection of certain payments described for Civilian Health 
and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS) 
beneficiaries. This waiver would apply to CHAMPUS beneficiaries 
who lost their CHAMPUS eligibility when they became entitled to 
Medicare because of disability or end-stage renal disease, 
excluding those who become eligible upon attaining age 65.
    This waiver is necessary because these beneficiaries were 
not informed of their loss of CHAMPUS eligibility, continued to 
use CHAMPUS benefits and the CHAMPUS system continued to pay 
for care, sometimes for years. When the Department of Defense 
issues erroneous benefit payments to an individual not eligible 
for CHAMPUS, the payments are a debt owed to the government and 
are subject to recovery under the Federal Claims Collection Act 
of 1966, as amended by the Debt Collection Act of 1982.
    This section would authorize the administering secretaries 
to waive the recovery of these erroneous payments so that 
beneficiaries who, due to no fault of their own, continued to 
use certain benefits for which they were no longer eligible are 
not unfairly penalized. This section also would establish a 
termination date for the waiver authority so that beneficiaries 
would not be enticed to avoid Medicare Part B enrollment.

 section 743--notification of certain champus-covered beneficiaries of 
                      loss of champus eligibility

    This section would direct the administering secretaries to 
develop a mechanism for notifying beneficiaries of their 
ineligibility for CHAMPUS health benefits when they lose their 
CHAMPUS eligibility due to disability status.

section 744--demonstration program to train military medical personnel 
                     in civilian shock trauma units

    During committee hearings on the military health-care 
system, testimony was received that recommended the Department 
of Defense strengthen affiliations with civilian hospitals to 
provide better wartime training and to meet some of the 
requirements for caring for active-duty personnel.
    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a demonstration program to evaluate the feasibility of 
providing additional shock trauma training for military medical 
personnel through arrangements with civilian hospitals where 
military medical personnel would work and train together as a 
team.

section 745--study regarding department of defense efforts to determine 
         appropriate force levels of wartime medical personnel

    This section would direct the Comptroller General of the 
United States to evaluate the effectiveness of the modeling 
efforts of each of the three service surgeons general for 
determining the appropriate wartime military medical force-
level requirements and to submit to Congress a report on this 
evaluation not later than March 1, 1996. The report shall (1) 
assess the modeling techniques used by each service; (2) 
analyze the data used in the model to identify medical 
personnel requirements; (3) identify the ability of the models 
to integrate reserve component requirements; and (4) evaluate 
the Department of Defense's ability to integrate the modeling 
efforts into a comprehensive, coordinated plan for rightsizing 
the military medical establishment.

   section 746--study regarding expanded mental health services for 
                     certain covered beneficiaries

    This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to study 
the feasibility of expanding mental health services to include 
``wraparound'' services, and to report the results of the study 
to Congress by March 1, 1996.
    Wraparound services provide continued care for child and 
adolescent patients designed to support the effectiveness of 
residential treatment. The process builds support for the 
patient, allowing shorter inpatient stays through comprehensive 
and continued management of care, and reducing recidivism for 
the residential phase of treatment. During a test at Fort 
Riley, Kansas, wraparound services reduced costs for inpatient 
psychiatric and residential care from $3.9 million in fiscal 
year 1991 to $0.87 million in fiscal year 1994.
    The wraparound services program would require providers or 
residential treatment services to share financial risk through 
case-rate reimbursement and to work to prevent recidivism by 
providing residential treatment services which include planning 
and individualized wraparound services as part of the 
treatment.

  section 747--report on improved access to military health care for 
               covered beneficiaries entitled to medicare

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
report on possible alternatives to improving access to the 
military health care system for those beneficiaries who are 
Medicare eligible and ineligible for the Civilian Health and 
Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS).
    The committee remains concerned about the growing 
population of military retirees who are unable to access the 
military health care system largely as a result of the drawdown 
of the military and the closure of military medical treatment 
facilities. These retirees are feeling increasingly 
disenfranchised from a government they served and defended 
devotedly. Without Medicare reimbursement, the Department will 
be forced to provide less and less care to this population.
    The committee remains committed to identifying cost-
effective alternatives for providing medical care to all 
military medical beneficiaries.

                       Items of Special Interest


medicare reimbursement to the defense health program for care provided 
                   to medicare-eligible beneficiaries

    The committee believes that Medicare reimbursement to 
Department of Defense medical facilities for care provided to 
Medicare-eligible beneficiaries can produce savings to both the 
Department of Defense and the Department of Health and Human 
Services because military hospital care is generally less 
expensive than health care services purchased in the private 
sector.
    The Department's implementation of the TRICARE managed 
health care program nationwide over the next several years will 
offer a propitious opportunity to achieve government-wide 
savings through Medicare reimbursement. Unfortunately, the 
Congressional Budget Office scoring of this initiative as a 
$2.7 billion direct spending cost by the year 2000 limits the 
committee's ability to act on this important initiative. This 
direct spending impact is largely due to the fact that the 
Health Care Financing Agency does not budget for military 
Medicare-eligible beneficiaries. Further limiting the 
committee's ability to act on this issue is the fact that the 
President's budget does not propose Medicare reimbursement to 
the Department.
    The committee remains convinced that Medicare reimbursement 
is in the best interest of the military health care system and 
that such reimbursement will result in overall savings to the 
Federal Government. The committee remains committed to working 
with other committees and the President to achieve this 
worthwhile and necessary objective.

         formation of veteran's wing within naval hospital guam

    The committee is concerned about the need to continue 
providing quality health care services to thousands of 
beneficiaries as the Navy closes and realigns its facilities on 
Guam. The establishment of a veterans' wing within the Naval 
Hospital, Guam, could provide these beneficiaries with quality 
health care. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of 
the Navy to study a possible cooperative arrangement with the 
Department of Veterans Affairs to establish a VA wing within 
the Naval Hospital on Guam and to report to Congress on the 
results of this study by March 1, 1996.

 health-care sharing agreement between department of veterans affairs 
                       and department of defense

    The committee is aware that the Secretary of Defense and 
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs have long had the authority 
to make sharing agreements for the mutual use or exchange of 
medical resources. Title II of Public Law 102-585 provided the 
authority for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to 
provide medical care to CHAMPUS eligible beneficiaries on a 
reimbursable basis. Such agreements can realize cost savings 
for the Department of Defense, while enabling Veterans Affairs 
to operate more efficiently and improve services to veterans.
    In a joint DOD/VA project implemented in early 1994 at the 
Asheville, North Carolina, VA Medical Center, Veterans Affairs 
provided services to more than 1,300 CHAMPUS patients at a 
discount from the CHAMPUS maximum allowable. Patient 
satisfaction has been very high and about 80 new registrants 
per month have requested services under the Asheville pilot 
project.
    Other VA health care facilities, which have worked closely 
with local military retirees and base commanders, are prepared 
to provide services to CHAMPUS eligibles under agreements 
similar to those established at Asheville. In many of these 
communities, TRICARE managed-care contracts are not scheduled 
to be implemented for nearly two years. The Asheville 
experience demonstrates the kind of service Veterans Affairs 
can provide in the interim. Therefore, the committee urges the 
Department to work with Veterans Affairs to expand the number 
of such agreements and to authorize VA facilities to serve as 
health care providers under the Department's TRICARE managed 
care system.

  TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED 
                                MATTERS


                         Legislative Provisions


         section 801--repeals of certain procurement provisions

    This section would repeal various provisions of law that: 
1) impose unique procurement integrity requirements on DOD 
personnel thereby placing them under the same standards applied 
to non-DOD federal employees; 2) require non-value added 
contract clauses; 3) impose archaic limitations on the 
delegation of secretarial authorities; and 4) limit sources for 
procurement of critical spare parts.

             section 802--fees for certain testing services

    This section would allow certain Department of Defense test 
facilities to recoup both direct and indirect costs when 
providing services to the private sector.

          section 803--testing of defense acquisition programs

    This section would clarify the applicable terminology used 
to test weapon systems and other hardware items.

    section 804--coordination and communication of defense research 
                               activities

    This section would make a technical change to allow 
additional flexibility in existing acquisition reporting 
requirements.

  section 805--addition of certain items to domestic source limitation

    This section would extend the current domestic source 
requirements for ball bearings and impose similar requirements 
for certain components of naval vessels.

        section 806--revisions to procurement notice provisions

    This section would conform the defense procurement notice 
posting threshold to the same threshold used by civilian 
government agencies.

               section 807--international competitiveness

    This section would amend the Arms Export Control Act to 
remove the current requirement that government-to-government 
sales of U.S. military equipment carry a requirement to charge 
for recoupment of non-recurring research and development costs. 
This policy has had the effect of encouraging U.S. aerospace 
companies to market military items abroad on a commercial 
basis, rather than through the preferred Foreign Military Sales 
(FMS) process. The committee does not believe this policy 
change will lead to an increase in the sales of military 
systems, but instead will allow American firms to compete on 
more equitable ground with foreign suppliers of military 
hardware.

         section 808--encouragement of use of leasing authority

    This section would encourage the Secretary of Defense to 
utilize leasing practices whenever practicable.

                       Items of Special Interest


       implementation of the federal acquisition streamlining act

    Congressional enactment of the Federal Acquisition 
Streamlining Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-355) last year was an 
important initial step in the direction of streamlining the 
laborious Federal procurement system. This legislation is aimed 
at reducing the costs associated with doing business with the 
government while maintaining the oversight necessary to protect 
the taxpayer's interests.
    The eventual success of the Federal Acquisition 
Streamlining Act (FASA), however, hinges on full and proper 
implementation of the law by the executive branch. In this 
regard, the committee commends the Department of Defense for 
moving rapidly to establish the necessary teams to develop 
regulations for public comment. On the other hand, the 
committee notes that action taken too quickly often does not 
achieve the intended results. Based on the committee's review 
of the proposed regulations, it appears that the draft FASA 
regulations fall into three categories: (1) those accomplishing 
what was intended; (2) those that miss the intent of the 
legislation; and (3) those that not only ignore the letter and 
spirit of the law but also impose new burdens not required by 
statute.
    In the first category--accomplishing what was intended--the 
draft commercial contracting regulations clearly were drawn on 
a clean slate, rather than just making patchwork changes to 
existing regulations. Rather than being risk adverse, this 
approach relies on the forces of the commercial marketplace for 
quality, terms, prices, and other critical factors. The 
committee is also encouraged to note that the list of 
subcontract flowdown waivers, as intended by Congress, is a 
relatively lengthy list.
    In the second category, the proposed regulations on 
contract financing, including commercial financing and 
performance based payments, are not only inconsistent with the 
legislative goals but would place enormous administrative 
burdens on the contracting officer and contractor. These 
burdens include: the requirements for commercial 
certifications, an either/or scenario for performance-based and 
progress payments, an arbitrary 75 percent reimbursement rate 
for performance-based payments and an automatic withholding of 
payments when one performance measure is missed or is in 
dispute. The proposed rule also permits agencies to issue their 
own regulations on commercial financing, in contravention of 
the legislation's intent to discourage nonstandard contract 
clauses.
    Finally, in the third category, the proposed regulations 
related to the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA) appear to miss 
the opportunity to take advantage of the legislative authority 
to eliminate regulatory-based burdens. Based on a review of the 
proposed TINA regulations, the committee identifies a number of 
deficiencies, to include: 1) the failure to make the 
definitions and forms more user friendly in an environment 
where the Department and other agencies are seeking access to 
commercial products; 2) the expansion of the requirement for 
post-award audits to apply to procurements which qualify for a 
cost or pricing data exemption under TINA; and 3) maintaining 
and expanding the scope of the ``percentage of sales test'' 
where sales to the general public are compared to sales to the 
government for purposes of determining whether a product 
qualifies for a TINA exemption.
    The committee understands that these issues, as well as 
others, are undergoing substantial revision as part of the 
regulatory process. Therefore, while the committee remains 
concerned over the initial draft proposals, it withholds final 
judgment on how well the regulatory process fulfills the full 
letter and spirit of this important legislation until the final 
regulations are issued.

            management responsibility for acquisition policy

    The committee is concerned that the current organizational 
structure within the Department of Defense has unnecessarily 
bifurcated the functional responsibility for development and 
implementation of acquisition policy. That responsibility is 
now split between the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition Reform and the Office of the Director 
for Defense Procurement. This arrangement results in 
unnecessary duplication of effort, but more importantly, 
invariably hinders the coherent development and implementation 
of needed acquisition reform within the Department. The 
committee strongly encourages the Secretary to revisit this 
organizational arrangement and to institute the appropriate 
changes necessary to ensure that functional responsibility for 
development and implementation of acquisition policy within the 
Department is consolidated in one place.

                      machine tool industrial base

    The committee continues to be concerned over the viability 
of the United States machine tool industry which is a critical 
component of national defense technology and industrial base. 
Therefore, the committee urges defense companies to support 
this vital component of the defense industrial base by 
purchasing domestically manufactured machine tool equipment 
wherever possible.

      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT


                         Legislative Provisions


   section 901--reorganization of office of the secretary of defense

    As an important element of its initiative to produce 
greater efficiencies within Department of Defense operations in 
order to fund modernization and operational readiness 
shortfalls, the committee has begun a review the organizational 
and personnel practices of the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense and associated support organizations. The committee is 
concerned by the incongruity in trends between significant 
growth in the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and 
drastic military force structure and defense budget reductions. 
During the ten year period from fiscal years 1985 to 1995, the 
number of civilian personnel assigned to OSD has increased by 
22 percent while combat force structure has been reduced by 40 
percent and real defense spending by 34 percent.
    While these statistics can only serve as a coarse measure 
of OSD's management efficiency, they do provide sufficient 
basis for the committee to direct certain corrective steps. 
Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 901) 
that would direct the Secretary of Defense to reduce the number 
of personnel assigned to OSD by 25 percent over a four year 
period.
    The committee further understands that in addition to the 
official number of personnel assigned to OSD, the Department 
has informally expanded OSD to include an additional 4,000 
personnel through the creation of so-called ``direct support 
activities'' that effectively serve as an extended OSD staff. 
The provision recommended by the committee would require that 
direct support activities and similar functions be included in 
the mandated personnel reduction.
    Section 901 would also reduce the number of authorized 
assistant secretaries of defense by two, from the current level 
of eleven to nine. The committee rejects the Administration 
request to further increase the number of assistant secretaries 
to twelve and points out that the Administration already 
previously increased the total number of Presidentially-
appointed civilian officials by a considerable number to 
oversee a drastically reduced Department of Defense operation.
    In order to allow for an orderly transition to downsized 
and more efficient OSD operation, section 901 would also 
require that the Secretary of Defense provide Congress with a 
comprehensive reorganization plan for his office. This plan 
should include a detailed presentation of the steps the 
Secretary recommends to implement the 25 percent reduction. The 
plan should also actively examine a number of functional 
consolidation and management options to increase efficiency 
while reducing personnel resources.
    Finally, to provide the Secretary with the broadest 
possible range of organizational options to consider, section 
901 would repeal a number of the current statutorily mandated 
offices and positions within OSD. The committee notes that 
repeal of these provisions does not require and should not be 
interpreted to mean the elimination of any of the affected 
offices. The committee recommends this action without prejudice 
toward any of these offices and intends only to extend the 
Secretary the broadest possible latitude in pursuing 
reorganizational efforts free of legislatively-driven 
constraints. Accordingly, the committee fully expects the 
Secretary to reciprocate by taking advantage of the latitude 
provided by this provision through the aggressive exploration 
of all possible reorganization and streamlining opportunities.

    section 902--restructuring of department of defense acquisition 
                       organization and workforce

    The committee notes that almost half of the 867,000 
civilian personnel currently employed by the Department of 
Defense are assigned to defense acquisition organizations. The 
size and breadth of the current defense acquisition 
infrastructure consumes enormous budgetary resources that could 
otherwise be utilized to meet quality of life core readiness 
and modernization shortfalls.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 
902) that would require the Secretary of Defense to reduce the 
number of personnel assigned to defense acquisition 
organizations by 25 percent over a four year period. The 
provision would also require a reduction of 30,000 personnel be 
achieved during fiscal year 1996. In addition, the provision 
requires the Secretary to develop and submit a plan to Congress 
that:
          (1) reduces the number of personnel assigned to 
        defense acquisition organizations by 25 percent, 
        exempting certain depot-maintenance employees;
          (2) eliminates duplication of functions among 
        existing defense acquisition organizations;
          (3) maximizes opportunities to consolidate defense 
        acquisition organizations to reduce management 
        overhead;
          (4) takes full advantage of simplified procedures and 
        other procedural changes established by the Federal 
        Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-
        355) and other internal DOD initiatives;
          (5) assesses the consolidation of certain functions 
        of the Defense Contract Audit Agency and the Defense 
        Contract Management Command;
          (6) assesses outsourcing of a significant portion of 
        the workload performed by the Defense Contract Audit 
        Agency and other acquisition defense agencies; and
          (7) assesses consolidating or eliminating selected 
        defense acquisition organizations.
    The committee is determined to realize significant 
reductions and increased efficiencies from the defense 
acquisition infrastructure. However, the committee has 
deliberately chosen not to direct specific organizational 
actions yet in order to allow the Secretary the opportunity to 
evaluate all possible options and provide Congress with his 
plan to achieve this broad objective. If the Secretary's plan 
proves inadequate, the committee will involve itself more 
directly and in more detail with regard to streamlining the 
defense acquisition infrastructure.

 section 903--plan for incorporation of department of energy national 
              security functions in department of defense

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report to Congress on the Secretary's plan for the 
incorporation into the Department of Defense of the national 
security programs of the Department of Energy which could be 
implemented if the Department of Energy is abolished and those 
programs are transferred to the Department of Defense.

 section 904--change in titles of certain marine corps general officer 
billets resulting from reorganization of the headquarters, marine corps

    This section would change references in current law to 
reflect the reorganization of Headquarters Marine Corps.

section 905--inclusion of the information resources management college 
                   in the national defense university

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a personnel system for the Information Resources 
Management College that is consistent with the personnel system 
for other institutions within the National Defense University.

  section 906--employment of civilians at the asia-pacific center for 
                            security studies

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a personnel system for the Asia-Pacific Center for 
Security Studies. The committee notes that the authority that 
would be granted under this provision is the same granted to 
the Secretary for the George C. Marshall European Center for 
Security Studies by section 923 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160).

 section 907--continued operation of uniformed services university of 
                          the health sciences

    The President's budget request proposed a phased closure of 
the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences 
(USUHS).
    During committee hearings on military medical readiness, 
the General Accounting Office and the Congressional Budget 
Office reported on weaknesses in military wartime medical 
readiness. The service surgeons general, at these hearings, 
reported on the importance of USUHS in effectively training 
military physicians to meet both peacetime and wartime medical 
readiness requirements.
    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
budget for ongoing operations at USUHS. The committee believes 
that USUHS is an institution of professional education vital to 
the education and medical readiness training of significant 
numbers of uniformed services health-care providers.

    section 908--redesignation of advanced research projects agency

    In 1993, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency 
(DARPA) was renamed to the Advanced Research Projects Agency 
(ARPA) by dropping ``defense'' from the title. Accompanying the 
change, the agency was directed to assume significantly 
increased responsibilities for managing defense reinvestment 
programs. This change resulted in a doubling of the Agency's 
budget and a dilution in the focus the agency once provided to 
national security programs and priorities. The committee 
believes that this unwarranted shift of the agency away from 
its important national security mission is improper and has 
contributed to the diversion of scarce defense research and 
development resources from defense priorities to ill-defined 
dual-use and other civilian applications. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends a provision (sec. 908) that would direct 
that ARPA be redesignated as the Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency (DARPA) to properly reflect its mission and 
responsibilities as a combat support agency of the Department 
of Defense. The committee also recommends the Department 
consider transitioning the oversight and management of 
Department-wide defense reinvestment and dual-use programs to 
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition 
and Technology. The committee recommends that, where practical, 
all existing ARPA letterhead, logo, and monogrammed expendable 
supplies shall be used until expended.

                           Items of Interest


                growth in legislative liaison operations

    The committee notes with concern the increasingly large 
number of legislative liaison operations and associated 
personnel within the Department of Defense. The committee notes 
that each of the regional Commanders-in-chief and many of the 
major service commands have independent legislative liaison 
offices in the Washington area. For example, the Army has 
separate Washington legislative liaison offices for Forces 
Command (FORSCOM), Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC), U.S. 
Army in Europe, U.S. Forces in Korea, and Allied Command 
Europe. Similarly, the Navy's Naval Ocean Systems Center, Navy 
Weapons Center, Pacific Test Center and other similar 
organizations each have legislative liaison operations. During 
a period of downsizing and budget constraint, the committee 
finds it difficult to understand how such legislative liaison 
operations can be justified and wonders why this function 
cannot be more efficiently performed through the service 
secretary's legislative liaison operation.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to provide a report to the Congressional defense committees by 
January 1, 1996, identifying all legislative liaison offices 
operating in the National Capital Region as of January 1, 1995. 
The report should include the number of personnel assigned to 
each of the identified legislative liaison offices, either 
permanently assigned or on temporary duty. The report should 
also include an individual evaluation of whether the function 
performed by each individual service liaison operation could be 
more efficiently performed by the service secretary's office.

                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS


                     Subtitle A--Financial Matters


                    section 1001--transfer authority

    This section would permit the transfer of amounts of 
authorizations made available in Division A of the bill for any 
fiscal year to any other authorization made available in 
Division A upon determination by the Secretary of Defense that 
such a transfer would be in the national interest. The 
provision would provide the authorization for reprogramming 
involving the transfer of authorization between amounts 
authorized as set out in bill language.
    The authority to transfer could only be used to provide 
authorization for higher priority items than the items from 
which authorization was transferred and could not be used to 
provide authorization for an item that was denied authorization 
by the Congress. The Secretary of Defense would be required to 
notify Congress promptly of transfers. The total amount of 
transfers would be limited to $2 billion. Historically, the 
transfer authority authorized has changed as follows:
                                                                 Billion
FY85-88........................................................... $2.00
FY89-91...........................................................  3.00
FY92..............................................................  2.25
FY93..............................................................  1.50
FY94-95...........................................................  2.00

            section 1002--incorporation of classified annex

    This section would provide the language required to 
incorporate the Classified Annex prepared by the Committee on 
Armed Services into the National Defense Authorization Act.

  section 1003--improved funding mechanisms for unbudgeted operations

    The committee has observed with alarm, the continuing 
practice by the Administration of engaging in costly 
peacekeeping and humanitarian contingency operations without 
properly budgeting the necessary resources. U.S. military 
operations resulting from the aftermath of the Persian Gulf 
War, in Somalia, Bosnia, Rwanda, Haiti, Cuba and other locales 
have imposed significant fiscal burdens on the Department at a 
time of declining resources. Lacking the budgeted resources, 
the Department has resorted to the damaging practice of 
financing the cost of these operations from the military 
services' operational readiness accounts--leading to the 
cancellation or deferral of training exercises, necessary 
equipment maintenance, and other routine activities that 
directly and significantly degrade force readiness.
    Given that the Department of Defense budget has 
historically only provided for the equipping and training of 
U.S. military forces and not for the execution of operations, 
the challenges posed by paying for unplanned operations are not 
new. However, what is new is the severely constrained defense 
budget, the quasi-permanent nature of many of the current 
operations, and the increased frequency with which the 
Administration continues to deploy U.S. military forces in 
support of UN or other ``peace operations.'' With over six 
months before fiscal year 1996 commences, the Secretary of 
Defense has already estimated the unbudgeted fiscal year 1996 
costs to the Department for ongoing contingency operations to 
be $1.5 billion. The true costs will surely be higher.
    In recognition of this problem, the Administration's fiscal 
year 1996 legislative proposal did contain a request to grant 
the Secretary of Defense extraordinary authority to obligate 
funds absent appropriations under certain conditions associated 
with contingency operations. The committee rejects this 
proposal as an inadequate stop-gap measure that fails to 
address the broader policy issues involved. Instead, the 
committee recommends a provision (sec. 1003) that would more 
fully address this matter in two components: an interim funding 
mechanism for unforseen and unbudgeted contingency operations, 
and mandated procedures to properly budget for ongoing 
contingency operations.
    To address unforseen and unbudgeted operations, the 
provision would revise existing provisions of law to allow the 
Secretary of Defense to draw upon the Defense Business 
Operating Fund (DBOF) along with a targeted transfer authority 
of $200 million from non-readiness accounts, as interim 
financing mechanisms for operations while securing approval of 
a supplemental appropriations request which would be required 
to be submitted within 30 days of the commencement of an 
operation. The provision would require that any liabilities 
incurred by the DBOF or other accounts from which funds are 
transferred must be restored with the funds provided through 
supplemental appropriations legislation. The committee directs 
that any transfer of funds from the designated accounts 
identified by this provision follow established prior approval 
reprogramming procedures.
    To address ongoing but unbudgeted operations, the provision 
would require that, for any operation that is ongoing at the 
beginning of a given fiscal year, the President must submit 
with the next fiscal year's budget request a specific funding 
request for that operation. Should the President fail to 
fulfill this requirement, funding authority for that operation 
would be automatically denied when that next fiscal year 
commences.
    Through this provision, the committee intends to compel the 
Administration to properly budget for the costs of expected and 
ongoing operations up-front and to abandon the current practice 
of seeking Congressional approval for supplemental funds after-
the-fact. This provision would thus grant Congress the 
opportunity to properly evaluate the costs and merits of 
ongoing operations before the beginning of the fiscal year in 
question. While the provision would grant the President certain 
latitude in how the funding request for such operations should 
be submitted, the committee strongly believes that funding for 
such operations should not come from within the national 
defense budget function (050) discretionary spending caps.

 section 1004--designation and liability of disbursing and certifying 
                               officials

    This section would provide for the designation and 
appointment of disbursing and certifying officials within the 
Department of Defense.

 section 1005--authority for obligation of certain unauthorized fiscal 
                    year 1995 defense appropriations

    This section would authorize fiscal year 1995 programs that 
received appropriations but no authorization.

      section 1006--authorization of prior emergency supplemental 
                  appropriations for fiscal year 1995

    This section would extend authorization to those items 
appropriated by the Fiscal Year 1995 emergency supplemental 
appropriations legislation.

 section 1007--prohibition on incremental funding of procurement issues

    This section would impose a permanent prohibition on the 
use of partial or incremental funding of procurement items.

                Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards


            section 1021--contract options for LMSR vessels

    This section recommends that the Secretary of the Navy 
negotiate a contract option price for a seventh LMSR at each of 
the two shipyards that have construction contracts.

   section 1022--vessels subject to repair under phased maintenance 
                               contracts

    This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to 
ensure that any existing contract for phased maintenance of any 
class or type of vessels will remain in effect without regard 
to any change of an operating command for these vessels.

  section 1023--clarification of requirements relating to repairs of 
                                vessels

    This section would permit the overhaul, repair, or 
maintenance of any vessel under the jurisdiction of the 
Secretary of the Navy to be performed in Guam.

                  section 1024--naming of naval vessel

    This section would express the sense of Congress that the 
Secretary of the Navy should name an appropriate Navy ship the 
U.S.S. Joseph Vittori in honor of Marine Corporal Joseph 
Vittori, who was posthumously awarded the Congressional Medal 
of Honor.

            section 1025--transfer of riverine patrol craft

    This section would permit the Secretary of the Navy to 
transfer a U.S.S. Swift-class riverine patrol craft to the 
Tidewater Community College, Portsmouth, Virginia, for 
scientific and educational purposes.

                       Subtitle C--Other Matters


  section 1031--termination and modification of authorities regarding 
national defense technology and industrial base, defense reinvestment, 
                    and defense conversion programs

    This section would repeal portions of chapter 148, title 
10, United States Code, that provide similar authorities for 
dual-use, cost-shared programs as provided elsewhere in law.

        section 1032--repeal of miscellaneous provisions of law

    This section would repeal miscellaneous provisions of law 
that have expired, are obsolete, are required to conform to 
other initiatives in the bill or have been suggested by the 
Administration and accepted by the Committee for repeal.

                       Items of Special Interest


                        counter-drug activities

Overview

    The fiscal year 1996 budget request for Department of 
Defense counter-drug activities is $680.4 million. This 
represents a net decrease of $40.9 million from the fiscal year 
1995 appropriated level of $721.3 million. The committee 
recommends authorization of the Department's request as 
follows:

 Drug Interdiction & Counter Drug Activities, Operation and Maintenance

                        [In thousands of dollars]

FY 96 Drug Interdiction & Counter-Drug Request................   680,400
    Source Nation Support.....................................   127,300
    Dismantling Cartels.......................................    64,300
    Detection and Monitoring..................................   111,700
    Law Enforcement Agency Support............................   279,300
    Demand Reduction:.........................................    97,800
Reductions:
    Community outreach programs...............................     8,236
Increases:
    Tethered Aerostat Radar System (PE 0102445F)..............     1,500
    Counterdrug Analysis (PE 0305889L)........................     1,200
    SouthCom Radars (Project #4419)...........................     1,500
    SOF CD Support (Project #6415)............................     2,536
    CARIBROC Comms (Project #3207)............................     1,500
Recommendation................................................   680,400

Counter-drug intelligence budget

    The committee commends the Department for responding to the 
concerns expressed last year regarding the increasing share of 
the DOD counter-drug budget that resides within the 
intelligence budget. The committee notes progress made in this 
area as reflected by the fiscal year 1996 budget request and 
urges the Department to continue the process of migrating those 
elements and functions in the counter-drug account currently 
classified as intelligence items to a non-intelligence 
designation.

Support for law enforcement

    The committee continues to support the Gulf States Counter-
drug Initiative and commends the Department of Defense and the 
Coordinator for Drug Enforcement Policy and Support for 
requesting funding for this program in the fiscal year 1996 
budget request. The committee urges the Department to continue 
to actively support this program in the future.

              chemical-biological warfare defense program

    The potential for the proliferation of weapons of mass 
destruction and the spread of chemical and biological weapons 
technology and delivery capabilities heighten committee 
concerns on the chemical and biological defense readiness of 
U.S. forces. In meeting the changing and evolving threat, the 
committee agrees that a strong chemical-biological defense 
program is an essential part of our national strategy, both for 
ensuring the capability of US military forces to fight on some 
future battlefield and as a major element of our 
counterproliferation program.
    The committee has reviewed the reports on the chemical and 
biological warfare defense program, required by title XVII of 
the National Defense Authorization Action for Fiscal Year 1994 
(Public Law 103-160), and is pleased to note the measures being 
taken by the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the 
military departments. Nevertheless, in light of the most likely 
threat scenarios, the committee continues to be concerned with 
the readiness of U.S. forces and with certain aspects of the 
chemical and biological defense program.
    The committee notes that the Department has made great 
strides in establishing a consolidated chemical-biological 
defense program with the Army as executive agent and with 
participation of all military services. The Department should 
exploit this initial success and continue efforts to ensure 
that an effective program management system drives the 
development of joint NBC defense doctrine, training, tactics, 
procedures and equipment, and the phasing out of service-unique 
programs. The committee is particularly concerned that the 
special training support at the Chemical and Biological Defense 
Command, the Army Chemical School, and the Live Agent Chemical 
Defense Training Facility in preparation for implementation of 
the Chemical Warfare Convention be maintained.
    The committee understands that the General Accounting 
Office is examining the ability of the military services to 
perform their missions in a chemical and biological warfare 
environment, and directs that the Comptroller General provide 
the committee by March 1, 1996, a report describing the 
Department's progress in addressing and solving shortfalls in 
chemical and biological warfare defense capabilities.
    The committee is concerned that the department lacks a 
joint, integrated system to maintain the visibility of chemical 
and biological defense equipment below the wholesale level and 
also lacks a standardized war reserve program for such 
equipment. The committee understands that an assessment of this 
problem is underway within the Department of Defense. The 
committee feels that there is potential for substantial costs 
savings if a serious effort is undertaken to consolidate the 
numerous chemical/biological depot supply and maintenance 
activities of the various services.
    The committee is disturbed by reports of deficiencies in 
the procurement and serviceability of protective masks and the 
lack of emphasis on the maintenance, training, and use of 
chemical-biological protective equipment. The committee directs 
the Secretary of Defense to take immediate action to ensure 
that protective masks and other individual chemical-biological 
protective equipment are serviceable, provide the level of 
protection required, and are properly maintained. The committee 
further directs that the Secretary of Defense, within 60 days 
of the enactment of this Act, provide a report to the 
congressional defense committees on the actions being taken to 
assess the situation and correct any deficiencies identified, 
additional actions under consideration, and additional 
resources and authority that may be required.
    The Department must place increased emphasis on chemical-
biological defense training both in units and in joint training 
of commanders and chemical specialists. The committee believes 
that the military services have not provided sufficient 
operations and maintenance funding for chemical and biological 
training and procurement. Consequently, the committee 
recommends an additional $50 million in operations and 
maintenance funding to remedy this deficiency as follows:
          Operations and Maintenance, Army (OMA) $10 million 
        each in Chemical Defense Training and Chemical Medical 
        Defense Training
          Operations and Maintenance Navy, Marine Corps and Air 
        Force (OMN, OMMC, and OMAF) $5 million each in Chemical 
        Defense Training and Chemical Medical Defense Training
    The committee views the program for providing adequate 
vaccines to protect US military forces as critical. In light of 
the threat, the committee believes that the biological defense 
program, including establishment of an effective vaccine 
development and production capability, should be among the 
Department's highest defense priorities. The committee directs 
the Secretary of Defense to address the establishment of this 
capability as an urgent matter and report the plan for 
providing such a capability within 60 days of the enactment of 
this Act.
    The Department has made significant improvements in the 
coordination and integration of service chemical and biological 
defense research, development, and acquisition. However, 
particular emphasis needs to be given to chemical and 
biological decontamination technology and the development and 
demonstration of advanced point and stand-off detection of 
chemical and biological agents. To address these and other 
concerns, the committee recommends increased authorizations to 
the budget request as indicated below:

                        [In millions of dollars]

PE 61384BP Basic research in advanced chemical biological sensor 
  and monitoring technology:
    Non-medical chemical biological defense.......................   3.0
    Medical chemical defense......................................   1.2
    Medical biological defense....................................   0.4
PE 62384BP--Exploratory development:
    Medical chemical defense......................................   1.2
    Medical biological defense....................................   0.2
    Non-medical chemical/biological defense:
        Enhanced chemical/biological detectors....................   2.9
        Enhanced individual protection............................   1.2
        High altitude/standoff remote chemical monitoring.........  18.0
PE 63384BP--Advanced development:
    Medical chemical defense life support.........................   1.1
    Medical biological defense vaccines...........................   0.4
    Chemical/biological defense advanced technology:
        Enhanced chemical and biological detection................  10.8
        Aircraft decontamination..................................   0.3
PE 63884BP Demonstration/validation:
    Light NBC defense reconnaissance system.......................   2.0
    Large scale area decontamination..............................   2.4
PE 64384BP Engineering & manufacturing development:
    Automated chemical agent detector.............................   2.0
    Aircrew eye/respiratory protection............................   1.0
    Chemical-biological protective shelter........................   3.0
    Multi-purpose integrated chemical agent detector..............   6.0

                        army experimental force

    The committee notes with approval the Army's designation of 
its Force XXI Experimental Force, and fully supports the intent 
to test new organizations, warfighting and operational 
concepts, training and equipment in order to enhance the 
lethality, survivability, sustainability, deployability and 
versatility of the future force.
    The committee believes that the Experimental Force can 
serve as an important tool for investigating the promise of the 
revolution in military affairs that may be possible through the 
rapid adaptation of information technologies to the 
battlefield. By contrast to simulations and various command-
post exercises, the Experimental Force is designed to put new 
technologies into the hands of soldiers so that they may seek 
practical solutions to the tactical challenges that confront 
them. Success in such efforts will allow the United States to 
retain the overwhelming advantage in conventional forces it now 
enjoys and which creates a pillar of national geopolitical 
strength. The committee particularly approves of the ``rolling 
baseline'' concept for quick integration of new concepts and 
technologies as appropriate.
    The committee also has a number of concerns regarding this 
promising effort. The Experimental Force must be given proper 
resources in order to carry out its mission in a timely 
fashion. The committee notes that many crucial items of 
equipment intended for the Experimental Force trials, such as 
advanced unmanned aerial vehicles, will not be available for 
years to come. Also, such practical experiments should be given 
due consideration by the Secretary of Defense in preparing 
future defense budgets, and the other services be encouraged to 
undertake such projects which combine technological, doctrinal 
and organizational experimentation, particularly in regard to 
the power projection missions that are central to the national 
security strategy.
    The committee encourages the Department of Defense to 
report regularly on the conduct of Experimental Force 
exercises, as well as related Force XXI events and exercises.

            integration of national security space programs

    The committee strongly endorses the Department's efforts to 
improve the coordination and integration of defense and 
intelligence space activities. The committee expects that the 
consolidation of defense space policy and acquisition oversight 
responsibilities and the establishment of a single focal point 
for space activities under the new Deputy Under Secretary of 
Defense for Space, reporting to the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Acquisition and Technology, will play a crucial role in 
achieving the normalization and integration of space activities 
within DOD.
    The committee believes that enhanced support for military 
operations and cost savings to the nation can be achieved by 
the consolidation of functions for defense and intelligence 
space architectures and acquisition management. In this regard, 
the committee strongly supports the statement of the 
President's nominee for Director of Central Intelligence 
regarding the intention ``to move immediately in coordination 
with the Secretary of Defense to a management structure that 
requires future systems to take account of the need, costs, and 
acquisition of both military and classified satellite systems 
in an integrated way.''
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide, 
no later than March 31, 1996, a report on national security 
space organization and management that addresses 
responsibilities and functions for: (1) development of an 
integrated national security space architecture; and (2) 
integrated acquisition of national security space programs.

  report on nuclear command, control, communications, and intelligence

    The committee is aware of an on-going study within the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense to examine nuclear command, 
control, communications, and intelligence (C3I) issues as a 
follow-up to the Nuclear Posture Review. The committee directs 
the Secretary of Defense to provide to the Congressional 
defense committees not later than February 15, 1996, a report 
on the study's findings, conclusions, and recommendations. The 
Secretary's report should also describe each of the 
programmatic and policy options considered, the cost and other 
implications of each of the options, and the reasons why the 
Department accepted or rejected each alternative.

              federal emergency management agency funding

    The committee believes that the civil defense activities of 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) no longer have a 
national security emphasis. Accordingly, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337) 
sought to move all of FEMA's civil defense activities out of 
the National Defense budget function. The committee is 
disappointed that the President's budget for fiscal year 1996 
does not appropriately reflect the transfer of all FEMA 
activities into other domestic budget accounts. Accordingly, 
the committee provides no authorization of appropriations for 
the civil defense activities of FEMA as part of the fiscal year 
1996 defense authorization budget.

TITLE XI--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE FORMER SOVIET 
                                 UNION


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $371 million for the 
Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program to continue 
activities to dismantle weapons of mass destruction and reduce 
the threat of weapons proliferation in the New Independent 
States of the former Soviet Union. Of this total, $194 million 
was requested for destruction and dismantlement; $71.5 million 
for chain of custody and nonproliferation activities; $75 
million for demilitarization and defense conversion activities; 
and $30.5 million for other program support. The committee 
reiterates its strong support for the accelerated dismantlement 
and destruction of strategic offensive weapons in the states of 
the former Soviet Union.
    The committee recommends a total of $200 million for CTR 
activities in fiscal year 1996, a reduction of $171 million 
from the requested amount. The committee approves the request 
for all dismantlement, destruction and weapons security 
activities, with the exception of the $104 million request to 
begin construction of a Russian chemical weapons destruction 
facility. Other changes to the request include: denial of funds 
for the construction of a fissile material storage facility in 
Russia; denial of authorization for Demilitarization Enterprise 
Fund activities; and a reduction of $4 million for other 
program support activities, consistent with the overall 
reduction in the program's funding.
    The committee is concerned with the expansion of 
authorities in the CTR program to conduct a wide range of non-
dismantlement, non-destruction and non-weapons security 
activities. The committee is further concerned with Congress' 
ability to conduct effectively its oversight responsibilities 
of CTR activities once funds have been authorized and 
appropriated. In this context, the committee expresses its 
alarm over the fact that the Department of Defense has 
conducted only three audit and examination visits to verify the 
whereabouts and condition of U.S. assistance delivered to the 
states of the former Soviet Union since the program's inception 
over four years ago. This concern has been heightened by recent 
General Accounting Office (GAO) reports that CTR funds may have 
been provided to institutions and individuals in Russia who 
remain involved in ongoing work on weapons of mass destruction. 
Accordingly, the extent to which there is a direct causal 
relationship between the CTR program and on-going dismantlement 
and destruction activities in the states of the former Soviet 
Union is difficult to verify with certainty.

                 Chemical Weapons Destruction Facility

    In denying the request of $104.0 million for construction 
of a chemical weapons destruction facility, the committee 
expresses its belief that this project is premature for a 
number of reasons. First, Russia has refused to agree to 
destroy the most lethal and militarily useful stocks of 
chemical weapons in its inventory first. The committee believes 
that if the U.S. ultimately pays for Russian chemical weapons 
destruction, then Russia should destroy its militarily useful 
stocks first.
    Second, Russia has refused to accept U.S. plans to build an 
incinerator to burn its chemical weapons stocks and, instead, 
has insisted on proceeding with an unproven technology and 
process know as neutralization--a process which may create more 
hazardous materials than it destroys.
    Third, a recent GAO draft report commissioned by the 
committee noted, ``many issues need to be resolved before 
large-scale funding can be undertaken. Requirements for fiscal 
year 1996 funding appear to be contingent upon completion of 
several tasks--most importantly the joint evaluation of 
chemical weapons destruction technology. DoD's fiscal years 
1996 and 1997 budgets assume the results of the joint 
evaluation will be favorable and completed on schedule by March 
1996. Further delays during fiscal year 1995 and early into 
1996 could reduce the need and impact the justification for the 
budget requests. Also, to date, CTR program officials remain 
uncertain about specific requirements for fiscal year 1996 
funding and how much of the funding they will be able to 
obligate during the fiscal year.''
    Fourth, Russia has yet to ratify the Chemical Weapons 
Convention, has made no specific commitment to the U.S. to 
carry out the terms and conditions of the U.S.-Russia bilateral 
chemical weapons destruction agreement, signed in 1990, and may 
still be developing new chemical weapons.
    Finally, a comprehensive implementation plan has yet to be 
signed to govern these activities and the total U.S. financial 
obligation remains unknown. Until the above matters are 
resolved, the committee will not support funding for this 
project.

                   Fissile Material Storage Facility

    While the committee approved the request of $6 million for 
continued design activities associated with a fissile material 
storage facility in Russia, $23 million in requested 
construction funds are denied for the following reasons. First, 
according to U.S. intelligence sources, Russia may already 
possess sufficient fissile material storage capacity, 
particularly if Russian Ministry of Defense storage space for 
intact weapons or Russian deep underground bunkers are taken 
into account. If so, the obligation of funds for construction 
of a new storage facility would seem to be unnecessary.
    Second, Russia and the U.S. have yet to conclude agreements 
for additional design and construction funds and work out 
arrangements for the use of a U.S.-hired integrating 
contractor. Russia has also failed to provide a construction 
schedule and more detailed design information to allow the U.S. 
to define equipment requirements.
    Third, GAO has noted that the estimated costs of the 
facility have increased dramatically since November 1993, with 
estimates of the U.S. cost-share having escalated accordingly. 
At a minimum, the project must be baselined before any 
significant commitment of U.S. construction funding is made.

                    Demilitarization Enterprise Fund

    The committee denies the request for the Demilitarization 
Enterprise Fund in fiscal year 1996 and recommends a provision 
(sec. 1103) that would repeal authority for these activities.
    The committee remains skeptical of CTR funded activities 
intended to assist in the ``conversion'' of Russian military 
enterprises into non-military enterprises. Even if defense 
conversion in Russia is feasible, a debateable proposition, the 
committee believes that such activities more appropriately fall 
into the category of either foreign aid or economic assistance 
and should not be the funding responsibility of the Department 
of Defense or the CTR program.
    According to GAO, ``DOD focussed on initiating [defense 
conversion] projects at former Soviet Union firms and 
facilities that once produced weapons of mass destruction, but 
there is only one facility where an active production line is 
being converted to civilian use.'' Moreover, the committee is 
concerned that CTR activities in this area have not given 
adequate priority to privatization of Russian industrial 
enterprises. In fact, it could be argued that CTR conversion 
activities may be hindering privatization by subsidizing state-
run military enterprises. If so, this result would be in direct 
contradiction to the Department's assertions that CTR defense 
conversion activities have enhanced Russia's prospects for 
longer-term economic reform.
    The committee is also concerned with the potentially 
astronomical costs associated with U.S. efforts to convert any 
significant portion of the Russian defense industry to civilian 
production. Hundreds of billions of dollars and decades of 
spending will be required to accomplish this task. The 
committee does not endorse the perspective that the Department 
of Defense has a financial responsibility to pay for the 
transformation of Russia's highly militarized economy or for 
the retraining of the workers in the Russian military-
industrial complex. This is particularly true in view of the 
fact that Russia maintains an active, aggressive and well 
funded strategic modernization program to this day.
    Based on communication with the Department of Defense, it 
is the committee's understanding that none of the requested 
fiscal year 1996 CTR funding is intended to pay for Russian 
housing or environmental restoration activities. With this 
understanding, the committee has opted not to include any 
statutory prohibition on such expenditures.

                        Peacekeeping Activities

    The committee recommends a provision (sec. 1104) that would 
prohibit the obligation or expenditure of CTR funds for the 
purpose of conducting peacekeeping exercises or any 
peacekeeping-related activities with Russia during fiscal year 
1996. This provision results from the committee having been 
notified by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
International Security Policy in May 1994 that the Department 
used CTR funds during the last fiscal year to conduct several 
peacekeeping field training exercises. Such activities should 
not be funded out of the CTR program since they have little to 
do with nuclear dismantlement, destruction or weapons security 
or with halting the proliferation of weapons of mass 
destruction.

                           Improved Oversight

    To facilitate the committee's ability to better oversee 
permitted CTR activities, the committee recommends several 
provisions. First, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 
1107) that would require the Secretary of Defense to submit an 
annual report accounting for U.S. CTR assistance, as well as a 
provision (sec. 1106) that would require prior notification of 
the obligation of CTR program funds. The committee also 
recommends a provision (sec. 1105) that would modify the 
certification that the President currently must make in order 
to provide assistance under the CTR program. This section would 
require proposed recipients of CTR assistance to meet certain 
minimum eligibility standards, such as compliance with arms 
control agreements, and respecting the rights of minorities, 
and other related criteria.

              TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS


                  Subtitle A--Peacekeeping Provisions


section 1201--limitation on expenditure of department of defense funds 
for united states forces placed under united nations command or control

    Presidential Decision Directive 25 (PDD-25) signed by 
President Clinton in May of 1994 contains a number of policy 
initiatives intended to promote peacekeeping as an important 
instrument of the Administration's national security policy. 
Summary documents and extensive public and private briefings on 
this policy initiative, make clear to the committee that the 
Administration has adopted a policy of allowing the placement 
of U.S. armed forces under the operational control of foreign 
commanders when engaged in peacekeeping operations.
     The Administration continues to stress that the President 
will retain ``command'' of U.S. forces at all times. However, 
the usage of the term ``command'' in this context refers to the 
administrative control of military forces which has never been 
an issue of debate or contention. On the other hand, the 
practice of ceding ``operational control'' of U.S. military 
forces to non-U.S. commanders remains a highly controversial 
and troubling policy. While certain U.S. military units have 
operated under the operational control of other nations, these 
instances have been rare and usually as part of larger 
coalition military operations where the U.S. retains overall 
operational command of the theater of operation. Further, these 
instances occurred during traditional military operations that 
allowed a high degree of planning and coordination to minimize 
the inherent complications resulting from mixed command chains.
    By contrast, the concept of ceding operational control of 
U.S. forces to a United Nations peacekeeping command is a 
relatively recent practice that has thus far yielded decidedly 
mixed results. As demonstrated during the UNOSOM II operation 
in Somalia, peacekeeping operations place a high premium on the 
ability to rapidly employ effective military force in response 
to unplanned circumstances. The tactical demands of such 
operations tend to stress and exacerbate the limitations of 
mixed-nationality operations resulting from the usually 
significant cultural, language, doctrine, and training 
differences among the participating national contingents. While 
only U.S. logistics forces were placed under UN operational 
control during UNOSOM II, the unanimous view of U.S. commanders 
interviewed by the committee during its review of the Somalia 
operation was that UN mixed-nationality command chains are 
inappropriate for demanding UN operations.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 1201) 
that would regulate the circumstances under which the President 
could commit U.S. forces under UN command or control. This 
provision would require that before U.S. forces may be deployed 
under the command or operational control of the UN, the 
President must first certify to the Congress that 1) such a 
command arrangement is necessary to protect U.S. national 
security interests, 2) the commander of the U.S. force involved 
will retain the right to report independently to U.S. military 
authorities and to decline to comply with orders judged to be 
illegal, military imprudent or beyond the mandate of the U.S. 
mission, 3) the U.S. force involved will remain under U.S. 
administrative command, and 4) the U.S. will retain the 
authority to withdraw the U.S. force involved and take action 
it considers necessary to protect this force if it is engaged.
     While this provision seeks to ensure that any deployment 
of U.S. forces under UN command or control is made with a clear 
and unambiguous understanding of the right of the United States 
to withdraw those forces at any time and to take any action 
considered necessary to protect such forces, the committee 
recognizes that any such decision to withdraw deployed U.S. 
forces should be made with due regard and consideration for the 
safety of U.S. and other national contingents deployed in any 
such given operation.
    The provision would further require the President to submit 
a report along with the aforementioned certification providing: 
1) a description of the national security interests that 
require such a command arrangement, 2) the mission of the U.S. 
forces involved, 3) the expected size and composition of the 
U.S. forces involved, 4) the incremental cost to the U.S. of 
participation in the operation, 5) the precise command and 
control relationship between the U.S. forces and the United 
Nations command structure, 6) the precise command and control 
relationship between the U.S. forces involved and the U.S. 
unified commander for the region in which the forces will be 
operating, 7) the extent to which the U.S. forces involved will 
be relying on non-U.S. forces for self protection, and 8) the 
timetable for the complete withdrawal of the U.S. forces 
involved.

  section 1202--limitation on use of department of defense funds for 
 united states share of costs of united nations peacekeeping activities

     Presidential Decision Directive 25 (PDD-25) proposes to 
change the manner in which the United States Government 
finances its annual assessed contribution to the UN for 
peacekeeping by having the Department of Defense pay for the 
U.S. costs of all Chapter VII operations and those Chapter VI 
operations involving U.S. troops. This so called ``shared 
responsibility'' arrangement was specifically rejected by the 
House Committee on Armed Services in the 103rd Congress during 
consideration of H.R. 4301, the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1995 and by the House of Representatives in 
adopting H.R. 7, the National Security Revitalization Act in 
February 1995.
     Therefore, the committee denies authorization for the $65 
million contained in the budget request for this purpose and 
recommends a provision (sec. 1202) that would specifically 
prohibit the expenditure of funds made available to the 
Department of Defense for voluntary or assessed financial 
contributions to the United Nations for the United States share 
of peacekeeping costs. The committee continues to strongly 
oppose the ``shared responsibility'' concept as it represents 
one more attempt to divert scarce defense resources toward a 
non-defense purpose.

              Subtitle B--Humanitarian Assistance Programs


 section 1211--overseas humanitarian, disaster, and civic aid programs

     This section would specify that all funding authorized by 
this Act for DOD humanitarian, disaster and overseas civic 
assistance programs shall be provided from the consolidated 
operations and maintenance Overseas, Humanitarian, Disaster, 
and Civic Aid (OHDACA) account established by title III of this 
bill. The committee recommends an authorization of $50 million 
for this account for fiscal year 1996.

                 section 1212--Humanitarian assistance

     This section would make technical corrections to existing 
provisions of law providing the Department of Defense to 
conduct humanitarian assistance activities. The provision would 
also repeal the authority to transfer DOD funds to the 
Secretary of State for the purpose of providing humanitarian 
assistance.

                section 1213--landmine clearance program

     This section would consolidate the current Department of 
Defense authority to conduct humanitarian demining activities 
into existing civic assistance authorities in title 10, United 
States Code.

                       Subtitle C--Other Matters


   section 1221--revision of definition of landmine for purposes of 
                       landmine export moratorium

     This section would amend the current definition of 
landmine to clarify that remotely operated devices are not 
included for the purposes of the landmine export moratorium.

     section 1222--extension and amendment of counterproliferation 
                              authorities

     This section would extend through fiscal year 1996 the 
authority for the Department of Defense to conduct the 
International Nonproliferation Initiative previously 
established in law. The provision would limit fiscal year 1996 
funding for Department support to international 
nonproliferation activities, including UNSCOM support, to 
$15,000,000.

  section 1223--prohibition on use of funds for activities associated 
    with the united states-people's republic of china joint defense 
                         conversion commission.

     The committee is aware of ongoing discussions as part of 
the United States-People's Republic of China Joint Defense 
Conversion Commission. Concerns have been expressed, however, 
about whether these talks, and agreements reached therein, 
serve United States national security goals and objectives. In 
particular, concern has been expressed that agreements reached 
through the commission have led to U.S. assistance to Chinese 
firms that have direct ties to the People's Liberation Army 
(PLA), resulting in possible subsidies to the PLA. Based on 
these and other concerns, the committee recommends a provision 
(sec. 1223) that would prohibit the use of Department of 
Defense funds provided by this Act for activities associated 
with the United States-People's Republic of China Joint Defense 
Conversion Commission.

              section 1224--defense export loan guarantees

    This section would create a defense export loan guarantee 
program which, at no cost to the taxpayer, would provide 
American defense firms the ability to offer financing as part 
of the financial package for arms sales to certain specified 
countries.

        section 1225--accounting for burdensharing contributions

    This section would authorize the United States to accept 
burdensharing contributions in the currency of the host nation 
or in dollars, and to manage it as a separate account, 
available until expended.

    section 1226--authority to accept contributions for expenses of 
  relocation within host nation of united states armed forces overseas

    This section would establish authority and procedures for 
the Secretary of Defense to accept contributions from host 
nations for the purposes of relocating United States armed 
forces within the host nation when such relocation is being 
accomplished at the convenience of the host nation and for the 
purpose of deploying United States troops to the host nation 
during contingency deployment.

        section 1227--sense of congress on abm treaty violations

    This section would express the Sense of Congress regarding 
violations of the ABM Treaty by the former Soviet Union.

                       Items of Special Interest


                 report on north korean military power

    The committee report on H.R. 4301, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (H. Rept. 103-499), 
directed the Secretary of Defense to task the Defense 
Intelligence Agency (DIA) to provide by January 1, 1995 an 
updated version of the unclassified report entitled ``North 
Korea: The Foundations of Military Power,'' published in 1991. 
The committee notes that the DIA has not yet fulfilled this 
request, and only recently received permission from the Office 
of the Secretary of Defense to begin this important project. 
This unacceptable delay is depriving the public of a valuable 
source of current, official, unclassified information at a 
crucial time in the debate over the future direction of United 
States national security policy toward North Korea. The 
committee once again directs the Secretary of Defense to 
provide to Congress as soon as possible, and no later than 
October 1, 1995, an updated version of the unclassified report 
in question.

                  african center for security studies

    To encourage a broader understanding on the African 
continent of military matters compatible with democratic 
principles and civilian control, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to develop an African Center for 
Securities Studies patterned after the George C. Marshall 
Center for European Security Studies located in Germany. The 
Secretary should ensure that the center offers advanced study 
and training in civil-military relations, the building of 
democratic institutions, and related courses to members of the 
United States military and to the militaries and defense 
civilian personnel of African nations. The Secretary should 
provide the Congressional defense committees with a plan on 
implementing this direction by December 1, 1995.

            sharing of intelligence with the united nations

    The committee continues to be concerned regarding the 
development and implementation of proper safeguards governing 
the sharing of U.S. intelligence materials with United Nations 
personnel and organizations, particularly in the conduct of UN 
peace operations. During the withdrawal of UN forces from 
Somalia, American troops discovered a large, unsecured cache of 
materials with significant potential to disclose intelligence 
sources and methods.
    A review of these incidents by the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff concluded that U.S. documents found in the UN 
intelligence files should never have been provided to the UN, 
that U.S. information sanitization procedures were violated, 
and that UN security management and execution were 
unsatisfactory. Accordingly, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to provide the Congressional defense 
committees with a report detailing: 1) the Secretary's plan to 
ensure that the breakdown in security procedures disclosed by 
UNOSOM II incident in Somalia is not repeated, 2) the status of 
corrective steps taken since the release of the U.S. Central 
Command review of this incident, 3) the status of efforts to 
develop standard UN guidance for information security 
(including, but not limited to receiving, handling, storing, 
and destroying sensitive information), and 4) the Secretary's 
assessment on the adequacy of UN intelligence information 
security for UN operations in Haiti and the former Yugoslavia.

            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS


                                PURPOSE

    The purpose of Division B is to provide military 
construction authorizations and related authority in support of 
the military departments during fiscal year 1996. As approved 
by the committee, Division B would authorize appropriations in 
the amount of $11,197,995 for construction in support of the 
active forces, reserve components, defense agencies, and the 
NATO security infrastructure fund for fiscal year 1996. A brief 
tabular summary of the authorizations provided in Division B 
for fiscal year 1996 follows:
    Offset Folio 392 Insert Here



                                overview

    The military construction authorization request for fiscal 
year 1996 was introduced as H.R.1529 on May 2, 1995.
    The Department of Defense requested authorization of 
appropriations of $6,579,073,000 for fiscal year 1996 for 
military construction and $4,125,221,000 for family housing 
construction and support. The committee recommends 
$6,878,840,000 for military construction and $4,319,155,000 for 
family housing construction and support for fiscal year 1996.

           Quality of Housing, Installations, and Facilities

    The committee is concerned about serious and critical 
shortfalls in the quality of military installations and 
facilities, including troop housing and military family 
housing. The committee notes that the construction and 
modernization of facilities and their upkeep and maintenance is 
a critical component of military readiness which has been 
underfunded in recent years. Shortfalls in the construction, 
repair and maintenance, and utilities accounts have exacerbated 
problems in the facilities infrastructure which has either 
deferred needed improvements or has diverted training and other 
operations and maintenance funds to pay for base maintenance 
and repair. Over the long-term, the cumulative effects of 
neglect have created a serious backlog in facilities 
construction and maintenance.
    The committee believes that the funding proposed by the 
Administration for fiscal year 1996 is not adequate to begin to 
reverse this backlog. Consequently, the committee recommends a 
significant investment of funds above the budget request for 
real property maintenance and the military construction 
accounts.
    The committee is pleased by the attention the Secretary of 
Defense has paid to the problems affecting military family 
housing, troop housing, and other quality of life improvements. 
The committee notes, however, that the limited request for 
funding of the military construction program led to difficult 
trade-offs which restricted funding for certain improvements, 
particularly troop housing.
    The committee proposes to address these shortfalls with 
both short-term improvements and legislative changes to the 
military construction program to enhance public-private 
partnerships in the development of military family housing. The 
committee recommends an increase of $472 million above the 
budget request for troop housing, military family housing, and 
other quality of life enhancements. The committee also 
recommends a series of legislative authorities to encourage 
private-sector involvement in the development of military 
family housing.

                      Base Closure and Realignment

    The Department of Defense requested authorization of 
appropriations of $3,897,892,000 for fiscal year 1996 for 
activities associated with base closure and realignment. The 
committee recommends $3,897,892,000.
    A tabular summary of the military construction projects 
included with the authorization of appropriations for fiscal 
year 1996 for the BRAC II and BRAC III accounts follows:
    Offset Folios 395 to 400 Insert here



                    NATO Security Investment Program

    The Department of Defense requested authorization of 
$179,000,000 for the NATO infrastructure fund for fiscal year 
1996. The committee recommends $161,000,000.

                AUTHORIZATION FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

    The Department of Defense requested $6,579,073,000 for 
military construction and $4,125,221,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 1996. Within the military construction request, 
$3,897,892,000 was requested for implementation of base closure 
and realignment actions.
    The committee recommends authorization of $6,878,840,000 
for military construction, including $3,897,892,000 for base 
closure implementation, and $4,319,155,000 for family housing.

                            TITLE XXI--ARMY


                                Summary

    The Army requested authorization of $472,724,000 for 
military construction and $1,381,096,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 1996. The committee recommends authorization of 
$631,608,000 for military construction, $1,459,996,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 1996, and $75,586,000 for the 
Homeowners Assistance Program.

                         Legislative Provisions


    section 2101--authorized army construction and land acquisition 
                                projects

    This section contains the list of authorized Army 
construction projects for fiscal year 1996. The authorized 
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis. 
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the 
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 
location.

                      section 2102--family housing

    This section would authorize new construction and planning 
and design of family housing units for the Army for fiscal year 
1996.

      section 2103--improvements to military family housing units

    This section would authorize improvements to existing units 
of family housing for fiscal year 1996.

          section 2104--authorization of appropriations, army

    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item contained in the Army's budget for fiscal year 
1996. This section also provides an overall limit on the amount 
the Army may spend on military construction projects.

                       Items of Special Interest


                      repair and maintenance, army

    The committee is aware of serious safety and other 
deficiencies at Lake Tholocco Dam at Fort Rucker, Alabama. The 
committee is also aware of critical structural deficiencies of 
two bridges at Fort Knox, Kentucky. The committee urges the 
Army to initiate appropriate repair and maintenance at both 
installations.
    The committee is also aware of a serious repair and 
maintenance backlog at Corpus Christi Army Depot, Texas which 
requires an extensive infrastructure renovation to offset 
deterioration to major mechanical, electrical and other 
systems. Many major infrastructure systems at the depot have 
reached the end of their useful lives and require major 
renovation, repair and upgrade. The committee urges the Army to 
initiate appropriate repair and maintenance of various 
buildings within the Corpus Christi Army Depot complex.

                improvements of military family housing

    The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts 
for improvements of military family housing and facilities, the 
Secretary of the Army execute the following projects: 
$3,400,000 for Whole House Improvements at White Sands Missile 
Range, New Mexico; $10,000,000 for Whole Neighborhood 
Revitalization at Fort Bragg, North Carolina; and $19,000,000 
for Whole Neighborhood Revitalization at Fort Campbell, 
Kentucky.

                          fort dix, new jersey

    The committee notes that the Department has actively sought 
to locate certain non-Department of Defense activities on 
military installations when appropriate. These activities 
generally reimburse the Department for services provided by the 
host installation. This practice can help offset a portion of 
base operating expenses.
    While generally supportive of this policy, the committee is 
concerned that it may be overused at certain military 
installations. Such overuse may detract and diminish the 
effectiveness of an installation in fulfilling its mission. In 
this context, the committee notes with concern recent efforts 
to place a youthful offender boot camp at Fort Dix, New Jersey. 
If permitted to locate at Fort Dix, the boot camp would 
represent the fourth corrections or youth-service program at 
this installation. The committee is concerned about the 
possible effects of an additional non-defense activity located 
at Fort Dix and would view unfavorably a decision by the 
Department to permit the establishment of a youthful offender 
boot camp at the installation.

                            TITLE XXII--NAVY


                                Summary

    The Navy requested authorization of $492,936,000 for 
military construction and $1,514,084,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 1996. The committee recommends authorization of 
$588,243,000 for military construction and $1,576,618,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 1996.

                         Legislative Provisions


    section 2201--authorized navy construction and land acquisition 
                                projects

    This section contains the list of authorized Navy 
construction projects for fiscal year 1996. The authorized 
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis. 
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the 
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 
location.

                      section 2202--family housing

    This section would authorize new construction and planning 
and design of family housing units for the Navy for fiscal year 
1996.

      section 2203--improvements to military family housing units

    This section would authorize improvements to existing units 
of family housing for fiscal year 1996.

          section 2204--authorization of appropriations, navy

    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item in the Navy's budget for fiscal year 1995. This 
section also provides an overall limit on the amount the Navy 
may spend on military construction projects.

                       Items of Special Interest


                      repair and maintenance, navy

    The committee is aware of major structural deficiencies in 
the fire suppression station at the Philadelphia Naval Base, 
Pennsylvania, and believes that modifications are required to 
provide a safe and efficient facility. The committee recognizes 
that the fire suppression station is required to continue 
providing firefighting and emergency response services for 
personnel who will remain at the facility after the closure of 
the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard. The committee urges the Navy 
to undertake a survey of the facility and to initiate 
appropriate repair and maintenance of the fire suppression 
station.

                     unspecified minor construction

    The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts 
for unspecified minor construction, the Secretary of the Navy 
execute the following projects: $950,000 for an alternate 
railway and $590,000 for relocation of a gas line at Marine 
Corps Logistics Base, Albany, Georgia.

                          planning and design

    The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts 
for planning and design, $2,340,000 be used to complete design 
work for wharf improvements at Naval Station Mayport, Florida. 
The recommended design work would support shore power and 
utility upgrades, structural and mooring improvements, 
environmental improvements, and other site improvements at 
wharfs C-2 and F. This design work is necessary to accommodate 
the growing number of activities situated and vessels 
homeported at Naval Station Mayport. The committee understands 
that the recommended design work will support both current 
activities at Naval Station Mayport as well as a possible 
upgrade of the installation to homeport a nuclear-powered 
aircraft carrier. In keeping with the latter interest, the 
committee urges that the specifications for this design work be 
consistent with those requisite to homeporting a nuclear-
powered aircraft carrier at Mayport.

                improvements of military family housing

    The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts 
for improvements of military family housing and facilities, the 
Secretary of the Navy execute the following projects: 
$14,575,000 for Whole House Revitalization at Naval Station 
Mayport, Florida; $15,300,000 for Whole House Revitalization, 
Phase I at Great Lakes Naval Training Center, Illinois; 
$8,795,000 for Whole House Improvements at Newport, Rhode 
Island; and $6,784,000 for Whole House Rehabilitation at Marine 
Corps Air Station, Beaufort, South Carolina.

             power plant upgrade, public works center, guam

    The committee understands that the Navy and the Guam Power 
Authority (GPA) have shared the operating cost and use of power 
plants to service the Guam island wide power system as agreed 
in the Power Pool Agreement of 1972. The committee also 
understands that the Navy may seek to terminate the Agreement 
and divest itself of all operating responsibilities of the 
power systems. The committee notes that, as stated in the 
Agreement, the Navy must upgrade the Piti Power Plant before it 
can withdraw from the Agreement and transfer the Piti units to 
GPA.

                        navy SEAL facility, guam

    The committee is encouraged by the cooperation of the Navy 
with the Government of Guam concerning the siting and 
construction timetable for Navy SEAL projects in Guam. The 
committee notes that the location of this facility in the inner 
harbor at Apra Harbor may restrict Guam's ability to develop 
its commercial port. The committee urges the Navy to continue 
to work cooperatively with the Government of Guam to examine 
alternative sites for the SEAL facility which consider Guam's 
economic needs.

    ordnance storage needs of marine corps air station yuma, arizona

    The committee remains concerned about ordnance storage at 
Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Yuma, Arizona and the effects 
on training and safety of current inadequate ordnance storage 
at the installation. The committee has reviewed the report of 
the Secretary of the Navy submitted on February 1, 1995 on this 
matter. The committee is pleased to note three of the seven 
military construction projects identified as requirements to 
remediate safety problems are programmed within the Future Year 
Defense Plan. The committee, however, is concerned that the 
remaining four military construction projects are unplanned. 
The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to reassess the 
requirements to address safety and training problems at MCAS 
Yuma and also urges the Navy to accelerate military 
construction projects to remediate such problems.

                         TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE


                                Summary

    The Air Force requested authorization of $497,104,000 for 
military construction and $1,098,216,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 1996. The committee recommends authorization of 
$586,841,000 for military construction and $1,140,716,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 1996.

                         Legislative Provisions


 section 2301--authorized air force construction and land acquisition 
                                projects

    This section contains the list of authorized Air Force 
construction projects for fiscal year 1996. The authorized 
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis. 
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the 
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each 
location.

                      section 2302--family housing

    This section would authorize new construction and planning 
and design of family housing units for the Air Force for fiscal 
year 1996.

      section 2303--improvements to military family housing units

    This section would authorize improvements to existing units 
of family housing for fiscal year 1996.

        section 2304--authorization of appropriations, air force

    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item in the Air Force's budget for fiscal year 1996. 
This section also would provide an overall limit on the amount 
the Air Force may spend on military construction projects.

  section 2305--retention of accrued interest on funds deposited for 
     construction of family housing, scott air force base, illinois

    This section would amend section 2310 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for fiscal year 1994 (division B 
of Public Law 103-760) to permit the retention of accrued 
interest on funds previously transferred to the County of St. 
Clair, Illinois, for the purpose of constructing military 
family housing at Scott Air Force Base. Upon the completion of 
construction all funds remaining, and any interest accrued 
thereon, shall be deposited in the general fund of the 
Treasury.

                       Items of Special Interest


                improvements of military family housing

    The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts 
for improvement of military family housing and facilities, the 
Secretary of the Air Force execute the following project: 
$5,900,000 for family housing improvements at Wright-Patterson 
Air Force Base, Ohio.

                    tyndall air force base, florida

    The committee is aware of deficiencies in the aircraft 
support equipment shop at Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida. The 
committee is concerned such deficiencies may jeopardize 
readiness and flight operations. The committee encourages the 
Air Force to examine the facility. If the Air Force determines 
that the facility can no longer support the required 
maintenance operation in an efficient and safe manner, the 
committee urges the Air Force to initiate design work on a 
replacement facility.

                      TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES


                                Summary

    The Defense agencies requested authorization of 
$857,405,000 for military construction and $56,239,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 1996. The committee recommends 
authorization of $728,332,000 for military construction and 
$66,239,000 for family housing.

                         Legislative Provisions


    section 2401--authorized defense agencies construction and land 
                          acquisition projects

    This section contains the list of authorized Defense 
Agencies construction projects for fiscal year 1996. The 
authorized amounts are listed on an installation-by-
installation basis. The state list contained in this report is 
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects 
authorized at each location.

            section 2402--family housing private investment

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
enter into agreements to construct, acquire, and improve family 
housing, for the purpose of encouraging private investment, in 
the amount of $22,000,000.

      section 2403--improvements to military family housing units

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
make improvements to existing units of family housing for 
fiscal year 1996 in an amount not to exceed $3,772,000.

               section 2404--energy conservation projects

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
carry out energy conservation projects.

    section 2405--authorization of appropriations, defense agencies

    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item in the Defense Agencies' budget for fiscal year 
1996. This section also would provide an overall limit on the 
amount the Defense Agencies may spend on military construction 
projects.

 section 2406--modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 1995 
                                projects

    This section would amend the table in section 2401 of the 
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 
(division B of Public Law 103-337) to provide for full 
authorization of projects to support chemical weapons and 
munitions destruction at Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas, and 
Umatilla Army Depot, Oregon.

 section 2407--limitation on expenditures for construction project at 
                      umatilla army depot, oregon

    This section would prohibit the expenditure of funds for 
the construction of a chemical weapons and munitions 
incinerator facility at Umatilla Army Depot, Oregon until after 
March 1, 1996.

      TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION INFRASTRUCTURE


                                Summary

    The Department of Defense requested authorization of 
$179,000,000 for the NATO infrastructure fund for fiscal year 
1996. The committee recommends $161,000,000.

                         Legislative Provisions


    section 2501--authorized NATO construction and land acquisition 
                                projects

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
make contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
infrastructure program in an amount equal to the sum of the 
amount specifically authorized in section 2502 of this bill and 
the amount of recoupment due to the United States for 
construction previously financed by the United States.

          section 2502--authorization of appropriations, NATO

    This section would authorize appropriations of $161,000,000 
as the U.S. contribution to the NATO infrastructure program.

            TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES


                                Summary

    The Department of Defense requested a military construction 
authorization of $182,012,000 for fiscal year 1996 for guard 
and reserve facilities. The committee recommends authorization 
for fiscal year 1996 of $284,924,000 to be distributed as 
follows:

Army National Guard.....................................     $72,537,000
Army Reserve............................................      42,963,000
Naval and Marine Corps Reserve..........................      19,655,000
Air National Guard......................................     118,267,000
Air Force Reserve.......................................      31,502,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
Total...................................................     284,924,000

                         Legislative Provisions


   section 2601--authorized guard and reserve construction and land 
                          acquisition projects

    This section would authorize appropriations for military 
construction for the guard and reserve by service component for 
fiscal year 1996. The state list contained in this report is 
intended to be the binding list of the specific projects 
authorized at each location.

section 2602--correction in authorized uses of funds for army national 
                     guard projects in Mississippi

    This section would clarify that amounts authorized to be 
appropriated in section 2601(1)(A) of the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (division B of Public 
Law 103-360) for the addition or alteration of Army National 
Guard armories at various locations in the State of Mississippi 
shall be available for the addition, alteration, or new 
construction of armory facilities and an operations and 
maintenance shop facility, including the acquisition of land 
for such facilities at such locations.

        TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS


 section 2701--expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be 
                            specified by law

    This section would provide that authorizations for military 
construction projects, repair of real property, land 
acquisition, family housing projects and facilities, 
contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
infrastructure program, and guard and reserve projects will 
expire on October 1, 1998 or the date of enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
1999, whichever is later. This expiration would not apply to 
authorizations for which appropriated funds have been obligated 
before October 1, 1998 or the date of enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for these projects, whichever is later.

section 2702--extensions of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1993 
                                projects

    This section would provide for selected extension of 
certain fiscal year 1993 military construction authorizations 
until October 1, 1996, or the date of the enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
1997, whichever is later.

 section 2703--extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1992 
                                projects

    This section would provide for selected extension of 
certain fiscal year 1992 military construction authorizations 
until October 1, 1996, or the date of the enactment of the Act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
1997, whichever is later.

                      section 2704--effective date

    This section would provide that Titles XXI, XXII, XXIII, 
XXIV, and XXVI of this bill shall take effect on October 1, 
1995, or the date of the enactment of this Act, whichever is 
later.

                    TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS


 Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing 
                                Changes


   section 2801--alternative means of acquiring and improving family 
         housing and supporting facilities for the armed forces

    This section would authorize a series of authorities as 
alternative methods of acquiring and improving family housing 
and supporting facilities for the armed forces. Such 
authorities would include the ability to contract and lease 
family housing. The authorities would be targeted at 
installations where there is a shortage of suitable family 
housing. For housing acquired under the authorities provided in 
this section, the unit size and type limitations in current law 
would be waived to encourage private sector development of 
military family housing units. The Department of Defense would 
be authorized to contribute up to 35 percent of the investment 
cost in any project. Such investment could take a number of 
forms, including cash, current housing, and/or real property. 
This section would also establish the Defense Family Housing 
Improvement Fund which would be the sole source of funding for 
projects undertaken under the authorities provided in this 
section. This section would also provide a 21-day notice-and-
wait requirement for any contract entered into by the 
Department under the authorities in this section, and a 30-day 
notice-and-wait requirement on requests to transfer funds from 
the family housing construction accounts into the fund. Each of 
the authorities contained in this section would expire on 
September 30, 2000.

   section 2802--inclusion of other armed forces in navy program of 
   limited partnerships with private developers for military housing

    This section would expand the limited partnership authority 
authorized for the Department of the Navy in the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (division B 
of Public Law 103-337) to each of the military departments. The 
expanded limited partnership authority would expire on 
September 30, 2000.

  section 2803--special unspecified minor construction thresholds for 
     projects to correct life, health, and safety deficiencies and 
       clarification of unspecified minor construction authority

    This section would increase the thresholds for unspecified 
minor construction projects from $1,500,000 to $3,000,000 and 
the thresholds for projects funded with operations and 
maintenance funds from $300,000 to $1,000,000 solely for 
construction and maintenance projects to remediate serious 
life, health, and safety deficiencies. The provision would not 
increase the budgetary requirements of the Department of 
Defense.
    The section would also make a technical and clarifying 
change in the definition of a minor construction project in the 
applicable provisions of chapter 169, title 10, United States 
Code.

section 2804--disposition of amounts recovered as a result of damage to 
                             real property

    This section would authorize the military departments to 
retain the proceeds recovered as a result of damages to real 
property rather than depositing those proceeds into the 
miscellaneous receipts account in the Treasury. Such proceeds 
would be made available for repair or replacement of damages to 
real property.

      section 2805--rental of family housing in foreign countries

    This section would authorize an increase in the number of 
high-cost family housing units which may be leased in foreign 
countries.

section 2806--pilot program to provide interest rate buy down authority 
    on loans for housing within housing shortage areas at military 
                             installations

    This section would authorize a three-year pilot project to 
provide additional housing assistance to military personnel. 
Under the program, which would be administered by the Secretary 
of Veterans Affairs (VA), the VA would buy down the interest 
rate on VA home loans for qualified applicants. The Secretary 
of Defense would reimburse the VA for the costs of the interest 
rate buy down. Authorization of the program would be limited to 
$10 million and could only be utilized at military 
installations which the Secretary of Defense considers to have 
a military family housing deficit.

                       Items of Special Interest


            impediments to reform of military family housing

    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review 
current statutes and regulations affecting the acquisition and 
improvement of military family housing. The Secretary shall 
submit a report on the Department's findings, including any 
recommendations for changes to applicable statutes and 
regulations, to the congressional defense committees, no later 
than February 1, 1996.

                  measurement of housing deficiencies

    The committee notes that each of the military departments 
has developed different methodologies for measuring 
deficiencies in the availability of housing for military 
families and enlisted personnel in local housing markets 
surrounding military installations. The committee is concerned 
that the authorities authorized in this bill for alternative 
means of acquiring and improving family housing and supporting 
facilities for the armed forces be utilized in a consistent 
manner. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a study of current deficiency measurement standards 
among the military departments and develop a common department-
wide standard for such measurements. The Secretary shall submit 
a report on the Department's progress to the congressional 
defense committees no later than February 1, 1996.

            Subtitle B--Defense Base Closure and Realignment


section 2811--authority to transfer property at military installations 
   to be closed to persons who construct or provide military family 
                                housing

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
enter into an agreement to transfer property or facilities at 
an installation closed, or to be closed, under current law to a 
person who agrees to provide, in exchange for the property or 
facilities, housing units located at another military 
installation where there is a shortage of suitable housing. 
Under the provision, the Secretary would not be permitted to 
select property or facilities for transfer that have been 
identified in the redevelopment plan for the installation as 
essential for base reuse and development.

 section 2812--deposit of proceeds from leases of property located at 
            military installations being closed or realigned

    This section would authorize the deposit of proceeds from 
leases of property located at installations being closed or 
realigned into the relevant account established to administer 
matters related to base closure and realignment.

 section 2813--agreements for certain services at installations being 
                                 closed

    This section would clarify current law to authorize the 
Secretary of Defense to enter into agreements with local 
governments for the provision of police or security services, 
fire protection services, airfield operation services, or other 
community services provided by such governments at military 
installations scheduled to be closed.

                       Items of Special Interest


 management of excess military lands for certain recreational purposes

    The committee recognizes the demand for access to public 
lands, including lands managed by the Department of Defense, 
for outdoor recreational and sporting pursuits. The committee 
is aware of proposals to make land on military bases that are 
closed or are scheduled to be closed available to the States 
and open to the public for such activities. The Secretary is 
directed to conduct a study of the feasibility of conveying 
land excess to the military departments as a result of a base 
closure and which has no local development purpose to the 
States for designation as wildlife management areas to be 
managed for outdoor recreational and sporting pursuits. The 
Secretary shall submit a report on the Department's findings, 
including any recommendations, to the Congress no later than 
May 1, 1996.

                 Subtitle C--Land Conveyances Generally


    section 2821--transfer of jurisdiction, fort sam houston, texas

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
transfer, without reimbursement, approximately 53 acres with 
improvements to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. The property 
is to be conveyed for use as a national cemetery. The cost of 
any surveys necessary for the transfer of jurisdiction shall be 
borne by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

   section 2822--land acquisition or exchange, shaw air force base, 
                         sumter, south carolina

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force 
to acquire, by means of an exchange of property, acceptance as 
a gift, or other means that do not require the use of 
appropriated funds, all rights, title, and interest in a parcel 
of real property, with improvements, consisting of 
approximately 1,100 acres adjacent to Shaw Air Force Base, 
Sumter, South Carolina.

   section 2823--transfer of certain real property at naval weapons 
  industrial reserve plant, calverton, new york, for use as national 
                                cemetery

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to 
transfer, without reimbursement, approximately 150 acres to the 
Secretary of Veterans Affairs. The property is to be conveyed 
for use as a national cemetery. The cost of any surveys 
necessary for the transfer of jurisdiction shall be borne by 
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

          section 2824--land conveyance, fort ord, california

     This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
convey a parcel of real property with improvements consisting 
of approximately 477 acres to the City of Seaside, California. 
The real property to be conveyed consists of the two Fort Ord 
golf courses and the Hayes housing facilities. As consideration 
for the conveyance of real property and improvements, the City 
shall pay an amount equal to the fair market value of the 
property to be conveyed. From the amount paid by the City as 
consideration for the conveyance, the Secretary shall deposit 
in the Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Fund account of the 
Department of the Army an amount equal to the fair market value 
of the golf courses conveyed under this section. The balance of 
the amount paid by the City shall be deposited in the 
Department of Defense Base Closure Account 1990.

     section 2825--land conveyance, indiana army ammunition plant, 
                          charlestown, indiana

     This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
convey, without consideration, a parcel of real property, with 
improvements, consisting of approximately 1,125 acres to the 
State of Indiana. The property to be conveyed is to be used for 
recreational purposes. The cost of any surveys necessary for 
the conveyance of real property shall be borne by the State of 
Indiana.

  section 2826--land conveyance, naval air station, pensacola, florida

     This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to 
convey a parcel of unimproved real property consisting of 
approximately 135 acres to West Florida Developers, Inc. As 
consideration for the conveyance of real property, West Florida 
Developers, Inc. shall agree to restrict the use of all lands 
located within the Air Installation Compatible Zone of Naval 
Air Station Pensacola owned by West Florida Developers, Inc. 
The cost of any surveys necessary for the conveyance shall be 
borne by West Florida Developers, Inc.

  section 2827--land conveyance, avon park air force range, sebring, 
                                florida

     This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air 
Force to convey, without consideration, a parcel of real 
property, with improvements, within the boundaries of the Avon 
Park Air Force Range near Sebring, Florida. The property is to 
be conveyed for the operation of a juvenile or other 
correctional facility. The exact acreage of the real property 
to be conveyed shall be determined by a survey satisfactory to 
the Secretary, and the cost for such survey shall be born by 
Highland County, Florida.

  section 2828--land conveyance, parks reserve forces training area, 
                           dublin, california

     This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
convey a parcel of real property, with improvements, consisting 
of approximately 31 acres to the County of Alameda, California. 
As consideration for the conveyance, the County would provide 
the Army with improvements and services at least equal to the 
appraised value of the real property conveyed. The improvements 
and services to be provided by the County would permit the 
relocation of the main gate of the Parks Reserve Forces 
Training Area, Dublin, California, and for the repair and 
replacement of deficient training area infrastructures. The 
exact acreage of the real property to be conveyed shall be 
determined by a survey satisfactory to the Secretary, and the 
cost for such survey shall be borne by the County.

  section 2829 land conveyance, holston army ammunition plant, mount 
                           carmel, tennessee

     This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
convey, without reimbursement, a parcel of real property 
consisting of approximately 6.5 acres to the City of Mount 
Carmel, Tennessee. The property is to be conveyed for expansion 
of the existing Mount Carmel Cemetery. The cost of any surveys 
necessary for the conveyance of real property shall be borne by 
the City.

section 2830--land conveyance, naval weapons industrial reserve plant, 
                             mcgregor texas

     This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to 
convey, without consideration, to the City of McGregor, Texas, 
all rights, title, interest, and improvements thereon to a 
parcel of real property containing the Naval Weapons Industrial 
Reserve Plant. The Secretary would be authorized to convey 
other fixtures located on the property if such equipment can be 
reinstituted after the conveyance. Until the real property is 
conveyed by deed, the Secretary would be permitted to lease the 
facility to the City in exchange for security, fire protection, 
and maintenance. The conveyed property would be used for 
purposes of economic redevelopment. The exact acreage and legal 
description of the property are to be determined by a survey 
acceptable to the Secretary with the cost to be borne by the 
City. Finally, the Secretary would be authorized to set 
additional terms and conditions which protect the interests of 
the United States.

section 2831--transfer of jurisdiction and land conveyance, fort devens 
                  military reservation, massachusetts

     This section would require the Secretary of the Army to 
convey, without reimbursement, a portion of the Fort Devens 
Military Reservation, Massachusetts, to the Secretary of the 
Interior at any time after the date on which the property is 
determined to be excess to the needs of the Department of 
Defense. The property is to be conveyed for inclusion in the 
Oxbow National Wildlife Refuge. The cost of any surveys 
necessary for the conveyance shall be borne by the Secretary of 
the Interior.
    This section would also require the Secretary of the Army 
to convey, without reimbursement, a parcel of real property 
consisting of approximately 100 acres of the parcel available 
for transfer to the Secretary of the Interior to the Town of 
Lancaster, Massachusetts. The cost of any surveys necessary for 
the conveyance shall be borne by the Town.

    section 2832--land conveyance, elmendorf air force base, alaska

     This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air 
Force to sell to a private person a parcel of real property 
consisting of approximately 32 acres located at Elmendorf Air 
Force Base, Alaska. As consideration for the sale, the 
purchaser shall be subject to the condition to provide 
appropriate maintenance for the apartment complex located on 
the property to be conveyed and used by members of the armed 
forces and their dependents stationed at the Elmendorf Air 
Force Base. The cost of any surveys necessary for the sale of 
real property shall be borne by the purchaser.

section 2833--land conveyance alternative to existing lease authority, 
                naval supply center, oakland, california

     This section would amend section 2834(b) of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993, (division 
B of Public Law 103-160), as amended, and section 2821 of the 
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 
(division B of Public Law 103-337) to authorize the Secretary 
of the Navy without consideration to convey, in lieu of an 
existing lease, the property described to the City of Oakland, 
California, the Port of Oakland, California, or the City of 
Alameda, California, under such terms as the Secretary 
considers appropriate. The exact acreage of the real property 
which may be conveyed shall be determined by a survey 
satisfactory to the Secretary, and the cost for such survey 
shall be borne by the recipient of the property.

            Subtitle D--Land Conveyances Involving Utilities


 section 2841--conveyance of resource recovery facility, fort dix, new 
                                 jersey

     This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
convey to Burlington County, New Jersey all rights, title, and 
interest of the United States in real property consisting of 
approximately two acres and containing a resource recovery 
facility. In consideration of the conveyance, Burlington County 
would accept the resource recovery facility in its existing 
condition and provide refuse and steam service to Fort Dix, New 
Jersey at a rate established by the appropriate State or 
Federal regulatory authority.

section 2842--conveyance of water and wastewater treatment plants, fort 
                            gordon, georgia

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
convey to the City of Augusta, Georgia all rights, title, and 
interest of the United States in several parcels of real 
property consisting of approximately seven acres each and 
containing water and wastewater treatment plants and 
distribution and collection systems. In consideration of the 
conveyance, the City of Augusta would accept the water and 
wastewater treatment plants and distribution and collection 
systems in their existing condition and provide water and sewer 
service to Fort Gordon, Georgia at a rate established by the 
appropriate State or Federal regulatory authority.

section 2843--conveyance of electrical distribution system, fort irwin, 
                               california

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
convey to the Southern California Edison Company, California 
all rights, title, and interest of the United States in the 
electrical distribution system located at Fort Irwin, 
California. In consideration of the conveyance, the Southern 
California Edison Company would accept the electrical 
distribution system in its existing condition and provide 
electrical service to Fort Irwin, California at a rate 
established by the appropriate State or Federal regulatory 
authority.

                       subtitle E--Other Matters


        section 2851--expansion of authority to sell electricity

    This section would amend section 2483(a) of title 10, 
United States Code, to expand the authority of the Department 
of Defense to permit the military departments to take advantage 
of changing electric power marketing conditions by increasing 
the available option to outsource for energy on military 
installations.

  section 2852--authority for mississippi state port authority to use 
    navy property at naval construction battalion center, gulfport, 
                              mississippi

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to 
enter into an agreement with the Port Authority of the State of 
Mississippi to permit joint use of real property and associated 
improvements comprising up to 50 acres located at the Naval 
Construction Battalion Center, Gulfport, Mississippi. The 
requirement would be for a period not to exceed 15 years, and 
the Port Authority would be required to pay fair market rental 
value as determined by the Secretary. The Secretary could not 
enter into any agreement until after the end of a 21-day period 
beginning on the date on which the Secretary submits a report 
to Congress explaining the terms of the proposed agreement and 
describing the consideration that the Secretary would expect to 
receive under the agreement.

  section 2853--prohibition on joint civil aviation use of naval air 
                      station miramar, california

    This section would prohibit the Secretary of the Navy from 
entering into any agreement that would provide for the regular 
use of Naval Air Station Miramar, California by civil aircraft.

section 2854--report regarding army water craft support facilities and 
                               activities

    This section would require a report by the Secretary of the 
Army regarding Army water craft support facilities and 
activities.

                       Items of Special Interest


                wargaming infrastructure and facilities

    The committee recognizes the importance of wargaming, 
simulation, and other analytical techniques to develop and 
evaluate advanced warfighting and campaign concepts and 
doctrine for future employment by the armed forces. The 
committee is aware of significant deficiencies in the 
infrastructure and facilities at several installations designed 
to support that purpose, including, but not limited to, the 
National Test Facility, Colorado; the Naval War College, Rhode 
Island; and the Armed Forces Staff College, Virginia. The 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a 
comprehensive study of the wargaming capability and 
infrastructure of the military departments and the Department 
of Defense. The Secretary shall submit a report on the 
Department's findings, including any recommendations for 
improvements to such facilities, to the congressional defense 
committees, no later than March 1, 1996.
    Offset Folios 423 to 432 Insert here



 DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND 
                          OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS


      TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS


                                Purpose

    Title XXXI would authorize appropriations for the national 
security programs of the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
1996, including management and operation of programs for 
research, development, and production in support of the armed 
forces, the production of strategic and critical materials for 
the armed forces, the protection of critical materials, 
materials and information necessary for national defense, 
management of defense radioactive wastes; environmental 
management, naval nuclear propulsion, and other military 
applications of nuclear energy.

                            Overall Concerns

    The United States nuclear arsenal remains a critical 
component of U.S. defense policy. Although the number of U.S. 
nuclear weapons has already declined significantly, and will 
decline further as a result of arms control agreements, there 
is every reason to believe that nuclear weapons will remain a 
cornerstone of U.S. security for decades to come. As stated in 
the February, 1995 National Military Strategy document, ``The 
highest priority of our military strategy is to deter a nuclear 
attack against our Nation and allies. Our survival and the 
freedom of action that we need to protect extended national 
interests depend upon strategic and on strategic nuclear forces 
and their associated command, control, and communications.''
    Despite such pronouncements, the infrastructure necessary 
to design, produce, and maintain U.S. nuclear weapons has 
suffered significant erosion resulting from the Department's 
neglect over the past several years. If steps are not taken 
soon to reverse this decline in the U.S. nuclear 
infrastructure, U.S. political and military leaders will soon 
lose confidence in the safety, reliability, and effectiveness 
of U.S. nuclear weapons. Once that happens, America's ability 
to deter aggression--indeed, its credibility as a superpower--
will be significantly diminished.
    The committee's actions recommended in this bill are 
intended to serve as a first step in correcting the 
Administration's unacceptable neglect of the U.S. nuclear 
infrastructure.

          Subtitle A--National Security Program Authorizations


                      summary of committee changes

     The fiscal year 1996 budget request for DOE national 
security programs totaled $11,178,746,000. Of the total amount 
requested, $3,540,175,000 was for weapons activities, 
$6,008,002,000 was for defense environmental restoration and 
waste management, $1,432,159,000 was for materials support and 
other defense programs, and $198,400,000 was for defense 
nuclear waste disposal.
    The committee recommends a total of $10,818,555,000 
including $3,610,914,000 for weapons activities, $5,265,478,000 
for defense environmental restoration and waste management, 
$1,001,239 for other defense activities, and $198,400,000 for 
defense nuclear waste disposal.
     The following table summarizes the request and the 
committee recommendation.
    Offset folio 436 insert here



                    section 3101--weapons activities

     This section would authorize Department of Energy weapons 
activity funding for fiscal year 1996.

  section 3102--defense environmental restoration and waste management

     The budget request contained $6.0 billion for activities 
of the Department of Energy's Office of Environmental 
Restoration and Waste Management. The committee recommends 
reducing the requested amount by $742.5 million for a total 
authorized amount of $5,265,478,000.
    This reduction would be accomplished by reducing operations 
and maintenance accounts and by reducing the funds accumulated 
in prior year ``uncosted balance'' accounts. Uncosted balance 
accounts, in which repose funds that have been appropriated and 
obligated but not actually expended, have grown to unacceptably 
high levels, making prudent financial management and program 
execution difficult. The committee notes that the Department 
has, in its budget submission, recommended the use of over $275 
million in prior years balances to offset the new funding 
requirement. The committee believes that these accounts may be 
further reduced without jeopardizing the health or safety of 
workers or localities.
    The committee directs that the Department of Energy absorb 
the funding reductions that would be authorized by this Act by 
eliminating headquarters contract support staff, headquarters 
support contracts and subcontracts, and headquarters support 
functions. The committee notes that within the Department there 
is significant duplication of function between contractor 
support personnel and government employees. Moreover, a 
disproportionate amount of the funding for the Department of 
Energy's environmental management program is allocated to 
administrative oversight activities, as opposed to actual 
cleanup or operations at sites in the field.
     The committee further directs that the Department submit a 
report to the congressional defense committees, contemporaneous 
with its fiscal year 1997 budget request, containing the 
following: (1) a projection by program and appropriation of 
carryover balances (uncosted and unobligated balances) to be 
available at the end of the current fiscal year. For example, 
for its fiscal year 1997 submission, the report should project 
balances for the end of fiscal year 1996; (2) target carryover 
balances by program for the end of the current fiscal year. The 
target balances should be derived from a model that is designed 
to determine the minimum amount of carryover balances needed 
for program operations and continuity; (3) a comparison of the 
results of the above findings which shows for each program the 
difference between the projected and target carryover balances; 
(4) a justification, if one exists, for the difference between 
the projected and target carryover balances; and (5) the amount 
of carryover balances that the Department cannot justify based 
on the calculation in paragraph (4). The committee believes 
that these carryover balances should be applied to reduce the 
Department's authorization request for the next fiscal year.

                section 3103--payment of civil penalties

     This section would authorize the Secretary of Energy to 
pay for civil penalties assessed in accordance with a federal 
facility agreement and consent order against the Rocky Flats 
site in Colorado.

                 section 3104--other defense activities

     This section would authorize funds for other defense 
activities of the Department of Energy for fiscal year 1996.

              section--3105 defense nuclear waste disposal

     This section would authorize funds for defense nuclear 
waste disposal activities of the Department of Energy for 
fiscal year 1996.

