[House Report 104-137]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



104th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 1st Session                                                    104-137
_______________________________________________________________________


 
            MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 1996

                                _______


 June 13, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


 Mrs. Vucanovich, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 1817]
    The Committee on Appropriations submits the following 
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making 
appropriations for military construction, family housing, and 
base realignments and closures for the Department of Defense 
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996.
                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Summary of Committee Recommendation..............................     2
Fiscal Year 1996 Budget Request..................................     3
Conformance with Authorization Bill..............................     3
Quality of Life in the Military:
    Troop Housing................................................     3
    Barracks Standards...........................................     6
    Child Development Centers....................................     7
    Child Care Services--Outsourcing Initiative..................     8
    Hospital and Medical Facilities..............................     8
Environmental Compliance Projects................................     9
Potential Canceled Projects Due to the Base Realignment and          10
  Closure Process.
European Construction Program....................................    10
Modular Construction.............................................    11
Parametric Cost Estimating.......................................    11
Hearing Transcripts..............................................    11
Foreign Currency Exchange Rates..................................    11
Annual Report on Design and Construction Progress................    12
Establishment of Audit Trail Documents...........................    12
Program, Project and Activity....................................    12
Military Construction:
    Army.........................................................    12
    Navy.........................................................    15
    Air Force....................................................    18
    Defense-Wide.................................................    18
    Reserve Components...........................................    21
NATO Security Investment Program.................................    22
Family Housing Overview..........................................    23
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund Overview...    26
Family Housing:
    Army.........................................................    29
    Navy and Marine Corps........................................    30
    Air Force....................................................    31
    Defense-Wide.................................................    33
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund............    33
Homeowners Assistance Fund.......................................    33
Base Realignment and Closure:
    Overview.....................................................    34
    Part I.......................................................    42
    Part II......................................................    42
    Part III.....................................................    43
    Part IV......................................................    43
General Provisions...............................................    44
Changes in Application of Existing Law...........................    44
Compliance with Rule XIII--Clause 3..............................    47
Appropriations Not Authorized By Law.............................    47
Transfer of Funds................................................    48
Rescission of Funds..............................................    48
Inflationary Impact Statement....................................    48
Comparisons with Budget Resolution...............................    48
Advance Spending Authority.......................................    48
Five-Year Projection of Outlays..................................    48
Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments..............    49
State List.......................................................    49
                  Summary of Committee Recommendation

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           Recommended compared 
                                                                                                   with         
                                                    Fiscal year    Fiscal   Fiscal year ------------------------
                                                        1995        year        1996                     Fiscal 
                                                   appropriation    1996    recommended   Fiscal year     year  
                                                                   request                    1995        1996  
                                                                                         appropriation   request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military construction............................      $2,531       $2,496      $2,806          $275       $310 
Family housing...................................       3,520        4,125       4,333           813        208 
Base realignment and closure.....................       2,676        3,898       3,898         1,222          0 
NATO Security Investment Program.................         119          179         161            42        (18)
Procurement reform...............................         (10)           0           0            10          0 
Fiscal year 1995 rescission......................        (101)           0           0           101          0 
                                                  --------------------------------------------------------------
      Total......................................       8,735       10,698      11,198         2,463        500 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Family Housing accounts represent $4.3 billion and account 
for 40 percent of the total appropriations included in this 
bill. Funding for these programs include such items as:
          $1.0 billion for construction and construction 
        improvements;
          $3.3 billion for operations and maintenance of 
        existing inventory;
          $76 million for the Homeowners Assistance Fund;
          $22 million for start-up costs for a private sector 
        pilot project.
    Base Realignment and Closure accounts represent $3.9 
billion and account for 35 percent of the total appropriations 
included in this bill. The Committee notes that this is an 
increase of $1.2 billion over fiscal year 1995 and includes 
$785 million for implementation of the 1995 round of closures. 
Funding for these programs include such items as:
          $1.1 billion for military construction and family 
        housing;
          $457 million for environmental cleanup;
          $2.3 billion for operations and maintenance.
    Military Construction Accounts represent $2.8 billion and 
account for 25 percent of the total appropriations included in 
this bill. Funding for these programs include such items as:
          $636 million for barracks construction;
          $207 million for environmental compliance;
          $178 million for medical related facilities;
          $108 million for chemical demilitarizaton;
          $57 million for child development centers.

                    Fiscal Year 1996 Budget Request

    The Committee notes that the Administration's fiscal year 
1996 budget request of $10,697,995,000 represents an increase 
of $1,962,595,000 over the fiscal year 1995 appropriation of 
$8,735,400,000. The majority of the increase results from 
quality of life requirements for family housing, $604,777,000, 
or 31 percent, as well as requirements for the implementation 
of base realignments and closures, $1,221,734,000, or 63 
percent. The Committee commends the Department of Defense for 
following the Committee's guidance in last year's report and 
seeking increased appropriations for family housing due to the 
contributions this program makes to readiness and retention.
    The Committee feels strongly that the increased emphasis on 
base realignment and closures, consuming over one third of the 
funding in this bill, has reduced the availability of funding 
for needed projects. While the Committee supports base 
realignment and closure funding, it is imperative the severe 
backlog in readiness, revitalization and quality of life 
projects be addressed. The Committee has added an additional 
$500,000,000 over the Administration's fiscal year 1996 budget 
request to fund the planning and construction of several 
barracks, family housing and child development center projects. 
The Department of Defense is urged to maintain this level of 
funding and to give priority consideration to these types of 
projects in its fiscal year 1997 budget request.

                  Conformance With Authorization Bill

    The House National Security Committee has reported H.R. 
1530, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1996, which contains authorization for the military 
construction, family housing and base realignment and closure 
accounts included in this bill. Because Senate and conference 
action on the authorization had not been completed at the time 
this bill was prepared, the Committee is considering only 
projects recommended for authorization in H.R. 1530. All 
projects included in this bill are approved subject to 
authorization.

                    Quality of Life in the Military
                             troop housing

    The Department of Defense has over 600,000 men and women 
living in troop housing. Approximately one half of DOD's 
barracks were built 30 or more years ago, with an average age 
of over 40 years. Of this inventory, over one fourth are 
considered substandard facilities and continuous maintenance is 
necessary to deal with such problems as asbestos, corroded 
pipes, inadequate ventilation, faulty heating and cooling 
systems, and peeling lead-based paint.
    Based on the ``2 plus 2'' standard, and a definition of 
deficit as ``characterizing adequacy of the existing 
inventory'', there is a total DOD barrack space deficit of 
160,000. The Army estimates a deficit of 75,600 barrack spaces; 
the Air Force 30,200; and the Navy/Marine Corps 54,300. The 
Department of Defense estimates it will cost approximately $8.5 
billion at the proposed new standard and take 10 years for the 
Air Force, 60 years for the Navy, 23 years for the Army and 32 
years for the Marine Corps to eliminate this deficit.
    The Department of Defense has requested $433,330,000 for 
9,916 barrack spaces in fiscal year 1996. The Committee has 
approved this request in full. In addition, to help alleviate 
the deficit an additional $202,332,000 has been provided. The 
locations were determined by component priorities and all 
projects are capable for construction during fiscal year 1996. 
The total appropriation for troop housing included in this bill 
is $635,662,000.
    The Committee understands that improving troop housing does 
not lie solely in constructing new barrack spaces. Renovation 
plays an important role in this process. The Committee notes 
that not included in this bill, and under the jurisdiction of 
the National Security Subcommittee, is a total request of $672 
million to renovate 4,931 barrack spaces under the Real 
Property Maintenance Account.
    In addition, the Quality of Life Task Force, chaired by the 
Honorable John O. Marsh, Jr., is in the process of reviewing 
other innovative strategies, assignment policy changes, and 
possibly diverting a larger share of troops off-base. The 
Committee looks forward to the results of the task force and 
encourages it to look at private sector initiatives similar to 
the proposed Family Housing Revitalization Act.
    The following troop housing construction projects are 
provided for fiscal year 1996:


------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Location                    Request          Recommended   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army:                                                                   
    Fort Huachuca, Arizona........        $16,000,000        $16,000,000
    Fort Carson, Colorado.........                  0         20,000,000
    Fort Lesley J. McNair,                                              
     District of Columbia.........          5,500,000          5,500,000
    Fort Benning, Georgia.........         33,000,000         33,000,000
    Schofield Barracks, Hawaii....                  0         15,000,000
    Fort Bragg, North Carolina....         18,500,000         18,500,000
    Fort Sill, Oklahoma...........                  0          8,000,000
    Fort Jackson, South Carolina..         32,000,000         32,000,000
    Fort Bliss, Texas.............         48,000,000         48,000,000
    Fort Hood, Texas..............         17,500,000         17,500,000
    Fort Hood, Texas..............                  0         15,000,000
    Fort Eustis, Virginia.........                  0         11,000,000
    Camp Stanley, Korea...........          6,800,000          6,800,000
    Camp Hovey, Korea.............          6,200,000          6,200,000
    Camp Hovey, Korea.............          7,300,000          7,300,000
    Camp Pelham, Korea............          5,600,000          5,600,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total, Army.................        196,400,000        265,400,000
                                   =====================================
Navy:                                                                   
    Port Hueneme, California......                  0         16,700,000
    Camp Pendleton Marine Corps                                         
     Base, California.............         11,940,000         11,940,000
    Annapolis Naval Station,                                            
     Maryland.....................          3,600,000          3,600,000
    Camp LeJeune Marine Corps                                           
     Base, North Carolina.........          8,300,000          8,300,000
    New River Marine Corps Air                                          
     Station, North Carolina......         14,650,000         14,650,000
    Beaufort, South Carolina......                  0         15,000,000
    Corpus Christi, Texas.........                  0          4,400,000
    Portsmouth Naval Hospital,                                          
     Virginia.....................          9,500,000          9,500,000
    Williamsburg Fleet and                                              
     Industrial Supply Center,                                          
     Virginia.....................          6,140,000          6,140,000
    Norfolk, Virginia.............                  0         18,000,000
    Naval Computer and Telcom Area                                      
     Mastersta WPAC, Guam.........          2,250,000          2,250,000
    Naples Naval Support Activity,                                      
     Italy........................          7,300,000          7,300,000
    Sigonella Naval Air Station,                                        
     Italy........................         11,300,000         11,300,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total, Navy.................         74,980,000        129,080,000
                                   =====================================
Air Force:                                                              
    Eielson AFB, Alaska...........          3,850,000          3,850,000
    Elmendorf AFB, Alaska.........          7,350,000          7,350,000
    Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona....          3,800,000          3,800,000
    Luke AFB, Arizona.............          5,200,000          5,200,000
    Edwards AFB, California.......         10,600,000         10,600,000
    Travis AFB, California........         10,500,000         10,500,000
    Travis AFB, California........          6,400,000          6,400,000
    Buckley ANG Base, Colorado....          5,500,000          5,500,000
    Peterson AFB, Colorado........          3,000,000          3,000,000
    Bolling AFB, District of                                            
     Columbia.....................          6,500,000          6,500,000
    Bolling AFB, District of                                            
     Columbia.....................          5,600,000          5,600,000
    Eglin AFB, Florida............                  0          7,300,000
    Moody AFB, Georgia............                  0          2,500,000
    Hickam AFB, Hawaii............          3,100,000          3,100,000
    Hickam AFB, Hawaii............          3,050,000          3,050,000
    Scott AFB, Illinois...........          8,000,000          8,000,000
    Scott AFB, Illinois...........          4,700,000          4,700,000
    McConnell AFB, Kansas.........          2,200,000          2,200,000
    McConnell AFB, Kansas.........                  0          6,500,000
    Andrews AFB, Maryland.........          6,000,000          6,000,000
    Keesler AFB, Mississippi......          6,500,000          6,500,000
    Keesler AFB, Mississippi......                  0          8,300,000
    Nellis AFB, Nevada............          9,900,000          9,900,000
    McGuire AFB, New Jersey.......                  0          7,300,000
    Cannon AFB, New Mexico........                  0          3,000,000
    Seymour-Johnson AFB, North                                          
     Carolina.....................                  0          2,000,000
    Grand Forks AFB, North Dakota.          8,500,000          8,500,000
    Tinker AFB, Oklahoma..........          5,100,000          5,100,000
    Charleston AFB, South Carolina          5,600,000          5,600,000
    Dyess AFB, Texas..............                  0          5,400,000
    Fairchild AFB, Washington.....          7,500,000          7,500,000
    Fairchild AFB, Washington.....                  0          8,200,000
    McChord AFB, Washington.......          4,300,000          4,300,000
    F.E. Warren AFB, Wyoming......          5,500,000          5,500,000
    Spangdahlem AB, Germany.......          5,900,000          5,900,000
    Araxos, Greece................          1,950,000          1,950,000
    Ghedi Airfield, Italy.........          1,450,000          1,450,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total, Air Force............        157,550,000        208,050,000
                                   =====================================
Defense-Wide:                                                           
    Fort Bragg, North Carolina....                  0          8,000,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total, Defense-Wide.........                  0          8,000,000
                                   =====================================
Army National Guard:                                                    
    Rickenbacker ANGB, Ohio.......                  0          1,750,000
    Camp Rapid, South Dakota......                  0          2,650,000
    Camp Williams, Utah...........                  0          5,197,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total, Army National Guard..                  0          9,597,000
                                   =====================================
Air National Guard:                                                     
    McGhee-Tyson Airport,                                               
     Tennessee....................          4,400,000          4,400,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total, Air National Guard...          4,400,000          4,400,000
                                   =====================================
Naval Reserve:                                                          
    New Orleans, Louisiana........                  0          5,035,000
    New Orleans, Louisiana........                  0          6,100,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total, Naval Reserve........                  0         11,135,000
                                   =====================================
      Grand total.................        433,330,000        635,662,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           barracks standards