                   Subtitle B--Legislative Provisions


                      section 3121--reprogramming

     This section would prohibit the reprogramming of funds in 
excess of 102 percent of the amount authorized for the program, 
or in excess of $1 million above the amount authorized for the 
program until the Secretary of Energy has notified the 
congressional defense committees and a period of 30 days has 
elapsed after the date on which the report is received. Should 
the Department demonstrate that it has improved its procedures 
for handling reprogramming requests, the committee would 
consider returning to a more flexible reprogramming statute in 
the future.

             section 3122--limits on general plant projects

     This section would limit the initiation of ``general plant 
projects'' authorized by the bill if the current estimated cost 
for any project exceeds $1.2 million. However, if the Secretary 
of Energy finds that the estimated cost of any project will 
exceed $1.2 million, the appropriate committees of Congress 
must be notified of the reasons for the cost variation.

             section 3123--limits on construction projects

     This section would permit any construction project to be 
initiated and continued only if the estimated cost for the 
project does not exceed 125 percent of the higher of: (1) the 
amount authorized for the project, or (2) the most recent total 
estimated cost presented to the Congress as justification for 
such project. To exceed such limits, the Secretary of Energy 
must report in detail to the appropriate committees of Congress 
and the report must be before the committees for 30 legislative 
days.
    This section would also specify that the 125 percent 
limitation would not apply to projects estimated to cost under 
$5 million.

                 section 3124--fund transfer authority

    This section would permit funds authorized to be 
appropriated by the bill to be transferred to other agencies of 
the government for performance of work for which the funds were 
authorized and appropriated. The provision would permit the 
merger of such funds with the authorizations of the agency to 
which they are transferred.
    This section would also limit to no more than five percent 
the amount of funds that may be transferred between 
authorizations in the Department of Energy that were authorized 
pursuant to this act.

     section 3125--authority for conceptual and construction design

    The committee recommends a new provision (sec. 3125) that 
would limit the Secretary of Energy's authority to request 
construction funding until the Secretary has certified a 
conceptual design. This section would provide an exception in 
the case of emergencies.

      section 3126--authority for emergency planning, design, and 
                        construction activities

    This section would permit, in addition to any advance 
planning and construction design otherwise authorized by the 
bill, the Secretary of Energy to perform planning and design 
utilizing available funds for any Department of Energy national 
security program construction project whenever the Secretary 
determines that the design must proceed expeditiously to 
protect the public health and safety, to meet the needs of 
national defense or to protect property.

section 3127--funds available for all national security programs of the 
                          department of energy

    This section would authorize, subject to the provisions of 
appropriation Acts and section 3121 of this bill, amounts 
appropriated pursuant to this bill for management and support 
activities and for general plant projects to be made available 
for use, when necessary, in connection with all national 
security programs of the Department of Energy.

                  section 3128--availability of funds

    This section would authorize, subject to a provision of an 
appropriation Act, amounts appropriated for operating expenses 
or for plant and capital equipment to remain available until 
expended.

   Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations


    section 3131--authority to conduct program relating to fissile 
                               materials

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Energy to 
conduct programs designed to improve the protection, control, 
and accountability of fissile materials in Russia, and would 
require a notification to Congress prior to the obligation of 
funds under this authority.

                section 3132--national ignition facility

    This section would prohibit obligation of funds for the 
National Ignition Facility (NIF) until the Secretary of Energy 
concludes that construction of the NIF will not impede U.S. 
nuclear nonproliferation objectives and notifies Congress of 
that conclusion.

                    section 3133--tritium production

    The committee is deeply concerned about the lack of 
progress by the Department in establishing a long-term source 
of tritium, which is necessary to maintain the Nation's nuclear 
deterrent. Therefore, the committee recommends a total of $100 
million for tritium production, an increase of $50 million over 
the request.
    Although the Department has announced its intention to 
reach a Record of Decision in November 1995, the committee is 
concerned with the direction the Department appears to be 
heading. The Department seems determined to avoid full 
consideration of the reactor option and is proceeding with 
research and development on an accelerator for future tritium 
production even though the use of such technology for this 
mission will likely cost the federal government many billions 
of dollars more than the reactor option. Moreover, the unproven 
and theoretical nature of the accelerator for this production 
application could also jeopardize the Department's ability to 
satisfy tritium requirements on schedule.
    On March 1, 1995, the Department issued a draft 
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) on tritium 
supply. It did not identify any unacceptable environmental 
consequences for either the reactor or the accelerator options. 
However, the Department has failed to release information on 
the costs, schedule, and uncertainties for implementing either 
of the approaches under consideration. It is the committee's 
view that the Advanced Light Water Reactor (ALWR) will provide 
the most proven technology at the least cost to the government 
(due in part to revenues from electricity generation) and is, 
therefore, the most logical choice. In addition, the most 
logical site for the tritium production mission would be the 
Savannah River Site (SRS) due to its existing tritium 
infrastructure. Therefore, the committee recommends a provision 
(sec. 3133) that would require that fiscal year 1996 funds for 
tritium production be used to proceed with multipurpose ALWR 
technology, including resumption of the light water reactor 
tritium-producing target program, as well as to continue on-
going research and development work on accelerator technology.
    The committee is interested in the proposal for a privately 
financed multipurpose reactor that could (1) produce tritium, 
(2) consume excess weapons plutonium, and (3) generate 
electricity as a means to reduce government costs. To date 
however, the Department has seemingly ignored this option. A 
Program Plan was submitted to the Department by private 
industry in March, 1994, to effect this option. In addition to 
saving the government billions of dollars in construction costs 
for a tritium production source, the private sector approach 
would also obviate the need for the Department to establish a 
separate, costly program to dispose of excess weapons 
plutonium. Accordingly, the committee directs the Department to 
begin implementation of the industry Program Plan and to make 
$14 million of fiscal year 1996 funds available to private 
industry for this purpose. If this program demonstrates that 
the privatized multipurpose reactor will indeed result in lower 
costs to the federal government for both plutonium disposition 
and tritium production, the committee expects the Department to 
proceed and to notify the committee of any enabling legislation 
that is required. If and when a reactor is constructed under 
this plan, the Department will ensure that any government funds 
provided for implementation of the industry's program plan be 
repaid out of future revenues from the facility's operation.
    Because accelerator technology may serve other important 
national security purposes, the Department should prepare a new 
program to demonstrate other potential applications of the 
technology. Because the Department already has accelerator 
research and development efforts under way, those efforts 
should continue while the new program plan is being prepared, 
but should focus upon activities that are expected to be 
beneficial to other nuclear defense applications. The committee 
recommends $40 million of the tritium production funds for the 
accelerator for this purpose. The committee requests that the 
Secretary of Energy prepare and submit a report to Congress 
describing the viable alternative nuclear defense missions for 
the accelerator and the funding and program plan needed to 
develop it. The report is due not later than 180 days after the 
date of enactment of this Act.
    The committee is also deeply concerned with the 
Department's inability to reach a decision on a plan for the 
disposition of excess weapons plutonium. It has taken the 
Department over a year and tens of millions of dollars to 
simply conclude that the January, 1994, recommendations of the 
National Academy of Sciences were correct. Meanwhile, the 
Department has increased its request for funding in fiscal year 
1996 above the fiscal year 1995 funding level and delayed 
issuance of a Record of Decision by several months to August 
1996. The committee believes that a multi-purpose reactor, 
under the Tritium Production Program, should be considered the 
preferred means of plutonium disposition, unless and until the 
Department is able to demonstrate a more visible alternative.
    On this basis, the committee directs the Department to 
provide sufficient funds for a complete analysis of the 
multipurpose ALWR in the performance of its PEIS on plutonium 
disposition. Furthermore, the committee recommends $5 million 
for the Pantex facility for evaluating engineering processes 
which are candidates for converting excess plutonium in its 
various forms into other fuel appropriate for use in the 
multipurpose reactor.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters


           section 3141--report on foreign tritium purchases

    The committee is concerned that the Department of Energy 
has failed to consider the potential benefits associated with 
the foreign purchase of tritium as a means of ensuring an 
adequate supply of tritium for the U.S. nuclear weapons 
stockpile. Therefore, the committee recommends a provision 
(sec. 3141) that would require the President to prepare and 
submit a report on foreign tritium purchases.

         section 3142--study on nuclear test readiness postures

    The Department of Energy has proposed to shift from a six-
months test readiness posture to a three-year test readiness 
posture. The committee is concerned about the implications of 
such a change in policy. Therefore, the committee recommends a 
provision (sec. 3142) that would require the Secretary of 
Energy to prepare and submit a report on the implications of 
changes in U.S. policy with respect to nuclear test readiness.

    section 3143--master plan on warheads in the enduring stockpile

    The Department of Energy has failed to translate its plans 
for stockpile stewardship and management into a detailed plan 
for assuring the safety, reliability, and effectiveness of the 
warheads to remain in the enduring stockpile. Therefore, the 
committee recommends a provision (sec. 3143) that would require 
the President to prepare and submit a master plan that 
describes in detail how the government plans to demonstrate, by 
2002, the capability to refabricate and certify warheads in the 
enduring stockpile, and the capability to design, fabricate, 
and certify new warheads.

section 3144--prohibition on international inspections of department of 
  energy facilities unless protection of restricted data is certified

    The committee is concerned that the Department of Energy 
may be planning to permit inspections of U.S. nuclear weapons 
facilities by the International Atomic Energy Agency without 
adequately safeguarding sensitive nuclear weapons design 
information. Therefore, the committee recommends a provision 
(sec. 3144) that would prohibit such inspections unless 
protection of such sensitive data is certified by the 
Secretary.

                           items of interest

Enhanced surveillance

    Under the current plans, the enduring U.S. nuclear 
stockpile will be smaller and less diverse, and thus more 
vulnerable to single-point and common-mode failures. New 
surveillance technologies, coupled with enhanced predictive 
capabilities as to the effects of materials aging on component 
and weapons performance are needed. The committee directs the 
Department to initiate an enhanced surveillance program to 
transition current surveillance activities from the reactive to 
the predictive mode. The committee recommends an additional $40 
million to initiate this new program in fiscal year 1996. These 
funds should be used to support surveillance hydrotests, 
nondestructive tests, system level modeling, materials 
laboratory tests and nondestructive test evaluation, and 
development of new diagnostic technologies to predict component 
lifetimes.

Accelerated strategic computing initiative

    Computational capabilities underpin every aspect of nuclear 
weapon design, engineering, and evaluation. In the absence of 
underground testing, significant advances in the laboratories' 
computational capabilities are necessary to support the 
stockpile stewardship program activities. The committee 
recognizes the importance of this activity, and therefore 
directs the Department to: (1) initiate additional development 
projects for high-end hardware development; (2) pursue 
additional activities to enhance problem solving and software 
environments, including high performance classified and 
unclassified networks; (3) fully fund planned weapons 
applications development projects in three-dimensional and high 
fidelity codes; and (4) develop weapons-specific parallel 
computing tools. The committee recommends an increase of $40 
million for this initiative for a total program funding level 
of $85 million in fiscal year 1996.

Dual revalidation

    The enduring nuclear stockpile will be subject to 
environmental and aging problems, and will require increasing 
attention and scrutiny to ensure safety, reliability, and 
performance. A new process called dual revalidation has 
recently been formulated. The revalidation process will rely 
upon the formulation of two independent teams from the 
Department of Energy, in coordination with the Department of 
Defense, to establish a baseline assessment of each weapon type 
in the enduring nuclear stockpile. The teams will use the 
baseline assessments as a basis for measuring any future 
changes in the weapon system, and to perform future weapon 
system analyses in support of system revalidation. The 
committee recognizes the importance of establishing the 
revalidation process as quickly as possible, and therefore 
recommends a funding level of $20 million in fiscal year 1996 
to initiate the program. These funds should be used to support 
the independent teams in reviewing the design calculations for 
the original design of the weapon, to exchange and analyze 
current surveillance and other data, and to bring new 
calculational methods and improved models to bear. In addition, 
funds may be used to support additional hydrodynamic and 
environmental tests with advance diagnostics, as needed, to 
establish a modern basis for the analysis.

Advanced manufacturing

    In years past, a large nuclear weapons production complex 
provided the capability and capacity to rapidly produce new 
weapons and fix problems in the stockpile. While new weapons 
are not planned, the Department must maintain a production 
capability to support the weapons stockpile as it ages. A new 
approach is needed to ensure the safety and reliability of the 
enduring U.S. nuclear stockpile that eliminates the need for a 
large facilities and infrastructure. The Department has 
identified a new initiative to develop the tools needed to 
support future manufacturing needs. This initiative, called the 
Advanced Design and Production Technologies (ADAPT) will build 
upon core activities in materials and components research, and 
accelerate the development and deployment of cost effective, 
environmentally acceptable product realization technologies and 
processes in direct support of the nuclear weapons stockpile. 
The committee recommends an additional $80 million for this 
initiative to accelerate five development areas planned by the 
Department: (1) advanced processes for materials and 
components, (2) communications infrastructure to integrate 
labs, plants and industry, (3) accelerated design and 
engineering environments, (4) initiate development of advanced 
controls for prototype manufacturing and assembly facilities, 
and (5) solids models development for analysis of complex 
manufacturing processes, including assembly.

Stockpile management activities

    The committee recognizes the importance of maintaining the 
existing nuclear stockpile at high standards of safety and 
reliability. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase 
of $40 million in the stockpile management account for fiscal 
year 1996. The committee is aware of the urgent need to 
stabilize plutonium stocks at defense programs sites and 
understands that the Department has recently completed a study 
to implement a plan for plutonium stabilization at the Lawrence 
Livermore National Laboratory. The committee therefore 
recommends that $30 million of the increased funding be made 
available to expedite the implementation of the plan.

Dual-axis radiographic hydrodynamic test facility

    The Dual-Axis Radiographic Test Facility (DARHT) at Los 
Alamos National Laboratory will provide substantial 
improvements in dynamic radiography and will be a major 
experimental tool for addressing weapon safety and reliability 
issues. The Department was forced by legal action to stop 
construction of DARHT in late January 1995 until completion of 
an environmental impact statement on the project. The draft 
environmental impact statement was released on May 12, 1995, 
for public comment and it is anticipated that the final 
document will be available in September of this year.
    In anticipation of a record of decision in early fiscal 
year 1996 determining that the project should be completed, the 
committee recommends an addition of $10 million to the request 
for operating funds and an additional $5 million for 
construction funds to restart the project and address the 
increased cost of construction due to the delays experienced. 
In addition, the committee fully supports beginning long-lead 
procurement associated with the second axis of the facility due 
to the critical nature of this project. An additional $5 
million is provided to begin this procurement in fiscal year 
1996 not fiscal year 1997 as anticipated by the Department.

Technology transfer

    The committee sees little benefit in pursuing technology 
transfer-related activities which have little or no relevance 
to the nuclear weapons mission. Therefore, the committee 
recommends authorization of not more than $25 million for 
technology transfer, a reduction of $220.4 million from the 
requested amount.

National resource center for plutonium

    The committee recommends authorization of $10 million, the 
requested amount, for the Amarillo National Resource Center for 
Plutonium, Amarillo, Texas. The committee strongly supports the 
continued activities of the center and urges the Secretary to 
request adequate funding for its continued operations in the 
fiscal year 1997 budget submission.

Emergency management

    In an effort to streamline the Department of Energy's 
emergency-related organizations and to eliminate redundancy, 
the committee recommends consolidating funding for emergency 
management which has previously been included in the weapons 
activities program direction account and funding for a separate 
emergency preparedness account. The fiscal year 1996 budget 
request for emergency management is $20.1 million and $8.2 
million for emergency preparedness. The committee recommends a 
total of $23.3 million for fiscal year 1996 for the combined 
programs. This reduction in funding from the budget request 
will require a reduction in the number of staff performing 
redundant functions and should lead to efficiencies in 
centralizing emergency planning and oversight.

Merger of capital equipment and general plant project funding

    The report of the Galvin Task Force reviewing Department of 
Energy laboratory operations highlighted instances where the 
current budget structure and congressional funding limitations 
may result in excessive administrative and procedural 
oversight. Micromanagement leads to increased costs and 
diminished productivity in the operation of the Department's 
laboratories and facilities. The committee recommends merging 
capital equipment and general plant projects funding with the 
operating funding to expedite the allocation of resources for 
operating, maintenance, and other infrastructure activities and 
to ensure the operation of the Department's laboratories and 
facilities in the most efficient and cost effective manner.
    Construction activity that exceeds the general plant 
project threshold of $2 million would continue to require 
specific authorization and appropriation by the Congress. Any 
construction activity that does not exceed the $2 million 
threshold would be included in the operation and maintenance 
account.
    The committee directs the Department, in implementing this 
change, to continue to reflect the capital equipment and 
general plant projects in the financial and accounting reports. 
The committee expects to be informed if there are major 
differences between the funding requested for capital equipment 
and general plant projects in the fiscal year 1996 budget 
request and the actual execution of the programs under these 
new guidelines. Also, specific details for planned capital 
equipment and general plant projects will continue to be 
reported in the annual budget justifications.

International center for applied research

    The International Center for Applied Research (ICAR) offers 
a unique approach to realize regional economic diversification 
through the application of science and technology. The 
committee is disappointed, however, that the Department's 
request did not include funds for ICAR. The committee strongly 
endorses this program and directs the Department to provide 
appropriate additional funds for ICAR in the Department's 
fiscal year 1997 budget submission.

Nevada test site

    The committee is concerned that the removal of Yucca 
Mountain support from the Nevada Test Site (NTS), or even a 
reduction in support, could adversely affect NTS readiness. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Nuclear Weapons Council to 
conduct a study of the impact of the elimination or reduction 
of Yucca Mountain support from NTS prior to any move by the 
Department to do so. The study should also examine options to 
reduce the cost of NTS services to Yucca Mountain if this is 
the primary rationale for removing or reducing NTS support. The 
committee recommends that the Department cease any effort to 
remove Yucca Mountain support prior to the Nuclear Weapons 
Council providing its study to the committee.

Reporting requirement for the total project costs for construction 
        activities

    The cost of construction projects for the Department of 
Energy includes activities funded from operating expenses as 
well as construction and capital equipment accounts. In 
addition to the preparation of the conceptual design report, 
project-related costs funded from operating expenses include 
items such as research and development, preparation of design 
criteria, safety analyses, and environmental documentation. As 
a result, the Department conducts activities related to 
construction projects prior to the authorization of the 
specific project by Congress.
    To ensure that all project-related activities funded by the 
operating expenses are identified and reviewed by Congress, the 
Department of Energy is directed to identify in the annual 
budget justification: (1) funding by project for all conceptual 
design reports where the cost of preparation will exceed $3 
million, and (2) funding by project for all project-related 
activities which will exceed $3 million on proposed 
construction projects which have a completed conceptual design 
report but for which specific construction project 
authorization has not been requested nor provided by Congress.

Commission on management of environmental restoration and waste 
        management program contracts at department of energy sites

    The committee is concerned that the vast sums of money 
authorized and appropriated each year to cleanup Department of 
Energy nuclear waste facilities are resulting in little 
measurable progress. A recent Government Accounting Office 
review of the environmental management program concluded that 
while ``DOE has received about $23 billion for environmental 
management since 1989, . . . little cleanup has resulted.'' 
Similarly, a recent congressional report prepared by Steven 
Blush and Thomas H. Heitman on the Hanford cleanup program in 
Richland, Washington found that in the six years since the 
Hanford cleanup has been funded at a cost of $7.5 billion, 
``very little cleanup has occurred.'' The Galvin Commission 
found that before any program could be successful, the 
Department of Energy must overcome ``disconnects'' in: (1) 
science/engineering and applications, (2) regulatory oversight 
and compliance, and (3) goals, objectives and means. . . .'' 
Current estimates are that the United States will spend between 
$350 billion dollars and $1 trillion before the remediation at 
all Department of Energy sites is complete.
    The committee believes that statutory and regulatory 
changes alone are inadequate to address the Department of 
Energy's cleanup problems. A new method of managing the 
environmental remediation contractual process is necessary. 
Real progress may be made only with the creation of a high-
level blue ribbon commission, similar to the Base Realignment 
and Closing Commission. This commission could assume ultimate 
control over which sites are remediated and to what degree, how 
much money is spent at each site, and the ultimate use for each 
site once remediation is complete. The commission could be 
composed of the most qualified and knowledgeable experts in the 
country. The committee further recommends that the Department 
of Energy's national laboratories be given a major role in 
advising the commission and in formulating a more efficient and 
cost effective environmental remediation contractual process.
    Among the initial objectives of such a commission would be 
to: (1) establish a risk standard for workers, the public and 
for environmental protection, and (2) establish cleanup 
standards that bear a reasonable relationship to the 
anticipated future use of the sites. The commission, in 
consultation with experts from the national laboratories, could 
then apply a ``triage'' cleanup concept at contaminated sites. 
Under this concept, the commission could provide guidance on, 
among the sites at a particular Department of Energy facility, 
which warrant immediate and intensive cleanup efforts and which 
should be cleaned up at a more moderate pace. Because of cost 
considerations or technology inadequacies, cleanup at other 
sites could be deferred. Once these decisions are made, the 
laboratories could then be assigned oversight responsibility 
for the execution of a cleanup plan at each site. If the 
laboratory with supervisory responsibility for managing the 
cleanup process at a site fails to achieve results, then the 
commission could intervene and remove the lab from the project 
or revise the cleanup plan for that site.
    The committee intends to work closely with the other House 
committees of jurisdiction over Department of Energy cleanup 
activities to further refine this commission concept and to 
develop statutory changes that may facilitate the cleanup 
process.
    Offset Folios 453 to 465 Insert here



   TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD AUTHORIZATION


                         Legislative Provision


                      section 3201--authorization

    Section 3201 would authorize $17 million for the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. The committee plans to conduct 
a thorough review of the activities and recommendations of the 
board during its consideration of the Department of Energy's 
fiscal year 1997 budget request.

                TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE


                   National Defense Stockpile Issues

    The committee continues to be concerned that the Department 
of Defense does not have a realistic or tangible plan that 
contributes to the planning guidance needed to maintain the 
National Defense Stockpile. The Strategic and Critical 
Materials Stock Piling Act (Public Law 103-337) requires the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a biennial report on stockpile 
requirements to include his recommendations with respect to 
stockpile requirements, and any revised national emergency 
planning assumptions used in determining the stockpile 
requirements. Even though the Department has had two years to 
prepare this required report, it has not been received to date 
by the committee. It is difficult for the committee to provide 
proper oversight on this important national security component 
absent the Department's required planning guidance.
    The Department has requested authority to transfer $150 
million from sales of materials from the stockpile to the 
services operations and maintenance accounts. Because the 
Department has not provided Congress with the statutorily 
required report on stockpile requirements, the committee has 
not considered the requested transfer authority for fiscal year 
1996. The committee has insufficient information upon which to 
base national security decisions concerning the stockpile.

                         Legislative Provisions


    section 3301--fiscal year 1996 authorized use of stockpile funds

    This section would authorize $77.1 million from the 
National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund for the operations 
and maintenance of the National Defense Stockpile for fiscal 
year 1996. The section would also permit the use of additional 
funds for extraordinary or emergency conditions after a 
notification to Congress.

section 3302--preference for domestic upgraders in disposal of chromite 
 and manganese ores and chromium ferro and manganese metal electrolytic

    This section would require that in any disposal from the 
National Defense Stockpile of chromite and manganese ores of 
metallurgical grade or chromium ferro and manganese metal 
electrolytic, a right of first refusal shall be given to 
domestic ferroalloy upgraders.

       section 3303--restrictions on disposal of manganese ferro

    This section would preclude the disposal of high carbon 
manganese ferro in the National Defense Stockpile until 
completing the disposal of all manganese ferro that does not 
meet the National Defense Stockpile classification of Grade 
One, Specification 30(a), as revised on May 22, 1992.

   section 3304--titanium initiative to support battle tank upgrade 
                                program

    This section would direct the transfer of up to 250 short 
tons per year for the next eight years of titanium sponge from 
the National Defense Stockpile to the Secretary of the Army for 
use in the weight reduction portion of the main battle tank 
upgrade program. This transfer would be without charge except 
for transportation and other related costs.

                  TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE


                  Naval Petroleum & Oil Shale Reserves

    The Department of Energy (DOE) proposed in its fiscal year 
1996 budget request to reduce the funding for the Naval 
Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves (NPOSR) to a ``caretaker'' 
status, that a government corporation be established for a 
period of two years, and then to sell the NPOSR. In testimony 
before the committee, DOE stated that the caretaker status for 
the NPOSR was an incentive for Congress to seriously consider 
the corporatization and then sale proposal. In a reversal of 
its budget proposal, DOE subsequently submitted a proposal to 
Congress to sell the NPOSR and, failing that, to corporatize 
the reserves.
    The committee is concerned that operating the NPOSR in a 
caretaker status may cause the considerable loss of revenue for 
these profitable resources and could reduce their value. The 
committee notes that the NPOSR have returned a net of over $13 
billion to the treasury since 1977 with many more years of 
profitable operations expected. The reduction of operating 
funds for the NPOSR for fiscal year 1996 will mean the loss of 
between $130 to $150 million.
    The committee believes that corporatization of the NPOSR 
for only two years makes no sense as there is no reason to 
believe that another government entity could operate the 
reserves any better. It is the committee's view that the 
federal government should not be in the commercial oil business 
and the NPOSR could never be managed in the most cost-efficient 
manner under federal government control. The committee also 
believes that it is possible for independent commercial oil 
field assessors to establish a fair market price, at least for 
NPR-1 and Elk Hills, and establish a minimum asking price.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 3403) 
that would mandate that NPR-1 be sold within one year. This 
provision would provide several requirements for the Secretary 
of Energy to ensure an impartial and fair assessment. In 
addition, the provision would direct that DOE study the 
remaining NPOSR and provide recommendations by December 31, 
1995, on the most cost-effective future of these reserves 
considering the status quo, sale, lease, or the transfer to 
other federal agencies of any or part of the remaining 
reserves.
    Section 3403 would also intend to resolve the State of 
California's claim to two sections of land located in Naval 
Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 (sections 16 and 36 of township 30 
south, range 23 east, Mount Diablo Principal Meridian, 
California) that have been the subject of a long-standing 
dispute between the State and the Federal government. In 
exchange for relinquishing its claim, the State will receive 
seven percent of the gross sales proceeds from the sale of the 
Reserve that remain after the direct expenses of the sale are 
taken into account. It is the intent of the committee that upon 
receipt of the proceeds from the sale by the Federal 
government, payment to the State of California of its share 
shall be made promptly.

                         Legislative Provisions


             section 3401--authorization of appropriations

    This section would authorize the appropriations of 
$101,028,000 for fiscal year 1996 for the Department of Energy 
for the operation of the Naval Petroleum Reserves.

  section 3402--price requirement on sale of certain petroleum during 
                            fiscal year 1996

    This section would require the Secretary of Energy to sell 
petroleum produced for the Naval Petroleum Reserves at 
established prices.

  section 3403--sale of naval petroleum reserve numbered 1 (elk hills)

    This section would require the Secretary of Energy to sell 
Naval Petroleum within one year. The section would also require 
that equity finalization between the unit partners at Elk Hills 
be completed five months after enactment.

section 3404--study regarding future of naval petroleum reserves (other 
                than naval petroleum reserve numbered 1)

    This section would require the Secretary of Energy to 
conduct a study to determine future options regarding the Naval 
Petroleum Reserves (except Elk Hills) that represents the most 
cost-effective option for the United States and report to the 
committee by December 31, 1995.

                  TITLE XXXV--PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION


              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

    On January 4, 1995, jurisdiction and responsibility in the 
House of Representatives for the annual authorization for the 
Panama Canal Commission (PCC) was transferred to the National 
Security Committee. The Commission operates as a government 
agency and is supervised by a nine member supervisory board, 
commonly referred to as the Panama Canal Commission Board of 
Directors.
    The Panama Canal Commission does not draw from U.S. 
taxpayer funds for operation of the Canal, but receives funding 
to cover its operating, administrative, and capital improvement 
expenses from tolls and other revenue collected. The Commission 
must receive an annual or semi-annual authorization to spend 
money it collects. The Commission must also receive an annual 
or semi-annual authorization for administrative expenditures. 
The Panama Canal Commission's total operating costs including 
depreciation and interest payments in Fiscal Year 1996 are 
estimated at $571 million. This subtitle grants the Commission 
authority to make expenditures from the Panama Canal Commission 
Resolving Fund within existing statutory limits for operating 
and maintenance expenses and sets a limit of $50,741,000 for 
administrative expenses.

   Subtitle B--Reconstitution of Commission as Government Corporation

    Section 3522 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484) required that the 
President review and report on possible changes to the Panama 
Canal Commission to facilitate the operation of the Canal as an 
autonomous entity after it is transferred to Panama at the end 
of 1999. This report with recommendations was transmitted to 
the Congress on April 12, 1994. The major features of the 
Administration's proposed legislative changes to the Panama 
Canal Commission are: (1) convert the Commission to a 
government corporation, although it would still be classified 
as an agency of the United States. Private audit procedures 
would be adopted; (2) change the Board of Directors so that no 
sectoral representation would be required, and two non-voting 
``international advisors'' could be invited to Board meetings; 
(3) The role of the Department of Defense representative on the 
Board would not change; he or she would retain the directed 
vote; (4) Changes in tolls would no longer require approval by 
the President of the United States; (5) The Commission would 
still be part of the federal budget process, under the 
provisions of the Government Corporation Control Act. The 
Commission would no longer require appropriations authority for 
its administrative expenses, however, the Commission would 
still be subject to an annual authorization and appropriate 
oversight by the Congress. The committee accepted the 
recommendations of the Administration for changes to the 
composition and operation of the Commission with only minor 
clarifying changes. The Committee notes that an earlier study 
on the role of the Department of Defense in the Commission's 
structure had recommended that the DOD representative not have 
the directed vote. The committee examined this issue and 
accepted the Administration's recommendation that this change 
in the authority of the Department of Defense could negatively 
affect the transition coordination among U.S. Government 
agencies. The committee also largely accepted the remaining 
Administration recommendations on modifications to the 
composition and operation of the Commission, making only minor 
or clarifying changes.

                           DEPARTMENTAL DATA

    The Department of Defense requested legislation, in 
accordance with the program of the President, as illustrated by 
the correspondence set out below:

              DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION REQUEST

                             Department of Defense,
                                 Office of General Counsel,
                                    Washington, DC, April 20, 1995.
Hon. Newt Gingrich,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker. The Department of Defense proposes the 
enclosed draft of legislation, ``To authorize appropriations 
for fiscal year 1996 for military activities of the Department 
of Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for 
fiscal year 1996, and for other purposes.''
    This legislative proposal is part of the Department of 
Defense legislative program for the 104th Congress and is 
needed to carry out the President's budget plans for fiscal 
year 1996. The Office of Management and Budget advises that 
there is no objection to the presentation of this proposal to 
the Congress and that its enactment would be in accord with the 
program of the President.
    This bill provides management authority for the Department 
of Defense in fiscal year 1996 and makes several changes to the 
authorities under which we operate. These changes are designed 
to permit a more efficient operation of the Department of 
Defense.
    Enactment of this legislation is of great importance to the 
Department of Defense and the Department urges its speedy and 
favorable consideration.
            Sincerely,
                                                   Judith A. Miller
    Enclosure.
                                ------                                


              MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION REQUEST

                             Department of Defense,
                                 Office of General Counsel,
                                    Washington, DC, April 24, 1995.
Hon. Newt Gingrich,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker. The Department of Defense proposes the 
following draft of legislation that would authorize certain 
construction at military installations for Fiscal Year 1996, 
and for other purposes. The bill would be called the ``Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996.'' This 
proposal is necessary to execute the President's Fiscal Year 
1996 budget plan. It is drafted to be a principle division of 
the departmental authorization legislation.
    The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is 
no objection to the presentation of this proposal to Congress, 
and that its enactment would be in accord with the program of 
the President.
    This proposal would authorize appropriations in Fiscal Year 
1996 for new construction and family housing support for the 
Active Forces, Defense Agencies, NATO Infrastructure Program, 
and Guard and Reserve Forces. The proposal establishes the 
effective dates for the program. The proposal includes 
construction projects resulting from base realignment and 
closure actions. Additionally, the Fiscal Year 1996 draft 
legislation includes General Provisions.
    Enactment of this legislation is of great importance to the 
Department of Defense and the Department urges its favorable 
consideration.
            Sincerely,
                                                  Judith A. Miller.
    Enclosure.
                                ------                                


                           COMMITTEE POSITION

    On May 24, 1995, the Committee on National Security, a 
quorum being present, approved H.R. 1530, as amended, by a vote 
of 48 to 3.

                  COMMUNICATIONS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES

                          House of Representatives,
                      Committee on International Relations,
                                      Washington, DC, May 31, 1995.
Hon. Floyd Spence,
Chairman, Committee on National Security, House of Representatives, 
        Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I understand that on Wednesday, May 24, 
1995, the Committee on National Security ordered favorably 
reported H.R. 1530, the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1996. The bill includes a number of provisions that 
fall within the legislative jurisdiction of the Committee on 
International Relations pursuant to Rule X(k) of the House of 
Representatives.
    The specific provisions within our committee's jurisdiction 
are: (1) Title II, Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense Act of 
1995 (except for Section 233--Implementation of Policy and 
Section 236--Ballistic Missile Defense Program Accountability); 
(2) Section 242--Policy Concerning Ballistic Missile Defense; 
(3) Section 244--Repeal of Missile Defense Provisions; (4) 
Section 389--Transfer of Excess Personal Property to Support 
Law Enforcement Activities; (5) Section 807--International 
Competitiveness; (6) Section 1032--Repeal of Miscellaneous 
Provisions of Law (Subsections (a) and (g); (7) Title XI--
Cooperative Threat Reduction With States of Former Soviet Union 
(Sections 1101-1107); (8) Title XII, Subtitle A--Peacekeeping 
Provisions (Sections 1201-1202); (9) Title XII, Subtitle B-- 
Humanitarian Assistance Programs (Sections 1211-1213); (10) 
Title XII, Subtitle C--Other Matters (Sections 1221-1227); and 
(11) Section 3131--Authority to Conduct Program Relating to 
Fissile Materials.
    Pursuant to Chairman Solomon's announcement that the 
Committee on Rules will move expeditiously to consider a rule 
for H.R. 1530 and your desire to have the bill considered on 
the House floor the week of June 12, 1995, and in recognition 
that both of our staffs have been consulting on these 
provisions, the Committee on International Relations will not 
seek a sequential referral of the bill as a result of including 
these provisions, without waiving or ceding now or in the 
future this committee's jurisdiction over the provisions in 
question. I will seek to have conferees appointed for these 
provisions during any House-Senate conference committee.
    I would appreciate your including this letter as a part of 
the report on H.R. 1530 and as part of the record during 
consideration of the bill by the House of Representatives.
    With best wishes,
            Sincerely,
                                      Benjamin A. Gilman, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                                     Committee on Commerce,
                                      Washington, DC, May 31, 1995.
Hon. Floyd Spence,
Chairman, Committee on National Security, House of Representatives, 
        Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: On May 24, 1995, the Committee on 
National Security ordered reported H.R. 1530, a bill to 
authorize appropriations for the Department of Defense for 
Fiscal Year 1996, and for other purposes.
    During the markup of this legislation, the Committee 
adopted the following provisions which fall within the 
jurisdiction of the Committee on Commerce:
    Section 325--Elimination of Authority to Transfer Amounts 
for Toxicological Profiles;
    Section 357--Procurement of Electricity from Most 
Economical Source;
    Section 601--Military Pay Raise for Fiscal Year 1995;
    Section 3103--Payment of Penalties;
    Section 3201--Authorization for the Defense Nuclear 
Facilities Safety Board;
    Section 3402--Price Requirement on Sale of Certain 
Petroleum During Fiscal Year 1996;
    Section 3403--Authorization to sell the Elk Hills Naval 
Petroleum Reserve; and
    Section 3404--Study Regarding Future of Naval Petroleum 
Reserves (Other than Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1).
    In recognition of your Committee's desire to bring this 
legislation expeditiously before the House, the Commerce 
Committee will not seek sequential referral of the bill based 
on the provisions listed above. By agreeing not to seek a 
sequential referral of the bill, the Commerce Committee does 
not waive its jurisdiction over these provisions. In addition, 
the Commerce Committee reserves its authority to seek equal 
conferees on these and any other provisions of the bill that 
are within the Commerce Committee's jurisdiction during any 
House-Senate conference that may be convened on this 
legislation.
    I want to thank you and your staff for your assistance in 
providing the Commerce Committee with a fair opportunity to 
evaluate its jurisdictional interests in H.R. 1530.
    I would appreciate your including this letter as a part of 
the Committee's report on H.R. 1530 and as part of the record 
during consideration of this bill by the House.
    With best wishes,
            Sincerely,
                           Thomas J. Bliley, Jr., Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
              Committee on Economic and Educational
                                             Opportunities,
                                      Washington, DC, May 23, 1995.
Hon. Floyd Spence,
Chairman, Committee on National Security, House of Representatives, 
        Washington, DC.
     Dear Chairman Spence: Thank you for working with me in 
your development of a pilot program to assess the feasibility 
of using private contractors to operate schools under the 
Defense Dependents' Education Act of 1978 which you intend to 
adopt and report this week. As you know, these provisions are 
within the sole jurisdiction of the Economic and Educational 
Opportunities Committee.
    We do not intend to seek sequential referral of H.R. 1530 
containing this program. However, the Committee does hold an 
interest in preserving its future jurisdiction with respect to 
issues raised in the aforementioned program, and its 
jurisdictional prerogatives should the provisions of this bill 
or any Senate amendments thereto be considered in a conference 
with the Senate. We would expect to be appointed as conferees 
on these provisions should a conference with the Senate arise.
    Again, I thank you for working with me in developing the 
amendments to H.R. 1530 and look forward to working with you on 
these issues in the future.
            Sincerely,
                                           Bill Goodling, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of representatives,
                            Committee on National Security,
                                      Washington, DC, May 30, 1995.
Hon. William F. Goodling,
Chairman, Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities, U.S. 
        House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Committee on Armed Services has just 
completed mark-up of H.R. 1530, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996.
    A provision has been included in the bill involving the 
Defense Dependents' Education Act of 1978 that falls within the 
legislative jurisdiction of the Committee on Economic and 
Educational Opportunities.
    I appreciate your cooperation in not seeking sequential 
referral of the bill. I understand and agree that such action 
shall not be construed as a waiver of your committee's 
jurisdictional interest. Your letter and this reply will be 
included in the committee's report on H.R. 1530.
    Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
            Sincerely,
                                         Floyd D. Spence, Chairman.

                              FISCAL DATA

    Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 
of Representatives, the committee attempted to ascertain annual 
outlays resulting from the bill during fiscal year 1996 and the 
four following fiscal years. The results of such efforts are 
reflected in the cost estimate prepared by the Director of the 
Congressional Budget Office under section 403 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, which is included in this 
report pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(C) of House rule XI.

                  Congressional Budget Office Estimate

    In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, the cost estimate 
prepared by the Congressional Budget Office and submitted 
pursuant to section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 
is as follows:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                      Washington, DC, May 30, 1995.
Hon. Floyd Spence,
Chairman, Committee on National Security, House of Representatives, 
        Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the attached cost estimate for H.R. 1530, the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, as ordered 
reported by the House Committee on National Security on May 24, 
1995.
    The bill would affect direct spending and receipts, and 
thus would be subject to pay-as-you-go procedures under section 
252 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act.
    If you wish, we would be pleased to provide further details 
on the estimate.
             Sincerely,
                                                   June E. O'Neill.
Attachment.

                      Congressional Budget Office


                             Cost Estimate

    1. Bill number: H.R. 1530.
    2. Bill title: National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1996.
    3. Bill status: As ordered reported by the House Committee 
on National Security on May 24, 1995.
    4. Bill purpose: This bill would authorize appropriations 
for 1996 for the military functions of the Department of 
Defense (DoD) and the Department of Energy (DoE). This bill 
also would prescribe personnel strengths for each active duty 
and selected reserve component.
    5. Estimated cost to the Federal Government: Table 1 
summarizes the budgetary effects of the bill. It shows the 
effects of the bill on direct spending, revenues, and asset 
sales and on authorizations of appropriations for 1996. 
Assuming appropriation of the amounts authorized, the bill 
would increase funding for discretionary programs in 1996 by 
$5.5 billion over the 1995 appropriated level, although outlays 
would decline by $3.2 billion.
    Table 2 shows the costs of provisions with the greatest 
direct spending and revenue impacts. Table 3 details the 
effects of Title XXXIV of the bill, which would provide for the 
sale of the Naval Petroleum Reserve at Elk Hills, California. 
Table 4 gives further details on authorizations of 
appropriations, including those affecting years after 1996.
    6. Basis of estimate: The estimate assumes that the bill 
will be enacted by October 1, 1995, and that the amounts 
authorized will be appropriated for 1996. Outlays are estimated 
according to historical spending patterns.
    Direct Spending, Revenues, and Asset Sales.--The bill 
contains several provisions that would affect direct spending 
or revenues, and thus would subject the bill to pay-as-you-go 
procedures under section 252 of the Balanced Budget and 
Emergency Deficit Control Act (see Table 2). The provisions 
involve selling the Naval Petroleum Reserve at Elk Hills, 
forgoing the recovery in foreign military sales of certain 
nonrecurring costs, spending proceeds from property 
transactions, and other matters related to compensation and 
retirement of certain personnel.

     TABLE 1.--BUDGETARY IMPACT OF H.R. 1530 AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY
                                    [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   1995       1996       1997       1998       1999       2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   DIRECT SPENDING, REVENUES, AND ASSET SALES
Direct Spending:
    Estimated Budget Authority................          0        116        460        480        474        475
    Estimated Outlays.........................          0        113        458        479        473        475
Revenues......................................          0          4         17          0          0          0
Asset Sales:
    Estimated Budget Authority................          0     -1,502          0          0          0          0
    Estimated Outlays.........................          0     -1,502          0          0          0          0
 
                                    SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATIONS ACTION
 
Spending Under Current Law:
    Budget Authority..........................    262,614          0          0          0          0          0
    Estimated Outlays.........................    269,943     91,575     39,320     17,893      8,784      3,825
Proposed Changes:
    Authorization Level.......................          0    268,131          0          0          0          0
    Estimated Outlays.........................          0    175,212     53,931     20,497      9,363      4,197
Spending Under H.R. 1530:
    Authorization Level \1\...................    262,614    268,131          0          0          0          0
    Estimated Outlays.........................    269,943    266,787     93,251     38,390     18,147      8,022
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1995 figure is the amount appropriated for programs authorized by this bill.
 
Note: Costs of the bill would fall under budget function 050, National Defense, except for the sale of the Naval
  Petroleum Reserve (functions 270 and 950) and certain other items as noted.

    Naval Petroleum Reserve. Title XXXIV would require that the 
Department of Energy sell Reserve 1 (Elk Hills) of the Naval 
Petroleum Reserve under certain conditions and procedures, 
direct the department to conduct a study regarding the future 
of the reserves remaining under government ownership, and 
authorize the appropriation of $101 million for the operation 
of all of the reserves in fiscal year 1996.

                           TABLE 2.--DIRECT SPENDING AND REVENUE IMPACTS OF H.R. 1530
                                    [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       1996     1997     1998     1999     2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 DIRECT SPENDING
Naval Petroleum Reserve............................................      105      450      444      418      397
Cost Recovery in Foreign Military Sales............................        0        0       25       48       70
Retirement Benefits for Civilians..................................        3        6        7        4        4
Property Transactions..............................................        1        2        3        3        4
Dependent Compensation.............................................        4        0        0        0        0
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
    Total Direct Spending..........................................      113      458      479      473      475
 
                                                    REVENUES
Retirement Benefits for Civilians..................................        4       17        0        0        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the provisions in this bill, the sale of the Elk 
Hills reserve would have three types of budgetary impacts over 
the 1996-2000 period (see Table 3). First, we estimate that 
selling the reserve would yield about $1.5 billion in 
nonroutine asset sale receipts by the end of fiscal year 1996. 
Although such receipts would reduce the deficit, they would not 
count as pay-as-you-go savings under the Balanced Budget and 
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985. For the purposes of this 
estimate, we assume that the government would be paid upon 
approval of the contracts of sale in fiscal year 1996. Under 
this bill, the costs associated with administering the sale, 
which are estimated to total less than $2 million, would be 
deducted from the proceeds. Second, paying seven percent of the 
net proceeds from the sale to the state of California would 
result in direct spending of an estimated $105 million in 1996, 
which would be counted for pay-as-you-go purposes. Third, 
beginning in 1997, the government would forgo the offsetting 
receipts that otherwise would have been collected from the sale 
of oil and related products from Elk Hills. These receipts, 
which are included in budget function 270, are projected to 
total about $400 million annually under current law through 
2000.

  TABLE 3.--BUDGETARY IMPACT OF TITLE XXXIV (NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES) OF H.R. 1530 AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE
                                      HOUSE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY
                                    [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Category                        1995       1996       1997       1998       1999       2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATIONS ACTION
Projected Spending Under Current Law:
    Budget Authority \1\......................        187          0          0          0          0          0
    Estimated Outlays.........................        199         89         26          0          0          0
Proposed Changes
    Authorization Level.......................          0        101          0          0          0          0
    Estimated Outlays.........................          0         56         30         13          0          0
Projected Spending Under Title XXXIV
    Authorization Levela......................        187        101          0          0          0          0
    Estimated Outlays.........................        199        144         56         13          0          0
 
                                                 DIRECT SPENDING
Payment of Sale Proceeds to California
    Estimated Budget Authority................          0        105          0          0          0          0
    Estimated Outlays.........................          0        105          0          0          0          0
Forgone Offsetting Receipts from Elk Hills
    Estimated Budget Authority................          0          0        450        444        418        397
 
    Estimated Outlays.........................          0          0        450        444        418        397
                                               ASSET SALE RECEIPTS
Proceeds from the Sale of Elk Hills
    Estimated Budget Authority................          0     -1,500          0          0          0          0
    Estimated Outlays.........................          0     -1,500          0          0          0          0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1995 amount represents funds already appropriated.
 
Note: Under current law, forgone offsetting receipts would count as an increase in direct spending, which is
  subject to pay-as-you-go procedures, while nonroutine asset sale receipts do not count as deficit reduction
  for pay-as-you-go purposes. Authorization changes also have no pay-as-you-go implications; rather, they are
  subject to the discretionary spending caps.

    For the purposes of this estimate, CBO assumes that the 
$101 million authorized for fiscal year 1996 will be 
appropriated and will be spent at historical rates. 
Appropriation of this amount would represent a significant 
reduction relative to current levels of operational support and 
could result in a loss of receipts of up to $75 million in 
1996. Any loss of receipts resulting from lower appropriations 
would not be attributed to H.R. 1530. We also assume that the 
authorization for 1996 includes any amounts needed to fund 
DOE's study of the future of the other naval petroleum 
reserves. Based on information from DOE, we estimate that this 
study would cost about $400,000.
    Cost Recovery in Foreign Military Sales. Section 807 would 
strike the section of the Arms Export Control Act that requires 
government-to-government sales of major defense equipment to 
include a charge for the recovery of a proportionate amount of 
any nonrecurring cost of research, development, and production. 
This provision would apply to sales agreements signed after the 
date of enactment. Charges for nonrecurring costs are collected 
upon delivery; therefore the bill would not affect collections 
until 1998. CBO estimates that enactment of section 807 would 
lower Department of Defense receipts by $25 million in 1998, 
$48 million in 1999, and $70 million in 2000.
    Retirement Benefits for Civilians. Section 338 would allow 
certain federal workers who were employed by nonappropriated 
fund instrumentalities (NAFI), and who are currently employed 
by the Department of Defense or the legislative branch and who 
are covered under the Federal Employees Retirement System, to 
receive retirement credit for their NAFI service. Employees 
would have to contribute to the retirement trust fund for each 
year of service for which they wish to receive credit. The bill 
limits the number of people who can apply for service credit in 
three ways. First, only employees who converted from a 
nonappropriated fund positions to appropriated fund positions 
after 1986 may apply. Second, the bill does not cover employees 
who convert in the future--the application period ends six 
months after enactment of the bill. Lastly, employees would no 
longer be able to apply for service credit once the Office of 
Personnel Management (OPM) determines that the actuarial 
present value of all benefits payable as a result of the 
enactment of this section has reached $50 million. CBO assumes, 
however, that OPM would not be able to implement this 
requirement and keep people from applying for credit.
    CBO estimates that approximately 8,000 employees would 
choose to purchase additional retirement credit, increasing 
revenues in 1996 and 1997 by $4 million and $17 million, 
respectively. Additional spending for annuity payments would 
total $3 million in 1996, $6 million in 1997, $7 million in 
1998, $4 million in 1999, and $4 million in 2000.
    Property Transactions. Section 388 would provide permanent 
authority for DoD to sell certain property abandoned on 
military installations and use the proceeds for morale, 
welfare, and recreation activities. This provision would result 
in asset sales that would total less than $500,000 annually 
with direct spending of the same amount.
    Section 2824 would allow the Army to spend the proceeds 
from selling certain property at the former Fort Ord Military 
Complex on morale, welfare, and recreation (MWR) activities. 
Under current law, the proceeds would be used to meet the costs 
of closing bases. Under H.R. 1530, an increase in discretionary 
appropriations of about $15 million would be needed to meet the 
base closing costs.
    Section 2832 would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force 
to convey at fair market value a portion of Elmendorf Air Force 
Base in Anchorage, Alaska. The proceeds from this asset sale, 
which would total about $2 million, would be available for 
expenditure only if appropriated by the Congress.
    Section 2812 would allow DoD to deposit proceeds from 
certain leases into the account used to fund base closures. 
Once deposited, the proceeds would be available for 
expenditure. Under current law, the lease proceeds, which would 
total about $4 million annually, are unavailable for 
expenditure unless appropriated by the Congress. Under this 
provision, direct spending would total about $1 million in 1996 
and would increase to $4 million by 2000.
    Other Provisions. Section 551 would lower military 
retirement annuities for officers who are unable to perform 
their duties because of desertion, absence, confinement, or 
other such factors. A lower annuity would result because the 
lost time would not be credited toward their time of service. 
Although some officers would extend their service to make up 
for the lost time, others would not. The savings associated 
with this provision are expected to be insignificant.
    Section 556 would compensate dependents of military 
personnel who are victims of abuse by their military sponsor. 
Public Law 103-160 provided up to 36 months of payments to 
these dependents, but the regulations outlining how payments 
are to be made were not completed until six months following 
enactment. This provision would compel the Secretary of Defense 
to make payments to beneficiaries who became eligible for 
payments during that six-month period. Approximately 260 
families would receive retroactive payments totalling $4 
million.
    Section 517 would establish a program to insure reserve 
personnel against a loss of personal income during certain 
periods of active duty. Participants would pay premiums into a 
fund administered by the Secretary of the Treasury, and 
benefits would be paid out to eligible recipients subject to 
the availability of funds. CBO is unable to estimate the 
participation rate in such a program or the amount of premiums 
each individual would pay. Nevertheless, no net additional 
spending would occur as a result of this provision in the long 
run because the value of benefits would be limited to the 
assets of the fund.
    Section 742 would waive reimbursement to the government 
from individuals who received health care under the Civilian 
Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS) 
even though they are eligible for Medicare. According to DoD, 
last year it received about $140,000 from people who received 
care through CHAMPUS instead of Medicare. The five-year costs 
of this provision would be less than $1 million.

Authorizations of Appropriations

    The bill specifically authorizes appropriations of $199 
billion for 1996 for operation and maintenance, procurement, 
research, development, test and evaluation, nuclear weapons 
programs and other DoD programs. These authorizations fall 
under National Defense, budget function 050.
    In addition, the bill would authorize appropriations for 
other budget functions:
    The bill would authorize $101 million for operating the 
Naval Petroleum Reserve (function 270) in 1996.
    It would authorize appropriations of $59 million for the 
Armed Forces Retirement Home (function 700).
    Section 2806 of the bill would establish a pilot program to 
lower interest rates temporarily on veterans' housing loans in 
areas that the Secretary of Defense designates as having 
housing shortages. The section authorizes $3 million a year to 
be appropriated to cover administrative costs (function 700) 
and $10 million in 1996 to buy down loans (function 050). 
According to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the 
average loan would be about $65,000. CBO estimates that the 
cost would be about $3,240 a loan and that about 3,100 
borrowers would benefit. This provision would also affect the 
Guaranty and Indemnity Fund program account to the extent that 
it increases participation in the VA loan program. If all of 
the new authority is used for additional loan originations, the 
estimated guaranty cost to the government would be at most $8 
million. However, the lack of available demographic data 
prevents a precise estimate of this cost.
    The bill also contains both specific and implicit 
authorizations of appropriations for other military programs, 
primarily for military personnel costs, some of which extend 
beyond 1996. Table 4 contains estimates for the amounts 
authorized and the related outlays. The following sections 
describe the estimated authorizations shown in Table 4 and 
provide information about CBO's cost estimates.
    Endstrength. The bill would authorize active and reserve 
component endstrengths for 1996 at a cost of almost $68 
billion. Endstrengths specifically stated in the bill for 
active-duty personnel would total about 1,485,000--the same as 
the Administration's request and about 38,000 below the level 
estimated for 1995. In addition, the bill would authorize 
appropriations in the amount of $112 million to be used to fund 
a higher endstrength. CBO estimates that approximately 7,600 
military personnel would be added as a result of this 
provision. Thus, the net effect on endstrength relative to the 
1995 level is a reduction of slightly more than 30,000 people.
    DoD's reserve endstrength would be authorized at about 
927,000 for 1996--the same as the Administration's request, but 
about 38,000 less than the level estimated for 1995. Also, the 
bill would authorize an endstrength of 8,000 in 1996 for the 
Coast Guard Reserve, which is the same as the Administration 
requested and the 1995 level; this authorization would cost 
about $65 million and would fall under budget function 400, 
Transportation.
    Compensation and Benefits. Section 601 would authorize a 
2.4 percent increase in the rates of basic pay and subsistence 
for military personnel, the same amount as contained in the 
Administration's budget. The cost of this increase relative to 
1995 rates of pay is about $1 billion.
    This section would also call for the basic allowance for 
quarters (BAQ) to increase by 5.2 percent. Under current law 
BAQ increases according to the military pay raise; 
consequently, the 2.4 percent pay raise authorized in this bill 
would raise BAQ by $83 million. The provisions that would raise 
BAQ the additional 2.8 percent would cost another $97 million. 
Thus, BAQ would increase by $180 million compared to 1995 
rates.
    Section 604 would make two changes that would increase 
Variable Housing Allowance (VHA) payments to servicemembers 
living in areas with high housing costs. The first change would 
increase the minimum payment to junior enlisted personnel at a 
cost of about $200 million annually. Because this provision 
would not take effect until July 1, 1996, costs in 1996 would 
be $50 million. The second change would protect members' VHA 
rates from being reduced during a tour of duty. VHA rates are 
calculated annually for different localities and may change 
depending on fluctuations in local housing costs. Most tours of 
duty last longer than one year, and VHA may be recalculated 
several times during that period. This provision would allow 
only increases in the payment, unless individual members were 
able to lower their housing expenses. The cost of this change 
is $18 million annually. Because the provision would not take 
effect until January 1, 1996, its first-year costs would total 
$13 million.
    Several sections would extend for two or more years certain 
payment authorities that are scheduled to expire at the end of 
1995 or 1996. Payment authorities for enlistment and 
reenlistment bonuses for active duty personnel would cost $137 
million in 1997. Extension of various bonus programs for 
Selected Reserve personnel would increase costs by $48 million 
in 1997. Authorities to make certain payments to medical 
professionals would also be extended--payments related to the 
pay grade of new physicians would cost about $1 million in 
1996, and special payments to others, including nurse officer 
candidates, registered nurses, and nurse anesthetists, would 
increase authorizations by $11.6 million in 1997 and 1998. 
Finally, extensions of special payments for aviators and 
nuclear-qualified personnel would total $15 million in 1996, 
$12 million in 1997, $21 million in 1998, and $8 million in 
1999 and 2000.
    Section 553 would establish a new education benefit for 
reserve personnel that would cost about $16 million in 1997 
rising to about $80 million in 2000. Reserve personnel in 
skills or specialties designated by the Secretary of Defense 
would be eligible for additional education benefits of as much 
as $350 a month. According to DoD, the program would begin as a 
pilot program. Assuming that preparing the program takes one 
year, there would be no significant costs until 1997, when 
about 10,000 reservists would be offered the benefit. 
Eligibility is expected to double by 2000.

 TABLE 4.--AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS IN THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT, 1996 AS ORDERED REPORTED
                                   BY THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY
                                    [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Category                             1996       1997       1998       1999       2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stated Authorizations....................................    198,760          3          3          3          3
Estimated Outlays........................................    109,053     50,503     20,601      9,432      4,227
Endstrengths:
    Function 050:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................     67,722          0          0          0          0
        Estimated Outlays................................     64,317      3,405          0          0          0
    Function 400:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................         65          0          0          0          0
        Estimated Outlays................................         59          7          0          0          0
Compensation and Benefits:
    Military Pay Raise:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................      1,036      1,359      1,346      1,343      1,343
        Estimated Outlays................................        984      1,343      1,347      1,343      1,343
    Basic Allowance for Quarters:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................         97        131        134        136        139
        Estimated Outlays................................         92        129        134        136        139
    Variable Housing Allowance:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................         63        220        224        229        236
        Estimated Outlays................................         60        212        224        229        236
    Expiring Authorities--Active Duty:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................          0        137        173         74         68
        Estimated Outlays................................          0        130        171         79         68
    Expiring Authorities--Reserves:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................          0         48         64         33         33
        Estimated Outlays................................          0         46         63         35         33
    Expiring Authorities--Medical:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................          1         12         12          0          0
        Estimated Outlays................................          1         11         12          1          0
    Expiring Authorities--Aviation & Nuclear:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................         15         12         21          8          8
        Estimated Outlays................................         14         12         21          9          8
    Education Benefits Reserve:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................          0         16         32         48         80
        Estimated Outlays................................          0         15         31         47         78
    Shipboard Housing Allowance:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................          4         20         24         24         25
        Estimated Outlays................................          4         19         24         24         25
    Basic Allowance for Subsistence:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................        -11        -22        -23        -23        -24
        Estimated Outlays................................        -10        -21        -23        -23        -24
    Special Pay for Recruiters:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................         14         19         19         19         19
        Estimated Outlays................................         13         19         19         19         19
    Sea Pay for Tender Crews:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................         10         10         10         10         10
        Estimated Outlays................................          9         10         10         10         10
    Pay Grade Limitations:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................          4          8          8          8          8
        Estimated Outlays................................          4          8          8          8          8
    Pay of Prisoners:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................         -6         -6         -6         -7         -7
        Estimated Outlays................................         -6         -6         -6         -7         -7
    1996 Retirement COLA:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................        403          0          0          0          0
        Estimated Outlays................................        403          0          0          0          0
Health Care Provisions:
    CHAMPUS Benefits:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................          a          9          9          8          8
        Estimated Outlays................................          a          7          9          8          8
    Medical/Dental for Selected Reserve:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................          a          5          6          6          6
        mated Outlays....................................          a          4          6          6          6
    TRIARE Evaluation/Report:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................          0          3          5          5          5
        Estimated Outlays................................          0          2          5          5          5
    Acquisition Work Force Reductions:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................      (\1\)       -284       -751     -1,423     -1,615
        Estimated Outlays................................      (\1\)       -279       -737     -1,397     -1,585
    War Reserve Stocks:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................      (\1\)       -150       -150        -90          0
        Estimated Outlays................................      (\1\)       -120       -150       -102        -18
    Total Authorizations of Appropriations:
        Estimated Authorization Level....................    268,131      1,550      1,160        411        346
        Estimated Outlays from Authorizations for 1996...    175,212     53,931     20,497      9,363      4,197
        Estimated Outlays from Authorizations for 1997-            0      1,483      1,170        432        356
         2000............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1996 impacts of these provisions are included in the amounts specifically authorized to be appropriated
  in the bill.

    Based on the experience of similar programs, CBO estimates 
that about 65 percent of those eligible would use their 
benefit. Because the program would not reach steady state 
before 2000, outlays would increase yearly throughout the five-
year period.
    Section 603 would authorize payment of housing allowances 
to certain personnel in pay grade E-6 who are assigned to 
shipboard sea duty. This change would eventually affect 4,200 
personnel, who would receive housing allowances averaging 
$5,700 annually. Payments would not immediately increase in 
every case, however, because individuals would have to show 
proof of housing expenses in order to qualify for the payment. 
The effective date of the change would be July 1, 1996. Total 
payments would increase by $4 million in 1996, $20 million in 
1997, and about $24 million annually in 1998 through 2000.
    Section 602 would lower costs for payments of the Basic 
Allowance for Subsistence (BAS). BAS is a cash allowance paid 
to military members who do not eat in government dining 
facilities, or mess halls. Most BAS recipients are married or 
live in private housing, away from dormitories and barracks 
with mess halls. Still, more than 17 percent of Navy and Air 
Force personnel living in dormitories currently receive 
payments. This provision would allow a maximum of 12 percent of 
dormitory residents of each military service to receive BAS 
payments. This change would stop payments of about $2,600 a 
year to about 8,500 people, for an annual savings of $22 
million. This estimate assumes the reduction would be phased in 
gradually during 1996, for a savings of $11 million in that 
year.
    Section 617 would provide for an increase of up to $100 per 
month in the rate of special pay for enlisted personnel who 
serve as recruiters. Approximately 17,000 recruiters would 
receive increases averaging just under $100 per month. This 
change would be effective January 1, 1996, and would increase 
costs by $14 million in that year and $19 million annually 
thereafter.
    Section 616 would authorize the payment of career sea pay 
for duty on board submarine and destroyer tenders. This change 
would result in additional payments averaging $2,000 per year 
to about 5,100 personnel, at a total annual cost of $10 
million.
    Section 402 would provide temporary relief from the 
limitations on the number of officers who may serve on active 
duty in certain pay grades. The effect of this provision would 
be to increase promotions from the next lower pay grade. This 
change would affect about 3,000 officers in the Navy and Air 
Force and increase pay costs by $4 million in 1996 and by $8 
million a year thereafter.
    Section 542 would cause military personnel who are confined 
by sentence of court-martial to forfeit their pay and 
allowances. The Department of Defense estimates that payments 
currently made to this group total $16 million annually, 
including contributions to the military retirement trust fund 
on their behalf. Forfeiture would not be required for personnel 
with dependents, probably about 60 percent of the total 
population. Thus, annual savings from stopping payments to the 
remainder would amount to $6 million annually.
    Military Retirement Cost-of-Living Allowance. Section 633 
would move the effective date of the cost-of-living allowance 
(COLA) for military retirement annuities from September 1996 to 
March 1996 to the extent provided in an appropriations act. The 
six-month advance in the COLA would cost $403 million in 1996 
and would have no budgetary impact in later years. Because the 
COLA would be subject to appropriations action, its cost would 
be charged against the discretionary caps and would not be 
subject to pay-as-you-go procedures.
    Health Care Provisions. Section 701 would increase the 
number of routine physical examinations and immunizations 
covered by the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the 
Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS). Currently CHAMPUS only covers 
immunizations for children less than two years old. This 
provision would expand coverage to include preventive visits 
and immunizations for children up to 19 years old, and it would 
allow CHAMPUS to cover routine office visits for pap smears and 
mammograms. These provisions would cost about $34 million over 
the 1997-2000 period.
    Section 703 would provide annual medical and dental 
screenings to members of the Selected Reserve of the Army who 
are assigned to units scheduled for deployment within 75 days 
after mobilization. The provision would also provide full 
physical examinations to reservists aged 40 and over once every 
two years. Dental care would be provided to ensure that members 
meet the dental standards required for deployment. According to 
DoD, this provision would apply to about 57,500 reservists. 
Because of geographical constraints, most of the medical care 
would be contracted out. The legislation would also direct the 
Secretary of Defense to conduct a demonstration program to 
offer other members of the Selected Reserve affordable dental 
care at no cost to the department. These provisions would cost 
about $23 million over the 1997-2000 period.
    Section 715 would require DoD to use a federally funded 
research and development center to evaluate the effectiveness 
of the TRICARE program. Based on the cost of similar reports, 
this provision would cost approximately $5 million annually 
after full program implementation by the end of 1997.
    The bill contains several provisions that would have little 
or no cost during the next five years:
          Section 733 would allow DoD to collect information 
        regarding insurance, medical service, or health plans 
        of third-party payers of beneficiaries it covers. Use 
        of the Health Care Financing Administration's database 
        for such purposes would require annual funding of less 
        than $500,000.
          Section 735 would expand the Financial Assistance 
        Program for health care professionals in reserve 
        components to include dental specialties. Based on 
        historical rates, the Department of Defense would 
        expect no more than five oral surgeons to be enrolled 
        in the program at any one time. The five-year cost 
        would total less than $1 million.
          Section 741 would terminate the Psychopharmacology 
        Demonstration Program. This provision would save about 
        $1.5 million over five years.
          Section 744 would direct DoD to implement a 
        demonstration program to evaluate the feasibility of 
        providing additional shock trauma training for military 
        medical personnel through the use of civilian 
        hospitals. According to DoD, the program participants 
        would be assigned to shock trauma units for three- to 
        six-month periods and the number of military medical 
        personnel participating in the demonstration program 
        would be small. The expected annual costs would be 
        minimal.
    Acquisition Workforce Reductions. Section 902 would require 
that the Secretary of Defense to reduce by the end of 1999 the 
number of civilians in positions related to acquisition 
programs to 75 percent of 1994 levels. This would reduce the 
number of acquisition workers by 110,000, or 30,000 more than 
under the Administration's current plan, assuming reductions in 
the acquisition workforce are proportional to those in the 
overall DoD workforce. This change would result in savings of 
more than $4 billion from 1997 to 2002.
    The Federal Work Force Restructuring Act of 1994 (Public 
Law 103-226) stipulates that the number of full-time-equivalent 
(FTE) positions in the executive branch be reduced to 1,882,000 
positions by 1999. It is likely that DoD will be required to 
help achieve this demand. Therefore, section 902 would result 
in savings only if FTEs are reduced below the levels in P.L. 
103-226.
    War Reserve Fuel Stocks. Section 392 would require DoD to 
reduce its stock of fuel for war reserves. DoD would meet this 
goal primarily by not replenishing its stocks after normal 
operations, although the bill would allow DoD to sell stocks at 
fair market value. Existing contracts and other operational 
considerations would postpone most of the budgetary impact 
until after 1996. The estimate assumes that the reductions 
would occur over four years and save a total of $520 million.
    Military Family Housing. Section 2801 would establish a new 
means of financing the construction of military family housing. 
It would authorize DoD to use direct loans, loan guarantees, 
long-term leases, rental guarantees, barter, direct government 
investment, and other financial arrangements to encourage 
private sector participation in building military housing.
    Appropriations of $22 million would be authorized in 1996 
for a new account, the Family Housing Improvement Fund, which 
would be available to fund the program. The fund would also 
receive transfers from other accounts, receipts from property 
sales and rents, returns on any capital, and other income from 
operations or transactions connected with the program. The 
amounts in the fund would be available to acquire housing using 
the various techniques mentioned above, but the total value of 
budget authority for all contracts and investments undertaken 
would be limited to $1 billion.
    CBO does not estimate any budgetary impact beyond the 
stated authorizations of appropriations in the bill--$22 
million for the new fund and other amounts in the accounts from 
which money could be transferred into the new fund. Some of the 
options available for use of the Family Housing Improvement 
Fund involve up-front commitments of government resources that 
would be spent over a long period of time. According to 
standard principles of federal accounting, obligations of the 
fund should reflect the full amount of the financial liability 
incurred when the government makes such a commitment. In the 
case of a long-term lease or rental guarantee, for example, 
obligations should equal the total amount of lease or rental 
payments over the life of the contract and appropriations to 
cover the full amount of such obligations should be available 
before entering into the lease or guarantee. Some commitments 
could take the form of lease-purchases, which would require the 
recording of both obligations and outlays up front. For a 
direct loan or loan guarantee, obligations should equal the 
estimated present value of federal transactions with the 
public, excluding receipts from other federal budget accounts 
that depend on the availability of future appropriations. If 
obligations were not recorded accurately, outlays could be 
substantially higher than this estimate assumes.
    Defense Export Guarantees. Section 1224 would authorize the 
Secretary of Defense to finance the export of defense articles 
and defense services through a new loan guarantee program. The 
authority to incur subsidy and administrative costs is limited 
to amounts provided in advance in appropriations acts. Because 
the bill is silent on the amount of the authorization, CBO 
assumes that it is open-ended. Nevertheless, CBO does not have 
an estimate for the budgetary impacts of the implicit 
authorization. Because some of the countries eligible for 
guarantees under the program have high credit risks, the 
subsidy costs could be significant.
    Panama Canal Commission. Title XXXV would authorize the 
Panama Canal Commission (PCC) to spend any sums available to it 
from operating revenues or Treasury borrowing for operation, 
maintenance, and improvement of the canal in fiscal year 1996. 
This title also would restructure the commission as a wholly 
owned government corporation. The PCC would continue to derive 
its financing for canal operations and other expenditures from 
the Panama Canal Revolving Fund. Spending from the fund would 
continue to be limited by the amounts received from tolls and 
other canal charges (estimated to be about $577 million in 
1995). PCC expenditures would remain subject to specific 
authorization by the Congress, but the bill would repeal an 
existing requirement that funding for administrative expenses 
be provided in appropriations acts.
    At present, spending from the Panama Canal Revolving Fund 
is considered discretionary because appropriations acts 
customarily limit the amount that may be obligated from it each 
year. Upon enactment of this legislation, however, outlays from 
the fund would be treated as mandatory spending. The change in 
spending category would have no impact on federal spending. 
Incorporating the commission could result in minor one-time 
costs, but such costs would be offset by either an increase in 
toll rates or a decrease in other spending from the fund. Other 
provisions of Title XXXV, including those that specify the 
commission's new authorities as a corporation and give it more 
direct authority over the basis and level of tolls, also would 
have no budgetary impact.
    CBO estimates collections in 1996 from tolls and other 
canal charges will be about $588 million, or about $12.5 
million more than outlays for the year.
    7. Pay-as-you-go considerations: Section 252 of the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 sets 
up pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct 
spending or receipts through 1998. Because this bill would 
affect direct spending, pay-as-you-go procedures would apply. 
These effects are summarized in the following table.

                                     [By fiscal years, in millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  1995         1996         1997         1998
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change in outlays...........................................            0          113          458          479
Change in receipts..........................................            0            4           17            0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. Estimated cost to State and local governments: The bill 
would affect the budgets of state and local governments through 
two provisions: one that would change the way distilled spirits 
are distributed on military installations and another that 
would sell the Naval Petroleum Reserve.
    Distribution of Distilled Spirits. The bill would require 
the Defense Department to use the most economical means of 
distributing distilled spirits to facilities that sell them on 
military installations. It would also prevent purchases from a 
private distributor if they were directly or indirectly subject 
to state taxation.
    The costs to all states of this provision could total a few 
million dollars annually. The Army and Air Force Exchange 
Service (AAFES) purchases about $71 million of distilled 
spirits from local distributors and another $68 million worth 
from its own distribution system. States would lose revenue 
from sales taxes to the extent that private distributors sold 
less to the Defense Department or if they made sales to the 
Department exempt from sales taxes.
    Naval Petroleum Reserve. Title XXXIV would allocate seven 
percent of the net proceeds from the sale of Elk Hills to the 
state of California if it agrees to release all claims against 
the United States by the State and the Teacher's Retirement 
Fund with respect to production and proceeds from the reserve. 
Our estimates suggest that California would receive about $105 
million at the end of fiscal year 1996 under these provisions.
    9. Estimate comparison: None.
    10. Previous CBO estimate: None.
    11. Estimate prepared by:
    Elizabeth Chambers, Kent Christensen, Victoria Fraider, and 
Amy Plapp prepared the estimates affecting the Department of 
Defense; Joseph Whitehill prepared the estimate for the foreign 
military sales and the export guarantee programs. Deborah Reis 
prepared the estimate for the Panama Canal Commission. Peter 
Fontaine and Kathy Gramp prepared the estimates for the Naval 
Petroleum Reserve; Wayne Boyington prepared the estimate for 
the costs of the retirement credits of employees of non-
appropriated fund instrumentalities.
    12. Estimate approved by: Paul N. Van de Water, Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                        Committee Cost Estimate

    The committee generally concurs with the estimate as 
contained in the report of the Congressional Budget Office.

                       Inflation Impact Statement

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the committee concludes that the bill 
would have no significant inflationary impact.

                           Oversight Findings

    With reference to clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, this legislation results from 
hearings and other oversight activities conducted by the 
committee pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X.
    With respect to clause 2(l)(3)(B) of rule XI of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, this legislation does not 
include any new spending or credit authority, nor does it 
provide for any increase or decrease in tax revenues or 
expenditures. However, two sections of the bill may be 
construed to provide new budget authority. These sections are:
          (1) section 556--Transitional compensation for 
        dependents of members of the armed forces separated for 
        dependent abuse;
          (2) section 2812--Deposit of proceeds from leases of 
        property located at installations being closed or 
        realigned.
The requirements of section 308(a)(1) of the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974 as that section pertains to the above cited 
provisions are addressed in the estimate prepared by the 
Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 403 
of such Act and included in this report.
    With respect to clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the committee has not received 
a report from the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 
pertaining to the subject matter of H.R. 1530.

                            Roll Call Votes

    In accordance with clause 2(l)(2)(B) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, roll call and voice 
votes were taken with respect to H.R. 1530. These votes are 
attached to this report.
    H.R. 1530 was ordered favorably reported to the House, a 
quorum being present, by a vote of 48-3.
    Offset Folios 501 to 525 Insert here



         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the 
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed 
to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is 
printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed 
is shown in roman):

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle C--Navy Programs

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



[SEC. 122. SEAWOLF SUBMARINE PROGRAM.

  [(a) Limitation on Program Cost.--Except as provided in 
subsection (b), the total amount obligated on or expended for 
procurement of the SSN-21 and SSN-22 Seawolf submarines may not 
exceed $4,759,571,000.
  [(b) Automatic Increase of Limitation Amount.--The amount of 
the limitation set forth in subsection (a) is increased by the 
following amounts:
          [(1) The amounts of outfitting costs and post-
        delivery costs incurred for the submarines referred to 
        in such subsection.
          [(2) The amounts of increases in costs attributable 
        to economic inflation.
          [(3) The amounts of increases in costs attributable 
        to compliance with changes in Federal, State, or local 
        laws.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 124. PROHIBITION ON TRIDENT II BACKFIT.

  [(a) Limitation.--The Secretary of the Navy may not modify 
any Trident I submarine to enable that submarine to be deployed 
with Trident II (D-5) missiles.
  [(b) Waiver Authority.--If the Secretary of Defense 
determines that adherence to the prohibition in subsection (a) 
would result in a significant national security risk to the 
United States, the Secretary may waive that prohibition. Such a 
waiver may not take effect until the Secretary submits to 
Congress a certification of that determination and of the 
reasons for that determination.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle D--Air Force Programs

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 133. HEAVY BOMBER FORCE REQUIREMENTS.

  (a)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(e) Limitation on Fund.--None of the amount available for 
the Enhanced Bomber Capability Fund may be obligated for 
advance procurement of new B-2 aircraft (including long-lead 
items).]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 216. ADVANCED LITHOGRAPHY PROGRAM.

  (a) Purpose.--The purpose of the Advanced Lithography Program 
(in this section referred to as the ``ALP'') is to fund goal-
oriented research and development to be conducted in both the 
public and private sectors [to help achieve a competitive 
position for American lithography tool manufacturers in the 
international market place.] to ensure that lithographic 
processes being developed by American-owned manufacturers 
operating in the United States will lead to superior 
performance electronics systems for the Department of Defense. 
For purposes of the preceding sentence, the term ``American-
owned manufacturers'' means a manufacturing company or other 
business entity the majority ownership or control of which is 
by United States citizens.
  (b) Conduct of Program.--(1)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (3) The Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects 
Agency may set priorities and funding levels for various 
technologies being developed for the ALP and shall consider 
funding recommendations by the SIA as advisory.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


              Subtitle B--Defense Business Operations Fund

SEC. 311. OVERSIGHT OF DEFENSE BUSINESS OPERATIONS FUND.

  (a)  * * *
  [(b) Purchase From Other Sources.--The Secretary of Defense 
or the Secretary of a military department may purchase goods 
and services that are available for purchase from the Defense 
Business Operations Fund from a source other than the Fund if 
the Secretary determines that such source offers a more 
competitive rate for the goods and services than the Fund 
offers.
  [(c) Limitation on Inclusion of Certain Costs in DBOF 
Charges.--A charge imposed for a good or service provided 
through the Fund may not include amounts necessary to cover 
costs incurred in connection with the closure or realignment of 
a military installation.
  [(d) Procedures for Accumulation of Funds.--The Secretary of 
Defense shall establish billing procedures to ensure that the 
balance in the Fund does not exceed the amount necessary to 
provide for the working capital requirements of the Fund, as 
determined by the Secretary.
  [(e) Annual Reports and Budget.--The Secretary of Defense 
shall annually submit to the congressional defense committees, 
at the same time that the President submits the budget under 
section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, the following:
          [(1) A detailed report that contains a statement of 
        all receipts and disbursements of the Fund (including 
        such a statement for each subaccount of the Fund) for 
        the year for which the report is submitted.
          [(2) A detailed proposed budget for the operation of 
        the Fund for the fiscal year for which the budget is 
        submitted.
          [(3) A comparison of the amounts actually expended 
        for the operation of the Fund for the previous fiscal 
        year with the amount proposed for the operation of the 
        Fund for that fiscal year in the budget.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


               Subtitle G--Reviews, Studies, and Reports

[SEC. 361. REPORTS ON TRANSFERS OF CERTAIN OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 
                    FUNDS.

  [(a) Annual Reports.--In each of 1995, 1996, and 1997, the 
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense 
committees, not later than the date on which the President 
submits the budget pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United 
States Code, in that year, a report on the following:
          [(1) Each transfer of amounts provided in an 
        appropriation Act to the Department of Defense for the 
        activities referred to in subsection (c) between 
        appropriations during the preceding fiscal year, 
        including the reason for the transfer.
          [(2) Each transfer of amounts provided in an 
        appropriation Act to the Department of Defense for an 
        activity referred to in subsection (c) within that 
        appropriation for any other such activity during the 
        preceding fiscal year, including the reason for the 
        transfer.
  [(b) Midyear Reports.--On May 1 of each of 1995, 1996, and 
1997, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the 
congressional defense committees a report on the following:
          [(1) Each transfer during the first six months of the 
        fiscal year in which the report is submitted of amounts 
        provided in an appropriation Act to the Department of 
        Defense for the activities referred to in subsection 
        (c) between appropriations, including the reason for 
        the transfer.
          [(2) Each transfer during the first six months of the 
        fiscal year in which the report is submitted of amounts 
        provided in an appropriation Act to the Department of 
        Defense for an activity referred to in subsection (c) 
        within that appropriation for any other such activity, 
        including the reason for the transfer.
  [(c) Covered Activities.--The activities referred to in 
subsections (a) and (b) are the following:
          [(1) Activities for which amounts are appropriated 
        for the Army for operation and maintenance for 
        operating forces for (A) combat units, (B) tactical 
        support, (C) force-related training/special activities, 
        (D) depot maintenance, and (E) JCS exercises.
          [(2) Activities for which amounts are appropriated 
        for the Navy for operation and maintenance for 
        operating forces for (A) mission and other flight 
        operations, (B) mission and other ship operations, (C) 
        fleet air training, (D) ship operational support and 
        training, (E) aircraft depot maintenance, and (F) ship 
        depot maintenance.
          [(3) Activities for which amounts are appropriated 
        for the Air Force for operation and maintenance for 
        operating forces for (A) primary combat forces, (B) 
        primary combat weapons, (C) global and early warning, 
        (D) air operations training, (E) depot maintenance, and 
        (F) JCS exercises.
  [(d) Repeal.--Section 377 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160; 107 
Stat. 1638) is hereby repealed.]

SEC. 361. SEMIANNUAL REPORTS TO CONGRESS ON TRANSFERS FROM HIGH-
                    PRIORITY READINESS APPROPRIATIONS.

  (a) Annual Reports.--(1) During 1996 and 1997, the Secretary 
of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees 
a report on transfers during the preceding fiscal year from 
funds available for the budget activities specified in 
subsection (d) (hereinafter in this section referred to as 
``covered budget activities''). The report each year shall be 
submitted not later than the date in that year on which the 
President submits the budget for the next fiscal year to 
Congress pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States 
Code.
  (2) Each such report shall include--
          (A) specific identification of each transfer during 
        the preceding fiscal year of funds available for any 
        covered budget activity, showing the amount of the 
        transfer, the covered budget activity from which the 
        transfer was made, and the budget activity to which the 
        transfer was made; and
          (B) with respect to each such transfer, a statement 
        of whether that transfer was made to a budget activity 
        within a different appropriation than the appropriation 
        containing the covered budget activity from which the 
        transfer was made or to a budget activity within the 
        same appropriation.
  (b) Midyear Reports.--On May 1 of each year specified in 
subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the 
congressional defense committees a report providing the same 
information, with respect to the first six months of the fiscal 
year in which the report is submitted, that is provided in 
reports under subsection (a) with respect to the preceding 
fiscal year.
  (c) Matters To Be Included.--In each report under this 
section, the Secretary shall include the following:
          (1) With respect to each transfer of funds identified 
        in the report, a statement of the specific reason for 
        the transfer.
          (2) For each covered budget activity--
                  (A) a statement, for the period covered by 
                the report, of--
                          (i) the total amount of transfers 
                        into funds available for that activity;
                          (ii) the total amount of transfers 
                        from funds available for that activity; 
                        and
                          (iii) the net amount of transfers 
                        into, or out of, funds available for 
                        that activity; and
                  (B) a detailed explanation of the transfers 
                into, and out of, funds available for that 
                activity during the period covered by the 
                report.
  (d) Covered Budget Activities.--The budget activities to 
which this section applies are the following:
          (1) The budget activity groups (known as 
        ``subactivities'') within the Operating Forces budget 
        activity of the annual Operation and Maintenance, Army, 
        appropriation that are designated as follows:
                  (A) Combat Units.
                  (B) Tactical Support.
                  (C) Force-Related Training/Special 
                Activities.
                  (D) Depot Maintenance.
                  (E) JCS Exercises.
          (2) The budget activity groups (known as 
        ``subactivities'') within the Operating Forces budget 
        activity of the annual Operation and Maintenance, Navy, 
        appropriation that are designated as follows:
                  (A) Mission and Other Flight Operations.
                  (B) Mission and Other Ship Operations.
                  (C) Fleet Air Training.
                  (D) Ship Operational Support and Training.
                  (E) Aircraft Depot Maintenance.
                  (F) Ship Depot Maintenance.
          (3) The budget activity groups (known as 
        ``subactivities''), or other activity, within the 
        Operating Forces budget activity of the annual 
        Operation and Maintenance, Air Force, appropriation 
        that are designated or otherwise identified as follows:
                  (A) Primary Combat Forces.
                  (B) Primary Combat Weapons.
                  (C) Global and Early Warning.
                  (D) Air Operations Training.
                  (E) Depot Maintenance.
                  (F) JCS Exercises.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle H--Other Matters

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 375. OPERATION OF MILITARY EXCHANGE AND COMMISSARY STORE AT NAVAL 
                    AIR STATION FORT WORTH, JOINT RESERVE CENTER, 
                    CARSWELL FIELD.

  The Secretary of Defense shall provide for the operation by 
the Army and Air Force Exchange Service[, until December 31, 
1995,] of any military exchange and commissary store located at 
the Naval Air Station Fort Worth, Joint Reserve Center, 
Carswell Field.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle E--Other Matters

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 556. ADMINISTRATION OF ATHLETICS PROGRAMS AT THE SERVICE 
                    ACADEMIES.

  (a)  * * *
  [(b) United States Naval Academy.--(1) Chapter 603 of such 
title is amended by adding at the end the following new 
section:

[``Sec. 6975. Athletics program: athletic director; nonappropriated 
                    fund account

  [``(a) The position of athletic director of the Naval Academy 
shall be a position in the civil service (as defined in section 
2101(1) of title 5). However, a member of the armed forces may 
fill that position as an active duty assignment.
  [``(b) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the 
Navy, the Superintendent of the Naval Academy shall administer 
a nonappropriated fund account for the athletics program of the 
Naval Academy. The Superintendent shall credit to that account 
all revenue received from the conduct of the athletics program 
of the Naval Academy and all contributions received for that 
program.''.
  [(2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

[``6975. Athletics program: athletic director; nonappropriated fund 
          account.''.

  [(3) The account referred to in subsection (b) of section 
6975 of title 10, United States Code, as added by paragraph 
(1), shall be established not later than the effective date set 
forth in subsection (e).]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE XIV--PEACE OPERATIONS AND HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE ACTIVITIES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle B--Assistance Activities

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 1413. HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR CLEARING LANDMINES.

  [(a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
carry out a program for humanitarian purposes to provide 
assistance to other nations in the detection and clearance of 
landmines. Such assistance shall be provided through 
instruction, education, training, and advising of personnel of 
those nations in the various procedures that have been 
determined effective for detecting and clearing landmines.
  [(b) Forms of Assistance.--The Secretary may provide 
assistance under subsection (a) by--
          [(1) providing Department of Defense personnel to 
        conduct the instruction, education, or training or to 
        furnish advice; or
          [(2) providing financial assistance or in-kind 
        assistance in support of such instruction, education, 
        or training.
  [(c) Limitation on United States Military Personnel.--The 
Secretary of Defense shall ensure that no member of the Armed 
Forces of the United States--
          [(1) while providing assistance under subsection (a), 
        engages in the physical detection, lifting, or 
        destroying of landmines (unless the member does so for 
        the concurrent purpose of supporting a United States 
        military operation); or
          [(2) provides such assistance as part of a military 
        operation that does not involve the Armed Forces of the 
        United States.
  [(d) Use of Funds.--Of the amount authorized to be 
appropriated by section 301 for Overseas Humanitarian, 
Disaster, and Civic Aid (OHDACA) programs of the Department of 
Defense, not more than $20,000,000 shall be available for the 
program under subsection (a). Such amount may be used--
          [(1) for activities to support the clearing of 
        landmines for humanitarian purposes, including 
        activities relating to the furnishing of education, 
        training, and technical assistance;
          [(2) for the provision of equipment and technology by 
        transfer or lease to a foreign government that is 
        participating in a landmine clearing program under this 
        section; and
          [(3) for contributions to nongovernmental 
        organizations that have experience in the clearing of 
        landmines to support activities described in subsection 
        (a).
  [(e) Notice to Congress.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
provide notice to Congress of any activity carried out under 
this section.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                      TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES

SEC. 2401. AUTHORIZED DEFENSE AGENCIES CONSTRUCTION AND LAND 
                    ACQUISITION PROJECTS.

  Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of 
appropriations in section 2405(a)(1), the Secretary of Defense 
may acquire real property and carry out military construction 
projects for the installations and locations inside the United 
States, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:

               Defense Agencies: Inside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Agency              Installation or location       Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Chemical Agents and           Anniston Army Depot,            $5,000,000
                              Pine Bluff Arsenal,           [$3,000,000]
                               Arkansas.................    $115,000,000
                              Tooele Army Depot, Utah...      $4,000,000
                              Umatilla Army Depot,         [$12,000,000]
                               Oregon...................    $186,000,000
 
      *         *         *         *         *         *         *
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                              ----------                              


   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEARS 1990 AND 1991



           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

Part A--Funding Authorizations

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Part B--B-2 Aircraft Program

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 112. LIMITATION ON ANNUAL PRODUCTION OF B-2 BOMBER FOR FISCAL 
                    YEARS AFTER FISCAL YEAR 1990

  [(a) Required Annual Certification.--Funds appropriated to 
the Department of Defense for a fiscal year after fiscal year 
1990 may not be obligated or expended for procurement for new 
production aircraft under the B-2 bomber program unless and 
until the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional 
defense committees the certification referred to in subsection 
(b) with respect to that fiscal year.
  [(b) Certification.--A certification referred to in 
subsection (a) for any fiscal year is a certification submitted 
by the Secretary of Defense to the congressional defense 
committees after the beginning of the fiscal year which is in 
writing and in unclassified form and in which the Secretary 
certifies each of the following:
          [(1) That the performance milestones for the B-2 
        aircraft for the previous fiscal year for both 
        developmental test and evaluation and operational test 
        and evaluation (as contained in the latest full 
        performance matrix for the B-2 aircraft program 
        established under section 232(a) of Public Law 100-456 
        and section 121 of Public Law 100-180) have been met.
          [(2) That the B-2 aircraft has a high probability of 
        being able to perform its intended missions.
          [(3) That any proposed modification to the 
        performance matrix referred to in paragraph (1) will be 
        provided in writing in advance to the congressional 
        defense committees.
          [(4) That the cost reduction initiatives established 
        for the B-2 program can be achieved (such certification 
        to be submitted together with details of the savings to 
        be realized).
          [(5) That the quality assurance practices and fiscal 
        management controls of the prime contractor and major 
        subcontractors associated with the B-2 program meet or 
        exceed accepted United States Government standards.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Part H--Chemical Munitions

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SEC. 173. CHEMICAL DEMILITARIZATION CRYOFRACTURE PROGRAM

  [(a) Program.--The Secretary of Defense, to the extent funds 
are available for the purpose, shall proceed as expeditiously 
as possible with the project to develop an operational 
cryofracture facility at the Tooele Army Depot, Utah.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


         TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION


Part A--Authorizations

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



      Part B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations


SEC. 211. BALANCED TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(e) Annual Report.--Not later than March 15 of each year, 
the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional 
defense committees a report on the Balanced Technology 
Initiative and related matters. Each such report shall include 
the following:
          [(1) A current assessment of the extent to which 
        advanced technologies can be used to exploit potential 
        vulnerabilities of hostile threats to the national 
        security of the United States.
          [(2) Identification of each program, project, and 
        activity being pursued under the Balanced Technology 
        Initiative and, with respect to each such program, 
        project, and activity, the amount made available 
        pursuant to this section and the source of such amount.
          [(3) For each program, project, and activity for 
        which funds are made available pursuant to this 
        section, a five-year funding plan that (A) provides for 
        the allocation of sufficient resources to maintain 
        adequate progress in research and development under 
        such program, project, or activity, and (B) specifies 
        the major programmatic and technical milestones and the 
        schedule for achieving those milestones.
          [(4) The status of each program, project, and 
        activity being pursued under the Balanced Technology 
        Initiative.
          [(5) Identification of other on-going or potential 
        research and development programs, projects, and 
        activities not currently provided for under this 
        section that should be considered for inclusion under 
        the Balanced Technology Initiative in order to improve 
        conventional defense capabilities.
          [(6) Identification of the most critical technologies 
        for the successful development of existing or potential 
        Balanced Technology Initiative programs, projects, and 
        activities and an assessment of the current status of 
        those technologies.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE XII--MILITARY DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SEC. 1208. TRANSFER OF EXCESS PERSONAL PROPERTY

  (a) Transfer Authorized.--(1) Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law and subject to subsection (b), the Secretary 
of Defense may transfer to Federal and State agencies personal 
property of the Department of Defense, including small arms and 
ammunition, that the Secretary determines is--
          (A) suitable for use by such agencies in [counter-
        drug activities] law enforcement activities, including 
        counter-drug activities; and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


               TITLE XIII--MILITARY APPELLATE PROCEDURES


 H4  deg.SEC. 1301. COURT OF MILITARY APPEALS

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(i) Termination of Authority Relating to Service of Article 
III Judges After 5 Years.--The authority of the Chief Justice 
of the United States under section 942(f) of title 10, United 
States Code, as enacted by subsection (c), shall terminate on 
September 30, 1995.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                     [TITLE XV--MILITARY CHILD CARE


[SEC. 1501. SHORT TITLE; DEFINITIONS

  [(a) Short Title.--This title may be cited as the ``Military 
Child Care Act of 1989''.
  [(b) Definitions.--For purposes of this title:
          [(1) The term ``military child development center'' 
        means a facility on a military installation (or on 
        property under the jurisdiction of the commander of a 
        military installation) at which child care services are 
        provided for members of the Armed Forces or any other 
        facility at which such child care services are provided 
        that is operated by the Secretary of a military 
        department.
          [(2) The term ``family home day care'' means home-
        based child care services that are provided for members 
        of the Armed Forces by an individual who (A) is 
        certified by the Secretary of the military department 
        concerned as qualified to provide those services, and 
        (B) provides those services on a regular basis for 
        compensation.
          [(3) The term ``child care employee'' means a 
        civilian employee of the Department of Defense who is 
        employed to work in a military child development center 
        (regardless of whether the employee is paid from 
        appropriated funds or nonappropriated funds).
          [(4) The term ``child care fee receipts'' means those 
        nonappropriated funds that are derived from fees paid 
        by members of the Armed Forces for child care services 
        provided at military child development centers.

[SEC. 1502. FUNDING FOR MILITARY CHILD CARE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1990

  [(a) Fiscal Year 1990 Funding.--(1) It is the policy of 
Congress that the amount of appropriated funds available during 
fiscal year 1990 for operating expenses for military child 
development centers shall not be less than the amount of child 
care fee receipts that are estimated to be received by the 
Department of Defense during that fiscal year. Of the amount 
authorized to be appropriated for the Department of Defense for 
fiscal year 1990, $102,000,000 shall be available for operating 
expenses for military child development centers.
  [(2) In addition to the amount referred to in paragraph (1), 
$26,000,000 shall be available for child care and child-related 
services of the Department other than military child 
development centers.
  [(3) In using the funds referred to in paragraph (1), the 
Secretary shall give priority to--
          [(A) increasing the number of child care employees 
        who are directly involved in providing child care for 
        members of the Armed Forces; and
          [(B) expanding the availability of child care for 
        members of the Armed Forces.
  [(b) Funds Derived From Parent Fees To Be Used for Employee 
Compensation and Other Child Care Services.--(1) Except as 
provided in paragraph (2), child care fee receipts may be used 
during fiscal year 1990 only for compensation of child care 
employees who are directly involved in providing child care.
  [(2) If the Secretary of Defense determines that compliance 
with the limitation in paragraph (1) would result in an 
uneconomical and inefficient use of such fee receipts, the 
Secretary may (to the extent that such compliance would be 
uneconomical and inefficient) use such receipts--
          [(A) first, for the purchase of consumable or 
        disposable items for military child development 
        centers; and
          [(B) if the requirements of such centers for 
        consumable or disposable items for fiscal year 1990 
        have been met, for other expenses of those centers.
  [(c) Report.--(1) Not later than December 31, 1989, the 
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report on 
how the Secretary intends to use the funds referred to in 
subsection (a), including how the Secretary intends to achieve 
the priorities specified in paragraph (3) of that subsection.
  [(2) If at the time such report is submitted the Secretary 
proposes to use the authority provided by subsection (b)(2), 
the Secretary shall include in the report under paragraph (1) a 
description of the use proposed to be made of that authority 
and a statement of the reasons why the Secretary determined 
that compliance with the limitation in subsection (b)(1) would 
result in an uneconomical and inefficient use of child care fee 
receipts, together with supporting cost information and other 
information justifying the determination.
  [(3) If the Secretary uses such authority after December 31, 
1989, the Secretary shall promptly inform the committees of the 
use of the authority and of the reasons for its use.