    The Committee understands the Department is attempting to 
develop a new standard for barracks construction and has 
tentatively developed a notional standard referred to as ``1 
plus 1''. However, this standard has yet to be accepted by the 
Department or formally approved. While the budget submission is 
described as being consistent with this standard, large 
discrepancies exist in the cost and amenities provided by each 
of the Services.
    The current barrack standard referred to as ``2 plus 2'' 
consists of two E1's through E4's to a room, each person having 
90 net square feet (NSF) of space, with two rooms or, 4 
individuals, sharing a bath. E5's and E6's receive a 180 NSF 
room and share a bath. E7's through E9's receive two 180 NSF 
rooms with a private bath. The estimated cost for this standard 
is $28,000 to $30,000 per module, or approximately $16,000 per 
junior enlisted.
    The Army currently has a temporary OSD waiver to construct 
to the ``1 plus 1'' standard. This is referred to as the 
``waiver standard'' and provides a 220 NSF room with a bath. 
Two E1's through E4's are to be assigned to this room--or one 
E5 through E9. The estimated cost for this standard is $57,000 
per module, or approximately $28,000 per junior enlisted.
    The proposed ``improved 1 plus 1'' standard would provide a 
module consisting of two 118 NSF rooms, a bath and a 
kitchenette. Two E1's through E4's would be assigned to the 
module (each having a private 118 NSF room) and share the bath 
and kitchenette. One E5 through E9 would be assigned to the 
module which would provide a private bath, kitchenette and a 
living room. The estimated cost for this standard is $70,000 
per module, or $35,000 per junior enlisted.
    The Committee is disappointed that the Department has not 
been able to agree on a Department-wide standard for barracks 
construction. It is imperative that a common barrack standard 
be developed by the Office of the Secretary of Defense in order 
to begin construction of all fiscal year 1996 barracks projects 
in a uniform manner and as quickly as possible. The Committee, 
in consideration of the increased priority on quality of life, 
approves the funding levels proposed. However, prior to award 
of any fiscal year 1996 barracks project, the Department is 
required to provide a report describing the accepted standard, 
the exceptions where that standard will not apply, the long-
term plan to achieve the standard, and the cost implications of 
doing so. The long-term plan should identify the eligible 
population by location, number of spaces requiring upgrade, and 
the current barracks situation at that location (i.e. the 
reason why the barracks are considered substandard). Further, 
if the current ``2 plus 2'' standard is revised, the Committee 
directs that the report contain a cost comparison between the 
``2 plus 2'' and the revised standard.
                       child development centers

    The Committee has added an additional $34,300,000 above the 
budget estimate of $22,915,000 for a total appropriation of 
$57,215,000 for new construction, or improvements, for child 
development centers. The Committee recognizes the increased 
importance of these centers due to the rising number of single 
military parents, dual military couples and military personnel 
with a civilian employed spouse.
    The Office of the Secretary of Defense established a goal 
of providing quality child care to 65% of the potential need in 
1992. Currently the Navy is meeting 39% of the potential need, 
the Marine Corps 60%, the Army 51% and the Air Force 53%, 
through either Child Development Centers or the Family Home 
Care program. In order to meet the 65% goal, approximately 
93,402 additional spaces are necessary, broken out by component 
as follows: the Navy's deficit is 55,000 spaces, the Marine 
Corps deficit is 18,000 spaces, the Army's deficit is 15,824 
spaces and the Air Force's deficit is 4,578 spaces. The 
Committee understands the DOD goal of 65% to meet the need for 
child care is in the process of being changed to 80%. 
Therefore, the deficit cited will be understated at the time of 
the change.
    In order to reduce this deficit the Committee has added an 
additional $34,300,000 for child development centers. The 
locations were determined by component priorities and all 
projects are capable for construction during fiscal year 1996.
    The following Child Development Center projects are 
provided for fiscal year 1996:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Location                     Request        Recommended  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama--Maxwell AFB..................       $3,700,000       $3,700,000
Arizona--Fort Huachuca................                0        2,550,000
California--Camp Pendleton............        3,000,000        3,000,000
California--Pt. Mugu Naval Air Warfare                                  
 Center...............................        1,300,000        1,300,000
Colorado--U.S. Air Force Academy......        4,200,000        4,200,000
Florida--Pensacola Naval Technical                                      
 Training Center......................        2,565,000        2,565,000
Georgia--Marine Corps Logistics Base,                                   
 Albany...............................                0        1,300,000
Georgia--Moody AFB....................                0        3,800,000
Missouri--Fort Leonard Wood...........                0        3,900,000
New Jersey--Lakehurst Naval Air                                         
 Warfare Center.......................        1,700,000        1,700,000
New York--U.S. Military Academy, West                                   
 Point................................                0        8,300,000
Oklahoma--Altus AFB...................                0        4,000,000
Texas--Fort Bliss.....................                0        4,000,000
Texas--Goodfellow AFB.................                0        1,000,000
Wyoming--F.E. Warren AFB..............                0        4,000,000
Germany--Vogelweh.....................        2,600,000        2,600,000
Korea--Yongsan Garrison, Seoul........                0        1,450,000
Turkey--Incirlik AB...................        1,600,000        1,600,000
United Kingdom--RAF Mildenhall........        2,250,000        2,250,000
                                       ---------------------------------
      Total...........................       22,915,000       57,215,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

              child care services--outsourcing initiative

    The Department is conducting demonstration projects to 
contract for spaces in off-base civilian child care centers. 
The Navy has been selected as the Executive Agent for these 
demonstration projects. Plans to contract spaces in Norfolk, 
Virginia and Barber's Point, Hawaii during 1995 and to expand 
to three additional locations in 1996 (San Diego, California; 
Jacksonville, Florida; and Tacoma, Washington) are underway. 
The Navy estimates that outsourcing will provide up to an 
additional 4,900 spaces in fiscal year 1996. The Department is 
to report to the Committee on the status and success of these 
demonstration projects and any other efforts underway for third 
party contracting for child care services by February 1, 1996.
                    hospital and medical facilities

    The budget request includes $280,250,000 for 17 projects to 
provide hospital and medical facilities, including both 
treatment facilities and medical research and development 
facilities. As explained elsewhere in this report, the amounts 
requested for projects at Forest Glen, Maryland, and at 
Portsmouth, Virginia exceed the amounts that can be executed 
during fiscal year 1996, and the Committee recommends reducing 
these two projects accordingly. Therefore, the Committee 
recommends a total of $164,250,000 for the 17 requested 
projects. The Committee recommends two projects in addition to 
those requested. The following hospital and medical projects 
are provided for fiscal year 1996:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Location                    Request          Recommended   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska--Elmendorf AFB.............        $28,100,000        $28,100,000
Arizona--Luke AFB.................          8,100,000          8,100,000
Arizona--Papago Military                                                
 Reservation......................                  0          1,084,000
California--Camp Pendleton........          1,700,000          1,700,000
California--Fort Irwin............          6,900,000          6,900,000
California--Vandenberg AFB........          5,700,000          5,700,000
Delaware--Dover AFB...............          4,400,000          4,400,000
Georgia--Fort Benning.............          5,600,000          5,600,000
Louisiana--Barksdale AFB..........          4,100,000          4,100,000
Maryland--Bethesda NH.............          1,300,000          1,300,000
Maryland--Forest Glen AFIP........          1,550,000          1,550,000
Maryland--Forest Glen WRAIR.......        119,000,000         27,000,000
North Carolina--Fort Bragg........                  0         13,200,000
Texas--Fort Hood..................          5,500,000          5,500,000
Texas--Lackland AFB...............          6,100,000          6,100,000
Texas--Reese AFB..................          1,000,000          1,000,000
Virginia--Chesapeake NNSC.........          4,300,000          4,300,000
Virginia--Portsmouth NH...........         71,900,000         47,900,000
Italy--Naples (Capodichino) NSA...          5,000,000          5,000,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total.......................        280,250,000        178,534,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   Environmental Compliance Projects

    The total budget request and appropriation for 44 projects 
needed to meet environmental compliance is $206,576,000. The 
Federal Facilities Compliance Act requires all federal 
facilities to meet both federal and State standards. These 
projects are considered Class I violations and are out of 
compliance; have received an enforcement action from the 
Environmental Protection Agency, the State, or local authority; 
and/or a compliance agreement has been signed or consent order 
received. Environmental projects that are Class I violations 
are required to be funded, and therefore are placed at the top 
of the priority list.
    The Army has requested a total of $21,230,000, or 5% of its 
total military construction request, for five projects. The 
Navy and Marine Corps have requested $115,000,000, or 24% of 
the total military construction request, for eight projects. 
The Air Force has requested $68,000,000, or 14% of its total 
military construction request, for 28 projects. In addition, 
the Air Force Reserve has requested one project at $1,000,000, 
and the Air National Guard has requested two projects for a 
total of $1,050,000.
    Following is a listing of all environmental compliance 
projects funded in this bill:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Installation or       Project              
         Class                   location           title    Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army:                                                                   
    Fort Carson, CO....  Sanitary Sewer Line....     $1,750             
    Fort Carson, CO....  Sewer Treatment Plant        9,100             
                          Upgrade.                                      
    Fort Lewis, WA.....  Consolidated Fuel            3,400             
                          Station.                                      
    Watervliet Arsenal,  Oil Runoff Containment         680             
     NY.                  Facility.                                     
    Fort Sill, OK......  Central Vechicle Wash        6,300             
                          Facility.                                     
Navy:                                                                   
    Navy Public Works    Wastewater Treatment        16,180             
     Ctr, GU.             Plant Upgrades.                               
    Naval Station,I      Sanitary Landfill......     11,500             
     Roosevelt Roads,                                                   
     Puerto Rico.                                                       
    Marine Corps Base,   Wastewater Treatment        45,500             
     Camp Lejeune, NC.    Plant (Phase II).                             
    Naval Station, San   Oily Waste Collection       19,960             
     Diego, CA.           and Treatment Fac.                            
    Naval Station,I      Oily Waste Collection       10,580             
     Norfolk, VA.         System (Phase I).                             
    NAWC, China Lake,    Industrial Wastewater        3,700             
     CA.                  Col/Treatment Fac.                            
    NUWC, Keyport, WA..  Metal Treatment              5,300             
                          Facility.                                     
    Naval Shipyard,      Metal Preparation            2,600             
     Bremerton, WA.       Facility Improvements.                        
Air Force:                                                              
    Tin City Long Range  Aboveground Fuel             2,500             
     Radar Site, AK.      Storage Tanks.                                
    Davis-Monthan AFB,   Alter Aircraft               1,000             
     AZ.                  Corrosion Control                             
                          Facility.                                     
    Tyndall AFB, FL....  Fire Training Facility.      1,200             
    Reese AFB, TX......  Fire Training Facility.      1,200             
    Laughlin AFB, TX...  Fire Training Facility.      1,400             
    Columbus AFB, MS...  Fire Training Facility.      1,150             
    Cape Canaveral AFS,  Fire Training Facility.      1,600             
     FL.                                                                
    Altus AFB, OK......  Fire Training Facility.      1,200             
    Kirtland AFB, NM...  Upgrade Storm Drainage       1,500             
                          System.                                       
    Minot AFB, ND......  Underground Fuel             1,550             
                          Storage Tanks.                                
    Nellis AFB, NV.....  Upgrade Storm Drainage         600             
                          System.                                       
    Arnold AFB, TN.....  Upgrade Engine Test          2,300             
                          Facilities.                                   
    Andrews AFB, MD....  Underground Fuel             6,886             
                          Storage Tanks.                                
    Langley AFB, VA....  Upgrade Storm Drainage       1,000             
                          System.                                       
    Mountain Home AFB,   Upgrade Storm Drainage         800             
     ID.                  System.                                       
    Mountain Home AFB,   Wastewater Treatment         9,850             
     ID.                  and Disposal Plant.                           
    Pope AFB, NC.......  Underground Fuel             2,150             
                          Storage Tanks.                                
    McGuire AFB, NJ....  Fire Training Facility.      1,600             
    McConnell AFB, KS..  Deicing Pad............      1,150             
    Moody AFB, GA......  Upgrade Storm Drainage         690             
                          System.                                       
    Randolph AFB, TX...  Fire Training Facility.      1,200             
    Cannon AFB, NM.....  Upgrade Storm Drainage         620             
                          System.                                       
    Little Rock AFB, AR  Upgrade Sanitary Sewer       2,500             
                          System.                                       
    Seymour Johnson      Upgrade Storm Drainage         830             
     AFB, NC.             System.                                       
    Shaw AFB, SC.......  Upgrade Storm Drainage       1,300             
                          System.                                       
    Beale AFB, CA......  Landfill Closure.......      7,500             
    Cannon AFB, NM.....  Wastewater Treatment         9,800             
                          and Disposal Plant.                           
    Incirlik AB, Turkey  Upgrade Sewage               2,900             
                          Treatment Plant.                              
Air Force Reserve:                                                      
    Youngstown ARS, OH.  Upgrade Base Water           1,000             
                          Distribution System.                          
Air National Guard:                                                     
    Atlantic City I      Upgrade Sanitary and           650             
     Airport, NJ.         Water Systems.                                
    Niagara Falls I      Upgrade Storm/Sanitary         400             
     International        Sewer System.                                 
     Airport, NY.                                                       
                                                            ------------
      Total............    .....................    206,576             
------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Potential Canceled Projects Due to the Base Realignment and Closure 
                                Process

    The Committee notes that the pending base realignment and 
closure process will obviate the need for projects previously 
funded, as well as projects included in the fiscal year 1996 
budget submission. In anticipation of savings due to 1995 base 
realignment and closure actions, the fiscal year 1995 Military 
Construction Appropriations Act contained general reductions 
totalling $136,671,000.
    Until a final decision is made on the 1995 base realignment 
and closure recommendations, it is not appropriate to rescind 
or eliminate any additional funding for specific projects that 
may be impacted. A list of those projects no longer required, 
along with reductions in funding, will be reflected in the 
fiscal year 1996 Military Construction Conference Report.
    The Committee notes that bill language was included in the 
Department of Defense Supplemental Appropriations Act (P.L. 
104-6) which prohibits the obligation of funds, for any fiscal 
year, to initiate military construction or family housing 
projects on an installation proposed for closure or realignment 
that was included in the Secretary's recommendations, unless 
removed by the Commission, or is included in the 
recommendations submitted to Congress in 1995 in accordance 
with the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as 
amended (P.L. 101-510). Projects related to realignments are 
defined as projects which are affected by the function or 
activity being realigned. The prohibition on obligation of 
funds is in effect unless the Congress enacts a Joint 
Resolution of Disapproval in accordance with the Defense Base 
Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as amended.

                     European Construction Program

    The Committee has recommended the requested $119,443,000 
for 25 projects in Europe. This includes 12 quality of life 
projects, 12 operational projects and one environmental 
project. The draw-down to a 100,000 troop permanent force 
structure is virtually complete, and the U.S. has reduced its 
European base structure by 62% from the pre-1990 inventory. 
While overall infrastructure requirements have been reduced, 
the European Command is faced with increased demands on quality 
of life facilities and the need for changing, modernizing, or 
increasing operational facility requirements. Safety and 
environmental concerns exist at older facilities that are in 
need of revitalization and modernization. In recent years, 
support for construction during the draw-down was minimal due 
to the uncertainty of permanent locations. Now that a stable 
European force structure is in place, and facing frequent 
deployments, it is imperative we reinvest in our quality of 
life and operational facilities, both essential components of 
readiness, in Europe.
    The funding for facility improvements in Europe has been 
made in order not to deprive our service members and their 
families of decent living and working conditions. Additional 
issues concerning the European Construction program are 
addressed in the NATO Security Investment Program section, 
later in this report.

                          Modular Construction

    The Committee believes that modular construction offers 
opportunity to reduce construction, design and administration 
costs as well as to provide for earlier construction completion 
of facilities. One area where modular construction may offer 
opportunities is with the standard designed barracks. 
Therefore, the Department is directed to report to the 
Committees on Appropriations by February 1, 1996 on steps taken 
to utilize modular construction in the military construction 
and family housing program.

                       Parametric Cost Estimating

    Parametric cost estimating uses actual historical costs, 
based on the size and type of a total facility or a compilation 
of its parts, to project the cost of a new facility. This 
technique is used in lieu of an engineered estimate which is 
based upon unit costs of labor and materials calculated to be 
included in the design. The Committee recognizes the Navy and 
the Air Force are using parametric cost estimating to reach the 
35% design level for the majority of projects requested. The 
Army, however, continues to use the traditional engineered 
estimate. The Department is urged to provide unanimity in the 
design process used for the budget submission.
                          Hearing Transcripts

    The Committee reiterates its policy on time allotted for 
editing of hearing transcripts by the Department. Three weeks 
is more than adequate for grammatical editing, and transcripts 
are expected to be returned by the Department within that time. 
The Committee strongly believes that nearly eleven weeks, as 
was the case with the Overview Hearing, is not acceptable.

                    Foreign Currency Exchange Rates

    The Department of Defense is directed in the future to 
include in its annual justification material all foreign 
currency exchange rates, including the NATO Security Investment 
Program average Infrastructure Accounting Unit (IAU), used in 
the formulation of its budget request.
    In addition, the Department is to provide in its annual 
budget justification material a breakout of all prior year 
funds transferred into the Foreign Currency Centrally Managed 
Allotment to cover additional costs of overseas construction 
due to the dollar's devaluation against foreign currencies. 
This material should identify the fiscal year and the account 
from which funds have been transferred.

           Annual Report on Design and Construction Progress

    The Department is instructed to reinstate the annual report 
on Design and Construction Progress (RCS DD-M(A) 1630). It is 
the intent of the Committee that this report be structured 
exactly the same as in the past and contain the following 
parts: (1) Performance Goals and Accomplishments; (2) Breakage 
and Lost Design; (3) Architect-Engineer Contract Activity and 
Design Accomplishment; (4) Project Status; (5) Supervision of 
Military Construction Programs; (6) Contingency Construction; 
(7) Unspecified Minor Construction; (8) NATO Security 
Investment Program; (9) Contracts Awarded on a Noncompetitive 
Basis; and (10) Cost Variations. Section numbers to the 
individual parts shall remain the same. The report is to 
include all projects funded under the Military Construction 
Accounts, the Family Housing Accounts, and the Base Realignment 
and Closure Accounts. This report shall be submitted to the 
Committee by February 1, 1996 and shall cover funds 
appropriated for fiscal year 1991 and thereafter.

                 Establishment of Audit Trail Documents

    The Department is directed to reinstate the initial and 
semi-annual submission of audit trail documents as directed in 
House Report 99-275. These reports will include line item 
detail on projects as budgeted in the Construction Annex and 
also include line item detail on projects funded under Minor 
Construction and Family Housing Improvements. The semi-annual 
reports shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 
(a) project amount (appropriation); (b) changes due to formal 
and below threshold reprogrammings; and (c) the current working 
estimate for each project. The audit trail documents are to 
reflect fiscal year 1996 and all active years.
    To ensure the Services comply with this directive, the 
Comptroller of the Department is to forward to the Committee 
copies of regulations implementing these procedures within 
sixty days following passage of the Military Construction 
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1996.

                     Program, Project and Activity

    For the purposes of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177) as amended by 
the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation 
Act of 1987, (Public Law 100-119), the term ``Program, Project 
and Activity'' will continue to be defined as the appropriation 
account.

                      Military Construction, Army
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................\1\ $550,476,000
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................     472,724,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................     625,608,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................     +75,132,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................    +152,884,000

\1\ Excludes rescission of $3,500,000 enacted in P.L. 104-6.

    The Committee recommends a total of $625,608,000 for 
Military Construction, Army for fiscal year 1996. This is an 
increase of $152,884,000 above the budget request for fiscal 
year 1996, and an increase of $75,132,000 above the amount 
appropriated for 1995.
  california--fort irwin (barstow-daggett): national training center 
                          airfield (phase ii)

    The Committee recommends continuation of the project 
initiated in fiscal year 1995 to provide an airfield for troop 
rotations at the National Training Center at Barstow-Daggett, 
California and recommends $10,000,000 for this purpose. Until 
this airfield is operational, the Committee strongly supports 
the use of the former George Air Force Base as an interim 
airfield for the National Training Center. The Committee 
recommends a new General Provision [Section 124] directing this 
airfield usage.

      california--presidio of san francisco: regional sewer system

    The budget request includes $3,000,000 to pay for a 
negotiated settlement with the City of San Francisco involving 
sewage treatment at the Presidio of San Francisco since the 
late 1970s. This project was requested because the Federal 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has canceled a portion of 
an EPA construction grant to the City of San Francisco that 
would have paid this bill. The Committee recommends denying 
this requested project as an Army military construction item, 
in light of the impacts of base realignment and closure at the 
Presidio of San Francisco. The Committee encourages the Army to 
review this matter with the EPA.
  New Mexico--White Sands Missile Range: National Range Control Center

    The Committee is concerned that the existing National Range 
Control Center at the White Sands Missile Range is located in a 
potentially hazardous building, and closure of the facility 
would result in closure of all Real Time operations at the 
range for an extended period. A four-phase construction program 
has been developed for replacement of this facility. The 
Committee supports this project and directs the Army to include 
the appropriate amount for Phase I of this effort in the fiscal 
year 1997 budget request.
           virginia--fort myer: army museum land acquisition

    The budget request includes $17,000,000 to acquire a site 
for the National Museum of the United States Army. The 
Committee recommends $14,000,000 for this project.

            virginia--fort belvoir: engineer proving ground

    For several years, the Army has been exploring the possible 
third-party development of the Engineer Proving Ground at Fort 
Belvoir, Virginia. The concept was for a very large project, 
similar in scope to the development of Tysons Corner or Reston, 
Virginia. It was planned in five phases and would take 25 to 30 
years to complete. The original plan was to exchange Army-owned 
land for approximately three million square feet of office 
space, which would allow Army personnel to move out of high-
cost leased space in the National Capital Region.
    Last year, the Auditor General of the Army was asked to 
review this project and to validate its justification, and the 
Chief of Engineers was asked to conduct an independent 
assessment from an engineering perspective, including a market 
analysis. A draft Request for Proposal is being reviewed by the 
Army's leadership, and the Committee is awaiting further 
developments. However, it appears that the original economic 
assumptions have been overtaken by events, and that the project 
may no longer be economically viable. Therefore, the Committee 
directs the Army to report on the current status of this 
project no later than September 1, 1995. If final decisions 
have not been reached by that date, the Army will be expected 
to notify the appropriate Committees of Congress prior to the 
publication of any Request for Proposal.
       KOREA--YONGSAN GARRISON (SEOUL): CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER

    The South Post Child Development Center in Yongsan, Korea 
was located in a structurally unsound facility constructed of 
highly combustible materials. The facility was not originally 
designed for child care, was inefficiently configured, and did 
not meet standards. These deficiencies required staffing in 
excess of what would normally be required for the capacity of 
the facility. The Committee fully concurs with the Army's 
decision to close this center due to documented safety concerns 
and staffing difficulties. However, this has necessitated the 
placement of children in outlying child care facilities, which 
in turn has overburdened those facilities and has greatly 
inconvenienced families in need of child care. Therefore the 
Committee recommends $1,450,000 for a replacement child 
development center, in order to relieve this situation 
immediately rather than endure the years required to program a 
military construction project.

               PANAMA--RELOCATION OF THE SOUTHERN COMMAND

    The Panama Canal Treaty of 1977 requires the withdrawal of 
United States military forces from Panama by December 31, 1999, 
including the relocation of the Southern Command (SOUTHCOM). 
The current plan to relocate SOUTHCOM headquarters has a target 
date of June of 1998, but no construction funds have been 
requested for fiscal year 1996.
    The Southern Command's area of responsibility encompasses 
19 countries, covering 7,000 miles from the Mexican-Guatemalan 
border to the southern tip of South America. The mission of 
SOUTHCOM is predominantly political rather than warfighting, 
involving face-to-face planning and coordination with key 
officials, as well as military-to-military contacts. The 
current focus of SOUTHCOM's efforts in Central and South 
America is counterdrug action, security cooperation, and 
support for democratic institutions.
    The joint-service SOUTHCOM headquarters consists of about 
700 Department of Defense civilians and military personnel, and 
approximately 1,500 family members. It is estimated that the 
establishment and construction of headquarters facilities will 
involve spending of approximately $60 million in all categories 
of expenditure, including a requirement for an administrative 
facility of about 140,000 square feet.
    On March 29, 1995, the Department of Defense announced its 
selection of South Dade County, Miami, as the future location 
for the headquarters of the United States Southern Command.
    Given the size and significance of this relocation, and the 
treaty obligation to complete this relocation in a timely 
fashion, the Committee directs the Army to report by September 
1, 1995 on all planning and design expenditures, all projected 
military construction and family housing expenditures, and all 
other expenses related to the relocation of SOUTHCOM. This 
report should include identification of the exact site 
preferred by the Army, and should also include a detailed 
description of consideration given to the disestablishment of 
SOUTHCOM.

                         MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES

    The Army has undertaken a number of management initiatives 
to develop more efficient and innovative methods for managing 
Army installations. Two items of particular interest to the 
Committee are the Installation Status Report and a task force 
established by the Secretary of the Army which is known as the 
Base Efficiency Study Team. In order to follow the developments 
of these initiatives, the Committee requests that the budget 
request for fiscal year 1997 will be accompanied by a report on 
these and other initiatives undertaken by the Army for improved 
management of Army installations.

                      firefighter training systems

    The Committee supports the need to provide training for 
firefighters that is both safe and effective. The Army 
currently trains its firefighters using techniques that have 
not only proven hazardous to trainees, but also have come under 
criticism due to possible violations of environmental 
regulations. Such regulations have closed all but 12 of the 
training centers. The Committee is aware of computer-
controlled, natural gas/propane systems currently in the Navy's 
inventory which safely replicate the required training 
environment and which also satisfy all environmental 
requirements. It is the Committee's opinion that the Army 
should develop a program to establish regional training centers 
where multiple commands can take advantage of a single site. 
Therefore, the Committee directs the Army to identify the 
appropriate locations for such sites, as well as the required 
military construction funds to support the sites over a four-
year period, and to report its findings to the Committee by 
October 1, 1995.

                      Military Construction, Navy
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................\1\ $385,110,000
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................     488,086,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................     588,243,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................    +203,133,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................    +100,157,000

\1\ Excludes rescission of $3,500,000 enacted in P.L. 104-6.

    The Committee recommends a total of $588,243,000 for 
Military Construction, Navy for fiscal year 1996. This is an 
increase of $100,157,000 above the budget request for fiscal 
year 1996, and an increase of $203,133,000 above the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1995.
     arizona--marine corps air station yuma: safe ordnance storage

    Last year, the Committee expressed its concern about safety 
issues related to the storage of ordnance at Marine Corps Air 
Station (MCAS) Yuma, Arizona. At the Committee's direction, the 
Secretary of the Navy studied these issues and prepared a 
report which identified specific remedial actions. The Navy 
study also recommended specific actions to modify on-base 
facilities and the purchase of sufficient property to move 
ordnance operations away from congested areas of the station.
    The Committee puts a high priority on providing for the 
safe ordnance storage needs at MCAS Yuma, and instructs the 
Secretary to prepare a plan to fully implement the Department 
of the Navy study. This plan should be delivered to the 
Committee no later than February 15, 1996.

    california--naval air station, north island: berthing wharf and 
                     controlled industrial facility

    The budget request includes $56,650,000 for a berthing 
wharf and $42,500,000 for a controlled industrial facility at 
North Island. These projects represent the first phase of 
required construction to berth three nuclear aircraft carriers 
in San Diego at an estimated cost by the Navy of $267.8 
million.
    The Committee understands that the General Accounting 
Office is in the process of reviewing the projected costs of 
berthing the three nuclear aircraft carriers at North Island 
and that discrepancies on the total cost of construction may 
exist. In addition, the GAO is evaluating the feasibility and 
costs associated with berthing the carriers at alternative 
locations. The GAO is directed to report to the Committee its 
findings on the accuracy of the construction estimates and 
alternative locations by the earliest possible date. The 
Committee is including the $99,150,000 requested for North 
Island and anticipates that this matter will be addressed in 
final conference action on the fiscal year 1996 bill.

       florida--mayport naval station: wharf improvements design

    The Navy is directed to complete additional design for 
wharf improvements at Mayport Naval Station within the 
increased amount provided for planning and design. This design 
should include shore power and utility upgrades, mooring 
improvements and other mechanical improvements at Wharfs C-2 
and F; the demolition of several small storage buildings for a 
retention pond site near Wharf F; construction of a heavy-duty 
concrete hardstand area and driveways/roadways near Wharf F; 
the construction of a stormwater collection system and 
retention ponds at Wharf F, and related work at Wharfs C-2 and 
F.
  georgia--marine corps logistics base, albany: separate gas main and 
                                railroad

    The natural gas line that supplies gas to the Marine Corps 
Logistics Base, Albany, Georgia is located only a few feet away 
from the main railroad track into the base. In some places the 
cover over the gas line is only two feet deep. The potential 
for damage to the gas line and the surrounding community in the 
event of a derailment is very high. The Marine Corps is 
directed to fund this project, which is estimated at $590,000, 
under Unspecified Minor Construction.

    georgia--marine corps logistics base, albany: alternate railroad

    The primary railroad track at the Marine Corps Logistics 
Base, Albany, Georgia was built 44 years ago. It serves 19 
warehouses, the vehicle loading ramp, the open loading area, 
the truck scale and the Marine Corps Multi-Commodity 
Maintenance Center. This track continuously needs repair and 
improvement, effecting the rail service for shipment of 
equipment and weapons systems. Should the primary track fail 
during a national crisis requiring mobilization of supplies, 
equipment, and weapons, then efforts to mobilize would be 
impeded. The Marine Corps is directed to construct an alternate 
railroad track, estimated at $950,000, using Unspecified Minor 
Construction.

       new jersey--naval weapons station earle: pier 4 extension

    The Committee understands that the Department of the Navy 
has programmed for fiscal year 1997 and fiscal year 1998 a 
total of $70,790,000 for the construction of a pier extension 
at the Naval Weapons Station, Earle, New Jersey. The Committee 
directs the Navy to ensure this project is requested at the 
earliest possible time.

               rhode island--naval war college, newport:

                   strategic maritime research center

    It is the intent of the Committee for the Navy to proceed 
with the Strategic Maritime Research Center at the Naval War 
College, Newport, Rhode Island based upon the initial 
appropriation of $10,000,000 in fiscal year 1995. The Committee 
understands the total amount necessary for this project is 
$28,000,000. In the event the Navy's design for this project 
does not lend itself to providing a complete and usable 
$10,000,000 segment, the Navy is directed to adjust the design 
to accomplish the same, and include provisions to complete the 
remaining portion when funds are available.

                     cuba--guantanamo bay: landfill

    The budget request includes a fiscal year 1995 emergency 
supplemental request for $18,000,000 to ``support peacekeeping, 
peace enforcement and humanitarian assistance operations in and 
around Cuba''. The $18,000,000 is for construction of a new 
landfill facility at Guantanamo Bay. The Committee did not 
address this issue in the Department of Defense Supplemental 
Appropriations, P.L. 104-6. This project was based on 
population projections that will not be realized due to the 
Administration's change in policy on refugees. Therefore, the 
Committee denies funding for this project.