[SEC. 1503. CHILD CARE EMPLOYEES

  [(a) Required Training.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
establish, and prescribe regulations to implement, a training 
program for child care employees. Those regulations shall apply 
uniformly among the military departments. Subject to paragraph 
(2), satisfactory completion of the training program shall be a 
condition of employment of any person as a child care employee.
  [(2) Under those regulations, the Secretary shall require 
that each child care employee complete the training program not 
later than six months after the date on which the employee is 
employed as a child care employee (except that, in the case of 
a child care employee hired before the date on which the 
training program is established, the Secretary shall require 
that the employee complete the program not later than six 
months after that date).
  [(3) The training program established under this subsection 
shall cover, at a minimum, training in the following:
          [(A) Early childhood development.
          [(B) Activities and disciplinary techniques 
        appropriate to children of different ages.
          [(C) Child abuse prevention and detection.
          [(D) Cardiopulmonary resuscitation and other 
        emergency medical procedures.
  [(b) Training and Curriculum Specialists.--(1) The Secretary 
of Defense shall require that at least one employee at each 
military child development center be a specialist in training 
and curriculum development. The Secretary shall ensure that 
such employees have appropriate credentials and experience.
  [(2) The duties of such employees shall include the 
following:
          [(A) Special teaching activities at the center.
          [(B) Daily oversight and instruction of other child 
        care employees at the center.
          [(C) Daily assistance in the preparation of lesson 
        plans.
          [(D) Assistance in the center's child abuse 
        prevention and detection program.
          [(E) Advising the director of the center on the 
        performance of other child care employees.
  [(3) Each employee referred to in paragraph (1) shall be an 
employee in a competitive service position.
  [(c) Program To Test Competitive Rates of Pay.--(1) For the 
purpose of improving the capability of the Department of 
Defense to provide military child development centers with a 
qualified and stable civilian workforce, the Secretary of 
Defense shall conduct a program as provided in this subsection 
to increase the compensation of child care employees. The 
Secretary shall begin the program not later than six months 
after the date of the enactment of this Act. The program shall 
be in effect for a period of at least two years.
  [(2) The program shall apply to all child care employees 
who--
          [(A) are directly involved in providing child care; 
        and
          [(B) are paid from nonappropriated funds.
  [(3) Under the program, child care employees at a military 
installation who are described in paragraph (2) shall be paid--
          [(A) in the case of entry-level employees, at rates 
        of pay competitive with the rates of pay paid to other 
        entry-level employees at that installation who are 
        drawn from the same labor pool; and
          [(B) in the case of other employees, at rates of pay 
        substantially equivalent to the rates of pay paid to 
        other employees at that installation with similar 
        training, seniority, and experience.
  [(d) Employment Preference Test Program for Military 
Spouses.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a test 
program under which qualified spouses of members of the Armed 
Forces shall be given a preference in hiring for the position 
of child care employee in a position paid from nonappropriated 
funds if the spouse is among persons determined to be best 
qualified for the position. A spouse who is provided a 
preference under this subsection at a military child 
development center may not be precluded from obtaining another 
preference, in accordance with section 806 of the Military 
Family Act of 1985 (10 U.S.C. 113 note), in the same 
geographical area as the military child development center.
  [(2) The test program under this subsection shall run 
concurrently with the program under subsection (c).
  [(e) Report on Compensation and Spouse Employment Preference 
Programs.--Not later than March 1, 1991, the Secretary of 
Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and House of Representatives a report on the programs 
under subsections (c) and (d). The report shall include the 
findings of the Secretary concerning the effect of each of the 
programs on the quality of child care provided in military 
child development centers and the effect of the spouse 
employment preference program on employee turnover at such 
centers.
  [(f) Additional Child Care Positions.--(1) The Secretary of 
Defense shall make available for child care programs of the 
Department of Defense, not later than September 30, 1990, at 
least 1,000 competitive service positions in addition to the 
number of competitive service positions in such programs as of 
September 30, 1989. During fiscal year 1991, the Secretary 
shall make available to child care programs of the Department 
additional competitive service positions so that the number of 
competitive service positions in such programs as of September 
30, 1991, is at least 3,700 greater than the number of 
competitive service positions in such programs as of September 
30, 1989.
  [(2) The Secretary may waive the increase otherwise required 
by the second sentence of paragraph (1) to the extent that the 
Secretary determines that such increase is not executable. If 
the Secretary issues such a waiver, the Secretary shall 
promptly submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and House of Representatives a report on the waiver. Any 
such report shall specify the number of such positions waived 
and the reasons for the waiver.
  [(3) The additional positions provided for in paragraph (1), 
and the workyears associated with those positions, that are 
used outside the United States shall not be counted for purpose 
of applying any limitation on the total number of positions or 
workyears, respectively, available to the Department of Defense 
outside the United States (or any limitation on the 
availability of appropriated funds for such positions or 
workyears for any fiscal year).
  [(g) Competitive Service Position Defined.--For purposes of 
this section, the term ``competitive service position'' means a 
position in the competitive service, as defined in section 
2102(a)(1) of title 5, United States Code.

[SEC. 1504. PARENT FEES

  [The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations 
establishing fees to be charged parents for the attendance of 
children at military child development centers. Those 
regulations shall be uniform for the military departments and 
shall require that, in the case of children who attend the 
centers on a regular basis, the fees shall be based on family 
income.

[SEC. 1505. CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION AND SAFETY AT FACILITIES

  [(a) Child Abuse Task Force.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
establish and maintain a special task force to respond to 
allegations of widespread child abuse at a military 
installation. The task force shall be composed of personnel 
from appropriate disciplines, including, where appropriate, 
medicine, psychology, and childhood development. In the case of 
such allegations, the task force shall provide assistance to 
the commander of the installation, and to parents at the 
installation, in helping them to deal with such allegations.
  [(b) National Hotline.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
establish and maintain a national telephone number for persons 
to use to report suspected child abuse or safety violations at 
a military child development center or family home day care 
site. The Secretary shall ensure that such reports may be made 
anonymously if so desired by the person making the report. The 
Secretary shall establish procedures for following up on 
complaints and information received over that number.
  [(2) The Secretary shall establish such national telephone 
number not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment 
of this Act and shall publicize the existence of the number.
  [(c) Assistance From Local Authorities.--The Secretary of 
Defense shall prescribe regulations requiring that, in a case 
of allegations of child abuse at a military child development 
center or family home day care site, the commander of the 
military installation or the head of the task force established 
under subsection (a) shall seek the assistance of local child 
protective authorities if such assistance is available.
  [(d) Safety Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
prescribe regulations on safety and operating procedures at 
military child development centers. Those regulations shall 
apply uniformly among the military departments.
  [(e) Inspections.--The Secretary of Defense shall require 
that each military child development center be inspected not 
less often than four times a year. Each such inspection shall 
be unannounced. At least one inspection a year shall be carried 
out by a representative of the installation served by the 
center, and one inspection a year shall be carried out by a 
representative of the major command under which that 
installation operates.
  [(f) Remedies for Violations.--(1) Except as provided in 
paragraph (2), any violation of a safety, health, or child 
welfare law or regulation (discovered at an inspection or 
otherwise) at a military child development center shall be 
remedied immediately.
  [(2) In the case of a violation that is not life threatening, 
the commander of the major command under which the installation 
concerned operates may waive the requirement that the violation 
be remedied immediately for a period of up to 90 days beginning 
on the date of the discovery of the violation. If the violation 
is not remedied as of the end of that 90-day period, the 
military child development center shall be closed until the 
violation is remedied. The Secretary of the military department 
concerned may waive the preceding sentence and authorize the 
center to remain open in a case in which the violation cannot 
reasonably be remedied within that 90-day period or in which 
major facility reconstruction is required.
  [(3) If a military child development center is closed under 
paragraph (2), the Secretary of the military department 
concerned shall promptly submit to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report 
notifying those committees of the closing. The report shall 
include--
          [(A) notice of the violation that resulted in the 
        closing and the cost of remedying the violation; and
          [(B) a statement of the reasons why the violation has 
        not been remedied as of the time of the report.
  [(g) Report on Cooperation With Department of Justice.--(1) 
The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Attorney 
General, shall study matters relating to military child care 
that are of concern to the Department of Justice. The matters 
studied shall include the following:
          [(A) Improving communication between the Department 
        of Defense and the Department of Justice in 
        investigations of child abuse in military programs and 
        in the coordination of the conduct of such 
        investigations.
          [(B) Eliminating overlapping responsibilities between 
        the two departments.
          [(C) Making better use of government and non-
        government experts in child abuse investigations and 
        prosecutions.
          [(D) Improving communication with affected families 
        by the Department of Defense, the Department of 
        Justice, and appropriate State and local agencies.
  [(2) Not later than six months after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
Congress a report on the study required by paragraph (1). The 
report shall include recommendations on methods for improving 
the matters studied.
  [(3) Not later than nine months after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 
States shall submit to Congress a report evaluating the 
findings in the report submitted under paragraph (2).

[SEC. 1506. PARENT PARTNERSHIPS WITH CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTERS

  [(a) Parent Boards.--The Secretary of Defense shall require 
that there be established at each military child development 
center a board of parents, to be composed of parents of 
children attending the center. The board shall meet 
periodically with staff of the center and the commander of the 
installation served by the center for the purpose of discussing 
problems and concerns. The board, together with the staff of 
the center, shall be responsible for coordinating the parent 
participation program described in subsection (b).
  [(b) Parent Participation Programs.--The Secretary of Defense 
shall require the establishment of a parent participation 
program at each military child development center. As part of 
such program, the Secretary of Defense may establish fees for 
attendance of children at such a center, in the case of parents 
who participate in the parent participation program at that 
center, at rates lower than the rates that otherwise apply.

[SEC. 1507. REPORT ON FIVE-YEAR DEMAND FOR CHILD CARE

  [(a) Report Required.--Not later than six months after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense 
shall submit to Congress a report on the expected demand for 
child care by military and civilian personnel of the Department 
of Defense during fiscal years 1991 through 1995.
  [(b) Plan for Meeting Demand.--The report shall include--
          [(1) a plan for meeting the expected child care 
        demand identified in the report; and
          [(2) an estimate of the cost of implementing that 
        plan.
  [(c) Monitoring of Family Day Care Providers.--The report 
shall also include a description of methods for monitoring 
family home day care programs of the military departments.

 H4  deg.[SEC. 1508. SUBSIDIES FOR FAMILY HOME DAY CARE

  [The Secretary of Defense may use appropriated funds 
available for military child care purposes to provide 
assistance to family home day care providers so that family 
home day care services can be provided to members of the Armed 
Forces at a cost comparable to the cost of services provided by 
military child development centers. The Secretary shall 
prescribe regulations for the provision of such assistance.

 H4  deg.[SEC. 1509. EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION DEMONSTRATION 
                    PROGRAM

  [(a) Demonstration Program for Accredited Centers.--(1) The 
Secretary of Defense shall carry out a program to demonstrate 
the effect on the development of preschool children of 
requiring that military child development centers meet 
standards of operation necessary for accreditation by an 
appropriate national early childhood programs accrediting body. 
To carry out such demonstration program, the Secretary shall 
ensure that not later than June 1, 1991, at least 50 military 
child development centers are accredited by such an appropriate 
national early childhood accrediting body.
  [(2) Each military child development center so accredited 
shall be designated as an early childhood education 
demonstration project and shall serve as a program model for 
other military child development centers and family home day 
care providers at military installations.
  [(b) Plan for Implementation.--Not later than April 1, 1990, 
the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services 
of the Senate and House of Representatives a plan for carrying 
out the requirements of subsection (a).
  [(c) Evaluation.--The Secretary shall obtain an independent 
evaluation of the demonstration program carried out under 
subsection (a) to determine the extent to which the imposition 
of a requirement that military child development centers meet 
accreditation standards effectively promotes the development of 
preschool children of members of the Armed Forces. The 
Secretary shall report the results of the evaluation to 
Congress, together with such comments and recommendations as 
the Secretary considers appropriate, not later than July 15, 
1992.

[SEC. 1510. DEADLINE FOR REGULATIONS

  [Regulations required to be prescribed by this title shall be 
prescribed not later than 90 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                     Subtitle F--Strategic Programs

SEC. 151. B-2 BOMBER AIRCRAFT PROGRAM.

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(c) Limitation on Number of B-2 Aircraft.--A total of not 
more than 20 deployable B-2 bomber aircraft plus one test 
aircraft may be procured.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle D--Defense Business Operations Fund

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 342. CAPITAL ASSET SUBACCOUNT.

  [(a) Use of Subaccount for Capital Assets Depreciation 
Charges.--Charges for goods and services provided through the 
Defense Business Operations Fund shall include amounts for 
depreciation of capital assets, set in accordance with 
generally accepted accounting principles. Amounts charged for 
depreciation shall be credited to a separate capital asset 
subaccount established within the Fund. The subaccount shall be 
available only for the payment of outlays for capital assets 
for the Fund.
  [(b) Award of Contracts.--The Secretary of Defense may award 
contracts for capital assets of the Fund in advance of the 
availability of funds in the subaccount, to the extent provided 
for in appropriations Acts.
  [(c) Annual Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
the congressional defense committees each year, at the same 
time that the President submits the budget to the Congress 
under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, a report 
that specifies--
          [(1) the opening balance of the subaccount as of the 
        beginning of the fiscal year in which the report is 
        submitted;
          [(2) the estimated amounts to be credited to the 
        subaccount in the fiscal year in which the report is 
        submitted;
          [(3) the estimated amounts of outlays to be paid out 
        of the subaccount in the fiscal year in which the 
        report is submitted;
          [(4) the estimated balance of the subaccount at the 
        end of the fiscal year in which the report is 
        submitted; and
          [(5) a statement of how much of the estimated balance 
        at the end of the fiscal year in which the report is 
        submitted will be needed to pay outlays in the 
        immediately following fiscal year that are in excess of 
        the amount to be credited to the subaccount in the 
        immediately following fiscal year.
  [(d) Authorization.--There is hereby authorized to be 
appropriated to the Fund subaccount for fiscal years 1993 and 
1994 such sums as may be necessary to pay, during fiscal year 
1993 and until April 15, 1994, outlays for capital assets in 
excess of the amount otherwise available in the subaccount.
  [(e) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
          (1) The term ``capital assets'' means the following 
        capital assets that have a development or acquisition 
        cost of not less than $15,000:
                  [(A) Minor construction projects financed by 
                the Fund pursuant to section 2805(c)(1) of 
                title 10, United States Code.
                  [(B) Automatic data processing equipment, 
                software, other equipment, and other capital 
                improvements.
          [(2) The term ``Fund'' means the Defense Business 
        Operations Fund.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 386. ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES THAT BENEFIT 
                    DEPENDENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND 
                    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES.

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Eligible Local Educational Agencies.--A local educational 
agency is eligible for assistance under subsection (b) for a 
fiscal year if--
          (1) at least [30] 20 percent (as rounded to the 
        nearest whole percent) of the students in average daily 
        attendance in the schools of that agency in that fiscal 
        year are military dependent students [counted under 
        subsection (a) or (b) of section 3 of the Act of 
        September 30, 1950 (Public Law 874, Eighty-first 
        Congress; 20 U.S.C. 238)];

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Adjustment Payments Related to Base Closures and 
Realignments.--Subject to subsection (g), to assist communities 
in making adjustments resulting from reductions in the size of 
the Armed Forces, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to 
the Secretary of Education funds to make payments to local 
educational agencies that are entitled to receive [under 
section 3 of the Act of September 30, 1950 (Public Law 874, 
Eighty-first Congress; 20 U.S.C. 238), payments adjusted in 
accordance with subsection (e) of such section by reason of 
conditions described in subparagraphs (A) through (C) of 
paragraph (1) of such subsection that result from] payments 
under section 8003(e) of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7703(e)) as a result of closures and 
realignments of military installations.
  (e) Report on Impact of Base Closures on Educational 
Agencies.--(1) Not later than February 15 of each of 1993, 
1994, [and 1995] 1995, and 1996, the Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation with the Secretary of Education, shall submit to 
Congress a report on the local educational agencies affected by 
the closures and realignment of military installations and by 
redeployments of members of the Armed Forces.
  (2) Each report shall contain the following:
          (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (C) The amounts paid to the local educational 
        agencies during that year under the Act of September 
        30, 1950 (Public Law 874, Eighty-first Congress; 20 
        U.S.C. 236 et seq.), title VIII of the Elementary and 
        Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7701 et 
        seq.), or any other provision of law authorizing the 
        payment of financial assistance to local communities or 
        local educational agencies on the basis of the presence 
        of dependent children of such members or employees in 
        such communities and in the schools of such agencies.
          (D) The projected transfers of such members and 
        employees in connection with closures, realignments, 
        and redeployments during the 12-month period beginning 
        on the date of the report, including--
                  (i) the installations to be closed or 
                realigned;
                  (ii) the installations to which personnel 
                will be transferred as a result of closures, 
                realignments, and redeployments; and
                  (iii) the effects of such transfers on the 
                number of dependent children who will be 
                included in determinations with respect to the 
                payment of funds to each affected local 
                educational agency [under subsections (a) and 
                (b) of section 3 of such Act (20 U.S.C. 238)].

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (h) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) The term ``local educational agency'' has the 
        meaning given that term in [section 1471(12) of the 
        Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 
        U.S.C. 2891(12)) section 8013(9) of the Elementary and 
        Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7713(9))].

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(3) The term ``State'' has the meaning given that 
        term in section 3(d)(3)(D)(i) of the Act of September 
        30, 1950 (Public Law 874, Eighty-first Congress; 20 
        U.S.C. 238(d)(3)(D)(i)).]
          (3) The term ``State'' does not include Puerto Rico, 
        Wake Island, Guam, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana 
        Islands, or the Virgin Islands.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle E--Counter-Drug Activities

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 1045. PILOT OUTREACH PROGRAM TO REDUCE DEMAND FOR ILLEGAL DRUGS.

  [(a) Pilot Program.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a 
pilot outreach program to reduce the demand for illegal drugs. 
The program shall include outreach activities by the active and 
reserve components of the Armed Forces and shall focus 
primarily on youths in general and inner-city youths in 
particular.
  [(b) Payment of Travel and Living Expenses.--The Secretary of 
Defense may provide travel and living allowances to members of 
the Armed Forces who participate in the pilot outreach program 
to permit such members to carry out demand reduction activities 
in areas beyond the vicinity of military installations and 
National Guard facilities.
  [(c) Funding.--Funds available to the Department of Defense 
for drug interdiction and counter-drug activities may be used 
for carrying out the pilot outreach program described in 
subsection (a).
  [(d) Duration of Program.--The pilot outreach program 
described in subsection (a) shall be conducted for a test 
period ending three years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
  [(e) Report.--Not later than two years after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
the Congress a report that assesses the effectiveness of the 
pilot outreach program and includes the recommendations of the 
Secretary regarding the continuation of the program.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle H--Other Matters

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 1081. CIVIL-MILITARY COOPERATIVE ACTION PROGRAM.

  [(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
          [(1) Many of the skills, capabilities, and resources 
        that the Armed Forces have developed to meet military 
        requirements can assist in meeting the civilian 
        domestic needs of the United States.
          [(2) Members of the Armed Forces have the training, 
        education, and experience to serve as role models for 
        United States youth.
          [(3) As a result of the reductions in the Armed 
        Forces resulting from the ending of the Cold War, the 
        Armed Forces will have fewer overseas deployments and 
        lower operating tempos, and there will be a much 
        greater opportunity than in the past for the Armed 
        Forces to assist civilian efforts to address critical 
        domestic problems.
          [(4) The United States has significant domestic needs 
        in areas such as health care, nutrition, education, 
        housing, and infrastructure that cannot be met by 
        current and anticipated governmental and private sector 
        programs.
          [(5) There are significant opportunities for the 
        resources of the Armed Forces, which are maintained for 
        national security purposes, to be applied in 
        cooperative efforts with civilian officials to address 
        these vital domestic needs.
          [(6) Civil-military cooperative efforts can be 
        undertaken in a manner that is consistent with the 
        military mission and does not compete with the private 
        sector.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                Subtitle I--Youth Service Opportunities

[SEC. 1091. NATIONAL GUARD CIVILIAN YOUTH OPPORTUNITIES PILOT PROGRAM.

  [(a) Program Authority.--During fiscal years 1993 through 
1995, the Secretary of Defense, acting through the Chief of the 
National Guard Bureau, may conduct a pilot program to be known 
as the ``National Guard Civilian Youth Opportunities Program''.
  [(b) Purpose.--The purpose of the pilot program is to provide 
a basis for determining--
          [(1) whether the life skills and employment potential 
        of civilian youth who cease to attend secondary school 
        before graduating can be significantly improved through 
        military-based training, including supervised work 
        experience in community service and conservation 
        projects, provided by the National Guard; and
          [(2) whether it is feasible and cost effective for 
        the National Guard to provide military-based training 
        to such youth for the purpose of achieving such 
        improvements.
  [(c) Conduct of Program in 10 National Guard Jurisdictions.--
The Secretary of Defense may provide for the conduct of the 
pilot program in any 10 of the States.
  [(d) Program Agreements.--(1) To carry out the pilot program 
in a State, the Secretary of Defense shall enter into an 
agreement with the Governor of the State or, in the case of the 
District of Columbia, with the commanding general of the 
District of Columbia National Guard.
  [(2) Each agreement under the pilot program shall provide for 
the Governor or, in the case of the District of Columbia, the 
commanding general to establish, organize, and administer a 
National Guard civilian youth opportunities program in the 
State.
  [(3) The agreement may provide for the Secretary to reimburse 
the State for civilian personnel costs attributable to the use 
of civilian employees of the National Guard in the conduct of 
the National Guard civilian youth opportunities program.
  [(e) Persons Eligible to Participate in Program.--(1) A 
school dropout from secondary school shall be eligible to 
participate in a National Guard civilian youth opportunities 
program conducted under the pilot program.
  [(2) The Secretary shall prescribe the standards and 
procedures for selecting participants for a National Guard 
civilian youth opportunities program from among school dropouts 
eligible to participate in the program.
  [(f) Authorized Benefits for Participants.--(1) To the extent 
provided in an agreement entered into in accordance with 
subsection (d) and subject to the approval of the Secretary, a 
person selected for training in a National Guard civilian youth 
opportunities program conducted under the pilot program may 
receive the following benefits in connection with that 
training:
          [(A) Allowances for travel expenses, personal 
        expenses, and other expenses.
          [(B) Quarters.
          [(C) Subsistence.
          [(D) Transportation.
          [(E) Equipment.
          [(F) Clothing.
          [(G) Recreational services and supplies.
          [(H) Other services.
          [(I) Subject to paragraph (2), a temporary stipend 
        upon the successful completion of the training, as 
        characterized in accordance with procedures provided in 
        the agreement.
  [(2) In the case of a person selected for training in a 
National Guard civilian youth opportunities program conducted 
under the pilot program who afterwards becomes a member of the 
Civilian Community Corps under subtitle E of title I of the 
National and Community Service Act of 1990 (as added by section 
1092(a)), the person may not receive a temporary stipend under 
paragraph (1)(I) while the person is a member of that Corps. 
The person may receive the temporary stipend after completing 
service in the Corps unless the person elects to receive 
benefits provided under subsection (f) or (g) of section 158 of 
such Act.
  [(g) Program Personnel.--(1) Personnel of the National Guard 
of a State in which a National Guard civilian youth 
opportunities program is conducted under the pilot program may 
serve on full-time National Guard duty for the purpose of 
providing command, administrative, training, or supporting 
services for that program. For the performance of those 
services, any such personnel may be ordered to duty under 
section 502(f) of title 32, United States Code, for not longer 
than the period of the program.
  [(2) For fiscal year 1993, personnel so serving may not be 
counted for the purposes of--
          [(A) any provision of law limiting the number of 
        personnel that may be serving on full-time active duty 
        or full-time National Guard duty for the purpose of 
        organizing, administering, recruiting, instructing, or 
        training the reserve components; or
          [(B) section 524 of title 10, United States Code, 
        relating to the number of reserve component officers 
        who may be on active duty or full-time National Guard 
        duty in certain grades.
  [(3) A Governor participating in the pilot program and the 
commanding general of the District of Columbia National Guard 
(if the District of Columbia National Guard is participating in 
the pilot program) may procure by contract the temporary full 
time services of such civilian personnel as may be necessary to 
augment National Guard personnel in carrying out a National 
Guard civilian youth opportunities program under the pilot 
program.
  [(4) Civilian employees of the National Guard performing 
services for such a program and contractor personnel performing 
such services may be required, when appropriate to achieve a 
program objective, to be members of the National Guard and to 
wear the military uniform.
  [(h) Equipment and Facilities.--(1) Equipment and facilities 
of the National Guard, including military property of the 
United States issued to the National Guard, may be used in 
carrying out the pilot program.
  [(2) Activities under the pilot program shall be considered 
noncombat activities of the National Guard for purposes of 
section 710 of title 32, United States Code.
  [(i) Status of Participants.--(1) A person receiving training 
under the pilot program shall be considered an employee of the 
United States for the purposes of the following provisions of 
law:
          [(A) Subchapter I of chapter 81 of title 5, United 
        States Code (relating to compensation of Federal 
        employees for work injuries).
          [(B) Section 1346(b) and chapter 171 of title 28, 
        United States Code, and any other provision of law 
        relating to the liability of the United States for 
        tortious conduct of employees of the United States.
  [(2) In the application of the provisions of law referred to 
in paragraph (1)(A) to a person referred to in paragraph (1)--
          [(A) the person shall not be considered to be in the 
        performance of duty while the person is not at the 
        assigned location of training or other activity or duty 
        authorized in accordance with a program agreement 
        referred to in subsection (d), except when the person 
        is traveling to or from that location or is on pass 
        from that training or other activity or duty;
          [(B) the person's monthly rate of pay shall be deemed 
        to be the minimum rate of pay provided for grade GS-2 
        of the General Schedule under section 5332 of title 5, 
        United States Code; and
          [(C) the entitlement of a person to receive 
        compensation for a disability shall begin on the day 
        following the date on which the person's participation 
        in the pilot program is terminated.
  [(3) A person referred to in paragraph (1) may not be 
considered an employee of the United States for any purpose 
other than a purpose set forth in that paragraph.
  [(j) Supplemental Resources.--(1) To carry out a National 
Guard civilian youth opportunities program conducted under the 
pilot program, the Governor of a State or, in the case of the 
District of Columbia, the commanding general of the District of 
Columbia National Guard may supplement any funding made 
available pursuant to subsection (m) out of other resources 
(including gifts) available to the Governor or the commanding 
general.
  [(2) The provision of funds authorized to be appropriated for 
the pilot program shall not preclude a Governor participating 
in the pilot program, or the commanding general of the District 
of Columbia National Guard (if the District of Columbia 
National Guard is participating in the pilot program), from 
accepting, using, and disposing of gifts or donations of money, 
other property, or services for the pilot program.
  [(k) Report.--(1) Within 90 days after the end of the one-
year period beginning on the first day of the pilot program, 
the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense 
committees a report on the design, conduct, and effectiveness 
of the pilot program during that one-year period. The report 
shall include an assessment of the matters set forth in 
paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (b).
  [(2) In preparing the report required by paragraph (1), the 
Secretary shall coordinate with the Governor of each State in 
which a National Guard civilian youth opportunities program is 
carried out under the pilot program and, if such a program is 
carried out in the District of Columbia, with the commanding 
general of the District of Columbia National Guard.
  [(l) Definitions.--In this section:
          [(1) The term ``pilot program'' means the National 
        Guard Civilian Youth Opportunities Program authorized 
        to be conducted under subsection (a).
          [(2) The term ``State'' includes the District of 
        Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.
          [(3) The term ``school dropout'' has the meaning 
        established for the term by the Secretary of Education 
        pursuant to section 6201(a) of the Elementary and 
        Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 3271(a)).
          [(4) The term ``full-time National Guard duty'' has 
        the meaning given that term in section 101 of title 32, 
        United States Code.
  [(m) Funding.--Of the amounts appropriated for the Department 
of Defense for operation and maintenance in fiscal year 1993 
pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 301, 
$50,000,000 shall be available to carry out the pilot program 
for fiscal year 1993.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 1093. COORDINATION OF PROGRAMS.

  [(a) Coordinated Administration.--To the maximum extent 
practicable, the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, the Board 
of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation for 
National and Community Service, and the Director of the 
Civilian Community Corps shall coordinate the National Guard 
Youth Opportunities Program established pursuant to section 
1091 and the Civilian Community Corps Demonstration Program 
established pursuant to the authorization contained in section 
152 of the National and Community Service Act of 1990 (as added 
by section 1092(a)).
  [(b) Objectives.--The officials referred to in subsection (a) 
shall ensure that--
          [(1) the programs referred to in subsection (a) are 
        conducted in such a manner in relationship to each 
        other that the public benefit of those programs is 
        maximized;
          [(2) to the maximum extent appropriate to meet the 
        needs of program participants, persons who complete 
        participation in the National Guard Youth Opportunities 
        Program and are eligible and apply to participate in 
        the Civilian Community Corps under the Civilian 
        Community Corps Demonstration Program are accepted for 
        participation in that Program; and
          [(3) the programs referred to in subsection (a) are 
        conducted simultaneously in competition with each other 
        in the same immediate area of the United States only 
        when the population of eligible participants in that 
        area is sufficient to justify the simultaneous conduct 
        of such programs in that area.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


             TITLE XI--ARMY GUARD COMBAT REFORM INITIATIVE


SEC. 1101. SHORT TITLE.

  This title may be cited as the ``Army National Guard Combat 
Readiness Reform Act of 1992''.

                 Subtitle A--Deployability Enhancements


SEC. 1111. [MINIMUM PERCENTAGE OF] PRIOR ACTIVE-DUTY PERSONNEL.

  [(a) Establishment of Minimum Percentage.--The Secretary of 
the Army shall have an objective of increasing the percentage 
of qualified prior active-duty personnel in the Army National 
Guard to 65 percent, in the case of officers, and to 50 
percent, in the case of enlisted members, by September 30, 
1997.
  [(b) Interim Accession Percentages.--The Secretary shall 
prescribe regulations establishing for each of fiscal years 
1993 through 1997 an accession percentage for officers, and a 
separate accession percentage for enlisted members, for prior 
active-duty personnel so as to facilitate compliance with the 
objectives stated in subsection (a).]
  (a) Additional Prior Active Duty Officers.--The Secretary of 
the Army shall increase the number of qualified prior active-
duty officers in the Army National Guard by providing a program 
that permits the separation of officers on active duty with at 
least two, but less than three, years of active service upon 
condition that the officer is accepted for appointment in the 
Army National Guard. The Secretary shall have a goal of having 
not fewer than 150 officers become members of the Army National 
Guard each year under this section.
  (b) Additional Prior Active Duty Enlisted Members.--The 
Secretary of the Army shall increase the number of qualified 
prior active-duty enlisted members in the Army National Guard 
through the use of enlistments as described in section 8020 of 
the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1994 (Public Law 
103-139). The Secretary shall enlist not fewer than 1,000 new 
enlisted members each year under enlistments described in that 
section.
  (c) Qualified Prior Active-Duty Personnel.--For purposes of 
this section, qualified prior active-duty personnel are members 
of the Army National Guard with not less than two years of 
active duty.
  [(d) Deadline for Regulations.--The regulations required by 
subsection (a) shall be prescribed not later than March 15, 
1993. The Secretary shall submit those regulations to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of 
Representatives not later than April 1, 1993.
  [(e) List of Certain Separated Officers.--On a semiannual 
basis, the Secretary of the Army shall furnish to the Chief of 
the National Guard Bureau a list containing the name, home of 
record, and last-known mailing address of each officer of the 
Army who during the previous six months was honorably separated 
from active duty in the grade of major or below.]

SEC. 1112. SERVICE IN SELECTED RESERVE IN LIEU OF ACTIVE-DUTY SERVICE.

  (a) * * *
  (b) ROTC Graduates.--The Secretary of the Army shall provide 
a program under which graduates of the Reserve Officers' 
Training Corps program may perform their minimum period of 
obligated service by a combination of (A) two years of active 
duty, and (B) such additional period of service as is necessary 
to complete the remainder of such obligation, to be served in 
the [National Guard] Selected Reserve.

SEC. 1113. REVIEW OF OFFICER PROMOTIONS BY COMMANDER OF ASSOCIATED 
                    ACTIVE DUTY UNIT.

  (a) Review.--Whenever an officer in an Army [National Guard] 
Selected Reserve unit as defined in subsection (b) is 
recommended for a unit vacancy promotion to a grade above first 
lieutenant, the recommended promotion shall be reviewed by the 
commander of the active duty unit associated with the [National 
Guard] Selected Reserve unit of that officer or another active-
duty officer designated by the Secretary of the Army. The 
commander or other active-duty officer designated by the 
Secretary of the Army shall provide to the promoting authority, 
through the promotion board convened by the promotion authority 
to consider unit vacancy promotion candidates, before the 
promotion is made, a recommendation of concurrence or 
nonconcurrence in the promotion. The recommendation shall be 
provided to the promoting authority within 60 days after 
receipt of notice of the recommended promotion.
  [(b) Implementation.--Subsection (a) shall take effect--
          [(1) on April 1, 1993, for officers in Army National 
        Guard units that on that date are designated as round-
        out/round-up units;
          [(2) on October 1, 1993, for officers in other units 
        of the Army National Guard in the Selected Reserve of 
        the Ready Reserve that are designated as early 
        deploying units; and
          [(3) on April 1, 1994, for officers in all other Army 
        National Guard combat units.]
  (b) Coverage of Selected Reserve Combat and Early Deploying 
Units.--(1) Subsection (a) applies to officers in all units of 
the Selected Reserve that are designated as combat units or 
that are designated for deployment within 75 days of 
mobilization.
  (2) Subsection (a) shall take effect with respect to officers 
of the Army Reserve, and with respect to officers of the Army 
National Guard in units not subject to subsection (a) as of the 
the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1996, at the end of the 90-day period 
beginning on such date of enactment.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 1115. INITIAL ENTRY TRAINING AND NONDEPLOYABLE PERSONNEL ACCOUNT.

  (a) Establishment of Personnel Account.--The Secretary of the 
Army shall establish a personnel accounting category for 
members of the Army National Guard[ Selected Reserve to be used 
for categorizing members of the [National Guard] Selected 
Reserve who have not completed the minimum training required 
for deployment or who are otherwise not available for 
deployment. The account shall be designed so that it is 
compatible with the decentralized personnel systems of the Army 
Guard and Reserve. The account shall be used for the reporting 
of personnel readiness and may not be used as a factor in 
establishing the level of Army Guard and Reserve force 
structure.
  (b) Use of Account.--Until a member of the Army [National 
Guard] Selected Reserve has completed the minimum training 
necessary for deployment, the member may not be assigned to 
fill a position in a [National Guard] Selected Reserve unit but 
shall be carried in the account established under subsection 
(a).
  (c) Time for Qualification for Deployment.--(1) If at the end 
of 24 months after [a member of the Army National Guard enters 
the National Guard] a member of the Army Selected Reserve 
enters the Army Selected Reserve, the member has not completed 
the minimum training required for deployment, the member shall 
be discharged [from the Army National Guard].
  (2) The Secretary of the Army may waive the requirement in 
paragraph (1) in the case of health care providers and in other 
cases determined necessary. The authority to make such a waiver 
may not be delegated.

SEC. 1116. MINIMUM PHYSICAL DEPLOYABILITY STANDARDS.

  The Secretary of the Army shall transfer the personnel 
classification of a member of the Army [National Guard] 
Selected Reserve from the [National Guard] Selected Reserve 
unit of the member to the personnel account established 
pursuant to section 1115 if the member does not meet minimum 
physical profile standards required for deployment. Any such 
transfer shall be made not later than 90 days after the date on 
which the determination that the member does not meet such 
standards is made.

[SEC. 1117. MEDICAL ASSESSMENTS.

  [The Secretary of the Army shall require that--
          [(1) each member of the Army National Guard undergo a 
        medical and dental screening on an annual basis; and
          [(2) each member of the Army National Guard over the 
        age of 40 undergo a full physical examination not less 
        often than every two years.

[SEC. 1118. DENTAL READINESS OF MEMBERS OF EARLY DEPLOYING UNITS.

  [(a) Development of Plan.--The Secretary of the Army shall 
develop a plan to ensure that units of the Army National Guard 
scheduled for early deployment in the event of a mobilization 
(as determined by the Secretary) are dentally ready (as defined 
in regulations of the Secretary) for deployment.
  [(b) Report.--The Secretary shall submit to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a 
report on such plan not later than February 15, 1993. The 
Secretary shall include in the report any legislative proposals 
that the Secretary considers necessary in order to implement 
the plan.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 1120. USE OF COMBAT SIMULATORS.

  The Secretary of the Army shall expand the use of 
simulations, simulators, and advanced training devices and 
technologies in order to increase training opportunities for 
members and units of the Army National Guard and the Army 
Reserve.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                       TITLE XV--NONPROLIFERATION


SEC. 1501. SHORT TITLE.

  This title may be cited as the ``Weapons of Mass Destruction 
Control Act of 1992''.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 1505. INTERNATIONAL NONPROLIFERATION INITIATIVE.

  (a) Assistance for International Nonproliferation 
Activities.--Subject to the limitations and requirements 
provided in this section, [during fiscal years 1994 and 1995] 
the Secretary of Defense, under the guidance of the President, 
may provide assistance to support international 
nonproliferation activities.
  (b) Activities for Which Assistance May Be Provided.--
Activities for which assistance may be provided under this 
section are activities such as the following:
          (1) Activities carried out by the International 
        Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that are designed to ensure 
        more effective safeguards against nuclear proliferation 
        and more aggressive verification of compliance with the 
        Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, 
        done on July 1, 1968.
          (2) Activities of [the On-Site Inspection Agency] the 
        Department of State in support of the United Nations 
        Special Commission on Iraq.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Form of Assistance.--(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (3) No amount may be obligated for an expenditure under this 
section unless the Director of the Office of Management and 
Budget determines that the expenditure [will be counted against 
the defense category of the discretionary spending limits for 
fiscal year 1993 (as defined in section 601(a)(2) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974) for purposes of part C of the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.] 
will be counted as discretionary spending in the national 
defense budget function (function 050).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Sources of Assistance.--(1) Funds provided as assistance 
under this section [for fiscal year 1994 shall be derived from 
amounts made available to the Department of Defense for fiscal 
year 1994. Funds provided as assistance under this section for 
fiscal year 1995 shall be derived from amounts made available 
to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 1995.] for any 
fiscal year shall be derived from amounts made available to the 
Department of Defense for that fiscal year. Funds provided as 
assistance under this section for a fiscal year [referred to in 
this paragraph] may also be derived from balances in working 
capital accounts of the Department of Defense.
  (2) Supplies and equipment provided as assistance under this 
section may be provided, by loan or donation, from existing 
stocks of the Department of Defense and the Department of 
Energy.
  (3) The total amount of the assistance provided in the form 
of funds under this section [may not exceed $40,000,000. Of 
such amount, not more than $25,000,000 for fiscal year 1994 or 
$20,000,000 for fiscal year 1995] may be used for the 
activities of [the On-Site Inspection Agency] the Department of 
Defense in support of the United Nations Special Commission on 
Iraq, may not exceed $25,000,000 for fiscal year 1994, 
$20,000,000 for fiscal year 1995, or $15,000,000 for fiscal 
year 1996.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) Quarterly Report.--(1) Not later than 30 days after the 
end of each quarter of [fiscal years 1994 and 1995] a fiscal 
year during which the authority of the Secretary of Defense to 
provide assistance under this section is in effect, the 
Secretary of Defense shall transmit to the committees of 
Congress named in paragraph (2) a report of the activities to 
reduce the proliferation threat carried out under this section. 
Each report shall set forth (for the preceding quarter and 
cumulatively)--
          (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) Termination of Authority.--The authority of the Secretary 
of Defense to provide assistance under this section terminates 
at the close of fiscal year 1996.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

SEC. 2001. SHORT TITLE.

  This division may be cited as the ``Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993''.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle C--Land Transactions

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SEC. 2834. LEASES OF PROPERTY, NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, OAKLAND, 
                    CALIFORNIA.

  (a) * * *
  (b) Lease Authorized with City or Port of Oakland.--(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (4) In lieu of entering into a lease under paragraph (1), or 
in place of an existing lease under such paragraph, the 
Secretary may convey, without consideration, the property 
described in such paragraph to the City of Oakland, California, 
the Port of Oakland, California, or the City of Alameda, 
California, under such terms and conditions as the Secretary 
considers appropriate.
  (5) The exact acreage and legal description of any property 
conveyed under paragraph (4) shall be determined by a survey 
satisfactory to the Secretary. The cost of each survey shall be 
borne by the recipient of the property.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

          * * * * * * *

                     Subtitle D--Air Force Programs

SEC. 131. B-2 BOMBER AIRCRAFT PROGRAM.

  (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
  [(c) Reaffirmation of Limitation on Number of B-2 Aircraft.--
As provided in section 151(c) of Public Law 102-484 (106 Stat. 
2339), the Secretary of the Air Force may not procure more than 
20 deployable B-2 bomber aircraft (plus one test aircraft which 
may not be made operational).
  [(d) Limitation on Total Program Cost.--The total amount 
obligated on or after the date of the enactment of this Act (1) 
for research, development, test, and evaluation for, and 
acquisition, modification and retrofitting of, the B-2 bomber 
aircraft referred to in subsection (c), and (2) for paying the 
costs associated with termination of the B-2 bomber aircraft 
program upon completion of the acquisition of those aircraft 
may not exceed $28,968,000,000 (in fiscal year 1981 constant 
dollars).]
          * * * * * * *

         TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

          * * * * * * *

                  Subtitle C--Missile Defense Programs

          * * * * * * *

[SEC. 234. COMPLIANCE OF BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEMS AND 
                    COMPONENTS WITH ABM TREATY.

  [(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
          [(1) Section 232(a)(1) of the Missile Defense Act of 
        1991 (10 U.S.C. 2431 note) establishes a goal for the 
        United States to comply with the ABM Treaty (including 
        any protocol or amendment thereto) and not develop, 
        test, or deploy any ballistic missile defense system, 
        or component thereof, in violation of that treaty (as 
        modified by any protocol or amendment thereto) while 
        deploying an anti-ballistic missile system capable of 
        providing a highly effective defense of the United 
        States against limited attacks of ballistic missiles.
          [(2) The Department of Defense has conducted no 
        formal compliance review of any of the components or 
        systems scheduled for early deployment as part of 
        either the Theater Missile Defense Initiative or the 
        initial limited defense system to be located at Grand 
        Forks, North Dakota.
          [(3) The Department of Defense is continuing to 
        obligate hundreds of millions of dollars for the 
        development and testing of systems or components of 
        ballistic missile defense systems before a 
        determination has been made that, if successfully 
        developed, tested, or deployed, those systems and 
        components would be in compliance with the ABM Treaty.
          [(4) The President requested the authorization and 
        appropriation of additional funds for continued 
        development of such systems and components during 
        fiscal year 1994.
          [(5) The United States and its allies face existing 
        and expanding threats from ballistic missiles capable 
        of being used as theater weapon systems that are 
        presently possessed by, being developed by, or being 
        acquired by a number of countries, including Iraq, 
        Iran, and North Korea.
          [(6) Some theater ballistic missiles presently 
        deployed or being developed (such as the Chinese-made 
        CSS-2) have capabilities equal to or greater than the 
        capabilities of missiles which were determined to be 
        strategic missiles more than 20 years ago under the 
        SALT I Interim Agreement of 1972 entered into between 
        the United States and the Soviet Union.
          [(7) The ABM Treaty was not intended to, and does 
        not, apply to or limit research, development, testing, 
        or deployment of missile defense systems, system 
        upgrades, or system components that are designed to 
        counter modern theater ballistic missiles, regardless 
        of the capabilities of such missiles, unless those 
        systems, system upgrades, or system components are 
        tested against or have demonstrated capabilities to 
        counter modern strategic ballistic missiles.
          [(8) It is a national security priority of the United 
        States to develop and deploy highly effective theater 
        missile defense systems capable of countering the 
        existing and expanding threats posed by modern theater 
        ballistic missiles as soon as is technically possible.
          [(9) It is essential that the Secretary of Defense 
        immediately undertake and complete a review for 
        compliance with the ABM Treaty of proposed theater 
        missile defense systems, system upgrades, and system 
        components so as to not delay the development and 
        deployment of such highly effective theater missile 
        defense systems.
  [(b) Required Compliance Review.--(1) The Secretary of 
Defense shall review the current baseline configuration of each 
system or system upgrade specified in paragraph (2), and the 
system components, to determine whether the development, 
testing, or deployment of that system or system upgrade would 
be in compliance with the ABM Treaty, including the 
interpretation of the Treaty set forth in the enclosure to the 
July 13, 1993, ACDA letter.
  [(2) The systems and system upgrades to be reviewed pursuant 
to paragraph (1) are the following:
          [(A) The Patriot Multimode Missile.
          [(B) The Extended Range Interceptor (ERINT).
          [(C) The Ground-Based Radar for theater missile 
        defenses (GBR-T).
          [(D) The Theater High Altitude Area Defense 
        interceptor missile (THAAD).
          [(E) The Brilliant Eyes space-based sensor system.
          [(F) Upgrades to the AEGIS/SPY radar system of the 
        Navy.
          [(G) Upgrades to the Standard Missile-2 (SM-2) 
        interceptor of the Navy.
  [(3) If during the course of the compliance review under 
paragraph (1) (or any other such compliance review of a 
ballistic missile system or system upgrade), an issue arises 
that appears to indicate that a provision of the ABM Treaty may 
limit research, development, testing, or deployment by the 
United States of highly effective theater missile defense 
systems capable of countering modern theater ballistic 
missiles, the Secretary of Defense shall immediately submit to 
the appropriate congressional committees a report on that 
issue.
  [(c) Report.--(1) For each system and system upgrade 
specified in paragraph (2) of subsection (b), the Secretary 
shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a 
report on the results of the review required by that 
subsection. A report may include the results of the reviews of 
more than one system and system upgrade. For any system or 
system upgrade determined not to be in compliance with the ABM 
Treaty, the Secretary shall indicate (A) what changes to the 
ABM Treaty would be required for the system to be deemed 
compliant with such modified ABM Treaty, and (B) what changes 
to the performance capability of the system or system upgrade 
would be required in order for it to become compliant with the 
existing Treaty, together with the effect of those performance 
capability changes on the effectiveness of the planned missile 
defense architecture.
  [(2) With regard to the Brilliant Eyes space-based sensor 
system, the Secretary shall include in the report findings on 
each of the following issues:
          [(A) Whether the current baseline configuration of 
        the Brilliant Eyes space-based sensor system would 
        comply with the ABM Treaty if the system were used in 
        conjunction with the planned ground-based radar system 
        and its ground-based interceptors at Grand Forks, North 
        Dakota.
          [(B) If not, whether design changes or operational 
        changes can be made to the Brilliant Eyes space-based 
        sensor system that--
                  [(i) will result in the sensor system, when 
                employed in conjunction with the planned 
                ground-based radar system and its ground-based 
                interceptors, being in compliance with the ABM 
                Treaty; and
                  [(ii) will not prevent the sensor system from 
                performing its strategic defense missions with 
                a high degree of effectiveness.
          [(C) If not, whether the Brilliant Eyes space-based 
        sensor system can be made, through design changes or 
        operational changes, for use only with theater missile 
        defense systems and be in compliance with the ABM 
        Treaty.
          [(D) If so, the extent to which deployment of the 
        Brilliant Eyes space-based sensor system would enhance 
        the capability of upper-tier theater defense systems 
        and lower-tier theater defense systems, respectively.
  [(d) Limitations on Funding Pending Submission of Report.--
(1) Not more than 50 percent of the funds reported pursuant to 
section 231(e) to be allocated for fiscal year 1994 for a 
system or system upgrade specified in subsection (b)(2) may be 
obligated for that system or system upgrade, or any of its 
components, until the Secretary completes the compliance review 
of such system or system upgrade required by subsection (b) and 
submits to the appropriate congressional committees the report 
on the results of the compliance review of that system or 
system upgrade as required by subsection (c).
  [(2) Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for 
fiscal year 1994, or otherwise made available to the Department 
of Defense from any funds appropriated for fiscal year 1994 or 
for any fiscal year before 1994, may not be obligated or 
expended--
          [(A) for any development or testing of anti-ballistic 
        missile systems or components except for development 
        and testing consistent with the interpretation of the 
        ABM Treaty set forth in the enclosure to the July 13, 
        1993, ACDA letter; or
          [(B) for the acquisition of any material or equipment 
        (including long lead materials, components, piece 
        parts, or test equipment, or any modified space launch 
        vehicle) required or to be used for the development or 
        testing of anti-ballistic missile systems or 
        components, except for material or equipment required 
        for development or testing consistent with the 
        interpretation of the ABM Treaty set forth in the 
        enclosure to the July 13, 1993, ACDA letter.
  [(e) Definitions.--In this section:
          [(1) The term ``July 13, 1993, ACDA letter'' means 
        the letter dated July 13, 1993, from the Acting 
        Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency to 
        the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations of 
        the Senate relating to the correct interpretation of 
        the ABM Treaty and accompanied by an enclosure setting 
        forth such interpretation.
          [(2) The term ``ABM Treaty'' means the Treaty between 
        the United States of America and the Union of Soviet 
        Socialist Republics on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic 
        Missiles, signed in Moscow on May 26, 1972.
          [(3) The term ``appropriate congressional 
        committees'' means--
                  [(A) the Committee on Armed Services, the 
                Committee on Foreign Affairs, and the Committee 
                on Appropriations of the House of 
                Representatives; and
                  [(B) the Committee on Armed Services, the 
                Committee on Foreign Relations, and the 
                Committee on Appropriations of the Senate.]
          * * * * * * *

SEC. 237. THEATER AND LIMITED DEFENSE SYSTEM TESTING.

  [(a) Testing of Theater Missile Defense Interceptors.--Except 
for the acquisition of those production representative missiles 
required for the completion of developmental and operational 
testing, the Secretary of Defense may not approve a theater 
missile defense interceptor program proceeding into the Low-
Rate Initial Production (Milestone IIIA) acquisition stage 
until the Secretary certifies to the congressional defense 
committees that more than two realistic live-fire tests, 
consistent with section 2366 of title 10, United States Code, 
have been conducted, the results of which demonstrate the 
achievement by the interceptors of the weapons systems 
performance goals specified in the system baseline document 
established pursuant to section 2435(a)(1)(A) of title 10, 
United States Code, before the program entered engineering and 
manufacturing systems development. The live-fire tests 
demonstrating such results shall involve multiple interceptors 
and multiple targets in the presence of realistic 
countermeasures.]
  (a) Testing of Theater Missile Defense Interceptors.--(1) The 
Secretary of Defense may not approve a theater missile defense 
interceptor program proceeding beyond the low-rate initial 
production acquisition stage until the Secretary certifies to 
the congressional defense committees that such program has 
successfully completed initial operational test and evaluation.
  (2) In order to be certified under paragraph (1) as having 
been successfully completed, the initial operational test and 
evaluation conducted with respect to an interceptors program 
must have included flight tests--
          (A) that were conducted with multiple interceptors 
        and multiple targets in the presence of realistic 
        countermeasures; and
          (B) the results of which demonstrate the achievement 
        by the interceptors of the baseline performance 
        thresholds.
  (3) For purposes of this subsection, the baseline performance 
thresholds with respect to a program are the weapons systems 
performance thresholds specified in the baseline description 
for the system established (pursuant to section 2435(a)(1) of 
title 10, United States Code) before the program entered the 
engineering and manufacturing development stage.
  (4) The number of flight tests described in paragraph (2) 
that are required in order to make the certification under 
paragraph (1) shall be a number determined by the Secretary of 
Defense to be sufficient for the purposes of this section.
  (5) The Secretary may augment live-fire testing to 
demonstrate weapons system performance goals for purposes of 
the certification under paragraph (1) through the use of 
modeling and simulation that is validated by ground and flight 
testing.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 333. CHARGES FOR GOODS AND SERVICES PROVIDED THROUGH THE DEFENSE 
                    BUSINESS OPERATIONS FUND.

  [(a) In General.--Charges for goods and services provided 
through the Defense Business Operations Fund--
          [(1) shall include amounts necessary to recover the 
        full costs of--
                  [(A) the development, implementation, 
                operation, and maintenance of systems 
                supporting the wholesale supply and maintenance 
                activities of the Department of Defense; and
                  [(B) the use of military personnel in the 
                provision of the goods and services, as 
                computed by calculating, to the maximum extent 
                practicable, such costs if employees of the 
                Department of Defense were used in the 
                provision of the goods and services; and
          [(2) shall not include amounts necessary to recover 
        the costs of a military construction project (as such 
        term is defined in section 2801(b) of title 10, United 
        States Code), other than a minor construction project 
        financed by the Defense Business Operations Fund 
        pursuant to section 2805(c)(1) of such title.
  [(b) Defense Finance Accounting Services.--The full cost of 
the operation of the Defense Finance Accounting Service shall 
be financed within the Defense Business Operations Fund through 
charges for goods and services provided through the Fund.]
          * * * * * * *

SEC. 371. SHIPS' STORES.

  (a) Conversion to Operation as Nonappropriated Fund 
Instrumentalities.--Not later than December 31, [1995] 1996, 
the Secretary of the Navy shall convert the operation of all 
ships' stores from operation as an activity funded by direct 
appropriations to operation by the Navy Exchange Service 
Command as an activity funded from sources other than 
appropriated funds.
          * * * * * * *

                   TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS

          * * * * * * *

                       Subtitle C--Other Matters

SEC. 731. USE OF HEALTH MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATION MODEL AS OPTION FOR 
                    MILITARY HEALTH CARE.

  (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (c) Government Costs.--The health benefit option required 
under subsection (a) shall be administered so that the costs 
incurred by the Secretary under [each managed health care 
initiative that includes the option] the TRICARE program are no 
greater than the costs that would otherwise be incurred to 
provide health care to the [covered beneficiaries who enroll in 
the option] members of the uniformed services and covered 
beneficiaries who participate in the TRICARE program.
  [(d) Covered Beneficiary Defined.--For purposes of this 
section, the term ``covered beneficiary'' means a beneficiary 
under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, other than a 
beneficiary under section 1074(a) of such title.]
  (d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
          (1) The term ``covered beneficiary'' means a 
        beneficiary under chapter 55 of title 10, United States 
        Code, other than a beneficiary under section 1074(a) of 
        such title.
          (2) The term ``TRICARE program'' means the managed 
        health care program that is established by the 
        Secretary of Defense under the authority of chapter 55 
        of title 10, United States Code, principally section 
        1097 of such title, and includes the competitive 
        selection of contractors to financially underwrite the 
        delivery of health care services under the Civilian 
        Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


  TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED 
                                MATTERS

 Subtitle A--Defense Technology and Industrial Base, Reinvestment and 
Conversion

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 802. UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INITIATIVE SUPPORT PROGRAM.

  (a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Defense, through the 
Director of Defense Research and Engineering, [shall] may 
establish a University Research Initiative Support Program.
  (b) Purpose.--Under the program, the Director [shall] may 
award grants and contracts to eligible institutions of higher 
education to support the conduct of research and development 
relevant to requirements of the Department of Defense.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) Selection Process.--In awarding grants and contracts 
under the program, the Director shall use a merit-based 
selection process that is consistent with the provisions of 
section 2361(a) of title 10, United States Code. [Such 
selection process shall require that each person selected to 
participate in such a merit-based selection process be a member 
of the faculty or staff of an institution of higher education 
that is a member of the National Association of State 
Universities and Land Grant Colleges or the American 
Association of State Colleges and Universities.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


 TITLE XII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF FORMER SOVIET 
                                 UNION

SEC. 1201. SHORT TITLE.

  This title may be cited as the ``Cooperative Threat Reduction 
Act of 1993''.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 1204. DEMILITARIZATION ENTERPRISE FUND.

  [(a) Designation of Fund.--The President is authorized to 
designate a Demilitarization Enterprise Fund for the purposes 
of this section. The President may designate as the 
Demilitarization Enterprise Fund any organization that 
satisfies the requirements of subsection (e).
  [(b) Purpose of Fund.--The purpose of the Demilitarization 
Enterprise Fund is to receive grants pursuant to this section 
and to use the grant proceeds to provide financial support 
under programs described in subsection (b)(5) for 
demilitarization of industries and conversion of military 
technologies and capabilities into civilian activities.
  [(c) Grant Authority.--The President may make one or more 
grants to the Demilitarization Enterprise Fund.
  [(d) Risk Capital Funding of Demilitarization.--The 
Demilitarization Enterprise Fund shall use the proceeds of 
grants received under this section to provide financial support 
in accordance with subsection (b) through transactions as 
follows:
          [(1) Making loans.
          [(2) Making grants.
          [(3) Providing collateral for loan guaranties by the 
        Export-Import Bank of the United States.
          [(4) Taking equity positions.
          [(5) Providing venture capital in joint ventures with 
        United States industry.
          [(6) Providing risk capital through any other form of 
        transaction that the President considers appropriate 
        for supporting programs described in subsection (b)(5).
  [(e) Eligible Organization.--An organization is eligible for 
designation as the Demilitarization Enterprise Fund if the 
organization--
          [(1) is a private, nonprofit organization;
          [(2) is governed by a board of directors consisting 
        of private citizens of the United States; and
          [(3) provides assurances acceptable to the President 
        that it will use grants received under this section to 
        provide financial support in accordance with this 
        section.
  [(f) Operational Provisions.--The following provisions of 
section 201 of the Support for East European Democracy (SEED) 
Act of 1989 (Public Law 101-179; 22 U.S.C. 5421) shall apply 
with respect to the Demilitarization Enterprise Fund in the 
same manner as such provisions apply to Enterprise Funds 
designated pursuant to subsection (d) of such section:
          [(1) Subsection (d)(5), relating to the private 
        character of Enterprise Funds.
          [(2) Subsection (h), relating to retention of 
        interest earned in interest bearing accounts.
          [(3) Subsection (i), relating to use of United States 
        private venture capital.
          [(4) Subsection (k), relating to support from 
        Executive agencies.
          [(5) Subsection (l), relating to limitation on 
        payments to Fund personnel.
          [(6) Subsections (m) and (n), relating to audits.
          [(7) Subsection (o), relating to record keeping 
        requirements.
          [(8) Subsection (p), relating to annual reports.
In addition, returns on investments of the Demilitarization 
Enterprise Fund and other payments to the Fund may be 
reinvested in projects of the Fund.
  [(g) Experience of Other Enterprise Funds.--To the maximum 
extent practicable, the Board of Directors of the 
Demilitarization Enterprise Fund should adopt for that Fund 
practices and procedures that have been developed by Enterprise 
Funds for which funding has been made available pursuant to 
section 201 of the Support for East European Democracy (SEED) 
Act of 1989 (Public Law 101-179; 22 U.S.C. 5421).
  [(h) Consultation Requirement.--In the implementation of this 
section, the Secretary of State and the Administrator of the 
Agency for International Development shall be consulted to 
ensure that the Articles of Incorporation of the Fund 
(including provisions specifying the responsibilities of the 
Board of Directors of the Fund), the terms of United States 
Government grant agreements with the Fund, and United States 
Government oversight of the Fund are, to the maximum extent 
practicable, consistent with the Articles of Incorporation of, 
the terms of grant agreements with, and the oversight of the 
Enterprise Funds established pursuant to section 201 of the 
Support for East European Democracy (SEED) Act of 1989 (22 
U.S.C. 5421) and comparable provisions of law.
  [(i) Initial Implementation.--The Board of Directors of the 
Demilitarization Enterprise Fund shall publish the first annual 
report of the Fund not later than January 31, 1995.
  [(j) Termination of Designation.--A designation of an 
organization as the Demilitarization Enterprise Fund under 
subsection (a) shall be temporary. When making the designation, 
the President shall provide for the eventual termination of the 
designation.]
          * * * * * * *

TITLE XIII--DEFENSE CONVERSION, REINVESTMENT, AND TRANSITION ASSISTANCE

SEC. 1301. SHORT TITLE.

  This title may be cited as the ``Defense Conversion, 
Reinvestment, and Transition Assistance Amendments of 1993''.
          * * * * * * *

   Subtitle C--Personnel Adjustment, Education, and Training Programs

          * * * * * * *

[SEC. 1333. GRANTS TO INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION TO PROVIDE 
                    EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION 
                    TO DISLOCATED DEFENSE WORKERS AND YOUNG ADULTS.

  [(a) Grant Program Authorized.--(1) The Secretary of Defense 
may establish a program to provide demonstration grants to 
institutions of higher education to assist such institutions in 
providing education and training in environmental restoration 
and hazardous waste management to eligible dislocated defense 
workers and young adults described in subsection (d). The 
Secretary shall award the grants pursuant to a merit-based 
selection process.
  [(2) A grant provided under this subsection may cover a 
period of not more than three fiscal years, except that the 
payments under the grant for the second and third fiscal year 
shall be subject to the approval of the Secretary and to the 
availability of appropriations to carry out this section in 
that fiscal year.
  [(b) Application.--To be eligible for a grant under 
subsection (a), an institution of higher education shall submit 
an application to the Secretary at such time, in such form, and 
containing such information as the Secretary may require. The 
application shall include the following:
          [(1) An assurance by the institution of higher 
        education that it will use the grant to supplement and 
        not supplant non-Federal funds that would otherwise be 
        available for the education and training activities 
        funded by the grant.
          [(2) A proposal by the institution of higher 
        education to provide expertise, training, and education 
        in hazardous materials and waste management and other 
        environmental fields applicable to defense 
        manufacturing sites and Department of Defense and 
        Department of Energy defense facilities.
  [(c) Use of Grant Funds.--(1) An institution of higher 
education receiving a grant under subsection (a) shall use the 
grant to establish a consortium consisting of the institution 
and one or more of each of the entities described in paragraph 
(2) for the purpose of establishing and conducting a program to 
provide education and training in environmental restoration and 
waste management to eligible individuals described in 
subsection (d). To the extent practicable, the Secretary shall 
authorize the consortium to use a military installation closed 
or selected to be closed under a base closure law in providing 
on-site basic skills training to participants in the program.
  [(2) The entities referred to in paragraph (1) are the 
following:
          [(A) Appropriate State and local agencies.
          [(B) Private industry councils (as described in 
        section 102 of the Job Training Partnership Act (29 
        U.S.C. 1512)).
          [(C) Community-based organizations (as defined in 
        section 4(5) of such Act (29 U.S.C. 1503(5)).
          [(D) Businesses.
          [(E) Organized labor.
          [(F) Other appropriate educational institutions.
  [(d) Eligible Individuals.--A program established or 
conducted using funds provided under subsection (a) may provide 
education and training in environmental restoration and waste 
management to--
          [(1) individuals who have been terminated or laid off 
        from employment (or have received notice of termination 
        or lay off) as a consequence of reductions in 
        expenditures by the United States for defense, the 
        cancellation, termination, or completion of a defense 
        contract, or the closure or realignment of a military 
        installation under a base closure law, as determined in 
        accordance with regulations prescribed by the 
        Secretary; or
          [(2) individuals who have attained the age of 16 but 
        not the age of 25.
  [(e) Elements of Education and Training Program.--In 
establishing or conducting an education and training program 
using funds provided under subsection (a), the institution of 
higher education shall meet the following requirements:
          [(1) The institution of higher education shall 
        establish and provide a work-based learning system 
        consisting of education and training in environmental 
        restoration--
                  [(A) which may include basic educational 
                courses, on-site basic skills training, and 
                mentor assistance to individuals described in 
                subsection (d) who are participating in the 
                program; and
                  [(B) which may lead to the awarding of a 
                certificate or degree at the institution of 
                higher education.
          [(2) The institution of higher education shall 
        undertake outreach and recruitment efforts to encourage 
        participation by eligible individuals in the education 
        and training program.
          [(3) The institution of higher education shall select 
        participants for the education and training program 
        from among eligible individuals described in paragraph 
        (1) or (2) of subsection (d).
          [(4) To the extent practicable, in the selection of 
        young adults described in subsection (d)(2) to 
        participate in the education and training program, the 
        institution of higher education shall give priority to 
        those young adults who--
                  [(A) have not attended and are otherwise 
                unlikely to be able to attend an institution of 
                higher education; or
                  [(B) have, or are members of families who 
                have, received a total family income that, in 
                relation to family size, is not in excess of 
                the higher of--
                          [(i) the official poverty line (as 
                        defined by the Office of Management and 
                        Budget, and revised annually in 
                        accordance with section 673(2) of the 
                        Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 
                        1981 (42 U.S.C. 9902(2))); or
                          [(ii) 70 percent of the lower living 
                        standard income level.
          [(5) To the extent practicable, the institution of 
        higher education shall select instructors for the 
        education and training program from institutions of 
        higher education, appropriate community programs, and 
        industry and labor.
          [(6) To the extent practicable, the institution of 
        higher education shall consult with appropriate 
        Federal, State, and local agencies carrying out 
        environmental restoration programs for the purpose of 
        achieving coordination between such programs and the 
        education and training program conducted by the 
        consortium.
  [(f) Selection of Grant Recipients.--To the extent 
practicable, the Secretary shall provide grants to institutions 
of higher education under subsection (a) in a manner which will 
equitably distribute such grants among the various regions of 
the United States.
  [(g) Limitation on Amount of Grant to a Single Recipient.--
The amount of a grant under subsection (a) that may be made to 
a single institution of higher education in a fiscal year may 
not exceed \1/3\ of the amount made available to provide grants 
under such subsection for that fiscal year.
  [(h) Reporting Requirements.--(1) The Secretary may provide a 
grant to an institution of higher education under subsection 
(a) only if the institution agrees to submit to the Secretary, 
in each fiscal year in which the Secretary makes payments under 
the grant to the institution, a report containing--
          [(A) a description and evaluation of the education 
        and training program established by the consortium 
        formed by the institution under subsection (c); and
          [(B) such other information as the Secretary may 
        reasonably require.
  [(2) Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment 
of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the President and 
Congress an interim report containing--
          [(A) a compilation of the information contained in 
        the reports received by the Secretary from each 
        institution of higher education under paragraph (1); 
        and
          [(B) an evaluation of the effectiveness of the 
        demonstration grant program authorized by this section.
  [(3) Not later than January 1, 1997, the Secretary shall 
submit to the President and Congress a final report 
containing--
          [(A) a compilation of the information described in 
        the interim report; and
          [(B) a final evaluation of the effectiveness of the 
        demonstration grant program authorized by this section, 
        including a recommendation as to the feasibility of 
        continuing the program.
  [(i) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
          [(1) Base closure law.--The term ``base closure law'' 
        means the following:
                  [(A) The Defense Base Closure and Realignment 
                Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 
                101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).
                  [(B) Title II of the Defense Authorization 
                Amendments and Base Closure and Realignment Act 
                (Public Law 100-526; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).
                  [(C) Section 2687 of title 10, United States 
                Code.
                  [(D) Any other similar law enacted after the 
                date of the enactment of this Act.
          [(2) Environmental restoration.--The term 
        ``environmental restoration'' means actions taken 
        consistent with a permanent remedy to prevent or 
        minimize the release of hazardous substances into the 
        environment so that such substances do not migrate to 
        cause substantial danger to present or future public 
        health or welfare or the environment.
          [(3) Institution of higher education.--The term 
        ``institution of higher education'' has the meaning 
        given such term in section 1201(a) of the Higher 
        Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1141(a)).
          [(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the 
        Secretary of Defense.
  [(j) Conforming Repeal.--Section 4452 of the Defense 
Conversion, Reinvestment, and Transition Assistance Act of 1992 
(division D of Public Law 102-484; 10 U.S.C. 2701 note) is 
repealed.

[SEC. 1334. ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES PROGRAM.

  [(a) Authority.--The Secretary of Defense, in consultation 
with the Secretary of Energy and the Administrator of the 
Environmental Protection Agency, may establish a scholarship 
program in order to enable eligible individuals described in 
subsection (d) to undertake the educational training or 
activities relating to environmental engineering, environmental 
sciences, or environmental project management in fields related 
to hazardous waste management and cleanup described in 
subsection (b) at the institutions of higher education 
described in subsection (c).
  [(b) Educational Training or Activities.--(1) The program 
established under subsection (a) shall be limited to 
educational training or activities related to--
          [(A) site remediation;
          [(B) site characterization;
          [(C) hazardous waste management;
          [(D) hazardous waste reduction;
          [(E) recycling;
          [(F) process and materials engineering;
          [(G) training for positions related to environmental 
        engineering, environmental sciences, or environmental 
        project management (including training for management 
        positions); and
          [(H) environmental engineering with respect to the 
        construction of facilities to address the items 
        described in subparagraphs (A) through (G).
  [(2) The program established under subsection (a) shall be 
limited to educational training or activities designed to 
enable individuals to achieve specialization in the following 
fields:
          [(A) Earth sciences.
          [(B) Chemistry.
          [(C) Chemical Engineering.
          [(D) Environmental engineering.
          [(E) Statistics.
          [(F) Toxicology.
          [(G) Industrial hygiene.
          [(H) Health physics.
          [(I) Environmental project management.
  [(c) Eligible Institutions of Higher Education.--Scholarship 
funds awarded under this section shall be used by individuals 
awarded scholarships to enable such individuals to attend 
institutions of higher education associated with hazardous 
substance research centers to enable such individuals to 
undertake a program of educational training or activities 
described in subsection (b) that leads to an undergraduate 
degree, a graduate degree, or a degree or certificate that is 
supplemental to an academic degree.
  [(d) Eligible Individuals.--Individuals eligible for 
scholarships under the program established under subsection (a) 
are the following:
          [(1) Any member of the Armed Forces who--
                  [(A) was on active duty or full-time National 
                Guard duty on September 30, 1990;
                  [(B) during the 5-year period beginning on 
                that date--
                          [(i) is involuntarily separated (as 
                        defined in section 1141 of title 10, 
                        United States Code) from active duty or 
                        full-time National Guard duty; or
                          [(ii) is separated from active duty 
                        or full-time National Guard duty 
                        pursuant to a special separation 
                        benefits program under section 1174a of 
                        title 10, United States Code, or the 
                        voluntary separation incentive program 
                        under section 1175 of that title; and
                  [(C) is not entitled to retired or retainer 
                pay incident to that separation.
          [(2) Any civilian employee of the Department of 
        Energy or the Department of Defense (other than an 
        employee referred to in paragraph (3)) who--
                  [(A) is terminated or laid off from such 
                employment during the five-year period 
                beginning on September 30, 1990, as a result of 
                reductions in defense-related spending (as 
                determined by the appropriate Secretary); and
                  [(B) is not entitled to retired or retainer 
                pay incident to that termination or lay off.
          [(3) Any civilian employee of the Department of 
        Defense whose employment at a military installation 
        approved for closure or realignment under a base 
        closure law is terminated as a result of such closure 
        or realignment.
  [(e) Award of Scholarship.--(1)(A) The Secretary of Defense 
shall award scholarships under this section to such eligible 
individuals as the Secretary determines appropriate pursuant to 
regulations or policies promulgated by the Secretary.
  [(B) In awarding a scholarship under this section, the 
Secretary shall--
          [(i) take into consideration the extent to which the 
        qualifications and experience of the individual 
        applying for the scholarship prepared such individual 
        for the educational training or activities to be 
        undertaken; and
          [(ii) award a scholarship only to an eligible 
        individual who has been accepted for enrollment in the 
        institution of higher education described in subsection 
        (c) and providing the educational training or 
        activities for which the scholarship assistance is 
        sought.
  [(2) The Secretary of Defense shall determine the amount of 
the scholarships awarded under this section, except that the 
amount of scholarship assistance awarded to any individual 
under this section may not exceed--
          [(A) $10,000 in any 12-month period; and
          [(B) a total of $20,000.
  [(f) Application; Period for Submission.--(1) Each individual 
desiring a scholarship under this section shall submit an 
application to the Secretary of Defense in such manner and 
containing or accompanied by such information as the Secretary 
may reasonably require.
  [(2) A member of the Armed Forces described in subsection 
(d)(1) who desires to apply for a scholarship under this 
section shall submit an application under this subsection not 
later than 180 days after the date of the separation of the 
member. In the case of members described in subsection (d)(1) 
who were separated before the date of the enactment of this 
Act, the Secretary shall accept applications from these members 
submitted during the 180-day period beginning on the date of 
the enactment of this Act.
  [(3) A civilian employee described in paragraph (2) or (3) of 
subsection (d) who desires to apply for a scholarship under 
this section, but who receives no prior notice of such 
termination or lay off, may submit an application under this 
subsection at any time after such termination or lay off. A 
civilian employee described in paragraph (1) or (2) of 
subsection (d) who receives a notice of termination or lay off 
shall submit an application not later than 180 days before the 
effective date of the termination or lay off. In the case of 
employees described in such paragraphs who were terminated or 
laid off before the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
Secretary shall accept applications from these employees 
submitted during the 180-day period beginning on the date of 
the enactment of this Act.
  [(g) Repayment.--(1) Any individual receiving scholarship 
assistance from the Secretary of Defense under this section 
shall enter into an agreement with the Secretary under which 
the individual agrees to pay to the United States the total 
amount of the scholarship assistance provided to the individual 
by the Secretary under this section, plus interest at the rate 
prescribed in paragraph (4), if the individual does not 
complete the educational training or activities for which such 
assistance is provided.
  [(2) If an individual fails to pay to the United States the 
total amount required pursuant to paragraph (1), including the 
interest, at the rate prescribed in paragraph (4), the unpaid 
amount shall be recoverable by the United States from the 
individual or such individual's estate by--
          [(A) in the case of an individual who is an employee 
        of the United States, set off against accrued pay, 
        compensation, amount of retirement credit, or other 
        amount due the employee from the United States; and
          [(B) such other method as is provided by law for the 
        recovery of amounts owing to the United States.
  [(3) The Secretary of Defense may waive in whole or in part a 
required repayment under this subsection if the Secretary 
determines that the recovery would be against equity and good 
conscience or would be contrary to the best interests of the 
United States.
  [(4) The total amount of scholarship assistance provided to 
an individual under this section, for purposes of repayment 
under this subsection, shall bear interest at the applicable 
rate of interest under section 427A(c) of the Higher Education 
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1077a(c)).
  [(h) Coordination of Benefits.--Any scholarship assistance 
provided to an individual under this section shall be taken 
into account in determining the eligibility of the individual 
for Federal student financial assistance provided under title 
IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070 et 
seq.).
  [(i) Report to Congress.--Not later than January 1, 1995, the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of 
Energy and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
Agency, shall submit to the Congress a report describing the 
activities undertaken under the program authorized by 
subsection (a) and containing recommendations for future 
activities under the program.
  [(j) Funding.--(1) To carry out the scholarship program 
authorized by subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense may use 
the unobligated balance of funds made available pursuant to 
section 4451(k) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484; 10 U.S.C. 2701 note) for 
fiscal year 1993 for environmental scholarship and fellowship 
programs for the Department of Defense.
  [(2) The cost of carrying out the program authorized by 
subsection (a) may not exceed $8,000,000 in any fiscal year.
  [(k) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
          [(1) The term ``base closure law'' means the 
        following:
                  [(A) Title II of the Defense Authorization 
                Amendments and Base Closure and Realignment Act 
                (Public Law 100-526; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).
                  [(B) The Defense Base Closure and Realignment 
                Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 
                101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).
          [(2) The term ``hazardous substance research 
        centers'' means the hazardous substance research 
        centers described in section 311(d) of the 
        Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
        Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9660(d)). Such term 
        includes the Great Plains and Rocky Mountain Hazardous 
        Substance Research Center, the Northeast Hazardous 
        Substance Research Center, the Great Lakes and Mid-
        Atlantic Hazardous Substance Research Center, the South 
        and Southwest Hazardous Substance Research Center, and 
        the Western Region Hazardous Substance Research Center.
          [(3) The term ``institution of higher education'' has 
        the same meaning given such term in section 1201(a) of 
        the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1141(a)).]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE XIV--MATTERS RELATING TO ALLIES AND OTHER NATIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                 Subtitle C--Export of Defense Articles

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 1423. EXTENSION OF LANDMINE EXPORT MORATORIUM.

  (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (d) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
``anti-personnel landmine'' means any of the following:
          (1)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
          (3) Any manually-emplaced munition or device designed 
        to kill, injure, or damage and which is actuated [by 
        remote control or] automatically after a lapse of time.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

          * * * * * * *

[SEC. 1432. AMERICAN DIPLOMATIC FACILITIES IN GERMANY.

  [(a) Limitation on Source of Funds for New United States 
Diplomatic Facilities.--(1) As of January 1, 1995, the United 
States may not purchase, construct, lease, or otherwise occupy 
any facility as an embassy, chancery, or consular facility in 
Germany unless that facility is purchased, constructed, 
modified, or leased with funds provided by the Government of 
Germany as an offset for the value of facilities returned by 
the United States Government to the Government of Germany 
pursuant to Article 52 of the Status-of-Forces Agreement with 
the Government of Germany in effect on the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
  [(2) The limitation in paragraph (1) does not apply with 
respect to any facility occupied as of January 1, 1995, by 
United States diplomatic personnel.
  [(b) Certification.--As of January 1, 1995, the Secretary of 
State (and any representative of the Secretary of State) may 
not enter into any legal instrument to purchase, construct, 
modify, or lease any facility described in subsection (a) until 
the Secretary of Defense certifies to the appropriate 
committees of Congress that the United States has received (or 
is scheduled to receive) cash payments or offsets-in-kind of a 
value not less than 50 percent of the value of the facilities 
returned by the United States Government to the Government of 
Germany pursuant to Article 52 of the Status-of-Forces 
Agreement with the Government of Germany in effect on the date 
of the enactment of this Act.
  [(c) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
``appropriate committees of Congress'' means--
          [(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.]
          * * * * * * *

            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

SEC. 2001. SHORT TITLE.

  This division may be cited as the ``Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994''.
          * * * * * * *

                         TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 2310. TRANSFER OF FUNDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FAMILY HOUSING, SCOTT 
                    AIR FORCE BASE, ILLINOIS.

  (a) * * *
  (b) Retention of Interest.--Interest accrued on the funds 
transferred to the County pursuant to subsection (a) shall be 
retained in the same account as the transferred funds and shall 
be available to the County for the same purpose as the 
transferred funds.
  [(b)] (c) Use of Funds.--All funds transferred pursuant to 
subsection (a) shall be used by the County for the 
construction, at a location acceptable to the Secretary, of a 
family housing complex to replace the Cardinal Creek Housing 
Complex at Scott Air Force Base. The number of units 
constructed using the transferred funds (and interest accrued 
on these funds) may not exceed the number of units of military 
family housing authorized for Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, 
in section 2302(a) of the Military Construction Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (division B of Public Law 102-484; 106 
Stat. 2595).
  (d) Completion of Construction.--Upon the completion of the 
construction authorized by this section, all funds remaining 
from the funds transferred pursuant to subsection (a) and the 
interest accrued on these funds shall be deposited in the 
general fund of the Treasury of the United States.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


                      TITLE 10, UNITED STATES CODE

                    Subtitle A--General Military Law

            PART I--ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS

Chap.                                                               Sec.
      Definitions....................................................101
     * * * * * * *

                           PART II--PERSONNEL

      Enlistments....................................................501
     * * * * * * *
      Missing Persons...............................................1501
     * * * * * * *
      Military Family Programs and Military Child Care..............1781
      Volunteers Investing in Peace and Security...................1801]
     * * * * * * *

               PART IV--SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT

      Planning and Coordination.....................................2201
     * * * * * * *
2891]ecurity and Control of Supplies..................................

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 2--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 114. Annual authorization of appropriations

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f)(1) No funds may be appropriated, or authorized to be 
appropriated, for any fiscal year for a purpose named in 
paragraph (1), (3), (4), or (5) of subsection (a) using 
incremental funding.
  (2) In the budget submitted by the President for any fiscal 
year, the President may not request appropriations, or 
authorization of appropriations, on the basis of incremental 
funding for a purpose specified in paragraph (1).
  (3) In this subsection, the term ``incremental funding'' 
means the provision of funds for a fiscal year for a 
procurement in less than the full amount required for 
procurement of a complete and usable product, with the 
expectation (or plan) for additional funding to be made for 
subsequent fiscal years to complete the procurement of a 
complete and usable product.
  (4) This subsection does not apply with respect to funding 
classifed as advance procurement funding.

Sec. 115. Personnel strengths: requirement for annual authorization

  (a) Congress shall authorize personnel strength levels for 
each fiscal year for each of the following:
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(3) The average military training student loads for 
        each of the armed forces (other than the Coast Guard).]
  (b) No funds may be appropriated for any fiscal year to or 
for--
          (1) the use of active-duty personnel or full-time 
        National Guard duty personnel of any of the armed 
        forces (other than the Coast Guard) unless the end 
        strength for such personnel of that armed force for 
        that fiscal year has been authorized by law; or
          (2) the use of the Selected Reserve of any reserve 
        component of the armed forces unless the end strength 
        for the Selected Reserve of that component for that 
        fiscal year has been authorized by law[; or].
          [(3) training military personnel in the training 
        categories described in subsection (f) of any of the 
        armed forces (other than the Coast Guard) unless the 
        average student load of that armed force for that 
        fiscal year has been authorized by law.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(f) Authorization under subsection (a)(3) is not required 
for unit or crew training student loads, but is required for 
student loads for the following individual training categories:
          [(1) Recruit and specialized training.
          [(2) Flight training.
          [(3) Professional training in military and civilian 
        institutions.
          [(4) Officer acquisition training.]
  (g) Congress shall authorize for each fiscal year the end 
strength for military technicians for each reserve component of 
the Army and Air Force. Funds available to the Department of 
Defense for any fiscal year may not be used for the pay of a 
military technician during that fiscal year unless the 
technician fills a position that is within the number of such 
positions authorized by law for that fiscal year for the 
reserve component of that technician. This subsection applies 
without regard to section 129 of this title.

Sec. 115a. Annual manpower requirements report

  (a) * * *
  (b)(1) * * *
  (2) The justification and explanation shall specify in detail 
for all major military force units (including each land force 
division, carrier and other major combatant vessel, air wing, 
and other comparable unit) the following:
          (A) Unit mission and capability.
          (B) Strategy which the unit supports.
          [(C) Area of deployment and illustrative areas of 
        potential deployment, including a description of any 
        United States commitment to defend such areas.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(d) In each such report, the Secretary shall also--
          [(1) identify, define, and group by mission and by 
        region the types of military bases, installations, and 
        facilities;
          [(2) provide an explanation and justification of the 
        relationship between this base structure and the 
        proposed military force structure; and
          [(3) provide a comprehensive identification of base 
        operating support costs and an evaluation of possible 
        alternatives to reduce those costs.
  [(e)] (d) The Secretary shall also include in each such 
report, with respect to each armed force under the jurisdiction 
of the Secretary of a military department, the following:
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(4) An analysis of the distribution of each of the 
        following categories of officers serving on active duty 
        on the last day of the preceding fiscal year by grade 
        in which serving and years of active commissioned 
        service:
                  [(A) Regular officers.
                  [(B) Reserve officers on the active-duty 
                list.
                  [(C) Reserve officers described in clauses 
                (B) and (C) of section 523(b)(1) of this title.
                  [(D) Officers other than those specified in 
                subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) serving in a 
                temporary grade.
          [(5) An analysis of the number of officers and 
        enlisted members serving on active duty for training as 
        of the last day of the preceding fiscal year under 
        orders specifying an aggregate period in excess of 180 
        days and an estimate for the current fiscal year of the 
        number that will be ordered to such duty, tabulated 
        by--
                  [(A) recruit and specialized training;
                  [(B) flight training;
                  [(C) professional training in military and 
                civilian institutions; and
                  [(D) officer acquisition training.
  [(f) In each such report, the Secretary shall also include 
recommendations for the average student load for each category 
of training for each component of the armed forces for the next 
three fiscal years. The Secretary shall include in the report 
justification for, and explanation of, the average student 
loads recommended.
  [(g)] (e)(1) In each such report, the Secretary shall also 
include recommendations for the end-strength levels for medical 
personnel for each component of the armed forces as of the end 
of the next fiscal year.
  (2) For purposes of this subsection, the term ``medical 
personnel'' includes--
          (A) in the case of the Army, members of the Medical 
        Corps, Dental Corps, Nurse Corps, Medical Service 
        Corps, Veterinary Corps, and Army Medical Specialist 
        Corps;
          (B) in the case of the Navy, members of the Medical 
        Corps, Dental Corps, Nurse Corps, and Medical Service 
        Corps;
          (C) in the case of the Air Force, members designated 
        as medical officers, dental officers, Air Force nurses, 
        medical service officers, and biomedical science 
        officers;
          (D) enlisted members engaged in or supporting 
        medically related activities; and
          (E) such other personnel as the Secretary considers 
        appropriate.
  (h) In each such report, the Secretary shall include a 
separate report on the Army and Air Force military technician 
programs. The report shall include a presentation, shown by 
reserve component and shown both as of the end of the preceding 
fiscal year and for the next fiscal year, of the following:
          (1) The number of military technicians required to be 
        employed (as specified in accordance with Department of 
        Defense procedures), the number authorized to be 
        employed under Department of Defense personnel 
        procedures, and the number actually employed.
          (2) Within each of the numbers under paragraph (1)--
                  (A) the number applicable to a reserve 
                component management headquarter organization; 
                and
                  (B) the number applicable to high-priority 
                units and organizations (as specified in 
                section 10216(a) of this title).
          (3) Within each of the numbers under paragraph (1), 
        the numbers of military technicians who are not 
        themselves members of a reserve component (so-called 
        ``single-status'' technicians), with a further display 
        of such numbers as specified in paragraph (2).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                CHAPTER 3--GENERAL POWERS AND FUNCTIONS

Sec.
121.  Regulations.
122.  Official registers.
     * * * * * * *
[127a.  Expenses for contingency operations.]
127a.  Operations for which funds are not provided in advance: funding 
          mechanisms.
127b.  Budgeting for ongoing operations.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 127. Emergency and extraordinary expenses

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(c) In any case in which funds are expended under the 
authority of subsections (a) and (b), the Secretary of Defense 
shall submit a report of such expenditures on a quarterly basis 
to the Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the 
Senate and the House of Representatives.]
  (c)(1) In any fiscal year in which funds are expended under 
the authority of this section, the Secretary of Defense shall 
submit a report of such expenditures on a quarterly basis to 
the committees specified in paragraph (3).
  (2) An obligation or expenditure in an amount of $1,000,000 
or more may not be made under the authority of this section for 
any single transaction until the Secretary of Defense has 
notified the committees specified in paragraph (3).
  (3) The committees referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) 
are--
          (A) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee 
        on Appropriations of the Senate; and
          (B) the Committee on National Security and the 
        Committee on Appropriations of the House of 
        Representatives.

[Sec. 127a. Expenses for contingency operations

  [(a) Designation of National Contingency Operations.--The 
funding procedures prescribed by this section apply with 
respect to any operation involving the armed forces that is 
designated by the Secretary of Defense as a National 
Contingency Operation. Whenever the Secretary designates an 
operation as a National Contingency Operation, the Secretary 
shall promptly transmit notice of that designation in writing 
to Congress. This section does not provide authority for the 
President or the Secretary of Defense to carry out an 
operation, but applies to the Department of Defense mechanisms 
by which funds are provided for operations that the armed 
forces are required to carry out under some other authority.
  [(b) Waiver of Requirement To Reimburse Support Units.--(1) 
When an operating unit of the armed forces participating in a 
National Contingency Operation receives support services from a 
support unit of the armed forces that operates through the 
Defense Business Operations Fund (or a successor fund), that 
operating unit need not reimburse that support unit for the 
incremental costs incurred by the support unit in providing 
such support, notwithstanding any other provision of law or 
Government accounting practice.
  [(2) The amounts which but for paragraph (1) would be 
required to be reimbursed to a support unit shall be recorded 
as an expense attributable to the operation and shall be 
accounted for separately.
  [(3) The total of the unreimbursed sums for all National 
Contingency Operations may not exceed $300,000,000 at any one 
time.
  [(c) Financial Plan for Contingency Operations.--(1) Within 
two months of the beginning of any National Contingency 
Operation, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a 
financial plan for the operation that sets forth the manner by 
which the Secretary proposes to obtain funds for the full cost 
to the United States of the operation.
  [(2) The plan shall specify in detail how the Secretary 
proposes to make the Defense Business Operations Fund (or a 
successor fund) whole again.
  [(d) Incremental Costs.--For purposes of this section, 
incremental costs of the Department of Defense with respect to 
an operation are the costs that are directly attributable to 
the operation and that are otherwise chargeable to accounts 
available for operation and maintenance or for military 
personnel. Any costs which are otherwise chargeable to accounts 
available for procurement may not be considered to be 
incremental costs for purposes of this section.
  [(e) Incremental Personnel Costs Account.--There is hereby 
established in the Department of Defense a reserve fund to be 
known as the ``National Contingency Operation Personnel Fund''. 
Amounts in the fund shall be available for incremental military 
personnel costs attributable to a National Contingency 
Operation. Amounts in the fund remain available until expended.
  [(f) Coordination With War Powers Resolution.--This section 
may not be construed as altering or superseding the War Powers 
Resolution. This section does not provide authority to conduct 
a National Contingency Operation or any other operation.
  [(g) GAO Compliance Reviews.--The Comptroller General of the 
United States shall from time to time, and when requested by a 
committee of Congress, conduct a review of the defense 
contingency funding structure under this section to determine 
whether the Department of Defense is complying with the 
requirements and limitations of this section.
  [(h) Definition.--In this section, the term ``National 
Contingency Operation'' means a military operation that is 
designated by the Secretary of Defense as an operation the cost 
of which, when considered with the cost of other ongoing or 
potential military operations, is expected to have a negative 
effect on training and readiness.]

Sec. 127a. Operations for which funds are not provided in advance: 
                    funding mechanisms

  (a) In General.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall use the 
procedures prescribed by this section with respect to any 
operation of the Department of Defense--
          (A) that involves the deployment (other than for a 
        training exercise) of elements of the armed forces for 
        a purpose other than a purpose for which funds have 
        been specifically provided in advance; or
          (B) that involves humanitarian assistance, disaster 
        relief, or support for law enforcement (including 
        immigration control) for which funds have not been 
        specifically provided in advance.
  (2) Whenever any operation described in paragraph (1) is 
commenced, the Secretary of Defense shall designate and 
identify that operation for the purposes of this section and 
shall promptly notify Congress of that designation (and of the 
identification of the operation).
  (3) This section does not provide authority for the President 
or the Secretary of Defense to carry out any operation, but 
establishes mechanisms for the Department of Defense by which 
funds are provided for operations that the armed forces are 
required to carry out under some other authority.
  (b) Waiver of Requirement To Reimburse Support Units.--(1) 
The Secretary of Defense shall direct that, when a unit of the 
armed forces participating in an operation described in 
subsection (a) receives services from an element of the 
Department of Defense that operates through the Defense 
Business Operations Fund (or a successor fund), such unit of 
the armed forces may not be required to reimburse that element 
for the incremental costs incurred by that element in providing 
such services, notwithstanding any other provision of law or 
any Government accounting practice.
  (2) The amounts which but for paragraph (1) would be required 
to be reimbursed to an element of the Department of Defense (or 
a fund) shall be recorded as an expense attributable to the 
operation and shall be accounted for separately.
  (c) Transfer Authority.--(1) Whenever there is an operation 
of the Department of Defense described in subsection (a), the 
Secretary of Defense may, subject to the provisions of 
appropriations Acts, transfer amounts described in paragraph 
(3) to accounts from which incremental expenses for that 
operation were incurred in order to reimburse those accounts 
for those incremental expenses. Amounts so transferred shall be 
merged with and be available for the same purposes as the 
accounts to which transferred.
  (2) The total amount that the Secretary of Defense may 
transfer under the authority of this section in any fiscal year 
is $200,000,000.
  (3) Transfers under this subsection may only be made from 
amounts appropriated to the Department of Defense for any 
fiscal year that remain available for obligation from any of 
the following accounts:
          (A) Environmental Restoration, Defense.
          (B) Cooperative Threat Reduction programs.
          (C) Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid 
        (OHDACA) programs.
          (D) Operations and Maintenance, Defense-Wide (but 
        only from funds available for administration and 
        service-wide activities).
  (4) The authority provided by this subsection is in addition 
to any other authority provided by law authorizing the transfer 
of amounts available to the Department of Defense. However, the 
Secretary may not use any such authority under another 
provision of law for a purpose described in paragraph (1) if 
there is authority available under this subsection for that 
purpose.
  (5) The authority provided by this subsection to transfer 
amounts may not be used to provide authority for an activity 
that has been denied authorization by Congress.
  (6) A transfer made from one account to another under the 
authority of this subsection shall be deemed to increase the 
amount authorized for the account to which the amount is 
transferred by an amount equal to the amount transferred.
  (d) Financial Plan.--(1) Within 30 days after the beginning 
of an operation described in subsection (a), the Secretary of 
Defense shall submit to Congress a financial plan for the 
operation that sets forth the manner by which the Secretary 
proposes to obtain funds for the cost to the United States of 
the operation. The plan shall specify in detail how the 
Secretary proposes to restore balances in the Defense Business 
Operations Fund (or a successor fund) to the levels that would 
have been anticipated but for the provisions of subsection (b). 
The Secretary may not include in such a plan a means to restore 
such balances that is prohibited by paragraph (2) or (4).
  (2) The Secretary may not restore (or propose in a plan under 
paragraph (1) to restore) balances in the Defense Business 
Operations Fund through increases in rates charged by that fund 
in order to compensate for costs incurred and not reimbursed 
due to subsection (b).
  (3) If the Secretary of Defense transfers funds under 
subsection (c), the Secretary shall submit to Congress, within 
30 days of such transfer, a plan for the restoration of the 
balance in the each account from which the transfer was made to 
the level that would have been the case but for the transfer.
  (4) The Secretary may not restore (or propose in a plan under 
paragraph (1) or (3) to restore) balances in any the Defense 
Business Operations Fund or any other fund or account through 
the use of unobligated amounts in an appropriation made for 
operation and maintenance that are available within that 
appropriation for an account (known as a budget activity 1 
account) that is specified as being for operating forces.
  (e) Submission of Requests for Supplemental Appropriations.--
(1) Whenever there is an operation described in subsection (a), 
the President shall submit to Congress a request for the 
enactment of supplemental appropriations for the then-current 
fiscal year, to be designated as an emergency supplemental 
appropriations, in order to provide funds to replenish the 
Defense Business Operations Fund or any other fund or account 
of the Department of Defense from which funds for the 
incremental expenses of that operation were derived under this 
section.
  (2) A request under paragraph (1) shall be submitted not 
later than the earlier of (A) the time at which incremental 
expenses for the operation exceed $10,000,000, or (B) 90 days 
after the date on which the operation begins. The request shall 
be submitted as a separate request from any other legislative 
proposal.
  (f) Incremental Costs.--For purposes of this section, 
incremental costs of the Department of Defense with respect to 
an operation are the costs of the Department that are directly 
attributable to the operation (and would not have been incurred 
but for the operation).
  (g) Relationship to War Powers Resolution.--This section may 
not be construed as altering or superseding the War Powers 
Resolution. This section does not provide authority to conduct 
any military operation.
  (h) GAO Compliance Reviews.--The Comptroller General of the 
United States shall from time to time, and when requested by a 
committee of Congress, conduct a review of the defense funding 
structure under this section to determine whether the 
Department of Defense is complying with the requirements and 
limitations of this section.