                    Military Construction, Air Force
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................\1\ $516,813,000
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................     495,655,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................     578,841,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................     +62,028,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................     +83,186,000

\1\ Excludes rescission of $3,500,000 enacted in P.L. 104-6.

    The Committee recommends a total of $578,841,000 for 
Military Construction, Air Force for fiscal year 1996. This is 
an increase of $83,186,000 above the budget request for fiscal 
year 1996, and an increase of $62,028,000 above the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1995.

 idaho--mountain home air force base: idaho training range (north site)

    The Air Force budget request includes $8,000,000 for the 
first phase of the construction of a training range in 
southwestern Idaho. On May 23, 1995 the Air Force announced 
that this project would no longer be pursued and terminated 
work on the supplemental environmental impact statement. 
Therefore, the Committee has denied funding for this project.
    The Committee understands that the Secretary of the Air 
Force is committed to working with all interested parties to 
identify other opportunities in Idaho for expanded wing 
tactical training. The Air Force is expected to keep the 
Committee apprised of all developments related to the expansion 
of the training range and should an agreement be reached 
construction funding should be requested in the fiscal year 
1997 budget request.

                  Military Construction, Defense-Wide
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................    $504,118,000
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................     857,405,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................     728,332,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................    +224,214,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................    -129,073,000

    The Committee recommends a total of $728,332,000 for 
Military Construction, Defense-Wide for fiscal year 1996. This 
is a decrease of $129,073,000 below the budget request for 
fiscal year 1996, and an increase of $224,214,000 above the 
amount appropriated for fiscal year 1995.
               chemical weapons demilitarization program

    The budget request includes a total of $108,000,000 for the 
following funding increments for the chemical weapons 
demilitarization program for fiscal year 1996:
          $40,000,000 Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas
          $55,000,000 Umatilla Depot Activity, Oregon
          $13,000,000 Planning and Design
    The approved military construction programs for prior 
fiscal years include an unobligated balance of $110,900,000 for 
facilities at Anniston Army Depot, Alabama. The award date for 
this contract is dependent upon issuance of environmental 
permits by the State of Alabama.
    Planned award/obligation dates for these three locations 
are as follows:
          August, 1995 Anniston Army Depot, Alabama
          March, 1996 Umatilla Depot Activity, Oregon
          June, 1996 Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas
    The Committee is concerned about continuing slippage in 
this program due to contracting, fiscal, programmatic, and 
other considerations. The Committee will expect to be notified 
in a timely fashion of any change in the planned award/
obligation dates listed above. In particular, if the Anniston 
contract is not awarded during August of 1995, the Department 
is directed to report on the reasons for slippage, and the 
revised award date. This report is to be submitted to the 
appropriate Committees of Congress not later than September 15, 
1995.
    On December 26, 1994, the Chemical Weapons Demilitarization 
Program was designated an Acquisition Category identification 
under the Major Defense Acquisition list. As a result of this 
designation, an Independent Cost Estimate must be developed for 
the Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program. The Committee will 
expect to be kept fully advised of the progress of this 
Independent Cost Estimate.
    The Army and the National Research Council have evaluated 
potential alternatives to incineration technology, and the Army 
has selected two low-temperature and low-pressure approaches 
for research and development: chemical neutralization as a 
stand-alone technology, and chemical neutralization followed by 
biodegradation. These efforts focus on bulk-only storage 
locations (Aberdeen, Maryland and Newport, Indiana). The 
Committee will expect to be kept fully advised of the progress 
of this research effort, as it relates to future military 
construction requirements at these locations.

             energy conservation investment program (ECIP)

    The Energy Conservation Investment Program provides 
financing for individual projects that are evaluated, 
prioritized on the basis of technical merit and return on 
investment, and presented individually to Congress for 
approval. The budget request includes $50,000,000 as the level 
of effort for this program for fiscal year 1996. The primary 
benefits of the program include improved facility conditions, 
reduced environmental pollution, and utility and maintenance 
cost reduction. The Department spends about $3 billion each 
year to heat, cool, light and provide direct mission support 
energy to installations. As currently programmed, in 
coordination with the Defense-wide Operations and Maintenance 
funded Federal Energy Management Program, the Department of 
Defense expects to accomplish a 20 percent reduction in 
building and facilities energy by the year 2000. It is the view 
of the Department that the savings from this program are 
comparable to the recent round of base closures.
    In addition, the Department of Defense stands as the 
largest builder and facility operator in the country, 
contributing about five percent of the Nation's construction. 
Therefore, the Department's adoption of new, energy-efficient 
technology creates enough market pull to stimulate its 
manufacture and common acceptance throughout the country.
    For fiscal years 1993, 1994, and 1995, the payback period 
of executed projects averaged approximately four years. The 
Committee believes this is a sound return on investment, and 
recommends full funding of the requested level of $50,000,000 
for this program. The Committee will expect that each 
individual project will continue to be supported with an 
economic analysis to show the savings-to-investment ratio and 
the simple payback, and that life-cycle cost analyses will 
continue to be performed as projects are modified by additional 
information and design detail. Most importantly, the Committee 
will expect the Department to give great consideration to 
further reduction in the payback period, especially in such 
areas as renewable energy, water conservation, emerging 
technologies, and contribution to environmental pollution 
prevention.
    The Committee is aware of the Department's efforts to 
develop a multi-media energy manager's training program in 
partnership with a larger private consortium. The Committee 
supports the use of appropriated funds to improve the level of 
technical and programmatic knowledge of Defense energy 
managers, as well as design engineers and architects, and the 
leveraging of Federal funds through participation in public/
private partnership such as this. Therefore, the Committee will 
expect the Department to continue to contribute such sums as 
may be required for the on-going multimedia software project.

                         phase-funded projects

    The Committee supports incremental funding of large 
projects in such a manner that annual funding increments will 
not exceed the amount of construction that can be executed in a 
single fiscal year. The Committee notes that the budget request 
for the Chemical Weapons Demilitarization Program conforms with 
this view by proposing phase-funding for projects at Pine Bluff 
Arsenal, Arkansas and at Umatilla Depot Activity, Oregon.
    Three other projects requested in the budget do not conform 
with this view. Therefore, the Committee has reduced the amount 
provided for these three projects to the level that can be 
executed during fiscal year 1996, as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Location/project             Budget request      Recommended   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forest Glen, Maryland: Army                                             
 Institute of Research (phase III)                                      
 (WRAIR)..........................       $119,000,000        $27,000,000
Columbus, Ohio: DFAS Operations                                         
 Facility (phase I)...............         72,403,000         37,400,000
Portsmouth, Virginia: Hospital                                          
 replacement (phase VII)..........         71,900,000         47,900,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        administrative provision

    Statutory language included under this account provides 
that the Secretary of Defense may transfer funds from this 
account to the military construction and family housing 
accounts. The Committee directs that any exercise of this 
authority must fall under the Committee's standing procedures 
for approval of reprogramming requests.

           ohio--columbus: dfas operations facility (phase i)

    Upon completion of the DFAS Operations Facility in 
Columbus, Ohio, the General Services Administration (GSA) 
intends to sell Air Force Plant #85 (which currently houses 
DFAS operations) at public auction. The Department of Defense 
will use the proceeds from this sale to pay GSA costs for 
administering the sale, and the remainder of the proceeds will 
be returned to the Air Force for industrial plant environmental 
cleanup projects. The Committee will expect to be kept advised 
of the timetable for this auction, the proceeds from this sale, 
and the projects financed with the proceeds.
    The Committee commends the Department for savings of 
approximately $3,600,000 in planning and design costs that will 
be realized based on a decision to use a ``mirror image'' of 
the Defense Construction Supply Center building which was 
recently constructed at the same location.
    The budget request for this project provided full funding 
of $72,403,000 to complete construction, which will require 
approximately three years to execute. The Committee recommends 
funding of $37,400,000, the level that can be executed during 
fiscal year 1996.

             texas--dyess air force base: clinic facilities

    The Committee is concerned that radiology, pharmacy, and 
other clinic facilities at Dyess Air Force Base are badly 
undersized and outdated. The Committee directs that the design 
of a project to correct this problem proceed in order to enable 
the project to be funded in fiscal year 1997.

      belgium--brussels: expand and renovate health/dental clinic

    Within funds provided for Unspecified Minor Construction, 
the Committee directs the Department to expand and renovate the 
Army health/dental clinic in Brussels, Belgium at an estimated 
cost of $850,000.

               Military Construction, Reserve Components
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................    $574,302,000
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................     182,012,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................     284,924,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................    -289,378,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................    +102,912,000

    The Committee recommends a total of $284,924,000 for 
Military Construction, Reserve Components for fiscal year 1996. 
This is an increase of $102,912,000 above the budget request 
for fiscal year 1996, and a decrease of $289,378,000 below the 
amount appropriated for 1995.
    The Committee's recommended action on each Reserve 
Component project is reflected in the State list at the end of 
this report.
    The Committee recommends approval of Military Construction, 
as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Component                   Request          Recommended   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard...............        $18,480,000        $72,537,000
Air National Guard................         85,647,000        118,267,000
Army Reserve......................         42,963,000         42,963,000
Naval Reserve.....................          7,920,000         19,655,000
Air Force Reserve.................         27,002,000         31,502,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total.......................        182,012,000        284,924,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          UNOBLIGATED BALANCES

    The Committee is very concerned over the execution rates 
for the military construction programs of the Reserve 
Components. According to the budget request for fiscal year 
1996, the following amounts will remain unobligated at the end 
of each fiscal year:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       1995         1996         1997   
      Component       1994 actual    estimate     estimate     estimate 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard.       $366.1       $281.8       $143.5        $59.1
Air National Guard..        237.6        250.0        186.2        143.8
Army Reserve........        121.3         62.5         41.9         30.2
Naval Reserve.......         59.7         25.1          7.1          5.6
Air Force Reserve...         42.8         35.5         25.7         23.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee understands that these amounts remain 
available for completion of prior year approved budget plans, 
that funds remain available for five years, and that the 
Reserve Components face a number of difficult challenges in 
program execution. However, the Committee will expect to see 
increased attention given to assure that contracts are awarded 
during the fiscal year in which funds are provided. The 
Committee intends to follow closely the reinstated Annual 
Report on Design and Construction Progress and the reinstated 
semi-annual submission of Audit Trail Documents in order to 
track improvement in program execution.

                   NEVADA--RENO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

    The Committee is aware that the mission of the Nevada Air 
National Guard will change in the near future. It is the 
expectation of the Committee that the Air National Guard will 
work closely with the Nevada National Guard to develop and 
design a workable and cost effective plan for the construction 
of a modified Guard facility at the Reno-Tahoe airport. The Air 
National Guard is to include the appropriate projects for this 
effort in the fiscal year 1997 budget request.

                   North Atlantic Treaty Organization

                      Security Investment Program

                 (FORMERLY NATO INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM)
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................\1\ $119,000,000
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................     179,000,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................     161,000,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................     +42,000,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................     -18,000,000

\1\ Excludes rescission of $33,000,000 enacted in P.L. 104-6.