Sec. 127b. Budgeting for ongoing operations

  (a) Requirement for Inclusion in Budget.--In the case of an 
operation of the Department of Defense described in subsection 
(c), the President shall include with the budget submitted to 
Congress pursuant to section 1105 of title 31 for the next 
fiscal year a specific request for enactment of legislation to 
provide for the provision of funds for such operation for that 
fiscal year in a manner that will result in there not being a 
lower amount of funds available to the Department of Defense 
for that fiscal year than would be the case if that operation 
were not carried out during that year. Such a request shall 
include one or more of the following:
          (1) A request for enactment of appropriation of funds 
        for the incremental costs for that operation that are 
        expected to be incurred by the Department of Defense 
        during the fiscal year for which the budget is 
        submitted, with such funds to be provided in, and 
        charged to, a budget function other than the national 
        defense budget function (function 050).
          (2) A request for enactment of appropriation of funds 
        for the incremental costs for that operation that are 
        expected to be incurred by the Department of Defense 
        during the fiscal year for which the budget is 
        submitted, with such designations or waivers as may be 
        necessary to ensure that (if enacted) such 
        appropriations are not counted against the total amount 
        of funds for the Department of Defense, or for the 
        national defense budget function, for purpose of any 
        statutory limitation or restriction.
          (3) A request for enactment of rescissions.
  (b) Limitation.--In the case of any operation to which the 
requirement of subsection (a) applies, no funds may be 
obligated or expended for that operation after the beginning of 
the fiscal year for which the budget is submitted if the 
requirement in subsection (a) is not complied with.
  (c) Covered Operations.--This section applies with respect to 
any operation of the Department of Defense involving the use of 
the Armed Forces that--
          (1) is ongoing in the first quarter of a fiscal year;
          (2) is not expected to end during the current fiscal 
        year;
          (3) for which appropriations were not specifically 
        provided in advance for the current fiscal year.
  (d) Waiver Authority.--The President may waive the provisions 
of this section for any fiscal year--
          (1) during which there is in effect a declaration of 
        war; or
          (2) during which authority is in effect pursuant to 
        section 12302 of this title to order units and members 
        of the Ready Reserve to active duty without the consent 
        of the persons concerned.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 129. Prohibition of certain civilian personnel management 
                    constraints

  (a) The civilian personnel of the Department of Defense shall 
be managed each fiscal year solely on the basis of and 
consistent with (1) the workload required to carry out the 
functions and activities of the department and (2) the funds 
made available to the department for such fiscal year. The 
management of such personnel in any fiscal year shall not be 
subject to any man-year constraint or limitation (including any 
limitation on full-time equivalent positions). The Secretary 
shall not be required to make a reduction in the number of 
full-time equivalent positions in the Department of Defense 
unless such reduction is necessary due to a reduction in funds 
available to the Department or is required under a law that is 
enacted after the date of the enactment of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 and that refers 
specifically to this subsection.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) With respect to each budget activity within an 
appropriation for any fiscal year for operations and 
maintenance, the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that there 
are employed during that fiscal year employees in the number, 
and of the type and with the skill mix, that are necessary to 
carry out the functions within that budget activity for which 
funds are provided for that fiscal year.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


             CHAPTER 4--OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

Sec.
131.  Office of the Secretary of Defense.
     * * * * * * *
[133a.   Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
          Technology.]
     * * * * * * *
[134a.   Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.]
     * * * * * * *
[137.  Director of Defense Research and Engineering.]
     * * * * * * *
[139.  Director of Operational Test and Evaluation.]
     * * * * * * *
[142.  Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Atomic Energy.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 131. Office of the Secretary of Defense

  (a) * * *
  (b) The Office of the Secretary of Defense is composed of the 
following:
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(6) The Director of Defense Research and 
        Engineering.
          [(7)] (6) The Assistant Secretaries of Defense.
          [(8) The Director of Operational Test and 
        Evaluation.]
          [(9)] (7) The General Counsel of the Department of 
        Defense.
          [(10)] (8) The Inspector General of the Department of 
        Defense.
          [(11)] (9) Such other offices and officials as may be 
        established by law or the Secretary of Defense may 
        establish or designate in the Office.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 133a. Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
                    Technology

  [(a) There is a Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Technology, appointed from civilian life by the 
President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
  [(b) The Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition 
and Technology shall assist the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Technology in the performance of his duties. 
The Deputy Under Secretary shall act for, and exercise the 
powers of, the Under Secretary when the Under Secretary is 
absent or disabled.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 134a. Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy

  [(a) There is a Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, 
appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the 
advice and consent of the Senate.
  [(b) The Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy shall 
assist the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy in the 
performance of his duties. The Deputy Under Secretary of 
Defense for Policy shall act for, and exercise the powers of, 
the Under Secretary when the Under Secretary is absent or 
disabled.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 137. Director of Defense Research and Engineering

  [(a) There is a Director of Defense Research and Engineering, 
appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the 
advice and consent of the Senate.
  [(b) Except as otherwise prescribed by the Secretary of 
Defense, the Director of Defense Research and Engineering shall 
perform such duties relating to research and engineering as the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology may 
prescribe.]

Sec. 138. Assistant Secretaries of Defense

  (a) There are [eleven] nine Assistant Secretaries of Defense, 
appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the 
advice and consent of the Senate.
  [(b)(1) The Assistant Secretaries shall perform such duties 
and exercise such powers as the Secretary of Defense may 
prescribe.
  [(2) One of the Assistant Secretaries shall be the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs. He shall have as his 
principal duty the overall supervision of reserve component 
affairs of the Department of Defense.
  [(3)(A) One of the Assistant Secretaries shall be the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, 
Communications, and Intelligence. He shall have as his 
principal duty the overall supervision of command, control, 
communications, and intelligence affairs of the Department of 
Defense.
  [(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), one of the Assistant 
Secretaries established by the Secretary of Defense may be an 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, who shall have 
as his principal duty the overall supervision of intelligence 
affairs of the Department of Defense.
  [(C) If the Secretary of Defense establishes an Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, the Assistant Secretary 
provided for under subparagraph (A) shall be the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, and Communications 
and shall have as his principal duty the overall supervision of 
command, control, and communications affairs of the Department 
of Defense.
  [(4) One of the Assistant Secretaries shall be the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity 
Conflict. He shall have as his principal duty the overall 
supervision (including oversight of policy and resources) of 
special operations activities (as defined in section 167(j) of 
this title) and low intensity conflict activities of the 
Department of Defense. The Assistant Secretary is the principal 
civilian adviser to the Secretary of Defense on special 
operations and low intensity conflict matters and (after the 
Secretary and Deputy Secretary) is the principal special 
operations and low intensity conflict official within the 
senior management of the Department of Defense.
  [(5) One of the Assistant Secretaries shall be the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Legislative Affairs. He shall have as 
his principal duty the overall supervision of legislative 
affairs of the Department of Defense.]
  (b) The Assistant Secretaries shall perform such duties and 
exercise such powers as the Secretary of Defense may prescribe.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) The Assistant Secretaries take precedence in the 
Department of Defense after the Secretary of Defense, the 
Deputy Secretary of Defense, the Secretaries of the military 
departments, [the Under Secretaries of Defense, and the 
Director of Defense Research and Engineering] and the Under 
Secretaries of Defense. The Assistant Secretaries take 
precedence among themselves in the order prescribed by the 
Secretary of Defense.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 139. Director of Operational Test and Evaluation

  [(a)(1) There is a Director of Operational Test and 
Evaluation in the Department of Defense, appointed from 
civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and 
consent of the Senate. The Director shall be appointed without 
regard to political affiliation and solely on the basis of 
fitness to perform the duties of the office of Director. The 
Director may be removed from office by the President. The 
President shall communicate the reasons for any such removal to 
both Houses of Congress.
  [(2) In this section:
          [(A) The term ``operational test and evaluation'' 
        means--
                  [(i) the field test, under realistic combat 
                conditions, of any item of (or key component 
                of) weapons, equipment, or munitions for the 
                purpose of determining the effectiveness and 
                suitability of the weapons, equipment, or 
                munitions for use in combat by typical military 
                users; and
                  [(ii) the evaluation of the results of such 
                test.
          [(B) The term ``major defense acquisition program'' 
        means a Department of Defense acquisition program that 
        is a major defense acquisition program for purposes of 
        section 2430 of this title or that is designated as 
        such a program by the Director for purposes of this 
        section.
  [(b) The Director is the principal adviser to the Secretary 
of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition 
and Technology on operational test and evaluation in the 
Department of Defense and the principal operational test and 
evaluation official within the senior management of the 
Department of Defense. The Director shall--
          [(1) prescribe, by authority of the Secretary of 
        Defense, policies and procedures for the conduct of 
        operational test and evaluation in the Department of 
        Defense;
          [(2) provide guidance to and consult with the 
        Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense 
        for Acquisition and Technology and the Secretaries of 
        the military departments with respect to operational 
        test and evaluation in the Department of Defense in 
        general and with respect to specific operational test 
        and evaluation to be conducted in connection with a 
        major defense acquisition program;
          [(3) monitor and review all operational test and 
        evaluation in the Department of Defense;
          [(4) coordinate operational testing conducted jointly 
        by more than one military department or defense agency;
          [(5) review and make recommendations to the Secretary 
        of Defense on all budgetary and financial matters 
        relating to operational test and evaluation, including 
        operational test facilities and equipment, in the 
        Department of Defense; and
          [(6) monitor and review the live fire testing 
        activities of the Department of Defense provided for 
        under section 2366 of this title.
  [(c) The Director may communicate views on matters within the 
responsibility of the Director directly to the Secretary of 
Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Defense without obtaining 
the approval or concurrence of any other official within the 
Department of Defense. The Director shall consult closely with, 
but the Director and the Director's staff are independent of, 
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology 
and all other officers and entities of the Department of 
Defense responsible for acquisition.
  [(d) The Director may not be assigned any responsibility for 
developmental test and evaluation, other than the provision of 
advice to officials responsible for such testing.
  [(e)(1) The Secretary of a military department shall report 
promptly to the Director the results of all operational test 
and evaluation conducted by the military department and of all 
studies conducted by the military department in connection with 
operational test and evaluation in the military department.
  [(2) The Director may require that such observers as he 
designates be present during the preparation for and the 
conduct of the test part of any operational test and evaluation 
conducted in the Department of Defense.
  [(3) The Director shall have access to all records and data 
in the Department of Defense (including the records and data of 
each military department) that the Director considers necessary 
to review in order to carry out his duties under this section.
  [(f) The Director shall prepare an annual report summarizing 
the operational test and evaluation activities (including live 
fire testing activities) of the Department of Defense during 
the preceding fiscal year. Each such report shall be submitted 
concurrently to the Secretary of Defense, the Under Secretary 
of Defense for Acquisition and Technology, and the Congress not 
later than 10 days after the transmission of the budget for the 
next fiscal year under section 1105 of title 31. If the 
Director submits the report to Congress in a classified form, 
the Director shall concurrently submit an unclassified version 
of the report to Congress. The report shall include such 
comments and recommendations as the Director considers 
appropriate, including comments and recommendations on 
resources and facilities available for operational test and 
evaluation and levels of funding made available for operational 
test and evaluation activities. The Secretary may comment on 
any report of the Director to Congress under this subsection.
  [(g) The Director shall comply with requests from Congress 
(or any committee of either House of Congress) for information 
relating to operational test and evaluation in the Department 
of Defense.
  [(h) The President shall include in the Budget transmitted to 
Congress pursuant to section 1105 of title 31 for each fiscal 
year a separate statement of estimated expenditures and 
proposed appropriations for that fiscal year for the activities 
of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation in carrying 
out the duties and responsibilities of the Director under this 
section.
  [(i) The Director shall have sufficient professional staff of 
military and civilian personnel to enable the Director to carry 
out the duties and responsibilities of the Director prescribed 
by law.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 141. Inspector General

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) The Inspector General shall be responsible for and shall 
oversee all investigations of procurement fraud within the 
Department of Defense.

[Sec. 142. Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Atomic Energy

  [(a) There is an Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for 
Atomic Energy, appointed by the President, by and with the 
advice and consent of the Senate.
  [(b) The Assistant to the Secretary shall advise the 
Secretary of Defense and the Nuclear Weapons Council on nuclear 
energy and nuclear weapons matters.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 7--BOARDS, COUNCILS, AND COMMITTEES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 173. Advisory personnel

  (a) * * *
  (b) A person who serves as a member of a committee may not be 
paid for that service while holding another position or office 
under the United States for which he receives compensation. 
[Other members and part-time advisers may serve without 
compensation or may be paid not more than $50 for each day of 
service, as the Secretary determines.] Other members and part-
time advisers shall (except as otherwise specifically 
authorized by law) serve without compensation for such service.

Sec. 174. Advisory personnel: research and development

  (a) * * *
  (b) A person who serves as a member of such a committee or 
panel may not be paid for that service while holding another 
position or office under the United States for which he 
receives compensation. [Other members and part-time advisers 
may serve without compensation or may be paid not more than $50 
for each day of service, as the Secretary concerned 
determines.] Other members and part-time advisers shall (except 
as otherwise specifically authorized by law) serve without 
compensation for such service.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 176. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology

  (a)(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (3) The Board of Governors shall consist of the [Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs] official in the 
Department of Defense with principal responsibility for health 
affairs, who shall serve as chairman of the Board of Governors, 
the Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services for 
Health, the Surgeons General of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, 
the [Chief Medical Director of the Department of Veterans 
Affairs] Under Secretary for Health of the Department of 
Veterans Affairs, and a former Director of the Institute, as 
designated by the Secretary of Defense, or the designee of any 
of the foregoing.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                   CHAPTER 9--DEFENSE BUDGET MATTERS

Sec.
221.  Future-years defense program: submission to Congress; consistency 
          in budgeting.
     * * * * * * *
[227.  Recruiting costs.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 227. Recruiting costs

  [The Secretary of Defense shall include in the budget 
justification documents submitted to Congress each year in 
connection with the submission of the budget pursuant to 
section 1105 of title 31 the following matters:
          [(1) The amount requested for the recruitment of 
        persons for enlistment or appointment into the armed 
        forces, including--
                  [(A) the personnel costs for Department of 
                Defense personnel whose duties include--
                          [(i) recruitment;
                          [(ii) the management of Department of 
                        Defense personnel performing 
                        recruitment duties; or
                          [(iii) supporting Department of 
                        Defense personnel in the performance of 
                        duties referred to in clause (i) or 
                        (ii);
                  [(B) the cost of providing support for such 
                personnel for the performance of those duties;
                  [(C) operation and maintenance costs 
                associated with recruitment, including the 
                costs of paid advertising and facilities;
                  [(D) the costs of incentives, including--
                          [(i) amounts paid under sections 
                        302d, 308a, 308c, 308f, 308g, 308h (for 
                        a first enlistment), and 308i of title 
                        37, relating to bonuses and other 
                        incentives;
                          [(ii) amounts deposited in the 
                        Department of Defense Education 
                        Benefits Fund pursuant to section 
                        2006(g) of this title; and
                          [(iii) payments under the provisions 
                        of chapters 105, 107, and 109 of this 
                        title and chapter 30 of title 38; and
                  [(E) costs associated with military entrance 
                processing.
          [(2) The appropriation accounts from which such costs 
        are to be paid.
          [(3) The estimated average total annual cost of 
        recruiting a person for enlistment or appointment into 
        the armed forces for the fiscal year covered by the 
        budget, determined and shown separately for--
                  [(A) each armed force;
                  [(B) the active component of each armed 
                force;
                  [(C) each of the reserve components of each 
                armed force; and
                  [(D) for all of the armed forces.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 18--MILITARY SUPPORT FOR CIVILIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 372. Use of military equipment and facilities

  The Secretary of Defense may, in accordance with other 
applicable law, make available any equipment (including 
associated supplies or spare parts), base facility, or research 
facility of the Department of Defense to any Federal, State, or 
local civilian law enforcement official for law enforcement 
purposes. Assistance provided under this section may include 
training facilities, sensors, protective clothing, antidotes, 
and other materials and expertise of the Department of Defense 
appropriate for use by a Federal, State, or local law 
enforcement agency in preparing for or responding to an 
emergency involving chemical or biological agents if the 
Secretary determines that the materials or services to be 
provided are not reasonably available from another source.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


             CHAPTER 20--HUMANITARIAN AND OTHER ASSISTANCE

                 SUBCHAPTER I--HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE

Sec.
401.  Humanitarian and civic assistance provided in conjunction with 
          military operations.
     * * * * * * *
[403.  International peacekeeping activities.]
     * * * * * * *
405.  Placement of United States forces under United Nations command or 
          control: limitation.
406.  Use of Department of Defense funds for United States share of 
          costs of United Nations peacekeeping activities: limitation.

Sec. 401. Humanitarian and civic assistance provided in conjunction 
                    with military operations

  (a)(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (4) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that no member of 
the armed forces, while providing assistance under this section 
that is described in subsection (e)(5)--
          (A) engages in the physical detection, lifting, or 
        destroying of landmines (unless the member does so for 
        the concurrent purpose of supporting a United States 
        military operation); or
          (B) provides such assistance as part of a military 
        operation that does not involve the armed forces.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) In this section, the term ``humanitarian and civic 
assistance'' [means--] means:
          (1) [medical] Medical, dental, and veterinary care 
        provided in rural areas of a country[;].
          (2) [construction] Construction of rudimentary 
        surface transportation systems[;].
          (3) [well] Well drilling and construction of basic 
        sanitation facilities[; and].
          (4) [rudimentary] Rudimentary construction and repair 
        of public facilities.
          (5) Detection and clearance of landmines, including 
        activities relating to the furnishing of education, 
        training, and technical assistance with respect to the 
        detection and clearance of landmines.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 403. International peacekeeping activities

  [(a) Authority.--To the extent provided in defense 
authorization Acts and appropriations Acts, the Secretary of 
Defense may furnish assistance in support of international 
peacekeeping activities of the United Nations or any regional 
organization of which the United States is a member.
  [(b) Forms of Assistance.--Assistance provided under 
subsection (a) may include funds, supplies, services, and 
equipment. Any funds so provided shall be derived from amounts 
available to the Department of Defense for the fiscal year for 
which the assistance is provided.
  [(c) Limitations.--Funds may be provided as assistance 
pursuant to subsection (a) for a fiscal year--
          [(1) only if funds available to the Department of 
        State for that fiscal year for contributions for 
        international peacekeeping activities are insufficient 
        or otherwise unavailable to meet the United States' 
        fair share of costs for international peacekeeping 
        activities, as determined by the President;
          [(2) only to the extent that such funds are required 
        to meet unexpected and urgent requirements;
          [(3) only to the extent that the United States' fair 
        share of such costs exceeds the amount that the 
        President requests Congress to appropriate for the 
        Department of State for such fiscal year for 
        international peacekeeping activities;
          [(4) only if the United States has received written 
        commitments that the United States will be fully and 
        promptly reimbursed by the United Nations or the 
        regional organization involved for outstanding 
        obligations incurred through an arrangement designated 
        under United Nations practices as a ``letter of 
        assist'' or a similar arrangement for logistics 
        support, supplies, services, and equipment provided by 
        the Department of Defense on a contract basis to the 
        United Nations or the regional organization involved; 
        and
          [(5) only if the Department of Defense will receive 
        any reimbursement to the United States from the United 
        Nations or a regional organization for outstanding 
        obligations incurred through an arrangement designated 
        under United Nations practices as a ``letter of 
        assist'' or a similar arrangement for logistics 
        support, supplies, services, and equipment provided by 
        the Department of Defense on a contract basis to the 
        United Nations or the regional organization involved, 
        unless such reimbursement to the Department of Defense 
        is otherwise precluded by law.
  [(d) Consultation.--The Secretary of Defense shall consult 
with the Secretary of State before furnishing any assistance 
pursuant to subsection (a).
  [(e) Determinations Required.--No assistance may be furnished 
pursuant to subsection (a) unless the Secretary of Defense 
certifies to Congress that the provision of such assistance 
will not adversely affect the military preparedness of the 
United States.
  [(f) Advance Notice to Congress.--Not less than 30 days 
before obligating any funds for purposes of subsection (a), the 
Secretary of Defense shall transmit to Congress a report on the 
proposed obligation. The report shall--
          [(1) specify the account, budget activity, and 
        particular program or programs from which the funds 
        proposed to be obligated are to be derived and the 
        amount of the proposed obligation;
          [(2) specify the activities and forms of assistance 
        for which the Secretary of Defense plans to obligate 
        such funds; and
          [(3) include the certification required by subsection 
        (e).
  [(g) Definition.--In this section, the term ``defense 
authorization Act'' means an Act that authorizes appropriations 
for one or more fiscal years for military activities of the 
Department of Defense, including the activities described in 
paragraph (7) of section 114(a) of this title.
  [(h) Termination.--The authority of the Secretary of Defense 
to furnish assistance under subsection (a) shall expire on 
September 30, 1994.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 405. Placement of United States forces under United Nations 
                    command or control: limitation

  (a) Limitation.--Except as provided in subsections (b) and 
(c), funds appropriated or otherwise made available for the 
Department of Defense may not be obligated or expended for 
activities of any element of the Armed Forces that after the 
date of the enactment of this section is placed under United 
Nations command or control, as defined in subsection (f).
  (b) Exception for Presidential Certification.--(1) Subsection 
(a) shall not apply in the case of a proposed placement of an 
element of the Armed Forces under United Nations command or 
control if the President, not less than 15 days before the date 
on which such United Nations command or control is to become 
effective (or as provided in paragraph (2)), meets the 
requirements of subsection (d).
  (2) If the President certifies to Congress that an emergency 
exists that precludes the President from meeting the 
requirements of subsection (d) 15 days before placing an 
element of the Armed Forces under United Nations command or 
control, the President may place such forces under such command 
or control and meet the requirements of subsection (d) in a 
timely manner, but in no event later than 48 hours after such 
command or control becomes effective.
  (c) Additional Exceptions.--
          (1) Exception for authorization by law.--Subsection 
        (a) shall not apply in the case of a proposed placement 
        of any element of the Armed Forces under United Nations 
        command or control if the Congress specifically 
        authorizes by law that particular placement of United 
        States forces under United Nations command or control.
          (2) Exception for nato operations.--Subsection (a) 
        shall not apply in the case of a proposed placement of 
        any element of the armed forces in an operation 
        conducted by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
  (d) Presidential Certifications.--The requirements referred 
to in subsection (b)(1) are that the President submit to 
Congress the following:
          (1) Certification by the President that--
                  (A) such a United Nations command or control 
                arrangement is necessary to protect national 
                security interests of the United States;
                  (B) the commander of any unit of the Armed 
                Forces proposed for placement under United 
                Nations command or control will at all times 
                retain the right--
                          (i) to report independently to 
                        superior United States military 
                        authorities; and
                          (ii) to decline to comply with orders 
                        judged by the commander to be illegal, 
                        militarily imprudent, or beyond the 
                        mandate of the mission to which the 
                        United States agreed with the United 
                        Nations, until such time as that 
                        commander receives direction from 
                        superior United States military 
                        authorities with respect to the orders 
                        that the commander has declined to 
                        comply with;
                  (C) any element of the Armed Forces proposed 
                for placement under United Nations command or 
                control will at all times remain under United 
                States administrative command for such purposes 
                as discipline and evaluation; and
                  (D) the United States will retain the 
                authority to withdraw any element of the Armed 
                Forces from the proposed operation at any time 
                and to take any action it considers necessary 
                to protect those forces if they are engaged.
          (2) A report setting forth the following:
                  (A) A description of the national security 
                interests that require the placement of United 
                States forces under United Nations command or 
                control.
                  (B) The mission of the United States forces 
                involved.
                  (C) The expected size and composition of the 
                United States forces involved.
                  (D) The incremental cost to the United States 
                of participation in the United Nations 
                operation by the United States forces which are 
                proposed to be placed under United Nations 
                command or control.
                  (E) The precise command and control 
                relationship between the United States forces 
                involved and the United Nations command 
                structure.
                  (F) The precise command and control 
                relationship between the United States forces 
                involved and the commander of the United States 
                unified command for the region in which those 
                United States forces are to operate.
                  (G) The extent to which the United States 
                forces involved will rely on non-United States 
                forces for security and self-defense and an 
                assessment on the ability of those non-United 
                States forces to provide adequate security to 
                the United States forces involved.
                  (H) The timetable for complete withdrawal of 
                the United States forces involved.
  (e) Classification of Report.--A report under subsection (d) 
shall be submitted in unclassified form and, if necessary, in 
classified form.
  (f) United Nations Command or Control.--For purposes of this 
section, an element of the Armed Forces shall be considered to 
be placed under United Nations command or control if--
          (1) that element is under the command or operational 
        control of an individual acting on behalf of the United 
        Nations for the purpose of international peacekeeping, 
        peacemaking, peace-enforcing, or similar activity that 
        is authorized by the Security Council under chapter VI 
        or VII of the Charter of the United Nations; and
          (2) the senior military commander of the United 
        Nations force or operation--
                  (A) is a foreign national or is a citizen of 
                the United States who is not a United States 
                military officer serving on active duty; or
                  (B) is a United States military officer 
                serving on active duty but--
                          (i) that element of the armed forces 
                        is under the command or operational 
                        control of a subordinate commander who 
                        is a foreign national or a citizen of 
                        the United States who is not a United 
                        States military officer serving on 
                        active duty; and
                          (ii) that senior military commander 
                        does not have the authority--
                                  (I) to dismiss any 
                                subordinate officer in the 
                                chain of command who is 
                                exercising command or 
                                operational control over United 
                                States forces and who is a 
                                foreign national or a citizen 
                                of the United States who is not 
                                a United States military 
                                officer serving on active duty;
                                  (II) to establish rules of 
                                engagement for United States 
                                forces involved; and
                                  (III) to establish criteria 
                                governing the operational 
                                employment of United States 
                                forces involved.
  (g) Interpretation.--Nothing in this section may be 
construed--
          (1) as authority for the President to use any element 
        of the armed forces in any operation;
          (2) as authority for the President to place any 
        element of the armed forces under the command or 
        operational control of a foreign national; or
          (3) as an unconstitutional infringement on the 
        authority of the President as commander-in-chief.

Sec. 406. Use of Department of Defense funds for United States share of 
                    costs of United Nations peacekeeping activities: 
                    limitation

  (a) Prohibition on Use of Funds.--Funds available to the 
Department of Defense may not be used to make a financial 
contribution (directly or through another department or agency 
of the United States) to the United Nations--
          (1) for the costs of a United Nations peacekeeping 
        activity; or
          (2) for any United States arrearage to the United 
        Nations.
  (b) Application of Prohibition.--The prohibition in 
subsection (a) applies to voluntary contributions, as well as 
to contributions pursuant to assessment by the United Nations 
for the United States share of the costs of a peacekeeping 
activity.

               SUBCHAPTER II--CIVIL-MILITARY COOPERATION

Sec.
[410.  Civil-Military Cooperative Action Program.

[Sec. 410. Civil-Military Cooperative Action Program

  [(a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Defense shall establish 
a program to be known as the ``Civil-Military Cooperative 
Action Program''. Under the program, the Secretary may, in 
accordance with other applicable law, use the skills, 
capabilities, and resources of the armed forces to assist 
civilian efforts to meet the domestic needs of the United 
States.
  [(b) Program Objectives.--The program shall have the 
following objectives:
          [(1) To enhance individual and unit training and 
        morale in the armed forces through meaningful community 
        involvement of the armed forces.
          [(2) To encourage cooperation between civilian and 
        military sectors of society in addressing domestic 
        needs.
          [(3) To advance equal opportunity.
          [(4) To enrich the civilian economy of the United 
        States through education, training, and transfer of 
        technological advances.
          [(5) To improve the environment and economic and 
        social conditions.
          [(6) To provide opportunities for disadvantaged 
        citizens of the United States.
  [(c) Advisory Councils.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
encourage the establishment of advisory councils on civil-
military cooperation at the regional, State, and local levels, 
as appropriate, in order to obtain recommendations for projects 
and activities under the program and guidance for the program 
from persons who are knowledgeable about regional, State, and 
local conditions and needs.
  [(2) The advisory councils should include officials from 
relevant military organizations, representatives of appropriate 
local, State, and Federal agencies, representatives of civic 
and social service organizations, business representatives, and 
labor representatives.
  [(3) The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall 
not apply to such councils.
  [(d) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe 
regulations governing the provision of assistance under the 
program. The regulations shall include the following:
          [(1) Rules governing the types of assistance that may 
        be provided.
          [(2) Procedures governing the delivery of assistance 
        that ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that 
        such assistance is provided in conjunction with, rather 
        than separate from, civilian efforts.
          [(3) Procedures for appropriate coordination with 
        civilian officials to ensure that the assistance--
                  [(A) meets a valid need; and
                  [(B) does not duplicate other available 
                public services.
          [(4) Procedures for the provision of assistance in a 
        manner that does not compete with the private sector.
          [(5) Procedures to minimize the extent to which 
        Department of Defense resources are applied exclusively 
        to the program.
          [(6) Standards to ensure that assistance is provided 
        under this section in a manner that is consistent with 
        the military mission of the units of the armed forces 
        involved in providing the assistance.
  [(e) Construction of Provision.--Nothing in this section 
shall be construed as authorizing--
          [(1) the use of the armed forces for civilian law 
        enforcement purposes; or
          [(2) the use of Department of Defense personnel or 
        resources for any program, project, or activity that is 
        prohibited by law.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


             CHAPTER 22--MISCELLANEOUS STUDIES AND REPORTS

Sec.
451.  Racial and ethnic issues; biennial survey; biennial report.
452.  Quarterly readiness reports.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 452. Quarterly readiness reports

  (a) Requirement.--Not later than 30 days after the end of 
each calendar-year quarter, the Secretary of Defense shall 
submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the 
Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives 
a report on military readiness. The report for any quarter 
shall be based on assessments that are provided during that 
quarter--
          (1) to any council, committee, or other body of the 
        Department of Defense (A) that has responsibility for 
        readiness oversight, and (B) the membership of which 
        includes at least one civilian officer in the Office of 
        the Secretary of Defense at the level of Assistant 
        Secretary of Defense or higher;
          (2) by senior civilian and military officers of the 
        military departments and the commanders of the unified 
        and specified commands; and
          (3) as part of any regularly established process of 
        periodic readiness reviews for the Department of 
        Defense as a whole.
  (b) Matters To Be Included.--Each such report--
          (1) shall specifically describe identified readiness 
        problems or deficiencies and planned remedial actions; 
        and
          (2) shall include the key indicators and other 
        relevant data related to the identified problem area or 
        deficiency.
  (c) Classification of Reports.--Reports under this section 
shall be submitted in unclassified form and may, as the 
Secretary determines necessary, also be submitted in classified 
form.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART II--PERSONNEL

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Chap.                                                               Sec.
      Enlistments....................................................501
     * * * * * * *
      Missing Persons...............................................1501
     * * * * * * *
      Military Family Programs and Military Child Care..............1781
     * * * * * * *

  CHAPTER 33A--APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, AND INVOLUNTARY SEPARATION AND 
RETIREMENT FOR MEMBERS ON THE WARRANT OFFICER ACTIVE-DUTY LIST

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 581. Selective retirement

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) The Secretary concerned may defer for not more than 90 
days the retirement of an officer otherwise approved for early 
retirement under this section in order to prevent a personal 
hardship to the officer or for other humanitarian reasons.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


   CHAPTER 36--PROMOTION, SEPARATION, AND INVOLUNTARY RETIREMENT OF 
OFFICERS ON THE ACTIVE-DUTY LIST

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


    SUBCHAPTER IV--CONTINUATION ON ACTIVE DUTY AND SELECTIVE EARLY 
RETIREMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 638. Selective early retirement

  (a) * * *
  (b)(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (3) The Secretary concerned may defer for not more than 90 
days the retirement of an officer otherwise approved for early 
retirement under this section or section 638a of this title in 
order to prevent a personal hardship to the officer or for 
other humanitarian reasons.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                CHAPTER 37--GENERAL SERVICE REQUIREMENTS

Sec.
651.  Members: required service.
     * * * * * * *
655.  Designation of persons having interest in status of missing 
          persons.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 655. Designation of persons having interest in status of missing 
                    persons

  (a) The Secretary concerned shall, upon the enlistment or 
appointment of a person in the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine 
Corps, require that the person specify in writing the person or 
persons, if any, to whom information on the whereabouts or 
status of the member shall be provided if such whereabouts or 
status are investigated under chapter 76 of this title. The 
Secretary shall periodically, and whenever the member is 
deployed as part of a contingency operation or in other 
circumstances specified by the Secretary, require that such 
designation be reconfirmed, or modified, by the member.
  (b) The Secretary concerned shall, upon the request of a 
member, permit the member to revise the person or persons 
specified by the member under subsection (a) at any time. Any 
such revision shall be in writing.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                        CHAPTER 39--ACTIVE DUTY

Sec.
671.  Members not to be assigned outside United States before completing 
          training.
     * * * * * * *
691.  Permanent end strength levels to support two major regional 
          contingencies.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 691. Permanent end strength levels to support two major regional 
                    contingencies

  (a) The end strengths specified in subsection (b) are the 
minimum strengths necessary to enable the armed forces to 
fulfill a national defense strategy calling for the United 
States to be able to successfully conduct two nearly 
simultaneous major regional contingencies.
  (b) Unless otherwise provided by law, the number of members 
of the armed forces (other than the Coast Guard) on active duty 
at the end of any fiscal year shall be not less than the 
following:
          (1) For the Army, 495,000.
          (2) For the Navy, 395,000.
          (3) For the Marine Corps, 174,000.
          (4) For the Air Force, 381,000.
  (c) No funds appropriated to the Department of Defense may be 
used to reduce the active duty end strengths for the armed 
forces below the levels specified in subsection (b) unless the 
Secretary of Defense submits to Congress notice of the proposed 
lower end strength levels and a justification for those levels. 
No action may then be taken to reduce such end strengths below 
the levels specified in subsection (b) until the end of the 
six-month period beginning on the date of the submission of 
such notification to Congress.
  (d) The number of members of the armed forces on active duty 
shall be counted for purposes of this section in the same 
manner as applies under section 115(a)(1) of this title.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 47--UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBCHAPTER VII--TRIAL PROCEDURE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 847. Art. 47. Refusal to appear or testify

  (a) * * *
  (b) Any person who commits an offense named in subsection (a) 
shall be tried on information in a United States district court 
or in a court of original criminal jurisdiction in any of the 
Territories, Commonwealths, or possessions of the United 
States, and jurisdiction is conferred upon those courts for 
that purpose. Upon conviction, such a person [shall be punished 
by a fine of not more than $500, or imprisonment for not more 
than six months, or both] shall be fined or imprisoned, or 
both, at the court's discretion.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                       SUBCHAPTER VIII--SENTENCES

855.                   55.                   Cruel and unusual
                                              punishments prohibited.
 
   *          *          *          *          *          *          *
 


857.                    57.                    Effective date of
                                                sentences.
857a.                   57a.                   Sentences: forfeiture of
                                                pay and allowances
                                                during confinement by
                                                sentence of court-
                                                martial.
 
   *          *          *          *          *          *          *
 

Sec. 857a. Art. 57a. Sentences: forfeiture of pay and allowances during 
                    confinement by sentence of court-martial

  (a) A court-martial sentence, as announced by the sentencing 
authority, that includes confinement shall result in the 
forfeiture of pay and allowances due that member during the 
period of the confinement or while on parole. The forfeiture 
shall be effective on the date on which the sentence is 
announced. The percentage of pay and allwances forfeited shall 
be the maximum percentage that the court-martial could have 
directed as part of the sentence.
  (b) If the sentence of a member who forfeits pay and 
allowances under subsection (a) is set aside or disapproved or, 
as finally approved, does not provide for confinement, the 
member shall be paid the pay and allowances which the member 
would have been paid, but for the forfeiture, for the period 
during which the forfeiture was in effect.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


    SUBCHAPTER IX--POST-TRIAL PROCEDURE AND REVIEW OF COURTS-MARTIAL


Sec. 860.  Art. 60. Action by the convening authority

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) In a case involving an accused who has dependents and in 
which the sentence, as approved, includes confinement, the 
convening authority or other person taking action under this 
section may waive some or all of the forfeiture of pay and 
allowances otherwise required by section 857a of this title 
(article 57a). Any amount of pay and allowances payable only by 
reason of such a waiver shall be paid, as the convening 
authority or other person taking action under this section 
directs, to the dependents of the accused.
  [(d)] (e) Before acting under this section on any general 
court-martial case or any special court-martial case that 
includes a bad-conduct discharge, the convening authority or 
other person taking action under this section shall obtain and 
consider the written recommendation of his staff judge advocate 
or legal officer. The convening authority or other person 
taking action under this section shall refer the record of 
trial to his staff judge advocate or legal officer, and the 
staff judge advocate or legal officer shall use such record in 
the preparation of this recommendation. The recommendation of 
the staff judge advocate or legal officer shall include such 
matters as the President may prescribe by regulation and shall 
be served on the accused, who may submit any matter in response 
under subsection (b). Failure to object in the response to the 
recommendation or to any matter attached to the recommendation 
waives the right to object thereto.
  [(e)] (f)(1) The convening authority or other person taking 
action under this section, in his sole discretion, may order a 
proceeding in revision or a rehearing.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 866. Art. 66. Review by Court of Criminal Appeals

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) The Judge Advocates General shall prescribe uniform rules 
of procedure for [Courts of Military Review] Courts of Criminal 
Appeals and shall meet periodically to formulate policies and 
procedure in regard to review of court-martial cases in the 
offices of the Judge Advocates General and by [Courts of 
Military Review] Courts of Criminal Appeals.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 870. Art. 70. Appellate counsel

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Appellate defense counsel shall represent the accused 
before the Court of Criminal Appeals, the Court of Appeals for 
the Armed Forces, or (except as provided in subsection (f)) the 
Supreme Court--
          (1) when requested by the accused;
          (2) when the United States is represented by counsel; 
        or
          (3) when the Judge Advocate General has sent the case 
        to the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) Representation of the accused by appellate defense 
counsel in preparation of a petition to the Supreme Court for a 
writ of certiorari shall be at the discretion of the appellate 
defense counsel.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                SUBCHAPTER X--PUNITIVE ARTICLES

                                 Sec. 

Art.

                                 877. 

77.

Principals.

                                 [895. 

95.

Resistance, breach of arrest, and escape.]

                                 895. 

95.

Resistance, flight, breach of arrest, and escape. deg.

          * * * * * * *

[Sec. 895. Art. 95. Resistance, breach of arrest, and escape

  [Any person subject to this chapter who resists apprehension 
or breaks arrest or who escapes from custody or confinement 
shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.]

Sec. 895. Art. 95. Resistance, flight, breach of arrest, and escape

  Any person subject to this chapter who--
          (1) resists apprehension;
          (2) flees from apprehension;
          (3) breaks arrest; or
          (4) escapes from custody or confinement;
shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 920. Art. 120. Rape and carnal knowledge

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(b) Any person subject to this chapter who, under 
circumstances not amounting to rape, commits an act of sexual 
intercourse with a female not his wife who has not attained the 
age of sixteen years, is guilty of carnal knowledge and shall 
be punished as a court-martial may direct.]
  (b) Any person subject to this chapter who, under 
circumstances not amounting to rape, commits an act of sexual 
intercourse with a person--
          (1) who is not that person's spouse; and
          (2) who has not attained the age of sixteen years;
is guilty of carnal knowledge and shall be punished as a court-
martial may direct.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) In a prosecution under subsection (b), it is a defense 
that--
          (1) the person with whom the accused committed the 
        act of sexual intercourse had at the time of the 
        alleged offense attained the age of twelve years; and
          (2) the accused reasonably believed that that person 
        had at the time of the alleged offense attained the age 
        of sixteen years.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                SUBCHAPTER XI--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

Sec. 937. Art. 137. Articles to be explained

  (a)(1) The sections of this title (articles of the Uniform 
Code of Military Justice) specified in paragraph (3) shall be 
carefully explained to each enlisted member at the time of (or 
[within six days] within fourteen days after)--
          (A) the member's initial entrance on active duty; or
          (B) the member's initial entrance into a duty status 
        with a reserve component.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


  SUBCHAPTER XII--UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

Sec. 944. Art. 144. Procedure

  The United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces may 
prescribe its rules  of  procedure  and  may  determine  the  
number  of  judges required to constitute a quorum. However, no 
person may appear before the court (whether on a brief or in 
person) other than an attorney who is admitted to practice 
before the court or who is authorized to appear by the court in 
a particular case (except that the court may permit a third-
year law student certified under a State rule for practical 
training of law students to appear as an amicus curiae).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


          CHAPTER 49--MISCELLANEOUS PROHIBITIONS AND PENALTIES

Sec.
971.  Service credit: officers may not count enlisted service performed 
          while serving as cadet or midshipman.
[972.  Enlisted members: required to make up time lost.]
972.  Members: effect of time lost.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 972. Enlisted members: required to make up time lost]

Sec. 972. Members: effect of time lost

  (a) Enlisted Members Required To Make Up Time Lost.--An 
enlisted member of an armed force who--
          (1) deserts;
          (2) is absent from his organization, station, or duty 
        for more than one day without proper authority, as 
        determined by competent authority;
          [(3) is confined for more than one day while awaiting 
        trial and disposition of his case, and whose conviction 
        has become final;
          [(4) is confined for more than one day under a 
        sentence that has become final; or]
          (3) is confined by military or civilian authorities 
        for more than one day before, during, or after trial; 
        or
          [(5)] (4) is unable for more than one day, as 
        determined by competent authority, to perform his 
        duties because of intemperate use of drugs or alcoholic 
        liquor, or because of disease or injury resulting from 
        his misconduct;
is liable, after his return to full duty, to serve for a period 
that, when added to the period that he served before his 
absence from duty, amounts to the term for which he was 
enlisted or inducted.
  (b) Officers Not Allowed Service Credit for Time Lost.--In 
the case of an officer of an armed force who after the date of 
the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1996--
          (1) deserts;
          (2) is absent from his organization, station, or duty 
        for more than one day without proper authority, as 
        determined by competent authority;
          (3) is confined by military or civilian authorities 
        for more than one day before, during, or after trial; 
        or
          (4) is unable for more than one day, as determined by 
        competent authority, to perform his duties because of 
        intemperate use of drugs or alcoholic liquor, or 
        because of disease or injury resulting from his 
        misconduct;
the period of such desertion, absence, confinement, or 
inability to perform duties may not be counted in computing, 
for any purpose other than basic pay under section 205 of title 
37, the officer's length of service.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


             CHAPTER 53--MISCELLANEOUS RIGHTS AND BENEFITS

Sec.
1031.  Administration of oath.
1032.  Disability and death compensation: dependents of members held as 
          captives.
     * * * * * * *
1044c.  Military advance medical directives: requirement for recognition 
          by States.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1044c. Military advance medical directives: requirement for 
                    recognition by States

  (a) Instruments To Be Given Legal Effect Without Regard to 
State Law.--A military advance medical directive--
          (1) is exempt from any requirement of form, 
        substance, formality, or recording that is provided for 
        advance medical directives under the laws of a State; 
        and
          (2) shall be given the same legal effect as an 
        advance medical directive prepared and executed in 
        accordance with the laws of the State concerned.
  (b) Military Advance Medical Directives.--For the purposes of 
this section, a military advance medical directive is any 
written declaration regarding future medical treatment that--
          (1) is executed by a person eligible for legal 
        assistance under section 1044(a) of this title or 
        regulations of the Secretary concerned; and
          (2) is intended--
                  (A) to provide, withdraw, or withhold life-
                prolonging procedures, including hydration and 
                sustenance, in the event of a terminal 
                condition or persistent vegetative state of the 
                declarant; or
                  (B) to appoint another person to make health 
                care decisions for the declarant under 
                circumstances stated in the declaration if the 
                declarant is determined to be incapable of 
                making informed health care decisions.
  (c) Statement To Be Included.--Under regulations prescribed 
by the Secretary concerned, a written declaration described in 
subsection (b) shall contain a statement that clearly indicates 
the purpose of the declaration to serve as the military advance 
medical directive of the declarant. However, the failure of a 
military advance medical directive to include such a statement 
shall not be construed to negate the legal effect of the 
directive under subsection (a).
  (d) State Defined.--In this section, the term ``State'' 
includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto 
Rico, and a possession of the United States.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1056. Relocation assistance programs

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(d) Director.--The Secretary of Defense shall establish the 
position of Director of Military Relocation Assistance Programs 
in the office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force 
Management and Personnel). The Director shall oversee 
development and implementation of the military relocation 
assistance programs under this section.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1059. Dependents of members separated for dependent abuse: 
                    transitional compensation; commissary and exchange 
                    benefits

  (a) Authority To Pay Compensation.--The Secretary of Defense, 
with respect to the armed forces (other than the Coast Guard 
when it is not operating as a service in the Navy), and the 
Secretary of Transportation, with respect to the Coast Guard 
when it is not operating as a service in the Navy, [may each 
establish a program] shall each establish a program to pay 
monthly transitional compensation in accordance with this 
section to dependents or former dependents of a member of the 
armed forces described in subsection (b).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Recipients of Payments.--In any case [of a separation 
from active duty as] described in subsection (b), the Secretary 
shall pay such compensation to dependents or former dependents 
of the former member as follows:
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                  CHAPTER 55--MEDICAL AND DENTAL CARE

Sec.
1071.  Purpose of this chapter.
1072.  Definitions.
     * * * * * * *
[1093.  Restriction on use of funds for abortions.]
1093.  Restriction on use of funds or facilities for abortions.
     * * * * * * *
[1100.  Military Health Care Account.]
1100.  Defense Health Program Account.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 1074a. Medical and dental care: members on duty other than active 
                    duty for a period of more than 30 days

  (a) Under joint regulations prescribed by the administering 
Secretaries, the following persons are entitled to the benefits 
described in subsection (b):
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (3) Each member of a uniformed service who incurs or 
        aggravates an injury, illness, or disease in the line 
        of duty while remaining overnight, between successive 
        periods of inactive-duty training, at or in the 
        vicinity of the site of the inactive-duty training, and 
        the site is outside reasonable commuting distance from 
        the member's residence.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) A member is not entitled to benefits under [this section] 
subsection (b) if the injury, illness, or disease, or 
aggravation of an injury, illness, or disease described in 
subsection (a)(2), is the result of the gross negligence or 
misconduct of the member.
  (d)(1) The Secretary of the Army shall provide to members of 
the Selected Reserve of the Army who are assigned to units 
scheduled for deployment within 75 days after mobilization the 
following medical and dental services:
          (A) An annual medical screening.
          (B) For members who are over 40 years of age, a full 
        physical examination not less often than once every two 
        years.
          (C) An annual dental screening.
          (D) The dental care identified in an annual dental 
        screening as required to ensure that a member meets the 
        dental standards required for deployment in the event 
        of mobilization.
  (2) The services provided under this subsection shall be 
provided at no cost to the member.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1079. Contracts for medical care for spouses and children: plans

  (a) To assure that medical care is available for dependents, 
as described in subparagraphs (A), (D), and (I) of section 
1072(2) of this title, of members of the uniformed services who 
are on active duty for a period of more than 30 days, the 
Secretary of Defense, after consulting with the other 
administering Secretaries, shall contract, under the authority 
of this section, for medical care for those persons under such 
insurance, medical service, or health plans as he considers 
appropriate. The types of health care authorized under this 
section shall be the same as those provided under section 1076 
of this title, except that--
          (1) with respect to dental care, only that care 
        required as a necessary adjunct to medical or surgical 
        treatment may be provided;
          [(2) routine physical examinations and immunizations 
        of dependents over two years of age may only be 
        provided when required in the case of dependents who 
        are traveling outside the United States as a result of 
        a member's duty assignment and such travel is being 
        performed under orders issued by a uniformed service, 
        except that pap smears and mammograms may be provided 
        on a diagnostic or preventive basis;]
          (2) consistent with such regulations as the Secretary 
        of Defense may prescribe regarding the content of 
        health promotion and disease prevention visits, the 
        schedule of pap smears and mammograms, and the types 
        and schedule of immunizations--
                  (A) for dependents under six years of age, 
                both health promotion and disease prevention 
                visits and immunizations may be provided; and
                  (B) for dependents six years of age or older, 
                health promotion and disease prevention visits 
                may be provided in connection with 
                immunizations or with diagnostic or preventive 
                pap smears and mammograms;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (h)[(1) Payment for a charge for services by an individual 
health-care professional (or other noninstitutional health-care 
provider) for which a claim is submitted under a plan 
contracted for under subsection (a) may be denied only to the 
extent that the charge exceeds the amount equivalent to the 
80th percentile of billed charges made for similar services in 
the same locality during the base period.] (1) Payment for a 
charge for services by an individual health care professional 
(or other noninstitutional health care provider) for which a 
claim is submitted under a plan contracted for under subsection 
(a) may not exceed the lesser of--
          (A) an amount equivalent to the 80th percentile of 
        billed charges made for similar services in the same 
        locality during a 12-month base period; or
          (B) an amount determined to be appropriate, to the 
        extent practicable, in accordance with the same 
        reimbursement rules as apply to payments for similar 
        services under title XVIII of the Social Security Act 
        (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.).
  (2) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(A), the 80th percentile 
of charges shall be determined by the Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation with the other administering Secretaries, and the 
base period shall be a period of twelve calendar months. The 
Secretary of Defense shall adjust the base period as frequently 
as he considers appropriate.
  (3) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(B), the appropriate 
payment amount shall be determined by the Secretary of Defense, 
in consultation with the other administering Secretaries.
  (4) The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the other 
administering Secretaries, shall prescribe regulations to 
provide for such exceptions to the payment limitations under 
paragraph (1) as the administering Secretaries determine to be 
necessary to assure that covered beneficiaries retain adequate 
access to health care services. Such exceptions may include the 
payment of amounts greater than the amount allowed under 
paragraph (1) when enrollees in managed care programs obtain 
covered emergency services from nonparticipating providers. To 
transition from the payment methods in effect before the date 
of the enactment of this paragraph to the methodology required 
by paragraph (1), the amount allowable for any service may not 
be reduced by more than 15 percent from the amount allowed for 
the same service during the immediately preceding 12-month 
period (or other period as established by the Secretary of 
Defense).
  (5) The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the other 
administering Secretaries, shall prescribe regulations to 
establish limitations (similar to those limitations established 
under title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et 
seq.)) on beneficiary liability for charges of an individual 
health care professional (or other noninstitutional health care 
provider).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1086. Contracts for health benefits for certain members, former 
                    members, and their dependents

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d)(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (4) The administering Secretaries shall develop a mechanism 
by which persons described in paragraph (1) who satisfy only 
the criteria specified in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of 
paragraph (2), but not subparagraph (C) of such paragraph, are 
promptly notified of their ineligibility for health benefits 
under this section. The administering Secretaries shall consult 
with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Health 
Care Financing Administration regarding a method to promptly 
identify persons requiring notice under this subsection.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1093. Restriction on use of funds or facilities for abortions

  Funds available to the Department of Defense, and medical 
treatment facilities or other facilities of the Department of 
Defense, may not be used to perform abortions except where the 
life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were 
carried to term.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1095. Health care services incurred on behalf of covered 
                    beneficiaries: collection from third-party payers

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (k)(1) To improve the administration of this section and 
sections 1079(j)(1) and 1086(d) of this title, the Secretary of 
Defense, in consultation with the other administering 
Secretaries, may prescribe regulations to collect information 
regarding insurance, medical service, or health plans of third-
party payers held by covered beneficiaries.
  (2) The collection of information under regulations issued 
under paragraph (1) shall be conducted in the same manner as 
provided in section 1862(b)(5) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 1395y(b)(5)). The Secretary may provide for obtaining 
from the Commissioner of Social Security employment information 
comparable to the information provided to the Administrator of 
the Health Care Financing Administration pursuant to such 
section. Such regulations may require the mandatory disclosure 
of social security account numbers for all covered 
beneficiaries.
  (3) The Secretary of Defense may disclosure relevant 
employment information collected under this subsection to 
fiscal intermediaries or other designated contractors.
  (4) The Secretary of Defense may provide for contacting 
employers of covered beneficiaries to obtain group health plan 
information comparable to the information authorized to be 
obtained under section 1862(b)(5)(C) of the Social Security Act 
(42 U.S.C. 1395y(b)(5)(C)). Clause (ii) of such section 
regarding the imposition of civil money penalties shall apply 
to the collection of information under this paragraph.
  (5) Information obtained under this subsection may not be 
disclosed for any purpose other than to carry out the purpose 
of this section and sections 1079(j)(1) and 1086(d) of this 
title.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1097. Contracts for medical care for retirees, dependents, and 
                    survivors: alternative delivery of health care

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Coordination With Facilities of the Uniformed Services.--
The Secretary of Defense may provide for the coordination of 
health care services provided pursuant to any contract or 
agreement under this section with those services provided in 
medical treatment facilities of the uniformed services. Subject 
to the availability of space and facilities and the 
capabilities of the medical or dental staff, the Secretary may 
not deny access to facilities of the uniformed services to a 
covered beneficiary on the basis of whether the beneficiary 
enrolled or declined enrollment in any program established 
under, or operating in connection with, any contract under this 
section. [However, the Secretary may] Notwithstanding the 
preferences established by sections 1074(b) and 1076 of this 
title, the Secretary shall, as an incentive for enrollment, 
establish reasonable preferences for services in facilities of 
the uniformed services for covered beneficiaries enrolled in 
any program established under, or operating in connection with, 
any contract under this section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) Charges for Health Care.--The Secretary of Defense may 
prescribe by regulation a premium, deductible, copayment, or 
other charge for health care provided under this section. In 
the case of contracts for health care services under this 
section or health care plans offered under section 1099 of this 
title for which the Secretary permits covered beneficiaries who 
are covered by section 1086 of this title and who participate 
in such contracts or plans to pay an enrollment fee in lieu of 
meeting the applicable deductible amount specified in section 
1086(b) of this title, the Secretary may establish the same (or 
a lower) enrollment fee for covered beneficiaries described in 
section 1086(d)(1) of this title who also participate in such 
contracts or plans. Without imposing additional costs on 
covered beneficiaries who participate in contracts for health 
care services under this section or health care plans offered 
under section 1099 of this title, the Secretary shall permit 
such covered beneficiaries to pay, on a monthly or quarterly 
basis, any enrollment fee required for such participation.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 1100. Military Health Care Account]

Sec. 1100. Defense Health Program Account

  (a) Establishment of Account.--(1) There is hereby 
established in the Department of Defense an account to be known 
as the ``[Military Health Care Account] Defense Health Program 
Account''. All sums appropriated to carry out the functions of 
the Secretary of Defense with respect to [the Civilian Health 
and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services] medical and 
health care programs of the Department of Defense shall be 
appropriated to the account.
  [(2) Amounts appropriated to the account shall remain 
available until obligated or expended under subsection (b) or 
(c).]
  (2) Three percent of the funds appropriated annually for the 
operation and maintenance of the programs and activities 
authorized by this chapter shall remain available for 
obligation until the end of the fiscal year following the 
fiscal year for which the funds were appropriated. This 
paragraph shall not apply for a fiscal year to the extent that 
a provision of law specifically refers to this paragraph and 
specifies that this paragraph shall not apply for that fiscal 
year.
  (b) Obligation of Amounts From Account by Secretary of 
Defense.--The Secretary of Defense may obligate or expend funds 
from the account for purposes of [entering into a contract] 
conducting programs and activities under this chapter, 
including contracts entered into under section 1079, 1086, 
1092, or 1097 of this title, to the extent amounts are 
available in the account.
  [(c) Allocation of Amounts in Account for Provision of 
Medical Care by Service Secretaries.--(1) The Secretary of a 
military department shall, before the beginning of a fiscal 
year quarter, provide to the Secretary of Defense an estimate 
of the amounts necessary to pay for charges for benefits under 
the program for covered beneficiaries under the jurisdiction of 
the Secretary for that quarter.
  [(2) The Secretary of Defense shall, subject to amounts 
provided in advance in appropriation Acts, make available to 
each Secretary of a military department the amount from the 
account that the Secretary of Defense determines is necessary 
to pay for charges for benefits under the program for covered 
beneficiaries under the jurisdiction of such Secretary for that 
quarter.
  [(d) Expenditure of Amounts From Account by Service 
Secretaries.--The Secretary of a military department shall 
provide medical and dental care to covered beneficiaries under 
the jurisdiction of the Secretary for a fiscal year quarter 
from amounts appropriated to the Secretary and from amounts 
from the account made available for that quarter to the 
Secretary by the Secretary of Defense. If the Secretary of a 
military department exhausts the amounts from the account made 
available to the Secretary for a fiscal year quarter, the 
Secretary shall transfer to the account from amounts 
appropriated to the Secretary an amount sufficient to provide 
medical and dental care to covered beneficiaries under the 
jurisdiction of the Secretary for the remainder of the fiscal 
year quarter.
  [(e)] (c) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
prescribe regulations to carry out this section.
  [(f) Definitions.--In this section:
          [(1) The term ``account'' means the Military Health 
        Care Account established in subsection (a).
          [(2) The term ``program'' means the Civilian Health 
        and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                         CHAPTER 59--SEPARATION

Sec.
1161.  Commissioned officers: limitations on dismissal.
     * * * * * * *
[1177.  Members who are permanently nonworldwide assignable: mandatory 
          discharge or retirement; counseling.]
1177.  Members infected with HIV-1 virus: mandatory discharge or 
          retirement.
     * * * * * * *

[Sec. 1177. Members who are permanently nonworldwide assignable: 
                    mandatory discharge or retirement; counseling

  [(a) Required Separation.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2), a 
member of the armed forces who is classified as permanently 
nonworldwide assignable due to a medical condition shall 
(except as provided in subsection (c)) be separated.
  [(2) Paragraph (1) shall not be in effect in the case of any 
of the armed forces if the Secretary concerned determines that 
the retention of permanently nonworldwide assignable members 
would not adversely affect the ability of that service to carry 
out its mission.
  [(3) A separation under paragraph (1) shall be made on a date 
determined by the Secretary concerned, which (except as 
provided in subsection (b)(2)) shall be as soon as practicable 
after the date on which the determination is made that the 
member should be so classified and not later than the last day 
of the twelfth month beginning after that date.
  [(b) Form of Separation.--(1) If a member to be separated 
under this section is eligible to retire under any provision of 
law or to be transferred to the Fleet Reserve or Fleet Marine 
Corps Reserve, the member shall be so retired or so 
transferred. Otherwise, the member shall be discharged.
  [(2) In the case of a member to be discharged under this 
section who on the date on which the member is to be discharged 
is within two years of qualifying for retirement under any 
provison of law, or of qualifying for transfer to the Fleet 
Reserve or Fleet Marine Corps Reserve under section 6330 of 
this title, the member may, as determined by the Secretary 
concerned, be retained on active duty until the member is 
qualified for retirement or transfer to the Fleet Reserve or 
Fleet Marine Corps Reserve, as the case may be, and then be so 
retired or transferred, unless the member is sooner retired or 
discharged under any other provision of law.
  [(c) Exceptions.--The Secretary concerned may waive 
subsection (a) with respect to an individual member of the 
armed forces under the jurisdiction of that Secretary if the 
Secretary determines that there are circumstances that warrant 
the retention of that member. Such circumstances may include--
          [(1) consideration that the medical condition making 
        the member permanently nonworldwide assignable was 
        incurred in combat or otherwise as the result of an 
        action of the member for which the member received a 
        decoration or other recognition for personal bravery;
          [(2) consideration that the member has a specific 
        proficiency or skill that is vital to the national 
        security; and
          [(3) any other circumstance that the Secretary 
        considers to be for the good of the service.
  [(d) Counseling About Available Medical Care.--A member to be 
separated under this section shall be provided information, in 
writing, before such separation of the available medical care 
(through the Department of Veterans Affairs and otherwise) to 
treat the member's condition. Such information shall include 
identification of specific medical locations near the member's 
home of record or point of discharge at which the member may 
seek necessary medical care.
  [(e) Separation To Be Considered Involuntary.--A separation 
under this section shall be considered to be an involuntary 
separation for purposes of any other provision of law.]

Sec. 1177. Members infected with HIV-1 virus: mandatory discharge or 
                    retirement

  (a) Mandatory Separation.--A member of the armed forces who 
is HIV-positive shall be separated. Such separation shall be 
made on a date determined by the Secretary concerned, which 
shall be as soon as practicable after the date on which the 
determination is made that the member is HIV-positive and not 
later than the last day of the sixth month beginning after such 
date.
  (b) Form of Separation.--If a member to be separated under 
this section is eligible to retire under any provision of law 
or to be transferred to the Fleet Reserve or Fleet Marine Corps 
Reserve, the member shall be so retired or so transferred. 
Otherwise, the member shall be discharged. The characterization 
of the service of the member shall be determined without regard 
to the determination that the member is HIV-positive.
  (c) Deferral of Separation for Members in 18-Year Retirement 
Sanctuary.--In the case of a member to be discharged under this 
section who on the date on which the member is to be discharged 
is within two years of qualifying for retirement under any 
provision of law, or of qualifying for transfer to the Fleet 
Reserve or Fleet Marine Corps Reserve under section 6330 of 
this title, the member may, as determined by the Secretary 
concerned, be retained on active duty until the member is 
qualified for retirement or transfer to the Fleet Reserve or 
Fleet Marine Corps Reserve, as the case may be, and then be so 
retired or transferred, unless the member is sooner retired or 
discharged under any other provision of law.
  (d) Separation To Be Considered Involuntary.--A separation 
under this section shall be considered to be an involuntary 
separation for purposes of any other provision of law.
  (e) Counseling About Available Medical Care.--A member to be 
separated under this section shall be provided information, in 
writing, before such separation of the available medical care 
(through the Department of Veterans Affairs and otherwise) to 
treat the member's condition. Such information shall include 
identification of specific medical locations near the member's 
home of record or point of discharge at which the member may 
seek necessary medical care.
  (f) HIV-Positive Members.--A member shall be considered to be 
HIV-positive for purposes of this section if there is serologic 
evididence that the member is infected with the virus known as 
Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 (HIV-1), the virus most commonly 
associated with the acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) 
in the United States. Such serologic evidence shall be 
considered to exist if there is a reactive result given by an 
enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) serologic test that 
is confirmed by a reactive and diagnostic immunoelectrophoresis 
test (Western blot) on two separate samples. Any such serologic 
test must be one that is approved by the Food and Drug 
Administration.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 61--RETIREMENT OR SEPARATION FOR PHYSICAL DISABILITY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1216. Secretaries: powers, functions, and duties

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) The Secretary concerned may not, with respect to any 
member who is a general officer or flag officer or is a medical 
officer being processed for retirement under any provisions of 
this title by reason of age or length of service--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

by reason of unfitness to perform the duties of his office, 
grade, rank, or rating unless the determination of the 
Secretary concerned with respect to unfitness is first approved 
by the Secretary of Defense on the recommendation of the 
[Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs] official in 
the Department of Defense with principal responsibility for 
health affairs.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 71--COMPUTATION OF RETIRED PAY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 1405. Years of service

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Exclusion of Time Required To Be [Made Up.--Time] Made Up 
or Excluded.--(1) Time required to be made up by an enlisted 
member of the Army or Air Force under section 972(a) of this 
title, or required to be made up by an enlisted member of the 
Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard under that section with 
respect to a period of time after the date of the enactment of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995, 
may not be counted in determining years of service under 
subsection (a).
  (2) Section 972(b) of this title excludes from computation of 
an officer's years of service for purposes of this section any 
time identified with respect to that officer under that 
section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 75--DEATH BENEFITS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1481. Recovery, care, and disposition of remains: decedents 
                    covered

  (a) The Secretary concerned may provide for the recovery, 
care, and disposition of the remains of the following persons:
          (1) Any Regular of an armed force, or member of an 
        armed force without component, under his jurisdiction 
        who dies while on active duty.
          (2) A member of a reserve component of an armed force 
        who dies while--
                  (A) on active duty;
                  (B) performing inactive-duty training;
                  (C) performing authorized travel directly to 
                or from active duty or inactive-duty training; 
                [or]
                  (D) remaining overnight, between successive 
                periods of inactive-duty training, at or in the 
                vicinity of the site of the inactive-duty 
                training, and the site is outside reasonable 
                commuting distance from the member's residence; 
                or
                  [(D)] (E) hospitalized or undergoing 
                treatment for an injury, illness, or disease 
                incurred or aggravated while on active duty or 
                performing inactive-duty training.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                      CHAPTER 76--MISSING PERSONS

Sec.
1501. System for accounting for missing persons.
1502. Missing persons: initial report.
1503. Initial inquiry.
1504. Subsequent inquiry.
1505. Further review.
1506. Personnel files.
1507. Recommendation of status of death.
1508. Persons previously declared dead.
1509. Return alive of person declared missing or dead.
1510. Effect on State law.
1511. Definitions.

Sec. 1501. System for accounting for missing persons

  (a) Office for Missing Persons.--The Secretary of Defense 
shall establish within the Office of the Secretary of Defense 
an office to be responsible for the policy, control, and 
oversight of the entire process for investigation and recovery 
related to persons covered by subsection (c). In carrying out 
the responsibilities of that office, the head of the office 
shall coordinate the efforts of the office with those of other 
departments and agencies of the Government and other elements 
of the Department of Defense for such purposes and shall be 
responsible for the coordination for such purposes within the 
Department of Defense among the military departments, the Joint 
Staff, and the commanders of the combatant commands.
  (b) Uniform DOD Procedures.--(1) The Secretary of Defense 
shall prescribe procedures, to apply uniformly through the 
Department of Defense, for--
          (A) the determination of the status of persons 
        described in subsection (c); and
          (B) for the systematic, comprehensive, and timely 
        collection, analysis, review, dissemination, and 
        periodic update of information related to such persons.
  (2) Such procedures shall be prescribed in a single directive 
applicable to all elements of the Department of Defense.
  (c) Covered Persons.--This chapter applies to the following 
persons:
          (1) Any member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or 
        Marine Corps on active duty who, during a period or war 
        or national emergency or any other period of 
        hostilities specified by the Secretary of Defense for 
        the purposes of this section, disappears in the theater 
        of such hostilities (except under circumstances 
        suggesting that the disappearance is voluntary).
          (2) Any civilian employee of the Department of 
        Defense (including an employee of a contractor of the 
        Department of Defense) who, during a period described 
        in paragraph (1), disappears in the theater of such 
        hostilities (except under circumstances suggesting that 
        the disappearance is voluntary) while serving with or 
        accompanying the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps 
        in the field during such period.
  (d) Primary Next of Kin.--The individual who is primary next 
of kin of any person described in subsection (c) may for 
purposes of this chapter designate another individual to act on 
behalf of that individual as primary next of kin. The Secretary 
of Defense shall treat a individual so designated as if the 
individual designated were the primary next of kin for purposes 
of this chapter. A designation under this subsection may be 
revoked at any time by the person who made the designation.

Sec. 1502. Missing persons: initial report

  (a) Preliminary Assessment and Recommendation by Commander.--
After receiving information that the whereabouts or status of a 
person covered by this chapter is uncertain and that the 
absence of the person may be involuntary, the commander of the 
unit, facility, or area to or in which the person is assigned 
shall make a preliminary assessment of the circumstances. If, 
as a result of that assessment, the commander concludes that 
the person is missing, the commander shall--
          (1) recommend that the person be placed in a missing 
        status; and
          (2) submit that recommendation to the commander of 
        the unified command for that area in accordance with 
        procedures prescribed under section 1501(b) of this 
        title.
  (b) Forwarding of Records.--The commander making the initial 
assessment shall (in accordance with procedures prescribed 
under section 1501(b) of this title) safeguard and forward for 
official use any information relating to the whereabouts or 
status of the person that result from the preliminary 
assessment or from actions taken to locate the person.

Sec. 1503. Initial inquiry

  (a) Appointment of Board.--Not later than ten days after 
receiving notification under section 1502(a)(2) of this title 
that a person has been recommended for placement in a missing 
status, the commander of the unified command having 
responsibility for the area in which the disappearance occurred 
shall appoint a board to conduct an inquiry into the 
whereabouts and status of the person.
  (b) Inquiries Involving More Than One Missing Person.--If it 
appears to the commander who appoints a board under this 
section that the absence or missing status of two or more 
persons is factually related, the commander may appoint a 
single board under this section to conduct the inquiry into the 
whereabouts or status of all such persons.
  (c) Composition.--(1) A board appointed under this section 
shall consist of at least one individual described in paragraph 
(2) who has experience with and understanding of military 
operations or activities similar to the operation or activity 
in which the person disappeared.
  (2) An individual referred to in paragraph (1) is the 
following:
          (A) A military officer, in the case of an inquiry 
        with respect to a member of the armed forces.
          (B) A civilian, in the case of an inquiry with 
        respect to a civilian employee of the United States or 
        of a contractor of the Department of Defense.
  (3) An individual may be appointed as a member of a board 
under this section only if the individual has a security 
clearance that affords the member access to all information 
relating to the whereabouts and status of the missing persons 
covered by the inquiry.
  (d) Duties of Board.--A board appointed to conduct an inquiry 
into the whereabouts or status of a missing person under this 
section shall--
          (1) collect, develop, and investigate all facts and 
        evidence relating to the disappearance, whereabouts, or 
        status of that person;
          (2) collect appropriate documentation of the facts 
        and evidence covered by the investigation;
          (3) analyze the facts and evidence, make findings 
        based on that analysis, and draw conclusions as to the 
        current whereabouts and status of the person; and
          (4) with respect to each person covered by the 
        inquiry, recommend to the commander who appointed the 
        board that--
                  (A) the person be placed in a missing status; 
                or
                  (B) the person be declared to have deserted, 
                to be absent without leave, or to be dead.
  (e) Inquiry Proceedings.--During the proceedings of an 
inquiry under this section, a board shall--
          (1) collect, record, and safeguard all facts, 
        documents, statements, photographs, tapes, messages, 
        maps, sketches, reports, and other information (whether 
        classified or unclassified) relating to the whereabouts 
        or status of each person covered by the inquiry;
          (2) gather information relating to actions taken to 
        find the person, including any evidence of the 
        whereabouts or status of the person arising from such 
        actions; and
          (3) maintain a record of its proceedings.
  (f) Counsel for Missing Person.--(1) The commander appointing 
a board to conduct an inquiry under this section shall appoint 
counsel to represent each person covered by the inquiry, or, in 
the case described by 1503(c) of this title, one counsel to 
represent all persons covered by the inquiry. Counsel appointed 
under this paragraph may be referred to as ``missing person's 
counsel''.
  (2) To be appointed as a missing person's counsel, a person 
must--
          (A) have the qualifications specified in section 
        827(b) of this title (article 27(b) of the Uniform Code 
        of Military Justice) for trial counsel or defense 
        counsel detailed for a general court-martial; and
          (B) have a security clearance that affords the 
        counsel access to all information relating to the 
        whereabouts or status of the person or persons covered 
        by the inquiry.
  (3) A missing person's counsel--
          (A) shall have access to all facts and evidence 
        considered by the board during the proceedings under 
        the inquiry for which the counsel is appointed;
          (B) shall observe all official activities of the 
        board during such proceedings;
          (C) may question witnesses before the board; and
          (D) shall monitor the deliberations of the board; and
  (4) A missing person's counsel shall review the report of the 
board under subsection (i) and submit to the commander who 
appointed the board an independent review of that report. That 
review shall be made an official part of the record of the 
board.
  (g) Access to Proceedings.--The proceedings of a board during 
an inquiry under this section shall be closed to the public 
(including, with respect to any missing person covered by the 
inquiry, the primary next of kin, other members of the 
immediate family, and any other previously designated person 
designated under section 655 of this title).
  (h) Recommendation on Status of Missing Persons.--(1) Upon 
completion of its inquiry, a board appointed under this section 
shall make a recommendation to the commander who appointed the 
board as to the appropriate determination of the current 
whereabouts or status of each person whose whereabouts were 
covered by the inquiry.
  (2)(A) A board may not recommend under paragraph (1) that a 
person be declared dead unless the board determines that the 
evidence before it established conclusive proof of the death of 
the person.
  (B) In this paragraph, the term ``conclusive proof of death'' 
means evidence establishing that death is the only credible 
explanation for the absence of the person.
  (i) Report.--(1) A board appointed under this section shall 
submit to the commander who appointed it a report on the 
inquiry carried out by the board. The report shall include--
          (A) a discussion of the facts and evidence considered 
        by the board in the inquiry;
          (B) the recommendation of the board under subsection 
        (h) with respect to each person covered by the report; 
        and
          (C) disclosure of whether classified documents and 
        information were reviewed by the board or were 
        otherwise used by the board in forming recommendations 
        under subparagraph (B).
  (2) A report submitted under this subsection may not be made 
public until one year after the date on which the report is 
submitted.
  (j) Actions by Regional Commander.--(1) Not later than 15 
days after the date of the receipt of a report under subsection 
(i), the commander who appointed the board shall review--
          (A) the report; and
          (B) the review of that report submitted under 
        subsection (f)(4) by the missing person's counsel.
  (2) In reviewing a report under paragraph (1), the commander 
receiving the report shall determine whether or not the report 
is complete and free of administrative error. If the commander 
determines that the report is incomplete, or that the report is 
not free of administrative error, the commander may return the 
report to the board for further action on the report by the 
board.
  (3) Upon a determination by the commander concerned that a 
report reviewed under this subsection is complete and free of 
administrative error, the commander shall make a recommendation 
concerning the status of each person covered by the report.
  (4) The report, together with the recommendations under 
paragraph (3), shall be forwarded to the Secretary of Defense 
in accordance with procedures prescribed under section 1501(b) 
of this title.
  (k) Determination by Secretary.--The Secretary of Defense (or 
the Secretary of the military department concerned acting under 
delegation of authority from the Secretary of Defense) shall 
review the recommendations of a report forwarded under 
subsection (j)(4). After conducting such review, the Secretary 
shall make a determination, with respect to each person whose 
status is covered by the report, whether such person shall (1) 
continue to have a missing status, (2) be declared to have 
deserted, (3) be declared to be absent without leave, or (4) be 
declared to be dead. In making such determination, the 
Secretary may convene a board in accordance with section 1504 
of this title.
  (l) Report to Family Members and Other Interested Persons.--
Not later than 30 days after the date on which the Secretary 
makes a determination under subsection (k), the Secretary of 
Defense, acting through the head of the office established 
under section 1501(a) of this title, shall--
          (1) provide an unclassified summary of the report of 
        the board (including the name of the missing person's 
        counsel for the inquiry, the names of the members of 
        the board, and the name of the commander who convened 
        the board) to the primary next of kin, to the other 
        members of the immediate family, and to any other 
        previously designated person of the missing person; and
          (2) inform each individual referred to in paragraph 
        (1) that the United States will conduct a subsequent 
        inquiry into the whereabouts or status of the person 
        not earlier than one year after the date of the first 
        official notice of the disappearance of the person, 
        unless information becomes available sooner that would 
        result in a substantial change in the official status 
        of the person.

Sec. 1504. Subsequent inquiry

  (a) Additional Board.--If information on the whereabouts or 
status of a person covered by an inquiry under section 1503 of 
this title becomes available within one year after the date of 
the submission of the report submitted under section 1502 of 
this title, the Secretary of Defense, acting through the head 
of the office established under section 1501(a) of this title, 
shall appoint a board under this section to conduct an inquiry 
into the information
  (b) Authority for Inquiry.--The Secretary of Defense may 
delegate authority over such subsequent inquiry to the 
Secretary concerned.
  (c) Secretary Concerned.--In this section, the term 
``Secretary concerned'' includes, in the case of a civilian 
employee of the Department of Defense or contractor of the 
Department of Defense, the Secretary of the military department 
or head of the agency employing the employee or contracting 
with the contractor, as the case may be.
  (d) Date of Appointment.--The Secretary shall appoint a board 
under this section to conduct an inquiry into the whereabouts 
and status of a missing person on or about one year after the 
date of the report concerning that person submitted under 
section 1502 of this title.
  (e) Combined Inquiries.--If it appears to the Secretary that 
the absence or status of two or more persons is factually 
related, the Secretary may appoint one board under this section 
to conduct the inquiry into the whereabouts or status of all 
such persons.
  (f) Composition.--(1) Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), a 
board appointed under this section shall consist of the 
following:
          (A) In the case of a board appointed to inquire into 
        the whereabouts or status of a member of the armed 
        forces, not less than three officers having the grade 
        of major or lieutenant commander or above.
          (B) In the case of a board appointed to inquire into 
        the whereabouts or status of a civilian employee of the 
        Department of Defense or contractor of the Department 
        of Defense--
                  (i) not less than three employees of the 
                Department of Defense whose rate of annual pay 
                is equal to or greater than the rate of annual 
                pay payable for grade GS-13 of the General 
                Schedule under section 5332 of title 5; and
                  (ii) such members of the armed forces as the 
                Secretary of Defense considers advisable.
  (2) The Secretary shall designate one member of a board 
appointed under this section as president of the board. The 
president of the board shall have a security clearance that 
affords the president access to all information relating to the 
whereabouts and status of each person covered by the inquiry.
  (3)(A) One member of each board appointed under this 
subsection shall be an attorney or judge advocate who has 
expertise in the public law relating to missing persons, the 
determination of death of such persons, and the rights of 
family members and dependents of such persons.
  (B) One member of each board appointed under this subsection 
shall be an individual who--
          (i) has an occupational specialty similar to that of 
        one or more of the persons covered by the inquiry; and
          (ii) has an understanding of and expertise in the 
        official activities of one or more such persons at the 
        time such person or persons disappeared.
  (g) Duties of Board.--A board appointed under this section to 
conduct an inquiry into the whereabouts or status of a person 
shall--
          (1) review the report under subsection (i) of section 
        1503 of this title of the board appointed to conduct 
        the inquiry into the status or whereabouts of the 
        person under section 1503 of this title and the 
        recommendation under subsection (j)(3) of that section 
        of the commander who appointed the board under that 
        subsection as to the status of the person;
          (2) collect and evaluate any document, fact, or other 
        evidence with respect to the whereabouts or status of 
        the person that has become available since the 
        completion of the inquiry under section 1503 of this 
        title;
          (3) draw conclusions as to the whereabouts or status 
        of the person;
          (4) determine on the basis of the activities under 
        paragraphs (1) and (2) whether the status of the person 
        should be continued or changed; and
          (5) submit to the Secretary of Defense a report 
        describing the findings and conclusions of the board, 
        together with a recommendation for a determination by 
        the Secretary concerning the whereabouts or status of 
        the person.
  (h) Counsel for Missing Persons.--(1) When the Secretary 
appoints a board to conduct an inquiry under this section, the 
Secretary shall appoint counsel to represent each person 
covered by the inquiry.
  (2) A person appointed as counsel under this subsection shall 
meet the qualifications and have the duties set forth in 
section 1503(f) of this title for a missing person's counsel 
appointed under that section.
  (3) The review of the report of a board on an inquiry that is 
submitted by such counsel shall be made an official part of the 
record of the board with respect to the inquiry.
  (i) Attendance of Family Members and Certain Other Interested 
Persons at Proceedings.--(1) With respect to any person covered 
by an inquiry under this section, the primary next of kin, 
other members of the immediate family, and any other previously 
designated persons of the missing person may attend the 
proceedings of the board during the inquiry in accordance with 
this section.
  (2) The Secretary shall notify each individual referred to in 
paragraph (1) of the opportunity to attend the proceedings of a 
board. Such notice shall be provided not less than 60 days 
before the first meeting of the board.
  (3) An individual who receives a notice under paragraph (2) 
shall notify the Secretary of the intent, if any, of that 
individual to attend the proceedings of the board not less than 
21 days after the date on which the individual receives the 
notice.
  (4) Each individual who notifies the Secretary under 
paragraph (3) of the individual's intent to attend the 
proceedings of the board--
          (A) in the case of an individual who is the primary 
        next of kin or another member of the immediate family 
        of a missing person whose status is a subject of the 
        inquiry and whose receipt of the pay or allowances 
        (including allotments) of the missing person could be 
        reduced or terminated as a result of a revision in the 
        status of the missing person, may attend the 
        proceedings of the board with private counsel;
          (B) shall have access to the personnel file of the 
        missing person, to unclassified reports (if any) of the 
        board appointed under section 1503 of this title to 
        conduct the inquiry into the whereabouts and status of 
        the person, and to any other unclassified information 
        or documents relating to the whereabouts and status of 
        the person;
          (C) shall be afforded the opportunity to present 
        information at the proceedings of the board that such 
        individual considers to be relevant to those 
        proceedings; and
          (D) subject to paragraph (5), shall be given the 
        opportunity to submit in writing objection to any 
        recommendation of the board under subsection (k) as to 
        the status of the missing person.
  (5) Objections under paragraph (4)(D) to any recommendation 
of the board shall be submitted to the president of the board 
not later than 24 hours after the date on which the 
recommendations are made. The president shall include any such 
objections in the report of the board under subsection (k).
  (6) An individual referred to in paragraph (1) who attends 
the proceedings of a board under this subsection shall not be 
entitled to reimbursement by the United States for any costs 
(including travel, lodging, meals, local transportation, legal 
fees, transcription costs, witness expenses, and other 
expenses) incurred by that individual in attending such 
proceedings.
  (j) Availability of Information to Boards.--(1) In conducting 
proceedings in an inquiry under this section, a board may 
secure directly from any department or agency of the United 
States any information that the board considers necessary in 
order to conduct the proceedings.
  (2) Upon written request from the president of a board, the 
head of a department or agency of the United States shall 
release information covered by the request to the board. In 
releasing such information, the head of the department or 
agency shall--
          (A) declassify to an appropriate degree classified 
        information; or
          (B) release the information in a manner not requiring 
        the removal of markings indicating the classified 
        nature of the information.
  (3)(A) If a request for information under paragraph (2) 
covers classified information that cannot be declassified, 
cannot be removed before release from the information covered 
by the request, or cannot be summarized in a manner that 
prevents the release of classified information, the classified 
information shall be made available only to president of the 
board making the request and the counsel for the missing person 
appointed under subsection (f).
  (B) The president of a board shall close to persons who do 
not have appropriate security clearances the proceeding of the 
board at which classified information is discussed. 
Participants at a proceeding of a board at which classified 
information is discussed shall comply with all applicable laws 
and regulations relating to the disclosure of classified 
information. The Secretary concerned shall assist the president 
of a board in ensuring that classified information is not 
compromised through board proceedings.
  (k) Recommendation on Status.--(1) Upon completion of an 
inquiry under this subsection, a board shall make a 
recommendation as to the current whereabouts or status of each 
missing person covered by the inquiry.
  (2) A board may not recommend under paragraph (1) that a 
person be declared dead unless--
          (A) proof of death is established by the board; and
          (B) in making the recommendation, the board complies 
        with section 1507 of this title.
  (l) Report.--A board appointed under this section shall 
submit to the Secretary of Defense a report on the inquiry 
carried out by the board, together with the evidence considered 
by the board during the inquiry. The report may include a 
classified annex.
  (m) Actions by Secretary.--(1) Not later than 30 days after 
the receipt of a report from a board under subsection (k), the 
Secretary shall review--
          (A) the report;
          (B) the review of the report submitted to the 
        Secretary under subsection (f)(3) by the counsel for 
        each person covered by the report; and
          (C) the objections, if any, to the report submitted 
        to the president of the board under subsection (g)(6).
  (2) In reviewing a report under paragraph (1) (including the 
review and objections described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of 
that paragraph), the Secretary shall determine whether or not 
the report is complete and free of administrative error. If the 
Secretary determines that the report is incomplete, or that the 
report is not free of administrative error, the Secretary may 
return the report to the board for further action on the report 
by the board.
  (3) Upon a determination by the Secretary that a report 
reviewed under this subsection is complete and free of 
administrative error, the Secretary shall make a determination 
concerning the status of each person covered by the report.
  (n) Report to Family Members and Other Interested Persons.--
Not later than 90 days after the date on which a board submits 
a report on a person under subsection (l), the Secretary of 
Defense shall--
          (1) with respect to each missing person whose status 
        or whereabouts are covered by the report, provide an 
        unclassified summary of the report to the primary next 
        of kin, the other members of the immediate family, and 
        any other previously designated person; and
          (2) in the case of a person who continues to be in a 
        missing status, inform each individual referred to in 
        paragraph (1) that the United States will conduct a 
        further investigation into the whereabouts or status of 
        the person not later than three years after the date of 
        the official notice of the disappearance of the person, 
        unless information becomes available within that time 
        that would result in a substantial change in the 
        official status of the person.

Sec. 1505. Further review

  (a) Subsequent Review.--(1) The Secretary shall conduct 
subsequent inquiries into the whereabouts or status of any 
person determined by the Secretary under section 1504 of this 
title to be in a missing status.
  (2) Subject to paragraph (4), the Secretary shall appoint a 
board to conduct an inquiry with respect to a person under this 
subsection--
          (A) on or about three years after the date of the 
        official notice of the disappearance of the person; and
          (B) not later than every three years thereafter.
  (3) In addition to appointment of boards under paragraph (2), 
the Secretary shall appoint a board to conduct an inquiry with 
respect to a person under this subsection upon receipt of 
information that could result in a change or revision of status 
of a missing person. Whenever the Secretary appoints a board 
under this paragraph, the time for subsequent appointments of a 
board under paragraph (2)(B) shall be determined from the date 
of the receipt of such information.
  (4) The Secretary is not required to appoint a board under 
paragraph (2) with respect to the disappearance of any person--
          (A) more than 20 years after the initial report under 
        section 1502 of this title of the disappearance of that 
        person; or
          (B) if, before the end of such 20-year period, the 
        missing person is accounted for.
  (b) Conduct of Proceedings.--The appointment of, and 
activities before, a board appointed under this section shall 
be governed by the provisions of section 1504 of this title 
with respect to a board appointed under that section.

Sec. 1506. Personnel files

  (a) Information in Files.--Except as provided in subsection 
(b), the Secretary of the department having jurisdiction over a 
missing person at the time of the person's disappearance shall, 
to the maximum extent practicable, ensure that the personnel 
file of the person contains all information in the possession 
of the United States relating to the disappearance and 
whereabouts or status of the person.
  (b) Classified Information.--(1) The Secretary concerned may 
withhold classified information from a personnel file under 
this section.
  (2) If the Secretary concerned withholds classified 
information from the personnel file of a person, the Secretary 
shall ensure that the file contains the following:
          (A) A notice that the withheld information exists.
          (B) A notice of the date of the most recent review of 
        the classification of the withheld information.
  (c) Wrongful Withholding.--Any person who knowingly and 
willfully withholds from the personnel file of a missing person 
any information (other than classified information) relating to 
the disappearance or whereabouts or status of a missing person 
shall be fined as provided in title 18 or imprisoned not more 
than one year, or both.
  (d) Availability of Information.--The Secretary concerned 
shall, upon request, make available the contents of the 
personnel file of a missing person to the missing person's 
primary next of kin, the other members of the missing person's 
immediate family, or any other previously designated person of 
the missing person.

Sec. 1507. Recommendation of status of death

  (a) Requirements Relating to Recommendation.--A board 
appointed under section 1504 or 1505 of this title may not 
recommend that a person be declared dead unless--
          (1) credible evidence exists to suggest that the 
        person is dead;
          (2) the United States possesses no credible evidence 
        that suggests that the person is alive;
          (3) representatives of the United States have made a 
        complete search of the area where the person was last 
        seen (unless, after making a good faith effort to 
        obtain access to such area, such representatives are 
        not granted such access); and
          (4) representatives of the United States have 
        examined the records of the government or entity having 
        control over the area where the person was last seen 
        (unless, after making a good faith effort to obtain 
        access to such records, such representatives are not 
        granted such access).
  (b) Submittal of Information on Death.--If a board appointed 
under section 1504 or 1505 of this title makes a recommendation 
that a missing person be declared dead, the board shall include 
in the report of the board with respect to the person under 
such section the following:
          (1) A detailed description of the location where the 
        death occurred.
          (2) A statement of the date on which the death 
        occurred.
          (3) A description of the location of the body, if 
        recovered.
          (4) If the body has been recovered and is not 
        identifiable through visual means, a certification by a 
        practitioner of an appropriate forensic science that 
        the body recovered is that of the missing person.

Sec. 1508. Persons previously declared dead

  (a) Review of Status.--(1) Not later than three years after 
the date of the enactment of this chapter, a person referred to 
in paragraph (2) may submit to the Secretary of Defense a 
request for appointment by the Secretary of a board to review 
the status of a person previously declared dead, in a case in 
which the death is declared to have occurred on or after 
January 1, 1950.
  (2) A board shall be appointed under this section with 
respect to the death of any person based on the request of any 
of the following persons:
          (A) An adult member of the immediate family of the 
        person previously declared dead.
          (B) An adult dependent of such person.
          (C) The primary next of kin of such person.
          (D) A person previously designated by such person.
  (3) A request under this paragraph shall be submitted to the 
Secretary of the department of the United States that had 
jurisdiction over the person covered by the request at the time 
of the person's disappearance.
  (b) Appointment of Board.--Upon request of a person under 
subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall appoint a board 
to review the status of the person covered by the request.
  (c) Duties of Board.--A board appointed under this section to 
review the status of a person shall--
          (1) conduct an investigation to determine the status 
        of the person; and
          (2) issue a report describing the findings of the 
        board under the investigation and the recommendations 
        of the board as to the status of the person.
  (d) Effect of Change in Status.--If a board appointed under 
this section recommends placing in a missing status a person 
previously declared dead, such person shall accrue no pay or 
allowances as a result of the placement of the person in such 
status.

Sec. 1509. Return alive of person declared missing or dead

  (a) Pay and Allowances.--Any person in a missing status or 
declared dead under the Missing Persons Act of 1942 (56 Stat. 
143) or by a board appointed under this chapter who is found 
alive and returned to the control of the United States shall be 
paid for the full time of the absence of the person while given 
that status or declared dead under the law and regulations 
relating to the pay and allowances of persons returning from a 
missing status.
  (b) Effect on Gratuities Paid as a Result of Status.--
Subsection (a) shall not be interpreted to invalidate or 
otherwise affect the receipt by any person of a death gratuity 
or other payment from the United States on behalf of a person 
referred to in subsection (a) before the date of the enactment 
of this chapter.

Sec. 1510. Effect on State law

  Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to invalidate or 
limit the power of any State court or administrative entity, or 
the power of any court or administrative entity of any 
political subdivision thereof, to find or declare a person dead 
for purposes of the such State or political subdivision.

Sec. 1511. Definitions

  In this chapter:
          (1) The term ``missing person'' means--
                  (A) a member of the armed forces on active 
                duty who is missing; or
                  (B) a civilian employee of the Department of 
                Defense or of a contractor of the Department of 
                Defense who is serving with or accompanying an 
                armed force under orders and who is missing.
          (2) The term ``missing status'' means the status of a 
        missing person who is determined to be absent in a 
        status of--
                  (A) missing;
                  (B) missing in action;
                  (C) interned in a foreign country;
                  (D) captured, beleaguered, or besieged by a 
                hostile force; or
                  (E) detained in a foreign country against 
                that person's will.
          (3) The term ``accounted for'', with respect to a 
        person in a missing status, means that the person is 
        returned to United States control alive, that the 
        remains of the person are returned to the United 
        States, or that credible evidence exists to support 
        another determination of the person's status.
          (4) The term ``primary next of kin'', in the case of 
        a missing person, means--
                  (A) the principal individual who, but for the 
                status of the person, would receive financial 
                support from the person; or
                  (B) in the case of a missing person for whom 
                there is no individual described in 
                subparagraph (A), the family member or other 
                individual designated by the missing person to 
                receive a death gratuity.
          (5) The term ``member of the immediate family'', in 
        the case of a missing person, means the spouse or a 
        child, parent, or sibling of the person.
          (6) The term ``previously designated person'', in the 
        case of a missing person, means an individual (other 
        than an individual who is a member of the immediate 
        family of the missing person) designated by the missing 
        person under section 655 of this title for purposes of 
        this chapter.
          (7) The term ``classified information'' means any 
        information the unauthorized disclosure of which (as 
        determined under applicable law and regulations) could 
        reasonably be expected to damage the national security.
          (8) The term ``State'' includes the District of 
        Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any 
        territory or possession of the United States.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                     CHAPTER 81--CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES

Sec.
1581.  Foreign National Employees Separation Pay Account.
     * * * * * * *
[1587.  Employees of nonappropriated fund instrumentalities.]
1587.  Employees of nonappropriated fund instrumentalities: personnel 
          actions.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 1587. Employees of nonappropriated fund instrumentalities]

Sec. 1587. Employees of nonappropriated fund instrumentalities: 
                    personnel actions

  (a) In this section:
          (1) The term ``nonappropriated fund instrumentality 
        employee'' means a civilian employee who is paid from 
        nonappropriated funds of Army and Air Force Exchange 
        Service, [Navy Resale and Services Support Office] Navy 
        Exchange Service Command, Marine Corps exchanges, or 
        any other instrumentality of the United States under 
        the jurisdiction of the armed forces which is conducted 
        for the comfort, pleasure, contentment, or physical or 
        mental improvement of members of the armed forces. Such 
        term includes a civilian employee of a support 
        organization within the Department of Defense or a 
        military department, such as the Defense Finance and 
        Accounting Service, who is paid from nonappropriated 
        funds on account of the nature of the employee's 
        duties.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) The Secretary of Defense shall be responsible for the 
prevention of actions prohibited by subsection (b) and for the 
correction of any such actions that are taken. The authority of 
the Secretary to correct such actions may not be delegated to 
the Secretary of a military department or to the [Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Manpower and Logistics] official in 
the Department of Defense with principal responsibility for 
personnel and readiness.
  (e) The Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the 
Director of the Office of Personnel Management and the Special 
Counsel of the Merit Systems Protection Board, shall prescribe 
regulations to carry out this section. Such regulations shall 
include provisions to protect the confidentiality of employees 
and applicants making disclosures described in clauses (1) and 
(2) of subsection (b) and to permit the direct reporting of 
alleged violations of subsection (b) to the Inspector General 
of the Department of Defense.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1595. Civilian faculty members at certain Department of Defense 
                    schools: employment and compensation

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Covered Institutions.--This section applies with respect 
to the following institutions of the Department of Defense:
          (1) The National Defense University.
          (2) The Foreign Language Center of the Defense 
        Language Institute.
          (3) The George C. Marshall European Center for 
        Security Studies.
          (4) The Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies.
  (d) Application to Faculty Members at NDU.--(1) In the case 
of the National Defense University, this section applies with 
respect to persons selected by the Secretary for employment as 
professors, instructors, and lecturers at the National Defense 
University after February 27, 1990.
  (2) For purposes of this section, the National Defense 
University includes the National War College, the Armed Forces 
Staff College, [the Institute for National Strategic Study] the 
Institute for National Strategic Studies, the Information 
Resources Management College, and the Industrial College of the 
Armed Forces.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) Application to Director and Deputy Director at Asia-
Pacific Center for Security Studies.--In the case of the Asia-
Pacific Center for Security Studies, this section also applies 
with respect to the Director and the Deputy Director.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


      CHAPTER 88--MILITARY FAMILY PROGRAMS AND MILITARY CHILD CARE

Subchapter                                                          Sec.
       Military Family Programs.....................................1781
       Military Child Care..........................................1791

                 SUBCHAPTER I--MILITARY FAMILY PROGRAMS

Sec.
1781. Office of Family Policy.
1782. Surveys of military families.
1783. Family members serving on advisory committees.
1784. Employment opportunities for military spouses.
1785. Youth sponsorship program.
1786. Dependent student travel within the United States.
1787. Reporting of child abuse.

Sec. 1781. Office of Family Policy

  (a) Establishment.--There is in the Office of the Secretary 
of Defense an Office of Family Policy (hereinafter in this 
section referred to as the ``Office''). The Office shall be 
under the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Force Management 
and Personnel.
  (b) Duties.--The Office--
          (1) shall coordinate programs and activities of the 
        military departments to the extent that they relate to 
        military families; and
          (2) shall make recommendations to the Secretaries of 
        the military departments with respect to programs and 
        policies regarding military families.
  (c) Staff.--The Office shall have not less than five 
professional staff members.

Sec. 1782. Surveys of military families

  (a) Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may conduct surveys 
of members of the armed forces on active duty or in an active 
status, members of the families of such members, and retired 
members of the armed forces to determine the effectiveness of 
Federal programs relating to military families and the need for 
new programs.
  (b) Responses To Be Voluntary.--Responses to surveys 
conducted under this section shall be voluntary.
  (c) Federal Recordkeeping Requirements.--With respect to such 
surveys, family members of members of the armed forces and 
reserve and retired members of the armed forces shall be 
considered to be employees of the United States for purposes of 
section 3502(3)(A)(i) of title 44.

Sec. 1783. Family members serving on advisory committees

  A committee within the Department of Defense which advises or 
assists the Department in the performance of any function which 
affects members of military families and which includes members 
of military families in its membership shall not be considered 
an advisory committee under section 3(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) solely because of such 
membership.

Sec. 1784. Employment opportunities for military spouses

  (a) Authority.--The President shall order such measures as 
the President considers necessary to increase employment 
opportunities for spouses of members of the armed forces. Such 
measures may include--
          (1) excepting, pursuant to section 3302 of title 5, 
        from the competitive service positions in the 
        Department of Defense located outside of the United 
        States to provide employment opportunities for 
        qualified spouses of members of the armed forces in the 
        same geographical area as the permanent duty station of 
        the members; and
          (2) providing preference in hiring for positions in 
        nonappropriated fund activities to qualified spouses of 
        members of the armed forces stationed in the same 
        geographical area as the nonappropriated fund activity 
        for positions in wage grade UA-8 and below and 
        equivalent positions and for positions paid at hourly 
        rates.
  (b) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe 
regulations--
          (1) to implement such measures as the President 
        orders under subsection (a);
          (2) to provide preference to qualified spouses of 
        members of the armed forces in hiring for any civilian 
        position in the Department of Defense if the spouse is 
        among persons determined to be best qualified for the 
        position and if the position is located in the same 
        geographical area as the permanent duty station of the 
        member;
          (3) to ensure that notice of any vacant position in 
        the Department of Defense is provided in a manner 
        reasonably designed to reach spouses of members of the 
        armed forces whose permanent duty stations are in the 
        same geographic area as the area in which the position 
        is located; and
          (4) to ensure that the spouse of a member of the 
        armed forces who applies for a vacant position in the 
        Department of Defense shall, to the extent practicable, 
        be considered for any such position located in the same 
        geographic area as the permanent duty station of the 
        member.
  (c) Status of Preference Eligibles.--Nothing in this section 
shall be construed to provide a spouse of a member of the armed 
forces with preference in hiring over an individual who is a 
preference eligible.