    The Committee recommends a total of $161,000,000 for the 
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program. 
This is a decrease of $18,000,000, or 10 percent, below the 
budget request for fiscal year 1996, and an increase of 
$42,000,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1995.
    For 1996, the NATO nations have agreed on a funding level 
of approximately $765,000,000. Of this amount, the U.S. 
requirement totals $199,000,000 and is based on a previously 
agreed cost share that averages about 26%. The Committee notes 
that this program is becoming predominately geared toward 
projects other than construction. Larger percentages are being 
spent on procurement costs, largely for communications and 
other command and control equipment and software. It is not the 
intent of the Committee to disrupt communication plans; 
however, the Committee is concerned that perhaps U.S. 
construction needs are taking a lower priority to procurement 
costs. The Committee directs the Department to review the mix 
of construction versus procurement costs under this program and 
the possibility of seeking alternative funding for procurement 
costs. Findings are to be included in the justification 
documentation accompanying the fiscal year 1997 budget request.
    The Committee is also concerned about the budgetary 
implications to the construction program connected with the 
expansion of NATO and the Partnership for Peace program. The 
Department of Defense is directed to report to the Committee by 
February 1, 1996 on the expected impacts these programs will 
have on U.S. contributions to the Security Investment Program.
    Beginning with fiscal year 1996, the Department of Defense 
is directed to report to the Committees on Appropriations, on a 
quarterly basis, the following information:
          (1) NATO Nations shares of construction costs based 
        on fund authorizations;
          (2) NATO Nations shares of procurement costs based on 
        fund authorizations; and
          (3) A listing of all obligations incurred that 
        quarter broken out by infrastructure category and 
        procurement category. This listing should show the 
        total project cost, the U.S. cost share and all other 
        NATO Nations cost shares.
                             Family Housing

                                overview

    The need for military family housing has changed with the 
all-volunteer structure of the force. In the mid-1950s forty-
two percent of the force was married, compared to sixty-one 
percent today. The percentage of service members with families 
will continue to grow, and the nature of an all-volunteer force 
implies greater expectations for the availability, size and 
amenities of family housing. At the same time, we are faced 
with a changing military environment due to overseas 
reductions, domestic base closures, major force reductions, and 
increased deployments.
    Today, the family housing program is even more important 
because it provides a quality of life incentive which attracts 
and retains dedicated individuals to serve in the military. 
However, the housing deficiencies are a severe disincentive to 
reenlistment. Testimony before the Committee states that it 
costs over $29,000 to recruit and train an enlisted soldier for 
the first assignment. This investment is lost each time a 
soldier must be replaced. The Committee has no question that 
housing is directly linked to readiness, morale, and retention.
    While this Committee has focused on the need for adequate 
family housing over the years, resources have been scarce. This 
problem has recently been brought to the forefront with several 
articles in the press and an increased focus by the Department 
of Defense. The family housing crisis exists today due to the 
majority of housing in the Department's inventory being 
substandard; high cost areas where housing deficits exist; and 
problems young families are facing who cannot afford to live in 
local communities.
    DOD policy is that married couples will live off-base when 
the economy can support them, and about two-thirds, or 614,928 
families, reside off-base. Where there is sufficient affordable 
housing in the community and commuting distances are not over 
one hour, most of these families are doing well. However, 12 
percent of military families living in civilian communities are 
in substandard housing. This is often the case when rents are 
excessive or a family can only afford to live in distant, 
isolated, and sometimes unsafe neighborhoods. This is occurring 
more often because housing allowances are covering only 75 
percent of the cost of civilian housing, on average. Many 
younger families only have one car and are faced with driving 
distances of over an hour to the installation. In some 
instances, families are choosing to remain separated simply 
because suitable, affordable housing is not available at a new 
assignment.
    The Department of Defense has a total of 350,799 on-base 
housing units in its inventory, with an average age of 32 
years. Two-thirds of the inventory is over 30 years old and 
requires a substantial annual investment to meet maintenance 
requirements. Over the years, the majority of these homes have 
gone without adequate maintenance and repair. And over two-
thirds of the inventory, or 218,551 units, is considered 
unsuitable. Unsuitable units require a major investment to 
correct deteriorated infrastructure, provide basic living 
standards and meet contemporary code requirements for 
electrical and mechanical systems, and for energy efficiency. 
Examples provided to the Committee of a typical scenario 
military families are facing include: severe health and safety 
deficiencies such as electrical systems and water pipes needing 
replacement; non-working or inefficient heating and cooling 
systems; nails coming through the ceilings and floors; kitchen 
cabinets water-logged and sinking; ceiling and wall paint 
chipped and peeling; screens with holes in them; doors coming 
apart; malfunctioning smoke detectors; light fixtures broken, 
and stoves and ovens with elements not working.
    The current backlog of deferred maintenance and repair 
totals in excess of $2,000,000,000. When housing units are not 
adequately maintained, eventually they must be closed and 
abandoned or demolished. Families who could have been housed in 
these units must then live off-base. In turn, this creates an 
additional expense for payment of housing allowances.
    It will be necessary to use many different approaches to 
help meet the current family housing need. The challenge is for 
a sustained overall commitment, at funding levels that will 
reduce the backlog of inadequate houses, reduce the housing 
deficits, and increase the quality of living conditions in a 
reasonable period of time. The Department estimates it will 
take $3,000,000,000 and over thirty years to correct the 
existing problem.
    The Secretary of Defense has proposed to Congress a plan 
for a private sector initiative which is discussed later in 
this report. The Committee is hopeful this initiative will be 
successful and help to resolve the problem in a more timely 
fashion. In the meantime, this bill provides a total of 
$4,235,569,000, and an increase of $715,125,000 over last year, 
for family housing related items. This includes the 
construction of new homes, the replacement of older homes, 
improvements to existing inventory, and operation and 
maintenance funds to properly manage and improve the current 
inventory. An additional $22,000,000 is also provided for 
startup costs for the private sector initiative, which fully 
funds the authorized level for this program.
                        new housing construction

    The fiscal year 1996 request is $355,088,000 to build 2,633 
units of new family housing. This is an increase of 15 percent 
over the fiscal year 1995 enacted level and reflects a specific 
initiative by the Department to improve family housing. The 
Committee is in total agreement with the Department's 
initiative and has approved all requested projects for new 
housing construction. In addition, the Committee has provided 
an additional $110,180,000 to build 790 units of new family 
housing. The total appropriation for new construction is 
$465,268,000 and will provide 3,423 new units. Details of the 
Committee's recommendations for new construction are provided 
in this report under the individual component accounts. The 
Committee expects that none of the approved projects will be 
reduced in scope. It is the understanding of the Committee, 
that upon a 30-day notification from the Secretary of Defense, 
and approval of the Committee, funds appropriated for a new 
construction project may be transferred to the Defense Family 
Housing Improvement Fund for the purpose of a private sector 
pilot project at the same location.

                       construction improvements

    A total of $350,508,000 has been requested for post-
acquisition construction for all Services to improve 4,725 
housing units. Post-acquisition construction is focused on 
modernizing existing units that are uneconomical to repair. The 
Committee recommends full funding of the request. In addition, 
the Committee has provided an additional $83,754,000 for eight 
construction improvement projects which are listed in this 
report under the individual component accounts, to improve an 
additional 1,250 units. The total appropriation for post-
acquisition construction is $434,262,000 and will improve 5,975 
units of family housing.
    It is the understanding of the Committee, that upon a 30-
day notification from the Secretary of Defense, and approval of 
the Committee, funds appropriated for a construction 
improvement project may be transferred to the Defense Family 
Housing Improvement Fund for the purpose of a private sector 
pilot project at the same location.
    The Committee continues the restriction on the amount 
invested in improving foreign source housing units. The three-
year limitation on overseas units is $35,000. If the components 
intend to program improvements to specific units which exceed 
$35,000 over a period of three years, total funding should be 
requested in one year. The justification for each unit should 
identify all improvements and major maintenance work done in 
the past three years, and all improvements and major 
maintenance planned in the following three years.

                       operation and maintenance

    The request for operation and maintenance expenses totals 
$3,265,605,000, an increase of $460,422,000, or 16 percent, 
above the fiscal year 1995 appropriation. The Committee 
recommends full funding of the request. These accounts provide 
for annual expenditures for maintenance and repair, 
furnishings, management, services, utilities, leasing, 
interest, mortgage insurance and miscellaneous expenses. Of the 
total appropriations provided for operation and maintenance, 
$1,578,083,000 is for maintenance and repair of existing 
housing. This is an increase of $405,792,000, or 35 percent, 
over fiscal year 1995 levels and is due to an effort on behalf 
of the Services to concentrate on taking better care of the 
current housing inventory. In addition, the Committee has 
provided an additional $14,000,000 for maintenance of Air Force 
family housing units.
    Expenditures from this account for general and flag officer 
quarters are to be reported in accordance with the guidelines 
previously established and reiterated later in this report. The 
Committee also continues the direction that the details of all 
other expenditures from this account which exceed $15,000 per 
unit, per year for major maintenance and repair of non-general 
and flag officer quarters be included as part of the 
justification material. The general provision limiting 
obligations from this account to no more than 20 percent of the 
total in the last two months of the fiscal year is included in 
this year's bill.
    The Committee continues the restriction on the transfer of 
funds between the operation and maintenance accounts. The 
limitation is ten percent to all primary accounts and 
subaccounts. Such transfers are to be reported to the Committee 
within thirty days of such action.
         Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund

                                overview

    The Secretary of Defense has proposed legislation which 
addresses the housing crisis by authorizing a five year, 
$1,000,000,000 private sector pilot project to replace or 
renovate approximately 200,000 units of family housing within 
the United States, its territories and possessions, and in 
Puerto Rico, but not overseas. The National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, H.R. 1530, as reported, 
contains the authorization for this program. New authority is 
granted to: guarantee mortgage payments and rental contracts to 
developers as incentives to build family housing; authorize 
commercial-style lease agreements for family housing; and 
engage in joint ventures with developers to construct family 
housing on government property.
    The legislation combines existing build/lease, rental 
guarantee, and limited partnership authority with new authority 
to guarantee loans and mortgages. It authorizes the Service 
Secretaries to enter into contracts providing for direct loans, 
guarantees, insurance and other payments to owners or 
mortgagors of military family housing and supporting 
facilities, e.g., child development centers. The Service 
Secretaries are also authorized to lease or sell land, family 
housing and supporting facilities for the purposes of providing 
additional family housing, or to improve existing family 
housing. However, this authority may not be exercised at any 
installation approved for closure. As part of the consideration 
for the sale or lease of property, 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 is required. Leases and sales are 
not subject to the provisions of the Military Leasing Act, the 
Federal Property and the Administrative Services Act, or the 
Economy Act. The authority to outlease or sell land and 
improvements will bypass the General Services Administration 
and is expected to reduce project costs substantially.
    Further, the legislation authorizes the establishment of a 
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund for 
alternative means of financing military family housing and 
ancillary supporting facilities. Funds in this account will be 
used to build or renovate family housing, mixing or matching 
various authorities in the authorization, and utilizing private 
capital and expertise to the maximum extent possible. The Fund 
is to contain appropriated and transferred funds from family 
housing construction accounts, and the total value in budget 
authority of all contracts and investments undertaken may not 
exceed $1,000,000,000. Transfers are authorized contingent upon 
a 30-day notification by the Secretary of Defense to the 
appropriate committees of Congress. Proceeds from investments, 
leases, and conveyances are to be deposited into this Fund, and 
any use of the Fund is subject to annual appropriations. The 
Family Housing Improvement Fund is to be administered as a 
single account without fiscal year limitations.
    This new authority to enter into contracts and partnerships 
and to make investments shall expire on September 30, 2000.

                    fiscal year 1996 appropriations

    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1996, H.R. 1530, as reported, contains authorization in the 
amount of $22,000,000 for the Department of Defense Family 
Housing Improvement Fund for fiscal year 1996. The President 
submitted a budget amendment on June 2, 1995, to reflect a 
request of $22,000,000 for the fund. The Committee supports 
this level of funding and has recommended it in the bill.

                         reporting requirements

    The Committee reiterates the reporting requirements 
contained in the enabling legislation. The Service Secretary 
concerned may not enter into any contract until after the end 
of the 21-day period beginning on the date the Secretary 
concerned submits written notice of the nature and terms of the 
contract to the appropriate committees of Congress.
    In addition, no transfer of appropriated funds into the 
account may take place until after the end of the 30-day period 
beginning on the date the Secretary of Defense submits written 
notice and justification for the transfer to the appropriate 
committees of Congress. The Appropriations Committee expects to 
receive prior notification of all such transfers of funds.

                   general and flag officer quarters

    The existing reporting requirements for general and flag 
officer quarters continue in full force and effect, in order to 
control expenditures for high cost quarters. The purpose of 
these requirements is to ensure that the total amount of all 
obligations for maintenance and repair (excluding operations) 
on each general or flag officer quarters is limited to $25,000 
per year, unless specifically included in the annual budget 
justification material. This continues the policy initiated in 
1984 and developed and elaborated over several years, to ensure 
that separate controls are established for orderly planning and 
programming to accomplish this work.
    Recognizing the uncertainties involved in accurately 
forecasting ``change in occupancy'' work, the Committee 
continues the following previously established notification 
requirement. The Committee must be notified when maintenance 
and repair costs for a unit will exceed the amount submitted in 
the budget justification by 25 percent or $5,000, whichever is 
less. The Committee must also be notified when maintenance and 
repair costs will exceed $25,000 for a unit not requested in 
the budget justification.
    Notifications of each proposed expenditure must be 
submitted over the signature of the Service Secretary for case-
by-case review and approval. Each Service is directed to 
continue to limit out-of-cycle submissions to one per year, 
except for situations which are justified as emergencies or 
safety-related.
                     leasing reporting requirement

    The Committee continues the reporting requirement for both 
domestic and foreign leases. For domestic leases (not funded by 
the Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund), the Department is 
directed to report quarterly on the details of all new or 
renewal domestic leases entered into during the previous 
quarter which exceed $12,000 per unit per year, including 
certification that less expensive housing was not available for 
lease. For foreign leases, the Department is directed to: 
perform an economic analysis on all new leases or lease/
contract agreements where more than 25 units are involved; 
report the details of any new or renewal lease exceeding 
$20,000 per year (as adjusted for foreign currency fluctuation 
from October 1, 1987, but not adjusted for inflation), 21 days 
prior to entering into such an agreement; and base leasing 
decisions on the economic analysis.

exclusion of asbestos and lead-based paint removal from maintenance and 
                             repair limits

    The Committee continues the requirement of an after-the-
fact notification where asbestos and/or lead-based paint 
removal costs cause the maintenance and repair thresholds of 
$15,000 for a military family housing unit, or $25,000 for a 
General or Flag Officer Quarters to be exceeded. The 
notification shall include work scope, cost break-out and other 
details pertinent to asbestos and/or lead-based paint removal 
work and shall be reported on a semi-annual basis.

                            execution rates

    The Committee notes that the average percentage obligation 
for conventionally constructed new family housing over the last 
five years is only 33 percent. The result is very few family 
housing construction projects are executed in the first year. 
The Department is directed to review the turn-key method to 
determine if this design process is indeed slowing program 
execution. In addition, the Department is to review the 
benefits of requiring the Services to modify the process to 
assure conventional family housing new construction projects 
are ready for award when the funds become available. This 
review should also take into account the possibility of using 
site-adapted standardized designs which have undergone value 
engineering studies to speed the process.
    It is also noted that family housing construction 
improvement projects average obligation rates in the first year 
are only 43%. The Department is to report to the Committee on 
what actions are being taken to increase this execution rate to 
a more acceptable rate.
    The Department should report its findings and actions being 
taken to improve the execution rates to the Committee no later 
than March 1, 1996.