Sec. 1785. Youth sponsorship program

  (a) Requirement.--The Secretary of Defense shall require that 
there be at each military installation a youth sponsorship 
program to facilitate the integration of dependent children of 
members of the armed forces into new surroundings when moving 
to that military installation as a result of a parent's 
permanent change of station.
  (b) Description of Programs.--The program at each 
installation shall provide for involvement of dependent 
children of members presently stationed at the military 
installation and shall be directed primarily toward children in 
their preteen and teenage years. Each program should 
consist of a number of elements, including relocation stress 
management, physical fitness, individual skills building, and 
prevention programs and should to the extent feasible be 
carried out in collaboration with the surrounding civilian 
communities. deg.
       

Sec. 1786. Dependent student travel within the United States

  Funds available to the Department of Defense for the travel 
and transportation of dependent students of members of the 
armed forces stationed overseas may be obligated for 
transportation allowances for travel within or between the 
contiguous States.

Sec. 1787. Reporting of child abuse

  (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall request each 
State to provide for the reporting to the Secretary of any 
report the State receives of known or suspected instances of 
child abuse and neglect in which the person having care of the 
child is a member of the armed forces (or the spouse of the 
member).
  (b) Definition.--In this section, the term ``child abuse and 
neglect'' has the meaning provided in section 3(1) of the Child 
Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5102).

                   SUBCHAPTER II--MILITARY CHILD CARE

Sec.
1791. Funding for military child care.
1792. Child care employees.
1793. Parent fees.
1794. Child abuse prevention and safety at facilities.
1795. Parent partnerships with child development centers.
1796. Subsidies for family home day care.
1797. Early childhood education program.
1798. Definitions.

Sec. 1791. Funding for military child care

  It is the policy of Congress that the amount of appropriated 
funds available during a fiscal year for operating expenses for 
military child development centers and programs shall be not 
less than the amount of child care fee receipts that are 
estimated to be received by the Department of Defense during 
that fiscal year.

Sec. 1792. Child care employees

  (a) Required Training.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
prescribe regulations implementing a training program for child 
care employees. Those regulations shall apply uniformly among 
the military departments. Subject to paragraph (2), 
satisfactory completion of the training program shall be a 
condition of employment of any person as a child care employee.
  (2) Under those regulations, the Secretary shall require that 
each child care employee complete the training program not 
later than six months after the date on which the employee is 
employed as a child care employee.
  (3) The training program established under this subsection 
shall cover, at a minimum, training in the following:
          (A) Early childhood development.
          (B) Activities and disciplinary techniques 
        appropriate to children of different ages.
          (C) Child abuse prevention and detection.
          (D) Cardiopulmonary resuscitation and other emergency 
        medical procedures.
  (b) Training and Curriculum Specialists.--(1) The Secretary 
of Defense shall require that at least one employee at each 
military child development center be a specialist in training 
and curriculum development. The Secretary shall ensure that 
such employees have appropriate credentials and experience.
  (2) The duties of such employees shall include the following:
          (A) Special teaching activities at the center.
          (B) Daily oversight and instruction of other child 
        care employees at the center.
          (C) Daily assistance in the preparation of lesson 
        plans.
          (D) Assistance in the center's child abuse prevention 
        and detection program.
          (E) Advising the director of the center on the 
        performance of other child care employees.
  (3) Each employee referred to in paragraph (1) shall be an 
employee in a competitive service position.
  (c) Competitive Rates of Pay.--For the purpose of providing 
military child development centers with a qualified and stable 
civilian workforce, employees at a military installation who 
are directly involved in providing child care and are paid from 
nonappropriated funds--
          (1) in the case of entry-level employees, shall be 
        paid at rates of pay competitive with the rates of pay 
        paid to other entry-level employees at that 
        installation who are drawn from the same labor pool; 
        and
          (2) in the case of other employees, shall be paid at 
        rates of pay substantially equivalent to the rates of 
        pay paid to other employees at that installation with 
        similar training, seniority, and experience.
  (d) Employment Preference Program for Military Spouses.--(1) 
The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a program under which 
qualified spouses of members of the armed forces shall be given 
a preference in hiring for the position of child care employee 
in a position paid from nonappropriated funds if the spouse is 
among persons determined to be best qualified for the position.
  (2) A spouse who is provided a preference under this 
subsection at a military child development center may not be 
precluded from obtaining another preference, in accordance with 
section 1794 of this title, in the same geographic area as the 
military child development center.
  (e) Competitive Service Position Defined.--In this section, 
the term ``competitive service position'' means a position in 
the competitive service, as defined in section 2102(a)(1) of 
title 5.

Sec. 1793. Parent fees

  (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe 
regulations establishing fees to be charged parents for the 
attendance of children at military child development centers. 
Those regulations shall be uniform for the military departments 
and shall require that, in the case of children who attend the 
centers on a regular basis, the fees shall be based on family 
income.
  (b) Local Waiver Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may 
provide authority to installation commanders, on a case-by-case 
basis, to establish fees for attendance of children at child 
development centers at rates lower than those prescribed under 
subsection (a) if the rates prescribed under subsection (a) are 
not competitive with rates at local non-military child 
development centers.

Sec. 1794. Child abuse prevention and safety at facilities

  (a) Child Abuse Task Force.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
maintain a special task force to respond to allegations of 
widespread child abuse at a military installation. The task 
force shall be composed of personnel from appropriate 
disciplines, including, where appropriate, medicine, 
psychology, and childhood development. In the case of such 
allegations, the task force shall provide assistance to the 
commander of the installation, and to parents at the 
installation, in helping them to deal with such allegations.
  (b) National Hotline.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
maintain a national telephone number for persons to use to 
report suspected child abuse or safety violations at a military 
child development center or family home day care site. The 
Secretary shall ensure that such reports may be made 
anonymously if so desired by the person making the report. The 
Secretary shall establish procedures for following up on 
complaints and information received over that number.
  (2) The Secretary shall publicize the existence of the 
number.
  (c) Assistance From Local Authorities.--The Secretary of 
Defense shall prescribe regulations requiring that, in a case 
of allegations of child abuse at a military child development 
center or family home day care site, the commander of the 
military installation or the head of the task force established 
under subsection (a) shall seek the assistance of local child 
protective authorities if such assistance is available.
  (d) Safety Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
prescribe regulations on safety and operating procedures at 
military child development centers. Those regulations shall 
apply uniformly among the military departments.
  (e) Inspections.--The Secretary of Defense shall require that 
each military child development center be inspected not less 
often than four times a year. Each such inspection shall be 
unannounced. At least one inspection a year shall be carried 
out by a representative of the installation served by the 
center, and one inspection a year shall be carried out by a 
representative of the major command under which that 
installation operates.
  (f) Remedies for Violations.--(1) Except as provided in 
paragraph (2), any violation of a safety, health, or child 
welfare law or regulation (discovered at an inspection or 
otherwise) at a military child development center shall be 
remedied immediately.
  (2) In the case of a violation that is not life threatening, 
the commander of the major command under which the installation 
concerned operates may waive the requirement that the violation 
be remedied immediately for a period of up to 90 days beginning 
on the date of the discovery of the violation. If the violation 
is not remedied as of the end of that 90-day period, the 
military child development center shall be closed until the 
violation is remedied. The Secretary of the military department 
concerned may waive the preceding sentence and authorize the 
center to remain open in a case in which the violation cannot 
reasonably be remedied within that 90-day period or in which 
major facility reconstruction is required.
  (3) If a military child development center is closed under 
paragraph (2), the Secretary of the military department 
concerned shall promptly submit to the Committee on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security 
of the House of Representatives a report notifying those 
committees of the closing. The report shall include--
          (A) notice of the violation that resulted in the 
        closing and the cost of remedying the violation; and
          (B) a statement of the reasons why the violation has 
        not been remedied as of the time of the report.

Sec. 1795. Parent partnerships with child development centers

  (a) Parent Boards.--The Secretary of Defense shall require 
that there be established at each military child development 
center a board of parents, to be composed of parents of 
children attending the center. The board shall meet 
periodically with staff of the center and the commander of the 
installation served by the center for the purpose of discussing 
problems and concerns. The board, together with the staff of 
the center, shall be responsible for coordinating the parent 
participation program described in subsection (b).
  (b) Parent Participation Programs.--The Secretary of Defense 
shall require the establishment of a parent participation 
program at each military child development center. As part of 
such program, the Secretary of Defense may establish fees for 
attendance of children at such a center, in the case of parents 
who participate in the parent participation program at that 
center, at rates lower than the rates that otherwise apply.

Sec. 1796. Subsidies for family home day care

  The Secretary of Defense may use appropriated funds available 
for military child care purposes to provide assistance to 
family home day care providers so that family home day care 
services can be provided to members of the armed forces at a 
cost comparable to the cost of services provided by military 
child development centers. The Secretary shall prescribe 
regulations for the provision of such assistance.

Sec. 1797. Early childhood education program

  The Secretary of Defense shall require that all military 
child development centers meet standards of operation necessary 
for accreditation by an appropriate national early childhood 
programs accrediting body.

Sec. 1798. Definitions

  In this subchapter:
          (1) The term ``military child development center'' 
        means a facility on a military installation (or on 
        property under the jurisdiction of the commander of a 
        military installation) at which child care services are 
        provided for members of the armed forces or any other 
        facility at which such child care services are provided 
        that is operated by the Secretary of a military 
        department.
          (2) The term ``family home day care'' means home-
        based child care services that are provided for members 
        of the armed forces by an individual who (A) is 
        certified by the Secretary of the military department 
        concerned as qualified to provide those services, and 
        (B) provides those services on a regular basis for 
        compensation.
          (3) The term ``child care employee'' means a civilian 
        employee of the Department of Defense who is employed 
        to work in a military child development center 
        (regardless of whether the employee is paid from 
        appropriated funds or nonappropriated funds).
          (4) The term ``child care fee receipts'' means those 
        nonappropriated funds that are derived from fees paid 
        by members of the armed forces for child care services 
        provided at military child development centers.

        [CHAPTER 89--VOLUNTEERS INVESTING IN PEACE AND SECURITY

[Sec.
[1801.  Volunteer program to assist independent states of the former 
          Soviet Union.
[1802.  Participants in program.
[1803.  Determining needs for volunteers; role of the Secretary of 
          State.
[1804.  Compensation and benefits.
[1805.  Termination of program.

[Sec. 1801. Volunteer program to assist independent states of the 
                    former Soviet Union

  [The Secretary of Defense may, in coordination with the 
Secretary of State, carry out a program in accordance with this 
chapter to provide technical assistance to address the 
infrastructure needs of the independent states of the former 
Soviet Union. Assistance under the program shall be provided by 
volunteers who are retired members of the armed forces, or who 
are former members of the armed forces, who have been recently 
released from active duty.

[Sec. 1802. Participants in program

  [(a) If the Secretary of Defense carries out a program under 
section 1801 of this title, the Secretary shall select the 
volunteers to participate in the program. Volunteers shall be 
selected from among individuals--
          [(1) who have retired from active duty or been 
        released from active duty under a voluntary separation 
        program; and
          [(2) who possess technical skills relevant to the 
        infrastructure needs of the independent states of the 
        former Soviet Union (as identified by the Secretary of 
        State pursuant to section 1803(a) of this title), 
        including skills in areas such as civil engineering, 
        electrical engineering, nuclear plant safety, 
        environmental cleanup, logistics, communications, and 
        health care.
  [(b) Volunteers may be selected from among individuals who 
were separated from active duty after October 22, 1990.
  [(c)(1) The Secretary of Defense may employ volunteers, by 
contract, to provide services that use their technical skills 
for the benefit of governmental or nonprofit nongovernmental 
entities in any of the independent states of the former Soviet 
Union.
  [(2) A person who is employed as a volunteer under paragraph 
(1) shall be considered to be an employee for the purposes of 
chapter 81 of title 5, relating to compensation for work-
related injuries. Such a person who is not otherwise employed 
by the Federal Government shall not be considered to be a 
Federal employee for any other purpose by reason of such 
employment as a volunteer.
  [(d) Volunteers may be required to agree to serve in an 
independent state of the former Soviet Union for a period of 
two years (in addition to such period of education and training 
provided under section 1803(c) of this title) except to the 
extent the Secretary of State determines otherwise.
  [(e) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe procedures for 
the selection of volunteers, including procedures for the 
submission of applications.
  [(f) The Secretary of Defense may maintain a registry of 
applicants who are qualified to be volunteers, including the 
skills of such applicants.

[Sec. 1803. Determining needs for volunteers; role of the Secretary of 
                    State

  [(a) The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the 
Secretary of State, may identify the technical skills that 
could be provided by volunteers pursuant to this chapter and 
identify opportunities for the placement of volunteers with 
governmental or nongovernmental entities in each participating 
country.
  [(b) The Secretary of State shall approve the functions to be 
performed by each volunteer assigned pursuant to this chapter 
and the assignment of each volunteer to an independent state of 
the former Soviet Union.
  [(c) The Secretary of State may provide volunteers with 
language training, cultural orientation, and such other 
education and training as the Secretary determines appropriate. 
Any expenses incurred by the Secretary of State in carrying out 
this subsection shall be reimbursed by the Secretary of Defense 
from amounts currently available to the Secretary of Defense.
  [(d) Each volunteer shall serve under the authority of the 
United States chief of mission to the participating country and 
shall be considered to be a member of the United States mission 
to that country.

[Sec. 1804. Compensation and benefits

  [(a) Each volunteer may be paid a stipend at the annual rate 
of $25,000, subject to the availability of appropriations.
  [(b) If the Secretary of Defense determines that it is 
necessary to do so in order to recruit qualified volunteers, 
the Secretary may provide volunteers with the allowances and 
other benefits considered appropriate by the Secretary, 
including the following:
          [(1) Round-trip transportation for the volunteer and 
        the volunteer's dependents.
          [(2) Medical care for the volunteer and dependents, 
        if the volunteer is not otherwise eligible for medical 
        care from the Department of Defense or such medical 
        care is otherwise not reasonably available.
          [(3) A housing allowance.
          [(4) An overseas cost-of-living allowance.
          [(5) Expenses of education of dependents.

[Sec. 1805. Termination of program

  [The selection of volunteers to participate in the program 
under this chapter shall terminate on September 30, 1995.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART III--TRAINING AND EDUCATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


          CHAPTER 103--SENIOR RESERVE OFFICERS' TRAINING CORPS

Sec.
2101.  Definitions.
     * * * * * * *
2111a. Detail of officers to senior military colleges.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 2107. Financial assistance program for specially selected members

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (h)(1) * * *
  (2) Of the total number of cadets appointed in the financial 
assistance programs under this section in any year, not less 
than 100 shall be designated for placement in the program of 
the Army for service upon commissioning in the Army National 
Guard, of which one-half shall be for financial assistance 
awarded for a period of two years and the remainder shall be 
for financial assistance awarded for a period of four years. A 
cadet designated under this paragraph who, having initially 
contracted for service as provided in subsection (b)(5)(A) and 
having received financial assistance for two years under an 
award providing for four years of financial assistance under 
this section, modifies such contract with the consent of the 
Secretary of the Army to provide for service as described in 
subsection (b)(5)(B), may be counted, for the year in which the 
contract is modified, toward the number of appointments 
required under the preceding sentence for financial assistance 
awarded for a period of four years. A cadet who receives 
financial assistance under this paragraph and is commissioned 
in the Army National Guard shall perform service as provided in 
subsection (b)(5)(B) and may not be accepted for service on 
full-time active duty pursuant to the member's voluntary 
application until the completion of the period of service 
prescribed in that subsection. The Secretary of the Army shall 
prescribe regulations to ensure a geographical distribution of 
the cadets who receive financial assistance under this 
paragraph.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2111a. Detail of officers to senior military colleges

  (a) Detail of Officers To Serve as Commandant or Assistant 
Commandant of Cadets.--(1) Upon the request of a senior 
military college, the Secretary of Defense shall detail an 
officer on the active-duty list to serve as Commandant of 
Cadets at that college or (in the case of a college with an 
Assistant Commandant of Cadets) detail an officer on the 
active-duty list to serve as Assistant Commandant of Cadets at 
that college (but not both).
  (2) In the case of an officer detailed as Commandant of 
Cadets, the officer may, upon the request of the college, be 
assigned from among the Professor of Military Science, the 
Professor of Naval Science (if any), and the Professor of 
Aerospace Science (if any) at that college or may be in 
addition to any other officer detailed to that college in 
support of the program.
  (3) In the case of an officer detailed as Assistant 
Commandant of Cadets, the officer may, upon the request of the 
college, be assigned from among officers otherwise detailed to 
duty at that college in support of the program or may be in 
addition to any other officer detailed to that college in 
support of the program.
  (b) Designation of Officers as Tactical Officers.--Upon the 
request of a senior military college, the Secretary of Defense 
shall authorize officers (other than officers covered by 
subsection (a)) who are detailed to duty as instructors at that 
college to act simultaneously as tactical officers (with or 
without compensation) for the Corps of Cadets at that college.
  (c) Detail of Officers.--The Secretary of a military 
department shall designate officers for detail to the program 
at a senior military college in accordance with criteria 
provided by the college. An officer may not be detailed to a 
senior military college without the approval of that college.
  (d) Senior Military Colleges.--The senior military colleges 
are the following:
          (1) Texas A&M University.
          (2) Norwich College.
          (3) The Virginia Military Institute.
          (4) The Citadel.
          (5) Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State 
        University.
          (6) North Georgia College.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


   CHAPTER 105--ARMED FORCES HEALTH PROFESSIONS FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE 
PROGRAMS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBCHAPTER II--NURSE OFFICER CANDIDATE ACCESSION PROGRAM

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2130a. Financial assistance: nurse officer candidates

  (a) Bonus Authorized.--(1) A person described in subsection 
(b) who, during the period beginning on November 29, 1989, and 
ending on September 30, [1996] 1998, executes a written 
agreement in accordance with subsection (c) to accept an 
appointment as a nurse officer may, upon the acceptance of the 
agreement by the Secretary concerned, be paid an accession 
bonus of not more than $5,000. The bonus shall be paid in 
periodic installments, as determined by the Secretary concerned 
at the time the agreement is accepted, except that the first 
installment may not exceed $2,500.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 108--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SCHOOLS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2162. Preparation of budget requests for operation of professional 
                    military education schools

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) * * *
          (2) The term ``National Defense University'' means 
        the National War College, the Armed Forces Staff 
        College, the Institute for National Strategic Studies, 
        the Information Resources Management College, and the 
        Industrial College of the Armed Forces.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 109--EDUCATIONAL LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAMS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2171. Education loan repayment program: enlisted members on active 
                    duty in specified military specialties

  (a)(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, the 
Secretary of Defense may repay--
          (A) any loan made, insured, or guaranteed under part 
        B of title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
        U.S.C. 1071 et seq.); [or]
          (B) any loan made under part D of such title (the 
        William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program, 20 U.S.C. 
        1087a et seq.); or
          [(B)] (C) any loan made under part E of such title 
        (20 U.S.C. 1087aa et seq.).
Repayment of any such loan shall be made on the basis of each 
complete year of service performed by the borrower.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 111--SUPPORT OF SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS, AND ENGINEERING EDUCATION

Sec.
2191.  Graduate fellowships.
     * * * * * * *
[2198.  Management training program in Japanese language and culture.]
     * * * * * * *

[Sec. 2198. Management training program in Japanese language and 
                    culture

  [(a) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the 
National Science Foundation, shall establish a program for the 
making of grants on a competitive basis to United States 
institutions of higher education and other United States not-
for-profit organizations for the conduct of programs for 
scientists, engineers, and managers to learn Japanese language 
and culture.
  [(b) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe in regulations 
the criteria for awarding a grant under the program for 
activities of an institution or organization referred to in 
subsection (a), including the following:
          [(1) Whether scientists, engineers, and managers of 
        defense laboratories and Department of Energy 
        laboratories are permitted a level of participation in 
        such activities that is beneficial to the development 
        and application of defense critical technologies by 
        such laboratories.
          [(2) Whether such activities include the placement of 
        United States scientists, engineers, and managers in 
        Japanese government and industry laboratories--
                  [(A) to improve the knowledge of such 
                scientists, engineers, and managers in (i) 
                Japanese language and culture, and (ii) the 
                research and development and management 
                practices of such laboratories; and
                  [(B) to provide opportunities for the 
                encouragement of technology transfer from Japan 
                to the United States.
          [(3) Whether an appropriate share of the costs of 
        such activities will be paid out of funds derived from 
        non-Federal Government sources.
  [(c) In this section, the term ``defense critical 
technology'' means a technology identified in a defense 
critical technologies plan submitted to the Congress under 
section 2506 of this title.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


               PART IV--SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT

Chap.                                                               Sec.
      Planning and Coordination.....................................2201
      Facilities for Reserve Components.............................2231
     * * * * * * *
      Security and Control of Supplies.............................2891]
     * * * * * * *

                 CHAPTER 131--PLANNING AND COORDINATION

Sec.
2201.  Apportionment of funds: authority for exemption; excepted 
          expenses.
     * * * * * * *
[2207.  Expenditure of appropriations: limitation.]
     * * * * * * *
2216.  Defense Business Operations Fund.
     * * * * * * *

[Sec. 2207. Expenditure of appropriations: limitation

  [Money appropriated to the Department of Defense may not be 
spent under a contract other than a contract for personal 
services unless that contract provides that--
          [(1) the United States may, by written notice to the 
        contractor, terminate the right of the contractor to 
        proceed under the contract if the Secretary concerned 
        or his designee finds, after notice and hearing, that 
        the contractor, or his agent or other representative, 
        offered or gave any gratuity, such as entertainment or 
        a gift, to an officer, official, or employee of the 
        United States to obtain a contract or favorable 
        treatment in the awarding, amending, or making of 
        determinations concerning the performance, of a 
        contract; and
          [(2) if a contract is terminated under clause (1), 
        the United States has the same remedies against the 
        contractor that it would have had if the contractor had 
        breached the contract and, in addition to other 
        damages, is entitled to exemplary damages in an amount 
        at least three, but not more than 10, as determined by 
        the Secretary or his designee, times the cost incurred 
        by the contractor in giving gratuities to the officer, 
        official, or employee concerned.
The existence of facts upon which the Secretary makes findings 
under clause (1) may be reviewed by any competent court.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2216. Defense Business Operations Fund

  (a) Management of Working-Capital Funds and Certain 
Activities.--(1) The Secretary of Defense may manage the 
performance of the working-capital funds and industrial, 
commercial, and support type activities described in subsection 
(b) through the fund known as the Defense Business Operations 
Fund, which is established on the books of the Treasury. Except 
for the funds and activities specified in subsection (b), no 
other functions, activities, funds, or accounts of the 
Department of Defense may be managed through the Fund. The 
Secretary may not convert to management through the Fund any 
function, activity, fund, or account of the Department of 
Defense that is not managed through the Fund as of the date of 
the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1996.
  (2) Management of the Fund, including management of cash 
balances in the Fund, shall be exercised in the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense under the immediate authority of the Under 
Secretary of Defense (Comptroller). The Fund shall be treated 
as a single account for purposes of subchapter III of chapter 
13 and subchapter II of chapter 15 of title 31.
  (b) Funds and Activities Included.--The funds and activities 
referred to in subsection (a) are the following:
          (1) Working-capital funds established under section 
        2208 of this title and in existence on December 5, 
        1991.
          (2) Those activities that, on December 5, 1991, were 
        funded through the use of a working-capital fund 
        established under that section.
          (3) The Defense Finance and Accounting Service.
          (4) The Defense Industrial Plant Equipment Center.
          (5) The Defense Commissary Agency.
          (6) The Defense Technical Information Service.
          (7) The Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service.
  (c) Separate Accounting, Reporting, and Auditing of Funds and 
Activities.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall provide in 
accordance with this subsection for separate accounting, 
reporting, and auditing of funds and activities managed through 
the Fund.
  (2) The Secretary shall maintain the separate identity of 
each fund and activity managed through the Fund that (before 
the establishment of the Fund) was managed as a separate fund 
or activity.
  (3) The Secretary shall maintain separate records for each 
function for which payment is made through the Fund and which 
(before the establishment of the Fund) was paid directly 
through appropriations, including the separate identity of the 
appropriation account used to pay for the performance of the 
function.
  (d) Charges for Goods and Services Provided through the 
Fund.--(1) Charges for goods and services provided through the 
Fund shall include the following amounts:
          (A) Amounts necessary to recover the full costs of--
                  (i) the development, implementation, 
                operation, and maintenance of systems 
                supporting the wholesale supply and maintenance 
                activities of the Department of Defense; and
                  (ii) the use of members of the armed forces 
                in the provision of the goods and services, 
                computed by calculating, to the maximum extent 
                practicable, such costs using the pay and 
                allowances of the members.
          (B) Amounts for depreciation of capital assets, set 
        in accordance with generally accepted accounting 
        principles.
          (C) Amounts necessary to recover the full cost of the 
        operation of the Defense Finance Accounting Service.
  (2) Charges for goods and services provided through the Fund 
may not include the following amounts:
          (A) Amounts necessary to recover the costs of a 
        military construction project (as defined in section 
        2801(b) of this title), other than a minor construction 
        project financed by the Fund pursuant to section 
        2805(c)(1) of this title.
          (B) Amounts necessary to cover costs incurred in 
        connection with the closure or realignment of a 
        military installation.
          (C) Amounts necessary to recover the costs of 
        functions designated by the Secretary of Defense as 
        mission critical, such as ammunition handling safety, 
        and amounts for ancillary tasks not directly related to 
        the mission of the function or activity managed through 
        the Fund.
  (3) After September 30, 1996, functions and activities 
managed through the Fund may not use advance billing in the 
provision of goods and services to customers.
  (e) Capital Asset Subaccount.--(1) Amounts charged for 
depreciation of capital assets pursuant to subsection (d)(1)(B) 
shall be credited to a separate capital asset subaccount 
established within the Fund.
  (2) The Secretary of Defense may award contracts for capital 
assets of the Fund in advance of the availability of funds in 
the subaccount.
  (f) Procedures For Accumulation of Funds.--The Secretary of 
Defense shall establish billing procedures to ensure that the 
balance in the Fund does not exceed the amount necessary to 
provide for the working capital requirements of the Fund, as 
determined by the Secretary.
  (g) Purchase From Other Sources.--The Secretary of Defense or 
the Secretary of a military department may purchase goods and 
services that are available for purchase from the Fund from a 
source other than the Fund if the Secretary determines that 
such source offers a more competitive rate for the goods and 
services than the Fund offers.
  (h) Annual Reports and Budget.--The Secretary of Defense 
shall annually submit to Congress, at the same time that the 
President submits the budget under section 1105 of title 31, 
the following:
          (1) A detailed report that contains a statement of 
        all receipts and disbursements of the Fund (including 
        such a statement for each subaccount of the Fund) for 
        the year for which the report is submitted.
          (2) A detailed proposed budget for the operation of 
        the Fund for the fiscal year for which the budget is 
        submitted. The proposed budget shall include the amount 
        necessary to cover the operating losses, if any, of the 
        Fund for the previous fiscal year.
          (3) A comparison of the amounts actually expended for 
        the operation of the Fund for the previous fiscal year 
        with the amount proposed for the operation of the Fund 
        for that fiscal year in the President's budget.
          (4) A report on the capital asset subaccount of the 
        Fund that contains the following information:
                  (A) The opening balance of the subaccount as 
                of the beginning of the fiscal year in which 
                the report is submitted.
                  (B) The estimated amounts to be credited to 
                the subaccount in the fiscal year in which the 
                report is submitted.
                  (C) The estimated amounts of outlays to be 
                paid out of the subaccount in the fiscal year 
                in which the report is submitted.
                  (D) The estimated balance of the subaccount 
                at the end of the fiscal year in which the 
                report is submitted.
                  (E) A statement of how much of the estimated 
                balance at the end of the fiscal year in which 
                the report is submitted will be needed to pay 
                outlays in the immediately following fiscal 
                year that are in excess of the amount to be 
                credited to the subaccount in the immediately 
                following fiscal year.
  (i) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) The term ``capital assets'' means the following 
        capital assets that have a development or acquisition 
        cost of not less than $15,000:
                  (A) Minor construction projects financed by 
                the Fund pursuant to section 2805(c)(1) of this 
                title.
                  (B) Automatic data processing equipment, 
                software, other equipment, and other capital 
                improvements.
          (2) The term ``Fund'' means the Defense Business 
        Operations Fund.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                   CHAPTER 137--PROCUREMENT GENERALLY

Sec.
2302.  Definitions.
     * * * * * * *
2317.  Equipment leasing.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 2317. Equipment leasing

  The Secretary of Defense shall authorize and encourage the 
use of leasing in the acquisition of equipment whenever such 
leasing is practicable and otherwise authorized by law.

    CHAPTER 138--COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS WITH NATO ALLIES AND OTHER 
COUNTRIES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


              SUBCHAPTER II--OTHER COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS

Sec.
2350a.  Cooperative research and development projects: allied countries.
     * * * * * * *
2350k.  Relocation within host nation of elements of armed forces 
          overseas.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2350j. Burden sharing contributions by designated countries and 
                    regional organizations

  (a) * * *
  [(b) Credit to Appropriations.--Contributions accepted in a 
fiscal year under subsection (a) shall be credited to 
appropriations of the Department of Defense that are available 
for that fiscal year for the purposes for which the 
contributions are made. The contributions so credited shall 
be--
          [(1) merged with the appropriations to which they are 
        credited; and
          [(2) available for the same time period as those 
        appropriations.]
  (b) Accounting.--Contributions accepted under subsection (a) 
which are not related to security assistance may be accepted, 
managed, and expended in dollars or in the currency of the host 
nation (or, in the case of a contribution from a regional 
organization, in the currency in which the contribution was 
provided). Any such contribution shall be placed in an account 
established for such purpose and shall remain available until 
expended for the purposes specified in subsection (c). The 
Secretary of Defense shall establish a separate account for 
such purpose for each country or regional organization from 
which such contributions are accepted under subsection (a).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Authorization of Military Construction.--Contributions 
[credited under subsection (b) to an appropriation account of 
the Department of Defense] placed in an account established 
under subsection (b) may be used--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) Notice and Wait Requirements.--(1) When a decision is 
made to carry out a military construction project under 
subsection (d), the Secretary of Defense shall submit [a report 
to the congressional defense committees] to the congressional 
committees specified in subsection (g) a report containing--
          (A) an explanation of the need for the project;
          (B) the then current estimate of the cost of the 
        project; and
          (C) a justification for carrying out the project 
        under that subsection.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (g) Congressional Committees.--The congressional committees 
referred to in subsection (e)(1) are--
          (1) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee 
        on Appropriations of the Senate; and
          (2) the Committee on National Security and the 
        Committee on Appropriations of the House of 
        Representatives.

Sec. 2350k. Relocation within host nation of elements of armed forces 
                    overseas

  (a) Authority to Accept Contributions.--The Secretary of 
Defense may accept contributions from any nation because of or 
in support of the relocation of elements of the armed forces 
from or to any location within that nation. Such contributions 
may be accepted in dollars or in the currency of the host 
nation. Any such contribution shall be placed in an account 
established for such purpose and shall remain available until 
expended for the purposes specified in subsection (b). The 
Secretary shall establish a separate account for such purpose 
for each country from which such contributions are accepted.
  (b) Use of Contributions.--The Secretary may use a 
contribution accepted under subsection (a) only for payment of 
costs incurred in connection with the relocation concerning 
which the contribution was made. Those costs include the 
following:
          (1) Design and construction services, including 
        development and review of statements of work, master 
        plans and designs, acquisition of construction, and 
        supervision and administration of contracts relating 
        thereto.
          (2) Transportation and movement services, including 
        packing, unpacking, storage, and transportation.
          (3) Communications services, including installation 
        and deinstallation of communications equipment, 
        transmission of messages and data, and rental of 
        transmission capability.
          (4) Supply and administration, including acquisition 
        of expendable office supplies, rental of office space, 
        budgeting and accounting services, auditing services, 
        secretarial services, and translation services.
          (5) Personnel costs, including salary, allowances and 
        overhead of employees whether full-time or part-time, 
        temporary or permanent (except for military personnel), 
        and travel and temporary duty costs.
          (6) All other clearly identifiable expenses directly 
        related to relocation.
  (c) Method of Contribution.--Contributions may be accepted in 
any of the following forms:
          (1) Irrevocable letter of credit issued by a 
        financial institution acceptable to the Treasurer of 
        the United States.
          (2) Drawing rights on a commercial bank account 
        established and funded by the host nation, which 
        account is blocked such that funds deposited cannot be 
        withdrawn except by or with the approval of the United 
        States.
          (3) Cash, which shall be deposited in a separate 
        trust fund in the United States Treasury pending 
        expenditure and which shall accrue interest in 
        accordance with section 9702 of title 31.
  (d) Annual Report to Congress.--Not later than 30 days after 
the end of each fiscal year, the Secretary shall submit to 
Congress a report specifying--
          (1) the amount of the contributions accepted by the 
        Secretary during the preceding fiscal year under 
        subsection (a) and the purposes for which the 
        contributions were made; and
          (2) the amount of the contributions expended by the 
        Secretary during the preceding fiscal year and the 
        purposes for which the contributions were expended.

                 CHAPTER 139--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Sec.
2351.  Availability of appropriations.
     * * * * * * *
[2356.  Contracts: delegations.]
     * * * * * * *
2366.  Major systems and munitions programs: [survivability] 
          vulnerability testing and lethality testing required before 
          full-scale production.
     * * * * * * *
[2370.  Biological Defense Research Program.]
     * * * * * * *

[Sec. 2356. Contracts: delegations

  [(a) The Secretary of a military department may delegate any 
authority under section 1584, 2353, 2354, or 2355 of this title 
to--
          [(1) the Under Secretary of his department;
          [(2) an Assistant Secretary of his department; or
          [(3) the chief, and one assistant to the chief, of 
        any technical service, bureau, or office.
However, the authority of the Secretary under section 
2353(b)(3) of this title may not be delegated to a person 
described in clause (3) of this subsection.
  [(b) Subject to other provisions of law, the power to 
negotiate and administer contracts for research or development, 
or both, may be further delegated. In this section, the term 
``negotiate'' means make without a solicitation for sealed bids 
under chapter 137 of this title.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2358. Research and development projects

  (a) Authority.--The Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of 
a military department may engage in basic research, applied 
research, advanced research, and development projects that--
          (1) * * *
          (2) either--
                  (A) relate to weapon systems and other 
                military needs; or
                  (B) are of potential interest to the 
                Department of Defense and advance the defense 
                policies and objectives specified in section 
                2501 of this title.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2361. Award of grants and contracts to colleges and universities: 
                    requirement of competition

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c)(1) * * *
  (2) Each report under paragraph (1) shall cover the preceding 
[calendar] fiscal year and shall be submitted not later than 
February 1 of the year after the fiscal year covered by the 
report.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2364. Coordination and communication of defense research 
                    activities

  (a) * * *
  (b) Functions of Defense Research Facilities.--The Secretary 
of Defense shall ensure, to the maximum extent practicable--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (5) that, in order to promote increased consideraton 
        of technological issues early in the development 
        process, any position paper prepared by a Defense 
        research facility on a technological issue relating to 
        a major weapon system, and any technological assessment 
        made by such facility in the case of such component, is 
        made a part of the records considered for the purpose 
        of making [milestone O, milestone I, and milestone II] 
        acquisition program decisions.
  (c) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) * * *
          [(2) The term ``milestone O decision'' means the 
        decision made within the Department of Defense that 
        there is a mission need for a new major weapons system 
        and that research and development is to begin to meet 
        such need.
          [(3) The term ``milestone I decision'' means the 
        decision by an appropriate official of the Department 
        of Defense selecting a new major weapon system concept 
        and a program for demonstration and validation of such 
        concept.
          [(4) The term ``milestone II decision'' means the 
        decision by an appropriate official of the Department 
        of Defense approving the full-scale development of a 
        new major weapon system.]
          (2) The term ``acquisition program decisions'' has 
        the meaning prescribed by the Secretary of Defense in 
        regulations.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2366. Major systems and munitions programs: [survivability] 
                    vulnerability and lethality testing required before 
                    full-scale production

  (a) Requirements.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall provide 
that--
          (A) a covered system may not proceed beyond low-rate 
        initial production until realistic [survivability] 
        vulnerability testing of the system is completed in 
        accordance with this section and the report required by 
        subsection (d) with respect to that testing is 
        submitted in accordance with that subsection; and
          (B) a major munition program or a missile program may 
        not proceed beyond low-rate initial production until 
        realistic lethality testing of the program is completed 
        in accordance with this section and the report required 
        by subsection (d) with respect to that testing is 
        submitted in accordance with that subsection.
  (2) The Secretary of Defense shall provide that a covered 
product improvement program may not proceed beyond low-rate 
initial production until--
          (A) in the case of a product improvement to a covered 
        system, realistic [survivability] vulnerability testing 
        is completed in accordance with this section; and
          (B) in the case of a product improvement to a major 
        munitions program or a missile program, realistic 
        lethality testing is completed in accordance with this 
        section.
  (b) Test Guidelines.--(1) [Survivability] Vulnerability and 
lethality tests required under subsection (a) shall be carried 
out sufficiently early in the development phase of the system 
or program (including a covered product improvement program) to 
allow any design deficiency demonstrated by the testing to be 
corrected in the design of the system, munition, or missile (or 
in the product modification or upgrade to the system, munition, 
or missile) before proceeding beyond low-rate initial 
production.
  (2) The costs of all tests required under that subsection 
shall be paid from funds available for the system being tested.
  (3) Testing should begin at the component, subsystem, and 
subassembly level, culminating with tests of the complete 
system configured for combat.
  (c) Waiver Authority.--(1) The Secretary of Defense may waive 
the application of the [survivability] vulnerability and 
lethality tests of this section to a covered system, munitions 
program, missile program, or covered product improvement 
program if the Secretary, before the system or program enters 
engineering and manufacturing development, certifies to 
Congress that live-fire testing of such system or program would 
be unreasonably expensive and impractical.
  (2) In the case of a covered system (or covered product 
improvement program for a covered system), the Secretary may 
waive the application of the [survivability] vulnerability and 
lethality tests of this section to such system or program and 
instead allow testing of the system or program in combat by 
firing munitions likely to be encountered in combat at 
components, subsystems, and subassemblies, together with 
performing design analyses, modeling and simulation, and 
analysis of combat data. Such alternative testing may not be 
carried out in the case of any covered system (or covered 
product improvement program for a covered system) unless the 
Secretary certifies to Congress, before the system or program 
enters engineering and manufacturing development, that the 
[survivability] vulnerability and lethality testing of such 
system or program otherwise required by this section would be 
unreasonably expensive and impracticable.
  (3) The Secretary shall include with any certification under 
paragraph (1) or (2) a report explaining how the Secretary 
plans to evaluate the [survivability] vulnerability or the 
lethality of the system or program and assessing possible 
alternatives to realistic [survivability] vulnerability testing 
of the system or program.
  (4) In time of war or mobilization, the President may suspend 
the operation of any provision of this section.
  (d) Reporting to Congress.--At the conclusion of 
[survivability] vulnerability or lethality testing under 
subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall submit a report 
on the testing to the Committees on Armed Services and on 
Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives. Each 
such report shall describe the results of the [survivability] 
vulnerability or lethality testing and shall give the 
Secretary's overall assessment of the testing.
  (e) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (3) The term ``realistic [survivability] 
        vulnerability testing'' means, in the case of a covered 
        system (or a covered product improvement program for a 
        covered system), testing for vulnerability of the 
        system in combat by firing munitions likely to be 
        encountered in combat (or munitions with a capability 
        similar to such munitions) at the system configured for 
        combat, with the primary emphasis on testing 
        vulnerability with respect to potential user casualties 
        and taking into equal consideration the susceptibility 
        to attack and combat performance of the system.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (6) The term ``covered product improvement program'' 
        means a program under which--
                  (A) a modification or upgrade will be made to 
                a covered system which (as determined by the 
                Secretary of Defense) is likely to affect 
                significantly the [survivability] vulnerability 
                of such system; or

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 2370. Biological Defense Research Program

  [(a) Annual Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
Congress an annual report on research, development, test, and 
evaluation conducted by the Department of Defense during the 
preceding fiscal year for the purposes of biological defense. 
The report shall be submitted in both classified and 
unclassified form and shall be submitted each year in 
conjunction with the submission of the budget to Congress for 
the next fiscal year.
  [(b) Contents of Report.--Each report under this section 
shall provide the following information:
          [(1) A description of each biological or infectious 
        agent or toxin that was used in, or that was the 
        subject of, research, development, test, and evaluation 
        conducted for the purposes of biological defense during 
        the fiscal year covered by the report and not 
        previously listed in publications of the Centers for 
        Disease Control (CDC).
          [(2) A description of the biological properties of 
        each such agent.
          [(3) A statement of the location of each biological 
        defense research facility and the amount spent by the 
        Department of Defense during the fiscal year covered by 
        the report at each such facility for research, 
        development, test, and evaluation for biological 
        defense research.
          [(4) A statement of the biosafety level used at each 
        such facility in conducting that research, development, 
        test, and evaluation.
          [(5) A statement that documentation of annual 
        coordination with local health, fire, and police 
        officials for the provision of emergency support 
        services has been included in the facility safety plan 
        for each biological defense research facility.
  [(c) Types of Research Covered.--This section applies to all 
research, development, test, and evaluation activities 
conducted by the Department of Defense for the purpose of 
biological defense.
  [(d) Definitions.--In this section:
          [(1) The term ``biosafety level'' means the 
        applicable biosafety level described in the publication 
        entitled ``Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical 
        Laboratories'' (CDC-NIH, 1984).
          [(2) The term ``biological defense research 
        facility'' means a location at which research, 
        development, test, and evaluation for purposes of 
        biological defense involving any biological or 
        infectious agent or toxin (whether or not listed in a 
        CDC publication) is conducted.]

Sec. 2370a. Medical countermeasures against biowarfare threats: 
                    allocation of funding between near-term and other 
                    threats

  (a) Allocation Between Near-Term and Other Threats.--Of the 
funds appropriated or otherwise made available for any fiscal 
year for the medical component of the Biological Defense 
Research Program (BDRP) of the [Department of Defense--
          [(1) not more than 80 percent may be obligated and 
        expended for product development, or for research, 
        development, test, or evaluation, of medical 
        countermeasures against near-term validated biowarfare 
        threat agents; and
          [(2) not more than 20 percent] Department of Defense, 
        not more than 50 percent may be obligated or expended 
        for product development, or for research, development, 
        test, or evaluation, of medical countermeasures against 
        mid-term or far-term validated biowarfare threat 
        agents.
  (b) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) * * *
          [(2) The term ``near-term validated biowarfare threat 
        agent'' means a validated biowarfare threat agent that 
        has been, or is being, developed or produced for 
        weaponization within 5 years, as assessed and 
        determined by the Defense Intelligence Agency.
          [(3)] (2) The term ``mid-term validated biowarfare 
        threat agent'' means a validated biowarfare threat 
        agent that is an emerging biowarfare threat, is the 
        object of research by a foreign threat country, and 
        will be ready for weaponization in more than 5 years 
        and less than 10 years, as assessed and determined by 
        the Defense Intelligence Agency.
          [(4)] (3) The term ``far-term validated biowarfare 
        threat agent'' means a validated biowarfare threat 
        agent that is a future biowarfare threat, is the object 
        of research by a foreign threat country, and could be 
        ready for weaponization in more than 10 years and less 
        than 20 years, as assessed and determined by the 
        Defense Intelligence Agency.
          [(5)] (4) The term ``weaponization'' means 
        incorporation into usable ordnance or other militarily 
        useful means of delivery.

Sec. 2371. Research projects: transactions other than contracts and 
                    grants

  (a) Additional Forms of Transactions Authorized.--The 
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of each military 
department may enter into transactions (other than contracts, 
cooperative agreements, and grants) under the authority of this 
subsection in carrying out basic, applied, and advanced 
research projects for the purpose of advancing the defense 
policies and objectives specified in section 2501 of this 
title. The authority under this subsection is in addition to 
the authority provided in section 2358 of this title to use 
contracts, cooperative agreements, and grants in carrying out 
such projects.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


           CHAPTER 141--MISCELLANEOUS PROCUREMENT PROVISIONS

Sec.
2381.  Contracts: regulations for bids.
     * * * * * * *
[2383.  Procurement of critical aircraft and ship spare parts: quality 
          control.]
     * * * * * * *
[2397  Employees or former employees of defense contractors: reports.
[2397a.   Requirements relating to private employment contacts between 
          certain Department of Defense procurement officials and 
          defense contractors.
[2397b.   Certain former Department of Defense procurement officials: 
          limitations on employment by contractors.
[2397c.   Defense contractors: requirements concerning former Department 
          of Defense officials.]
     * * * * * * *

[Sec. 2383. Procurement of critical aircraft and ship spare parts: 
                    quality control

  [(a) In procuring any spare or repair part that is critical 
to the operation of an aircraft or ship, the Secretary of 
Defense shall require the contractor supplying such part to 
provide a part that meets all appropriate qualification and 
contractural quality requirements as may be specified and made 
available to prospective offerors. In establishing the 
appropriate qualification requirements, the Secretary of 
Defense shall use the Department of Defense qualification 
requirements that were used to qualify the original production 
part unless the Secretary determines in writing--
          [(1) that there are other requirements sufficiently 
        similar to those requirements that should be used 
        instead; or
          [(2) that any or all such requirements are 
        unnecessary.
  [(b) In this section, the term ``spare or repair part'' means 
any individual piece, part, subassembly, or component which is 
furnished for the logistic support or repair of an end item and 
not as an end item itself.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 2397. Employees or former employees of defense contractors: 
                    reports

  [(a) In this section:
          [(1) The term ``contract'' means a contract 
        (including the net amount of modifications to, and the 
        exercise of options under, the contract) that is in an 
        amount in excess of the simplified acquisition 
        threshold, as in effect at the time that the contract 
        is awarded. The term does not include a contract for 
        the purchase of commercial items (as defined in section 
        4(12) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act 
        (41 U.S.C. 403(12))).
          [(2) The term ``defense contractor'' means a person 
        that provides services, supplies, or both (including 
        construction) to the Department of Defense under a 
        contract directly with the Department.
          [(3) The term ``served'', when used with 
        ``otherwise'', includes the representation of a defense 
        contractor--
                  [(A) at a hearing, trial, appeal, or other 
                action in which the United States was a party 
                and that involved services, supplies, or both 
                (including construction) that were provided to, 
                or to be provided to, the Department by the 
                contractor; and
                  [(B) in a transaction with the Department 
                that involved services, supplies, or both 
                (including construction) that were provided to, 
                or to be provided to, the Department by the 
                contractor.
  [(b)(1) This subsection applies to--
          [(A) a former or retired officer of the Army, Navy, 
        Air Force, or Marine Corps who (i) has at least 10 
        years of active service, and (ii) held for any period 
        during that service a grade above captain or, if the 
        Navy, above lieutenant; and
          [(B) a former civilian official or employee 
        (including a consultant or part-time employee) of the 
        Department of Defense whose pay rate (at any time 
        during the three-year period before the end of the last 
        service of the person with the Department) was at least 
        equal to the minimum rate at the time for GS-13.
  [(2)(A) If a person to whom this subsection applies (i) was 
employed by, or served as a consultant or otherwise to, a 
defense contractor at any time during a year at an annual pay 
rate of at least $25,000 and the defense contractor was awarded 
contracts by the Department of Defense during the preceding 
year that totaled at least $10,000,000, and (ii) within the 
two-year period ending on the day before the person began the 
employment or consulting relationship, the person served on 
active duty or was a civilian employee for the Department, the 
person shall file a report with the Secretary of Defense in 
such manner and form as the Secretary may prescribe. The person 
shall file the report not later than 90-days after the date on 
which the person began the employment or consulting 
relationship.
  [(B) The person shall file an additional report each time, 
during the two-year period beginning on the date the active 
duty or civilian employment with the Department terminated, 
that the person's job with the defense contractor significantly 
changes or the person commences an employment or consulting 
relationship with another defense contractor under the 
conditions described in the first sentence. A person required 
to file an additional report under this subparagraph shall file 
the report within 30 days after the date of the change or the 
date the employment or consulting relationship commences, as 
the case may be.
  [(3) The report shall contain the following information:
          [(A) The name and address of the person reporting.
          [(B) The name and address of the defense contractor 
        that employed the person or for whom the person served 
        as a consultant or otherwise.
          [(C) The title of the position of the person when 
        serving the defense contractor.
          [(D) A description of the duties and work performed 
        or to be performed by the person for the defense 
        contractor, and a description of any similar duties or 
        work performed for which the person had at least 
        partial responsibility as a civilian official or 
        employee of the Department of Defense or a member of 
        the armed forces during the two-year period referred to 
        in paragraph (2)(A)(ii).
          [(E) The military grade of the person while on active 
        duty or the gross pay rate while performing civilian 
        service for the Department.
          [(F) A description of the duties and the work 
        performed by the person while on active duty or 
        performing civilian service for the Department during 
        the two-year period referred to in paragraph (2)(A)(ii) 
        and a description of the type of work performed and the 
        extent to which such work was performed by the person 
        for the defense contractor that has employed the person 
        or has retained the person as a consultant.
          [(G) The date the active duty or civilian service by 
        the person for the Department ended and the date the 
        service with the defense contractor began and, if 
        applicable, ended.
          [(H) Other pertinent information the Secretary 
        requires.
          [(I) A statement describing any disqualification 
        action taken by the person during the two-year period 
        referred to in paragraph (2)(A)(ii) with respect to any 
        involvement in a matter concerning the defense 
        contractor.
  [(c)(1) A person who (A) holds civilian office or employment 
(including employment as a consultant or part-time employee) in 
the Department at any time during a year at a pay rate at least 
equal to the minimum rate for GS-13, and (B) within the two-
year period before the effective date of employment with the 
Department was employed by, or served as a consultant or 
otherwise to, a defense contractor at any time during a year at 
an annual pay rate of at least $25,000 and the contractor was 
awarded contracts by the Department during that year that total 
at least $10,000,000, shall file a report with the Secretary in 
the way and at the time prescribed by the Secretary.
  [(2) The report shall contain the following information:
          [(A) The name and address of the person reporting.
          [(B) The title of the position of the person with the 
        Department.
          [(C) A description of the duties and work performed 
        by the person with the Department and a description of 
        any similar duties or work for which the person had at 
        least partial responsibility as an employee or 
        consultant of the defense contractor during the two-
        year period referred to in paragraph (1)(B).
          [(D) The name and address of the defense contractor 
        that employed the person or for whom the person served 
        as a consultant or otherwise.
          [(E) The title of the position of the person when 
        serving the defense contractor.
          [(F) A description of the duties and the work 
        performed by the person for the defense contractor and 
        a description of the type of work and the extent to 
        which such work was performed by the person in 
        connection with contracts of the defense contractor 
        with the Department during the two-year period referred 
        to in paragraph (1)(B).
          [(G) The date the service of the person with the 
        defense contractor ended and the date the service with 
        the Department began.
          [(H) Other pertinent information the Secretary 
        requires.
  [(d) The Secretary shall maintain a file containing the 
information filed under this section. The file may be inspected 
by members of the public at any time during regular work hours.
  [(e) Before April 1 of each year, the Secretary shall report 
to Congress the names of persons who have filed reports for the 
preceding year under this section. The names shall be listed, 
by groups, under the names of the appropriate defense 
contractors. The Secretary may include for each name 
appropriate additional information.
  [(f)(1) A person who fails to comply with the filing 
requirements of this section shall be liable to the United 
States for an administrative penalty in the amount of $10,000, 
or in such lesser amount as may be determined by the Secretary 
of Defense, considering all the relevant circumstances.
  [(2) The Secretary shall determine whether a person has 
failed to file a report required by this section and shall 
determine the amount of the penalty under paragraph (1). The 
Secretary shall make the determinations on the record after 
opportunity for an agency hearing as provided in subchapter II 
of chapter 5 of title 5. The determinations of the Secretary 
shall be subject to judicial review under chapter 7 of such 
title.

[Sec. 2397a. Requirements relating to private employment contacts 
                    between certain Department of Defense procurement 
                    officials and defense contractors

  [(a) In this section:
          [(1) The term ``contract'' has the same meaning as 
        provided in section 2397(a)(1) of this title.
          [(2) The term ``covered defense official'' means any 
        individual who is serving--
                  [(A) as a civilian officer or employee of the 
                Department of Defense in a position for which 
                the rate of pay is equal to or greater than the 
                minimum rate of pay payable for grade GS-11 
                under the General Schedule; or
                  [(B) on active duty in the armed forces in a 
                pay grade of O-4 or higher.
          [(3) The term ``defense contractor'' has the same 
        meaning as provided in section 2397(a)(2) of this 
        title.
          [(4) The term ``designated agency ethics official'' 
        has the same meaning as the term ``designated agency 
        official'' in section 109(3) of the Ethics in 
        Government Act of 1978 (92 Stat. 1850; 5 U.S.C. App.).
          [(5) The term ``employment'' means a relationship 
        under which an individual furnishes services in return 
        for any payment or other compensation paid directly or 
        indirectly to the individual for the services.
          [(6) The term ``procurement function'' includes, with 
        respect to a contract, any function relating to--
                  [(A) the negotiation, award, administration, 
                or approval of the contract;
                  [(B) the selection of a contractor;
                  [(C) the approval of changes in the contract;
                  [(D) quality assurance, operation and 
                developmental testing, the approval of payment, 
                or auditing under the contract; or
                  [(E) the management of the procurement 
                program.
  [(b)(1) If a covered defense official who has participated in 
the performance of a procurement function in connection with a 
contract awarded by the Department of Defense contacts, or is 
contacted by, the defense contractor to whom the contract was 
awarded (or an agent of such contractor) regarding future 
employment opportunities for the official with the defense 
contractor, the official (except as provided in paragraph (2)) 
shall--
          [(A) promptly report the contact to the official's 
        supervisor and to the designated agency ethics official 
        (or his designee) of the agency in which the covered 
        defense official is employed; and
          [(B) for any period for which future employment 
        opportunities for the covered defense official have not 
        been rejected by either the covered defense official or 
        the defense contractor, disqualify himself from all 
        participation in the performance of procurement 
        functions relating to contracts of the defense 
        contractor.
  [(2) A covered defense official is not required to report the 
first contact with a defense contractor under paragraph (1)(A) 
or to disqualify himself under paragraph (1)(B) if the defense 
official terminates the contact immediately. However, if an 
additional contact of the same or a similar nature is made by 
or with the defense contractor, the covered defense official 
shall report (as provided in paragraph (1)) the contact and all 
contacts of the same or a similar nature made by or with the 
defense contractor during the 90-day period ending on the date 
the additional contact is made.
  [(c) A report required by subsection (b)(1) shall include--
          [(1) the date of each contact covered by the report; 
        and
          [(2) a brief description of the substance of the 
        contact.
  [(d)(1)(A) If the Secretary of Defense determines under 
paragraph (2) that a person has failed promptly to make a 
report required by subsection (b)(1)(A) or (b)(2) or has failed 
to disqualify himself in any case in which he is required to do 
so under subsection (b)(1)(B)--
          [(i) the person may not accept or continue employment 
        with the defense contractor during the 10-year period 
        beginning with the date of separation from Government 
        service; and
          [(ii) the Secretary may impose on the person an 
        administrative penalty in the amount of $10,000, or in 
        such lesser amount as may be prescribed by the 
        Secretary, taking into consideration all the 
        circumstances.
  [(B) An individual who accepts or continues employment 
prohibited by subparagraph (A)(i) shall be liable to the United 
States for an administrative penalty as provided in 
subparagraph (A)(ii). Such penalty may be in addition to any 
penalty previously imposed on the individual under subparagraph 
(A)(ii) for failure promptly to make a report relating to the 
defense contractor by whom the individual is employed as 
required by subsection (b)(1)(A) or (b)(2).
  [(C) The Secretary of Defense may take action against an 
individual under this paragraph before, on, or after the date 
on which the individual's employment with the Government is 
terminated.
  [(2)(A) The Secretary of Defense shall determine--
          [(i) whether an individual has failed promptly to 
        make a report required by subsection (b)(1)(A) or 
        (b)(2) or has failed to disqualify himself in any case 
        in which he is required to do so under subsection 
        (b)(1)(B) and whether to impose a penalty under 
        paragraph (1)(A)(ii) and the amount of such penalty; 
        and
          [(ii) whether an individual is liable to the United 
        States for an administrative penalty under paragraph 
        (1)(B) and the amount of such penalty.

There shall be a rebuttable presumption in favor of a covered 
defense official that failure to report a contact with a 
defense contractor or failure to disqualify himself from 
participation in the performance of certain procurement 
functions is not a violation of subsection (b)(1)(A) or (b)(2) 
or subsection (b)(1)(B), as the case may be, if the defense 
official has received an opinion in writing from the designated 
agency ethics official under subsection (e) stating that a 
report or disqualification by the official was not necessary.
  [(B) Determinations of the Secretary under subparagraph (A) 
shall be made on the record after opportunity for an agency 
hearing as provided in subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5. 
The determinations of the Secretary shall be subject to 
judicial review under chapter 7 of such title.
  [(e) If a designated agency ethics official or his designee 
receives a report required by subsection (b) or a request for 
advice from a covered defense official relating to a contact 
described in such subsection, the designated agency ethics 
official or his designee may issue a written opinion regarding 
the necessity of a covered defense official to file a report or 
disqualify himself from participation in certain procurement 
functions, as the case may be.
  [(f) A covered defense official should request the advice of 
his supervisor and the appropriate designated agency ethics 
official (or his designee) on matters to which this section 
applies.

[Sec. 2397b. Certain former Department of Defense procurement 
                    officials: limitations on employment by contractors

  [(a)(1) Subject to subsections (c) and (d), a person who is a 
former officer or employee of the Department of Defense or a 
former or retired member of the armed forces may not accept 
compensation from a contractor during the two-year period 
beginning on the date of such person's separation from service 
in the Department of Defense if--
          [(A) on a majority of the person's working days 
        during the two-year period ending on the date of such 
        person's separation from service in the Department of 
        Defense, the person performed a procurement function 
        (relating to a contract of the Department of Defense) 
        at a site or plant that is owned or operated by the 
        contractor and that was the principal location of such 
        person's performance of that procurement function;
          [(B) the person performed, on a majority of the 
        person's working days during such two-year period, 
        procurement functions relating to a major defense 
        system and, in the performance of such functions, 
        participated personally and substantially, and in a 
        manner involving decisionmaking responsibilities, with 
        respect to a contract for that system through contact 
        with the contractor; or
          [(C) during such two-year period the person acted as 
        one of the primary representatives of the United 
        States--
                  [(i) in the negotiation of a Department of 
                Defense contract in an amount in excess of 
                $10,000,000 with the contractor; or
                  [(ii) in the negotiation of a settlement of 
                an unresolved claim of the contractor in an 
                amount in excess of $10,000,000 under a 
                Department of Defense contract.
  [(2) In the application of paragraph (1) to a former officer 
or employee of the Department of Defense or a former or retired 
member of the armed forces, a person's status as a contractor 
shall be determined as of the date of the separation from 
service in the Department of Defense of the officer or employee 
or member or former member involved.
  [(b)(1) Any person who knowingly violates subsection (a)(1) 
shall be subject to a civil fine, in an amount not to exceed 
$250,000, in a civil action brought by the United States in the 
appropriate district court of the United States.
  [(2) Any person who knowingly offers or provides any 
compensation to another person, and who knew or should have 
known that the acceptance of such compensation is or would be 
in violation of subsection (a)(1), shall be subject to a civil 
fine, in an amount not to exceed $500,000, in a civil action 
brought by the United States in the appropriate district court 
of the United States.
  [(c) This section does not apply to any person with respect 
to--
          [(1) duties described in clause (A) or (B) of 
        subsection (a)(1) which were performed while such 
        person was serving--
                  [(A) in a civilian position for which the 
                rate of pay is less than the minimum rate of 
                pay payable for grade GS-13 of the General 
                Schedule; or
                  [(B) as a member of the armed forces in a pay 
                grade below pay grade O-4; or
          [(2) duties described in clause (C) of subsection 
        (a)(1) which were performed while such person was 
        serving--
                  [(A) in a civilian position for which the 
                rate of pay is less than the minimum rate of 
                pay payable for a Senior Executive Service 
                position; or
                  [(B) as a member of the armed forces in a pay 
                grade below pay grade O-7.
  [(d) This section does not prohibit any person from accepting 
compensation from any contractor that, during the fiscal year 
preceding the fiscal year in which such compensation is 
accepted, was not a Department of Defense contractor or was a 
contractor under Department of Defense contracts in a total 
amount less than $10,000,000.
  [(e)(1) Any person may, before accepting any compensation, 
request the appropriate designated agency ethics official to 
advise such person on the applicability of this section to the 
acceptance of such compensation. For purposes of the preceding 
sentence, the appropriate designated agency ethics official is 
the designated agency ethics official of the agency in which 
such person was serving at the time such person separated from 
service in the Department of Defense.
  [(2) A request for advice under paragraph (1) shall contain 
all information that is relevant to a determination by the 
designated agency ethics official on such request.
  [(3) Not later than 30 days after the date on which a 
designated agency ethics official receives a request for advice 
under paragraph (1), such official shall issue a written 
opinion on the applicability of this section to the acceptance 
of compensation covered by the request.
  [(4) If a designated agency ethics official, on the basis of 
a complete disclosure as required by paragraph (2), states in a 
written opinion furnished to any person under this subsection 
that this section is inapplicable to the acceptance of 
compensation by such person from a contractor in a particular 
case, there shall be a conclusive presumption in favor of such 
person, for the purposes of this section, that the person's 
acceptance of such compensation in such case is not a violation 
of subsection (a)(1).
  [(f) In this section:
          [(1) The term ``compensation'' includes any payment, 
        gift, benefit, reward, favor, or gratuity--
                  [(A) which is provided, directly or 
                indirectly, for services rendered by the person 
                accepting such payment, gift, benefit, reward, 
                favor, or gratuity; and
                  [(B) which is valued in excess of $250 at the 
                prevailing market price.
          [(2)(A) The term ``contractor'' means a person--
                  [(i) that contracts to supply the Department 
                of Defense with goods or services;
                  [(ii) that controls or is controlled by a 
                person described in clause (i); or
                  [(iii) that is under common control with a 
                person described in clause (i).
          [(B) Such term does not include--
                  [(i) an affiliate or subsidiary of a person 
                described in subparagraph (A) that is clearly 
                not engaged in the performance of a Department 
                of Defense contract;
                  [(ii) a State or local government; or
                  [(iii) any person who contracts to supply the 
                Department of Defense only commercial items (as 
                defined in section 4(12) of the Office of 
                Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 
                403(12))).
          [(3) The term ``procurement function'' includes, with 
        respect to a contract, any function relating to--
                  [(A) the negotiation, award, administration, 
                or approval of the contract;
                  [(B) the selection of a contractor;
                  [(C) the approval of changes in the contract;
                  [(D) quality assurance, operational and 
                developmental testing, the approval of payment, 
                or auditing under the contract; or
                  [(E) the management of the procurement 
                program.
          [(4) The term ``armed forces'' does not include the 
        Coast Guard.
          [(5) The term ``major defense system'' has the 
        meaning given the term ``major system'' in section 
        2302(5) of this title.
  [(g) For the purposes of this section, a person who is a 
retired member or a former member of the armed forces shall be 
considered to have been separated from service in the 
Department of Defense upon the date of the person's discharge 
or release from active duty.

[Sec. 2397c. Defense contractors: requirements concerning former 
                    Department of Defense officials

  [(a)(1) Each contract for the procurement of goods or 
services in excess of $100,000 entered into by the Department 
of Defense shall include a provision under which the contractor 
agrees not to provide compensation to a person if the 
acceptance of such compensation by such person would violate 
section 2397b(a)(1) of this title.
  [(2) Such a contract shall also provide that if the 
contractor knowingly violates a contract provision required by 
paragraph (1) the contractor shall pay to the United States, as 
liquidated damages under the contract, an amount equal to the 
greater of--
          [(A) $100,000; or
          [(B) three times the amount of the compensation paid 
        by the contractor to the person in violation of such 
        contract provision.
  [(b)(1)(A) Any contractor that was awarded one or more 
contracts by the Department of Defense during the preceding 
fiscal year in an aggregate amount of at least $10,000,000 that 
is subject during a calendar year to a contract provision 
described in subsection (a) shall submit to the Secretary of 
Defense, not later than April 1 of the next year, a written 
report covering the preceding calendar year. Each such report 
shall list the name of each person (together with other 
information adequate for the Government to identify the person) 
who--
          [(i) is a former officer or employee of the 
        Department of Defense or a former or retired member of 
        the armed forces; and
          [(ii) during the preceding calendar year was provided 
        compensation by that contractor, if such compensation 
        was provided within two years after such officer, 
        employee, or member left service in the Department of 
        Defense.
  [(B) In the case of each person named in a report submitted 
under subparagraph (A), the report shall--
          [(i) identify the agency in which the person was 
        employed or served on active duty during the last two 
        years of the person's service with the Department of 
        Defense;
          [(ii) state the person's job title and identify each 
        major defense system, if any, on which the person 
        performed any work with the Department of Defense 
        during the last two years of the person's service with 
        the Department;
          [(iii) contain a complete description of any work 
        that the person is performing on behalf of the 
        contractor; and
          [(iv) identify each major defense system on which the 
        person has performed any work on behalf of the 
        contractor.
  [(2) A person who knowingly fails to file a report required 
by paragraph (1) shall be subject to an administrative penalty, 
not to exceed $10,000, imposed by the Secretary of Defense 
after an opportunity for an agency hearing on the record 
pursuant to regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense. 
The determinations of the Secretary shall be included in such 
record. The determinations of the Secretary shall be subject to 
judicial review under chapter 7 of title 5.
  [(3) The Secretary of Defense shall review each report under 
paragraph (1) for the purposes of (A) assessing the accuracy 
and completeness of the report, and (B) identifying possible 
violations of section 2397b(a)(1) of this title or of a 
contract provision required by subsection (a). The Secretary 
shall report any such possible violation to the Attorney 
General.
  [(4) The Secretary shall make reports submitted under this 
subsection available to any Member of Congress upon request.
  [(d) Subsection (g) of section 2397b of this title, and the 
definitions prescribed in subsection (f) of such section, apply 
to this section.
  [(e) This section does not apply to contracts for the 
purchase of commercial items (as defined in section 4(12) of 
the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 
403(12))).]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2398. Procurement of gasohol as motor vehicle fuel

  [(a) DOD Motor Vehicles.--To the maximum extent feasible and 
consistent with overall defense needs and vehicle management 
practices prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary 
shall make contracts, by competitive bid and subject to 
appropriations, to purchase domestically produced alcohol or 
alcohol-gasoline blends containing at least 10 percent 
domestically produced alcohol for use in motor vehicles owned 
or operated by the Department of Defense.
  [(b)] (a) Other Federal Fuel Procurements.--Consistent with 
the vehicle management practices prescribed by the heads of 
affected departments and agencies of the Federal Government and 
consistent with Executive Order Number 12261, whenever the 
Secretary of Defense enters into a contract for the procurement 
of unleaded gasoline that is subject to tax under section 4081 
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for motor vehicles of a 
department or agency of the Federal Government other than the 
Department of Defense, the Secretary shall buy alcohol-gasoline 
blends containing at least 10 percent domestically produced 
alcohol in any case in which the price of such fuel is the same 
as, or lower than, the price of unleaded gasoline.
  [(c)] (b) Solicitations.--Whenever the Secretary issues a 
solicitation for bids to procure unleaded gasoline under 
subsection [(b)] (a), the Secretary shall expressly include in 
such solicitation a request for bids on alcohol-gasoline blends 
containing at least 10 percent domestically produced alcohol.

Sec. 2399. Operational test and evaluation of defense acquisition 
                    programs

  (a) Condition for Proceeding Beyond Low-Rate Initial 
Production.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall provide that a 
major defense acquisition program may not proceed beyond low-
rate initial production until initial operational test and 
evaluation of the program is completed.
  (2) In this subsection, the term ``major defense acquisition 
program'' means a conventional weapons system that--
          (A) [a conventional weapons system that] is a major 
        system within the meaning of that term in section 
        2302(5) of this title; and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (3) The Secretary of Defense shall designate an official of 
the Department of Defense to perform the duties of the position 
referred to in this section as the ``designated OT&E 
official''.
  (b) Operational Test and Evaluation.--(1) Operational testing 
of a major defense acquisition program may not be conducted 
until the [Director of Operational Test and Evaluation of the 
Department of Defense] designated OT&E official approves (in 
writing) the adequacy of the plans (including the projected 
level of funding) for operational test and evaluation to be 
conducted in connection with that program.
  (2) The [Director] designated OT&E official shall analyze the 
results of the operational test and evaluation conducted for 
each major defense acquisition program. At the conclusion of 
such testing, the [Director] designated OT&E official shall 
prepare a report stating the opinion of the [Director] 
designated OT&E official as to--
          (A) whether the test and evaluation performed were 
        adequate; and
          (B) whether the results of such test and evaluation 
        confirm that the items or components actually tested 
        are effective and suitable for combat.
  (3) The [Director] designated OT&E official shall submit each 
report under paragraph (2) to the Secretary of Defense, the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology, and 
the congressional defense committees. Each such report shall be 
submitted to those committees in precisely the same form and 
with precisely the same content as the report originally was 
submitted to the Secretary and Under Secretary and shall be 
accompanied by such comments as the Secretary may wish to make 
on the report.
  (c) Determination of Quantity of Articles Required for 
Operational Testing.--The quantity of articles of a new system 
that are to be procured for operational testing shall be 
determined by--
          (1) the [Director of Operational Test and Evaluation 
        of the Department of Defense] designated OT&E official, 
        in the case of a new system that is a major defense 
        acquisition program (as defined in section 139(a)(2)(B) 
        of this title); or
          (2) the operational test and evaluation agency of the 
        military department concerned, in the case of a new 
        system that is not a major defense acquisition program.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) Impartial Contracted Advisory and Assistance Services.--
(1) The [Director] designated OT&E official may not contract 
with any person for advisory and assistance services with 
regard to the test and evaluation of a system if that person 
participated in (or is participating in) the development, 
production, or testing of such system for a military department 
or Defense Agency (or for another contractor of the Department 
of Defense).
  (2) The [Director] designated OT&E official may waive the 
limitation under paragraph (1) in any case if the [Director] 
designated OT&E official determines in writing that sufficient 
steps have been taken to ensure the impartiality of the 
contractor in providing the services. The Inspector General of 
the Department of Defense shall review each such waiver and 
shall include in the Inspector General's semi-annual report an 
assessment of those waivers made since the last such report.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(g) Director's Annual Report.--As part of the annual report 
of the Director under section 139 of this title, the Director 
shall describe for each program covered in the report the 
status of test and evaluation activities in comparison with the 
test and evaluation master plan for that program, as approved 
by the Director. The Director shall include in such annual 
report a description of each waiver granted under subsection 
(e)(2) since the last such report.
  [(h)] (g) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) The term ``operational test and evaluation'' has 
        the meaning given that term in section 139(a)(2)(A) of 
        this title. For purposes of subsection (a), that term 
        does not include an operational assessment based 
        exclusively on--
                  (A) computer modeling;
                  (B) simulation; or
                  (C) an analysis of system requirements, 
                engineering proposals, design specifications, 
                or any other information contained in program 
                documents.
          (2) The term ``congressional defense committees'' 
        means the Committees on Armed Services and the 
        Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and House of 
        Representatives.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


  CHAPTER 146--CONTRACTING FOR PERFORMANCE OF CIVILIAN COMMERCIAL OR 
                       INDUSTRIAL TYPE FUNCTIONS

Sec.
2461.  Commercial or industrial type functions: required studies and 
          reports before conversion to contractor performance.
     * * * * * * *
2472.  Management of depot employees.
2473.  Depot-level maintenance and repair workload.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 2464. Core logistics functions

  (a) * * *
  (b) Limitation on Contracting.--(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(3) A waiver under paragraph (2) may not take effect until--
          [(A) the Secretary submits a report on the waiver to 
        the Committees on Armed Services and the Committees on 
        Appropriations of the Senate and House of 
        Representatives; and
          [(B) a period of 20 days of continuous session of 
        Congress or 40 calendar days has passed after the 
        receipt of the report by those committees.
  [(4) For purposes of paragraph (3)(B), the continuity of a 
session of Congress is broken only by an adjournment sine die, 
and the days on which either House is not in session because of 
an adjournment of more than three days to a day certain are 
excluded in the computation of such 20-day period.]
  (3) A waiver under paragraph (2) may not take effect until 
the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the 
Secretary submits a report on the waiver to the 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 House of Representatives.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2466. Limitations on the performance of depot-level maintenance of 
                    materiel

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) [Exception.--] Exceptions.--(1) Subsection (a) shall not 
apply with respect to the Sacramento Army Depot, Sacramento, 
California.
  (2) If a maintenance or repair project for a single item that 
is contracted for performance by non-Federal Government 
personnel accounts for 5 percent or more of the funds made 
available in a fiscal year to a military department or a 
Defense Agency for depot-level maintenance and repair workload, 
the project and the funds necessary for the project shall not 
be considered when applying the percentage limitation specified 
in subsection (a) to that military department or Defense 
Agency.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2472. Management of depot employees

  (a) Prohibition on Management by End Strength.--The civilian 
employees of the Department of Defense involved in the depot-
level maintenance and repair of materiel may not be managed on 
the basis of any end-strength constraint or limitation on the 
number of such employees who may be employed on the last day of 
a fiscal year. Such employees shall be managed solely on the 
basis of the available workload and the funds made available 
for such depot-level maintenance and repair.
  (b) Annual Report.--Not later than 60 days after the 
beginning of each fiscal year, the Secretary of Defense shall 
submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the 
Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives 
a report on the number of employees employed and expected to be 
employed by the Department of Defense during that fiscal year 
to perform depot-level maintenance and repair of materiel. The 
report shall indicate whether that number is sufficient to 
perform the depot-level maintenance and repair functions for 
which funds have been appropriated for that fiscal year for 
performance by Department of Defense employees.Section 
395 of the revised title III added this section. Should this be 
section 2473? deg.

Sec. 2473. Depot-level maintenance and repair workload

  (a) Importance of Depot-Level Maintenance and Repair Core 
Capabilities.--It is essential for the national defense that 
the United States maintain a core depot-level maintenance and 
repair capability (including skilled personnel, equipment, and 
facilities) within facilities owned and operated by the 
Department of Defense that--
          (1) is of the proper size (A) to ensure a ready and 
        controlled source of technical competence and repair 
        and maintenance capability necessary to meet the 
        requirements of the National Military Strategy and 
        other requirements for responding to military 
        contingencies, and (B) to provide for rapid 
        augmentation in time of emergency; and
          (2) is assigned sufficient workload to ensure cost 
        efficiency and proficiency in time of peace.
  (b) Determination of Core Depot Maintenance Activities.--(1) 
The Secretary of each military department shall identify those 
depot-level maintenance and repair activities under that 
Secretary's jurisdiction that are necessary to ensure for that 
military department the depot-level maintenance and repair 
capability described in subsection (a) and as required by 
section 2464 of this title.
  (2) The Secretary of each military department shall prescribe 
the procedures to be used to quantify the requirements 
necessary to support the capability described in subsection 
(a).
  (c) Performance of Workload That Supports Depot-Level 
Maintenance and Repair Core Capabilities.--The Secretary of 
each military department shall require the performance of 
depot-level maintenance and repair of activities identified 
under subsection (b) at organic Department of Defense 
maintenance depots at levels sufficient to ensure that the 
Department of Defense maintains the core depot-level 
maintenance and repair capability described in subsection (a).
  (d) Interservicing of Workload.--The Secretary of Defense, 
after consultation with the Secretaries of the military 
departments, may transfer workload that supports the core 
capability described in subsection (a) from one military 
department to another. The Secretary of Defense shall use 
merit-based criteria in evaluating such transfers.
  (e) Source of Repair for Other Depot-Level Workloads.--In the 
case of depot-level maintenance and repair workloads in excess 
of the workload required pursuant to subsection (c) to be 
performed at organic Department of Defense depots, the 
Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the Secretaries 
of the military departments, may provide for the performance of 
those workloads through sources selected by competition. The 
Secretary of Defense shall use competition between private 
firms and organic Department of Defense depots for any such 
workload when the Secretary determines there are less than two 
qualified sources of supply among private firms for the 
performance of that specific depot-level maintenance workload.
  (f) Depot-Level Workload Competitions.--In any competition 
under this section for a depot-level workload (whether among 
private firms or between Department of Defense activities and 
private firms), bids from any entity participating in the 
competition shall be formulated using the most recent 
version of the Department of Defense Cost Comparability 
Handbook and shall deg. accurately disclose all costs properly 
and consistently derived from accounting systems and practices 
that comply with laws, policies, and standards applicable to 
that entity. In any competition between Department of Defense 
activities and private firms, the Government calculation for 
the cost of performance of the function by Department of 
Defense civilian employees shall be based on an estimate using 
the most efficient and cost effective manner for performance of 
such function by Department of Defense civilian employees.
  (g) Annual Report.--Not later than March 1 of each year, the 
Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report 
specifying depot maintenance core capability requirements 
determined in accordance with the procedures established to 
comply with subsection (b)(2) and the planned amount of 
workload to be accomplished in the organic depots of each 
military department in support of those requirements for the 
following fiscal year. The report shall identify the planned 
amount of workload measured by direct labor hours and by 
amounts expended and shall be shown separately for each 
commodity group.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                  CHAPTER 147--UTILITIES AND SERVICES

Sec.
2481.  Utilities and services: sale; expansion and extension of systems 
          and facilities.
[2482.  Commissary stores: private operation.]
2482.  Commissary stores: operation.
[2483.  Sale of electricity from alternate energy and cogeneration 
          production facilities.]
2483.  Special sale authority regarding electricity.
2483a.  Procurement of electricity from most economical source.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 2482. Commissary stores: [private] operation

  (a) Private Operation.--Private persons may operate 
commissary stores under such regulations as the Secretary of 
Defense may approve. A contract with a private person for the 
operation of any commissary store may not require or permit the 
contractor to carry out functions for the procurement of 
products to be sold in the store or to engage in functions 
relating to the overall management of a commissary system or 
the management of any such store. Such functions shall be 
carried out by personnel of the Department of Defense under 
regulations approved by the Secretary of Defense.
  (b) Contracts With Other Agencies and Instrumentalities.--(1) 
The Defense Commissary Agency, and other agencies of the 
Department of Defense that support the operation of the 
commissary store system, may enter into contracts or other 
agreements with other appropriated fund or nonappropriated fund 
instrumentalities of the Department of Defense or other 
departments or agencies of the United States to facilitate 
efficiency in the management and operation of the commissary 
store system.
  (2) A commissary store operated by a nonappropriated fund 
instrumentality shall be operated in accordance with section 
2484 of this title. Subject to such section, the Secretary of 
Defense may authorize a transfer of goods, supplies, and 
facilities of, and funds appropriated for, the Defense 
Commissary Agency to a nonappropriated fund instrumentality 
operating a commissary store.
  (c) Payments to Vendor Agents.--If a distributor for a vendor 
of resale products under contract to the Defense Commissary 
Agency is designated as an agent by and for the vendor, the 
distributor may invoice the agency and accept payments from the 
agency under the vendor's contract. A distributor designated as 
a agent for purposes of this subsection may request payment for 
more than one product of the vendor on the same invoice. All 
payments made by the agency to a distributor designated by a 
vendor as the vendor's agent shall be considered payments under 
the vendor's contract, and the payments shall fulfill the 
payment obligations of the United States in the same manner as 
if the payments had been made directly to the vendor.

[Sec. 2483. Sale of electricity from alternate energy and cogeneration 
                    production facilities]

Sec. 2483. Special sale authority regarding electricity

  (a) The Secretary of a military department may sell, contract 
to sell, or authorize the sale by a contractor to a public or 
private utility company of electrical energy generated from 
[alternate energy or cogeneration type production facilities] 
energy production facilities which are under the jurisdiction 
(or produced on land which is under the jurisdiction) of the 
Secretary concerned. The sale of such energy shall be made 
under such regulations, for such periods, and at such prices as 
the Secretary concerned prescribes consistent with the Public 
Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2601 et 
seq.).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2483a. Procurement of electricity from most economical source

  The Secretary of Defense shall procure electricity for use on 
military installations and by other activities and functions of 
the Department of Defense from the most economical source, as 
determined by the Secretary. The Secretary shall make the 
determination required by this section in the manner provided 
in section 2462 of this title.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2486. Commissary stores: merchandise that may be sold; uniform 
                    surcharges and pricing

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations 
establishing uniform pricing policies for merchandise 
authorized for sale by this section. The policies in the 
regulations shall--
          (1) require the establishment of a sales price of 
        [each item] items of merchandise at a level which will 
        recoup the [actual product cost of the item] total 
        average product cost of merchandise sold (consistent 
        with this section and sections 2484 and 2685 of this 
        title); and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2487. Commissary stores: limitations on release of sales 
                    information

  (a) * * *
  (b) Release Under Competitively Awarded Agreements.--The 
Secretary of Defense may enter into one or more agreements that 
provide for limited release of information described in 
subsection (a)(2). The Secretary shall use competitive 
procedures to enter into each such agreement unless the 
agreement is between the Defense Commissary Agency and a 
manufacturer, distributor, or other vendor doing business with 
the Agency and is restricted to information directly related to 
merchandise provided by that manufacturer, distributor, or 
vendor. Each agreement shall require payment for such 
information and shall specify the amount of such payment.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2488. Nonappropriated fund instrumentalities: purchase of 
                    alcoholic beverages

  (a) The Secretary of Defense shall provide that--
          (1) covered alcoholic beverage purchases made for 
        resale on a military installation located in the United 
        States shall be made from the most competitive source 
        and distributed in the most economical manner, price 
        and other factors considered, except that

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c)(1) In the case of covered alcoholic beverage purchases of 
distilled spirits, to determine whether a nonappropriated fund 
instrumentality of the Department of Defense represents the 
most economical method of distribution to package stores, the 
Secretary of Defense shall consider all components of the 
distribution costs incurred by the nonappropriated fund 
instrumentality, such as overhead costs (including management, 
logistics, administration, depreciation, and utilities), the 
costs of carrying inventory, and handling and distribution 
costs.
  (2) If the use of a private distributor would subject covered 
alcoholic beverage purchases of distilled spirits to direct or 
indirect State taxation, a nonappropriated fund instrumentality 
shall be considered to be the most economical method of 
distribution regardless the results of the determination under 
paragraph (1).
  (3) The Secretary shall use the agencies performing audit 
functions on behalf of the armed forces and the Inspector 
General of the Department of Defense to make determinations 
under this subsection.
  [(c)] (d) In this section:
          (1) The term ``covered alcoholic beverage purchases'' 
        means purchases of alcoholic beverages by a 
        nonappropriated fund instrumentality of the Department 
        of Defense with nonappropriated funds.
          (2) The term ``State'' includes the District of 
        Columbia.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


 CHAPTER 148--NATIONAL DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY AND INDUSTRIAL BASE, DEFENSE 
                  REINVESTMENT, AND DEFENSE CONVERSION

Subchapter                                                          Sec.
      Definitions...................................................2491
     * * * * * * *
2540Defense Export Loan Guarantees....................................

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBCHAPTER II--POLICIES AND PLANNING

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2501. Congressional defense policy concerning national technology 
                    and industrial base, reinvestment, and conversion

  (a) Defense Policy Objectives for National Technology and 
Industrial Base.--It is the policy of Congress that the 
national technology and industrial base be capable of meeting 
the following national security objectives:
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(5) Furthering the missions of the Department of 
        Defense through the support of policy objectives and 
        programs relating to the defense reinvestment, 
        diversification, and conversion objectives specified in 
        subsection (b).]
  (b) Policy Objectives Relating to [Defense Reinvestment, 
Diversification, and Conversion] Technology Development for 
National Security.--It is the policy of Congress that[, during 
a period of reduction in defense expenditures,] the United 
States further the national security objectives set forth in 
subsection (a) through programs [of reinvestment, 
diversification, and conversion of defense resources] that--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (5) assist those activities being undertaken at the 
        State and local levels to support [defense economic 
        reinvestment] economic investment, conversion, 
        adjustment, and diversification activities; and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2502. National Defense Technology and Industrial Base Council

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Responsibilities.--The Council shall have the following 
responsibilities:
          (1) To ensure effective cooperation among departments 
        and agencies of the Federal Government, and to provide 
        advice and recommendations to the President, the 
        Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Energy, the 
        Secretary of Commerce, and the Secretary of Labor, 
        concerning--
                  (A) the capabilities of the national 
                technology and industrial base to meet the 
                national security objectives set forth in 
                section 2501(a) of this title;
                  (B) programs for achieving[, during a period 
                of reduction in defense expenditures, the 
                defense reinvestment, diversification, and 
                conversion objectives] the objectives set forth 
                in section 2501(b) of this title; and
                  (C) changes in acquisition policy that 
                strengthen the national technology and 
                industrial base.
          [(2) To provide overall policy guidance to ensure 
        effective implementation by agencies of the Federal 
        Government of defense reinvestment and conversion 
        activities during a period of reduction in defense 
        expenditures.
          [(3)] (2) To prepare the periodic assessment and the 
        periodic plan required by sections 2505 and 2506 of 
        this title, respectively.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


 SUBCHAPTER III--PROGRAMS FOR DEVELOPMENT, APPLICATION, AND SUPPORT OF 
                         DUAL-USE TECHNOLOGIES

Sec.
[2511.  Defense dual-use critical technology partnerships.
[2512.  Commercial-military integration partnerships.
[2513.  Regional technology alliances assistance program.]
2511.  Defense dual-use critical technology program.
     * * * * * * *
[2520.  Navy Reinvestment Program.]
     * * * * * * *

[Sec. 2511. Defense dual-use critical technology partnerships]

Sec. 2511. Defense dual-use critical technology program

  (a) Establishment of [Partnerships] Program.--The Secretary 
of Defense shall conduct a program to further the national 
security objectives set forth in section 2501(a) of this 
title[, by providing for the establishment of cooperative 
arrangements (hereinafter in this section referred to as 
``partnerships'') between the Department of Defense and 
entities referred to in subsection (b) in order to encourage 
and provide] by encouraging and providing for research, 
development, and application of dual-use critical technologies. 
The Secretary may make grants, enter into contracts, or enter 
into cooperative agreements and other transactions pursuant to 
section 2371 of this title [in order to establish the 
partnerships] in furtherance of the program. The Secretary 
shall identify projects to be conducted as part of the program.
  [(b) Non-Department of Defense Participants.--In the case of 
each partnership, the entities with which the Secretary enters 
into the partnership shall include two or more eligible firms 
or a nonprofit research corporation established by two or more 
eligible firms and, may also include, as determined appropriate 
by the Secretary of Defense, a Federal laboratory or 
laboratories, Government-owned and operated industrial 
facilities, institutions of higher education, agencies of State 
governments, and other entities that participate in the 
partnership by supporting the activities conducted by such 
firms or corporations under this section.
  [(c) Financial Commitment of Non-Federal Government 
Participants.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that 
the amount of funds provided by the Federal Government to a 
partnership does not exceed 50 percent of the total cost of 
partnership activities.
  [(2) The Secretary may prescribe regulations to provide for 
consideration of in-kind contributions by non-Federal 
Government participants in a partnership for the purpose of 
calculating the share of the partnership costs that has been or 
is being undertaken by such participants. In such regulations, 
the Secretary may authorize a participant that is a small 
business concern to use funds received under the Small Business 
Innovation Research Program or the Small Business Technology 
Transfer Program to help pay the costs of partnership 
activities. Any such funds so used may be considered in 
calculating the amount of the financial commitment undertaken 
by the non-Federal Government participants unless the Secretary 
determines that the small business concern has not made a 
significant equity percentage contribution in the partnership 
from non-Federal sources.
  [(3) The Secretary shall consider a partnership proposal 
submitted by a small business concern without regard to the 
ability of the small business concern to immediately meet its 
share of the anticipated partnership costs. Upon the selection 
of a partnership proposal submitted by a small business 
concern, the small business concern shall have a period of not 
less than 120 days in which to arrange to meet its financial 
commitment requirements under the partnership from sources 
other than a person of a foreign country. If the Secretary 
determines upon the expiration of that period that the small 
business concern will be unable to meet its share of the 
anticipated partnership costs, the Secretary shall revoke the 
selection of the partnership proposal submitted by the small 
business concern.
  [(d) Assistance Authorized.--The Secretary of Defense may 
provide a partnership with technical and other assistance to 
facilitate the achievement of the purposes of this section. In 
providing such assistance, the Secretary shall make available, 
as appropriate for the work to be performed by each 
partnership, equipment and facilities of Department of Defense 
laboratories (including the scientists and engineers at those 
laboratories) to a partnership recognized under this section 
for purposes of any project that is approved by the Secretary.]
  (b) Assistance Authorized.--The Secretary of Defense may 
provide technical and other assistance to facilitate the 
achievement of the purposes of projects conducted under the 
program. In providing such assistance, the Secretary may make 
available, as appropriate for the work to be performed, 
equipment and facilities of Department of Defense laboratories 
(including the scientists and engineers at those laboratories) 
for purposes of projects selected by the Secretary.
  [(e)] (c) Selection Process.--Competitive procedures shall be 
used in the [establishment of partnerships] conduct of the 
program.
  [(f)] (d) Selection Criteria.--The criteria for the selection 
of [proposed partnerships for establishment under this section] 
projects under the program shall include the following:
          (1) The extent to which the [program proposed to be 
        conducted by the partnership] proposed project advances 
        and enhances the national security objectives set forth 
        in section 2501(a) of this title.
          (2) The technical excellence of the [program proposed 
        to be conducted by the partnership] proposed project.
          (3) The qualifications of the personnel proposed to 
        participate in the [partnership's] proposed project's 
        research activities.
          (4) An assessment of timely private sector investment 
        in activities to achieve the goals and objectives of 
        the proposed [partnership] project other than through 
        the [partnership] project.
          (5) The potential effectiveness of the [partnership] 
        project in the further development and application of 
        each technology proposed to be developed by the 
        [partnership] project for the national technology and 
        industrial base.
          (6) The extent of the financial commitment of 
        eligible firms to the proposed [partnership] project.
          (7) The extent to which the [partnership] project 
        does not unnecessarily duplicate projects undertaken by 
        other agencies.
          (8) Such other criteria that the Secretary 
        prescribes.
  [(g)] (e) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
prescribe regulations for the purposes of this section.

[Sec. 2512. Commercial-military integration partnerships

  [(a) Establishment of Partnerships.--The Secretary of Defense 
shall conduct a program to further the national security 
objectives set forth in section 2501(a) of this title by 
providing for the establishment of cooperative arrangements 
(hereinafter in this section referred to as ``partnerships'') 
between the Department of Defense and one or more eligible 
firms and nonprofit research corporations referred to in 
section 2511(b) of this title. A partnership may also include, 
as determined appropriate by the Secretary of Defense, a 
Federal laboratory or laboratories, institutions of higher 
education, agencies of State governments, and other entities 
that participate in the partnership by supporting the 
activities conducted by such firms or corporations under this 
section.
  [(b) Assistance Authorized.--(1) The Secretary may make 
grants, enter into contracts, and enter into cooperative 
agreements and other transactions pursuant to section 2371 of 
this title in order to establish the partnerships.
  [(2) The Secretary may not enter into a partnership under 
this section for a period longer than 5 years.
  [(3) The Secretary may provide a partnership with technical 
and other assistance to facilitate the achievement of the 
purposes of this section, subject to the limitations in 
subsection (c).
  [(c) Financial Commitment of Non-Federal Government 
Participants.--(1) The Secretary shall ensure that the amount 
of funds provided by the Secretary under a partnership does not 
exceed the maximum authorized percentage of the total cost of 
partnership activities.
  [(2) The maximum authorized percentage of funding referred to 
in paragraph (1) for each year of a partnership is as follows:
          [(A) 50 percent in the first year.
          [(B) 40 percent in the second year.
          [(C) 30 percent in the each of the third, fourth, and 
        fifth years.
  [(3)(A) The Secretary shall prescribe regulations to provide 
for consideration of in-kind contributions by non-Federal 
Government participants in a partnership for the purpose of 
determining the share of the partnership costs that has been or 
is being undertaken by such participants.
  [(B) In such regulations, the Secretary may authorize a 
participant that is a small business concern to use funds 
received under the Small Business Innovation Research Program 
or the Small Business Technology Transfer Program to help pay 
the costs of partnership activities. Any such funds so used may 
be considered in calculating the amount of the financial 
commitment undertaken by the non-Federal Government 
participants unless the Secretary determines that the small 
business concern has not made a significant equity percentage 
contribution in the partnership from non-Federal sources.
  [(C) The Secretary shall consider a partnership proposal 
submitted by a small business concern without regard to the 
ability of the small business concern to immediately meet its 
share of the anticipated partnership costs. Upon the selection 
of a partnership proposal submitted by a small business 
concern, the small business concern shall have a period of not 
less than 120 days in which to arrange to meet its financial 
commitment requirements under the partnership from sources 
other than a person of a foreign country. If the Secretary 
determines upon the expiration of that period that the small 
business concern will be unable to meet its share of the 
anticipated partnership costs, the Secretary shall revoke the 
selection of the partnership proposal submitted by the small 
business concern.
  [(d) Selection Process.--Competitive procedures shall be used 
in the establishment of partnerships.
  [(e) Selection Criteria.--The criteria for the selection of a 
proposed partnership for establishment under this section shall 
include the following:
          [(1) The extent to which the program proposed to be 
        conducted by the partnership advances and enhances the 
        national security objectives set forth in section 
        2501(a) of this title.
          [(2) The technical excellence of the program proposed 
        to be conducted by the partnership.
          [(3) The qualifications of the personnel proposed to 
        participate in the partnership's research activities.
          [(4) An assessment that timely private sector 
        investment in activities to achieve the goals and 
        objectives of the proposed partnership other than 
        through the partnership.
          [(5) The potential effectiveness of the partnership 
        in the further development and application of each 
        technology proposed to be developed by the partnership 
        for the industrial and technology base.
          [(6) The extent of the financial commitment of the 
        eligible firms to the proposed partnership.
          [(7) The likelihood that the partnership will develop 
        technologies that are sufficiently viable in the 
        commercial sector so that such technologies will be 
        available to meet the future reconstitution 
        requirements and other needs of the Department of 
        Defense described in the most recent national 
        technology and industrial base plan prepared under 
        section 2506 of this title.
          [(8) The likelihood that, within five years after the 
        establishment of the partnership (or a lesser period 
        established by the Secretary), Federal Government 
        funding of the partnership will not be necessary.
          [(9) The extent to which the partnership does not 
        unnecessarily duplicate programs undertaken by other 
        Federal agencies.
          [(10) Such other criteria as the Secretary 
        prescribes.

[Sec. 2513. Regional technology alliances assistance program

  [(a) Establishment of Program.--The Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation and coordination with the Secretary of Commerce, 
shall conduct a program to further the national security 
objectives set forth in section 2501(a) of this title by 
providing assistance for the activities of eligible regional 
technology alliances in the United States.
  [(b) Eligible Alliances.--A regional technology alliance is 
eligible for assistance under the program if--
          [(1) the purpose of the regional technology alliance 
        is to facilitate the use of one or more defense 
        critical technologies for defense and commercial 
        purposes by an industry in the region served by that 
        regional technology alliance in order to maintain 
        within the United States industrial capabilities that 
        are vital to the national security of the United 
        States; and
          [(2) the regional technology alliance meets the other 
        requirements of this section.
  [(c) Program Participants.--(1) The participants in a 
regional technology alliance--
          [(A) shall include--
                  [(i) eligible firms that conduct business in 
                the region of the United States served or to be 
                served by the regional technology alliance; and
                  [(ii) a sponsoring agency in such region; and
          [(B) may include other organizations considered 
        appropriate by the Secretary of Defense.
  [(2)(A) A sponsoring agency of a regional technology alliance 
may be any agency described in subparagraph (B) that, as 
determined by the Secretary, provides adequate assurances that 
it will--
          [(i) meet the financial requirement in subsection 
        (e); and
          [(ii) provide assistance in the management of the 
        regional technology alliance.
  [(B) An agency referred to in subparagraph (A) is any of the 
following:
          [(i) An agency of a State or local government.
          [(ii) A nonprofit organization established, or 
        performing functions, pursuant to an agreement entered 
        into by one or more States or local governments.
          [(iii) A membership organization in which a State or 
        local government is a member.
          [(iv) An institution of higher education designated 
        by a State or local government.
  [(d) Assistance Authorized.--(1) Under the program, the 
Secretary may provide--
          [(A) financial assistance for the activities of a 
        regional technology alliance (including, in the case of 
        a proposed regional technology alliance, the 
        establishment of such regional technology alliance) in 
        any amount not in excess of 50 percent of the cost of 
        conducting such activities (including the cost of 
        establishing a proposed regional technology alliance) 
        during the period covered by the financial assistance; 
        and
          [(B) technical assistance for the activities (and, in 
        the case of a proposed regional technology alliance, 
        the establishment) of a regional technology alliance 
        awarded financial assistance authorized by subparagraph 
        (A).
  [(2) The Secretary may not provide financial assistance under 
the program for construction of facilities.
  [(3) The Secretary may furnish assistance to a regional 
technology alliance under the program for not more than six 
years.
  [(e) Financial Contributions of Alliance Participants.--(1) 
The sponsoring agency of a regional technology alliance and the 
eligible firms participating in the regional technology 
alliance shall pay at least 50 percent of the total cost 
incurred each year for the activities of the regional 
technology alliance. Funds contributed for the activities of 
the regional technology alliance by institutions of higher 
education or private, nonprofit organizations participating in 
the regional technology alliance shall be considered as funds 
contributed by the sponsoring agency.
  [(2) If the right to use or license the results of any 
research and development activity of a regional technology 
alliance is limited by participants in the regional technology 
alliance to one or more, but less than one-half, of the 
eligible firms participating in the regional technology 
alliance, the non-Federal Government participants in the 
regional technology alliance shall pay the total cost incurred 
for such activity.
  [(3) The Secretary may prescribe regulations to provide for 
consideration of in-kind contributions by non-Federal 
Government participants in a regional technology alliance for 
the purpose of calculating the share of the costs that has been 
or is being undertaken by such participants. In such 
regulations, the Secretary may authorize a participant that is 
a small business concern to use funds received under the Small 
Business Innovation Research Program or the Small Business 
Technology Transfer Program to help pay the costs of a regional 
technology alliance. Any such funds so used may be considered 
in calculating the amount of the financial commitment 
undertaken by the non-Federal Government participants unless 
the Secretary determines that the small business concern has 
not made a significant equity percentage contribution in the 
regional technology alliance from non-Federal sources.
  [(4) The Secretary shall consider a proposal for a regional 
technology alliance that is submitted by a small business 
concern without regard to the ability of the small business 
concern to immediately meet its share of the anticipated costs 
of the alliance. Upon the selection of a proposal submitted by 
a small business concern, the small business concern shall have 
a period of not less than 120 days in which to arrange to meet 
its financial commitment requirements under the regional 
technology alliance from sources other than a person of a 
foreign country. If the Secretary determines upon the 
expiration of that period that the small business concern will 
be unable to meet its share of the anticipated costs, the 
Secretary shall revoke the selection of the proposal submitted 
by the small business concern.
  [(f) Management Plan.--A regional technology alliance shall 
operate under a management plan that includes provisions for 
the eligible firms participating in the regional technology 
alliance to have the primary responsibility for directing the 
activities of the regional technology alliance and to exercise 
that responsibility through, among any other means, majority 
voting membership of such firms on the board of directors of 
the regional technology alliance.
  [(g) Administration of Program.--The Secretary shall 
prescribe regulations that, to the extent practicable, apply 
the same requirements and authorities in the administration of 
this section as apply under subsections (d) and (e) of section 
2511 of this title in the case of the dual-use critical 
technologies partnerships program provided for in that section.
  [(h) Selection Criteria.--The criteria for selection of a 
regional technology alliance to receive financial assistance 
under this section shall include the following:
          [(1) The potential for the activities of the regional 
        technology alliance to result in--
                  [(A) increased availability of technology for 
                the enhancement of national security; and
                  [(B) the emergence in such region of new 
                firms that are capable of applying dual-use 
                critical technologies.
          [(2) The potential for the regional technology 
        alliance to be able to apply critical technology 
        research and development supported or conducted by 
        Federal laboratories and institutions of higher 
        education in the advancement of national security 
        interests of the United States.
          [(3) The potential for the regional technology 
        alliance to sustain itself through support from 
        industry and other non-Federal Government sources after 
        termination of the Federal assistance provided pursuant 
        to this section.
          [(4) The level of involvement of appropriate State 
        and local agencies, institutions of higher education, 
        and private, nonprofit entities in the regional 
        technology alliance.
          [(5) The potential for the regional technology 
        alliance to increase industrial competitiveness.
          [(6) The potential for the regional technology 
        alliance to meet the needs of small- and medium-sized 
        defense-dependent companies across multiple activity 
        areas including--
                  [(A) outreach;
                  [(B) manufacturing education and training;
                  [(C) technology development;
                  [(D) technology deployment; and
                  [(E) business counseling.
          [(7) Such other criteria as the Secretary 
        prescribes.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2516. Military-Civilian Integration and Technology Transfer 
                    Advisory Board

  (a) * * *
  (b) Goals.--The goals of the Advisory Board are to ensure, in 
furtherance of the national security objectives set forth in 
section 2501(a) of this title--
          (1) the effective integration of commercial 
        technologies and best practices into defense 
        industries;
          (2) the efficient transfer of defense technologies to 
        civilian industries, where applicable; and
          (3) that civilian markets are appropriately 
        integrated into dual-use technology development 
        strategies[; and].
          [(4) that dual-use critical technologies are used in 
        carrying out defense reinvestment, diversification, and 
        conversion activities described in section 2501(b) of 
        this title.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2519. Federal Defense Laboratory Diversification Program

  (a) * * *
  (b) Partnerships.--(1) The Secretary shall provide for the 
establishment under the program of cooperative arrangements 
(hereinafter in this section referred to as ``partnerships'') 
between a Department of Defense laboratory and eligible firms 
and nonprofit research corporations [referred to in section 
2511(b) of this title]. A partnership may also include one or 
more additional Federal laboratories, institutions of higher 
education, agencies of State and local governments, and other 
entities, as determined appropriate by the Secretary.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Financial Commitment of Non-Federal Government 
Participants.--[(1)] The Secretary shall ensure that the non-
Federal Government participants in a partnership make a 
substantial contribution to the total cost of partnership 
activities. The amount of the contribution shall be 
commensurate with the risk undertaken by such participants and 
the potential benefits of the activities for such participants.
  [(2) The regulations prescribed pursuant to section 
2511(c)(2) of this title shall apply to in-kind contributions 
made by non-Federal Government participants in a partnership.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) Selection Criteria.--The criteria for the selection of a 
proposed partnership for establishment under this section shall 
include the criteria set forth in [section 2511(f)] section 
2511(d) of this title.

[Sec. 2520. Navy Reinvestment Program

  [(a) Establishment of Program.--The Secretary of the Navy 
shall conduct a program in accordance with this section for the 
purpose of promoting cooperation between the Department of the 
Navy and industry on research and development of dual-use 
technologies in order to further the national security 
objectives set forth in section 2501(a) of this title.
  [(b) Partnerships.--The Secretary shall provide for the 
establishment under the program of cooperative arrangements 
(hereinafter in this section referred to as ``partnerships'') 
between Department of the Navy entities and eligible firms and 
nonprofit research corporations referred to in section 2511(b) 
of this title. A partnership may also include one or more 
Federal laboratories, institutions of higher education, 
agencies of State and local governments, and other entities, as 
determined appropriate by the Secretary.
  [(c) Program Requirements and Administration.--Subsections 
(c) through (f) of section 2519 of this title shall apply in 
the administration of the program.
  [(d) Additional Selection Criteria.--The selection criteria 
for a proposed partnership for establishment under this section 
shall also include the potential effectiveness of the 
partnership in the further development and application of each 
technology proposed to be developed by the partnership for Navy 
acquisition programs.
  [(e) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe regulations 
for the purposes of this section.]

    SUBCHAPTER IV--MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY AND DUAL-USE ASSISTANCE 
                           EXTENSION PROGRAMS

Sec.
[2521.  National Defense Manufacturing Technology Program.
[2522.  Defense Advanced Manufacturing Technology Partnerships.
[2523.  Manufacturing extension programs.
[2524.  Defense dual-use assistance extension program.
[2525.  Manufacturing Science and Technology Program.]
2525.  Manufacturing technology program.

[Sec. 2521. National Defense Manufacturing Technology Program

  [(a) Establishment of Program.--The Secretary of Defense 
shall establish a National Defense Manufacturing Technology 
Program. The Secretary shall use the program to--
          [(1) provide centralized guidance and direction 
        (including goals, milestones, and priorities) to the 
        military departments and the Defense Agencies on all 
        matters relating to manufacturing technology;
          [(2) direct the development and implementation of 
        Department of Defense plans, programs, projects, 
        activities, and policies that promote the development 
        and application of advanced technologies to 
        manufacturing processes, tools, and equipment;
          [(3) improve the manufacturing quality, productivity, 
        technology, and practices of businesses and workers 
        providing goods and services to the Department of 
        Defense;
          [(4) promote dual-use manufacturing processes;
          [(5) disseminate information concerning improved 
        manufacturing improvement concepts, including 
        information on such matters as best manufacturing 
        practices, product data exchange specifications, 
        computer-aided acquisition and logistics support, and 
        rapid acquisition of manufactured parts;
          [(6) sustain and enhance the skills and capabilities 
        of the manufacturing work force;
          [(7) promote high-performance work systems (with 
        development and dissemination of production 
        technologies that build upon the skills and 
        capabilities of the work force), high levels of worker 
        education and training; and
          [(8) ensure appropriate coordination between the 
        manufacturing technology programs and industrial 
        preparedness programs of the Department of Defense and 
        similar programs undertaken by other departments and 
        agencies of the Federal Government or by the private 
        sector.
  [(b) Relationship to National Technology and Industrial Base 
Plan.--The Secretary shall ensure that the program is developed 
and implemented in accordance with the manufacturing technology 
guidance set forth in the national technology and industrial 
base plan prepared under section 2506 of this title.
  [(c) Revisions.--The Secretary shall revise the program not 
later than March 15 of each year through fiscal year 1997 and 
of each odd-numbered year thereafter. Each revision shall 
identify each manufacturing technology program, project, or 
activity of the Department of Defense and the amounts provided 
for each such program, project, and activity in the budget 
submitted by the President under section 1105 of title 31 for 
the fiscal year beginning in that year.

[Sec. 2522. Defense Advanced Manufacturing Technology Partnerships

  [(a) Establishment of Partnerships.--The Secretary of Defense 
may, in order to further the national security objectives set 
forth in section 2501(a) of this title, enter into cooperative 
arrangements (hereinafter in this section referred to as 
``partnerships'') with entities referred to in subsection (b) 
in order to encourage and provide for research and development 
of advanced manufacturing technologies with the potential for 
having a broad range of military and dual-uses applications.
  [(b) Non-Department of Defense Participants.--In the case of 
each partnership, the entities with which the Secretary enters 
into the partnership shall include two or more eligible firms 
or a nonprofit research corporation established by two or more 
eligible firms and may also include, as determined appropriate 
by the Secretary of Defense, a Federal laboratory or 
laboratories, institutions of higher education, agencies of 
State governments, and other entities that participate in the 
partnership by supporting the activities conducted by such 
firms or corporations under this section. A partnership may 
include other organizations considered appropriate by the 
Secretary of Defense.
  [(c) Administration of Program.--The Secretary shall 
prescribe regulations that, to the extent practicable, apply 
the same requirements and authorities in the administration of 
this section as apply under subsections (c) through (e) of 
section 2511 of this title in the case of the dual-use critical 
technologies partnerships program provided for in that section.
  [(d) Selection Criteria.--The criteria for the selection of 
proposed partnerships for establishment under this section 
shall include the following criteria:
          [(1) The criteria specified in section 2511(f) of 
        this title.
          [(2) The extent to which the partnerships provide for 
        the development of advanced manufacturing technologies 
        usable for significantly reducing the potential health, 
        safety, and environmental hazards associated with 
        existing manufacturing processes.
          [(3) Such other criteria as prescribed by the 
        Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Council.

[Sec. 2523. Manufacturing extension programs

  [(a) Use of Programs.--The Secretary of Defense, acting 
through the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
Technology, and in coordination with the Secretary of Commerce 
and the Secretary of Energy, shall promote the improvement of 
the subtier defense industry through use of manufacturing 
extension programs. Manufacturing extension programs so used 
shall include programs carried out by the Secretary of Commerce 
pursuant to section 25 and section 26 of the Act of March 3, 
1901 (15 U.S.C. 278k and 278l) and section 5121(b) of the 
Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (15 U.S.C. 278l 
note).
  [(b) Program Requirements.--(1) The Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, shall, in order to 
further the national security objectives set forth in section 
2501(a) of this title, establish a program--
          [(A) to support existing manufacturing extension 
        programs of regions, States, local governments, and 
        private, nonprofit organizations;
          [(B) to promote the development of a broad range of 
        such programs that will benefit both the national 
        security and the economic prosperity of the United 
        States; and
          [(C) to increase the involvement of appropriate 
        segments of the private sector in activities that 
        improve the manufacturing quality, productivity, and 
        performance of United States-based small manufacturing 
        firms.
  [(2) In awarding financial assistance under the program, the 
Secretary, on the basis of merit pursuant to a competitive 
selection process, shall select manufacturing extension 
programs that demonstrate evidence of the following:
          [(A) Comprehensive and high quality services, 
        including staff with significant experience in 
        industrial manufacturing.
          [(B) Significant involvement by, and support from, 
        private industry.
          [(C) The potential for assisting a significant number 
        of United States-based small manufacturing firms with a 
        limited expenditure of Federal funds.
  [(3)(A) The Secretary shall ensure that the amount of 
financial assistance furnished by the Federal Government to a 
manufacturing extension program under this subsection may not 
exceed 50 percent of the total cost of the program. Financial 
assistance shall be provided to a recipient program for a 
period of five years unless such financial assistance is 
earlier terminated for good cause. Recipients of such financial 
assistance shall be required to report to the Secretary 
annually beginning one year after the date that such financial 
assistance is initiated. Such report shall include a 
description of the progress of the recipient program in meeting 
the objectives set out in paragraph (1).
  [(B) The Secretary of Defense shall require a major 
evaluation of each manufacturing extension program receiving 
financial assistance under this subsection. The evaluation 
shall be conducted during the third year that such program 
receives such financial assistance. If, on the basis of such 
evaluation, the Secretary finds that the financial assistance 
to the extension program should be terminated for good cause, 
the Secretary shall provide sufficient financial assistance to 
terminate that program. The amount of that assistance may not 
exceed the amount that would otherwise have been provided for 
continuing the financial assistance to the recipient program 
through the end of the fourth year.
  [(C) Subparagraphs (A) and (B) do not prohibit a recipient 
program from reapplying for financial assistance under this 
subsection upon the expiration or termination of the furnishing 
of financial assistance under this subsection. The application 
for additional financial assistance shall be subject to the 
requirements and procedures set out in this subsection in the 
same manner and to the same extent as initial applications for 
financial assistance under this subsection.
  [(D) The Secretary may prescribe regulations to provide for 
consideration of in-kind contributions by non-Federal 
Government participants in a manufacturing extension program 
for the purpose of calculating the share of the costs that has 
been or is being undertaken by such participants. In such 
regulations, the Secretary may authorize a participant that is 
a small business concern to use funds received under the Small 
Business Innovation Research Program or the Small Business 
Technology Transfer Program to help pay the costs of the 
program. Any such funds so used may be considered in 
calculating the amount of the financial commitment undertaken 
by the non-Federal Government participants unless the Secretary 
determines that the small business concern has not made a 
significant equity percentage contribution in the program from 
non-Federal sources.
  [(4) The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Commerce 
shall enter into an agreement for carrying out the program 
established pursuant to this subsection. The agreement shall 
include procedures to ensure that the program is fully 
coordinated with related manufacturing programs of the 
Department of Commerce.

[Sec. 2524. Defense dual-use assistance extension program

  [(a) Establishment of Program.--The Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation and coordination with the Secretary of Energy and 
the Secretary of Commerce, shall establish a program to further 
the national security objectives set forth in section 2501(a) 
of this title and the defense reinvestment, diversification, 
and conversion program objectives set forth in section 2501(b) 
of this title by providing support to entities referred to in 
subsection (b) for programs described in that subsection.
  [(b) Programs Supported.--The Secretary may provide support 
under this section for programs sponsored by the Federal 
Government, regional entities, States, local governments, and 
private entities and nonprofit organizations that assist 
businesses economically dependent on Department of Defense 
expenditures to acquire dual-use capabilities through the 
provision under those programs of the following forms of 
assistance:
          [(1) Assistance in converting from government-
        oriented management, production, training, and 
        marketing practices to commercial practices.
          [(2) Assistance in acquiring and using public and 
        private sector resources, literature, and other 
        information concerning--
                  [(A) research, development, and production 
                processes and practices;
                  [(B) identification of technologies and 
                products having the potential for defense and 
                nondefense commercial applications;
                  [(C) marketing practices and opportunities;
                  [(D) identification of potential suppliers, 
                partners, and subcontractors;
                  [(E) identification of opportunities for 
                government support, including support through 
                grants, contracts, partnerships, and consortia;
                  [(F) enhancement of workforce skills and 
                capabilities, including--
                          [(i) development and introduction of 
                        high-performance work systems, 
                        workforce literacy programs, and 
                        programs for worker education and 
                        training;
                          [(ii) other programs that build upon 
                        the skills and capabilities of the 
                        workforce; and
                  [(G) trade and export assistance.
          [(3) Loan guarantees to small business concerns and 
        medium-sized business concerns that are economically 
        dependent on defense expenditures, under the terms and 
        conditions specified under other applicable law.
  [(c) Assistance Authorized.--(1) The Secretary may make 
grants, enter into contracts, or enter into cooperative 
agreements and other transactions pursuant to section 2371 of 
this title.
  [(2) Subject to subsection (d), the Secretary may provide a 
program referred to in subsection (b) with technical and other 
assistance.
  [(3) The Secretary is authorized to carry out a program to 
provide assistance to small businesses that are economically 
dependent on defense expenditures to obtain access to a 
national network of scientists and engineers, and to 
information resources (including access through on-line data 
bases to local, national, and international technical and 
business literature encompassing a wide range of technologies), 
that can help minimize technical risk and thereby facilitate 
the development and commercialization of new products.
  [(d) Financial Commitment of Non-Federal Government 
Participants.--(1) The Secretary shall ensure that the amount 
of funds provided by the Secretary to a program under this 
section does not exceed 50 percent of the total cost of the 
program.
  [(2) The Secretary may prescribe regulations to provide for 
consideration of in-kind contributions by non-Federal 
Government participants in a program under this section for the 
purpose of calculating the share of the costs that has been or 
is being undertaken by such participants. In such regulations, 
the Secretary may authorize a participant that is a small 
business concern to use funds received under the Small Business 
Innovation Research Program or the Small Business Technology 
Transfer Program to help pay the costs of the program. Any such 
funds so used may be considered in calculating the amount of 
the financial commitment undertaken by the non-Federal 
Government participants unless the Secretary determines that 
the small business concern has not made a significant equity 
percentage contribution in the program from non-Federal 
sources.
  [(3) The Secretary shall consider a program proposal 
submitted by a small business concern without regard to the 
ability of the small business concern to immediately meet its 
share of the anticipated program costs. Upon the selection of a 
proposal submitted by a small business concern, the small 
business concern shall have a period of not less than 120 days 
in which to arrange to meet its financial commitment 
requirements under the program from sources other than a person 
of a foreign country. If the Secretary determines upon the 
expiration of that period that the small business concern will 
be unable to meet its share of the anticipated program costs, 
the Secretary shall revoke the selection of the program 
proposal submitted by the small business concern.
  [(e) Special Requirements Regarding Loan Guarantees.--(1) The 
Secretary shall carry out the loan guarantee program authorized 
under subsection (b)(3) during any fiscal year for which funds 
are specifically made available to cover the costs of loan 
guarantees to be issued pursuant to such subsection.
  [(2) In addition to the selection criteria specified in 
subsection (f), the selection criteria in the case of the loan 
guarantee program under subsection (b)(3) shall also include 
the following:
          [(A) The extent to which the loans to be guaranteed 
        would support the retention of defense workers whose 
        employment would otherwise be permanently or 
        temporarily terminated as a result of reductions in 
        expenditures by the United States for defense, the 
        termination or cancellation of a defense contract, the 
        failure to proceed with an approved major weapon 
        system, the merger or consolidation of the operations 
        of a defense contractor, or the closure or realignment 
        of a military installation.
          [(B) The extent to which the loans to be guaranteed 
        would stimulate job creation and new economic 
        activities in communities most adversely affected by 
        reductions in expenditures by the United States for 
        defense, the termination or cancellation of a defense 
        contract, the failure to proceed with an approved major 
        weapon system, the merger or consolidation of the 
        operations of a defense contractor, or the closure or 
        realignment of a military installation.
          [(C) The extent to which the loans to be guaranteed 
        would be used to acquire (or permit the use of other 
        funds to acquire) capital equipment to modernize or 
        expand the facilities of the borrower to enable the 
        borrower to remain in the national technology and 
        industrial base available to the Department of Defense.
  [(3) To be eligible for a loan guarantee under subsection 
(b)(3), a borrower must be able to demonstrate to the 
satisfaction of the Secretary that at least 25 percent of the 
value of the borrower's sales during the preceding fiscal year 
were derived from--
          [(A) contracts with the Department of Defense or the 
        defense-related activities of the Department of Energy; 
        or
          [(B) subcontracts in support of defense-related prime 
        contracts.
  [(4) The maximum amount of loan principal that the Secretary 
may guarantee under the loan guarantee program during a fiscal 
year may not exceed--
          [(A) $1,250,000, with respect to a small business 
        concern; and
          [(B) $10,000,000 with respect to a medium-sized 
        business concern.
  [(f) Selection Process and Criteria.--Competitive procedures 
shall be used in the selection of programs to receive 
assistance under this section. The criteria for the selection 
of a program to receive assistance under this section shall 
include the following:
          [(1) The extent to which the program advances and 
        enhances the national security objectives set forth in 
        section 2501(a) of this title and the reinvestment, 
        diversification, and conversion program objectives set 
        forth in section 2501(b) of this title.
          [(2) The technical excellence of the program.
          [(3) The qualifications of the personnel proposed to 
        participate in the program's research activities.
          [(4) The adequacy of timely private sector investment 
        in activities that is sufficient to achieve the goals 
        and objectives of the programs.
          [(5) The potential effectiveness of the program in 
        the conversion of businesses (and their work forces) 
        from capabilities that make the companies economically 
        dependent on Department of Defense expenditures to 
        capabilities having defense and nondefense commercial 
        applications.
          [(6) The ability of the program to assist businesses 
        (and their work forces) that are adversely affected by 
        significant reductions in Department of Defense 
        spending.
          [(7) The extent of the financial commitment by 
        sources other than the Department of Defense.
          [(8) The extent to which the program would 
        supplement, rather than duplicate, other available 
        services.
          [(9) The likelihood that, within five years after the 
        commencement of assistance for a program under this 
        section (or a lesser period established by the 
        Secretary), Department of Defense assistance will not 
        be necessary to sustain the program.
          [(10) Such other criteria as the Secretary 
        prescribes.
  [(g) Definition.--In this section, the ``medium-sized 
business concern'' means a business concern that is not more 
than two times the maximum size specified by the Administrator 
of the Small Business Administration for purposes of 
determining whether a business concern furnishing a product or 
service is a small business concern.
  [(h) Termination of Authority.--After September 30, 1995, 
funds may be provided by the Department of Defense under this 
section only for programs referred to in subsection (b) for 
which funds have been provided by the Department of Defense 
under this section on or before that date. No funds may be 
provided by the Department of Defense under this section for a 
program referred to in subsection (b) after September 30, 
1998.]

Sec. 2525. Manufacturing [science and] technology program

  (a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Defense shall establish 
a Manufacturing [Science and] Technology Program to further the 
national security objectives of section 2501(a) of this title. 
The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology 
shall administer the program.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Competition and Cost Sharing.--(1) * * *
  (2) A grant may not be awarded under the program, and a 
contract, cooperative agreement, or other transaction may not 
be entered into under the program, on any basis other than a 
cost-sharing basis unless the Secretary of Defense determines 
that the grant, contract, cooperative agreement, or other 
transaction, as the case may be, is for a program that--
          (A) is not likely to have any immediate and direct 
        commercial application; [or]
          (B) is of sufficiently high risk to discourage cost 
        sharing by non-Federal Government sources[.]; or
          (C) will be carried out by an institution of higher 
        education.
  (3) At least 25 percent of the funds available for the 
program each fiscal year shall be used for awarding grants and 
entering into contracts, cooperative agreements, and other 
transactions on a cost-share basis under which the ratio of 
recipient costs to Government costs is two to one.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBCHAPTER V--MISCELLANEOUS TECHNOLOGY BASE POLICIES AND PROGRAMS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 2534. Miscellaneous limitations on the procurement of goods other 
                    than United States goods

  (a) Limitation on Certain Procurements.--The Secretary of 
Defense may procure any of the following items only if the 
manufacturer of the item satisfies the requirements of 
subsection (b):
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(3) Air circuit breakers.--Air circuit breakers for 
        naval vessels.]
          (3) Vessel components.--(A) The following components 
        of vessels:
                  (i) Air circuit breakers.
                  (ii) Vessel propellers with a diameter of six 
                feet or more, if the propellers incorporate 
                only castings poured and finished in the United 
                States.
                  (iii) Welded shipboard anchor and mooring 
                chain with a diameter of four inches or less.
          (B) The following components of vessels, to the 
        extent they are unique to marine applications: ship and 
        marine cable assemblies, hose assemblies, hydraulics 
        and pumps for steering, gyrocompasses, marine 
        autopilots, electronic navigation chart systems, 
        attitude and heading reference units, power supplies, 
        and steering controls.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Applicability to Certain Items.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (3) Ball bearings and roller bearings.--Subsection 
        (a)(5) and this paragraph shall cease to be effective 
        on October 1, [1995] 2000.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (g) Inapplicability to Contracts Under Simplified Acquisition 
Threshold.--(1) This section does not apply to a contract or 
subcontract for an amount that does not exceed the simplified 
acquisition threshold.
  (2) Paragraph (1) does not apply to contracts for items 
described in subsection (a)(5) (relating to ball bearings and 
roller bearings).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2539b. Availability of samples, drawings, information, equipment, 
                    materials, and certain services

  (a)

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Fees.--Fees for services made available under subsection 
(a)(3) shall be established in the regulations prescribed 
pursuant to subsection (a). Such fees may not exceed the amount 
necessary to recoup the direct and indirect costs involved, 
such as direct costs of utilities, contractor support, and 
salaries of personnel that are incurred by the United States to 
provide for the testing.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


             SUBCHAPTER VI--DEFENSE EXPORT LOAN GUARANTEES

Sec.
2540.  Establishment of loan guarantee program.
2540a.  Transferability.
2540b.  Limitations.
2540c.  Fees charged and collected.
2540d.  Definitions.

Sec. 2540. Establishment of loan guarantee program

  (a) Establishment.--In order to meet the national security 
objectives in section 2501(a) of this title, the Secretary of 
Defense shall establish a program under which the Secretary may 
issue guarantees assuring a lender against losses of principal 
or interest, or both principal and interest, arising out of the 
financing of the sale or long-term lease of defense articles, 
defense services, or design and construction services to a 
country referred to in subsection (b).
  (b) Covered Countries.--The authority under subsection (a) 
applies with respect to the following countries:
          (1) A member nation of the North Atlantic Treaty 
        Organization (NATO).
          (2) A country designated as of March 31, 1995, as a 
        major non-NATO ally pursuant to section 2350a(i)(3) of 
        this title.
          (3) A country that was a member nation of the Asia 
        Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) as of March 31, 
        1995.
  (c) Authority Subject to Provisions of Appropriation Acts.--
The Secretary may guarantee a loan under this subchapter only 
to such extent or in such amounts as may be provided in advance 
in appropriations Acts.

Sec. 2540a. Transferability

  A guarantee issued under this subchapter shall be fully and 
freely transferable.

Sec. 2540b. Limitations

  (a) Terms and Conditions of Loan Guarantees.--In issuing a 
guarantee under this subchapter for a medium-term or long-term 
loan, the Secretary may not offer terms and conditions more 
beneficial than those that would be provided to the recipient 
by the Export-Import Bank of the United States under similar 
circumstances in conjunction with the provision of guarantees 
for nondefense articles and services.
  (b) Losses Arising From Fraud or Misrepresentation.--No 
payment may be made under a guarantee issued under this 
subchapter for a loss arising out of fraud or misrepresentation 
for which the party seeking payment is responsible.
  (c) No Right of Acceleration.--The Secretary of Defense may 
not accelerate any guaranteed loan or increment, and may not 
pay any amount, in respect of a guarantee issued under this 
subchapter, other than in accordance with the original payment 
terms of the loan.

Sec. 2540c. Fees charged and collected

  (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall charge a fee 
(known as ``exposure fee'') for each guarantee issued under 
this subchapter.
  (b) Amount.--To the extent that the cost of the loan 
guarantees under this subchapter is not otherwise provided for 
in appropriations Acts, the fee imposed under this section with 
respect to a loan guarantee shall be fixed in an amount 
sufficient to meet potential liabilities of the United States 
under the loan guarantee.
  (c) Payment Terms.--The fee for each guarantee shall become 
due as the guarantee is issued. In the case of a guarantee for 
a loan which is disbursed incrementally, and for which the 
guarantee is correspondingly issued incrementally as portions 
of the loan are disbursed, the fee shall be paid incrementally 
in proportion to the amount of the guarantee that is issued.

Sec. 2540d. Definitions

  In this subchapter:
          (1) The terms ``defense article'', ``defense 
        services'', and ``design and construction services'' 
        have the meanings given those terms in section 47 of 
        the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2794).
          (2) The term ``cost'', with respect to a loan 
        guarantee, has the meaning given that term in section 
        502 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control 
        Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 661a).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 152--ISSUE OF SUPPLIES, SERVICES, AND FACILITIES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


 SUBCHAPTER II--ISSUE OF SERVICEABLE MATERIAL OTHER THAN TO THE ARMED 
                                 FORCES

Sec.
2541.  Equipment and barracks: national veterans' organizations.
     * * * * * * *
2554.  Logistical support and personnel services: national and 
          international sporting events.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 2544. Equipment and other services: Boy Scout Jamborees

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (g) In the case of a Boy Scout Jamboree held on a United 
States military installation, the Secretary of Defense may 
provide personnel services and logistical support at the 
military installation in addition to the support authorized 
under subsections (a) and (d).
  [(g)] (h) Other departments of the Federal Government are 
authorized, under such regulations as may be prescribed by the 
Secretary thereof, to provide to the Boy Scouts of America, 
equipment and other services, under the same conditions and 
restrictions prescribed in the preceding subsections for the 
Secretary of Defense.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2551. Humanitarian assistance

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(b) Authority To Transfer Funds.--To the extent provided in 
defense authorization Acts for a fiscal year, the Secretary of 
Defense may transfer to the Secretary of State funds 
appropriated for the purposes of this section to provide for--
          [(1) the payment of administrative costs incurred in 
        providing the transportation described in subsection 
        (a); and
          [(2) the purchase or other acquisition of 
        transportation assets for the distribution of 
        humanitarian relief supplies in the country of 
        destination.
  [(c) Transportation of Humanitarian Relief.--(1) 
Transportation of humanitarian relief provided with funds 
appropriated for the purposes of this section shall be provided 
under the direction of the Secretary of State.
  [(2) Such transportation shall be provided by the most 
economical commercial or military means available, unless the 
Secretary of State determines that it is in the national 
interest of the United States to provide such transportation 
other than by the most economical means available. The means 
used to provide such transportation may include the use of 
aircraft and personnel of the reserve components of the Armed 
Forces.
  [(3) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as waiving 
the requirements of section 2631 of this title and sections 
901(b) and 901b of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 U.S.C. 
App. 1241(b) and 1241f).
  [(d)] (b) Availability of Funds.--To the extent provided in 
appropriation Acts, funds appropriated for humanitarian 
assistance for the purposes of this section shall remain 
available until expended.
  [(e) Status Reports.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
submit (at the times specified in paragraph (2)) to the 
Committees on Armed Services and Foreign Relations of the 
Senate and the Committees on Armed Services and Foreign Affairs 
of the House of Representatives a report on the provision of 
humanitarian assistance pursuant to this section.
  [(2)(A) Whenever there is enacted a defense authorization Act 
that contains an authorization of appropriations for 
humanitarian assistance, a report referred to in paragraph (1) 
shall be submitted as provided in that paragraph not later than 
60 days after the date of the enactment of that Act.
  [(B) In addition to reports submitted as provided in 
subparagraph (A), a report shall be submitted under paragraph 
(1) not later than June 1 of each year.
  [(3) Each report required by paragraph (1) shall cover all 
provisions of law, contained in defense authorization Acts, 
that authorize appropriations for humanitarian assistance to be 
available for the purposes of this section. A report submitted 
after the obligation of all amounts appropriated pursuant to 
such a provision of law shall not cover that provision of law.
  [(4) Subject to paragraph (3), a report required by paragraph 
(1) shall contain (as of the date on which the report is 
submitted) the following information:
          [(A) The total amount of funds obligated for 
        humanitarian relief under this section.
          [(B) The number of scheduled and completed flights 
        for purposes of providing humanitarian relief under 
        this section.
          [(C) A description of any transfer of excess 
        nonlethal supplies of the Department of Defense made 
        available for humanitarian relief purposes under 
        section 2547 of this title. The description shall 
        include the date of the transfer, to whom the transfer 
        is made, the quantity of items transferred, the 
        acquisition value of the items transferred, and the 
        value of the items at the time of the transfer.]
  (c) Status Reports.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
submit to the congressional committees specified in subsection 
(f) an annual report on the provision of humanitarian 
assistance pursuant to this section for the prior fiscal year. 
The report shall be submitted each year at the time of the 
budget submission by the President for the next fiscal year.
  (2) Each report required by paragraph (1) shall cover all 
provisions of law that authorize appropriations for 
humanitarian assistance to be available from the Department of 
Defense for the purposes of this section.
  (3) Each report under this subsection shall set forth the 
following information regarding activities during the previous 
fiscal year:
          (A) The total amount of funds obligated for 
        humanitarian relief under this section.
          (B) The number of scheduled and completed 
        transportation missions for purposes of providing 
        humanitarian assistance under this section.
          (C) A description of any transfer of excess nonlethal 
        supplies of the Department of Defense made available 
        for humanitarian relief purposes under section 2547 of 
        this title. The description shall include the date of 
        the transfer, the entity to whom the transfer is made, 
        and the quantity of items transferred.
  [(f)] (d) Report Regarding Relief for Unauthorized 
Countries.--In any case in which the Secretary of Defense 
provides for the transportation of humanitarian relief to a 
country to which the transportation of humanitarian relief has 
not been specifically authorized by law, the Secretary shall 
notify [the Committees on Appropriations and on Armed Services 
of the Senate and House of Representatives, the Committee on 
Foreign Relations of the Senate, and the Committee on Foreign 
Affairs of the House of Representatives of the] the 
congressional committees specified in subsection (f) and the 
Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and House of 
Representatives of the Secretary's intention to provide such 
transportation. The notification shall be submitted not less 
than 15 days before the commencement of such transportation.
  [(g)] (e) Definition.--In this section, the term ``defense 
authorization Act'' means an Act that authorizes appropriations 
for one or more fiscal years for military activities of the 
Department of Defense, including authorizations of 
appropriations for the activities described in paragraph (7) of 
section 114(a) of this title.
  (f) Congressional Committees.--The congressional committees 
referred to in subsections (c)(1) and (d) are the following:
          (1) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee 
        on Foreign Relations of the Senate.
          (2) The Committee on National Security and the 
        Committee on International Relations of the House of 
        Representatives.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2554. Logistical support and personnel services: national and 
                    international sporting events

  (a) Authority To Provide Support.--Subject to subsection (b), 
the Secretary of Defense may provide logistical support and 
personnel services in connection with a national or 
international sporting event held in the United States, the 
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or a Territory or possession of 
the United States.
  (b) Conditions on Support.--The Secretary of Defense may make 
logistical support and personnel services available in 
connection with a national or international sporting event only 
if the entity or organization receiving the support or services 
agrees to reimburse the Secretary for the cost of providing the 
support or services. The Secretary may waive the requirement 
for reimbursement if the Secretary determines that the sporting 
event did not result in a profit for the sponsoring entity or 
organization.
  (c) Pay and Nontravel-Related Allowances.--(1) Except as 
provided in paragraph (2), the costs for pay and nontravel-
related allowances of members of the armed forces providing 
logistical support and personnel services in connection with a 
national or international sporting event shall not be included 
in determining the cost of the support or services under 
subsection (b).
  (2) Paragraph (1) does not apply in the case of members of a 
reserve component called or ordered to active duty to provide 
the logistical support and personnel services.
  (3) If logistical support and personnel services in 
connection with a national or international sporting event are 
provided by civilian employees of the Department of Defense, 
the time during which the employees provide such support or 
services shall be considered to be creditable service for 
purposes of determining eligibility for an annuity under 
chapter 83 or 84 of title 5.
  (d) Deposit of Amounts Received.--Amounts received by the 
Secretary of Defense under subsection (b), shall be credited to 
the special event account available to the Department of 
Defense.
  (e) Funds Available To Provide Support.--Subject to such 
limitations as may be provided in appropriation Acts, only 
those funds that, on the date of the enactment of this section, 
are in the special event account available to the Department of 
Defense and amounts received under subsection (b) after that 
date may be used to provide logistical support and personnel 
services in connection with a national or international 
sporting event.

CHAPTER 153--EXCHANGE OF MATERIAL AND DISPOSAL OF OBSOLETE, SURPLUS, OR 
UNCLAIMED PROPERTY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2572. Documents, historical artifacts, and condemned or obsolete 
                    combat materiel: loan, gift, or exchange

  (a) * * *
  (b)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary concerned may 
exchange items described in subsection (c) that are [not needed 
by the armed forces for similar items held by any individual, 
organization, institution, agency, or nation or for search, 
salvage, transportation, and restoration services which 
directly benefit the historical collection of the armed 
forces.] not needed by the armed forces for any of the 
following items or services if they directly benefit the 
historical collection of the armed forces:
          (A) Similar items held by any individual, 
        organization, institution, agency, or nation.
          (B) Conservation supplies, equipment, facilities, or 
        systems.
          (C) Search, salvage, or transportation services.
          (D) Restoration, conservation, or preservation 
        services.
          (E) Educational programs.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


             CHAPTER 155--ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS AND SERVICES

Sec.
2601.  General gift funds.
     * * * * * * *
2610.  Acceptance of monetary awards from competition for excellence.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2610. Acceptance of monetary awards from competition for 
                    excellence

  (a) Acceptance Authorized.--The Secretary of Defense may 
accept any monetary award given to the Department of Defense by 
a nongovernmental entity as an award in competition recognizing 
excellence or innovation in providing services or administering 
programs.
  (b) Disposition of Awards.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2), a 
monetary award accepted under subsection (a) shall be credited 
to the appropriation supporting the operation of the command, 
installation, or other activity that is recognized for the 
award and, in such amount as is provided in advance in 
appropriation Acts, shall be available for the same purposes as 
the underlying appropriation.
  (2) Subject to such limitations as may be provided in 
appropriation Acts, the Secretary of Defense may disburse an 
amount not to exceed 50 percent of the monetary award to 
persons who are responsible for the excellence or innovation 
recognized by the award. A person may not receive more than 
$10,000 under the authority of this paragraph from any monetary 
reward.
  (c) Incidental Expenses.--Subject to such limitations as may 
be provided in appropriation Acts, appropriations available to 
the Department of Defense may be used to pay incidental 
expenses incurred to compete in a competition described in 
subsection (a) or to accept a monetary award under this 
section.
  (d) Regulations and Reporting.--(1) The Secretary of Defense 
shall prescribe regulations to determine the disposition of any 
monetary awards accepted under this section and the payment of 
incidental expenses under subsection (c).
  (2) The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress an 
annual report describing the disposition of any monetary awards 
accepted under this section and the payment of any incidental 
expenses under this subsection (c).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                      CHAPTER 157--TRANSPORTATION

Sec.
2631.  Supplies: preference to United States vessels.
     * * * * * * *
2643.  Commissary and exchange services: transportation overseas.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 2634. Motor vehicles: for members on change of permanent station

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) When the Secretary concerned makes a determination under 
[section 406(l) of title 37] section 406(k) of title 37 that 
the dependents of a member on a permanent change of station are 
unable to accompany the member to an overseas duty station 
because of unexpected and uncontrollable circumstances, and the 
member shipped a motor vehicle pursuant to this section in 
anticipation of a dependent accompanying the member to the new 
duty station, the member may reship or transship such motor 
vehicle in accordance with this section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2643. Commissary and exchange services: transportation overseas

  The Secretary of Defense shall give the officials responsible 
for operation of commissaries and military exchanges the 
authority to negotiate directly with private carriers for the 
most cost-effective transportation of commissary and exchange 
supplies by sea without relying on the Military Sealift Command 
or the Military Traffic Management Command. Section 2631 of 
this title, regarding the preference for vessels of the United 
States or belonging to the United States in the transportation 
of supplies by sea, shall apply to the negotiation of 
transportation contracts under the authority of this section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


  CHAPTER 159--REAL PROPERTY; RELATED PERSONAL PROPERTY; AND LEASE OF 
NONEXCESS PROPERTY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 2667. Leases: non-excess property

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d)(1)(A) All money rentals received pursuant to leases 
entered into by the Secretary of a military department under 
this section shall be deposited in a special account in the 
Treasury established for such military department, except--
          (i) amounts paid for utilities and services furnished 
        lessees by the Secretary; and
          (ii) money rentals referred to in paragraph (4) or 
        (5).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (5) Money rentals received by the United States from a lease 
under subsection (f) shall be deposited into the relevant 
account established under section 207(a) of the Defense 
Authorization Amendments and Base Closure and Realignment Act 
(Public Law 100-526; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) or section 2906(a) of 
the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of 
title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 160--ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2703. Environmental restoration transfer account

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(c) Obligation of Transferred Amounts.--Funds transferred 
under subsection (b) may only be obligated or expended from the 
account or fund to which transferred in order to carry out the 
functions of the Secretary under this chapter or environmental 
restoration functions under any other provision of law.
  [(d)] (c) Budget Reports.--In proposing the Budget for any 
fiscal year pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, the President 
shall set forth separately the amount requested for 
environmental restoration programs of the Department of Defense 
under this chapter or any other Act.
  [(e) Amounts Recovered Under CERCLA.--Amounts recovered under 
section 107 of CERCLA for response actions of the Secretary 
shall be credited to the transfer account.]
  (d) Amounts Recovered.--The following amounts shall be 
credited to the transfer account:
          (1) Amounts recovered under section 107 of CERCLA for 
        response actions of the Secretary.
          (2) Any other amounts recovered by the Secretary or 
        the Secretary of the military department concerned from 
        a contractor, insurer, surety, or other person to 
        reimburse the Department of Defense for any expenditure 
        for environmental response activities.
  [(f)] (e) Payment of Fines and Penalties.--None of the funds 
appropriated to the transfer account for fiscal years 1995 
through 1999 may be used for the payment of a fine or penalty 
imposed against the Department of Defense unless the act or 
omission for which the fine or penalty is imposed arises out of 
an activity funded by the transfer account.

Sec. 2704. Commonly found unregulated hazardous substances

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) DOD Support.--The Secretary of Defense shall transfer to 
the Secretary of Health and Human Services such toxicological 
data[, such sums from amounts appropriated to the Department of 
Defense,] and such personnel of the Department of Defense as 
may be necessary (1) for the preparation of toxicological 
profiles under subsection (b) or (2) for other health related 
activities under section 104(i) of CERCLA. The Secretary of 
Defense and the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall 
enter into a memorandum of understanding regarding the manner 
in which this section shall be carried out[, including the 
manner for transferring funds and personnel and for 
coordination of activities under this section].
  (d) EPA Health Advisories.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (3) DOD support for health advisories.--The Secretary 
        of Defense shall transfer to the Administrator such 
        toxicological data[, such sums from amounts 
        appropriated to the Department of Defense,] and such 
        personnel of the Department of Defense as may be 
        necessary for the preparation of such health 
        advisories. The Secretary and the Administrator shall 
        enter into a memorandum of understanding regarding the 
        manner in which this subsection shall be carried out[, 
        including the manner for transferring funds and 
        personnel and for coordination of activities under this 
        subsection].

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


             CHAPTER 165--ACCOUNTABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY

Sec.
2771.  Final settlement of accounts: deceased members.
     * * * * * * *
2782.  Damage to real property: disposition of amounts recovered.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2773. Designation, powers, and accountability of deputy disbursing 
                    officials

  (a)(1) [With the approval of a Secretary of a military 
department when the Secretary considers it necessary, a 
disbursing official of the military department] Subject to 
paragraph (3), a disbursing official of the Department of 
Defense may designate a deputy disbursing official--
          (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (3) A disbursing official may make a designation under 
paragraph (1) only with the approval of the Secretary of 
Defense or, in the case of a disbursing official of a military 
department, the Secretary of that military department.
  (b)(1) If a disbursing official of [any military department] 
the Department of Defense dies, becomes disabled, or is 
separated from office, a deputy disbursing official may 
continue the accounts and payments in the name of the former 
disbursing official until the last day of the [2d month] second 
month after the month in which the death, disability, or 
separation occurs. The accounts and payments shall be allowed, 
audited, and settled as provided by law. The Secretary of the 
Treasury shall honor checks signed in the name of the former 
disbursing official in the same way as if the former disbursing 
official had continued in office.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2782. Damage to real property: disposition of amounts recovered

  Except as provided in section 2775 of this title, amounts 
recovered for damage caused to real property under the 
jurisdiction of the Secretary of a military department or, with 
respect to the Defense Agencies, under the jurisdiction of the 
Secretary of Defense shall be credited to the account available 
for the repair or replacement of the real property at the time 
of recovery. In such amounts as are provided in advance in 
appropriation Acts, amounts so credited shall be available for 
use for the same purposes and under the same circumstances as 
other funds in the account.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


     CHAPTER 169--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING

Subchapter                                                          Sec.
      Military Construction.........................................2801
     * * * * * * *
2871Alternative Provision of Military Family Housing..................

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBCHAPTER I--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2805. Unspecified minor construction

  (a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), within an amount 
equal to 125 percent of the amount authorized by law for such 
purpose, the Secretary concerned may carry out minor military 
construction projects not otherwise authorized by law. A minor 
military construction project is a military construction 
project (1) that is for a single undertaking at a military 
installation, and (2) that has an approved cost equal to or 
less than $1,500,000. However, if the military construction 
project is intended solely to correct a life, health, or safety 
deficiency, a minor military construction project may have an 
approved cost equal to or less than $3,000,000.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the Secretary 
concerned may spend from appropriations available for operation 
and maintenance amounts necessary to carry out an unspecified 
military construction project costing [not more than $300,000.] 
not more than--
          (A) $1,000,000, in the case of an unspecified 
        military construction project intended solely to 
        correct a life, health, or safety deficiency; or
          (B) $300,000, in the case of other unspecified 
        military construction projects.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                 SUBCHAPTER II--MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING

Sec.
2821.  Requirement for authorization of appropriations for construction 
          and acquisition of military family housing.
     * * * * * * *
[2837.  Limited partnerships with private developers of housing.]
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 2828. Leasing of military family housing

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e)(1) Expenditures for the rental of family housing in 
foreign countries (including the costs of utilities, 
maintenance, and operation) may not exceed $20,000 per unit per 
year, except that [300 units] 450 units may be leased in 
foreign countries for not more than $25,000 per unit per year. 
These maximum lease amounts may be waived by the Secretary 
concerned with respect to not more than a total of [220 such 
units] 350 such units that are leased for incumbents of special 
positions or for personnel assigned to Defense Attache Offices 
or that are leased in countries where excessive costs of 
housing would cause undue hardship on Department of Defense 
personnel.
  (2) In addition to the [300 units] 450 units of family 
housing referred to in paragraph (1) for which the maximum 
lease amount is $25,000 per unit per year, the Secretary of the 
Navy may lease not more than 2,000 units of family housing in 
Italy subject to that maximum lease amount.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 2837. Limited partnerships with private developers of housing

  [(a) Limited Partnerships.--(1) In order to meet the housing 
requirements of members of the naval service, and the 
dependents of such members, at a military installation 
described in paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Navy may enter 
into a limited partnership with one or more private developers 
to encourage the construction of housing and accessory 
structures within commuting distance of the installation. The 
Secretary may contribute not less than five percent, but not 
more than 35 percent, of the development costs under a limited 
partnership.
  [(2) Paragraph (1) applies to a military installation under 
the jurisdiction of the Secretary at which there is a shortage 
of suitable housing to meet the requirements of members and 
dependents referred to in such paragraph.
  [(b) Collateral Incentive Agreements.--The Secretary may also 
enter into collateral incentive agreements with private 
developers who enter into a limited partnership under 
subsection (a) to ensure that, where appropriate--
          [(1) a suitable preference will be afforded members 
        of the naval service in the lease or purchase, as the 
        case may be, of a reasonable number of the housing 
        units covered by the limited partnership; or
          [(2) the rental rates or sale prices, as the case may 
        be, for some or all of such units will be affordable 
        for such members.
  [(c) Selection of Investment Opportunities.--(1) The 
Secretary shall use publicly advertised, competitively bid or 
competitively negotiated, contracting procedures, as provided 
in chapter 137 of this title, to enter into limited 
partnerships under subsection (a).
  [(2) When a decision is made to enter into a limited 
partnership under subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit a 
report in writing to the appropriate committees of Congress on 
that decision. Each such report shall include the justification 
for the limited partnership, the terms and conditions of the 
limited partnership, a description of the development costs for 
projects under the limited partnership, and a description of 
the share of such costs to be incurred by the Secretary. The 
Secretary may then enter into the limited partnership only 
after the end of the 21-day period beginning on the date the 
report is received by such committees.
  [(d) Account.--(1) There is hereby established on the books 
of the Treasury an account to be known as the ``Navy Housing 
Investment Account''.
  [(2) There shall be deposited into the Account--
          [(A) such funds as may be authorized for and 
        appropriated to the Account; and
          [(B) any proceeds received by the Secretary from the 
        repayment of investments or profits on investments of 
        the Secretary under subsection (a).
  [(3) In such amounts as is provided in advance in 
appropriation Acts, the Account shall be available for 
contracts, investments, and expenses necessary for the 
implementation of this section.
  [(4) The Secretary may not enter into a contract in 
connection with a limited partnership under subsection (a) or a 
collateral incentive agreement under subsection (b) unless the 
Account contains sufficient funds, as of the time the contract 
is entered into, to satisfy the total obligations to be 
incurred by the United States under the contract.
  [(e) Navy Housing Investment Board.--(1) The Secretary of the 
Navy shall establish a board to be known as the ``Navy Housing 
Investment Board'', which shall have the duties--
          [(A) of advising the Secretary regarding those 
        proposed limited partnerships under subsection (a), if 
        any, that are financially and otherwise sound 
        investments for meeting the objectives of this section;
          [(B) of administering the Account established under 
        subsection (d); and
          [(C) of assisting the Secretary in such other ways as 
        the Secretary determines to be necessary and 
        appropriate to carry out this section.
  [(2) The Navy Housing Investment Board shall be composed of 
seven members appointed for a two-year term by the Secretary. 
Among such members, the Secretary may appoint two persons from 
the private sector who have knowledge and experience in the 
financing and the construction of housing. The Secretary shall 
designate one of the members as chairperson of the Board.
  [(3) Members of the Navy Housing Investment Board, other than 
those members regularly employed by the Federal Government, may 
be paid while attending meetings of the Board or otherwise 
serving at the request of the Secretary, compensation at a rate 
equal to the daily equivalent of the minimum annual rate of 
basic pay payable for level IV of the Executive Schedule under 
section 5315 of title 5 for each day (including travel time) 
during which the member is engaged in the actual performance of 
duties vested in the Board. Members shall receive travel 
expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in 
accordance with section 5702 and 5703 of title 5.
  [(4) The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall 
not apply to the Navy Housing Investment Board.
  [(f) Report.--Not later than 60 days after the end of each 
fiscal year in which the Secretary carries out activities under 
this section, the Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report 
specifying the amount and nature of the deposits into, and the 
expenditures from, the Account during such fiscal year and of 
the amount and nature of all other expenditures made pursuant 
to such section during such fiscal year.
  [(g) Transfer of Navy Lands Prohibited.--Nothing in this 
section shall be construed to permit the Secretary, as part of 
a limited partnership entered into under this section, to 
transfer the right, title, or interest of the United States in 
any real property under the jurisdiction of the Secretary.
  [(h) Expiration and Termination of Authorities.--(1) The 
authority of the Secretary to enter into a limited partnership 
under this section shall expire on September 30, 1999.
  [(2) The Navy Housing Investment Board shall terminate on 
November 30, 1999.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


    SUBCHAPTER IV--ALTERNATIVE PROVISION OF MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING

Sec.
2871. Definitions.
2872. General limitations and authorities.
2873. Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund.
2874. Limited partnerships with private developers of housing.
2875. Housing finance and acquisition authorities.
2876. Expiration of authority.

Sec. 2871. Definitions

  In this subchapter:
          (1) The term ``construction'' means the construction 
        of additional units of military family housing and 
        ancillary supporting facilities or the replacement or 
        renovation of existing units or ancillary supporting 
        facilities.
          (2) The term ``ancillary supporting facilities'' 
        means facilities related to military family housing, 
        such as day care centers, community centers, housing 
        offices, maintenance complexes, tot lots, and parks. 
        Such term does not include commercial facilities that 
        could not otherwise be constructed using funds 
        appropriated to the Department of Defense.
          (3) The term ``contract'' includes any contract, 
        lease, or other agreement entered into under the 
        authority of this subchapter.
          (4) The term ``Fund'' means the Department of Defense 
        Family Housing Improvement Fund established under 
        section 2873(a) of this title.

Sec. 2872. General limitations and authorities

  (a) Use of Authorities.--The Secretary concerned may use the 
authorities provided by this subchapter, singly or in 
conjunction with other authorities provided under this chapter, 
to help meet the military family housing needs of members of 
the armed forces and the dependents of such members at military 
installations at which there is a shortage of suitable housing 
for members and their dependents.
  (b) Term.--Subject to section 2873(d)(2) of this title, a 
contract entered into under this subchapter may be for such 
term as the Secretary concerned considers to be in the best 
interests of the United States.
  (c) Phased Occupancy.--A contract under this subchapter may 
provide for phased occupancy of completed family housing units 
under one or more interim leases during the period of the 
construction or renovation of the housing units. In no case 
shall any such interim lease extend beyond the construction or 
renovation period.
  (d) Unit Size and Type.--Section 2826 of this title shall not 
apply to military family housing units acquired or constructed 
under this subchapter, except that room and floor area size of 
such housing units should generally be comparable to private 
sector housing available in the same locality. When acquiring 
existing family housing in lieu of construction under section 
2824 of this title, the Secretary concerned may vary the number 
of types of units to be acquired as long as the total number of 
units is substantially the same as authorized by law.
  (e) Location.--The Secretary concerned may use the 
authorities provided under this subchapter to acquire or 
construct military family housing units and ancillary 
supporting facilities in the United States, the Commonwealth of 
Puerto Rico, and in any territory or possession of the United 
States.
  (f) Notification Required for Contracts.--The Secretary 
concerned may not enter into a contract under this subchapter 
until after the end of the 21-day period beginning on the date 
the Secretary concerned submits to the appropriate committees 
of Congress written notice of the nature and terms of the 
contract.
  (g) Assignments.--The Secretary concerned may assign members 
of the armed forces to any military family housing obtained 
using the authorities provided in this subchapter in accordance 
with section 403(b) of title 37.
  (h) Allotments.--The Secretary concerned may require a member 
of the armed forces to pay rent by allotment as a condition of 
occupying military family housing obtained using the 
authorities provided in this subchapter.
  (i) Supporting Facilities.--Any contract entered into under 
this subchapter may include provisions for the construction or 
acquisition of ancillary supporting facilities.
  (j) Authority to Lease or Sell Land, Housing, and Supporting 
Facilities.--(1) The Secretary concerned may lease or sell 
land, housing, and ancillary supporting facilities under the 
jurisdiction of the Secretary for the purpose of providing 
additional military family housing or improving existing 
military family housing under this subchapter, except that the 
authority to lease or sell real property under this subchapter 
shall not extend to property located at a military installation 
approved for closure.
  (2) A sale or lease under this subsection may be made for 
such consideration and upon such terms and conditions as the 
Secretary concerned shall determine to be consistent with the 
purposes of this subchapter and the public interest. The 
acreage and legal description of any property leased or 
conveyed under this subsection shall be determined by a survey 
satisfactory to the Secretary concerned.
  (3) Section 2667 of this title, the Federal Property and 
Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 471), section 
501 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (42 
U.S.C. 11411), and section 321 of the Act of June 30, 1932 (47 
Stat. 412) shall not apply to leases and sales under this 
subsection.
  (4) As part or all of the consideration for the sale or lease 
of property under this subsection, the Secretary concerned 
shall require an ancillary agreement under which the person 
receiving the property agrees to give priority to military 
members and their dependents in the leasing of existing or new 
housing units under the control or provided by the person. Such 
agreements may provide for the payment by the Secretary 
concerned of security or damage deposits.

Sec. 2873. Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund

  (a) Establishment.--There is hereby established on the books 
of the Treasury an account to be known as the Department of 
Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund, which shall be 
administered by the Secretary of Defense as a single account. 
Amounts in the Fund shall be available without fiscal year 
limitation.
  (b) Deposits.--There shall be deposited into the Fund the 
following:
          (1) Amounts authorized for and appropriated into the 
        Fund.
          (2) Subject to subsection (c), any amounts that the 
        Secretary of Defense may transfer to the Fund from 
        amounts appropriated to the Department of Defense for 
        construction of military family housing.
          (3) Proceeds received from the conveyance or lease of 
        real property under section 2872(j) of this title, 
        income from operations conducted under this subchapter, 
        including refunds of deposits, and any return of 
        capital or return on investments entered into under 
        this subchapter.
          (4) Proceeds received by the Secretary concerned from 
        the repayment of investments or profits on investments 
        of the Secretary under section 2874(a) of this title.
  (c) Notification Required for Transfers.--A transfer of 
appropriated amounts to the Fund under subsection (b)(2) may be 
made only after the end of the 30-day period beginning on the 
date the Secretary of Defense submits written notice of, and 
justification for, the transfer to the appropriate committees 
of Congress.
  (d) Use of Funds.--(1) In such total amount as is provided in 
advance in appropriation Acts, the Secretary of Defense may use 
amounts in the Fund for alternative means of financing military 
family housing and ancillary supporting facilities as 
authorized in this subchapter.
  (2) The Secretary may not enter into a contract under this 
subchapter unless the Fund contains sufficient amounts, as of 
the time the contract is entered into, to satisfy the total 
obligations to be incurred by the United States under the 
contract.
  (3) The total value in budget authority of all contracts and 
investments undertaken using the authorities provided in the 
subchapter shall not exceed $1,000,000,000.
  (e) Loans and Loan Guarantees.--Loans and loan guarantees may 
be entered into under this subchapter only to the extent that 
appropriations of budget authority to cover their costs (as 
defined in section 502(5) of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 
1990 (2 U.S.C. 661a(5))) are made in advance, or authority is 
otherwise provided in appropriations Acts.
  (f) Annual Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
the appropriate committees of Congress an annual report 
detailing the expenditures from and deposits into the Fund 
during the preceding year and the utilization and effectiveness 
of the authorities provided by this subchapter. The Secretary 
shall submit the report at the same time that the President 
submits the budget to Congress under section 1105 of title 31.

Sec. 2874. Limited partnerships with private developers of housing

  (a) Limited Partnerships.--In order to meet the housing 
requirements of members of the armed forces, and the dependents 
of such members, at a military installation described in 
section 2872(a) of this title, the Secretary concerned may 
enter into a limited partnership with one or more private 
developers to encourage the construction of housing and 
ancillary supporting facilities within commuting distance of 
the installation. Section 2875(d) of this title shall apply 
with respect to the investments the Secretary concerned may 
make toward development costs under a limited partnership.
  (b) Collateral Incentive Agreements.--The Secretary concerned 
may also enter into collateral incentive agreements with 
private developers who enter into a limited partnership under 
subsection (a) to ensure that, where appropriate--
          (1) a suitable preference will be afforded members of 
        the armed forces in the lease or purchase, as the case 
        may be, of a reasonable number of the housing units 
        covered by the limited partnership; or
          (2) the rental rates or sale prices, as the case may 
        be, for some or all of such units will be affordable 
        for such members.
  (c) Selection of Investment Opportunities.--(1) The Secretary 
concerned shall use publicly advertised, competitively bid or 
competitively negotiated, contracting procedures, as provided 
in chapter 137 of this title, to enter into limited 
partnerships under subsection (a).
  (2) When a decision is made by the Secretary concerned to 
enter into a limited partnership under subsection (a), the 
Secretary shall submit a report in writing to the appropriate 
committees of Congress on that decision. Each such report shall 
include the justification for the limited partnership, the 
terms and conditions of the limited partnership, a description 
of the development costs for projects under the limited 
partnership, and a description of the share of such costs to be 
incurred by the Secretary concerned. The Secretary concerned 
may then enter into the limited partnership only after the end 
of the 21-day period beginning on the date the report is 
received by such committees.
  (d) Housing Investment Boards.--(1) Each Secretary concerned 
shall establish a housing investment board, which shall have 
the duties--
          (A) of advising the Secretary concerned regarding 
        those proposed limited partnerships under subsection 
        (a), if any, that are financially and otherwise sound 
        investments for meeting the objectives of this section;
          (B) of administering amounts in the Account 
        established under section 2873 of this title that are 
        made available to the Secretary concerned to carry out 
        this section; and
          (C) of performing such other tasks as the Secretary 
        concerned determines to be necessary and appropriate to 
        assist the Secretary to carry out the duties of the 
        Secretary under this section.
  (2) A housing investment board shall be composed of seven 
members appointed for a two-year term by the Secretary 
concerned. Among such members, the Secretary concerned may 
appoint two persons from the private sector who have knowledge 
and experience in the financing and the construction of 
housing. The Secretary concerned shall designate one of the 
members as chairperson.
  (3) Members of a housing investment board, other than those 
members regularly employed by the Federal Government, may be 
paid while attending meetings of the board or otherwise serving 
at the request of the Secretary concerned, compensation at a 
rate equal to the daily equivalent of the minimum annual rate 
of basic pay payable for level IV of the Executive Schedule 
under section 5315 of title 5 for each day (including travel 
time) during which the member is engaged in the actual 
performance of duties vested in the board. Members shall 
receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of 
subsistence, in accordance with sections 5702 and 5703 of title 
5.
  (4) The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall 
not apply to the housing investment boards.
  (5) The housing investment boards shall terminate on 
September 30, 2000.

Sec. 2875. Housing finance and acquisition authorities

  (a) Guarantees.--(1) The Secretary concerned may enter into 
contracts that provide for guarantees, insurance, or other 
contingent payments to owners, mortgagors, or assignees of 
housing units and ancillary supporting facilities that are made 
available for use by members of the armed forces.
  (2) Contingencies under which payments may be made under such 
a contract include the following:
          (A) A failure to pay interest or principal on 
        mortgages, generally or as a result of a base closure 
        or realignment, a reduction in force, an extended 
        deployment of assigned forces, or similar 
        contingencies.
          (B) A failure to achieve specified occupancy levels 
        of, or rental income from, housing units covered by a 
        contract.
  (3) Such contracts may be on such terms and conditions as the 
Secretary concerned considers necessary or desirable to induce 
the provision of housing and ancillary supporting facilities, 
whether by acquisition or construction, for use by members of 
the armed forces, and to protect the financial interests of the 
United States.
  (b) Leases.--The Secretary concerned may enter into a 
contract for the lease of housing units to be acquired or 
constructed on or near a military installation. Such a contract 
may provide for the owner of the property to operate and 
maintain the facilities.
  (c) Differential Payments.--In entering into contracts under 
this subchapter, the Secretary concerned may make a 
differential payment in addition to rental payments made by 
individual members.
  (d) Investments.--(1) The Secretary concerned may make 
investments in nongovernmental entities involved in the 
acquisition or construction of housing and ancillary supporting 
facilities on or near a military installation for such 
consideration and upon such terms and conditions as the 
Secretary concerned determines to be consistent with the 
purposes of this subchapter and the public interest.
  (2) Such investments may take the form of limited partnership 
interests, stock, debt instruments, or a combination thereof.
  (3) The investment made by the Secretary concerned in an 
acquisition or construction project under this subsection, 
whether the investment is in the form of cash, land or 
buildings under section 2872(j) of this title, or other form, 
may not exceed 35 percent of the capital costs of the 
acquisition or construction project.
  (e) Collateral Incentive Agreements.--The Secretary concerned 
may also enter into collateral incentive agreements in 
connection with investments made under subsection (d) to ensure 
that a suitable preference will be afforded members of the 
armed forces to lease or purchase, at affordable rates, a 
reasonable number of the housing units covered by the 
investment contract.

Sec. 2876. Expiration of authority

  The authority of the Secretaries concerned to enter into 
contracts and partnerships and to make investments under this 
subchapter shall expire on September 30, 2000.

             [CHAPTER 171--SECURITY AND CONTROL OF SUPPLIES

[Sec.
[2891.  Security and control of supplies: annual report.
[2892.  Miscellaneous procedures.

[Sec. 2891. Security and control of supplies: annual report

  [(a) The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees 
on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a 
report for each of fiscal years 1992, 1993, 1994 on security 
and control of Department of Defense supplies. Each such report 
shall be submitted not later than four months after the end of 
the fiscal year for which the report is submitted.
  [(b) Each report shall include the following:
          [(1) A summary of each of the physical inventory 
        program plans of the Department of Defense, the Defense 
        Logistics Agency, and the military departments for the 
        fiscal year in which the report is submitted.
          [(2) A discussion of the deficiencies, if any, in the 
        security and control of Department of Defense supplies 
        in the fiscal year preceding the year in which the 
        report is submitted and a discussion of the extent to 
        which such deficiencies have been corrected.
          [(3) A discussion of--
                  [(A) research and development projects 
                carried out by the Department of Defense in 
                such preceding fiscal year for the improvement 
                of the inventory and recordkeeping capabilities 
                of the Department;
                  [(B) any proposals for expeditious 
                application of any new technology resulting 
                from such projects; and
                  [(C) the budget needs for research and 
                development for such purpose in the fiscal year 
                in which the report is submitted and any 
                subsequent fiscal year for which the budget 
                needs have been determined.
          [(4) The budget authority made available to the 
        Department of Defense for inventory control functions 
        in the fiscal year in which the report is submitted and 
        in each of the five fiscal years preceding such fiscal 
        year.
          [(5) The budget authority proposed for such purpose 
        in the budget submitted to Congress under section 1105 
        of title 31 for the fiscal year following the fiscal 
        year in which the report is submitted.
          [(6) The budget authority needed for such purpose in 
        each of the five fiscal years following the fiscal year 
        for which such budget is submitted.
          [(7) An evaluation of the effectiveness of supply 
        inventory control in the fiscal year preceding the 
        fiscal year in which the report is submitted, the 
        criteria used by the Secretary to make such evaluation, 
        and the information considered by the Department in 
        making the evaluation, including the value of supplies 
        lost or stolen or for which accountability has 
        otherwise been lost.
          [(8) The aggregate statistics for all incidents of 
        theft, fraud, or breach of security involving 
        Department of Defense supplies that were investigated 
        by military or civilian law enforcement agencies during 
        the fiscal year preceding the fiscal year in which the 
        report is submitted (including incidents involving 
        munitions), a summary description of all such incidents 
        (including the circumstances under which the incidents 
        occurred), and the lessons learned by the Department of 
        Defense from such incidents.
          [(9) A summary description of the cases determined by 
        the Secretary of Defense to be cases of major thefts of 
        Department of Defense supplies during the fiscal year 
        preceding the fiscal year in which the report is 
        submitted, including any case involving a loss in an 
        amount greater than $1,000,000 or a loss of sensitive 
        or classified items.
          [(10) The value, and an analysis, of in-transit 
        losses that occurred during the fiscal year preceding 
        the fiscal year in which the report is submitted.

[Sec. 2892. Miscellaneous procedures

  [(a) The Secretary of Defense shall require an investigation 
of each discrepancy in an accounting for supplies of the 
Department of Defense involving an amount exceeding the amount 
determined under procedures prescribed by the Secretary. The 
Secretary shall prescribe procedures that provide for random 
investigation of physical inventory discrepancies, regardless 
of the value of the property involved in the discrepancy.
  [(b) The Secretary shall, to the extent feasible, require 
that the job junction of supply ordering and the job function 
of supply receiving be performed by different offices and 
individuals.
  [(c) The Secretary shall ensure--
          [(1) that the employees of the Department of Defense 
        and members of the armed forces assigned to manage 
        Department of Defense supplies are skilled in the 
        management of such supplies; and
          [(2) that no employee of the Department of Defense 
        and no member of the armed forces is assigned to 
        perform such function for disciplinary reasons.]

CHAPTER 172--STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 2901. Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program

  (a) * * *
  (b) The purposes of the program are as follows:
          (1) To address environmental matters of concern to 
        the Department of Defense [and the Department of 
        Energy] through support for basic and applied research 
        and development of technologies that can enhance the 
        capabilities of the departments to meet [their] its 
        environmental obligations.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(3) To furnish other governmental organizations and 
        private organizations with data, enhanced data 
        collection capabilities, and enhanced analytical 
        capabilities for use by such organizations in the 
        conduct of environmental research, including research 
        concerning global environmental change.
          [(4)] (3) To identify technologies developed by the 
        private sector that are useful for Department of 
        Defense and Department of Energy defense activities 
        concerning environmental restoration, hazardous and 
        solid waste minimization and prevention, hazardous 
        material substitution, and provide for the use of such 
        technologies in the conduct of such activities.

Sec. 2902. Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program 
                    Council

  (a) * * *
  (b) The Council is composed of [thirteen] 12 members as 
follows:
          (1) The Director of Defense Research and Engineering.
          (2) The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
          [(3) The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force 
        responsible for matters relating to space.
          [(4)] (3) The Deputy Under Secretary of Defense 
        responsible for environmental security.
          [(5)] (4) The Assistant Secretary of Energy for 
        Defense programs.
          [(6)] (5) The Assistant Secretary of Energy 
        responsible for environmental restoration and waste 
        management.
          [(7)] (6) The Director of the Department of Energy 
        Office of Energy Research.
          [(8)] (7) The Administrator of the Environmental 
        Protection Agency.
          [(9)] (8) One representative from each of the Army, 
        Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard[, who shall be 
        nonvoting members].
          [(10)] (9) The Executive Director of the Council 
        (appointed pursuant to section 2903 of this title), who 
        shall be a nonvoting member.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) The Council shall have the following responsibilities:
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(3) To prepare an annual five-year strategic 
        environmental research and development plan that shall 
        cover the fiscal year in which the plan is prepared and 
        the four fiscal years following such fiscal year.
          [(4)] (3) To promote the maximum exchange of 
        information, and to minimize duplication, regarding 
        environmentally related research, development, and 
        demonstration activities through close coordination 
        with the military departments and Defense Agencies, the 
        Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection 
        Agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
        Administration, the National Aeronautics and Space 
        Administration, other departments and agencies of the 
        Federal Government or any State and local governments, 
        including the [Federal Coordinating Council on Science, 
        Engineering, and Technology] National Science and 
        Technology Council, and other organizations engaged in 
        such activities.
          [(5)] (4) To ensure that research and development 
        activities under the Strategic Environmental Research 
        and Development Program do not duplicate other ongoing 
        activities sponsored by the Department of Defense, the 
        Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection 
        Agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
        Administration, the National Aeronautics and Space 
        Administration, or any other department or agency of 
        the Federal Government.
          [(6)] (5) To ensure that the research and development 
        programs identified for support pursuant to policies 
        and procedures prescribed by the council utilize, to 
        the maximum extent possible, the talents, skills, and 
        abilities residing at the Federal laboratories, 
        including the Department of Energy multiprogram and 
        defense laboratories, the Department of Defense 
        laboratories, and Federal contract research centers. To 
        utilize the research capabilities of institutions of 
        higher education and private industry to the extent 
        practicable.
  (e) In carrying out subsection (d)(1), the Council shall 
prescribe policies and procedures that--
          [(1) provide for appropriate access by Federal 
        Government personnel, State and local government 
        personnel, college and university personnel, industry 
        personnel, and the general public to data under the 
        control of, or otherwise available to, the Department 
        of Defense that is relevant to environmental matters 
        by--
                  [(A) identifying the sources of such data;
                  [(B) publicizing the availability and sources 
                of such data by appropriately-targeted 
                dissemination of information to such personnel 
                and the general public, and by other means; and
                  [(C) providing for review of classified data 
                relevant to environmental matters with a view 
                to declassifying or preparing unclassified 
                summaries of such data;
          [(2) provide governmental and nongovernmental 
        entities with analytic assistance, consistent with 
        national defense missions, including access to military 
        platforms for sensor deployment and access to computer 
        capabilities, in order to facilitate environmental 
        research;
          [(3) provide for the identification of energy 
        technologies developed for national defense purposes 
        (including electricity generation systems, energy 
        storage systems, alternative fuels, biomass energy 
        technology, and applied materials technology) that 
        might have environmentally sound, energy efficient 
        applications for other programs of the Department of 
        Defense and the Department of Energy national security 
        programs, particularly technologies that have the 
        potential for industrial, commercial, and other 
        governmental applications, and to support programs of 
        research in and development of such applications;
          [(4)] (1) provide for the identification and support 
        of programs of basic and applied research, development, 
        and demonstration in technologies useful--
                  (A) to facilitate environmental compliance, 
                remediation, and restoration activities of the 
                Department of Defense and at Department of 
                Energy defense facilities;
                  (B) to minimize waste generation, including 
                reduction at the source, by such departments; 
                or
                  (C) to substitute use of nonhazardous, 
                nontoxic, nonpolluting, and other 
                environmentally sound materials and substances 
                for use of hazardous, toxic, and polluting 
                materials and substances by such departments;
          [(5)] (2) provide for the identification and support 
        of research, development, and application of other 
        technologies developed for national defense purposes 
        which not only are directly useful for programs, 
        projects, and activities of such departments, but also 
        have useful applications for solutions to [such 
        national and international environmental problems as 
        climate change and ozone depletion] national and 
        international environmental problems;
          [(6)] (3) provide for the Secretary of Defense, the 
        Secretary of Energy, and the Administrator of the 
        Environmental Protection Agency, in cooperation with 
        other Federal and State agencies, as appropriate, to 
        conduct joint research, development, and demonstration 
        projects relating to innovative technologies, 
        management practices, and other approaches for purposes 
        of--
                  (A) preventing pollution from all sources;
                  (B) minimizing hazardous and solid waste, 
                including recycling; and
                  (C) treating hazardous and solid waste, 
                including the use of thermal, chemical, and 
                biological treatment technologies;
          [(7)] (4) encourage transfer of technologies referred 
        to in [clauses (2) through (6)] paragraphs (1) through 
        (3) to the private sector under the Stevenson-Wydler 
        Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3701 et 
        seq.) and other applicable laws;
          [(8)] (5) provide for the identification of, and 
        planning for the demonstration and use of, existing 
        environmentally sound, energy-efficient technologies 
        developed by the private sector that could be used 
        directly by the Department of Defense;
          [(9)] (6) provide for the identification of military 
        specifications that prevent or limit the use of 
        environmentally beneficial technologies, materials, and 
        substances in the performance of Department of Defense 
        contracts and recommend changes to such specifications; 
        and
          [(10)] (7) to ensure that the research and 
        development programs identified for support pursuant to 
        the policies and procedures prescribed by the Council 
        are closely coordinated with, and do not duplicate, 
        ongoing activities sponsored by the Department of 
        Defense, the Department of Energy, the Environmental 
        Protection Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space 
        Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
        Administration, or other Federal agencies.
  [(f)(1) To assist the Council in preparing the five-year 
strategic environmental research and development plan under 
subsection (d)(3), the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary 
of Energy may each submit to the Council a proposal for 
conducting environmental research under this chapter. The 
Secretary of each department shall ensure that the 
environmental research proposal of the department includes--
          [(A) short- and long-term, cooperative, basic, and 
        applied research systems engineering and development 
        programs in environmental research;
          [(B) short- and long-term, basic research in 
        environmental restoration at the respective 
        laboratories of each department; and
          [(C) participation by industry and institutions of 
        higher education.
  [(2) The Secretary of each department shall ensure that, in 
the development of its environmental research proposal, 
consideration is given to--
          [(A) the need for increased research in basic 
        science, including basic materials, physics, molecular 
        structures, chemistry, and biology related to 
        environmental research at that department's defense 
        operations, production, research, and maintenance 
        facilities; and
          [(B) ways to identify and conduct research and 
        development on technologies for environmental 
        restoration, remediation and waste cleanup activities, 
        waste minimization, and hazardous and toxic materials 
        substitution potential in defense production and 
        maintenance activities.
  [(3) The Secretary of each department shall transmit the 
proposal to the Council not later than July 1 of each year.
  [(g)] (f) The Council shall be subject to the authority, 
direction, and control of the Secretary of Defense in 
prescribing policies and procedures under subsection (d)(1).
  [(h)(1) Not later than February 1 of each year, the Council 
shall submit to the Secretary of Defense an annual report on 
the annual five-year strategic environmental research and 
development plan prepared pursuant to subsection (d)(3).
  [(2) The report shall contain the following:
          [(A) A description of the actions to be taken during 
        the five-year period covered by the plan in order to 
        prevent duplication of research and development 
        activities referred to in the policies and procedures 
        prescribed pursuant to subsection (d)(1).
          [(B) A description of the involvement with Federal 
        interagency coordinating entities such as the Federal 
        Coordinating Council on Science, Engineering, and 
        Technology.
          [(C) A description of each project selected or 
        recommended by the Council for support and funding, 
        including the duration of, and the total estimated or 
        (if known) actual cost of--
                  [(i) each such project supported during the 
                fiscal year in which the plan is submitted and 
                the preceding fiscal year; and
                  [(ii) each such project proposed for funding 
                during the fiscal year in which the annual 
                report is submitted and the following four 
                fiscal years.
          [(D) The amounts requested, in the budget submitted 
        to Congress pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31 for 
        the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the 
        annual report is submitted, for the programs, projects, 
        and activities of the Strategic Environmental Research 
        and Development Program and the estimated expenditures 
        under such programs, projects, and activities during 
        such following fiscal year.
          [(E) The amount requested in such budget for each 
        Federal laboratory, including each Department of 
        Defense and Department of Energy laboratory.
          [(F) The amount made available, for the fiscal year 
        in which the annual report is submitted, to each 
        Federal laboratory, including each Department of 
        Defense and Department of Energy laboratory.
          [(G) A description of any changes in military 
        specifications recommended by the Council, actions to 
        be taken to effectuate any such recommended changes on 
        an expedited basis, and the projected date for each 
        such change.
          [(H) A description of all contracts, agreements, or 
        other documents for cooperative research and 
        development activities entered into pursuant to the 
        Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 
        U.S.C. 3701 et seq.) during the fiscal year preceding 
        the fiscal year in which the annual report is 
        submitted.
          [(I) Plans for transferring technology and 
        information to other governmental agencies and to 
        nongovernmental organizations involved in environmental 
        research and related matters.
          [(J) A description of plans to increase access to 
        data described in subsection (e)(1).
          [(K) Such additional recommendations or proposals, 
        including proposals for legislation, relating to the 
        Strategic Environmental Research and Development 
        Program as the Council considers appropriate.
  [(3) The Council shall make a draft of the five-year 
strategic environmental research and development plan covered 
by each report available for public comment for a period of at 
least 30 days.
  [(4) Not later than March 15 of each year the Secretary of 
Defense and the Secretary of Energy shall transmit the annual 
report to the Congress. The Secretary of Defense and the 
Secretary of Energy may submit such comments on the annual 
report as each Secretary considers appropriate.]

Sec. 2903. Executive Director

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) The Executive Director may enter into contracts [or] 
using competitive procedures. The Executive Director may enter 
into other agreements in accordance with applicable [law, 
except that] law. In either case, the Executive Director shall 
first obtain the approval of the Council for any contract or 
agreement in an amount equal to or in excess of $500,000 or 
such lesser amount as the Council may prescribe.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2904. Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program 
                    Scientific Advisory Board

  (a) The Secretary of Defense [and the Secretary of Energy], 
in consultation with the Secretary of Energy and the 
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, shall 
jointly appoint a Strategic Environmental Research and 
Development Program Scientific Advisory Board (hereafter in 
this section referred to as the ``Advisory Board'') consisting 
of not less than six and not more than 14 members.
  (b)(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(3) The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Energy, in 
consultation with the Administrator of the Environmental 
Protection Agency, shall request--
          [(A) that the head of the National Academy of 
        Sciences, in consultation with the head of the National 
        Academy of Engineering and the head of the Institutes 
        of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, 
        nominate persons for appointment to the Advisory Board;
          [(B) that the Council on Environmental Quality 
        nominate for appointment to the Advisory Board at least 
        one person who is a representative of environmental 
        public interest groups; and
          [(C) that the National Association of Governors 
        nominate for appointment to the Advisory Board at least 
        one person who is representative of the interests of 
        State governments.
  [(4)] (3) Members of the Advisory Board shall be appointed 
for terms of [three] not less than two years and not more than 
six years.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(g) The Advisory Board shall assist and advise the Council 
in identifying the environmental data and analytical assistance 
activities that should be covered by the policies and 
procedures prescribed pursuant to section 2902(d)(1) of this 
title.
  [(h) Not later than March 15 of each year, the Advisory Board 
shall submit to the Congress an annual report setting forth its 
actions during the year preceding the year in which the report 
is submitted and any recommendations, including recommendations 
on projects, programs, and information exchange and 
recommendations for legislation, that the Advisory Board 
considers appropriate regarding the Strategic Environmental 
Research and Development Program.
  [(i)] (g) Each member of the Advisory Board shall be required 
to file a financial disclosure report under title I of the 
Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.).

Subtitle B--Army

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART II--PERSONNEL

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                         CHAPTER 331--STRENGTH

Sec.
3201.  Officers on active duty: minimum strength based on requirements.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 3201. Officers on active duty: minimum strength based on 
                    requirements

  (a) The Secretary of the Army shall ensure that (beginning 
with fiscal year 1999) the strength at the end of each fiscal 
year of officers on active duty is sufficient to enable the 
Army to meet at least 90 percent of the programmed manpower 
structure for the active component of the Army.
  (b) The number of officers on active duty shall be counted 
for purposes of this section in the same manner as applies 
under section 115(a)(1) of this title.
  (c) In this section:
          (1) The term ``programmed manpower structure'' means 
        the aggregation of billets describing the full manpower 
        requirements for units and organizations in the 
        programmed force structure.
          (2) The term ``programmed force structure'' means the 
        set of units and organizations that exist in the 
        current year and that is planned to exist in each 
        future year under the then-current Future-Years Defense 
        Program.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 337--APPOINTMENTS AS RESERVE OFFICERS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 3359. Commissioned officers: original appointment; determination 
                    of grade

  (a) * * *
  (b) In the case of a person who is originally appointed as a 
reserve officer in the Medical Corps of the Army during the 
period beginning on October 1, 1983, and ending on September 
30, [1995] 1996, and who is credited with service under section 
3353 of this title, the commissioned grade in which that person 
is appointed (based on the service credited under that section) 
shall be determined as follows:
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 3380. Commissioned officers: promotion of reserve commissioned 
                    officers on active duty and not on the active duty 
                    list

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) The authority to promote officers under this section 
shall expire on September 30, [1995] 1996.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 367--RETIREMENT FOR LENGTH OF SERVICE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 3925. Computation of years of service: voluntary retirement; 
                    enlisted members

  (a) * * *
  (b) Time required to be made up under section 972(a) of this 
title may not be counted in determining years of service under 
subsection (a).

Sec. 3926. Computation of years of service: voluntary retirement; 
                    regular and reserve commissioned officers

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) Section 972(b) of this title excludes from computation of 
an officer's years of service for purposes of this section any 
time identified with respect to that officer under that 
section.

PART III--TRAINING

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                    CHAPTER 401--TRAINING GENERALLY

Sec.
4301.  Members of Army: detail as students, observers, and investigators 
          at educational institutions, industrial plants, and hospitals.
4302.  Enlisted members of Army: schools.
4303.  Army Ranger Training: instructor staffing; safety.
     * * * * * * *
[4307.  Director of civilian marksmanship: detail.
[4308.  Promotion of civilian marksmanship: authority of the Secretary 
          of the Army.]
4307.  Promotion of rifle practice and firearms safety: administration.
4308.  Promotion of rifle practice and firearms safety: activities.
     * * * * * * *
[4310.  Rifle instruction: detail of members of Army.]
4310.  Rifle instruction and competitions: participation of members.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 4303. Army Ranger Training: instructor staffing; safety

  (a) Levels of Personnel Assigned To Be Not Less Than Number 
Required.--(1) The Secretary of the Army shall ensure that at 
all times the number of officers, and the number of enlisted 
members, permanently assigned to the Army Ranger Training 
Brigade (or other organizational element of the Army primarily 
responsible for ranger student training) are not less than the 
required manning spaces for that brigade.
  (2) If at any time the number of officers, or the number of 
enlisted members, permanently assigned to the Ranger Training 
Brigade is less than the required manning spaces for officers, 
or for enlisted members, as the case may be, for the Brigade, 
the Secretary of the Army shall submit to Congress a notice of 
such shortage, together with a statement of the reasons for the 
shortage and of the expected date when the number assigned will 
be not less that the required manning spaces, in accordance 
with paragraph (1).
  (b) Required Manning Spaces.--(1) The Secretary of the Army 
may not (except as provided in paragraph (3)) reduce the 
required manning spaces for the Ranger Training Brigade below 
the baseline required manning spaces.
  (2) In this section:
          (A) The term ``required manning spaces'' means the 
        number of personnel spaces for officers, and the number 
        of personnel spaces for enlisted members, that are 
        designated in Army authorization documents as the 
        number required to accomplish the missions of a 
        particular unit or organization.
          (B) The term ``baseline required manning spaces'' 
        means the required manning spaces for the Army Ranger 
        Training Brigade as of February 10, 1995, of 94 
        officers and 658 enlisted members.
  (3) The Secretary may (subject to paragraph (4)) make 
reductions in required manning spaces for the Army Ranger 
Training Brigade from the baseline required manning spaces if--
          (A) reductions in ranger student training loads 
        result in decreased instructor workload; and
          (B) one or more of the three major phases of the 
        Ranger Course (conducted at Fort Benning, Georgia, at 
        the Mountain Ranger Camp, and in Florida) is 
        eliminated.
  (4) Before making a reduction authorized by paragraph (3) in 
required manning spaces, the Secretary of the Army shall submit 
to Congress a report on the proposed reduction. Such a 
reduction may not be made unless the report includes a 
certification by the Secretary that the reduction will not 
reduce the ability of the commander of the Ranger Training 
Brigade to conduct training safely. The report shall include a 
description of the reduction (including specification of the 
number of officers and the number of enlisted members that will 
be considered to be required to carry out the missions of the 
Army Ranger Training Brigade after the reduction) and shall set 
forth the rationale of the Secretary for the reduction.
  (c) Training Safety Cells.--(1) The Secretary of the Army 
shall establish and maintain an organizational entity known as 
a ``safety cell'' as part of the organizational elements of the 
Army responsible for conducting each of the three major phases 
of the Ranger Course. The safety cell in each different 
geographic area of Ranger Course training shall be comprised of 
personnel who have sufficient continuity and experience in that 
geographic area of such training to be knowledgeable of the 
local conditions year-round, including conditions of terrain, 
weather, water, and climate and other conditions and the 
potential effect on those conditions on Ranger student training 
and safety.
  (2) Members of each safety cell shall be assigned in 
sufficient numbers to serve as advisers to the officers in 
charge of the major phase of Ranger training and shall assist 
those officers in making informed daily ``go'' and ``no-go'' 
decisions regarding training in light of all relevant 
conditions, including conditions of terrain, weather, water, 
and climate and other conditions.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 4307. Director of civilian marksmanship: detail

  [The President may detail a commissioned officer of the Army 
or of the Marine Corps as director of civilian marksmanship, to 
serve under the direction of the Secretary of the Army.

[Sec. 4308. Promotion of civilian marksmanship: authority of the 
                    Secretary of the Army

  [(a) Program Required.--The Secretary of the Army, under 
regulations approved by him upon the recommendation of the 
National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice, shall 
provide for--
          [(1) the operation and maintenance of indoor and 
        outdoor rifle ranges and their accessories and 
        appliances;
          [(2) the instruction of citizens of the United States 
        in marksmanship, and the employment of necessary 
        instructors for that purpose;
          [(3) the promotion of practice in the use of rifled 
        arms, the maintenance and management of matches or 
        competitions in the use of those arms, and the issue, 
        without cost, of the arms, ammunition (including 
        caliber .22 and caliber .30 ammunition), targets, and 
        other supplies and appliances necessary for those 
        purposes, to gun clubs under the direction of the 
        National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice that 
        provide training in the use of rifled arms to youth, 
        the Boy Scouts of America, 4-H Clubs, Future Farmers of 
        America, and other youth-oriented organizations for 
        training and competition;
          [(4) the award to competitors of trophies, prizes, 
        badges, and other insignia;
          [(5) the loan or sale at fair market value of caliber 
        .30 rifles, caliber .22 rifles, and air rifles, and the 
        sale of ammunition at fair market value, to gun clubs 
        that--
                  [(A) are under the direction of the National 
                Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice; and
                  [(B) provide training in the use of rifled 
                arms;
          [(6) the sale at fair market value of arms (including 
        surplus M-1 Garand rifles), ammunition, targets, and 
        other supplies and appliances necessary for target 
        practice to citizens of the United States over 18 years 
        of age who are members of a gun club under the 
        direction of the National Board for the Promotion of 
        Rifle Practice;
          [(7) the maintenance of the National Board for the 
        Promotion of Rifle Practice, including provision for 
        its necessary expenses and those of its members and for 
        the Board's expenses incidental to the conduct of the 
        Board's annual meetings;
          [(8) the procurement of necessary supplies, 
        appliances, trophies, prizes, badges, and other 
        insignia, clerical and other services, and labor; and
          [(9) the transportation of employees, instructors, 
        and civilians to give or to receive instruction or to 
        assist or engage in practice in the use of rifled arms, 
        and the transportation and subsistence, or an allowance 
        instead of subsistence, of members of teams authorized 
        by the Secretary to participate in matches or 
        competitions in the use of rifled arms.
  [(b) Additional Authority.--The Secretary may--
          [(1) provide personnel services (in addition to pay 
        and nontravel-related allowances for members of the 
        armed forces) in carrying out the Civilian Marksmanship 
        Program; and
          [(2) impose reasonable fees for persons and gun clubs 
        participating in any program conducted by the Secretary 
        for the promotion of marksmanship among civilians.
  [(c) Amounts Collected.--Amounts collected by the Secretary 
under the Civilian Marksmanship Program, including the proceeds 
from the sale of arms, ammunition, targets, and other supplies 
and appliances under subsection (a), shall be credited to the 
appropriation available for the support of the Civilian 
Marksmanship Program and shall be available to carry out such 
program. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, such 
amounts shall remain available until expended.
  [(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to 
be appropriated for each fiscal year such sums as may be 
necessary to pay the personnel costs and other expenses of the 
Civilian Marksmanship Program in such fiscal year to the extent 
that the amounts available out of the revenues collected under 
the program are insufficient to defray such costs and expenses.
  [(e) Definition.--In this section, the term ``Civilian 
Marksmanship Program'' means the program carried out by the 
Secretary of the Army under this section and sections 4310 
through 4312 of this title and includes the National Matches 
and small-arms firing schools referred to in section 4312 of 
this title.]

Sec. 4307. Promotion of rifle practice and firearms safety: 
                    administration

  (a) Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality.--On and after 
October 1, 1995, the Civilian Marksmanship Program shall be 
operated as a nonappropriated fund instrumentality of the 
United States within the Department of Defense for the benefit 
of members of the armed forces and for the promotion of rifle 
practice and firearms safety among civilians.
  (b) National Board.--(1) The Civilian Marksmanship Program 
shall be under the general supervision of a National Board for 
the Promotion of Rifle Practice and Firearms Safety, which 
shall replace the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle 
Practice. The National Board shall consist of nine members who 
are appointed by the Secretary of the Army.
  (2) The term of office of a member of the National Board 
shall be two years. However, in the case of the initial 
National Board, the Secretary shall appoint four members who 
will have a one-year term.
  (3) Members of the National Board shall serve without 
compensation, except that members shall be allowed travel 
expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates 
authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of 
chapter 57 of title 5, while away from their homes or regular 
places of business in the performance of services for the 
National Board.
  (c) Director and Staff.--The National Board shall appoint a 
person to serve as director of the Civilian Marksmanship 
Program. The compensation and benefits of the director and all 
other civilian employees of the Department of Defense used by 
the Civilian Marksmanship Program shall be paid from 
nonappropriated funds available to the Civilian Marksmanship 
Program.
  (d) Funding.--(1) Except as provided in section 4310 of this 
title, funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the 
Department of Defense in appropriation Acts may not be 
obligated or expended to benefit the Civilian Marksmanship 
Program or activities conducted by the Civilian Marksmanship 
Program.
  (2) The National Board and the director may solicit, accept, 
hold, use, and dispose of, in furtherance of the activities of 
the Civilian Marksmanship Program, donations of money, 
property, and services received by gift, devise, bequest, or 
otherwise. Donations may be accepted from munitions and 
firearms manufacturers notwithstanding any legal restrictions 
otherwise arising from their procurement relationships with the 
United States.
  (3) Amounts collected under the Civilian Marksmanship 
Program, including the proceeds from the sale of arms, 
ammunition, targets, and other supplies and appliances under 
section 4308 of this title, shall be credited to the Civilian 
Marksmanship Program and shall be available to carry out the 
Civilian Marksmanship Program. Amounts collected by, and 
available to, the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle 
Practice before the date of the enactment of this section from 
rifle sales programs and from fees in connection with 
competitions sponsored by that Board shall be transferred to 
the National Board to be available to carry out the Civilian 
Marksmanship Program.
  (4) Funds held on behalf of the Civilian Marksmanship Program 
shall not be construed to be Government or public funds or 
appropriated funds and shall not be available to support other 
nonappropriated fund instrumentalities of the Department of 
Defense. Funds held on behalf of other nonappropriated fund 
instrumentalities of the Department of Defense shall not be 
available to support the Civilian Marksmanship Program. 
Expenditures on behalf of the Civilian Marksmanship Program, 
including compensation and benefits for civilian employees, may 
not exceed $5,000,000 during any fiscal year. The approval of 
the National Board shall be required for any expenditure in 
excess of $50,000. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
funds held on behalf of the Civilian Marksmanship Program shall 
remain available until expended.
  (e) Definitions.--In this section and sections 4308 through 
4313 of this title:
          (1) The term ``Civilian Marksmanship Program'' means 
        the rifle practice and firearms safety program carried 
        out by the National Board under section 4308 and 
        includes the National Matches and small-arms firing 
        schools referred to in section 4312 of this title.
          (2) The term ``National Board'' means the National 
        Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice and Firearms 
        Safety.