                         reprogramming criteria

    The reprogramming criteria that apply to military 
construction projects (25 percent of the funded amount or 
$2,000,000, whichever is less) also apply to new housing 
construction projects and to improvement projects over 
$2,000,000.

                          Family Housing, Army
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................  $1,183,710,000
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................   1,381,096,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................   1,463,996,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................    +280,286,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................     +82,900,000

    The Committee recommends a total of $1,463,996,000 for 
Family Housing, Army for fiscal year 1996. This is an increase 
of $82,900,000 above the budget request for fiscal year 1996, 
and an increase of $280,286,000 above the amount appropriated 
for fiscal year 1995.

                              Construction

    The Committee has approved $126,400,000 for new 
construction, instead of the $43,500,000 requested, as shown 
below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Location/Project               Requested         Recommended   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama: Redstone Arsenal (118                                          
 units)...........................  .................        $12,000,000
Kentucky: Fort Knox (150 units)...  .................         19,000,000
New York: U.S. Military Academy                                         
 (119 units)......................        $16,500,000         16,500,000
Virginia: Fort Lee (135 units)....  .................         19,500,000
Washington: Fort Lewis (84 units).         10,800,000         10,800,000
Construction improvements.........         14,200,000         46,600,000
Planning..........................          2,000,000          2,000,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total.......................         43,500,000        126,400,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       construction improvements

    The following projects are to be accomplished within the 
additional amount provided above the budget request for 
construction improvements:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Location                Number of units      Recommended   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kentucky--Fort Campbell...........                262        $19,000,000
New Mexico--White Sands...........                 36          3,400,000
North Carolina--Fort Bragg........                 96         10,000,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total.......................                394         32,400,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       operation and maintenance

    The budget request includes $1,445,283 for 27 projects 
where anticipated maintenance and repair obligations will 
exceed $25,000 per dwelling unit for General Officer Quarters. 
In the face of all of the Army's unmet requirements for 
barracks, child development centers, family housing, and other 
quality of life facilities, the Committee questions the need 
for such a level of effort for maintenance and repair of 
General Officer Quarters. The Committee has not reduced the 
amount available for operation and maintenance of family 
housing. However, the Committee directs the Army to cancel the 
27 proposed projects for General Officer Quarters, and to apply 
these funds to reduction of the backlog of maintenance and 
repair of enlisted family housing units.

                 Family Housing, Navy and Marine Corps
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................  $1,205,064,000
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................   1,514,084,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................   1,579,618,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................    +374,554,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................     +65,534,000

    The Committee recommends a total of $1,579,618,000 for 
Family Housing, Navy and Marine Corps for fiscal year 1996. 
This is an increase of $65,534,000 above the budget request for 
fiscal year 1996, and an increase of $374,554,000 above the 
amount appropriated for fiscal year 1995.

                              construction

    The Committee has approved $531,289,000 for new 
construction, instead of the $465,755,000 requested, as shown 
below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Location/Project               Requested         Recommended   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
California:                                                             
    Lemoore Naval Air Station (240                                      
     units).......................        $34,900,000        $34,900,000
    Marine Corps Base Camp                                              
     Pendleton (community center).          1,438,000          1,438,000
    Marine Corps Base Camp                                              
     Pendleton (housing office)...            707,000            707,000
    Marine Corps Base Camp                                              
     Pendleton (69 units).........         10,000,000         10,000,000
    Marine Corps Base Camp                                              
     Pendleton (136 units)........  .................         20,080,000
    Pacific Missile Test Center                                         
     Point Mugu (housing office/                                        
     self help center)............          1,020,000          1,020,000
    Public Works Center San Diego                                       
     (346 units)..................         49,310,000         49,310,000
Hawaii: Public Works Center, Pearl                                      
 Harbor (252 units)...............         48,400,000         48,400,000
Maryland:                                                               
    Naval Air Test Center Patuxent                                      
     River (housing warehouse/self                                      
     help center).................            890,000            890,000
    USNA Annapolis (housing office/                                     
     self help center)............            800,000            800,000
North Carolina: Marine Corps Air                                        
 Station Cherry Point (community                                        
 center)..........................          1,003,000          1,003,000
Pennsylvania: NSCC Mechanicsburg                                        
 (housing office).................            300,000            300,000
Virginia:                                                               
    Dahlgren Naval Surface Warfare                                      
     Center (housing office/self                                        
     help center).................            520,000            520,000
    Public Works Center Norfolk                                         
     (housing office/housing                                            
     warehouse)...................          1,390,000          1,390,000
    Public Works Center Norfolk                                         
     (320 units)..................         42,500,000         42,500,000
Puerto Rico: NS Roosevelt Roads                                         
 (housing office).................            710,000            710,000
Construction improvements.........        247,477,000        292,931,000
Planning..........................         24,390,000         24,390,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total.......................        465,755,000        531,289,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       construction improvements

    The following projects are to be accomplished within the 
additional amount provided above the budget request for 
construction improvements:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Location                Number of units      Recommended   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florida--Mayport..................                400        $14,575,000
Illinois--Great Lakes.............                150         15,300,000
Rhode Island--Newport.............                 64          8,795,000
South Carolina--Beaufort..........                176          6,784,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total.......................                790         45,454,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       Family Housing, Air Force
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................  $1,102,289,000
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................   1,098,216,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................   1,157,716,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................     +55,427,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................     +59,500,000

    The Committee recommends a total of $1,157,716,000 for 
Family Housing, Air Force for fiscal year 1996. This is an 
increase of $59,500,000 above the budget request for fiscal 
year 1996, and an increase of $55,427,000 above the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1995.

                              construction

    The Committee has approved $294,503,000 for new 
construction, instead of the $249,003,000 requested, as shown 
below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Location/Project               Requested         Recommended   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska: Elmendorf AFB (housing                                          
 office/maintenance facility).....         $3,000,000         $3,000,000
Arizona: Davis-Monthan AFB (80                                          
 units)...........................          9,498,000          9,498,000
Arkansas: Little Rock AFB (1 unit)            210,000            210,000
California:                                                             
    Beale AFB (housing office)....            842,000            842,000
    Edwards AFB (67 units)........         11,350,000         11,350,000
    Edwards AFB (60 units)........                 --          9,400,000
    Vandenberg AFB (housing                                             
     office)......................            900,000            900,000
    Vandenberg AFB (143 units)....         20,200,000         20,200,000
Colorado: Peterson AFB (housing                                         
 office)..........................            570,000            570,000
District of Columbia: Bolling AFB                                       
 (32 units).......................          4,100,000          4,100,000
Florida:                                                                
    Eglin AFB (housing office)....            500,000            500,000
    Eglin AFB Hurlburt Field                                            
     (housing service center).....            880,000            880,000
    MacDill AFB (housing office)..            646,000            646,000
    Patrick AFB (70 units)........          7,947,000          7,947,000
    Tyndall AFB (52 units)........          5,500,000          5,500,000
    Tyndall AFB (30 units)........                 --          4,300,000
Georgia: Moody AFB (3 units)......            513,000            513,000
Idaho: Mountain Home AFB (housing                                       
 office)..........................            844,000            844,000
Kansas: McConnell AFB (39 units)..          5,193,000          5,193,000
Louisiana: Barksdale AFB (62                                            
 units)...........................         10,299,000         10,299,000
Massachusetts: Hanscom AFB (24                                          
 units)...........................                 --          4,900,000
Mississippi: Keelser AFB (98                                            
 units)...........................          9,300,000          9,300,000
Missouri: Whiteman AFB (72 units).          9,948,000          9,948,000
Nevada:                                                                 
    Nellis AFB (6 units)..........          1,357,000          1,357,000
    Nellis AFB (137 units)........                 --         21,000,000
New Mexico:                                                             
    Holloman AFB (1 unit).........            225,000            225,000
    Kirtland AFB (105 units)......         11,000,000         11,000,000
North Carolina:                                                         
    Pope AFB (104 units)..........          9,984,000          9,984,000
    Seymour Johnson AFB (1 unit)..            204,000            204,000
South Carolina: Shaw AFB                                                
 (maintenance facility)...........            715,000            715,000
Texas:                                                                  
    Dyess AFB (maintenance                                              
     facility)....................            580,000            580,000
    Lackland AFB (67 units).......          6,200,000          6,200,000
    Sheppard AFB (housing office).            500,000            500,000
    Sheppard AFB (maintenance                                           
     facility)....................            600,000            600,000
Washington: McChord AFB (50 units)          9,504,000          9,504,000
Guam: Andersen AFB (housing                                             
 office)..........................          1,700,000          1,700,000
Turkey: Incirlick AB (150 units)..         10,146,000         10,146,000
Construction improvements.........         85,059,000         90,959,000
Planning..........................          8,989,000          8,989,000
                                   -------------------------------------
      Total.......................        249,003,000        294,503,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       construction improvements

    The following project is to be accomplished within the 
additional amount provided above the request for construction 
improvements:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Location                Number of units      Recommended   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ohio--Wright-Patterson AFB........                 66         $5,900,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       operation and maintenance

    The budget request includes $408,971,000 for maintenance of 
real property. The Committee recommends an increase of 
$14,000,000, providing a total of $422,971,000 for this 
purpose.

                      Family Housing, Defense-Wide
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................     $29,381,000
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................      34,239,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................      34,239,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................      +4,858,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................               0

    The Committee recommends a total of $34,239,000 for Family 
Housing, Defense-Wide for fiscal year 1996. This is equal to 
the budget request for fiscal year 1996, and an increase of 
$4,858,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1995.
         Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................              $0
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................      22,000,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................      22,000,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................     +22,000,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................               0

    The Committee recommends a total of $22,000,000 for the 
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund for 
fiscal year 1996. This is equal to the budget request for 
fiscal year 1996, and an increase of $22,000,000 above the 
amount appropriated for fiscal year 1995.

                       Homeowners Assistance Fund
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................              $0
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................      75,586,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................      75,586,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................     +75,586,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................               0

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $75,586,000 
for the Homeowners Assistance Fund. The Committee notes that no 
funding was provided for fiscal year 1995 since unobligated 
balances were to be carried over from prior years and revenue 
was expected from the resale of homes during fiscal year 1995.
    The Homeowners Assistance Fund is a non-expiring revolving 
fund which finances a program for providing assistance to 
homeowners by reducing their losses incident to the disposal of 
their homes when military installations at or near where they 
are serving or employed are ordered to be closed or the scope 
of operations is reduced. The Fund was established in 
recognition of the fact that base closure and reduction actions 
can have serious economic effects on local communities. The 
Fund receives funding from several sources: appropriations, 
borrowing authority, reimbursable authority, prior fiscal year 
unobligated balances, revenue from sale of acquired properties, 
and recovery of prior year obligations.
    Recent base closure and realignment actions have had a 
significant impact on this account. The total estimated 
requirements for fiscal year 1996 are $238,478,000. Funding for 
this requirement will come from the following sources: 
appropriations in the amount of $75,586,000; estimated revenue 
of $122,307,000; and prior year carryover of $40,585,000.
    The budget request included a new General Provision to 
provide transfer authority among the Homeowners Assistance Fund 
and the Base Realignment and Closure Accounts. The Committee 
recommends including this provision as Section 123 of the bill. 
However, the Committee directs that any exercise of this 
authority must fall under the Committee's standing procedures 
for approval of reprogramming requests.
                      Base Realignment and Closure

                                overview

    The Congress has appropriated to date, $9,500,000,000 for 
realignment and closure since fiscal year 1990. In the bill for 
fiscal year 1996, the Committee is recommending total funding 
of $3.9 billion under three accounts, as requested. The request 
represents a $1,221,734,000 increase, or 44 percent, over 
fiscal year 1995 appropriations. These funds are necessary to 
ensure closure schedules can be met and anticipated savings 
will be realized. In addition, funding is essential for 
accelerated cleanup which is necessary for reuse of surplus 
properties and future job creation.
    The Committee, in appropriating such funds, has provided 
the Department with the flexibility to allocate funds by 
Service, by function and by base. The Committee, in recognizing 
the complexities of realigning and closing bases and providing 
for environmental restoration, has provided such flexibility to 
allow the Office of the Secretary of Defense to monitor the 
program execution of the Services and to redistribute 
unobligated balances as appropriate to avoid delays and to 
effect timely execution of realignment and closures along with 
environmental restoration.
    The following table displays the total amount appropriated 
for each round of base closure including amounts recommended 
for fiscal year 1996:

                                          BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE                                          
                           [Total funding, fiscal year 1990 through fiscal year 1996]                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Fiscal year 1990                                                         
                                        through fiscal    Fiscal year 1995   Fiscal year 1996        Total      
                                          year 1994           enacted          recommended                      
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part I..............................     $2,585,230,000        $87,600,000                 NA     $2,672,830,000
Part II.............................      3,476,610,000    \2\ 398,700,000       $964,843,000      4,840,153,000
Part III............................    \1\ 636,308,000  \3\ 2,290,858,000      2,148,480,000      5,075,646,000
Part IV.............................                 NA                 NA        784,569,000        784,569,000
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.........................      6,698,148,000      2,777,158,000      3,897,892,000     13,373,198,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes rescission of $507,692,000 (P.L. 103-211).                                                         
\2\ Includes transfer of $133,000,000 from ``Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense.''                             
\3\ Includes rescission of $32,000,000 (P.L. 104-6).                                                            

                       ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION

    Since the start of the current process for Base Realignment 
and Closure, Military Construction Appropriations Acts have 
appropriated a total of $9,475,306,000 for the entire program 
for fiscal years 1990 through 1995. Within this total, 
statutory language has provided that not less than 
$1,965,700,000 has been available for activities associated 
with environmental restoration. Against this ``floor,'' the 
Department has allocated $2,330,000,000 for environmental 
restoration.
    The Committee is concerned that the design and cost of 
environmental restoration efforts should be tailored to match 
the proposed re-use of an installation in order to assure that 
costs are reasonable and affordable. Therefore, for funds 
provided for fiscal year 1996, the Committee recommends 
statutory language to establish a ceiling on the level of 
funding for environmental restoration, as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Ceiling on   
              Account                 Total program      environmental  
                                                       restoration costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BRAC I............................                 NA                 NA
BRAC II...........................       $964,843,000       $224,800,000
BRAC III..........................      2,148,480,000        232,300,000
BRAC IV...........................        784,569,000                 NA
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The statutory ceiling established by the Committee is equal 
to the Department's execution plan for fiscal year 1996.
                         construction projects

    The Department of Defense has requested a total of 
$1,100,000,000 within the fiscal year 1996 budget request for 
base realignment and closure for construction projects funded 
under the Base Realignment and Closure Accounts, Parts II and 
III. The Committee recommends full funding for these important 
projects. The Committee finds it important that the Congress be 
advised of any programmatic changes. Therefore, any change in a 
project shall be considered a change in a specifically 
authorized and appropriated project and all limitations and 
notification procedures shall apply to these construction 
projects in the same manner as within the ``Active and Reserve 
Component'' accounts. The Committee provides approval and 
appropriated funds for the following construction projects:


                      BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE                      
 [Fiscal year 1996 budget estimate, Base Realignment and Closure, fiscal
             year 1996 BRAC military construction projects]             
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Recommended 
     Component/State/project description      BRAC round    (thousands) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army 91 BRAC construction, fiscal year 1996:  ..........  ..............
    Arizona:                                  ..........  ..............
        Fort Huachuca:                        ..........  ..............
            Hospital/Dental Clinic (38300)..         II           $2,250
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Army, Arizona.......  ..........           2,250
    California:                               ..........  ..............
        Sacramento Army Depot:                ..........  ..............
            Reserve Center Renovation                                   
             (45589)........................         II            2,000
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Army, California....  ..........           2,000
                                                         ===============
    Colorado:                                 ..........  ..............
        Fort Carson:                          ..........  ..............
            Prime Care Clinic (38437).......         II            4,300
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Army, Colorado......  ..........           4,300
                                                         ===============
    Maryland:                                 ..........  ..............
        Adelphi Research Laboratory:          ..........  ..............
            Scale Model Facility (27365)....         II            1,500
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Army, Maryland......  ..........           1,500
                                                         ===============
    Massachusetts:                            ..........  ..............
        Fort Devens:                          ..........  ..............
            Ammo Supply Point (41792).......         II            2,750
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Army, Massachusetts.  ..........           2,750
                                                         ===============
    South Carolina:                           ..........  ..............
        Fort Jackson:                         ..........  ..............
            Hospital Addition/Clinic (38310)         II            5,400
            Bachelor Officers Quarters                                  
             (38289)........................         II           10,400
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Army, South Carolina  ..........          15,800
                                                         ===============
            Planning and design.............         II              215
                                                         ===============
              Total for Army 91 BRAC                                    
               construction, fiscal year                                
               1996.........................  ..........          28,815
                                                         ===============
Army 93 BRAC construction, fiscal year 1996:  ..........  ..............
    Michigan:                                 ..........  ..............
        Detroit Arsenal:                      ..........  ..............
            Mobility Center Laboratory                                  
             (42673)........................        III            5,141
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Army, Michigan......  ..........           5,141
                                                         ===============
    Virginia:                                 ..........  ..............
        Fort Belvoir:                         ..........  ..............
            Operations and Training Facility                            
             (42678)........................        III            4,950
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Army, Virginia......  ..........           4,950
                                                         ===============
              Total for Army 93 BRAC                                    
               construction, fiscal year                                
               1996.........................  ..........          10,091
                                                         ===============
Navy 91 BRAC construction, fiscal year 1996:  ..........  ..............
    California:                               ..........  ..............
        Marine Corps Air Station, Camp                                  
         Pendleton:                           ..........  ..............
            Aircraft Maintenance Facilities                             
             (518T).........................         II           38,230
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Navy, California....  ..........          38,230
                                                         ===============
    Pennsylvania:                             ..........  ..............
        Naval Shipyard, Philadelphia:         ..........  ..............
            Utilities Reconfiguration (597S)         II           13,000
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Navy, Pennsylvania..  ..........          13,000
                                                         ===============
            Planning and design.............         II           16,950
                                                         ===============
              Total for Navy 91 BRAC                                    
               construction, fiscal year                                
               1996.........................  ..........          68,180
                                                         ===============
Navy 93 BRAC construction, fiscal year 1996:  ..........  ..............
    California:                               ..........  ..............
        Naval and Marine Corps Reserve                                  
         Center:                              ..........  ..............
            Reserve Center Addition, Alameda                            
             (149T).........................        III            7,900
        Marine Corps Air Station Camp                                   
         Pendleton:                           ..........  ..............
            Aircraft Parking Apron (026T)...        III           14,320
            Bachelor Enlisted Quarters and                              
             Physical Fitness Center (028T).        III           10,750
            Maintenance Facility (031T).....        III           18,210
            Training and Administrative                                 
             Facility (027T)................        III            3,160
        Marine Corps Air Station Miramar                                
            Aircraft Maintenance Complex                                
             (006T).........................        III           61,193
            Airfield Parking and Pads (001T)        III           47,552
            Bachelor Enlisted Quarters                                  
             (002T).........................        III           38,654
            Admin and Training Facilities                               
             (003T).........................        III           16,300
            Operational Support Complex                                 
             (008T).........................        III           14,420
            Utilities Improvement (009T)....        III           19,750
            Maintenance Facilities (010T)...        III           22,940
            Naval Exchange Laundry and Dry                              
             Cleaning (389T)................        III            2,440
            Building Conversion (720T)......        III            1,700
        Fleet Combat Training Center,                                   
         Pacific, San Diego                                             
            Medical Research Laboratory                                 
             (384T).........................        III              685
        Fleet Training Center, San Diego                                
            Applied Instruction Building                                
             (023T).........................        III            8,403
        Navy Public Works Center, San Diego                             
            Public Works Shop (175T)........        III            2,920
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Navy, California....  ..........         291,297
                                                         ===============
    DIstrict of Columbia:                                               
        Strategic Systems Program,                                      
         Washington:                                                    
            Building Renovation (003T)......        III            4,500
        Washington Navy Yard:                                           
            Building Renovation (002T)......        III           18,354
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Navy, District of                               
               Columbia.....................  ..........          22,854
                                                         ===============
    Florida:                                                            
        Navy Air Station, Pensacola:                                    
            Consolidate Training Building                               
             (686T).........................        III           27,100
            Bachelor Enlisted Quarters                                  
             (687T).........................        III           39,700
        Naval Aviation Depot, Jacksonville:                             
            Administrative Building (220T)..         II           11,000
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Navy, Florida.......  ..........          77,800
                                                         ===============
    Hawaii:                                                             
        Navy Public Works Center, Pearl                                 
         Harbor:                                                        
            Utility System Modification                                 
             (539T).........................        III            2,800
        Marine Corps Air Station, Kaneohe                               
         Bay:                                                           
            Helicopter Landing Pad (287T)...        III            1,250
            Maintenance Hangar Alterations                              
             (0270T)........................        III           13,400
            Ordnance Facilities (508T)......        III            2,800
            Aircraft Rinse Facility                                     
             Modification (269T)............        III            1,850
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Navy, Hawaii........  ..........          22,100
                                                         ===============
    Illinois:                                                           
        Naval Training Center, Great Lakes:                             
            Bachelor Enlisted Quarters                                  
             (619T).........................        III           23,700
            Brig (579T).....................        III              420
            Child Development Center (583T).        III            1,700
            Elevator Trainer School (601T)..        III            2,650
            Medical Clinic Addition (584T)..        III            6,090
            Training Building Renovations                               
             (581T).........................        III            3,250
            Fire Station (164T).............        III            2,560
        Recruit Training Command, Great                                 
         Lakes:                                                         
            Dental Clinic Alterations (604T)        III            9,595
            Medical Clinic Alterations                                  
             (590T).........................        III            3,218
            Medical Clinic Addition (586T)..        III            4,047
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Navy, Illinois......  ..........          57,230
                                                         ===============
    Maryland:                                                           
        Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian                            
         Head:                                                          
            Explosive Test Facility (146T)..        III           10,300
        Naval Air Warfare Center, Patuxent                              
         River:                                                         
            Administrative Facilities (960T)        III           29,400
            Propulsion System Evaluation                                
             Facility (953T)................        III           25,750
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Navy, Maryland......  ..........          65,450
                                                         ===============
    Nevada:                                                             
        Naval Air Station, Fallon:                                      
            Battalion Unit Equipment Shop                               
             (316T).........................        III            1,050
            Domestic Water Storage (319T)...        III            2,230
            Waste Water System Improvement                              
             (320T).........................        III            1,300
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Navy, Nevada........  ..........           4,580
                                                         ===============
    Tennessee:                                                          
        Engineering Development Center,                                 
         Arnold AFB, Tullahoma:                                         
            Propulstion System Laboratory                               
             (159T).........................        III           51,405
        Naval Air Station, Memphis:                                     
            Building Conversion (323T)......        III            1,300
            Building Conversion (324T)......        III            7,400
            Installation of Telephone Switch                            
             (322T).........................        III            5,010
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Navy, Tennessee.....  ..........          65,115
                                                         ===============
    Texas:                                                              
        Naval Air Station, Fort Worth:                                  
            Aircraft Support Facilities                                 
             (102T).........................        III           19,886
            Administrative and Supply                                   
             Building (140T)................        III              860
            Administrative/Supply Building                              
             Alterations (106T).............        III            4,730
            Building Alterations and                                    
             Additions (101T)...............        III            9,523
            Child Development Center (121T).        III            2,010
            Jet Engine Test Cell (104T).....        III           13,840
            Medical and Dental Clinic (103T)        III            4,510
            Reserve Training Building (108T)        III           17,300
                                                         ---------------
               Subtotal, Navy, Texas........  ..........          72,659
                                                         ===============
    Virginia:                                                           
        Naval Amphibious Base, Little Creek:                            
            Underway Replenishment Operator                             
             Training Facility (390T).......        III            4,300
        Marine Corps Combat Development                                 
         Command, Quantico:                                             
            Marine Corps Manpower Center                                
             (465T).........................        III           17,406
                                                         ---------------
               Subtotal, Navy, Virginia.....  ..........          21,706
                                                         ===============
    Washington:                                                         
        Naval Weapons Station Detachment,                               
         Port Hadlock:                                                  
            High Explosive Magazines (298T).        III            5,100
        Pudget Sound Naval Shipyard,                                    
         Bremerton:                                                     
            Parking Garage (300T)...........        III           14,400
        Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island:                              
            Aircraft Parking Apron                                      
             Alterations (603T).............        III            4,500
            Engine Maintenance Shop Addition                            
             (612T).........................        III            4,300
            Flight Simulator Building                                   
             Addition (605T)................        III            4,090
            Ground Support Equipment Shop                               
             (600T).........................        III            3,660
            Hangar Alteration (608T)........        III            4,690
            Sonobuoy Storage Facility (615T)        III            2,200
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Navy, Washington....  ..........          42,940
                                                         ===============
    Midway Island:                                                      
        Naval Air Facility:                                             
            Demolition (401T)...............        III            3,000
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Navy, Midway Island.  ..........           3,000
                                                         ===============
              Total Navy 93 BRAC                                        
               construction, fiscal year                                
               1996.........................  ..........         746,731
                                                         ===============
Navy 93 BRAC family housing, fiscal year                                
 1996:                                                                  
    California:                                                         
        Marine Corps Air Station, Camp                                  
         Pendleton:                                                     
            Family Housing (Community                                   
             Center) (506T).................        III            1,332
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, family housing,                                 
               Navy, California.............  ..........           1,332
                                                         ===============
    Florida:                                                            
        Naval Air Station, Pensacola:                                   
            Family Housing--116 units (406T)        III           10,790
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, family housing,                                 
               Navy, Florida................  ..........          10,790
                                                         ===============
    Illinois:                                                           
        Naval Public Works Center, Great                                
         Lakes:                                                         
            Family Housing--100 units (401T)        III           13,580
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, family housing,                                 
               Navy, Illinois...............  ..........          13,580
                                                         ===============
    Rhode Island:                                                       
        Naval Engineering Training Center,                              
         Newport:                                                       
            Demolish Family Housing--400                                
             units (500T)...................        III            2,000
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, family housing,                                 
               Navy, Rhode Island...........  ..........           2,000
                                                         ===============
    Washington:                                                         
        Naval Submarine Base, Bangor:                                   
             Family Housing--34 units (404T)        III            4,840
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, family housing,                                 
               Navy, Washington.............  ..........           4,840
                                                         ===============
              Total 93 BRAC family housing,                             
               Navy, fiscal year 1996.......  ..........          32,542
                                                         ===============
Air Force 91 BRAC construction, fiscal year                             
 1996:                                                                  
    California:                                                         
        Vandenberg AFB:                                                 
            Site Utilities (XUMU963007).....         II            2,900
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force,                                      
               California...................  ..........           2,900
                                                         ===============
    Colorado:                                                           
        Buckley ANGB:                                                   
            Enlisted Dormitory (CRWU953050).         II            5,600
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force, Colorado.  ..........           5,600
                                                         ===============
    Maryland:                                                           
        Fort Meade:                                                     
            AFIS Audio Visual School (41524)         II           14,000
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force, Maryland.  ..........          14,000
                                                         ===============
    North Carolina:                                                     
        Pope AFB:                                                       
            Munitions Storage Complex                                   
             (TMKH933621)...................         II            4,450
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force, North                                
               Carolina.....................  ..........           4,450
                                                         ===============
    Ohio:                                                               
        Rickenbacker ANGB:                                              
            Alter Base Maintenance Shops                                
             (NL26939686)...................         II            1,050
            Alter Support Shops (NLZ6939687)         II            1,250
            Alter Fencing and Utilities                                 
             (NLZ26939690)..................         II              620
            Alter Fuel System Maintenance                               
             Dock (NLZ26939700).............         II              600
            Jet Fuel Storage/Distribution                               
             (NLZ26939729)..................         II            9,100
        Wright-Patterson AFB:                                           
            NECAP Complex (NHTV943204)......         II            8,500
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force,..........  ..........          21,120
                                                         ===============
    Oklahoma:                                                           
        Altus AFB:                                                      
            Flight Simulator/Academic                                   
             Facility (AGGN953006)..........         II           10,000
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force, Oklahoma.  ..........          10,000
                                                         ===============
    Texas:                                                              
        Bergstrom Air Reserve Base:                                     
            Conventional Munitions Complex                              
             (BJHZ949003R)..................         II            2,100
            Add/Alter BCE Complex                                       
             (BJHZ949005R)..................         II            2,000
            Add/Alter Maintenance Shop                                  
             (BJHZ949006R)..................         II            2,900
            Isolate Utilities/Fence                                     
             (BJHZ949004R)..................         II              680
            Alter Vehicle Maintenance                                   
             Complex (BJHZ949010)...........         II              500
            Airmen Dining Hall (BJHZ949009).         II            2,400
            Base Supply Warehouse                                       
             (BJHZ949001R)..................         II            2,900
        Goodfellow AFB:                                                 
            Base Pavements (JCGU953002).....         II            1,000
        Lackland AFB:                                                   
            Alter Technical Training                                    
             (MPLS913333)...................         II            2,250
        Randolph AFB:                                                   
            Base Streets (TYMX953003).......         II            1,700
        Sheppard AFB:                                                   
            Base Roads (VNV9530015).........         II            1,800
            Central Preparation Kitchen/                                
             Bakery (VNV953004).............         II            1,800
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force, Texas....  ..........          22,030
                                                         ===============
              Total Air Force 91 BRAC                                   
               construction, fiscal year                                
               1996.........................  ..........          80,100
                                                         ===============
Air Force BRAC 91 family housing, fiscal                                
 year 1996:                                                             
    Oklahoma:                                                           
        Altus AFB:                                                      
            Family Housing--180 units                                   
             (AGGN954015)...................         II           18,500
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, family housing, Air                             
               Force, Oklahoma..............  ..........          18,500
                                                         ===============
              Total Air Force BRAC 91 family                            
               housing, fiscal year 1996....  ..........          18,500
                                                         ===============
Air Force BRAC 93 construction, fiscal year                             
 1996:                                                                  
    California:                                                         
        March AF Reserve Base:                                          
            Alter Wing HQ Admin (PCZ959001).        III            1,350
            Alter Medical Training                                      
             Facilities (PCZ959003).........        III            1,550
            Alter Weapons Storage                                       
             (PCZ959008)....................        III            1,850
            BCE Maintenance Shop/Storage                                
             (PCZ959002)....................        III              970
            Alter Dining Hall (PCZ959005)...        III            1,100
            Isolate Utilities/Perimeter                                 
             Fence PCZ959004)...............        III            2,250
            Alter Support Facilities                                    
             (PCZ959007)....................        III              300
        Travis AFB:                                                     
            Upgrade Roads (XOAT953320)......        III              300
            Combat Camera Squadron                                      
             Facilities (XDAT963100)........        III            9,900
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force,                                      
               California...................  ..........          19,570
                                                         ===============
    Florida:                                                            
        MacDill AFB:                                                    
            Isolate Utilities (NVZR940081)..        III              400
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force, Florida..  ..........             400
                                                         ===============
    Louisiana:                                                          
        Barksdale AFB:                                                  
            HAVE NAP Missile Complex                                    
             (AWUB962401)...................        III            2,600
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force, Louisiana  ..........           2,600
                                                         ===============
    Massachusetts:                                                      
        Westover AF Reserve Base:                                       
            Alter Aero-Medical Training                                 
             (YTPM950047)...................        III              480
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force,                                      
               Massachusetts................  ..........             480
                                                         ===============
    New Jesey:                                                          
        McGuire AFB:                                                    
            Upgrade Roads (PTFL943167)......        III            1,400
            Add/Alter Aero-Med Services                                 
             Clinic (PTFL943174)............        III            1,950
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force, New                                  
               Jersey.......................  ..........           3,350
                                                         ===============
    New York:                                                           
        Griffiss AFB:                                                   
            Northeast Air Defense Sector                                
             Support Facility (JREZ959501)..        III            1,900
            10th Mountain Complex ANG                                   
             (JREZ9449512)..................        III            3,150
            Alter Consolidated Logistical                               
             Facility (JREZ940055)..........        III            3,750
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force, New York.  ..........           8,800
                                                         ===============
    North Dakota:                                                       
        Minot AFB:                                                      
            Aircraft Ground Equipment                                   
             Corrosion Control (QJVF952104).        III              600
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, North Dakota........  ..........             600
                                                         ===============
    South Carolina:                                                     
        Shaw AFB:                                                       
            Special Operations Facility                                 
             (VLSB943013)...................        III            8,400
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force, South                                
               Carolina.....................  ..........           8,400
                                                         ===============
    Texas:                                                              
        Lackland AFB:                                                   
            IAAFA Student Officers Quarters                             
             (MPLS963240)...................        III            4,250
            IAAFA Tech Training Classroom                               
             (MPLS963241)...................        III            4,250
            IAAFA Enlisted Dormitory                                    
             (MPLS963244)...................        III            8,100
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force, Texas....  ..........          16,600
                                                         ===============
              Total Air Force 93 BRAC                                   
               construction, fiscal year                                
               1996.........................  ..........          60,800
                                                         ===============
Air Force 93 BRAC family housing, fiscal                                
 year 1996:                                                             
    New Jersey:                                                         
        McGuire AFB:                                                    
            Family Housing Improvements (142                            
             Units) (PTFL95400X)............        III           15,900
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Air Force, family                               
               housing, New Jersey..........  ..........          15,900
                                                         ===============
              Total Air Force 93 BRAC family                            
               housing, fiscal year 1996....  ..........          15,900
                                                         ===============
Defense Logistics Agency 93 BRAC                                        
 construction fiscal year 1996:                                         
    Ohio:                                                               
        Defense Electronic Supply Center,                               
         Dayton:                                                        
            Renovate Operations Space.......        III           10,654
                                                         ---------------
              Subtotal, Defense Logistics                               
               Agency, Ohio.................  ..........          10,654
                                                         ===============
              Total DLA 93 BRAC                                         
               construction, fiscal year                                
               1996.........................  ..........          10,654
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Base Realignment and Closure, Part I
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................     $87,600,000
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................               0
    Committee recommendation in the bill................               0
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................     -87,600,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................               0