Sec. 4308. Promotion of rifle practice and firearms safety: activities

  (a) Instruction, Safety, and Competition Programs.--(1) The 
Civilian Marksmanship Program shall provide for--
          (A) the operation and maintenance of indoor and 
        outdoor rifle ranges and their accessories and 
        appliances;
          (B) the instruction of citizens of the United States 
        in marksmanship, and the employment of necessary 
        instructors for that purpose;
          (C) the promotion of practice in the use of rifled 
        arms and the maintenance and management of matches or 
        competitions in the use of those arms; and
          (D) the award to competitors of trophies, prizes, 
        badges, and other insignia.
  (2) In carrying out this subsection, the Civilian 
Marksmanship Program shall give priority to activities that 
benefit firearms safety training and competition for youth and 
reach as many youth participants as possible.
  (3) Before a person may participate in any activity sponsored 
or supported by the Civilian Marksmanship Program under this 
subsection, the person shall be required to certify that the 
person has not violated any Federal or State firearms laws.
  (b) Sale and Issuance of Arms and Ammunition.--(1) The 
Civilian Marksmanship Program may issue, without cost, the 
arms, ammunition (including caliber .22 and caliber .30 
ammunition), targets, and other supplies and appliances 
necessary for activities conducted under subsection (a). 
Issuance shall be made only to gun clubs under the direction of 
the National Board that provide training in the use of rifled 
arms to youth, the Boy Scouts of America, 4-H Clubs, Future 
Farmers of America, and other youth-oriented organizations for 
training and competition.
  (2) The Civilian Marksmanship Program may sell at fair market 
value caliber .30 rifles, caliber .22 rifles, and air rifles, 
and ammunition for such rifles, to gun clubs that are under the 
direction of the National Board and provide training in the use 
of rifled arms. In lieu of sales, the Civilian Marksmanship 
Program may loan such rifles to such gun clubs.
  (3) The Civilian Marksmanship Program may sell at fair market 
value small arms, ammunition, targets, and other supplies and 
appliances necessary for target practice to citizens of the 
United States over 18 years of age who are members of a gun 
club under the direction of the National Board.
  (4) Before conveying any weapon or ammunition to a person, 
whether by sale or lease, the National Board shall provide for 
a criminal records check of the person with appropriate Federal 
and State law enforcement agencies.
  (c) Other Authorities.--The National Board shall provide 
for--
          (1) the procurement of necessary supplies, 
        appliances, trophies, prizes, badges, and other 
        insignia, clerical and other services, and labor to 
        carry out the Civilian Marksmanship Program; and
          (2) the transportation of employees, instructors, and 
        civilians to give or to receive instruction or to 
        assist or engage in practice in the use of rifled arms, 
        and the transportation and subsistence, or an allowance 
        instead of subsistence, of members of teams authorized 
        by the National Board to participate in matches or 
        competitions in the use of rifled arms.
  (d) Fees.--The National Board may impose reasonable fees for 
persons and gun clubs participating in any program or 
competition conducted under the Civilian Marksmanship Program 
for the promotion of rifle practice and firearms safety among 
civilians.
  (e) Receipt of Excess Arms and Ammunition.--(1) The Secretary 
of the Army shall reserve for the Civilian Marksmanship Program 
all remaining M-1 Garand rifles, and ammunition for such 
rifles, still held by the Army. After the date of the enactment 
of this section, the Secretary of the Army shall cease 
demilitarization of remaining M-1 Garand rifles in the Army 
inventory unless such rifles are determined to be irreparable 
by the Defense Logistics Agency.
  (2) Transfers under this subsection shall be made without 
cost to the Civilian Marksmanship Program, except that the 
National Board shall assume the costs of transportation for the 
transferred small arms and ammunition.
  (f) Participation Conditions.--(1) All participants in the 
Civilian Marksmanship Program and activities sponsored or 
supported by the National Board shall be required, as a 
condition of participation, to sign affidavits stating that--
          (A) they have never been convicted of a firearms 
        violation under State or Federal law; and
          (B) they are not members of any organization which 
        advocates the violent overthrow of the United States 
        Government.
  (2) Any person found to have violated this subsection shall 
be ineligible to participate in the Civilian Marksmanship 
Program and future activities sponsored or supported by the 
National Board.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 4310. Rifle instruction: detail of members of Army

  [(a) The President may detail regular or reserve officers and 
noncommissioned officers of the Army to duty as instructors at 
rifle ranges for training civilians in the use of military 
arms.
  [(b) The Secretary of the Army may detail enlisted members of 
the Army as temporary instructors in the use of the rifle to 
organized rifle clubs requesting that instruction.]

Sec. 4310. Rifle instruction and competitions: participation of members

  (a) Participation Authorized.--The commander of a major 
command of the armed forces may detail regular or reserve 
officers and noncommissioned officers under the authority of 
the commander to duty as instructors at rifle ranges for 
training civilians in the safe use of military arms. The 
commander of a major command may detail enlisted members under 
the authority of the commander as temporary instructors in the 
safe use of the rifle to organized rifle clubs requesting that 
instruction. The commander of a major command may detail 
members under the authority of the commander to provide other 
logistical and administrative support for competitions and 
other activities conducted by the Civilian Marksmanship 
Program. Members of a reserve component may be detailed only if 
the service to be provided meets a legitimate training need of 
the members involved.
  (b) Costs of Participation.--The commander of a major command 
of the armed forces may pay the personnel costs and travel and 
per diem expenses of members of an active or reserve component 
of the armed forces who participate in a competition sponsored 
by the Civilian Marksmanship Program or who provide instruction 
or other services in support of the Civilian Marksmanship 
Program.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 4312. National rifle and pistol matches: small-arms firing school

  (a) An annual competition called the ``National Matches'' and 
consisting of rifle and pistol matches for a national trophy, 
medals, and other prizes shall be held [as prescribed by the 
Secretary of the Army] as part of the Civilian Marksmanship 
Program.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 4313. National Matches and small-arms school: expenses

  (a) Junior Competitors.--(1) Junior competitors at National 
Matches, small-arms firing schools, and competitions in 
connection with National Matches and special clinics under 
section 4312 of this title may be paid a subsistence allowance 
in such amount as the [Secretary of the Army] National Board 
shall prescribe.
  (2) A junior competitor referred to in paragraph (1) may be 
paid a travel allowance, in such amount as the [Secretary of 
the Army] National Board shall prescribe, instead of travel 
expenses and subsistence while traveling. The travel allowance 
for the return trip may be paid in advance.
  (3) For the purposes of this subsection, a junior competitor 
is a competitor who is under 18 years of age or is a member of 
a gun club organized for the students of a college or 
university.
  (b) Reserve Component Personnel.--[Appropriated funds 
available for the Civilian Marksmanship Program (as defined in 
section 4308(e) of this title) may] Nonappropriated funds 
available to the Civilian Marksmanship Program shall be used to 
pay the personnel costs and travel and per diem expenses of a 
member of a reserve component for any active duty performed by 
the member in a fiscal year in support of the program after the 
end of that member's scheduled period of annual training for 
that fiscal year.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


              CHAPTER 403--UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY

Sec.
4331.  Establishment; Superintendent; faculty.
     * * * * * * *
[4357.  Athletics program: athletic director; nonappropriated fund 
          account.]
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 4342. Cadets: appointment; numbers, territorial distribution

  (a) The authorized strength of the Corps of Cadets of the 
Academy is as follows:
          (1) Each Senator, Representative, and Delegate in 
        Congress, including the Resident Commissioner from 
        Puerto Rico, is entitled to nominate 10 persons for 
        each vacancy that is available to him under this 
        section. Nominees may be submitted without ranking or 
        with a principal candidate and 9 ranked or unranked 
        alternates. Qualified nominees not selected for 
        appointment under this subsection shall be considered 
        qualified alternates for the purposes of selection 
        under other provisions of this chapter.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (10) One cadet from the Commonwealth of the Northern 
        Marianas Islands, nominated by the resident 
        representative from the commonwealth.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 4355. Board of Visitors

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (h) While performing his duties, each member of the Board and 
each adviser [is entitled to not more than $5 a day and] shall 
be reimbursed under Government travel regulations for his 
travel expenses.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 4357. Athletics program: athletic director; nonappropriated fund 
                    account

  [(a) The position of athletic director of the Academy shall 
be a position in the civil service (as defined in section 
2101(1) of title 5). However, a member of the armed forces may 
fill that position as an active duty assignment.
  [(b) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the 
Army, the Superintendent of the Academy shall administer a 
nonappropriated fund account for the athletics program of the 
Academy. The Superintendent shall credit to that account all 
revenue received from the conduct of the athletics program of 
the Academy and all contributions received for that program.]

PART IV--SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 439--SALE OF SERVICEABLE MATERIAL

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 4621. Quartermaster supplies: members of armed forces; veterans; 
                    executive or military departments and employees; 
                    prices

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) Whenever, under regulations to be prescribed by the 
Secretary, subsistence supplies are furnished to any branch of 
the Army or sold to employees of any executive department other 
than the Department of Defense, payment shall be made in cash 
or by commercial credit.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle C--Navy and Marine Corps

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART I--ORGANIZATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                CHAPTER 506--HEADQUARTERS, MARINE CORPS

Sec.
5041.  Headquarters, Marine Corps: function; composition.
     * * * * * * *
[5044.  Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps.
[5045.  Chief of Staff; Deputy and Assistant Chiefs of Staff.]
5044.  Vice Commandant of the Marine Corps.
5045.  Director of the Marine Corps Staff; Deputy and Assistant 
          Commandants.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 5041. Headquarters, Marine Corps: function; composition

  (a) * * *
  (b)  The  Headquarters,  Marine  Corps,  is  composed  of  
the following:
          (1) The Commandant of the Marine Corps.
          [(2) The Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps.
          [(3) The Chief of Staff of the Marine Corps.
          [(4) The Deputy Chiefs of Staff.
          [(5) The Assistant Chiefs of Staff.]
          (2) The Vice Commandant of the Marine Corps.
          (3) The Director of the Marine Corps Staff.
          (4) The Deputy Commandants of the Marine Corps.
          (5) The Assistant Commandants of the Marine Corps.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 5044. Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps]

Sec. 5044. Vice Commandant of the Marine Corps

  (a) There is an [Assistant Commandant] Vice Commandant of the 
Marine Corps, appointed by the President, by and with the 
advice and consent of the Senate, from officers on the active-
duty list of the Marine Corps not restricted in the performance 
of duty.
  (b) The [Assistant Commandant] Vice Commandant of the Marine 
Corps, while so serving, has the grade of general without 
vacating his permanent grade.
  (c) The [Assistant Commandant] Vice Commandant has such 
authority and duties with respect to the Marine Corps as the 
Commandant, with the approval of the Secretary of the Navy, may 
delegate to or prescribe for him. Orders issued by the 
[Assistant Commandant] Vice Commandant in performing such 
duties have the same effect as those issued by the Commandant.
  (d) When there is a vacancy in the office of Commandant of 
the Marine Corps, or during the absence or disability of the 
Commandant--
          (1) the [Assistant Commandant] Vice Commandant of the 
        Marine Corps shall perform the duties of the Commandant 
        until a successor is appointed or the absence or 
        disability ceases; or
          (2) if there is a vacancy in the office of the 
        [Assistant Commandant] Vice Commandant of the Marine 
        Corps or the [Assistant Commandant] Vice Commandant is 
        absent or disabled, unless the President directs 
        otherwise, the most senior officer of the Marine Corps 
        in the Headquarters, Marine Corps, who is not absent or 
        disabled and who is not restricted in performance of 
        duty shall perform the duties of the Commandant until a 
        successor to the Commandant or the [Assistant 
        Commandant] Vice Commandant is appointed or until the 
        absence or disability of the Commandant or [Assistant 
        Commandant] Vice Commandant ceases, whichever occurs 
        first.

[Sec. 5045. Chief of Staff; Deputy and Assistant Chiefs of Staff

  [There are in the Headquarters, Marine Corps, a Chief of 
Staff, not more than five Deputy Chiefs of Staff, and not more 
than three Assistant Chiefs of Staff, detailed by the Secretary 
of the Navy from officers on the active-duty list of the Marine 
Corps.]

Sec. 5045. Director of the Marine Corps Staff; Deputy and Assistant 
                    Commandants

  (a) There are in the Headquarters, Marine Corps, the 
following:
          (1) A Director of the Marine Corps Staff.
          (2) Not more than five Deputy Commandants of the 
        Marine Corps.
          (3) Not more than three Assistant Commandants of the 
        Marine Corps.
  (b) The officers specified in subsection (a) shall be 
detailed by the Secretary of the Navy from officers on the 
active-duty list of the Marine Corps.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART II--PERSONNEL

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                  CHAPTER 544--TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS

Sec.
5721.  Temporary promotions of certain Navy lieutenants.

Sec. 5721. Temporary promotions of certain Navy lieutenants

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) The authority to make appointments under this section 
terminates on September 30, [1995] 1998.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                   CHAPTER 571--VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT

Sec.
6321.  Officers: 40 years.
     * * * * * * *
6328.  Computation of years of service: voluntary retirement.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 6328. Computation of years of service: voluntary retirement

  (a) Enlisted Members.--Time required to be made up under 
section 972(a) of this title after the date of the enactment of 
this section may not be counted in computing years of service 
under this chapter.
  (b) Officers.--Section 972(b) of this title excludes from 
computation of an officer's years of service for purposes of 
this chapter any time identified with respect to that officer 
under that section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART III--EDUCATION AND TRAINING

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 603--UNITED STATES NAVAL ACADEMY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 6954. Midshipmen: number

  (a) There may be at the Naval Academy at any one time 
midshipmen as follows:
          (1) Each Senator, Representative, and Delegate in 
        Congress, including the Resident Commissioner from 
        Puerto Rico, is entitled to nominate 10 persons for 
        each vacancy that is available under this section. 
        Nominees may be submitted without ranking or with a 
        principal candidate and 9 ranked or unranked 
        alternates. Qualified nominees not selected for 
        appointment under this subsection shall be considered 
        qualified alternates for the purposes of selection 
        under other provisions of this chapter.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (10) One from the Commonwealth of the Northern 
        Marianas Islands, nominated by the resident 
        representative from the commonwealth.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 6968. Board of Visitors

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (h) While performing his duties, each member of the Board and 
each adviser [is entitled to not more than $5 a day and] shall 
be reimbursed under Government travel regulations for his 
travel expenses.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART IV--GENERAL ADMINISTRATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                       CHAPTER 633--NAVAL VESSELS

Sec.
7291.  Classification.
     * * * * * * *
7315.  Phased maintenance contracts: vessels covered.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 7310. Overhaul, repair, etc. of vessels in foreign shipyards: 
                    restrictions

  (a) Vessels With Homeport in United States.--A naval vessel 
(or any other vessel under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of 
the Navy) the homeport of which is in the United States may not 
be overhauled, repaired, or maintained in a shipyard outside 
the United States or Guam, other than in the case of voyage 
repairs.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 7315. Phased maintenance contracts: vessels covered

  In any case in which the Secretary of the Navy enters into a 
contract for the phased maintenance of a class of vessels or 
vessels of an identified type, the Secretary shall ensure 
that--
          (1) any vessel that is covered by the contract when 
        it is entered into remains covered by the contract, 
        regardless of operating command to which the vessel is 
        subsequently assigned, unless the vessel is taken out 
        of service for the Department of the Navy; and
          (2) any vessel of a class or type covered by the 
        contract that is delivered to the Navy while the 
        contract is in effect is covered by the contract.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                 CHAPTER 641--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

Sec.
7420.  Definitions.
7421.  Jurisdiction and control.
7421a.  Sale of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 (Elk Hills).
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 7421a. Sale of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 (Elk Hills)

  (a) Sale Required.--(1) Notwithstanding any other provision 
of this chapter, the Secretary shall sell all right, title, and 
interest of the United States in and to lands owned or 
controlled by the United States inside Naval Petroleum Reserve 
Numbered 1, commonly referred to as the Elk Hills Unit, located 
in Kern County, California, and established by Executive order 
of the President, dated September 2, 1912. Within one year 
after the effective date, the Secretary shall enter into one or 
more contracts for the sale of all of the interest of the 
United States in the reserve.
  (2) In this section:
          (A) The term ``reserve'' means Naval Petroleum 
        Reserve Numbered 1.
          (B) The term ``unit plan contract'' means the unit 
        plan contract between equity owners of the lands within 
        the boundaries of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 
        entered into on June 19, 1944.
          (C) The term ``effective date'' means the date of the 
        enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
        Fiscal Year 1996.
  (b) Equity Finalization.--(1) Not later than five months 
after the effective date, the Secretary shall finalize equity 
interests of the known oil and gas zones in Naval Petroleum 
Reserve Numbered 1 in the manner provided by this subsection.
  (2) The Secretary shall retain the services of an independent 
petroleum engineer, mutually acceptable to the equity owners, 
who shall prepare a recommendation on final equity figures. The 
Secretary may accept the recommendation of the independent 
petroleum engineer for final equity in each known oil and gas 
zone and establish final equity interest in the Naval Petroleum 
Reserve Numbered 1 in accordance with such recommendation, or 
the Secretary may use such other method to establish final 
equity interest in the reserve as the Secretary considers 
appropriate.
  (3) If, on the effective date, there is an ongoing equity 
redetermination dispute between the equity owners under section 
9(b) of the unit plan contract, such dispute shall be resolved 
in the manner provided in the unit plan contract within five 
months after the effective date. Such resolution shall be 
considered final for all purposes under this section.
  (c) Timing and Administration of Sale.--(1) Not later than 
two months after the effective date, the Secretary shall retain 
the services of five independent experts in the valuation of 
oil and gas fields to conduct separate assessments, in a manner 
consistent with commercial practices, of the fair market value 
of the interest of the United States in Naval Petroleum Reserve 
Numbered 1. In making their assessments, the independent 
experts shall consider (among other factors) all equipment and 
facilities to be included in the sale, the net present value of 
the reserve, and the net present value of the anticipated 
revenue stream that the Secretary determines the Treasury would 
receive from the reserve if the reserve were not sold, adjusted 
for any anticipated increases in tax revenues that would result 
if the reserve were sold. The independent experts shall 
complete their assessments within five months after the 
effective date. In setting the minimum acceptable price for the 
reserve, the Secretary shall consider the average of the five 
assessments or, if more advantageous to the Government, the 
average of three assessments after excluding the high and low 
assessments.
  (2) Not later than two months after the effective date, the 
Secretary shall retain the services of an investment banker to 
independently administer, in a manner consistent with 
commercial practices and in a manner that maximizes sale 
proceeds to the Government, the sale of Naval Petroleum Reserve 
Numbered 1 under this section.
  (3) Not later than five months after the effective date, the 
sales administrator selected under paragraph (2) shall complete 
a draft contract for the sale of Naval Petroleum Reserve 
Numbered 1, which shall accompany the invitation for bids and 
describe the terms and provisions of the sale of the interest 
of the United States in the reserve. The draft contract shall 
identify all equipment and facilities to be included in the 
sale. The draft contract, including the terms and provisions of 
the sale of the interest of the United States in the reserve, 
shall be subject to review and approval by the Secretary, the 
Secretary of the Treasury, and the Director of the Office of 
Management and Budget.
  (4) Not later than six months after the effective date, the 
Secretary shall publish an invitation for bids for the purchase 
of the reserve.
  (5) Not later than nine months after the effective date, the 
Secretary shall accept the highest responsible offer for 
purchase of the interest of the United States in Naval 
Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 that meets or exceeds the minimum 
acceptable price determined under paragraph (1).
  (d) Future Liabilities.--The United States shall hold 
harmless and fully indemnify the purchaser of the interest of 
the United States in Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 from 
and against any claim or liability as a result of ownership in 
the reserve by the United States.
  (e) Treatment of State of California Claim.--After deducting 
the costs incurred to conduct the sale of Naval Petroleum 
Reserve Numbered 1 under this section, seven percent of the 
remaining proceeds from the sale of the reserve shall be paid 
to the State of California, subject to the conditions that--
          (1) the State credit the payment to the Supplemental 
        Benefits Maintenance Account within the Teachers' 
        Retirement Fund; and
          (2) all claims against the United States by the State 
        and the Teachers' Retirement Fund are released with 
        respect to production and proceeds of sale from the 
        reserve.
  (f) Production Allocation for Sale.--(1) As part of the 
contract for purchase of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1, 
the purchaser of the interest of the United States in the 
reserve shall agree to make up to 25 percent of the purchaser's 
share of annual petroleum production from the purchased lands 
available for sale to small refiners, which do not have their 
own adequate sources of supply of petroleum, for processing or 
use only in their own refineries. None of the reserved 
production sold to small refiners may be resold in kind. The 
purchaser of the reserve may reduce the quantity of petroleum 
reserved under this subsection in the event of an insufficient 
number of qualified bids. The seller of this petroleum 
production has the right to refuse bids that are less than the 
prevailing market price of comparable oil.
  (2) The purchaser of the reserve shall also agree to ensure 
that the terms of every sale of the purchaser's share of annual 
petroleum production from the purchased lands shall be so 
structured as to give full and equal opportunity for the 
acquisition of petroleum by all interested persons, including 
major and independent oil producers and refiners alike.
  (g) Maintaining Elk Hills Unit Production.--Until the sale of 
Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 is completed under this 
section, the Secretary shall continue to produce the reserve at 
the maximum daily oil or gas rate from a reservoir, which will 
permit maximum economic development of the reservoir consistent 
with sound oil field engineering practices in accordance with 
section 3 of the unit plan contract. The definition of maximum 
efficient rate in section 7420(6) of this title shall not apply 
to the reserve.
  (h) Effect on Existing Contracts.--(1) In the case of any 
contract, in effect on the effective date, for the purchase of 
production from any part of the United States' share of Naval 
Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1, the sale of the interest of the 
United States in the reserve shall be subject to the contract 
for a period of three months after the closing date of the sale 
or until termination of the contract, whichever occurs first. 
The term of any contract entered into after the effective date 
for the purchase of such production shall not exceed the 
anticipated closing date for the sale of the reserve.
  (2) The Secretary shall exercise the termination procedures 
provided in the contract between the United States and Bechtel 
Petroleum Operation, Inc., Contract Number DE-ACO1-85FE60520 so 
that the contract terminates not later than the date of closing 
of the sale of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 under 
subsection (c).
  (3) The Secretary shall exercise the termination procedures 
provided in the unit plan contract so that the unit plan 
contract terminates not later than the date of closing of the 
sale of reserve under subsection (c).
  (i) Effect on Antitrust Laws.--Nothing in this section shall 
be construed to alter the application of the antitrust laws of 
the United States to the purchaser of Naval Petroleum Reserve 
Numbered 1 or to the lands in the reserve subject to sale under 
this section upon the completion of the sale.
  (j) Preservation of Private Right, Title, and Interest.--
Nothing in this section shall be construed to adversely affect 
the ownership interest of any other entity having any right, 
title, and interest in and to lands within the boundaries of 
Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 and which are subject to the 
unit plan contract.
  (k) Congressional Notification.--Section 7431 of this title 
shall not apply to the sale of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 
1 under this section. However, the Secretary may not enter into 
a contract for the sale of the reserve until the end of the 31-
day period beginning on the date on which the Secretary 
notifies the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the 
Committee on National Security and the Committee on Commerce of 
the House of Representatives of the proposed sale.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 647--DISPOSAL OF OBSOLETE OR SURPLUS MATERIAL

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 7545. Obsolete material and articles of historical interest: loan 
                    or gift

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(c) No loan or gift under this section may be made unless--
          [(1) notice of the proposal to make the loan or gift 
        is sent to Congress;
          [(2) 30 calendar days of continuous session of 
        Congress have expired after the notice was sent to 
        Congress; and
          [(3) during that 30-day period Congress does not pass 
        a concurrent resolution stating in substance that it 
        does not favor the proposed loan or gift.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


            CHAPTER 651--SHIPS' STORES AND COMMISSARY STORES

Sec.
7601.  Sales: members of naval service and Coast Guard; widows and 
          widowers; civilian employees and other persons.
     * * * * * * *
7606.  Subsistence and other supplies: members of armed forces; 
          veterans; executive or military departments and employees; 
          prices.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 7606. Subsistence and other supplies: members of armed forces; 
                    veterans; executive or military departments and 
                    employees; prices

  (a) The branch, office, or officer designated by the 
Secretary of the Navy shall procure and sell, for cash or 
credit--
          (1) articles specified by the Secretary of the Navy 
        or a person designated by the Secretary, to members of 
        the Navy and Marine Corps; and
          (2) items of individual clothing and equipment to 
        members of the Navy and Marine Corps, under such 
        restrictions as the Secretary may prescribe.
An account of sales on credit shall be kept and the amount due 
reported to any branch office, or officer designated by the 
Secretary. Except for articles and items acquired through the 
use of working capital funds under section 2208 of this title, 
sales of articles shall be at cost, and sales of individual 
clothing and equipment shall be at average current prices, 
including overhead, as determined by the Secretary.
  (b) The branch, office, or officer designated by the 
Secretary shall sell subsistence supplies to members of other 
armed forces at the prices at which like property is sold to 
members of the Navy and Marine Corps.
  (c) The branch, office, or officer designated by the 
Secretary may sell serviceable supplies, other than subsistence 
supplies, to members of other armed forces at the prices at 
which like property is sold to members of the Navy and Marine 
Corps.
  (d) A person who has been discharged honorably or under 
honorable conditions from the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine 
Corps and who is receiving care and medical treatment from the 
Public Health Service or the Department of Veterans Affairs may 
buy subsistence supplies and other supplies, except articles of 
uniform, at the prices at which like property is sold to 
members of the Navy and Marine Corps.
  (e) Under such conditions as the Secretary may prescribe, 
exterior articles of uniform may be sold to a person who has 
been discharged from the Navy or Marine Corps honorably or 
under honorable conditions at the prices at which like articles 
are sold to members of the Navy or Marine Corps. This 
subsection does not modify section 772 or 773 of this title.
  (f) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, payment 
for subsistence supplies shall be made in cash or by commercial 
credit.
  (g) The Secretary may provide for the procurement and sale of 
stores designated by him to such civilian officers and 
employees of the United States, and such other persons, as he 
considers proper--
          (1) at military installations outside the United 
        States (provided such sales conform with host nation 
        support agreements); and
          (2) at military installations inside the United 
        States where the Secretary determines that it is 
        impracticable for those civilian officers, employees, 
        and persons to obtain those stores from commercial 
        enterprises without impairing the efficient operation 
        of military activities.
However, sales to such civilian officers and employees inside 
the United States may be only to those who reside within 
military installations.
  (h) Appropriations for subsistence of the Navy or Marine 
Corps may be applied to the purchase of subsistence supplies 
for sale to members of the Navy and Marine Corps on active duty 
for the use of themselves and their families.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


             CHAPTER 661--ACCOUNTABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY

Sec.
7861.  Custody of departmental records and property.
     * * * * * * *
[7863.  Disbursements by order of commanding officer.]
7863.  Disposal of public stores by order of commanding officer.
     * * * * * * *

[Sec. 7863. Disbursements by order of commanding officer]

Sec. 7863. Disposal of public stores by order of commanding officer

  When settling an account of a disbursing official, the 
Comptroller General shall allow [disbursements of public moneys 
or] disposal of public stores the disbursing official made 
under an order of a commanding officer when presented with 
satisfactory evidence that the order was made and that [the 
money was paid or] the stores disposed of as the order 
provided. The commanding officer is accountable for the 
[disbursement or] disposal.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle D--Air Force

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART II--PERSONNEL

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 837--APPOINTMENTS AS RESERVE OFFICERS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 8359. Commissioned officers: original appointment; determination 
                    of grade

  (a) * * *
  (b) In the case of a person who is originally appointed as a 
reserve officer of the Air Force with a designation as a 
medical officer during the period beginning on October 1, 1983, 
and ending on September 30, [1995] 1996, and who is credited 
with service under section 8353 of this title, the commissioned 
grade in which that person is appointed (based on the service 
credited under that section) shall be determined as follows:
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 8380. Commissioned officers: promotion of reserve commissioned 
                    officers on active duty and not on the active duty 
                    list

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) The authority to promote officers under this section 
shall expire on September 30, [1995] 1996.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 867--RETIREMENT FOR LENGTH OF SERVICE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 8925. Computation of years of service: voluntary retirement; 
                    enlisted members

  (a) * * *
  (b) Time required to be made up under section 972(a) of this 
title may not be counted in computing years of service under 
subsection (a).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 8926. Computation of years of service: voluntary retirement; 
                    regular and reserve commissioned officers

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Section 972(b) of this title excludes from computation of 
an officer's years of service for purposes of this section any 
time identified with respect to that officer under that 
section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART III--TRAINING

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 903--UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 9342. Cadets: appointment; numbers, territorial distribution

  (a) The authorized strength of Air Force Cadets of the 
Academy is as follows:
          (1) Each Senator, Representative, and Delegate in 
        Congress, including the Resident Commissioner from 
        Puerto Rico, is entitled to nominate 10 persons for 
        each vacancy that is available to him under this 
        section. Nominees may be submitted without ranking or 
        with a principal candidate and 9 ranked or unranked 
        alternates. Qualified nominees not selected for 
        appointment under this subsection shall be considered 
        qualified alternates for the purposes of selection 
        under other provisions of this chapter.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (10) One cadet from the Commonwealth of the Northern 
        Marianas Islands, nominated by the resident 
        representative from the commonwealth.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 9355. Board of Visitors

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (h) While performing his duties, each member of the Board and 
each adviser [is entitled to not more than $5 a day and] shall 
be reimbursed under Government travel regulations for his 
travel expenses.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART IV--SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 931--CIVIL RESERVE AIR FLEET

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 9512. Contracts for the inclusion or incorporation of defense 
                    features

  (a) * * *
  (b) Commitment to Civil Reserve Air Fleet.--Each contract 
entered into under this section shall provide--
          (1) that any aircraft covered by the contract shall 
        be committed to the Civil Reserve Air Fleet;
          (2) that, so long as the aircraft is owned or 
        controlled by a contractor, the contractor shall 
        operate the aircraft for the Department of Defense as 
        needed during any activation of the [full] Civil 
        Reserve Air Fleet, notwithstanding any other contract 
        or commitment of that contractor; and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) Exclusivity of Commitment to Civil Reserve Air Fleet.--
Notwithstanding section 101 of the Defense Production Act of 
1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2071), each aircraft covered by a contract 
entered into under this section shall be committed exclusively 
to the Civil Reserve Air Fleet for use by the Department of 
Defense as needed during any activation of the [full] Civil 
Reserve Air Fleet unless the aircraft is released from that use 
by the Secretary of Defense.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 939--SALE OF SERVICEABLE MATERIAL

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 9621. Subsistence and other supplies: members of armed forces; 
                    veterans; executive or military departments and 
                    employees; prices

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) Whenever, under regulations to be prescribed by the 
Secretary, subsistence supplies are furnished to any 
organization of the Air Force or sold to employees of any 
executive department other than the Department of Defense, 
payment shall be made in cash or by commercial credit.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                     Subtitle E--Reserve Components

                PART I--ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION

Chap.                                                               Sec.
      Definitions..................................................10001
     * * * * * * *

                      PART II--PERSONNEL GENERALLY

      Authorized Strengths and Distribution in Grade...............12001
      Enlisted Members.............................................12101
     * * * * * * *
      Ready Reserve Income Insurance...............................12521
     * * * * * * *


                 PART I--ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION


     * * * * * * *

           CHAPTER 1007--ADMINISTRATION OF RESERVE COMPONENTS

Sec.
10201.  Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs.
     * * * * * * *
10216.  Military technicians.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 10201. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs

  [As provided in section 138(b)(2) of this title, the official 
in the Department of Defense with responsibility for overall 
supervision of reserve component affairs of the Department of 
Defense is the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve 
Affairs.]
  The official in the Department of Defense with responsibility 
for overall supervision of reserve component affairs of the 
Department of Defense is the official designated by the 
Secretary of Defense to have that responsibility.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 10216. Military technicians

  (a) Priority for Management of Military Technicians.--(1) As 
a basis for making the annual request to Congress pursuant to 
section 115 of this title for authorization of end strengths 
for military technicians of the Army and Air Force reserve 
components, the Secretary of Defense shall give priority to 
supporting authorizations for dual status military technicians 
in the following high-priority units and organizations:
          (A) Units of the Selected Reserve that are scheduled 
        to deploy no later than 90 days after mobilization.
          (B) Units of the Selected Reserve that are or will 
        deploy to relieve active duty peacetime operations 
        tempo.
          (C) Those organizations with the primary mission of 
        providing direct support surface and aviation 
        maintenance for the reserve components of the Army and 
        Air Force, to the extent that the military technicians 
        in such units would mobilize and deploy in a skill that 
        is compatible with their civilian position skill.
  (2) For each fiscal year, the Secretary of Defense shall, for 
the high-priority units and organizations referred to in 
paragraph (1), achieve a programmed manning level for military 
technicians that is not less than 90 percent of the programmed 
manpower structure for those units and organizations for 
military technicians for that fiscal year.
  (3) For each fiscal year, the Secretary of Defense shall, for 
reserve component management headquarters organizations 
(including national and State-level National Guard 
headquarters, in United States Property and Fiscal Offices, and 
in similar management-level headquarters in the Army and Air 
Force Reserve), achieve a programmed manning level for military 
technicians that is not more than 70 percent of the programmed 
manpower structure for those organizations for military 
technicians for that fiscal year.
  (4) Military technician authorizations and personnel in high-
priority units and organizations specified in paragraph (1) 
shall be exempt from any requirement (imposed by law or 
otherwise) for reductions in Department of Defense civilian 
personnel and shall only be reduced as part of military force 
structure reductions. Planned reductions in Department of 
Defense civilian personnel that would apply to such technician 
authorizations and personnel but for this paragraph shall be 
reallocated by the Secretary of Defense on a proportional basis 
throughout the Department of Defense, with an emphasis on 
reducing headquarters personnel.
  (b) Dual-Status Requirement.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
require the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Air 
Force to establish as a condition of employment for each 
individual who is hired after the date of the enactment of this 
section as a military technician that the individual maintain 
membership in the Selected Reserve (so as to be a so-called 
``dual-status'' technician) and shall require that the civilian 
and military position skill requirements of dual-status 
military technicians be combatible. No Department of Defense 
funds may be spent for compensation for any military technician 
hired after the date of the enactment of this section who is 
not a member of the Selected Reserve, except that compensation 
may be paid for up to six months following loss of membership 
in the selected reserve if such loss of membership was not due 
to the failure to meet military standards.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                      PART II--PERSONNEL GENERALLY

Chap.                                                               Sec.
      Authorized Strengths and Distribution in Grade...............12001
      Enlisted Members.............................................12101
     * * * * * * *
      Ready Reserve Income Insurance...............................12521
     * * * * * * *

              CHAPTER 1214--READY RESERVE INCOME INSURANCE

Sec.
12521.  Definitions.
12522.  Establishment and purpose of program.
12523.  Program administration.
12524.  Eligible insurance companies.
12525.  Persons insured; amount.
12526.  Deductions; payment.
12527.  Payment of insurance; beneficiaries.
12528.  Premiums; accounting to the Secretary.
12529.  Forfeiture.

Sec. 12521. Definitions

  In this chapter:
          (1) The term ``covered service'' means active duty in 
        the armed forces performed by a member of a reserve 
        component under orders for more than 30 days which 
        specify that the member's service is in support of an 
        operational mission for which members of the reserve 
        components have been ordered to active duty without 
        their consent or in support of forces activated during 
        a period of war or during a period of national 
        emergency as declared by the President or Congress.
          (2) The term ``covered member'' means a member of the 
        Ready Reserve who is eligible for and who has not 
        declined coverage under this chapter.
          (3) The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of 
        Defense.
          (4) The term ``Department'' means the Department of 
        Defense.
          (5) The term ``Board'' means the Board of Actuaries 
        established under section 2006(e)(1) of this title.
          (6) The term ``Fund'' means the Department of Defense 
        Ready Reserve Income Insurance Fund.

Sec. 12522. Establishment and purpose of program

  (a) Establishment.--There is established an insurance program 
for members of the Ready Reserve to be known as the Department 
of Defense Ready Reserve Income Insurance Program which shall 
be administered by the Secretary. There is also established on 
the books of the Treasury a fund to be known as the Department 
of Defense Ready Reserve Income Insurance Fund, which shall be 
administered by the Secretary of the Treasury. The Fund shall 
be used for the accumulation of funds in order to finance on an 
actuarially sound basis liabilities of the Program.
  (b) Assets of Fund.--There shall be deposited into the Fund 
the following, which shall constitute the assets of the Fund:
          (1) Amounts paid into the Fund under sections 12526 
        and 12528 of this title.
          (2) Any amount appropriated to the Fund.
          (3) Any return on investment of the assets of the 
        Fund.
  (c) Board of Actuaries.--The Department of Defense Education 
Benefits Fund Board of Actuaries shall have the actuarial 
responsibility for the Program.
  (d) Determination of Contributions to the Fund.--(1) Not 
later than six months after the Program is established, the 
Board shall determine (project) the premium rate for the 
coverage to be offered.
  (2) If at the time of any such valuation there has been a 
change in benefits under the Program that has been made since 
the last such valuation and such change in benefits increases 
or decreases the present value of amounts payable from the 
Fund, the Board shall determine a premium rate methodology and 
schedule for the liquidation of any liability (or actuarial 
gain to the Fund) created by such change and any previous such 
changes so that the present value of the sum of the scheduled 
premium payments (or reduction in payments that would otherwise 
be made) equals the cumulative increase (or decrease) in the 
present value of such benefits.
  (3) If at the time of any such valuation the Board determines 
that, based upon changes in actuarial assumptions since the 
last valuation, there has been an actuarial gain or loss to the 
Fund, the Board shall recommend a premium rate schedule for the 
amortization of the cumulative gain or loss to the Fund created 
by such change in assumptions and any previous such changes in 
assumptions through an increase or decrease in the payments 
that would otherwise be made to the Fund.
  (4) If at any time liabilities exceed assets of the Fund as a 
result of a call up, and funds are unavailable to pay benefits, 
the Secretary shall seek a special appropriation to cover the 
unfunded liability. If appropriations are not made, in any 
fiscal year, the Secretary shall limit the value of any 
benefits conferred by this program to an amount that does not 
exceed assets of the Fund expected to accrue at the end of such 
fiscal year. Benefits that cannot be paid because of such 
limitation of funds shall be deferred and paid only after funds 
become available.
  (e) Payments Into the Fund.--(1) Payment into the Fund under 
this subsection shall accumulate in accordance with the 
provisions of section 12526 of this title.
  (2) At the beginning of each fiscal year, the Secretary shall 
determine the sum of the following:
          (A) The projected amount of the premiums to be 
        collected, investment earnings, and any special 
        appropriations received for that fiscal year.
          (B) The amount for that year of any cumulative 
        unfunded liability (including any negative amount or 
        any gain to the Fund) resulting from payments of 
        benefits.
          (C) The amount for that year (including any negative 
        amount) of any cumulative actuarial gain or loss to the 
        Fund.
  (f) Investment of Assets of Fund.--The Secretary of the 
Treasury shall invest such portion of the Fund as is not in the 
judgment of the Secretary of Defense required to meet current 
liabilities. Such investments shall be in public debt 
securities with maturities suitable to the needs of the Fund, 
as determined by the Secretary of Defense, and bearing interest 
at rates determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, taking 
into consideration current market yields on outstanding 
marketable obligations of the United States of comparable 
maturities. The income on such investments shall be credited to 
and form a part of the Fund.

Sec. 12523. Program administration

  The insurance program provided for in this chapter shall be 
administered by the Secretary, who is authorized to adopt such 
rules, procedures, and policies as in the Secretary's judgment 
may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of 
this chapter.

Sec. 12524. Eligible insurance companies

  (a) The Secretary may, without regard to section 3709 of the 
Revised Statutes (41 U.S.C. 5), purchase from one or more 
insurance companies a policy or policies of group insurance to 
offer benefits to all members. Each such insurance company 
shall (1) be licensed to issue insurance in each of the 50 
States and in the District of Columbia, and (2) as of the most 
recent December 31 for which information is available to the 
Secretary, have in effect at least 1 percent of the total 
amount of insurance which all such insurance companies have in 
effect in the United States.
  (b) Any insurance company which issues a policy under 
subsection (a) shall establish an administrative office at a 
place and under a name designated by the Secretary.
  (c) The Secretary may use the facilities and services of any 
insurance company issuing any policy under this chapter and may 
designate one such company as the representative of the other 
companies and contract to pay a reasonable fee to the 
designated company for its services.
  (d) The Secretary shall arrange with the insurance company 
issuing any policy under this chapter to reinsure, under 
conditions approved by the Secretary, portions of the total 
amount of insurance under such policy or policies with such 
other insurance companies (which meet qualifying criteria set 
forth by the Secretary) as may elect to participate in such 
reinsurance.
  (e) The Secretary may at any time discontinue any policy 
purchased under this section.

Sec. 12525. Persons insured; amount

  (a)(1) Any policy of insurance provided under this chapter 
shall insure each covered member of the Ready Reserve against 
covered service. Any covered member ordered into covered 
service shall be entitled to payment of a basic benefit of 
$1,000 for each month of covered service which is in excess of 
the initial 30 days of covered service, unless the member has 
elected in writing (A) not to be insured under this chapter, 
(B) to be insured for a lower benefit of half the basic 
benefit, or (C) to be insured in a greater amount, in 
increments of $500, above the basic benefit not to exceed 
$5,000 per month of covered service (adjusted pursuant to 
paragraph (2)), following the initial 30 days of covered 
service, except that no member may be paid under this chapter 
for more than 12 months of covered service served during any 
period of 18 months. Payment for any period of covered service 
less than one month shall be at the rate of one-thirtieth of 
the monthly rate for each day served. Payment shall be based 
solely on insured status and on the period of covered service 
served; no proof of lost income or expenses incurred as a 
result of covered service shall be required.
  (2) The Secretary shall determine annually the effect of 
inflation on the benefits and establish an adjustment rate 
which ensures that there is no loss of value in the benefits 
payable to a member. Adjustments shall apply to benefits for 
members with existing coverage and for newly eligible members. 
Such adjustments for inflation will be rounded to the nearest 
$10 increment.
  (3) Members of the Ready Reserve who, under regulations 
prescribed by the Secretary of Defense in coordination with the 
Secretary of Transportation, are serving on active duty (or 
full-time National Guard duty) shall not be eligible to 
purchase insurance under this chapter. Additional categories of 
members of the Ready Reserve, in the discretion of the 
Secretary of Defense, may also be excluded from eligibility to 
purchase insurance under this chapter.
  (b) Promptly following the effective date of this chapter, 
the Secretary shall make a one-time offer of insurance coverage 
under this chapter to all persons who were members of the Ready 
Reserve of an armed force on that date and who remain members 
of the Ready Reserve. Members of the Ready Reserve, first 
becoming eligible for coverage after the effective date of this 
chapter, shall be automatically enrolled for the basic benefit 
unless declined, or another amount is elected under subsection 
(a)(1).
  (c) Members shall be given a written explanation of the 
insurance and be advised that they have the right (1) to 
decline coverage altogether, (2) to select half the basic 
benefit, or (3) to select increased benefits. The right of a 
member of the Ready Reserve to decline, increase, or decrease 
coverage shall be exercised within 30 days of first being 
eligible for coverage.

Sec. 12526. Deductions; payment

  (a)(1) During any period in which a member insured under this 
chapter is participating in paid reserve training or other 
duty, there shall be deducted each month from the member's 
basic pay or compensation for inactive duty training an amount 
determined by the Secretary to be the same for all members of 
the Ready Reserve who subscribe to the same amount of insurance 
as the share of the cost attributable to insuring such member. 
As provided in section 12525 of this title, the Secretary may 
establish graduated monthly premiums for an amount of insurance 
less than the basic amount of coverage or in excess of the 
basic coverage amount.
  (2) Any member insured under this chapter who is not in a pay 
status in which the member receives pay on a monthly basis 
shall pay the cost attributable to insuring such member in 
accordance with regulations to be adopted by the Secretary.
  (b) An amount equal to the first amount due on insurance 
under this chapter may be advanced from current appropriations 
for military pay to any such member, which amount shall 
constitute a lien upon the pay for military service accruing to 
the person to whom such advance was made, and shall be 
collected therefrom if not otherwise paid. No disbursing or 
certifying officer shall be responsible for any loss by reason 
of such advance.
  (c) The sums withheld from the basic or other pay of insured 
members or deposited by insured members, together with the 
income derived from any dividends or premium rate adjustments, 
shall be deposited to the credit of the Fund. All premium 
payments for insurance issued under this chapter shall be 
deposited into the Fund.

Sec. 12527. Payment of insurance; beneficiaries

  (a) A member insured under this chapter who serves in excess 
of 30 days of covered service shall be paid the amount to which 
such member is entitled on a monthly basis, with the first 
payment due no later than one month following the 30th day of 
covered service. The Secretary shall adopt regulations 
prescribing the manner in which payments shall be made, either 
to the member or, in accordance with subsection (d), to a 
designated person or entity.
  (b) A member may designate in writing another person 
(including a spouse, parent, or other person with an insurable 
interest as determined by the Secretary by regulation) to whom 
the insurance payments to which such member is entitled are to 
be paid. Such designation may be made to a bank or other 
financial institution, to the credit of a designated person. In 
the latter event, insurance payments to which a member becomes 
entitled shall be paid to the designated person, bank or 
financial institution.
  (c) Any amount of insurance payable under this chapter on 
account of a deceased member's period of covered service shall 
be paid, upon the establishment of a valid claim therefor, to 
the beneficiary or beneficiaries which the former member had 
designated in writing. If no such designation has been made, 
the amount shall be payable in accordance with the laws of the 
State of the member's domicile.

Sec. 12528. Premiums; accounting to the Secretary

  (a) Each policy of insurance provided by the Secretary under 
this chapter shall include for the first policy years a fixed 
monetary premium per $1,000 of insurance, based, in 
consultation with the Board, on the best available estimate of 
risk and financial exposure, levels of subscription by members, 
and other relevant factors. Different premium levels may be 
established for different amounts of coverage, provided that 
the premium rate established for the basic benefit shall not be 
at a premium rate higher than the premium rate set for 
increased coverages.
  (b) Each policy shall include provisions whereby the premium 
rate for the first policy year shall be continued for 
subsequent policy years (but the premium amount may be 
increased to account for inflation-adjusted benefit increases). 
The rate may be readjusted for any subsequent year with the 
consent of the Secretary based on prior consultation with the 
Board of Actuaries.

Sec. 12529. Forfeiture

  Any person found guilty of mutiny, treason, spying, or 
desertion, or who refuses to perform service in the armed 
forces or refuses to wear the uniform of any of the armed 
forces, shall forfeit all rights to insurance under this 
chapter.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


  PART IV--TRAINING FOR RESERVE COMPONENTS AND EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE 
PROGRAMS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


   CHAPTER 1606--EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR MEMBERS OF THE SELECTED 
RESERVE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 16131. Educational assistance program: establishment; amount

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (j)(1) In the case of a person who has a skill or specialty 
designated by the Secretary concerned as a skill or specialty 
in which there is a critical shortage of personnel or for which 
it is difficult to recruit or, in the case of critical units, 
retain personnel, the Secretary concerned may increase the rate 
of the educational assistance allowance applicable to that 
person to such rate in excess of the rate prescribed under 
subparagraphs (A) through (D) of subsection (b)(1) as the 
Secretary of Defense considers appropriate, but the amount of 
any such increase may not exceed $350 per month.
  (2) The authority provided by paragraph (1) shall be 
exercised by the Secretaries of the military departments under 
regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 1608--HEALTH PROFESSIONS STIPEND PROGRAM

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 16201. Financial assistance: health-care professionals in reserve 
                    components

  (a) * * *
  (b) Physicians and Dentists in Critical Specialties.--(1) 
Under the stipend program under this chapter, the Secretary of 
the military department concerned may enter into an agreement 
with a person who--
          (A) is a graduate of a medical school or dental 
        school;
          (B) is eligible for appointment, designation, or 
        assignment as a medical officer or dental officer in 
        the Reserve of the armed force concerned; and
          (C) is enrolled or has been accepted for enrollment 
        in a residency program for [physicians in a medical 
        specialty] physicians or dentists in a medical or 
        dental specialty designated by the Secretary concerned 
        as a specialty critically needed by that military 
        department in wartime.
  (2) Under the agreement--
          (A) the Secretary shall agree to pay the participant 
        a stipend, in an amount determined under subsection 
        (e), for the period or the remainder of the period of 
        the residency program in which the participant enrolls 
        or is enrolled;
          (B) the participant shall not be eligible to receive 
        such stipend before appointment, designation, or 
        assignment as a medical officer or dental officer for 
        service in the Ready Reserve;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 1609--EDUCATION LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAMS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 16301. Education loan repayment program: enlisted members of 
                    Selected Reserve with critical specialties

  (a)(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, the 
Secretary of Defense may repay--
          (A) any loan made, insured, or guaranteed under part 
        B of title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
        U.S.C. 1071 et seq.); [or]
          (B) any loan made under part D of such title (the 
        William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program, 20 U.S.C. 
        1087a et seq.); or
          [(B)] (C) any loan made under part E of such title 
        (20 U.S.C. 1087aa et seq.).
Repayment of any such loan shall be made on the basis of each 
complete year of service performed by the borrower.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 16302. Education loan repayment program: health professions 
                    officers serving in Selected Reserve with wartime 
                    critical medical skill shortages

  (a) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense 
and subject to the other provisions of this section, the 
Secretary concerned may repay--
          (1) * * *
          (2) any loan made under part D of such title (the 
        William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program, 20 U.S.C. 
        1087a et seq.); or
          [(2)] (3) a loan made under part E of such title (20 
        U.S.C. 1087aa et seq.) after October 1, 1975;
          [(3)] (4) a health professions education loan made or 
        insured under part A of title VII of the Public Health 
        Service Act (42 U.S.C. 292 et seq.) or under part B of 
        title VIII of such Act (42 U.S.C. 297 et seq.); and
          [(4)] (5) a loan made, insured, or guaranteed through 
        a recognized financial or educational institution if 
        that loan was used to finance education regarding a 
        health profession that the Secretary of Defense 
        determines to be critically needed in order to meet 
        identified wartime combat medical skill shortages.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) The authority provided in this section shall apply only 
in the case of a person first appointed as a commissioned 
officer before October 1, [1996] 1998.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEARS 1992 AND 1993

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                    [Part C--Missile Defense Program


[SEC. 231. SHORT TITLE.

  [This part may be cited as the ``Missile Defense Act of 
1991''.

[SEC. 232. MISSILE DEFENSE GOALS OF THE UNITED STATES.

  [(a) Missile Defense Goals of the United States.--It is a 
goal of the United States to--
          [(1) comply with the ABM Treaty, including any 
        protocol or amendment thereto, and not develop, test, 
        or deploy any ballistic missile defense system, or 
        component thereof, in violation of the treaty, as 
        modified by any protocol or amendment thereto, while 
        developing, and maintaining the option to deploy, an 
        anti-ballistic missile system that is capable of 
        providing a highly effective defense of the United 
        States against limited attacks of ballistic missiles;
          [(2) maintain strategic stability; and
          [(3) provide highly effective theater missile 
        defenses (TMDs) to forward-deployed and expeditionary 
        elements of the Armed Forces of the United States and, 
        as appropriate, to friends and allies of the United 
        States.
  [(b) Endorsement of Additional Measures.--As an additional 
component of the overall goal of protecting the United States 
against the threat posed by ballistic missiles, Congress 
endorses such additional measures as--
          [(1) joint discussions between the United States and 
        other nuclear weapons states on strengthening nuclear 
        command and control, to include discussions concerning 
        the use of permissive action links and post-launch 
        destruct mechanisms on all intercontinental-range 
        ballistic missiles of the two nations;
          [(2) reductions that enhance stability in strategic 
        weapons of the United States and Russia to levels below 
        the limitations of the Strategic Arms Reduction Talks 
        (START) Treaties, to include the down-loading of 
        multiple warhead ballistic missiles, as appropriate; 
        and
          [(3) reinvigorated efforts to halt the proliferation 
        of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction.

[SEC. 233. IMPLEMENTATION OF GOAL.

  [(a) In General.--To implement the goal specified in section 
232(a), the Congress--
          [(1) directs the Secretary of Defense to take the 
        actions specified in subsection (b); and
          [(2) urges the President to take the actions 
        described in subsection (c).
  [(b) Actions of the Secretary of Defense.--
          [(1) Theater missile defense systems.--The Secretary 
        of Defense shall develop advanced theater missile 
        defense systems for deployment in compliance with the 
        ABM Treaty, including any protocol or amendment 
        thereto.
          [(2) Initial abm deployment.--The Secretary shall 
        conduct a research and development program to develop 
        and maintain the option to deploy a cost-effective, 
        operationally effective, and ABM Treaty-compliant 
        antiballistic missile system at a single site as the 
        initial step toward deployment of an antiballistic 
        missile system described in section 232(a)(1) designed 
        to protect the United States against limited ballistic 
        missile threats, including accidental or unauthorized 
        launches or Third World attacks. The system components 
        to be developed shall include--
                  [(A) 100 ground-based interceptors, the 
                design of which is to be determined by 
                competition and downselection for the most 
                capable interceptor or interceptors;
                  [(B) fixed, ground-based, antiballistic 
                missile battle management radars; and
                  [(C) optimum utilization of space-based 
                sensors, including sensors capable of cueing 
                ground-based antiballistic missile interceptors 
                and providing initial targeting vectors, and 
                other sensor systems that are not prohibited by 
                the ABM Treaty, including specifically the 
                Ground Surveillance and Tracking System.
  [(c) Presidential Actions.--Congress urges the President to 
pursue immediate discussions with Russia and other successor 
states of the former Soviet Union, as appropriate, on the 
feasibility of, and mutual interest in, amendments to the ABM 
Treaty to permit--
          [(1) clarification of the distinctions for the 
        purposes of the ABM Treaty between theater missile 
        defenses and anti-ballistic missile defenses, including 
        interceptors, radars, and other sensors; and
          [(2) increased use of space-based sensors for direct 
        battle management.

[SEC. 238. REVIEW OF FOLLOW-ON DEPLOYMENT OPTIONS.

  [Once development testing of components for a Limited Defense 
System has begun, the President and the Congress shall assess 
the progress in the ABM Treaty amendments negotiation called 
for under section 233(c) and shall consider the options 
available to the United States as now exist under the ABM 
Treaty. To assist in this review process, the President shall 
submit to the Congress not later than May 1, 1994, an interim 
report on the progress of the negotiations, and shall submit to 
the Congress additional interim reports on the progress of such 
negotiations at six-month intervals thereafter until such time 
as the President notifies the Congress that such negotiations 
have been concluded or terminated.

[SEC. 239. ABM TREATY DEFINED.

  [For purposes of this part, the term ``ABM Treaty'' means the 
Treaty between the United States of America and the Union of 
Soviet Socialist Republics on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic 
Missiles, signed in Moscow on May 26, 1972.

[SEC. 240. INTERPRETATION.

  [Nothing in this part may be construed to imply--
          [(1) congressional authorization for development, 
        testing, or deployment of anti-ballistic missile 
        systems in violation of the ABM Treaty, including any 
        protocol or amendment to that treaty; or
          [(2) final congressional authorization for deployment 
        of anti-ballistic missile systems in compliance with 
        the ABM Treaty.]
          * * * * * * *

                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

          * * * * * * *

                          Part B--Limitations

          * * * * * * *

[SEC. 316. LIMITATIONS ON THE USE OF DEFENSE BUSINESS OPERATIONS FUND.

  [(a) Management Method.--The Secretary of Defense may manage 
the performance of the working-capital funds and industrial, 
commercial, and support type activities described in subsection 
(b) through the use of a single Defense Business Operations 
Fund (in this section referred to as the ``Fund''). Except for 
the funds and activities specified in subsection (b), no other 
functions, activities, funds, or accounts of the Department of 
Defense may be managed through the Defense Business Operations 
Fund.
  [(b) Funds and Activities Included.--The funds and activities 
referred to in subsection (a) are--
          [(1) working-capital funds established under section 
        2208 of title 10, United States Code, and in existence 
        on the date of the enactment of this Act;
          [(2) those activities that, on the date of the 
        enactment of this Act, are funded through the use of a 
        working-capital fund established under that section; 
        and
          [(3) the Defense Finance and Accounting Service, the 
        Defense Industrial Plant Equipment Center, the Defense 
        Commissary Agency, the Defense Technical Information 
        Service, and the Defense Reutilization and Marketing 
        Service.
  [(c) Separate Accounting, Reporting, and Auditing of Funds 
and Activities.--For purposes of accounting, financial 
reporting, and auditing, the Secretary of Defense shall 
maintain--
          [(1) the separate identity of each fund and activity 
        managed through the Fund that (before the establishment 
        of the Fund) was managed as a separate fund or 
        activity; and
          [(2) separate records for each function for which 
        payment is made through the Fund and which (before the 
        establishment of the Fund) was paid directly through 
        appropriations, including the separate identity of the 
        appropriation account used to pay for the performance 
        of the function.
  [(d) Comprehensive Management Plan.--(1) Not later than 30 
days after the date of the enactment of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994, the Secretary of 
Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a 
comprehensive management plan for the Defense Business 
Operations Fund. The Secretary shall identify in the plan the 
actions the Secretary will take to improve the implementation 
and operation of the Defense Business Operations Fund.
  [(2)(A) The plan shall also include the following matters:
          [(i) The specific tasks to be performed to address 
        the serious shortcomings that exist in the Fund's 
        implementation and operation.
          [(ii) Milestones for starting and completing each 
        task.
          [(iii) A statement of the resources needed to 
        complete each task.
          [(iv) The specific organizations within the 
        Department of Defense that are responsible for 
        accomplishing each task.
          [(v) Department of Defense plans to monitor the 
        implementation of all corrective actions.
  [(B) The plan shall also address the following specific 
areas:
          [(i) The management and organizational structure of 
        the Fund.
          [(ii) The development and implementation of the 
        policies and procedures, including cash management and 
        internal controls, applicable to the Fund.
          [(iii) Management reporting, including financial and 
        operational reporting.
          [(iv) Accuracy and reliability of cost accounting 
        data.
          [(v) Development and use of performance indicators to 
        measure the efficiency and effectiveness of Fund 
        operations.
          [(vi) The status of efforts to develop and implement 
        new financial systems for the Fund.
  [(e) Progress Report on Implementation.--Not later than 
February 1, 1994, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the 
congressional defense committees a report on the progress made 
in implementing the comprehensive management plan required by 
subsection (d). The report shall describe the progress made in 
reaching the milestones established in the plan and provide an 
explanation for the failure to meet any of the milestones. The 
Secretary shall submit a copy of the report to the Comptroller 
General of the United States at the same time the Secretary 
submits the report to the congressional defense committees.
  [(f) Responsibilities of the Comptroller General.--(1) The 
Comptroller General shall monitor and evaluate the progress of 
the Department of Defense in developing and implementing the 
comprehensive management plan required by subsection (d).
  [(2) Not later than March 1, 1994, the Comptroller General 
shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report 
containing the following:
          [(A) The findings and conclusions of the Comptroller 
        General resulting from the monitoring and evaluation 
        conducted under paragraph (1).
          [(B) An evaluation of the progress report submitted 
        to the congressional defense committees by the 
        Secretary of Defense pursuant to subsection (e).
          [(C) Any recommendations for legislation or 
        administrative action concerning the Fund that the 
        Comptroller General considers appropriate.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                    Part C--Environmental Provisions

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 343. USE OF PROCEEDS FROM THE SALE OF CERTAIN LOST, ABANDONED, OR 
                    UNCLAIMED PERSONAL PROPERTY.

  (a) [Demonstration Project] Special Rule Regarding 
Proceeds.--Notwithstanding section 2575(b) of title 10, United 
States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall conduct a 
[demonstration project] permanent program under which the 
proceeds from the sale under that section of lost, abandoned, 
or unclaimed property found on a military installation referred 
to in subsection (b) shall be credited to the operation and 
maintenance account of that installation and used--
          (1)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
  [(d) Period of Demonstration Project.--The demonstration 
project required by subsection (a) shall--
          [(1) terminate at the end of the two-year period 
        beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act; and
          [(2) apply with respect to the disposal during that 
        period under section 2575 of title 10, United States 
        Code, of property found on the military installations 
        referred to in subsection (b).
  [(e) Report.--Not later than 60 days after the end of the 
two-year period described in subsection (d), the Secretary of 
Defense shall submit a report to Congress describing the 
results of the demonstration project required by subsection 
(a).]
    (d) Application of Special Rule.--The special rule provided 
by subsection (a) shall apply with respect to the disposal 
under section 2575 of title 10, United States Code, of property 
found on the military installations referred to in subsection 
(b).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


              TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

          * * * * * * *

                         Part B--Reserve Forces

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 414. PILOT PROGRAM FOR ACTIVE COMPONENT SUPPORT OF THE RESERVES.

  (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (c) Personnel To Be Assigned.--(1) The Secretary shall assign 
not less than 2,000 active component personnel to serve as 
advisers under the program. After September 30, 1994, the 
number under the preceding sentence shall be increased to not 
less than 5,000.
  (2) The Secretary of Defense may count toward the number of 
active component personnel required under paragraph (1) to be 
assigned to serve as advisers under the program under this 
section any active component personnel who are assigned to an 
active component unit (A) that was established principally for 
the purpose of providing dedicated training support to reserve 
component units, and (B) the primary mission of which is to 
provide such dedicated training support.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

SEC. 2001. SHORT TITLE.

  This division may be cited as the ``Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1992''.
          * * * * * * *

                    TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

          * * * * * * *

              Part B--Defense Base Closure and Realignment

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 2827. FUNDING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AT MILITARY 
                    INSTALLATIONS TO BE CLOSED AND REPORT ON 
                    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION COSTS AT SUCH 
                    INSTALLATIONS.

  (a)  * * *
  [(b) Report on Environmental Restoration Costs for 
Installations To Be Closed Under 1990 Base Closure Law.--(1) 
Each year, at the same time the President submits to Congress 
the budget for a fiscal year (pursuant to section 1105 of title 
31, United States Code), the Secretary of Defense shall submit 
to Congress a report on the funding needed for the fiscal year 
for which the budget is submitted, and for each of the 
following four fiscal years, for environmental restoration 
activities at each military installation described in paragraph 
(2), set forth separately by fiscal year for each military 
installation.
  [(2) The report required under paragraph (1) shall cover each 
military installation which is to be closed pursuant to the 
Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of 
title XXIX of Public Law 101-510).]
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT 1986

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Part B--Strategic Defense Initiative

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 222. REQUIREMENT FOR SPECIFIC AUTHORIZATION FOR DEPLOYMENT OF 
                    STRATEGIC DEFENSE INITIATIVE SYSTEM.

  [A strategic defense system developed as a consequence of 
research, development, test, and evaluation conducted on the 
Strategic Defense Initiative program may not be deployed in 
whole or in part unless--
          [(1) the President determines and certifies to 
        Congress in writing that--
                  [(A) the system is survivable (that is, the 
                system is able to maintain a sufficient degree 
                of effectiveness to fulfull its mission, even 
                in the face of determined attacks against it); 
                and
                  [(B) the system is cost effective at the 
                margin to the extent that the system is able to 
                maintain its effectiveness against the offense 
                at less cost than it would take to develop 
                offensive countermeasures and proliferate the 
                ballistic missiles necessary to overcome it; 
                and
          [(2) funding for the deployment of such system has 
        been specifically authorized by legislation enacted 
        after the date on which the President makes the 
        certification to Congress.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 225. CONGRESSIONAL EXPRESSION ON THE STRATEGIC DEFENSE INITIATIVE 
                    AND THE ABM TREATY.

  [(a) Findings Regarding ABM Treaty.--The Congress finds--
          [(1) that the President's Commission on Strategic 
        Forces declared in its report to the President, dated 
        March 21, 1984, that ``One of the most successful arms 
        control agreements is the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty 
        of 1972''; and
          [(2) that the Secretary of State has stated that the 
        ``ABM Treaty requires consultations, and the President 
        has explicitly recognized that any ABM-related 
        deployments arising from research into ballistic 
        missile defenses would be a matter for consultations 
        and negotiation between the Parties''.
  [(b) Sense of Congress Regarding SDI and the ABM Treaty.--It 
is the sense of Congress--
          [(1) that it fully supports the declared policy of 
        the President that a principal objective of the United 
        States in negotiations with the Soviet Union on nuclear 
        and space arms is to reverse the erosion of the Anti-
        Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972;
          [(2) that action by the Congress in approving funds 
        for research on the Strategic Defense Initiative--
                  [(A) does not express or imply an intention 
                on the part of the Congress that the United 
                States should abrogate, violate, or otherwise 
                erode such treaty; and
                  [(B) does not express or imply any 
                determination or commitment on the part of the 
                Congress that the United States develop, test, 
                or deploy ballistic missile strategic defense 
                weaponry that would contravene such treaty; and
          [(3) that funds appropriated for the Strategic 
        Defense Initiative program should not be used in a 
        manner inconsistent with any of the treaties commonly 
        known as the Limited Test Ban Treaty, the Threshold 
        Test Ban Treaty, the Outer Space Treaty, or the Anti-
        Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


            [TITLE VIII--MILITARY FAMILY POLICY AND PROGRAMS

[SEC. 801. SHORT TITLE.

  [This title may be cited as the ``Military Family Act of 
1985''.

[SEC. 802. OFFICE OF FAMILY POLICY.

  [(a) Establishment.--There is hereby established in the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense an Office of Family Policy 
(hereinafter in this section referred to as the ``Office''). 
The Office shall be under the Assistant Secretary of Defense 
for Force Management and Personnel.
  [(b) Duties.--The Office--
          [(1) shall coordinate programs and activities of the 
        military departments to the extent that they relate to 
        military families; and
          [(2) shall make recommendations to the Secretaries of 
        the military departments with respect to programs and 
        policies regarding military families.
  [(c) Staff.--The Office shall have not less than five 
professional staff members.
  [(d) Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit a report 
to Congress concerning the Office no later than September 30, 
1986. The report shall include--
          [(1) a description of the activities of the Office 
        and the composition of its staff; and
          [(2) the recommendations of the Office for 
        legislative and administrative action to enhance the 
        well-being of military families.

[SEC. 803. TRANSFER OF MILITARY FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER.

  [The Military Family Resource Center of the Department of 
Defense is hereby transferred from the Office of the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs to the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary for Force Management and Personnel.

[SEC. 804. SURVEYS OF MILITARY FAMILIES.

  [The Secretary of Defense may conduct surveys of members of 
the Armed Forces serving on active duty, members of the 
families of such members, and retired members of the Armed 
Forces to determine the effectiveness of existing Federal 
programs relating to military families and the need for new 
programs. Responses to surveys conducted under this section 
shall be voluntary. With respect to such surveys, family 
members of members of the Armed Forces and retired members of 
the Armed Forces shall be considered to be employees of the 
United States for purposes of section 3502(4)(A) of title 44, 
United States Code.

[SEC. 805. FAMILY MEMBERS SERVING ON ADVISORY COMMITTEES.

  [A committee within the Department of Defense which advises 
or assists the Department in the performance of any function 
which affects members of military families and which includes 
members of military families in its membership shall not be 
considered an advisory committee under section 3(2) of the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) solely because 
of such membership.

[SEC. 806. EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR MILITARY SPOUSES.

  [(a) Authority.--The President shall order such measures as 
the President considers necessary to increase employment 
opportunities for spouses of members of the Armed Forces. Such 
measures may include--
          [(1) excepting, pursuant to section 3302 of title 5, 
        United States Code, from the competitive service 
        positions in the Department of Defense located outside 
        of the United States to provide employment 
        opportunities for qualified spouses of members of the 
        Armed Forces in the same geographical area as the 
        permanent duty station of the members; and
          [(2) providing preference in hiring for positions in 
        nonappropriated fund activities to qualified spouses of 
        members of the Armed Forces stationed in the same 
        geographical area as the nonappropriated fund activity 
        for positions in wage grade UA-8 and below and 
        equivalent positions and for positions paid at hourly 
        rates.
  [(b) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe 
regulations--
          [(1) to implement such measures as the President 
        orders under subsection (a);
          [(2) to provide preference to qualified spouses of 
        members of the Armed Forces in hiring for any civilian 
        position in the Department of Defense if the spouse is 
        among persons determined to be best qualified for the 
        position and if the position is located in the same 
        geographical area as the permanent duty station of the 
        member;
          [(3) to ensure that notice of any vacant position in 
        the Department of Defense is provided in a manner 
        reasonably designed to reach spouses of members of the 
        Armed Forces whose permanent duty stations are in the 
        same geographic area as the area in which the position 
        is located; and
          [(4) to ensure that the spouse of a member of the 
        Armed Forces who applies for a vacant position in the 
        Department of Defense shall, to the extent practicable, 
        be considered for any such position located in the same 
        geographic area as the permanent duty station of the 
        member.
  [(c) Status of Preference Eligibles.--Nothing in this section 
shall be construed to provide a spouse of a member of the Armed 
Forces with preference in hiring over an individual who is a 
preference eligible.

[SEC. 807. YOUTH SPONSORSHIP PROGRAM.

  [The Secretary of Defense shall direct that there be 
established at each military installation a youth sponsorship 
program to facilitate the integration of dependent children of 
members of the Armed Forces into new surroundings when moving 
to that military installation as a result of a parent's 
permanent change of station. Such a program shall, to the 
extent feasible, provide for involvement of dependent children 
of members presently stationed at the military installation.

[SEC. 808. DEPENDENT STUDENT TRAVEL WITHIN THE UNITED STATES.

  [Funds available to the Department of Defense for the travel 
and transportation of dependent students of members of the 
Armed Forces stationed overseas may be obligated for 
transportation allowances for travel within or between the 
contiguous States.

[SEC. 809. RELOCATION AND HOUSING.

  [(a) Relocation Assistance.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
submit to Congress a report on the desirability and feasibility 
of providing relocation assistance to members of the uniformed 
services and their families through contracts entered into by 
the Department of Defense with firms which provide such 
assistance to individuals. Such report shall be submitted not 
later than March 1, 1986.
  [(b) Amortization Period for Parking Facilities for House 
Trailers and Mobile Homes.--Section 403(k) of title 37, United 
States Code, is amended by striking out ``15-year period'' and 
inserting in lieu thereof ``25-year period''.
  [(c) Cost of Unaccompanied Personnel Housing for Members of 
Uniformed Service.--Section 5911 of title 5, United States 
Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new 
subsection:
  [``(h) A member of the uniformed service on a permanent 
change of duty station or temporary duty orders and occupying 
unaccompanied personnel housing--
          [``(1) is exempt from the requirement of subsection 
        (c) to pay a rental rate or charge based on the 
        reasonable value of the quarters and facilities 
        provided; and
          [``(2) shall pay such lesser rate or charge as the 
        Secretary of Defense establishes by regulation.''.

[SEC. 810. FOOD PROGRAMS.

  [(a) Food Costs for Certain Enlisted Members.--Section 1011 
of title 37, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 
end thereof the following new subsection:
  [``(c) Spouses and dependent children of enlisted members in 
pay grades E-1, E-2, E-3, and E-4 may not be charged for meals 
sold at messes in excess of a level sufficient to cover food 
costs.''.
  [(b) Report on Issuance of Food Stamps Coupons to Overseas 
Households of Members Stationed Outside the United States.--(1) 
The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on 
the feasibility of having the Department issue food stamp 
coupons to overseas households of members stationed outside the 
United States.
  [(2) The report shall include--
          [(A) an estimate of the cost of providing the 
        coupons; and
          [(B) legislative and administrative recommendations 
        for providing for the issuance of the coupons.
  [(3) The report shall be submitted not later than December 
31, 1985.

[SEC. 811. REPORTING OF CHILD ABUSE.

  [(a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall request each 
State to provide for the reporting to the Secretary of any 
report the State receives of known or suspected instances of 
child abuse and neglect in which the person having care of the 
child is a member of the Armed Forces (or the spouse of the 
member).
  [(b) Definition.--For purposes of this section the term 
``child abuse and neglect'' shall have the same meaning as 
provided in section 3(1) of the Child Abuse Prevention and 
Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5102).

[SEC. 812. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

  [(a) Housing Availability.--(1) The Secretary of Defense 
shall submit to Congress a report on the availability and 
affordability of off-base housing for members of the Armed 
Forces and their families.
  [(2) The report shall--
          [(A) examine the availability of affordable housing 
        for each pay grade and for all geographic areas within 
        the United States and for appropriate overseas 
        locations; and
          [(B) examine the relocation assistance provided by 
        the Department of Defense incident to a permanent 
        change of station by a member of the Armed Forces in 
        locating housing at the member's new duty station and 
        in disposing of housing at the member's old duty 
        station.
  [(3) The report shall be submitted within one year after the 
date of the enactment of this Act.
  [(b) Need for Assistance to Dependents Entering New Secondary 
Schools.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a 
report recommending administrative and legislative action to 
assist families of members of the Armed Forces making a 
permanent change of station so that a dependent child who 
transfers between secondary schools with different graduation 
requirements is not subjected to unnecessary disruptions in 
education or inequitable, unduly burdensome, or duplicative 
education requirements. Such report shall be submitted within 
one year after the date of the enactment of this Act.

[SEC. 813. EFFECTIVE DATE.

  [This title shall take effect on October 1, 1985.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEARS 1988 AND 1989

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                  Part C--Strategic Defense Initiative


Subpart 1--SDI Funding and Program Limitations and Requirements

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



[SEC. 226. PROHIBITION ON DEPLOYMENT OF ANTI-BALLISTIC MISSILE SYSTEM 
                    UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY LAW.

  [The Secretary of Defense may not deploy any anti-ballistic 
missile system unless such deployment is specifically 
authorized by law after the date of the enactment of this Act.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE XII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                   Part B--Force Structure and Policy


SEC. 1211. IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES REORGANIZATION.

  (a) * * *
  (b) Resources for CINCSOF.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
provide sufficient resources for the commander of the unified 
combatant command for special operations forces established 
pursuant to section 167 of title 10, United States Code, to 
carry out his duties and responsibilities, including 
particularly his duties and responsibilities relating to the 
following functions:
          (1) Developing and acquiring special operations-
        peculiar equipment and acquiring special operations-
        peculiar material, supplies, and services.
          (2) Providing advice and assistance to [the Assistant 
        Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low 
        Intensity Conflict] the official designated by the 
        Secretary of Defense to have principal responsibility 
        for matters relating to special operations and low 
        intensity conflict in the Assistant Secretary's overall 
        supervision of the preparation and justification of the 
        program recommendations and budget proposals for 
        special operations forces.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


   SECTION 8123 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1989

  [Sec. 8123. Whereas the Congress supports the President's 
goal of reducing United States and Soviet conventional forces 
in Europe and reducing United States and Soviet strategic 
nuclear forces;
  [Whereas it is important the Congress and the President be in 
agreement on United States national security goals and 
objectives in order for the United States to be in the 
strongest possible position to negotiate with the Soviet Union 
future reductions in conventional and strategic nuclear forces;
  [Whereas the Congress strongly opposes the undercutting of 
these arms reduction negotiations by either the United States 
or the Soviet Union through unnecessary military initiatives or 
counter-productive arms control proposals;
  [Whereas no decision has been made on the development or 
deployment of strategic defenses:
  [Therefore, it is the sense of the Congress that--
          [(1) in order to maintain the basis for strong 
        deterrence, the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) 
        should be a long-term and robust research program to 
        provide the United States with expanded options for 
        responding to a Soviet breakout from the 1972 Anti-
        Ballistic Missile Treaty and to respond to other future 
        Soviet arms initiatives that might pose a grave threat 
        to United States national security;
          [(2) by expanding potential United States strategic 
        options the SDI research program can enhance United 
        States leverage in the United States-Soviet arms 
        reduction negotiations and serve as a safeguard for 
        ensuring that negotiated agreements are kept;
          [(3) future research plans and budgets for SDI must 
        be established using realistic projections of available 
        resources in the overall defense budget and must not 
        undercut other important Department of Defense 
        programs; and
          [(4) in matching research priorities against 
        available resources, the primary emphasis of SDI should 
        be to explore promising new technologies, such as 
        directed energy technologies, which might have long-
        term potential to defend against a responsive Soviet 
        offensive nuclear threat.]
                              ----------                              


DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1992

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE VIII

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


  [Sec. 8121. (a) There is established on the books of the 
Treasury a fund entitled the ``Defense Business Operations 
Fund'' (hereinafter referred to as the ``Fund'') to be operated 
as a working capital fund under the provisions of section 2208 
of title 10, United States Code. Existing organizations which 
shall operate as part of the Fund shall include, but not be 
limited to, (1) The Defense Finance and Accounting Service; (2) 
The Defense Commissary Agency; (3) The Defense Technical 
Information Center; (4) The Defense Reutilization and Marketing 
Service; and (5) The Defense Industrial Plant Equipment 
Service.
  [(b) Upon the enactment of this Act, there shall be 
transferred to the Fund all assets and balances of working 
capital funds heretofore established under the provisions of 
section 2208 of title 10, United States Code.
  [(c) Amounts charged for supplies and services provided by 
the Fund shall include capital asset charges which shall be 
calculated so that the total amount of the charges assessed 
during any fiscal year shall equal the total amount of (1) the 
costs of equipment purchased during that fiscal year by the 
Fund for the purpose of providing supplies and services by the 
Fund and (2) the costs, other than costs of military 
construction, of capital improvements made for the purpose of 
providing services by the Fund.
  [(d) Capital asset charges collected pursuant to the 
provisions of subsection (c) shall be credited to a subaccount 
of the Fund which shall be available only for the payment of: 
(1) the costs of equipment purchased by the Fund for the 
purpose of providing supplies and services by the Fund and (2) 
the costs other than costs of military construction, of capital 
improvements made for the purposes of providing services by the 
Fund.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [Sec. 8133. (a) Congress finds that:
          [(1) The NATO Alliance has been a cornerstone of 
        United States and world security since its foundation 
        in 1949.
          [(2) All America's NATO allies have in the past been 
        supportive of the objects and purposes of the ABM 
        Treaty.
          [(3) Two of America's NATO allies have strategic 
        forces of their own, which would be directly affected 
        by significant changes to the ABM Treaty.
          [(4) Changes in the ABM Treaty would have profound 
        political and security implications for every member of 
        the NATO Alliance and other allies of the United 
        States.
  [(b) Before initiating negotiations with the Soviet Union 
with the objective of making significant modifications to the 
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, and its associated protocol, the 
President should consult with the allies of the United States 
in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Japan, and other 
allies as appropriate and seek a consensus on negotiating 
objectives concerning defensive systems that would enhance the 
security interests of the member states of NATO and other 
allies and strengthen the NATO Alliance as a whole.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART III--EMPLOYEES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subpart D--Pay and Allowances

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 53--PAY RATES AND SYSTEMS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBCHAPTER II--EXECUTIVE SCHEDULE PAY RATES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 5315. Positions at level IV

  Level IV of the Executive Schedule applies to the following 
positions, for which the annual rate of basic pay shall be the 
rate determined with respect to such level under chapter 11 of 
title 2, as adjusted by section 5318 of this title:
          Deputy Administrator of General Services.
          Associate Administrator of the National Aeronautics 
        and Space Administration.
          Assistant Administrators, Agency for International 
        Development (6).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          Assistant Secretaries of Defense [(11)] (9).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subpart E--Attendance and Leave

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 61--HOURS OF WORK

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBCHAPTER II--FLEXIBLE AND COMPRESSED WORK SCHEDULES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 6121. Definitions

    For purposes of this subchapter--
          (1) ``agency'' means any Executive agency, any 
        military department, the Government Printing Office, 
        and the Library of Congress;
          [(2) ``employee'' has the meaning given it by section 
        2105 of this title;]
          (2) ``employee'' has the meaning given it by section 
        2105(a) and also includes those paid from 
        nonappropriated funds of the Army and Air Force 
        Exchange Service, Navy Ship's Stores Ashore, Navy 
        exchanges, Marine Corps exchanges, Coast Guard 
        exchanges, and other instrumentalities of the United 
        States under the jurisdiction of the armed forces 
        conducted for the comfort, pleasure, contentment, and 
        mental and physical improvement of personnel of the 
        armed forces;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 63--LEAVE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBCHAPTER II--OTHER PAID LEAVE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 6323. Military leave; Reserves and National Guardsmen

  (a)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d)(1) A military reserve technician described in section 
8401(30) is entitled at such person's request to leave without 
loss of, or reduction in, pay, leave to which such person is 
otherwise entitled, credit for time or service, or performance 
or efficiency rating for each day, not to exceed 44 workdays in 
a calendar year, in which such person is on active duty without 
pay, as authorized pursuant to section 12315 of title 10, under 
section 12301(b) or 12301(d) of title 10 (other than active 
duty during a war or national emergency declared by the 
President or Congress) for participation in noncombat 
operations outside the United States, its territories and 
possessions.
  (2) An employee who requests annual leave or compensatory 
time to which the employee is otherwise entitled, for a period 
during which the employee would have been entitled upon request 
to leave under this subsection, may be granted such annual 
leave or compensatory time without regard to this section or 
section 5519.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subpart G--Insurance and Annuities

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 89--HEALTH INSURANCE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 8905a. Continued coverage

  (a)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d)(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (4)(A) If the basis for continued coverage under this section 
is an involuntary separation from a position, or a voluntary 
separation from a surplus position, in or under the Department 
of Defense due to a reduction in force--
          (i) the individual shall be liable for not more than 
        the employee contributions referred to in paragraph 
        (1)(A)(i); and
          (ii) the agency which last employed the individual 
        shall pay the remaining portion of the amount required 
        under paragraph (1)(A).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (C) For the purpose of this paragraph, ``surplus position'' 
means a position which is identified in pre-reduction in force 
planning as no longer required, and which is expected to be 
eliminated under formal reduction-in-force procedures.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


TITLE 37, UNITED STATES CODE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 3--BASIC PAY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 204. Entitlement

  (a)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (g)(1) A member of a reserve component of a uniformed service 
is entitled, to the pay and allowances provided by law or 
regulation for a member of a regular component of a uniformed 
service of corresponding grade and length of service whenever 
such member is physically disabled as the result of an injury, 
illness, or disease incurred or aggravated--
          (A) in line of duty while performing active duty;
          (B) in line of duty while performing inactive-duty 
        training (other than work or study in connection with a 
        correspondence course of an armed force or attendance 
        in an inactive status at an educational institution 
        under the sponsorship of an armed force or the Public 
        Health Service); [or]
          (C) while traveling directly to or from such duty or 
        training[.]; or
          (D) in line of duty while remaining overnight, 
        between successive periods of inactive-duty training, 
        at or in the vicinity of the site of the inactive-duty 
        training, and the site is outside reasonable commuting 
        distance from the member's residence.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (h)(1) A member of a reserve component of a uniformed service 
who is physically able to perform his military duties, is 
entitled, upon request, to a portion of the monthly pay and 
allowances provided by law or regulation for a member of a 
regular component of a uniformed service of corresponding grade 
and length of service for each month for which the member 
demonstrates a loss of earned income from nonmilitary 
employment or self-employment as a result of an injury, 
illness, or disease incurred or aggravated--
          (A) in line of duty while performing active duty;
          (B) in line of duty while performing inactive-duty 
        training (other than work or study in connection with a 
        correspondence course of an armed force or attendance 
        in an inactive status at an educational institution 
        under the sponsorship of an armed force or the Public 
        Health Service); [or]
          (C) while traveling directly to or from that duty or 
        training[.]; or
          (D) in line of duty while remaining overnight, 
        between successive periods of inactive-duty training, 
        at or in the vicinity of the site of the inactive-duty 
        training, and the site is outside reasonable commuting 
        distance from the member's residence.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 206. Reserves; members of National Guard: inactive-duty training

  (a) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary concerned, 
and to the extent provided for by appropriations, a member of 
the National Guard or a member of a reserve component of a 
uniformed service who is not entitled to basic pay under 
section 204 of this title, is entitled to compensation, at the 
rate of \1/30\ of the basic pay authorized for a member of a 
uniformed service of a corresponding grade entitled to basic 
pay--
          (1)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (3) for a regular period of instruction that the 
        member is scheduled to perform but is unable to perform 
        because of physical disability resulting from an 
        injury, illness, or disease incurred or aggravated--
                  (A) in line of duty while performing--
                          (i) active duty; or
                          (ii) inactive-duty training; [or]
                  (B) while traveling directly to or from that 
                duty or training (unless such injury, illness, 
                disease, or aggravation of an injury, illness, 
                or disease is the result of the gross 
                negligence or misconduct of the member)[.]; or
                  (C) in line of duty while remaining 
                overnight, between successive periods of 
                inactive-duty training, at or in the vicinity 
                of the site of the inactive-duty training, and 
                the site is outside reasonable commuting 
                distance from the member's residence.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                 CHAPTER 5--SPECIAL AND INCENTIVE PAYS

Sec.
301. Incentive pay: hazardous duty.
301a. Incentive pay: aviation career.
301b. Special pay: aviation career officers extending period of active 
          duty.
     * * * * * * *
302g. Special pay: Selected Reserve health care professionals in 
          critically short wartime specialties.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 301a. Incentive pay: aviation career

    (a)(1)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (4) To be entitled to continuous monthly incentive pay, an 
officer must perform the prescribed operational flying duties 
(including flight training but excluding proficiency flying) 
for [9] 8 of the first 12, and 12 of the first 18 years of the 
aviation service of the officer. However, if an officer 
performs the prescribed operational flying duties (including 
flight training but excluding proficiency flying) for at least 
10 but less than 12 of the first 18 years of the aviation 
service of the officer, the officer will be entitled to 
continuous monthly incentive pay for the first 22 years of the 
officer's service as an officer. Entitlement to continuous 
monthly incentive pay ceases for an officer (other than a 
warrant officer) upon completion of 25 years of service as an 
officer (as computed under section 205 of this title), but such 
an officer in a pay grade below pay grade O-7 remains entitled 
to monthly incentive pay under subsection (b)(1) for the 
performance of operational flying duty.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 301b. Special pay: aviation career officers extending period of 
                    active duty

    (a) Bonus Authorized.--An aviation officer described in 
subsection (b) who, during the period beginning on January 1, 
1989, and ending on [September 30, 1995] September 30, 1998, 
executes a written agreement to remain on active duty in 
aviation service for at least one year may, upon the acceptance 
of the agreement by the Secretary concerned, be paid a 
retention bonus as provided in this section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 302d. Special pay: accession bonus for registered nurses

    (a) Accession Bonus Authorized.--(1) A person who is a 
registered nurse and who, during the period beginning on 
November 29, 1989, and ending on [September 30, 1996] September 
30, 1998, executes a written agreement described in subsection 
(c) to accept a commission as an officer and remain on active 
duty for a period of not less than four years may, upon the 
acceptance of the agreement by the Secretary concerned, be paid 
an accession bonus in an amount determined by the Secretary 
concerned.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 302e. Special pay: nurse anesthetists

    (a) Special Pay Authorized.--(1) An officer described in 
subsection (b)(1) who, during the period beginning on November 
29, 1989, and ending on [September 30, 1996] September 30, 
1998, executes a written agreement to remain on active duty for 
a period of one year or more may, upon the acceptance of the 
agreement by the Secretary concerned, be paid incentive special 
pay in an amount not to exceed $15,000 for any 12-month period.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 302g. Special pay: Selected Reserve health care professionals in 
                    critically short wartime specialties

  (a) Special Pay Authorized.--An officer of a reserve 
component of the armed forces described in subsection (b) who 
executes a written agreement under which the officer agrees to 
serve in the Selected Reserve of an armed force for a period of 
not less than one year nor more than three years, beginning on 
the date the officer accepts the award of special pay under 
this section, may be paid special pay at an annual rate not to 
exceed $10,000.
  (b) Eligible Officers.--An officer referred to in subsection 
(a) is an officer in a health care profession who is qualified 
in a specialty designated by regulations as a critically short 
wartime specialty.
  (c) Time for Payment.--Special pay under this section shall 
be paid annually at the beginning of each twelve-month period 
for which the officer has agreed to serve.
  (d) Refund Requirement.--An officer who voluntarily 
terminates service in the Selected Reserve of an armed force 
before the end of the period for which a payment was made to 
such officer under this section shall refund to the United 
States the full amount of the payment made for the period on 
which the payment was based.
  (e) Inapplicability of Discharge in Bankruptcy.--A discharge 
in bankruptcy under title 11 that is entered less than five 
years after the termination of an agreement under this section 
does not discharge the person receiving special pay under the 
agreement from the debt arising under the agreement.
  (f) Termination of Agreement Authority.--No agreement under 
this section may be entered into after September 30, 1998.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 303a. Special pay: health professionals; general provisions

  (a) The Secretary of Defense, with respect to the Army, Navy, 
and Air Force, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 
with respect to the Public Health Service, shall prescribe 
regulations for the administration of sections 301d, [302, 
302a, 302b, 302c, 302d, 302e,] 302 through 302g, and 303 of 
this title.
  (b) Special pay authorized under sections 301d, [302, 302a, 
302b, 302c, 302d, 302e,] 302 through 302g, and 303 of this 
title is in addition to any other pay or allowance to which an 
officer is entitled. The amount of special pay to which an 
officer is entitled under any of such sections may not be 
included in computing the amount of any increase in pay 
authorized by any other provision of this title or in computing 
retired pay, separation pay, severance pay, or readjustment 
pay.
  (c) The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a review every two 
years of the special pay for health professionals authorized by 
sections 301d, [302, 302a, 302b, 302c, 302d, 302e,] 302 through 
302g, and 303 of this title.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 305a. Special pay: career sea pay

  (a)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d)(1) In this section, the term ``sea duty'' means duty 
performed by a member--
          (A) while permanently or temporarily assigned to a 
        ship, ship-based staff, or ship-based aviation unit and 
        while serving on a ship the primary mission of which is 
        accomplished while under way [or], while serving as a 
        member of the off-crew of a two-crewed submarine, or 
        while serving as a member of a tender-class ship (with 
        the hull classification of submarine or destroyer); or

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 307. Special pay: special duty assignment pay for enlisted members

  (a) An enlisted member who is entitled to basic pay and is 
performing duties which have been designated under subsection 
(b) as extremely difficult or as involving an unusual degree of 
responsibility in a military skill may, in addition to other 
pay or allowances to which he is entitled, be paid special duty 
assignment pay at a monthly rate not to exceed $275. In the 
case of a member who is serving as a military recruiter and is 
eligible for special duty assignment pay under this subsection 
on account of such duty, the Secretary concerned may increase 
the monthly rate of special duty assignment pay for the member 
to not more than $375.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 308. Special pay: reenlistment bonus

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (g) No bonus shall be paid under this section with respect to 
any reenlistment, or voluntary extension of an active-duty 
reenlistment, in the armed forces entered into after [September 
30, 1996] September 30, 1998.

Sec. 308a. Special pay: enlistment bonus

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) No bonus shall be paid under this section with respect to 
any enlistment or extension of an initial period of active duty 
in the armed forces made after [September 30, 1996] September 
30, 1998.

Sec. 308b. Special pay: reenlistment bonus for members of the Selected 
                    Reserve

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) No bonus may be paid under this section to any enlisted 
member who, after [September 30, 1996] September 30, 1998, 
reenlists or voluntarily extends his enlistment in a reserve 
component.

Sec. 308c. Special pay: bonus for enlistment in the Selected Reserve

    (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) No bonus may be paid under this section to any enlisted 
member who, after [September 30, 1996] September 30, 1998, 
enlists in the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve of an 
armed force.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 308d. Special pay: enlisted members of the Selected Reserve 
                    assigned to certain high priority units

    (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (c) Additional compensation may not be paid under this 
section for inactive duty performed after [September 30, 1996] 
September 30, 1998.

Sec. 308e. Special pay: bonus for reserve affiliation agreement

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) No bonus may be paid under this section to any person for 
a reserve obligation agreement entered into after [September 
30, 1996] September 30, 1998.

Sec. 308f. Special pay: bonus for enlistment in the Army

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) No bonus may be paid under this section with respect to 
an enlistment in the Army after [September 30, 1996] September 
30, 1998.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 308h. Special pay: bonus for reenlistment, enlistment, or 
                    voluntary extension of enlistment in elements of 
                    the Ready Reserve other than the Selected Reserve

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (g) A bonus may not be paid under this section to any person 
for a reenlistment, enlistment, or voluntary extension of an 
enlistment after [September 30, 1996] September 30, 1998.

Sec. 308i. Special pay: prior service enlistment bonus

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (i) No bonus may be paid under this section to any person for 
an enlistment after [September 30, 1996] September 30, 1998.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 312. Special pay: nuclear-qualified officers extending period of 
                    active duty

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) The provisions of this section shall be effective only in 
the case of officers who, on or before [September 30, 1996] 
September 30, 1998, execute the required written agreement to 
remain in active service.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 312b. Special pay: nuclear career accession bonus

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) The provisions of this section shall be effective only in 
the case of officers who, on or before [September 30, 1996] 
September 30, 1998, have been accepted for training for duty in 
connection with the supervision, operation, and maintenance of 
naval nuclear propulsion plants.

Sec. 312c. Special pay: nuclear career annual incentive bonus

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) For the purposes of this section, a ``nuclear service 
year'' is any fiscal year beginning before [October 1, 1996] 
October 1, 1998.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 7--ALLOWANCES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 402. Basic allowance for subsistence

  (a) * * *
  (b)(1) An enlisted member is entitled to the basic allowance 
for subsistence on a daily basis, of one of the following 
types--
          [(1)] (A) when rations in kind are not available;
          [(2)] (B) when permission to mess separately is 
        granted; and
          [(3)] (C) when assigned to duty under emergency 
        conditions where no messing facilities of the United 
        States are available.
  (2) The allowance to an enlisted member, when authorized, may 
be paid in advance for a period of not more than three months. 
An enlisted member is entitled to the allowance while on an 
authorized leave of absence, while confined in a hospital, or 
while performing travel under orders away from his designated 
post of duty other than field duty or sea duty. The allowance 
for an enlisted member who is authorized to receive the basic 
allowance for subsistence under this subsection is at the rate 
prescribed in accordance with section 1009 of this title or as 
otherwise prescribed by law.
  (3) Unless he is entitled to basic pay under chapter 3 of 
this title, an enlisted member of a reserve component of a 
uniformed service, or of the National Guard, is entitled, in 
the discretion of the Secretary concerned, to rations in kind, 
or a part thereof, when the instruction or duty periods, 
described in section 206(a) of this title, total at least eight 
hours in a calendar day. The Secretary concerned may provide an 
enlisted member who could be provided rations in kind under the 
preceding sentence with a commutation when rations in kind are 
not available.
  (4) In the case of members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or 
Marine Corps who, when present at their permanent duty station, 
reside without dependents in Government quarters, the Secretary 
concerned may not provide a basic allowance for subsistence to 
more than 12 percent of such members under the jurisdiction of 
the Secretary concerned. The Secretary concerned may exceed 
such percentage during a fiscal year if the Secretary 
determines that compliance would increase costs to the 
Government, would impose financial hardships on members 
otherwise entitled to a basic allowance for subsistence, or 
would reduce the quality of life for such members. This 
paragraph shall not apply to members described in the first 
sentence when the members are not residing at their permanent 
duty station. The percentage limitation specified in this 
paragraph shall be achieved as soon as possible after the date 
of the enactment of this paragraph, but in no case later than 
September 30, 1996.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e)(1) The President may prescribe regulations for the 
administration of this section, including definitions of the 
terms ``field duty'' and ``sea duty'' for the purposes of [the 
third sentence of subsection (b)] subsection (b)(2).
  (2) For purposes of [subsection (b)] subsection (b)(2), a 
member shall not be considered to be performing travel under 
orders away from his designated post of duty if such member--
          (A) is an enlisted member serving his first tour of 
        active duty;
          (B) has not actually reported to a permanent duty 
        station pursuant to orders directing such assignment; 
        and
          (C) is not actually traveling between stations 
        pursuant to orders directing a change of station.

Sec. 403. Basic allowance for quarters

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c)(1) * * *
  (2) A member of a uniformed service without dependents who is 
in a pay grade below pay grade [E-7] E-6 is not entitled to a 
basic allowance for quarters while he is on sea duty. A member 
of a uniformed service without dependents who is in a pay grade 
above [E-6] E-5 who is assigned to sea duty under a permanent 
change of station is not entitled to a basic allowance for 
quarters if the unit to which the member is ordered is deployed 
and the permanent station of the unit is different than the 
permanent station from which the member is reporting.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 403a. Variable housing allowance

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c)[(1) The monthly amount of a variable housing allowance 
under this section for a member of a uniformed service with 
respect to an area is the difference between (A) the median 
monthly cost of housing in that area for members of the 
uniformed services serving in the same pay grade and with the 
same dependency status as that member, and (B) 80 percent of 
the median monthly cost of housing in the United States for 
members of the uniformed services serving in the same pay grade 
and with the same dependency status as that member.] (1) The 
monthly amount of a variable housing allowance under this 
section for a member of a uniformed service with respect to an 
area is equal to the greater of the following:
          (A) An amount equal to the difference between--
                  (i) the median monthly cost of housing in 
                that area for members of the uniformed services 
                serving in the same pay grade and with the same 
                dependency status as that member; and
                  (ii) 80 percent of the median monthly cost of 
                housing in the United States for members of the 
                uniformed services serving in the same pay 
                grade and with the same dependency status as 
                that member.
          (B) An amount determined by the Secretary of Defense 
        as the minimum necessary to meet the cost of adequate 
        housing in that area, as determined by the Secretary, 
        for all residents in that area with an appropriate 
        income level selected by the Secretary.
  (2) The rates of variable housing allowance shall be reduced 
as necessary to comply with subsection (d).
  (3) The effective date of any adjustment in rates of variable 
housing allowance because of a redetermination of median 
monthly costs of housing under [this subsection] paragraph 
(1)(A) or minimum levels of variable housing allowances under 
paragraph (1)(B) shall be the same as the effective date of the 
next increase after such redetermination in the basic 
allowances for quarters. However, on and after January 1, 1996, 
the monthly amount of a variable housing allowance under this 
section for a member of a uniformed service with respect to an 
area may not be reduced so long as the member retains 
uninterrupted eligibility to receive a variable housing 
allowance within that area and the member's certified housing 
costs are not reduced, as indicated by certifications provided 
by the member under subsection (b)(4).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (5) Any reduction required under paragraph (2) and any 
determination of median monthly costs of housing or minimum 
levels of variable housing allowances under this subsection 
shall be made under regulations prescribed under subsection 
(e).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d)(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (3) In making a determination under paragraph (1) for a 
fiscal year, the amount authorized to be paid for the preceding 
fiscal year for the variable housing allowance shall be 
adjusted to reflect changes during the year for which the 
determination is made in the number, grade distribution, and 
dependency status of members of the uniformed services entitled 
to variable housing allowance from the number of such members 
during the preceding fiscal year. In addition, the total amount 
determined under paragraph (1) shall be adjusted to ensure that 
sufficient amounts are available to allow payment of any 
additional variable housing allowance necessary as a result of 
paragraph (1)(B) and the requirements of the second sentence of 
paragraph (3). Adjustments under this paragraph shall be made 
in accordance with regulations prescribed under subsection (e).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 406. Travel and transportation allowances: dependents; baggage and 
                    household effects

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (h)(1) If the Secretary concerned determines that it is in 
the best interests of a member described in paragraph (2) or 
the member's dependents and the United States, the Secretary 
may, when orders directing a change of permanent station for 
the member concerned have not been issued, or when they have 
been issued but cannot be used as authority for the 
transportation of the member's dependents, baggage, and 
household effects--
          (A) authorize the movement of the member's 
        dependents, baggage, and household effects at the 
        station to an appropriate location in the United States 
        or its possessions or, if the dependents are foreign 
        nationals, to the country of the dependents' origin and 
        prescribe transportation in kind, reimbursement 
        therefor, or a monetary allowance in place thereof, as 
        the case may be, plus a per diem, as authorized under 
        subsection (a) or (b); and
          (B) in the case of a member described in paragraph 
        (2)(A), authorize the transportation of one motor 
        vehicle that is owned or leased by the member (or a 
        dependent of the member) and is for his dependents' 
        personal use to that location by means of 
        transportation authorized under section 2634 of title 
        10.
If the member's baggage and household effects are in 
nontemporary storage under subsection (d), the Secretary 
concerned may authorize their movement to the location 
concerned and prescribe transportation in kind or reimbursement 
therefor, as authorized under subsection (b). For the purposes 
of this section, a member's unmarried child for whom the member 
received transportation in kind to his station outside the 
United States or in Hawaii or Alaska, reimbursement therefor, 
or a monetary allowance in place thereof, and [who became 21 
years of age] who, by reason of age or graduation from (or 
cessation of enrollment in) an institution of higher education, 
would otherwise cease to be a dependent of the member while the 
member was serving at that station, shall still be considered 
as a dependent of the member.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(i) The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees 
on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a 
report at the end of each fiscal year stating--
          [(1) the number of dependents who during the 
        preceding fiscal year were accompanying members of the 
        Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps who were 
        stationed outside the United States and were authorized 
        by the Secretary concerned to receive allowances or 
        transportation for dependents under subsection (a) or 
        (h); and
          [(2) the number of dependents who during the 
        preceding fiscal year were accompanying members of the 
        Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps who were 
        stationed outside the United States and were not 
        authorized to receive such allowances or 
        transportation.
  [(j)] (i) A member traveling under orders who is relieved 
from a duty station is entitled to transportation for his 
dependents, baggage, and household effects, plus a per diem for 
the member's dependents, regardless of the time the dependents, 
baggage, or household effects arrive at their destination. 
Appropriations of the Department of Defense available for 
travel or transportation that are current when the member is 
relieved may be used to pay for the transportation.
  [(k)] (j)(1) Appropriations available to the Department of 
Defense for providing transportation of household effects of 
members of the armed forces under subsection (b) are available 
to pay a monetary allowance to a member when the member 
participates in a program in which baggage and household 
effects of the member are transported by a privately owned or 
rental vehicle or in which a member provides all or a part of 
the labor in connection with the transportation of the baggage 
and household effects of the member (including packing, 
crating, and loading) under regulations of the Secretary of the 
military department concerned. The allowance is not limited to 
reimbursement for actual expenses and may be paid in advance of 
the transportation of the baggage and household effects. 
However, the amount of the allowance shall provide a savings to 
the United States when the total cost of the transportation is 
compared with the cost that would be incurred under subsection 
(b).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(l)] (k) Under uniform regulations prescribed by the 
Secretaries concerned, a member with dependents who is ordered 
to make an overseas permanent change of station and who, in 
anticipation of his dependents accompanying him overseas, ships 
baggage and household effects to that overseas station, may be 
authorized a return shipment of the baggage and household 
effects if, after the shipment, the member's dependents are 
unable to accompany him overseas and the Secretary concerned 
determines that such inability was unexpected and 
uncontrollable.
  [(m)] (l) For the purposes of this section, the residence of 
a dependent of a member who is a student not living with the 
member while at school shall be considered to be the permanent 
duty station of the member or the designated residence of 
dependents of the member if the member's dependents are not 
authorized to reside with the member.
  [(n)] (m) No carrier, port agent, warehouseman, freight 
forwarder, or other person involved in the transportation of 
property may have any lien on, or hold, impound, or otherwise 
interfere with, the movement of baggage and household goods 
being transported under this section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 407. Travel and transportation allowances: dislocation allowance

  (a) Except as provided in subsections (b), (c), and (d) and 
under regulations prescribed by the Secretary concerned, a 
member of a uniformed service is entitled to a dislocation 
allowance equal to the basic allowance for quarters for two 
months as provided for the member's pay grade and dependency 
status in section 403 of this title if--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (3) the member's dependents actually move from their 
        place of residence under circumstances described in 
        section 406a of this title; [or]
          (4) the member is without dependents and--
                  (A) actually moves to a new permanent station 
                where not assigned to quarters of the United 
                States; or
                  (B) actually moves from a place of residence 
                under circumstances described in section 406a 
                of this title[.]; or
          (5) the member's dependents actually make an 
        authorized move in connection with the member's 
        directed order to move as a result of the closure or 
        realignment of a military installation.
If a dislocation allowance is paid under [clause (3) or (4)(B)] 
paragraph (3) or (4)(B), the member is not entitled to a 
dislocation allowance under [clause (1)] paragraph (1) or (5).
  (b) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary concerned, 
whenever a member is entitled to a dislocation allowance under 
[subsection (a)(3) or (a)(4)(B)] paragraph (3) or (4)(B) of 
subsection (a), the member is also entitled to a second 
dislocation allowance equal to the basic allowance for quarters 
for two months as provided for a member's pay grade and 
dependency status in section 403 of this title if, subsequent 
to the member or member's dependents actually moving from their 
place of residence under circumstances described in section 
406a of this title, the member or member's dependents complete 
that move to a new location and then actually move from that 
new location to another location also under circumstances 
described in section 406a of this title. If a second 
dislocation allowance is paid under this subsection, the member 
is not entitled to a dislocation allowance under [subsection 
(a)(1)] paragraph (1) or (5) of subsection (a) in connection 
with those moves.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 427. Family separation allowance

  (a) * * *
  (b) Additional Separation Allowance.--(1)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (4) A member who elects to serve a tour of duty unaccompanied 
by his dependents at a permanent station to which the movement 
of his dependents is authorized at the expense of the United 
States under section 406 of this title is not entitled to an 
allowance under this subsection unless such entitlement is 
based on paragraph (1)(B). The Secretary concerned may waive 
the preceding sentence in situations in which it would be 
inequitable to deny the allowance to the member because of 
unusual family or operational circumstances.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                CHAPTER 10--PAYMENTS TO MISSING PERSONS

Sec.

551. Definitions.
552. Pay and allowances: continuance while in a missing status; 
          limitations.
553. Allotments: continuance, suspension, initiation, resumption, or 
          increase while in a missing status; limitations.
     * * * * * * *
[555. Secretarial review.]
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 552. Pay and allowances: continuance while in a missing status; 
                    limitations

  (a) A member of a uniformed service who is on active duty or 
performing inactive-duty training, and who is in a missing 
status, is--
          (1) * * *
          (2) for the period, not to exceed one year, required 
        for his hospitalization and rehabilitation after 
        termination of that status, under regulations 
        prescribed by the Secretaries concerned, with respect 
        to incentive pay, considered to have satisfied the 
        requirements of section 301 of this title so as to 
        entitle him to a continuance of that pay.
However, a member who is performing full-time training duty or 
other full-time duty without pay, or inactive-duty training 
with or without pay, is entitled to the pay and allowances to 
which he would have been entitled if he had been on active duty 
with pay. Notwithstanding section 1523 of title 10 or any other 
provision of law, the promotion of a member while he is in a 
missing status is fully effective [for all purposes, even 
though the Secretary concerned determines under section 556(b) 
of this title that the member died before the promotion was 
made.] for all purposes.
  (b) The expiration of a member's term of service while he is 
in a missing status does not end his entitlement to pay and 
allowances under subsection (a). Notwithstanding the death of a 
member while in a missing status, entitlement to pay and 
allowances under subsection (a) ends on the date--
          (1) the Secretary concerned receives evidence that 
        the member is dead; or
          [(2) that his death is prescribed or determined under 
        section 555 of this title.]
          (2) that his death is determined under chapter 76 
        title 10.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) A member in a missing status who is continued in that 
status under [section 555 of this title] chapter 76 of title 10 
is entitled to be credited with pay and allowances under 
subsection (a).

Sec. 553. Allotments: continuance, suspension, initiation, resumption, 
                    or increase while in a missing status; limitations

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) When the Secretary concerned under chapter 76 of title 10 
officially reports that a member in a missing status is alive, 
the payments of allotments authorized by subsections (a)-(d) 
may, subject to section 552 of this title, be made until the 
date [the Secretary concerned receives evidence] a board 
convened under chapter 76 of title 10 reports that the member 
is dead or has returned to the controllable jurisdiction of the 
department concerned.
  (g) A member in a missing status who is continued in that 
status under [section 555 of this title] chapter 76 of title 10 
is entitled to have the payments of allotments authorized by 
subsections (a)-(d) continued, increased, or initiated.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[Sec. 555. Secretarial review

  [(a) When a member of a uniformed service entitled to pay and 
allowances under section 552 of this title has been in a 
missing status, and the official report of his death or of the 
circumstances of his absence has not been received by the 
Secretary concerned, he shall, before the end of a 12-month 
period in that status, have the case fully reviewed. After that 
review and the end of the 12-month period in a missing status, 
or after a later review which shall be made when warranted by 
information received or other circumstances, the Secretary 
concerned, or his designee, may--
          [(1) if the member can reasonably be presumed to be 
        living, direct a continuance of his missing status; or
          [(2) make a finding of death.
  [(b) When a finding of death is made under subsection (a), it 
shall include the date death is presumed to have occurred for 
the purpose of--
          [(1) ending the crediting of pay and allowances;
          [(2) settlement of accounts; and
          [(3) payment of death gratuities.
That date is--
          [(A) the day after the day on which the 12-month 
        period in a missing status ends; or
          [(B) if the missing status has been continued under 
        subsection (a), the day determined by the Secretary 
        concerned, or his designee.
  [(c) For the sole purpose of determining status under this 
section, a dependent of a member on active duty is treated as 
if he were a member. Any determination made by the Secretary 
concerned, or his designee, under this section is conclusive on 
all other departments and agencies of the United States. This 
subsection does not entitle a dependent to pay, allowances, or 
other compensation to which he is not otherwise entitled.]

Sec. 556. Secretarial determinations

  (a) The Secretary concerned, or his designee, may make any 
determination necessary to administer this chapter and, when so 
made, it is conclusive as to--
          [(1) death or finding of death;
          [(2)] (1) the fact of dependency under this chapter;
          [(3)] (2) the fact of dependency for the purpose of 
        paying six months' death gratuities authorized by law; 
        and
          [(4)] (3) the fact of dependency under any other law 
        authorizing the payment of pay, allowances, or other 
        emoluments to enlisted members of the armed forces, 
        when the payments are contingent on dependency[;].
          [(5) any other status covered by this chapter;
          [(6) an essential date, including one on which 
        evidence or information is received by the Secretary 
        concerned; and
          [(7) whether information received concerning a member 
        of a uniformed service is to be construed and acted on 
        as an official report of death.
  [(b) When the Secretary concerned receives information that 
he considers establishes conclusively the death of a member of 
a uniformed service, he shall, notwithstanding any earlier 
action relating to death or other status of the member, act on 
it as an official report of death. After the end of the 12-
month period in a missing status prescribed by section 555 of 
this title, the Secretary concerned, or his designee, shall, 
when he considers that the information received, or a lapse of 
time without information, establishes a reasonable presumption 
that a member in a missing status is dead, make a finding of 
death.
  [(c)] (b) The Secretary concerned, or his designee, may 
determine the entitlement of a member to pay and allowances 
under this chapter, including credits and charges in his 
account, and that determination is conclusive. An account may 
not be charged or debited with an amount that a member 
captured, beleaguered, or besieged by a hostile force may 
receive or be entitled to receive from, or have placed to his 
credit by, the hostile force as pay, allowances, or other 
compensation.
  [(d)] (c) The Secretary concerned, or his designee, may, when 
warranted by the circumstances, reconsider a determination made 
under this chapter, and change or modify it.
  [(e)] (d) When the account of a member has been charged or 
debited with an allotment paid under this chapter, the amount 
so charged or debited shall be recredited to the account of the 
member if the Secretary concerned, or his designee, determines 
that the payment was induced by fraud or misrepresentation to 
which the member was not a party.
  [(f)] (e) Except an allotment for an unearned insurance 
premium, an allotment paid from pay and allowances of a member 
for the period he is entitled to pay and allowances under 
section 552 of this title may not be collected from the 
allottee as an overpayment when it was caused by delay in 
receiving evidence of death. An allotment payment for a period 
after the end of entitlement to pay and allowances under this 
chapter, or otherwise, which was caused by delay in receiving 
evidence of death, may not be collected from the allottee or 
charged against the pay of the deceased member.
  [(g)] (f) The Secretary concerned, or his designee, may waive 
the recovery of an erroneous payment or overpayment of an 
allotment to a dependent if he considers recovery is against 
equity and good conscience.
  [(h)] (g) For the sole purpose of determining [status] pay 
under this section, a dependent of a member of a uniformed 
service on active duty is treated as if he were a member. [Any 
determination made by the Secretary concerned, or his designee, 
under this section is conclusive on all other departments and 
agencies of the United States.] This subsection does not 
entitle a dependent to pay, allowances, or other compensation 
to which he is not otherwise entitled.

Sec. 557. Settlement of accounts

  (a) The Secretary concerned, or his designee, may settle the 
account of--
          (1) a member of a uniformed service for whose account 
        payments have been made under sections 552[, 553, and 
        555] and 553 of this title; and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 559. Benefits for members held as captives

  (a) * * *
  (b)(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (4) Any interest accruing under this subsection on--
          (A) any amount for which a member is indebted to the 
        United States under section 552(c) of this title shall 
        be deemed to be part of the amount due under such 
        section; and
          (B) any amount referred to in [section 556(f)] 
        section 556(e) of this title shall be deemed to be part 
        of such amount for purposes of such section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                 CHAPTER 15--PROHIBITIONS AND PENALTIES

Sec.

802. Forfeiture of pay during absence from duty due to disease from 
          intemperate use of alcohol or drugs.
803. Commissioned officers of Army or Air Force: forfeiture of pay when 
          dropped from rolls.
[804. Enlisted members of Army or Air Force: pay and allowances not to 
          accrue during suspended sentence of dishonorable discharge.]
     * * * * * * *

[Sec. 804. Enlisted members of Army or Air Force: pay and allowances 
                    not to accrue during suspended sentence of 
                    dishonorable discharge

  [Pay and allowances do not accrue to an enlisted member of 
the Army or the Air Force who is in confinement under sentence 
of dishonorable discharge, while the execution of the sentence 
to discharge is suspended.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Chapter 19--Administration

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



Sec. 1008. Presidential recommendations concerning adjustments and 
                    changes in pay and allowances

  [(a) The President shall direct an annual review of the 
adequacy of the pays and allowances authorized by this title 
for members of the uniformed services. Upon completion of this 
review, but not later than March 31 of each year, the President 
shall submit to Congress a detailed report summarizing the 
results of such annual review together with any recommendations 
for adjustments in the rates of pay and allowances authorized 
by this title.]
  (a) Not later than March 31 of each year, the President shall 
submit to Congress such recommendations (if any) as the 
President considers appropriate for adjustments in the rates of 
pay and allowances authorized by this title for members of the 
uniformed services.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1012. Disbursement and accounting: pay of enlisted members of the 
                    National Guard

  Amounts appropriated for the pay, under subsections (a), (b), 
and (d) of section 206, section 301(f), [the last sentence of 
section 402(b)] section 402(b)(3), and section 1002 of this 
title, of enlisted members of the Army National Guard of the 
United States or the Air National Guard of the United States 
for attending regular periods of duty and instruction shall be 
disbursed and accounted for by the [Secretary concerned] 
Secretary of Defense. All such disbursements shall be made for 
3-month periods for units of the Army National Guard or Air 
National Guard under regulations prescribed by the [Secretary 
concerned] Secretary of Defense, and on pay rolls prepared and 
authenticated as prescribed in those regulations.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT, 1984

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE X--MILITARY PERSONNEL MATTERS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Part B--Reserve Component Management

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


   computation of years of service for mandatory transfer of certain 
                   reservists to the retired reserve

SEC. 1016. (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


  (d) The amendments made by this section shall be effective 
only for the period beginning on October 1, 1983, and ending on 
September 30 [1995.] 1996.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE XII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Part D--Miscellaneous

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                    public health service hospitals

SEC. 1252. (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


  [(d) The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall submit annually 
to the Committees on Appropriations and on Armed Services of 
the Senate and the House of Representatives a written report on 
the results of the studies and projects carried out under this 
section. The first such report shall be submitted not later 
than one year after the date of the enactment of this section. 
The last such report shall be submitted not later than one year 
after the completion of all such studies and projects.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(f) Limitation of Expenditures.--The total amount of 
expenditures by the Secretary of Defense to carry out this 
section and section 911 of the Military Construction 
Authorization Act, 1982 (42 U.S.C. 248c), may not exceed 
$154,000,000 for fiscal year 1991.]
  (f) Limitation on Expenditures.--The total amount of 
expenditures by the Secretary of Defense to carry out this 
section and section 911 of the Military Construction 
Authorization Act, 1982 (42 U.S.C. 248c), for fiscal year 1996 
may not exceed $300,000,000, adjusted by the Secretary to 
reflect the inflation factor used by the Department of Defense 
for such year.
  (2) During fiscal year 1996, the number of covered 
beneficiaries under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code 
(including covered beneficiaries described in section 
1086(d)(1) of such title), who are enrolled in managed care 
plans offered by facilities described in subsection (a) and 
designated under subsection (c) may not exceed the number of 
such covered beneficiaries so enrolled as of September 30, 
1995.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SECTION 613 OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEAR 1989


[SEC. 613. SPECIAL PAY FOR CRITICALLY SHORT WARTIME HEALTH SPECIALISTS 
                    IN THE SELECTED RESERVE.

  [(a) In General.--(1) An officer of a reserve component of 
the Armed Forces described in paragraph (2) who executes a 
written agreement under which the officer agrees to serve in 
the Selected Reserve of an armed force for a period of not less 
than one year nor more than three years, beginning on the date 
the officer accepts the award of special pay under this 
section, may be paid special pay at an annual rate not to 
exceed $10,000.
  [(2) An officer referred to in paragraph (1) is an officer in 
a health care profession who is qualified in a specialty 
designated by regulations as a critically short wartime 
specialty.
  [(3) Special pay under this section shall be paid annually at 
the beginning of each twelve-month period for which the officer 
has agreed to serve.
  [(b) Refund Requirement.--An officer who voluntarily 
terminates service in the Selected Reserve of an armed force 
before the end of the period for which a payment was made to 
such officer under this section shall refund to the United 
States the full amount of the payment made for the period on 
which the payment was based.
  [(c) Inapplicability of Discharge in Bankruptcy.--A discharge 
in bankruptcy under title 11, United States Code, that is 
entered less than 5 years after the termination of an agreement 
under this section does not discharge the person receiving such 
special pay from the debt arising under the agreement.
  [(d) Termination of Agreement Authority.--No agreement under 
this section may be entered into after September 30, 1996.
  [(e) Purpose of Program.--The authority provided under this 
section shall be used only for the purpose of establishing and 
conducting a pilot test program to determine the effect that 
the program provided for in this section has on the retention 
of officers who are qualified in specialties designated by 
regulation as critically short wartime specialties.
  [(f) Regulations.--(1) This section shall be administered 
under regulations prescribed by the Secretary concerned and 
approved by the Secretary of Defense.
  [(2) As used in paragraph (1), the term ``Secretary 
concerned'' has the same meaning as provided in section 101(5) 
of title 37, United States Code.
  [(g) Limitations on Obligations.--The total amount of 
payments made during fiscal year 1989 as the result of 
agreements entered into under this section may not exceed 
$4,000,000.
  [(h) Report.--(1) Not later than September 1, 1988, the 
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a 
report containing a description of the manner in which the 
pilot test program provided for in this section is to be 
structured, including the minimum periods of service to be 
required for various levels of special pay under this section.
  [(2) Not later than February 1, 1990, the Secretary also 
shall submit to such committees an evaluation of the 
effectiveness of the program and recommendations for its 
continuation or modification.
  [(i) Effective Date.--The authority to enter into agreements 
under this section shall take effect 30 days after the date on 
which the committees referred to in subsection (h)(1) receive 
the report required by such subsection.]
                              ----------                              


NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


 H1  deg.Part E--Miscellaneous

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 352. ARMY RELIABILITY CENTERED-INSPECT AND REPAIR ONLY AS 
                    NECESSARY PROGRAM AT ANNISTON ARMY DEPOT.

  [The Secretary of the Army may operate and maintain an Army 
Reliability Centered-Inspect and Repair Only as Necessary 
Program at Anniston Army Depot in Anniston, Alabama.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 355. STAFF OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR SPECIAL 
                    OPERATIONS AND LOW INTENSITY CONFLICT.

  [(a) Requirement for Increased Staff.--The Secretary of 
Defense shall increase the size of the permanent staff of the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low 
Intensity Conflict in accordance with this section. To achieve 
such increase, the Secretary may not reduce the size of the 
permanent staff authorized for the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Policy.
  [(b) Size of Staff.--On and after May 1, 1991, the number of 
employees of the Department of Defense assigned or detailed to 
duty to assist the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special 
Operations and Low Intensity Conflict in the performance of the 
functions of the Assistant Secretary may not be less than the 
equivalent of 77 full-time employees.
  [(c) Number of Senior Level Employees.--Nine of the employee 
positions designated for the staff of the Assistant Secretary 
of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict 
shall be senior level employees who are recognized by rank for 
their managerial and supervisory duties.
  [(d) Increase in Total Number of Department of Defense 
Employees not Authorized.--This section does not authorize an 
increase in the number of civilian employees that may be 
employed by the Department of Defense.
  [(e) Assessment of Staff Needs.--The Secretary of Defense 
shall provide for an assessment, by an organization outside the 
Department of Defense, of the staff requirements of the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low 
Intensity Conflict. The Secretary shall submit the results of 
that assessment to the Congress not later than 180 days after 
the date of the enactment of this Act, together with such 
comments and recommendations as the Secretary considers 
appropriate.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


 H1  deg.Part B--Health Care Management

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 718. UNIFORMED SERVICES TREATMENT FACILITIES.

  (a)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Managed-Care Delivery and Reimbursement Model.--
          (1) Time for operation.--Not later than the date of 
        the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense 
        shall begin operation of a managed-care delivery and 
        reimbursement model that will continue to utilize the 
        Uniformed Services Treatment Facilities in the military 
        health services system. [A participation agreement] 
        Except as provided in paragraph (4), a participation 
        agreement negotiated between a Uniformed Services 
        Treatment Facility and the Secretary of Defense under 
        this subsection shall not be subject to the Federal 
        Acquisition Regulation issued pursuant to section 25(c) 
        of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 
        U.S.C. 421(c)).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (4) Application of federal acquisition regulation.--
        On and after the date of the enactment of this 
        paragraph, Uniformed Services Treatment Facilities and 
        any participation agreement between Uniformed Services 
        Treatment Facilities and the Secretary of Defense shall 
        be subject to the Federal Acquisition Regulation issued 
        pursuant to section 25(c) of the Office of Federal 
        Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 421(c)) 
        notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in such a 
        participation agreement. The requirements regarding 
        competition in the Federal Acquisition Regulation shall 
        apply with regard to the negotiation of any new 
        participation agreement between the Uniformed Services 
        Treatment Facilities and the Secretary of Defense under 
        this subsection or any other provision of law.
          (5) Plan for integrating facilities.--(A) Not later 
        than March 1, 1996, the Secretary of Defense shall 
        submit to Congress a plan under which Uniformed 
        Services Treatment Facilities, upon the termination of 
        their status as such facilities and the expiration of 
        participation agreements entered into under this 
        section, may be included in the exclusive health care 
        provider networks established by the Secretary for the 
        geographic regions in which the facilities are located. 
        The Secretary shall address in the plan the feasibility 
        of implementing the managed care plan of the Uniformed 
        Services Treatment Facilities, known as Option II, on a 
        mandatory basis for all USTF Medicare-eligible 
        beneficiaries and the potential cost savings to the 
        Military Health Care Program that could be achieved 
        under such option.
          (B) The plan developed under this paragraph shall be 
        consistent with the requirements specified in paragraph 
        (4). If the plan is not submitted to Congress by the 
        expiration date of the participation agreements entered 
        into under this section, the participation agreements 
        shall remain in effect, at the option of the Uniformed 
        Services Treatment Facilities, until the end of the 
        180-day period beginning on the date the plan is 
        finally submitted.
          (C) For purposes of this paragraph, the term ``USTF 
        Medicare-eligible beneficiaries'' means covered 
        beneficiaries under chapter 55 of title 10, United 
        States Code, who are enrolled in a managed health plan 
        offered by the Uniformed Services Treatment Facilities 
        and entitled to hospital insurance benefits under part 
        A of title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
        1395c et seq.).
          [(4)] (6) Definition.--For purposes of this 
        subsection, the term ``Uniformed Services Treatment 
        Facility'' means a facility described in section 911(a) 
        of the Military Construction Authorization Act, 1982 
        (42 U.S.C. 248c(a)).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

SEC. 2001. SHORT TITLE

  This division may be cited as the ``Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991''.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


   H3  deg.TITLE XXIX--DEFENSE BASE CLOSURES AND REALIGNMENTS

     H3  deg.Part A--Defense Base Closure and Realignment 
                               Commission

 H4  deg.SEC. 2901. SHORT TITLE AND PURPOSE.

  (a) Short Title.--This part may be cited as the ``Defense 
Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990''.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 2905. IMPLEMENTATION.

  (a) * * *
  (b) Management and Disposal of Property.--(1)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (8)[(A) Subject to subparagraph (C), the Secretary may 
contract with local governments for the provision of police 
services, fire protection services, airfield operation 
services, or other community services by such governments at 
military installations to be closed under this part if the 
Secretary determines that the provision of such services under 
such contracts is in the best interests of the Department of 
Defense.] (A) Subject to subparagraph (C), the Secretary may 
enter into agreements (including contracts, cooperative 
agreements, or other arrangements for reimbursement) with local 
governments for the provision of police or security services, 
fire protection services, airfield operation services, or other 
community services by such governments at military 
installations to be closed under this part if the Secretary 
determines that the provision of such services under such an 
agreement is in the best interests of the Department of 
Defense.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) Transfer Authority in Connection With Construction or 
Provision of Military Family Housing.--(1) Subject to paragraph 
(2), the Secretary may enter into an agreement to transfer by 
deed real property or facilities located at an installation 
closed or to be closed under this part with any person who 
agrees, in exchange for the real property or facilities, to 
transfer to the Secretary housing units that are constructed or 
provided by the person and located at or near a military 
installation at which there is a shortage of suitable housing 
to meet the requirements of members of the Armed Forces and 
their dependents. The Secretary may not select real property 
for transfer under this paragraph if the property is identified 
in the redevelopment plan for the installation as items 
essential to the reuse or redevelopment of the installation.
  (2) A transfer of real property or facilities may be made 
under paragraph (1) only if--
          (A) the fair market value of the housing units to be 
        received by the Secretary in exchange for the property 
        or facilities to be transferred is equal to or greater 
        than the fair market value of such property or 
        facilities, as determined by the Secretary; or
          (B) the recipient of the property or facilities 
        agrees to pay to the Secretary the difference between 
        the fair market values if the fair market value of the 
        housing units is lower than the fair market value of 
        the property or facilities to be transferred.
  (3) Notwithstanding section 2906(a)(2), the Secretary shall 
deposit funds received under paragraph (2)(B) in the Department 
of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund established under 
section 2873(a) of title 10, United States Code.
  (4) The Secretary shall submit to the appropriate committees 
of Congress a report describing each agreement proposed to be 
entered into under paragraph (1), including the consideration 
to be received by the United States under the agreement. The 
Secretary may not enter into the agreement until the end of the 
30-day period beginning on the date the appropriate committees 
of Congress receive the report regarding the agreement.
  (5) The Secretary may require any additional terms and 
conditions in connection with an agreement authorized by 
subsection as the Secretary considers appropriate to protect 
the interests of the United States.

SEC. 2906. ACCOUNT.

  (a) In General.--(1)  * * *
  (2) There shall be deposited into the Account--
          (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (C) except as provided in subsection (d), proceeds 
        received from the [transfer or disposal] lease, 
        transfer, or disposal of any property at a military 
        installation closed or realigned under this part; and
          (D) proceeds received after September 30, 1995, from 
        the [transfer or disposal] lease, transfer, or disposal 
        of any property at a military installation closed or 
        realigned under title II of the Defense Authorization 
        Amendments and Base Closure and Realignment Act (Public 
        Law 100-526; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


       SECTION 18 OF THE OFFICE OF FEDERAL PROCUREMENT POLICY ACT

SEC. 18. PROCUREMENT NOTICE.

  (a)(1) Except as provided in subsection (c)--
          (A) * * *
          (B) an executive agency intending to solicit bids or 
        proposals for a contract for property or services for a 
        price expected to exceed $10,000 but not to exceed 
        $25,000 shall post, for a period of not less than ten 
        days, in a public place at the contracting office 
        issuing the solicitation a notice of solicitation 
        described in [subsection (f)--
                  [(i) in the case of an executive agency other 
                than the Department of Defense, if a contract 
                is for a price expected to exceed $10,000, but 
                not to exceed $25,000; and
                  [(ii) in the case of the Department of 
                Defense, if the contract is for a price 
                expected to exceed $5,000, but not to exceed 
                $25,000; and] subsection (b); and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(4) An executive agency intending to solicit offers for a 
contract for which a notice of solicitation is required to be 
posted under paragraph (1)(B) shall ensure that contracting 
officers consider each responsive offer timely received from an 
offeror.
  [(5)] (4) An executive agency shall establish a deadline for 
the submission of all bids or proposals in response to a 
solicitation with respect to which no such deadline is provided 
by statute. Each deadline for the submission of offers shall 
afford potential offerors a reasonable opportunity to respond.
  [(6)] (5) The Administrator shall prescribe regulations 
defining limited circumstances in which flexible deadlines can 
be used under paragraph (3) for the submission of bids or 
proposals for the procurement of commercial items.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


               SECTION 21 OF THE ARMS EXPORT CONTROL ACT

  Sec. 21. Sales From Stocks.--(a)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e)(1) After September 30, 1976, letters of offer for the 
sale of defense articles or for the sale of defense services 
that are issued pursuant to this section or pursuant to section 
22 of this Act shall include appropriate charges for--
          (A) administrative services, calculated on an average 
        percentage basis to recover the full estimated costs 
        (excluding a pro rata share of fixed base operations 
        costs) of administration of sales made under this Act 
        to all purchasers of such articles and services as 
        specified in section 43(b) and section 43(c) of this 
        Act; and
          [(B) a proportionate amount of any nonrecurring costs 
        of research, development, and production of major 
        defense equipment (except for equipment wholly paid for 
        either from funds transferred under section 503(a)(3) 
        of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 or from funds 
        made available on a nonrepayable basis under section 23 
        of this Act); and
          [(C)] (B) the recovery of ordinary inventory losses 
        associated with the sale from stock of defense articles 
        that are being stored at the expense of the purchaser 
        of such articles.
  [(2) The President may reduce or waive the charge or charges 
which would otherwise be considered appropriate under paragraph 
(1)(B) for particular sales that would, if made, significantly 
advance United States Government interests in North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization standardization, standardization with the 
Armed Forces of Japan, Australia, or New Zealand in furtherance 
of the mutual defense treaties between the United States and 
those countries, or foreign procurement in the United States 
under coproduction arrangements.
  [(3)] (2)(A) The President may waive the charges for 
administrative services that would otherwise be required by 
paragraph (1)(A) in connection with any sale to the Maintenance 
and Supply Agency of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in 
support of--
          (i) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


TITLE 31, UNITED STATES CODE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBTITLE III--FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 33--DEPOSITING, KEEPING, AND PAYING MONEY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                        SUBCHAPTER II--PAYMENTS

Sec. 3321. Disbursing authority in the executive branch

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) The head of each of the following executive agencies 
shall designate personnel of the agency as disbursing officials 
to disburse public money available for expenditure by the 
agency:
          (1) United States Marshal's Office.
          [(2) The Department of Defense (except for 
        disbursements for departmental pay and expenses in the 
        District of Columbia).]
          (2) The Department of Defense.
          (3) The Coast Guard (when not operating as a service 
        in the Navy).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 3325. Vouchers

  (a)  * * *
  [(b) Subsection (a) of this section does not apply to 
disbursements of a military department of the Department of 
Defense, except for disbursements for departmental pay and 
expenses in the District of Columbia.]
  (b) In addition to officers and employees referred to in 
subsection (a)(1)(B) of this section as having authorization to 
certify vouchers, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of 
Transportation (with respect to the Coast Guard when it is not 
operating as a service in the Navy) may authorize, in writing, 
members of the armed forces under their jurisdiction to certify 
vouchers.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 35--ACCOUNTING AND COLLECTION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBCHAPTER III--AUDITING AND SETTLING ACCOUNTS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 3527. General authority to relieve accountable officials and 
                    agents from liability

  (a) * * *
  (b)(1) The Comptroller General shall relieve a disbursing 
official of the [armed forces] Department of Defense or the 
Coast Guard responsible for the physical loss or deficiency of 
public money, vouchers, or records, or shall authorize 
reimbursement, from an appropriation or fund available for 
reimbursement, of the amount of the loss or deficiency paid by 
or for the official as restitution, when--
          (A) the Secretary of Defense or the [appropriate 
        Secretary of the military department of the Department 
        of Defense] Secretary of Transportation (with respect 
        to the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a 
        service in the Navy) decides that the official was 
        carrying out official duties when the loss or 
        deficiency occurred;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 3528. Responsibilities and relief from liability of certifying 
                    officials

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(d) This section does not apply to disbursements of a 
military department of the Department of Defense, except 
disbursements for departmental pay and expenses in the District 
of Columbia.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBTITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 91--GOVERNMENT CORPORATIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 9101. Definitions

  In this chapter--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (3) ``wholly owned Government corporation'' means--
                  (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  (P) the Panama Canal Commission.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


              SECTION 409 OF THE ACT OF NOVEMBER 19, 1969

  AN ACT To authorize appropriations during the fiscal year 1970 for 
 procurement of aircraft, missiles, naval vessels, and tracked combat 
vehicles, and research, development, test, and evaluation for the Armed 
    Forces, and to authorize the construction of test facilities as 
  Kwajalein Missile Range, and to prescribe the authorized personnel 
strength of the Selected Reserve of each reserve component of the Armed 
                     Forces, and for other purposes

  Sec. 409. [(a) The Secretary of Defense shall submit an 
annual report to Congress on or before January 31 setting forth 
the amounts spent during the preceding year for research, 
development, test, and evaluation of all lethal and nonlethal 
chemical and biological agents. The Secretary shall include in 
each report a full explanation of each expenditure, including 
the purpose and the necessity therefor. The report shall 
include a full accounting of all experiments and studies 
conducted by the Department of Defense in the preceding year, 
whether directly or under contract, which involve the use of 
human subjects for the testing of chemical or biological 
agents.]
  (b) None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this 
Act or any other Act may be used for the transportation of any 
lethal chemical or any biological warfare agent to or from any 
military installation in the United States, the open air 
testing of any such agent within the United States, or the 
disposal of any such agent within the United States until the 
following procedures have been implemented:
          (1) the Secretary of Defense (hereafter referred to 
        in this section as the ``Secretary'') has determined 
        that the transportation or testing proposed to be made 
        is necessary in the interests of national security;
          (2) the Secretary has brought the particulars of the 
        proposed transportation or testing to the attention of 
        the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, who in 
        turn may direct the Surgeon General of the Public 
        Health Service and other qualified persons to review 
        such particulars with respect to any hazards to public 
        health and safety which such transportation, testing, 
        or disposal may pose and to recommend what 
        precautionary measures are necessary to protect the 
        public health and safety; and
          (3) the Secretary has implemented any precautionary 
        measures recommended in accordance with paragraph (2) 
        above (including where practicable, the detoxification 
        of any such agent, if such agent is to be transported 
        to or from a military installation for disposal): 
        Provided, however, That in the event the Secretary 
        finds the recommendation submitted by the Surgeon 
        General would have the effect of preventing the 
        proposed transportation or testing, the President may 
        determine that overriding considerations of national 
        security require such transportation, testing, or 
        disposal be conducted. Any transportation or testing 
        conducted pursuant to such a Presidential determination 
        shall be carried out in the safest practicable manner, 
        and the President shall report his determination and an 
        explanation thereof to the President of the Senate and 
        the Speaker of the House of Representatives as far in 
        advance as practicable[; and].
          [(4) the Secretary has provided notification that the 
        transportation, testing, or disposal will take place, 
        except where a Presidential determination has been 
        made: (A) to the President of the Senate and the 
        Speaker of the House of Representatives at least 10 
        days before any such transportation will be commenced 
        and at least 30 days before any such testing or 
        disposal will be commenced; (B) to the Governor of any 
        State through which such agents will be transported, 
        such notification to be provided appropriately in 
        advance of any such transportation.]
  (c)(1) None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by 
this Act or any other Act may be used for the future 
deployment, storage, or disposal at any place outside the 
United States of--
          (A) any lethal chemical or any biological warfare 
        agent, or
          (B) any delivery system specfically designed to 
        disseminate any such agent,
 unless prior notice of such deployment, storage, or disposal 
has been given to the country exercising jurisdiction over such 
place. [In the case of any place outside the United States 
which is under the jurisdiction or control of the United States 
Government, no such action may be taken unless the Secretary 
gives prior notice of such action to the President of the 
Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.] As 
used in this paragraph, the term ``United States'' means the 
several States and the District of Columbia.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


     SECTION 1634 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION, 1985

                   [naval nuclear propulsion program

  [Sec. 1634. The provisions of Executive Order Numbered 12344, 
dated February 1, 1982, pertaining to the Naval Nuclear 
Propulsion Program, shall remain in force until changed by 
law.]
                              ----------                              


CONVENTIONAL FORCES IN EUROPE TREATY IMPLEMENTATION ACT OF 1991

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                  TITLE II--SOVIET WEAPONS DESTRUCTION

PART A--SHORT TITLE

SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.

  This title may be cited as the ``Soviet Nuclear Threat 
Reduction Act of 1991''.

PART B--FINDINGS AND PROGRAM AUTHORITY

SEC. 211. NATIONAL DEFENSE AND SOVIET WEAPONS DESTRUCTION.

  (a)  * * *
  (b) Exclusions.--United States assistance in destroying 
nuclear and other weapons under this title may not be provided 
to the Soviet Union, any of its republics, or any successor 
entity unless the President certifies to the Congress that the 
proposed recipient is [committed to]--
          (1) making a substantial investment of its resources 
        for dismantling or destroying such weapons;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION AMENDMENTS AND BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT ACT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE II--CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 204. IMPLEMENTATION.

  (a)  * * *
  (b) Management and Disposal of Property.--(1)  * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (8)[(A) Subject to subparagraph (C), the Secretary may 
contract with local governments for the provision of police 
services, fire protection services, airfield operation 
services, or other community services by such governments at 
military installations to be closed under this title if the 
Secretary determines that the provision of such services under 
such contracts is in the best interests of the Department of 
Defense.] (A) Subject to subparagraph (C), the Secretary may 
enter into agreements (including contracts, cooperative 
agreements, or other arrangements for reimbursement) with local 
governments for the provision of police or security services, 
fire protection services, airfield operation services, or other 
community services by such governments at military 
installations to be closed under this title if the Secretary 
determines that the provision of such services under such an 
agreement is in the best interests of the Department of 
Defense.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) Transfer Authority in Connection With Construction or 
Provision of Military Family Housing.--(1) Subject to paragraph 
(2), the Secretary may enter into an agreement to transfer by 
deed real property or facilities located at an installation 
closed or to be closed under this title with any person who 
agrees, in exchange for the real property or facilities, to 
transfer to the Secretary housing units that are constructed or 
provided by the person and located at or near a military 
installation at which there is a shortage of suitable housing 
to meet the requirements of members of the Armed Forces and 
their dependents. The Secretary may not select real property 
for transfer under this paragraph if the property is identified 
in the redevelopment plan for the installation as items 
essential to the reuse or redevelopment of the installation.
  (2) A transfer of real property or facilities may be made 
under paragraph (1) only if--
          (A) the fair market value of the housing units to be 
        received by the Secretary in exchange for the property 
        or facilities to be transferred is equal to or greater 
        than the fair market value of such property or 
        facilities, as determined by the Secretary; or
          (B) the recipient of the property or facilities 
        agrees to pay to the Secretary the difference between 
        the fair market values if the fair market value of the 
        housing units is lower than the fair market value of 
        the property or facilities to be transferred.
  (3) Notwithstanding section 207(a)(7), the Secretary shall 
deposit funds received under paragraph (2)(B) in the Department 
of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund established under 
section 2873(a) of title 10, United States Code.
  (4) The Secretary shall submit to the appropriate committees 
of Congress a report describing each agreement proposed to be 
entered into under paragraph (1), including the consideration 
to be received by the United States under the agreement. The 
Secretary may not enter into the agreement until the end of the 
21-day period beginning on the date the appropriate committees 
of Congress receive the report regarding the agreement.
  (5) The Secretary may require any additional terms and 
conditions in connection with an agreement authorized by this 
subsection as the Secretary considers appropriate to protect 
the interests of the United States.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 207. FUNDING

  (a) Account.--(1)  * * *
  (2) There shall be deposited into the Account--
          (A) funds authorized for and appropriated to the 
        Account with respect to fiscal year 1990 and fiscal 
        years beginning thereafter;
          (B) any funds that the Secretary may, subject to 
        approval in an appropriation Act, transfer to the 
        Account from funds appropriated to the Department of 
        Defense for any purpose, except that such funds may be 
        transferred only after the date on which the Secretary 
        transmits written notice of, and justification for, 
        such transfer to the appropriate committees of 
        Congress; [and]
          (C) proceeds described in section 204(b)(4)(A)[.]; 
        and
          (D) proceeds from leases of property under section 
        2667(f) of title 10, United States Code, at a military 
        installation to be closed or realigned under this 
        title.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (7) Proceeds received after September 30, 1995, from the 
[transfer or disposal] lease, transfer, or disposal of any 
property at a military installation closed or realigned under 
this title shall be deposited directly into the Department of 
Defense Base Closure Account 1990 established by section 
2906(a) of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 
(part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 
note).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


Panama Canal Act of 1979

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                TITLE I--ADMINISTRATION AND REGULATIONS


                   CHAPTER 1--PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION


                      [establishment of commission

    [Sec. 1101. There is established in the executive branch of 
the United States Government an agency to be known as the 
Panama Canal Commission (hereinafter in this Act referred to as 
the ``Commission''). The Commission shall, under the general 
supervision of the Board established by section 1102 of this 
Act, be responsible for the maintenance and operation of the 
Panama Canal and the facilities and appurtenances related 
thereto. The authority of the President with respect to the 
Commission shall be exercised through the Secretary of Defense.

                           [supervisory board

    [Sec. 1102. (a) The Commission shall be supervised by a 
Board composed of nine members, one of whom shall be the 
Secretary of Defense or an officer of the Department of Defense 
designated by the Secretary. Not less than five members of the 
Board shall be nationals of the Republic of Panama. At least 
one of the members of the Board who are nationals of the United 
States shall be experienced and knowledgeable in the management 
or operation of an American-flag steamship line which has or 
had ships regularly transiting the Panama Canal, at least one 
other such member shall be experienced and knowledgeable in 
United States port operations or in the business of exporting 
or importing one of the regular commodities dependent on the 
Panama Canal as a transportation route, and at least one other 
such member shall be experienced and knowledgeable in labor 
matters in the United States Three members of the Board shall 
hold no other office in or be employed by the Government of the 
United States. Members of the Board who are nationals of the 
United States shall cast their votes as directed by the 
nationals of the United States shall cast their votes as 
directed by the Secretary of Defense or his designee.]


   establishment, purposes, offices, and residence of the commission


    Sec. 1101. (a) For the purposes of managing, operating, and 
maintaining the Panama Canal and its complementary works, 
installations and equipment, and of conducting operations 
incident thereto, in accordance with the Panama Canal Treaty of 
1977 and related agreements, the Panama Canal Commission 
(hereinafter in this Act referred to as the ``Commission'') is 
established as a wholly owned government corporation (as that 
term is used in chapter 91 of title 31, United States Code) 
within the executive branch of the Government of the United 
States. The authority of the President with respect to the 
Commission shall be exercised through the Secretary of Defense.
    (b) The principal office of the Commission shall be located 
in the Republic of Panama in one of the areas made available 
for use of the United States under the Panama Canal Treaty of 
1977 and related agreements, but the Commission may establish 
branch offices in such other places as it deems necessary or 
appropriate for the conduct of its business. Within the meaning 
of the laws of the United States relating to venue in civil 
actions, the Commission is an inhabitant and resident of the 
District of Columbia and the eastern judicial district of 
Louisiana.


                           supervisory board


    Sec. 1102. (a) The Commission shall be supervised by a 
Board composed of nine members, one of whom shall be the 
Secretary of Defense or an officer of the Department of Defense 
designated by the Secretary. Not less than five members of the 
Board shall be nationals of the United States and the remaining 
members of the Board shall be nationals of the Republic of 
Panama. Three members of the Board who are nationals of the 
United States shall hold no other office in, and shall not be 
employed by, the Government of the United States, and shall be 
chosen for the independent perspective they can bring to the 
Commission's affairs. Members of the Board who are nationals of 
the United States shall cast their votes as directed by the 
Secretary of Defense or a designee of the Secretary of Defense.
    (d)(1) In order to enhance the prestige of the Commission 
in the world shipping community and allow for the exchange of 
varied perspectives between the Board and distinguished 
international guests in the important deliberations of the 
Commission, the Government of the United States and the 
Republic of Panama may each invite to attend meetings of the 
Board, as a designated international advisor to the Board, one 
individual chosen for the independent perspective that 
individual can bring to the Commission's affairs, and who--
          (A) is not a citizen of Panama;
          (B) does not represent any user or customer of the 
        Panama Canal, or any particular interest group or 
        nation; and
          (C) does not have any financial interest which could 
        constitute an actual or apparent conflict with regard 
        to the relationship of the individual with the Board of 
        the Commission.
    (2) Such designated international advisors may be 
compensated by the Commission in the same manner and under the 
same circumstances as apply under subsection (b) with regard to 
members of the Board. Such designated international advisors 
shall have no vote on matters pending before the Board.


                    general powers of the commission


    Sec. 1102a. (a) The Commission, subject to the Panama Canal 
Treaty of 1977 and related agreements, and to chapter 91 of 
title 31, United States Code, popularly known as the Government 
Corporation Control Act--
          (1) may adopt, alter, and use a corporate seal, which 
        shall be judicially noticed;
          (2) may by action of the Board of Directors adopt, 
        amend, and repeal bylaws governing the conduct of its 
        general business and the performance of the powers and 
        duties granted to or imposed upon it by law;
          (3) may sue and be sued in its corporate name, except 
        that--
                  (A) its amenability to suit is limited by 
                Article VIII of the Panama Canal Treaty of 
                1977, section 1401 of this Act, and otherwise 
                by law;
                  (B) an attachment, garnishment, or similar 
                process may not be issued against salaries or 
                other moneys owed by the Commission to its 
                employees except as provided by section 5520a 
                of title 5, United States Code, and section 
                459, 461, and 462 of the Social Security Act 
                (42 U.S.C. 659, 661, 662), or as otherwise 
                specifically authorized by the laws of the 
                United States; and
                  (C) it is exempt from the payment of interest 
                on claims and judgments;
          (4) may enter into contracts, leases, agreements, or 
        other transactions; and
          (5) may determine the character of, and necessity 
        for, its obligations and expenditures and the manner in 
        which they shall be incurred, allowed, and paid, and 
        may incur, allow, and pay them, subject to pertinent 
        provisions of law generally applicable to Government 
        corporations.
    (b) The Commission shall have the priority of the 
Government of the United States in the payment of debts out of 
bankrupt estates.


                     specific powers of commission


    Sec. 1102b. (a) Subject to the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977 
and related agreements, and to chapter 91 of title 31, United 
States Code, popularly known as the Government Corporation 
Control Act, the Commission may--
          (1) manage, operate, and maintain the Panama Canal;
          (2) construct or acquire, establish, maintain, and 
        operate docks, wharves, piers, shoreline facilities, 
        shops, yards, marine railways, salvage and towing 
        facilities, fuel-handling facilities, motor 
        transportation facilities, power systems, water 
        systems, a telephone system, construction facilities, 
        living quarters and other buildings, warehouses, 
        storehouses, a printing plant, and manufacturing, 
        processing, or service facilities in connection 
        therewith, recreational facilities, and other 
        activities, facilities, and appurtenances necessary and 
        appropriate for the accomplishment of the purposes of 
        this Act;
          (3) use the United States mails in the same manner 
        and under the same conditions as the executive 
        departments of the Federal Government; and
          (4) take such actions as are necessary or appropriate 
        to carry out the powers specifically conferred upon it.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                          CHAPTER 2--EMPLOYEES


Subchapter I--Panama Canal Commission Personnel

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



    deduction from basic pay of amounts due for supplies or services

    Sec. 1205. The Commission may deduct from the basic pay 
otherwise payable by the Commission to any officer or employee 
of the Commission any amount due from the officer or employee 
to the Commission or to any contractor of the Commission for 
transportation, board, supplies, or any other service. Any 
amount so deducted may be paid by the Commission to any 
contractor to whom it is due or may be credited by the 
Commission to any [appropriation] fund from which the 
Commission has expended such amount.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                     CHAPTER 3--FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS


Subchapter I--Funds

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                      panama canal revolving fund

    Sec. 1302.(a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (c)(1) There shall be deposited in the Panama Canal 
Revolving Fund, on a continuing basis, toll receipts (other 
than amounts of toll receipts deposited into the Panama Canal 
Commission Dissolution Fund under section 1305) and all other 
receipts of the Commission. Except as provided in section 1303 
[and subject to paragraph (2)], no funds may be obligated or 
expended by the Commission in any fiscal year unless such 
obligation or expenditure has been specifically authorized by 
law.
    [(2) No funds may be obligated or expended by the 
Commission in any fiscal year for administrative expenses 
except to the extent or in such amounts as are provided in 
appropriation Acts.
    [(3)](2) No funds may be authorized for the use of the 
Commission, or obligated or expended by the Commission in any 
fiscal year in excess of--
          (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    [(e) The Committee on Appropriations of each House of 
Congress shall review the annual budget of the Commission, 
including operations and capital expenditures.]
    (e) In accordance with section 9104 of title 31, United 
States Code, the Congress shall review the annual budget of the 
Commission.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                          emergency authority

    Sec. 1303. If authorizing legislation described in section 
1302(c)(1) has not been enacted for a fiscal year, then the 
Commission may withdraw funds from the Panama Canal Revolving 
Fund in order to defray emergency expenses and to ensure the 
continuous, efficient, and safe operation of the Panama Canal, 
including expenses for capital projects. [The authority of this 
section may not be used for administrative expenses.] The 
authority of this section may be exercised only until 
authorizing legislation described in section 1302(c)(1) is 
enacted, or for a period of 24 months after the end of the 
fiscal year for which such authorizing legislation was last 
enacted, whichever occurs first. Within 60 days after the end 
of any calendar quarter in which expenditures are made under 
this section, the Commission shall report such expenditures to 
the appropriate committees of the Congress.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subchapter II--Accounting Policies and Audits

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



     [audit by the comptroller general of the united states] audits

    Sec. 1313. (a) [Financial transactions] Subject to 
subsection (d), financial transactions of the Commission shall 
be audited by the Comptroller General of the United States 
(hereinafter in this Act referred to as the ``Comptroller 
General'') pursuant to the Accounting and Auditing Act of 1950 
(31 U.S.C. 65 et seq.). In conducting any audit pursuant to 
such Act, the appropriate representatives of the Comptroller 
General shall have access to all books, accounts, financial 
records, reports, files, and other papers, items, or property 
in use by the Commission and necessary to facilitate such 
audit, and such representative shall be afforded full 
facilities for verifying transactions with the balances or 
securities held by depositories, fiscal agents, and custodians. 
An audit pursuant to such Act shall first be conducted with 
respect to the fiscal year in which this Act becomes effective.
    (b) [The Comptroller General] Subject to subsection (d), 
the Comptroller General shall, not later than six months after 
the end of each fiscal year, submit to the Congress a report of 
the audit conducted pursuant to subsection (a) of this section 
with respect to such fiscal year. Such report shall set forth 
the scope of the audit and shall include--
     (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (d) At the discretion of the Board provided for in section 
1102, the Commission may hire independent auditors to perform, 
in lieu of the Comptroller General, the audit and reporting 
functions prescribed in subsections (a) and (b).
    (e) In addition to auditing the financial statements of the 
Commission, the independent auditor shall, in accordance with 
standards for an examination of a financial forecast 
established by the American Institute of Certified Public 
Accountants, examine and report on the Commission's financial 
forecast that it will be in a position to meet its financial 
liabilities on December 31, 1999.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                  Subchapter III--Interagency Accounts


                  interagency services; reimbursements

    Sec. 1321. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (d) Amounts expended for furnishing services referred to in 
subsection (c) of this section to persons eligible to receive 
them, less amounts payable by such persons, shall be fully 
reimbursable to the department or agency furnishing the 
services, except to the extent that such expenditures are the 
responsibility of that department or agency. The 
[appropriations or] funds of the Commission shall be available 
for such reimbursements on behalf of--
          (1) employees of the Commission, and
          (2) other persons authorized to receive such services 
        who are eligible to receive them pursuant to the Panama 
        Canal Treaty of 1977 and related agreements.
The appropriations or funds of any other department or agency 
of the United States conducting operations in the Republic of 
Panama, including the Smithsonian Institution, shall be 
available for reimbursements on behalf of employees of such 
department or agency and their dependents.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


         CHAPTER 4--CLAIMS FOR INJURIES TO PERSONS OR PROPERTY


                    Subchapter I--General Provisions


                     settlement of claims generally

    Sec. 1401. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (c) An award made to a claimant under this section shall be 
payable out of any moneys [appropriated for or] made available 
to the Commission. The acceptance by the claimant of the award 
shall be final and conclusive on the claimant, and shall 
constitute a complete release by the claimant of his claim 
against the United States and against any employee of the 
United States acting in the course of his employment who is 
involved in the matter giving rise to the claim.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subchapter II--Vessel Damage

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                          settlement of claims

    Sec. 1415. The Commission, by mutual agreement, compromise, 
or otherwise, may adjust and determine the amounts of the 
respective awards of damages pursuant to this subchapter. Such 
amounts may be paid only out of money [appropriated or] 
allotted for the maintenance and operation of the Panama Canal. 
Acceptance by a claimant of the amount awarded to him shall be 
deemed to be in full settlement of such claim against the 
Government of the United States.

                           actions on claims

    Sec. 1416. A claimant for damages pursuant to section 
1411(a) or 1412 of this Act who considers himself aggrieved by 
the findings, determination, or award of the Commission in 
reference to his claim may bring an action on the claim against 
the Commission in the United States District Court for the 
Eastern District of Louisiana. Subject to the provisions of 
this chapter and of applicable regulations issued pursuant to 
section 1801 of this Act relative to navigation of the Panama 
Canal and adjacent waters, such actions shall proceed and be 
heard by the court without a jury according to the principles 
of law and rules of practice obtaining generally in like cases 
between a private party and a department or agency of the 
United States. Any judgment obtained against the Commission in 
an action under this subchapter may be paid out of money 
[appropriated or] allotted for the maintenance and operation of 
the Panama Canal. An action for damages cognizable under this 
section shall not otherwise lie against the United States or 
the Commission, nor in any other court, than as provided in 
this section; nor may it lie against any officer or employee of 
the United States or of the Commission. Any action on a claim 
under this section shall be barred unless the action is brought 
within one year after the date on which the Commission mails to 
the claimant written notification of the Commission's final 
determination with respect to the clam, or within one year 
after the date of the enactment of the Panama Canal Amendments 
Act of 1985, whichever is later. Attorneys appointed by the 
Commission shall represent the Commission in any action arising 
under this subchapter.

              CHAPTER 6--TOLLS FOR USE OF THE PANAMA CANAL


         [prescription of measurement rules and rates of tolls

    [Sec. 1601. (a) The President is authorized, subject to the 
provisions of this chapter, to prescribe and from time to time 
change--
          [(1) the rules for the measurement of vessels for the 
        Panama Canal; and
          [(2) the tolls that shall be levied for the use of 
        the Canal.
    [(b) Such rules of measurement and tolls prevailing on the 
effective date of this Act shall continue in effect until 
changed as provided in this chapter.]


          prescription of measurement rules and rates of tolls


    Sec. 1601. The Commission may, subject to the provisions of 
this Act, prescribe and from time to time change--
          [(1) the rules for the measurement of vessels for the 
        Panama Canal; and
          [(2) the tolls that shall be levied for the use of 
        the Panama Canal.

                               procedures

    Sec. 1604. (a) The Commission shall publish in the Federal 
Register notice of any proposed change in the rules of 
measurement or rates of tolls referred to in section [1601(a)] 
1601 of this Act. The Commission shall give interested parties 
an opportunity to participate in the proceedings through 
submission of written data, views, or arguments, and 
participation in a public hearing to be held not less than 30 
days after the date of publication of the notice. The notice 
shall include the substance of the proposed change and a 
statement of the time, place, and nature of the proceedings. At 
the time of publication of such notice, the Commission shall 
make available to the public an analysis showing the basis and 
justification for the proposed change, which, in the case of a 
change in rates of tolls, shall indicate the conformity of the 
existing and proposed rates of tolls with the requirements of 
section 1602 of this Act, and the Commission's adherence to the 
requirement for full consideration of the following factors set 
forth in Understanding (1) incorporated in the Resolution of 
Ratification of the Treaty Concerning the Permanent Neutrality 
and Operation of the Panama Canal (adopted by the United States 
Senate on March 16, 1978):
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    [(c) After the proceedings have been conducted pursuant to 
subsections (a) and (b) of this section, the Commission shall 
publish in the Federal Register a notice of the changes in the 
rules of measurement or rates of tolls, as the case may be, to 
be recommended to the President.
    [(d) Upon publication of the notice pursuant to subsection 
(c) of this section, the Commission shall forward a complete 
record of the proceedings, with the recommendation of the 
Commission, to the President for his consideration. The 
President may approve, disapprove, or modify any or all of the 
changes in the rules of measurement or rates of tolls 
recommended by the Commission.
    [(e) Rules of measurement or rates of tolls prescribed by 
the President pursuant to this chapter shall take effect on a 
date prescribed by the President which is not less than 30 days 
after the President publishes such rules or rates in the 
Federal Register.]
    (c) After the proceedings have been conducted pursuant to 
subsection (a) and (b) of this section, the Commission may 
change the rules of measurement or rates of tolls, as the case 
may be. The Commission shall, however, publish notice of such 
change in the Federal Register not less than 30 days before the 
effective date of the change.
    [(f)] (d) Action to change the rules of measurement for the 
Panama Canal or the rates of tolls for the use of the Canal 
pursuant to this chapter shall be subject to judicial review in 
accordance with chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


TITLE 38, UNITED STATES CODE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



PART III--READJUSTMENT AND RELATED BENEFITS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


              CHAPTER 37--HOUSING AND SMALL BUSINESS LOANS


                          subchapter i--general

Sec.
3701.  Definitions.
     * * * * * * *
3708.  Authority to buy down interest rates: pilot program.
     * * * * * * *

Sec. 3708. Authority to buy down interest rates: pilot program

  (a) In order to enable the purchase of housing in areas where 
the supply of suitable military housing is inadequate, the 
Secretary may conduct a pilot program under which the Secretary 
may make periodic or lump sum assistance payments on behalf of 
an eligible veteran for the purpose of buying down the interest 
rate on a loan to that veteran that is guaranteed under this 
chapter for a purpose described in paragraph (1), (2), (3), 
(6), or (10) of section 3710(a).
  (b) An individual is an eligible veteran for the purposes of 
this section if--
          (1) the individual is a veteran, as defined in 
        section 3701(b)(4) of this title, or is on active Guard 
        and Reserve duty, as defined by section 101(d) of title 
        10;
          (2) the individual submits an application for a loan 
        guaranteed under this chapter within one year of an 
        assignment of the individual to duty at a military 
        installation in the United States designated by the 
        Secretary of Defense as a housing shortage area;
          (3) at the time the loan referred to in subsection 
        (a) is made, the individual is an enlisted member, 
        warrant officer, or an officer (other than a warrant 
        officer) at a pay grade of O-3 or below;
          (4) the individual has not previously used any of the 
        individual's entitlement to housing loan benefits under 
        this chapter; and
          (5) the individual receives comprehensive prepurchase 
        counseling from the Secretary (or the designee of the 
        Secretary) before making application for a loan 
        guaranteed under this chapter.
  (c) Loans with respect to which the Secretary may exercise 
the buy down authority under subsection (a) shall--
          (1) provide for a buy down period of not more than 
        three years in duration;
          (2) specify the maximum and likely amounts of 
        increases in mortgage payments that the loans would 
        require; and
          (3) be subject to such other terms and conditions as 
        the Secretary may prescribe by regulation.
  (d) The Secretary shall promulgate underwriting standards for 
loans for which the interest rate assistance payments may be 
made under subsection (a). Such standards shall be based on the 
interest rate for the second year of the loan.
  (e) The Secretary or lender shall provide comprehensive 
prepurchase counseling to eligible veterans explaining the 
features of interest rate buy downs under subsection (a), 
including a hypothetical payment schedule that displays the 
increases in monthly payments to the mortgagor over the first 
five years of the mortgage term. For the purposes of this 
subsection, the Secretary may assign personnel to military 
installations referred to in subsection (b)(2).
  (f) There is authorized to be appropriated $3,000,000 
annually to carry out this section.
  (g) The Secretary may not guarantee a loan under this chapter 
after September 30, 1998, on which the Secretary is obligated 
to make payments under this section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


              ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REP. HERBERT H. BATEMAN

    Preserving the nation's submarine industrial base is a 
vital long-term national security objective. One cannot help 
but be sympathetic to the Navy's desire to maintain two 
shipyards capable of producing nuclear-powered warships, 
particularly submarines. This Member would support such a 
strategy if there were any prospect that we required more than 
one. No one, however, anticipates building enough submarines to 
support two or more nuclear-capable shipyards. The Navy's two 
nuclear-capable shipyard strategy is based upon flawed 
analyses, including the assumption that having two such 
shipyards will provide an important hedge against manmade or 
natural catastrophes that could shut down one of the two yards 
and that future maritime threats might require submarine 
production to be increased above the capacity of the New 
England shipyard, Electric Boat, which the Navy wants to be its 
exclusive submarine builder.
    These assumptions ought to be rejected. Throughout the Cold 
War, when the growing threat from the Soviet submarine force 
was a matter of great concern to many of us in Congress, there 
were no instances of submarine construction being impeded by 
manmade or natural catastrophes. Shipyards are not federal 
buildings sitting mere feet from major streets and, 
consequently, are not vulnerable to car bombs. Any such 
terrorist act that did succeed in damaging one pier or drydock 
would be very unlikely to inflict similar damage to other areas 
of the yard in question. In fact, the threat of terrorism is 
greater to submarines already in the fleet and tied up at 
piers. More importantly, however, and of relevance also to the 
Navy's second assumption pertaining to surge capacity, any 
crisis or war that breaks out will be responded to or fought 
with the submarines in hand at that time. It takes five years 
for a shipyard currently constructing nuclear submarines to 
build one. It is estimated that it would take eight years for a 
yard that has been out of the submarine construction business 
to build even one submarine because of the loss of skilled 
workers and engineers. The Navy's policy is a multibillion 
dollar insurance premium that adds nothing to our security.
    For these reasons the two yard strategy is fundamentally 
flawed. The economic arguments further demonstrate the 
questionable logic behind the Navy's analysis. Even the Navy 
concedes that significant savings would be achieved by 
consolidating submarine construction at Newport News 
Shipbuilding because of that yard's ability to spread overhead 
costs across several programs. All Newport News is asking for 
is the right to compete fairly and objectively for contracts to 
build the New Attack Submarine (NAS), the generation of ship 
expected to follow construction of the Seawolf-class boats. The 
Navy has argued that Electric Boat should be the sole builder 
of all nuclear-powered submarines, despite documented cost 
savings of having Newport News do the work. Every analysis 
concludes that Newport News Shipbuilding is expected to be the 
lowest cost builder.
    Central to the debate on whether to permit Newport News to 
compete for future nuclear submarine construction contracts are 
the measures needed to keep both submarine builders healthy 
during the current crucial transition period during which both 
shipyards are completing their backlogs of submarine work. The 
Navy strategy calls for construction of a third Seawolf-class 
submarine for the sole purpose of keeping Electric Boat 
healthy. Toward that end, it is ready to spend over $2.5 
billion on construction of a submarine even the Navy concedes 
is not needed for military purposes. Military Procurement 
Subcommittee Chairman Hunter has attempted to reconcile 
competing interests by terminating work on that third Seawolf, 
providing other ``bridge'' funding to Electric Boat for 
modifications on the second Seawolf and providing funding to 
ensure Newport News Shipbuilding is involved in the design of 
the NAS. Additionally, the chairman's concerns about the 
conceptual viability of the presently proposed New Attack 
Submarine are reflected in his decision to push back 
construction on the first boat in that class until the year 
2000, while having Electric Boat construct an experimental 
research and development platform in 1998, previously the date 
for construction of the first NAS.
    As stated earlier, the chairman is to be commended for his 
efforts at working with the Navy as well as with both 
interested shipyards in fashioning a submarine construction 
strategy that will accomplish the two-yard objective. While 
this member shares the chairman's concerns about the NAS and 
wishes it to be the best submarine that we can afford, there 
are questions as to the practicality of his strategy. The NAS 
was conceptualized to be a lower cost albeit less capable 
platform than Seawolf. We need to explore technological 
innovations and facilitate the emergence of improved submarine 
designs, systems and components. There comes a time, though, 
when the country must proceed with the actual construction of a 
platform, taking into account the fact that improvements are 
typically incorporated into submarines under construction as 
well as existing hulls during the life of a particular class of 
ship. Delaying construction of the New Attack Submarine until 
after 1998 creates a risk that neither Electric Boat nor 
Newport News Shipbuilding will be in the position to build 
submarines without a significant delay while incurring the cost 
of reconstituting their design and construction capabilities, 
or else building additional Seawolfs.
    It has been stated by some of the supporters in Congress of 
the New England shipyard that Newport News enjoys an unfair 
advantage in an open competition because it has been the Navy's 
sole source for aircraft carrier construction. This argument 
ignores the fact that Electric Boat has been the sole source 
for ballistic missile submarine construction throughout the 
Trident submarine program and that it was given contracts for 
Los Angeles-class attack submarines that it lost out on in open 
competition simply to keep it viable. In short, American 
taxpayers have already done their fair share to keep Electric 
Boat open despite the fact that another yard exists that can do 
the work as well and for less money.
    Newport News Shipbuilding can build numerically more 
submarines than Electric Boat. History demonstrates it designs 
and builds them as well or better than the New England yard and 
all data demonstrate significant cost savings in building 
future submarines at Newport News. There is no requirement for 
a second nuclear-capable shipyard. It is my hope and desire 
that we build upon what the National Security Committee mark 
provides so that in the end we get the best next-generation 
submarine we can afford, built by the shipyard that wins a fair 
and honest competition. To allow the government to select which 
competitor is permitted to survive without regard for important 
factors like cost effectiveness is not the American way. 
Congress must act to assure that both Electric Boat and Newport 
Shipbuilding have the opportunity to compete for future 
submarine construction contracts. That is the American way.

                                                Herbert H. Bateman.

                  ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF ROBERT K. DORNAN

                   FY 1996 Defense Authorization Bill

    This bill marks a very historic moment in our country's 
approach to maintaining national security. For the first time 
in four decades, a new majority in the House of Representatives 
is setting the priorities for spending by the Department of 
Defense. Because of the increasing pressures we face both here 
and abroad, this new approach to our nation's security could 
not have come at a better or more appropriate time.
    The world is becoming much more complex in terms of 
security requirements. Situations in Somalia, Bosnia and Haiti 
have clearly demonstrated the dangers our military forces will 
face despite the apparent end of the Cold War with the former 
Soviet Union. Meanwhile, increased budgetary pressures, 
including a commitment to balance the federal budget by 2002, 
mean that the resources available to maintain an effective 
military capability will be very limited. Against this 
backdrop, the current administration has not only failed to 
clearly articulate a comprehensive foreign and national 
security policy for the future, but has under funded its own 
very questionable ``Bottom Up Review'' by as much as 150 
billion dollars!
    In response to these circumstances, the House National 
Security Committee has taken very bold and innovative measures 
designed to not only maintain but drastically improve our 
military capability for both now and the next century.
    Highly motivated and qualified soldiers, sailors, airmen 
and Marines remain the foundation for an effective combat 
fighting force. In order to recruit, retain and reward such 
troops, the committee, led by my Personnel Subcommittee, took 
the following necessary steps. First, we placed a mandatory 
floor on military force structure in order to prevent the 
Administration from further cutting personnel levels below 
those recommended in the Bottom Up Review. We also authorized 
the Secretary of Defense funding for an additional 7,500 
personnel that could be used directly to relieve pressure on 
certain portions of each military service being stressed by 
high operations tempo such as Air Force AWACS, Army military 
police, and Army Patriot missile units. In the area of 
compensation, we fully approved a military pay increase, the 
first requested by this administration in three years, and 
supported a range of other compensation initiatives over and 
above those requested including a 5.2 percent increase in the 
basic allowance for quarters (BAQ).
    Another area that deserves and received more attention from 
the committee was training/readiness. Besides additional funds 
for property maintenance, base operations, ammunition, and 
other basic supplies, the Personnel Subcommittee increased the 
number of military technicians, a key to reserve component 
readiness, by 1,400 personnel above the level requested by the 
President. In order to pay for these combat readiness 
initiatives, the committee cut over 2 billion dollars in non-
defense spending from this bill. While many of these ``civil-
military'' programs may have great merit, we decided that the 
priority should be on military programs that directly 
contribute to combat readiness. The defense budget must be for 
defense.
    Finally, the committee made a firm commitment to new 
technology by funding vital modernization programs which will 
ensure our technical edge over any adversary for the 
foreseeable future. Chief among these modernization initiatives 
was additional funding for ballistic missile defense (BMD) 
including full funding in FY 1996 for Navy lower and upper tier 
systems. By providing this additional funding, we will be able 
to build upon our previous investment in Aegis ships, radar and 
missiles and provide our allies, forward deployed forces, and 
even the U.S. with an effective missile defense by the turn of 
the century.
    We also accelerated funding for armed reconnaissance 
helicopters for the Army, a requirement that was clearly 
demonstrated after the loss of an unarmed, underpowered, 
unstealthy OH-58 aircraft over North Korea earlier this year. 
The committee funded 20 additional OH-58D ``Kiowa Warrior'' 
aircraft to meet this requirement in the short term and fully 
endorsed the RAH-66 ``Comanche'' program to address this 
requirement in the long term.
    The committee also made a clear commitment to address the 
lack of long range conventional bomber capability by 
authorizing funding for additional B-2 production and continued 
conventional enhancements to the B-1B aircraft. Such long range 
power projection systems will be vital to a future, credible 
U.S. military presence overseas.
    This defense bill does not represent the total answer to 
our future national security requirements. It represents only 
the beginning. However, such a strong foundation is vital, 
especially without better guidance or vision from the present 
administration, if we are to ensure the national security of 
this great nation in the 21st century.
    For those who might question why we need to continue to 
invest so much in defense, I would remind them, during this 
50th anniversary of our victory in World War II, of the high 
price we pay in terms of human life when we are not properly 
prepared to quickly and decisively win at war. We must always 
remember that those who are most prepared to wage war are also 
those who are least likely to need to do so because of such 
preparedness. As one of our greatest battlefield commanders, 
Matt Ridgway, once commented: ``What red-blooded American could 
oppose so shining a concept as victory? It would be like 
standing up for sin against virtue.''
    The House National Security Committee FY 1996 Defense 
Authorization Bill is a commitment to victory instead of 
defeat. Hopefully the Senate and appropriations committees will 
show the same commitment when considering this defense budget.

                                                       R.K. Dornan.

              ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF CONGRESSMAN CHET EDWARDS

    I was pleased to support final passage of the fiscal year 
1996 Defense Authorization Act. This measure, while not fully 
meeting the defense objectives I believe our nation should 
pursue, does attempt to reverse the trend of shrinking defense 
budgets. I am particularly pleased with the increased funding 
allocated to the procurement accounts to allow for an 
improvement in our modernization efforts. I especially applaud 
our committee's efforts in the area of improving the Quality-
of-Life for our military personnel, which the Administration 
sought to make this top priority this year.
    I applaud the work of our new chairman for this consistent 
efforts to maintain fairness throughout the hearing process. 
While the hearings were held in a compressed time frame, they 
did allow for an examination of some critical areas in shaping 
our national security posture. I am hopeful additional hearings 
will be held after work is finalized on the Defense 
Authorization Act, so that a more comprehensive long-term 
vision can be established to determine what our defense policy 
will be into the next century.
    While the final budget figure is uncertain at this time, I 
am pleased that it appears a higher defense spending level can 
be anticipated for the new fiscal year. We need to allocate 
this funding increase in a wise and prudent manner, and I agree 
with many of the spending priorities established in this year's 
bill.
    We must continue to emphasize our most important defense 
attribute, that being our first-rate personnel. It is through 
our people that our defense forces remain second to none. The 
recent Administration announcement about improved quality-of-
life emphasis is certainly followed in this measure, by grating 
a payraise, improving barracks and family housing, and 
providing a portion of the funding needed for impact aid. Our 
military personnel cannot be distracted about their children's 
education, and by eliminating this funding our local 
communities will be negatively affected. The results will be 
harmful to the education provided to these children, and I 
maintain this will have a dramatic and negative impact our 
personnel's morale, readiness and desire to remain in the 
military. I am hopeful that the full allocation will be granted 
for impact aid, and I will continue working to achieve that 
goal.
    There are some important areas which were not fully debated 
at the committee level, and have been deferred until the 
measure is considered by the full House. Important programs 
such as the Seawolf submarine and the B-2 Stealth bomber need a 
full and complete debate to allow the full House to decide 
which course we should follow with regard to these important 
and expensive systems. We need to carefully measure the 
military utility, the future costs of such systems, and the 
impact on the military industrial base before deciding the fate 
of these and other critical defense programs.
    I will closely monitor the defense budget bottom line to 
determine what impact this funding level will have on programs 
which are important to addressing our modernization needs. We 
must carefully consider, should the budget figure drop below 
our current level, as to what programs are of a higher priority 
and meet our immediate or near-term defense posture.
    In the area of missile defense, I remain concerned about 
the bill's renewed emphasis on national missile defense. While 
I do support a strong and vigorous missile defense plan, I do 
not want to see our current Theater Missile Defense (TMD) plan 
disrupted or shortchanged by this new funding decision. I will 
continue to work with my colleagues to ensure our decisions in 
this area will not be without focus and strong direction.
    There is a need for further refinement of this defense 
bill, and I will be working throughout the process from the 
floor to the conference to ensure a success defense bill 
emerges. I do find the committee product to be more that a good 
first step to meeting the defense needs of the present, and 
hopefully addressing some of our short-term deficiencies in 
modernization. With the world still changing and the defense 
threats far from certain, we need to carefully and wisely craft 
a defense bill that allows for our military to meet these 
evolving threats to our nation and our allies.
    I am pleased to commend the dedication, hard work and 
professionalism of the committee staff for all their assistance 
in drafting this important measure. I look forward to their 
continuing efforts as we further refine the committee's work in 
the coming months.
    I look forward to containing work with my colleagues in 
finalizing a fiscal year 1996 Defense Authorization bill which 
meets our national security needs.

                                                      Chet Edwards.

  DISSENTING VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVES DELLUMS, SCHROEDER, EVANS, AND 
                                 MEEHAN

    We dissent from the recommendation of the Committee on 
National Security to report the bill, H.R. 1530, as amended, to 
the House with a recommendation for passage. We believe that 
the overall level of expenditures contained within the bill 
(although within the limits established by the House Budget 
Resolution) are higher than needed for an adequate defense 
posture. In addition, we disagree with the spending priorities 
established by the Committee and with numerous provisions of 
the bill that aggressively promote extreme agendas on important 
social issues.
    We are especially troubled that the process of public 
deliberation on the bill has been so frustrated and that the 
Committee's well-developed and well-earned legacy of 
bipartisanship has been so tattered during the development of 
the bill. Efforts to achieve bipartisan consensus on the major 
national security issues of which the committee has 
jurisdiction has always constituted the singular, most 
distinguishing achievement of our committee. It has been 
reflected historically not only in the fine work of staff and 
committee collegiality, but in the willingness sincerely to 
solicit Administration and alternative views on the important 
issues facing the Committee. This has been especially true of 
Committee initiatives, such as the Goldwater/Nichols 
reorganization bill, military retirement reform and acquisition 
reform, to name a few.
    The report of H.R. 1530 contains enormous and sweeping 
provisions that have not only been developed without the 
benefit or full consultation with the Administration and 
others, they have not been illuminated properly by the 
subcommittee and full committee hearing process. Whether in 
personnel matters, weapons procurement, research and 
development, foreign policy initiatives or acquisition reform, 
the failure to initiate full-fledged, even-handed inquiries 
into these matters constitutes, in our judgement, a real 
shortcoming in the legislative process. We hope that these 
shortcomings are a result of the learning process and will be 
remedied in the future.
    It is our view that these procedural shortcomings have 
created an environment in which substantive programs are being 
initiated with significant potential adverse results.
    For example, the committee report would embark upon an 
extraordinarily costly program to purchase new B-2 bombers at 
great expense and without justification. All of the testimony 
the Committee received by the Department of Defense and the 
services came to the conclusion that additional B-2s were 
unneeded, and that their purchase would crowd out other, higher 
priority programs (even if more money were to be made available 
than was contained in the President's request). This view was 
supported ultimately both by the independent bomber needs study 
called for by the FY 1995 Defense Authorization Act and 
conducted by the highly respected Institute for Defense 
Analysis, as well as by an independent assessment by the Roles 
& Missions Commission that was established also by 
congressional initiative.
    The bottom line is: We do not need more B-2s; the Secretary 
of Defense does not want more B-2s; and the uniformed, 
operational Air Force has higher priorities to which it would 
devote additional resources, as was testified to before our 
committee.
    The inclusion of funding for additional B-2s is sufficient 
in itself to warrant rejection of the committee report. But 
other shortcomings exist.
    The committee report recommends putting more resources 
towards our weapons inventory in order to fend off what some on 
the committee have claimed has been a ``procurement holiday'' 
that threatens modernization and future readiness. Dire 
forecasts of future shortages are made based on the fact that 
we have not made recent purchases of modern weapons. The claims 
ignore the fact that reductions in major systems procurement 
resulted from the ability to rely upon sustaining the inventory 
by absorbing excess equipment that resulted from downsizing the 
force.
    In testimony before the Committee, Defense Secretary 
William Perry displayed in graphic terms the plans to resume 
procurements--when reliance on the absorption strategy would no 
longer be sufficient--in time to maintain inventory average-age 
goals. The replacement strategy would appropriately and with 
timeliness secure the modernization of the weapons inventory 
and guarantee future readiness. Further rushing to replace 
weapons that are fairly ``young''--that is, acquired during the 
1980's build-up--has the effect of ``throwing away'' useful 
service life, and thereby wasting taxpayer dollars.
    Surely the acquisition program that warrants close 
monitoring by the committee; but it does not warrant a 
precipitous buy of major equipment. In fact, this ``procurement 
holiday'' scare reminds us of a previous claim of what ended up 
being a non-existent missile gap.
    As to the Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972, the 
majority made several assurances that it was not their intent 
to now develop non-treaty compliant Theater Missile Defense or 
National Missile Defense systems, nor to cause a breakout from 
the Treaty through the Missile Defense Act rewrite. Yet, all 
attempts to have the Committee report rewrite conform to the 
ABM Treaty, or to limit development activities that would 
violate the Treaty, were successfully resisted by the majority. 
One might ask, why jeopardize START II by playing fast and 
loose with the ABM Treaty when it is the reduced warhead limits 
of START II that, it is argued, would make a National Missile 
Defense technically feasible.
    In addition, the committee report would double the 
investment in national missile defense programs. There is no 
crucial, near-term threat that warrants such an increase in 
spending, much less the reckless disregard for the ABM Treaty 
that the language of the report displays.
    These are just some highlights of the research, development 
and procurement activity that has soaked up the excessive 
resources dumped in the Committee's lap by the House-passed 
budget resolution and which will propel our acquisition program 
back to the future--creating reliance upon weapons programs 
developed to meet Cold War strategic plans that will not meet 
effectively the requirements of the future, and may, in fact, 
only serve to re-ignite those destabilizing competitions.
    Part of the bill-payers for this acquisition splurge were 
vitally important environmental clean-up programs that the 
Departments of Energy and Defense are required by law or 
litigation to complete--and for which it is our obligation to 
provide them the funding. These clean-up and prevention efforts 
are the way of the future and the committee's hostility to 
their continuance and to fund suitably the programs that exist 
is shortsighted.
    Part of the payment for the acquisition splurge also came 
from dual-use programs that are being used to position the 
industrial base to be able to support fully the emerging 
defense industrial challenges of the century to come. Such 
additional shortsightedness in cutting these funds in order to 
pay in part for lower priority Cold War-era weapons should be 
rejected by the House.
    Not all of the problems with the report are money spending 
problems. The report would throw out of the service those 
personnel with the HIV-1 virus who are perfectly capable of 
serving their nation. The Army personnel chief has stated that 
current DoD regulations are perfectly capable of handling 
persons with non-world wide deployable status. Targeting those 
with HIV-1 status is unconscionable and was done without even 
the barest of committee inquiries into the issue.
    Again without the benefit of hearing, the report would 
further close down a woman's constitutionally protected right 
to an abortion by denying her access to such medical procedures 
when she is dependent on military health care systems overseas.
    Constricting the Cooperative Threat Reduction (so-called 
Nunn-Lugar) program--with its potential for so dramatically 
aiding in the elimination of weapons of mass destruction--is 
wrong and runs counter to the arguments offered by those in 
favor of a national missile defense program who argued that we 
must better defend our citizens from such weapons. Again, funds 
($171 million) were squeezed from the program to finance 
projects and weapons systems of less effective value to the 
nation's security. Secretary Perry stated that this program was 
one of his highest priorities, and the House should surely 
revisit this issue.
    Placing roadblocks in the path of our effective 
participation in United Nations peacekeeping, the bill not only 
challenges the President's rightful responsibilities as 
commander in chief, it directly and adversely affects our long-
term national security interests by erecting these impediments 
to participation. Clearly this is a case in which the American 
people are way ahead of the committee in comprehending the 
enduring moral value, financial benefit and the advantage 
generated by having the United States participate fully in 
peacekeeping efforts to control the outbreak of war and 
violence. The report contains a major acquisition reform 
package, one which is adopted without one hearing prior to the 
Committee on National Security markup of the bill. We also are 
without the benefit of learning of the outcome of last year's 
significant reforms in acquisition, thereby running the risk 
that this program will hinder last year's effort. In addition, 
passage of a second major package so quickly will reduce our 
ability to analyze which reforms worked well and which did not.
    We are also concerned with the proposal in section 3133 to 
fund multipurpose reactor programs that will breach the 
firewall between nuclear-power and defense nuclear-weapons 
programs. This has major implications for U.S. non-
proliferation efforts, prematurely anticipates the Secretary of 
Energy's decision-making process to identify the best source 
for tritium production and, again, was done without the benefit 
of subcommittee or committee hearings.
    In the past two years, the committee reports of the defense 
authorization bill have put the United States on a path beyond 
Cold War thinking and began to move us towards a post-Cold War 
national security strategy.
    We believe that this report reverses that course: It buys 
more weapons whose design, function and purposes are rooted in 
Cold War strategy and doctrine. It pushes away from an 
aggressive arms control strategy and potentially back towards 
global brinkmanship. It seeks to impede effective efforts by 
the defense department to ready itself for the challenges of 
the current time and the next century--all in the name of 
keeping it ``ready'' for the types of challenges which arose in 
the past. This bill represents not just a lost opportunity to 
adjust to the changes of our time, but carries with it the tone 
and substance that has been the basis for so many destabilizing 
arms and ideological competitions of the past.
    We remain convinced in the value and the efficacy of our 
ideas, and of the accuracy of our vision that we have entered a 
new world with enormous potential for transformation--one in 
which we should boldly paint new strokes of national security 
and foreign policy rather than just to tinker at the margins of 
a now outdated national security strategy.

                                   Ronald V. Dellums.
                                   Patricia Schroeder.
                                   Lane Evans.
                                   Martin T. Meehan.

                 DISSENTING REMARKS OF REP. LANE EVANS

    I opposed final passage of the House National Security 
Committee's mark of the FY96 DOD Authorization Act because I 
believe it sets in motion a number of expensive ``Cold War'' 
procurement programs that will compete with fundamental defense 
spending priorities.
    I am concerned that this bill puts us on a course to buy 
``Cold War'' weapons systems such as the B-2, F-22 and National 
Missile Defense. Funding these types of programs seriously 
imbalances spending priorities. The number of big ticket and 
unnecessary procurement items authorized in this bill will make 
it difficult to fund basic defense needs in the out-years. The 
bow wave of increasing procurement costs that the bill sets in 
motion will make it much harder to ensure baseline defense 
capabilities. Specifically, I am concerned that this growth in 
procurement spending will threaten a number of important 
priorities such as: adequate funding to operate and maintain 
our forces, stable pay and benefits for our military 
servicemembers, and the ability to retain a steady and capable 
civilian workforce.
    I also opposed provisions in this bill that rob important 
environmental funding priorities. I am proud of the work this 
committee has done over the last decade to clean-up the decades 
of neglect at the nuclear weapons production complex and 
military bases around our nation. Yet, the arbitrary cuts in 
this bill in the DOE environmental restoration account and the 
Defense Environmental Restoration Account (DERA) threaten to 
reverse this progress, and in the process, the health and 
safety of Americans who live and work around these facilities.

                                                        Lane Evans.

 DISSENTING VIEWS ON THE PROVISIONS REQUIRING THE IMMEDIATE SEPARATION 
 OF HIV-POSITIVE PERSONNEL AND BANNING ABORTIONS IN MILITARY HOSPITALS 
                                OVERSEAS

    We had hoped that divisive social issues would not be 
included in the FY96 Defense Authorization Bill.
    Regrettably, two such issues were included in the personnel 
title in the bill reported from the National Security 
Committee: a ban on privately-funded abortions in military 
hospitals overseas and a provision to require the immediate 
discharge of all HIV positive service members. Neither was the 
subject of hearings and both are unnecessary departures from 
current policy.
Abortions in military hospitals overseas
    The bill reported from the National Security Committee 
repeals current policy and bans all privately-funded abortions 
performed in military hospitals overseas. Under current policy, 
no federal funds are used, and health care professionals who 
are opposed to performing abortions as a matter of conscience 
or moral principle are not required to do so.
    This is a matter of fairness. Servicewomen and military 
dependents stationed abroad don't expect special treatment, 
only the right to receive the same services guaranteed to 
American women by Roe v. Wade--at their own expense--that are 
available in this country.
    Prohibiting women from using their own funds to obtain 
abortion services at overseas military facilities endangers 
their health. Women will be forced to seek illegal, unsafe 
procedures, or be forced to delay the procedure for several 
weeks until they can return to the states. The question for our 
House colleagues is whether they can justify limiting 
constitutionally-protected rights and providing lower quality 
health care simply because these servicewomen have duty 
assignments overseas. We cannot.
Separation of HIV-posutive personnel
    The bill reported from the Committee also includes a 
provision requiring HIV-positive personnel to be immediately 
separated from the military services. It is punitive, 
discriminatory and an example of unnecessary Congressional 
micromanagement of the Pentagon when current policy is working.
    Current law prescribes that so long as these individuals 
are deemed fit for duty by the Service itself, they may 
continue in the Service. The Department of Defense and the 
Services have effectively and responsibly exercised the 
discretion Congress provided them. There is no evidence that 
current policy has resulted in lower military readiness or the 
retention of unqualified individuals.
    The Department of Defense and all four Services support 
current policy. They see no reason to change a policy that 
works well.
    We regret the Committee's action endorsing these two 
divisive, unfair and punitive policies.

                                   Jane Harman.
                                   Pat Schroeder.
                                   Marty Meehan.
                                   Neil Abercrombie.
                                   Rosa L. DeLauro.
                                   Lane Evans.
                                   Mike Ward.
                                   Ronald V. Dellums.

         ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS OF PATRICK J. KENNEDY

    While I voted to report the FY96 Defense Authorization bill 
out of Committee and believe that the bill contains a number of 
significant initiatives that will enhance our national 
security, there remain some issues with which I am deeply 
concerned.
    One of the primary responsibilities of this Committee is 
ensuring our service personnel are properly prepared to meet 
any of the wide-ranging challenges and tasks our nation asks of 
them. In so doing, I think it is essential that we maintain a 
vigorous investment in the research and development of advanced 
technology. The budget reported out of Committee, which 
provides an approximate increase of $1.5 billion to the 
Administration's request for research and development, is a 
step in that direction. By applying advanced technology, we can 
seek to maximize military effectiveness while minimizing the 
human cost to our men and women in uniform. As a member of the 
Research and Development Subcommittee, I am pleased to note the 
Committee placed a high priority for investment in modeling and 
simulation technologies. These technologies will provide a high 
quality supplement to training, develop tactics and evaluate 
new capabilities in a cost-effective and low-risk manner.
    But I firmly believe that advanced technology is only part 
of the picture--the most sophisticated and advanced military 
equipment will have little impact if our military personnel are 
not provided proper training and education. I was gratified to 
hear the service chiefs and the various CINCs who testified 
before the Committee this year emphatically state the need to 
maintain a strong and solid commitment to the mission of 
professional military education.
    As a member of the Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant 
Marine, I am gratified that the Committee accepted the 
recommendations of the panel to provide reemployment rights for 
merchant seaman called to duty during times of crisis or war. 
These rights, long overdue and reflective of those provided to 
our Reserve and Guard personnel, will help maintain a strong 
merchant marine, a critical capability to a maritime nation 
such as ours.
    Another issue brought up by the Panel and a topic which I 
hope will be the basis for future action, is the issue of 
enacting international standards for shipboard labor. Our Panel 
heard powerful testimony regarding the often treacherous and 
inhumane living and working conditions of foreign crews. For 
national security, economic, political and social reasons, I 
believe it would benefit the United States to take the lead in 
ensuring the international community moves in the direction of 
raising the labor standards closer to ours rather than lowering 
those standards to the lowest common denominator.
    Finally, I am puzzled by the Committee's recommended 
proposal for the future of our attack submarine fleet. During 
Committee hearings on the budget request, the Committee queried 
the services on their major modernization and procurement 
priorities. This Committee has heard, on a number of occasions, 
testimony from the Navy's leadership, both civilian and 
military, informing us of their highest modernization 
priority--completing construction of the third and final 
Seawolf, SSN23, and beginning low-rate production of the New 
Attack Submarine in FY98. These two actions will enable our 
undersea fleet to maintain technological superiority and to 
meet the force structure requirements contained in the Bottom 
Up Review.
    Yet, the Committee failed to heed Navy guidance and 
instead, with the stroke of a pen and without the benefit of a 
single hearing on the Committee proposal, decided to ignore the 
Navy's carefully constructed submarine modernization effort. I 
am disturbed that such a drastic and unexplored deviation will 
not only be costly in the fiscal sense but will also have a 
negative impact on our national security and the future 
development of the Navy's attack submarine fleet. I find it 
somewhat contradictory that the Committee believed it necessary 
to fund the B-2 bomber to maintain the bomber industrial base 
but did not find it necessary to finish construction of SSN23 
to maintain the submarine industrial base, an industry with 
only two possible production yards and no commercial 
counterpart.

                                                Patrick J. Kennedy.

                                