    The Committee notes that fiscal year 1995 was the last year 
for appropriations into this account.
                 Base Realignment and Closure, Part II
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................    $265,700,000
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................     964,843,000
    Committee recommendation in the bill................     964,843,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................    +699,143,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................               0

    The Committee recommends a total of $964,843,000 for Base 
Realignment and Closure, Part II for fiscal year 1996. This is 
equal to the budget request for fiscal year 1996 and an 
increase of $699,143,000 above the amount appropriated for 
fiscal year 1995. Below is the recommended distribution of 
funds as requested:

        Activity                                             Recommended
Military Construction...................................    $177,100,000
Family Housing..........................................      18,800,000
Environmental...........................................     224,800,000
Operation and Maintenance...............................     554,200,000
Military Personnel (PCS)................................         200,000
Other...................................................      69,843,000
Revenues................................................     -79,300,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................     964,843,000
                    fort benjamin harrison, indiana

    The Committee understands that the Secretary of the Army is 
considering using the existing medical clinic building at Fort 
Benjamin Harrison for a VA-run clinic, to include a family 
practice clinic, a laboratory, a pharmacy and other facilities 
to support all active duty soldiers, military retirees and 
their families. The Committee directs the Secretary to follow 
through with this proposal and report back to the Committee 
within thirty days after enactment of this Act with the status 
of this directive.
                 Base Realignment and Closure, Part III
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation........................\1\ $2,322,858,000
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................   2,148,480,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................   2,148,480,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................    -174,378,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................               0

\1\ Excludes rescission of $32,000,000 enacted in P.L. 104-6, and 
excludes transfer of $133,000,000 from ``Homeowners Assistance Fund, 
Defense''.

    The Committee recommends a total of $2,148,480,000 for Base 
Realignment and Closure, Part III for fiscal year 1996. This is 
equal to the budget request for fiscal year 1996 and a decrease 
of $174,378,000 below the amount appropriated for fiscal year 
1995. Below is the recommended distribution of funds as 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
requested:

        Activity                                             Recommended
Military Construction...................................    $828,200,000
Family Housing..........................................      48,700,000
Environmental...........................................     232,300,000
Operation and Maintenance...............................     921,000,000
Military Personnel (PCS)................................      24,900,000
Other...................................................      93,380,000
Revenues................................................               0
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................   2,148,480,000
                 Base Realignment and Closure, Part IV
Fiscal year 1995 appropriation..........................               0
Fiscal year 1996 estimate...............................    $784,569,000
Committee recommendation in the bill....................     784,569,000
Comparison with:
    Fiscal year 1995 appropriation......................    +784,569,000
    Fiscal year 1996 estimate...........................               0

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $784,569,000 
for Base Realignment and Closure, Part IV for fiscal year 1996 
provided that such funds will be available for construction 
only to the extent an official budget justification is 
submitted to the Committees on Appropriations, and that such 
funds are available solely for approved 1995 base realignments 
and closures.
    The Committee notes that the budget estimate was derived in 
a notional manner. To date, the Department has not indicated 
how these funds will be distributed except that a portion of 
the funds will be used for site surveys and for planning and 
design. Therefore, the Committee directs that no funds be 
obligated except for site surveys and for planning and design 
until the Committees on Appropriations have been provided with 
a five year program for executing the 1995 base realignment and 
closure plan with justifications (Form 1391) for fiscal year 
1996 funds. This five year program shall include planned fiscal 
year 1996 expenditures for environmental restoration.
                           General Provisions

    The bill carries a number of routine General Provisions 
that have been included for several years.
    The Committee recommends three General Provisions which 
have not been included heretofore as follows:
    Section 123. This section provides transfer authority among 
the Homeowners Assistance Fund and the Base Realignment and 
Closure Accounts. The Committee directs that any exercise of 
this authority must fall under the Committee's standing 
procedures for approval of reprogramming requests.
    Section 124. This section requires the Army to use George 
Air Force Base as the interim airhead for the National Training 
Center at Fort Irwin until Barstow-Daggett reaches Initial 
Operational Capability as the permanent airhead.
    Section 125. This section requires the Army to convey a 
portion of the former Fort Sheridan, Illinois to the Lake 
County Forest Preserve District, in consideration for which the 
District shall provide maintenance and care to the remaining 
Fort Sheridan cemetery. This section also permits the Army to 
convey remaining surplus property at the former Fort Sheridan 
to the Fort Sheridan Joint Planning Committee or its successor, 
for fair market value.

                 Changes in Application of Existing Law

    Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of 
Representatives, the following statements are submitted 
describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill 
which directly or indirectly change the application of existing 
law.
    Language is included in various parts of the bill to 
continue on-going activities which require annual authorization 
or additional legislation, which to date has not been enacted.
    The bill includes a number of provisions which place 
limitations on the use of funds in the bill or change existing 
limitations and which might, under some circumstances, be 
construed as changing the application of existing law.
    The bill provides that appropriations shall remain 
available for more than one year for some programs for which 
the basic authorizing legislation does not presently authorize 
such extended availability.
    A provision of the ``Military Construction, Defense-Wide'' 
account which permits the Secretary of Defense to transfer 
funds to other accounts for military construction or family 
housing.
    A new account has been established, ``Department of Defense 
Family Housing Improvement Fund'', for limited partnership 
arrangements with private developers to provide affordable 
timely housing for service members.
    A provision of the ``Base Realignment and Closure Account, 
Part II'' states that not more than $224,800,000 of the funds 
appropriated shall be available solely for environmental 
restoration.
    A provision of the ``Base Realignment and Closure Account, 
Part III'' states that not more than $232,300,000 of the funds 
appropriated shall be available solely for environmental 
restoration.
    A provision of the ``Base Realignment and Closure Account, 
Part IV'' states that funds will be available for construction 
only to the extent detailed budget justification is transmitted 
to the Committees on Appropriations.
    A provision of the ``Base Realignment and Closure Account, 
Part IV'' states that funds are available solely for the 
approved 1995 base realignments and closures.
    Section 101 of the General Provisions states that none of 
the funds appropriated in Military Construction Appropriations 
Acts shall be expended for payments under a cost-plus-a-fixed-
fee contract for work, where cost estimates exceed $25,000, to 
be performed within the United States, except Alaska, without 
the specific approval in writing of the Secretary of Defense, 
except in the case of contracts for environmental restoration 
at base closure sites.
    Section 102 of the General Provisions permits use of funds 
for hire of passenger motor vehicles.
    Section 103 of the General Provisions permits use of funds 
for Defense Access Roads.
    Section 104 of the General Provisions prohibits 
construction of new bases inside the continental United States 
for which specific appropriations have not been made.
    Section 105 of the General Provisions limits the use of 
funds for purchase of land or land easements.
    Section 106 of the General Provisions prohibits the use of 
funds to acquire land, prepare a site, or install utilities for 
any family housing except housing for which funds have been 
made available.
    Section 107 of the General Provisions limits the use of 
minor construction funds to transfer or relocate activities 
among installations.
    Section 108 of the General Provisions prohibits the 
procurement of steel unless American producers, fabricators, 
and manufacturers have been allowed to compete.
    Section 109 of the General Provisions prohibits payment of 
real property taxes in foreign nations.
    Section 110 of the General Provisions prohibits 
construction of new bases overseas without prior notification.
    Section 111 of the General Provisions establishes a 
threshold for American preference of $500,000 relating to 
architect and engineer services in Japan, in any NATO member 
country, and in the Arabian Gulf.
    Section 112 of the General Provisions establishes 
preference for American contractors for military construction 
in the United States territories and possessions in the Pacific 
and on Kwajalein Atoll, or in the Arabian Gulf.
    Section 113 of the General Provisions requires the 
Secretary of Defense to give prior notice to Congress of 
military exercises involving construction in excess of 
$100,000.
    Section 114 of the General Provisions limits obligations 
during the last two months of the fiscal year.
    Section 115 of the General Provisions permits funds 
appropriated in prior years to be available for construction 
authorized during the current session of Congress.
    Section 116 of the General Provisions permits the use of 
expired or lapsed funds to pay the cost of supervision for any 
project being completed with lapsed funds.
    Section 117 of the General Provisions permits obligation of 
funds from more than one fiscal year to execute a construction 
project, provided that the total obligation for such project is 
consistent with the total amount appropriated for the project.
    Section 118 of the General Provisions allows expired funds 
to be transferred to the ``Foreign Currency Fluctuations, 
Construction, Defense'' account.
    Section 119 of the General Provisions directs the Secretary 
of Defense to report annually regarding the specific actions to 
be taken during the current fiscal year to encourage other 
member nations of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, 
Japan, Korea, and United States allies in the Arabian Gulf to 
assume a greater share of the common defense burden.
    Section 120 of the General Provisions allows transfer of 
proceeds from ``Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part I'' 
to the continuing Base Realignment and Closure accounts.
    Section 121 of the General Provisions prohibits expenditure 
of funds except in compliance with the Buy American Act.
    Section 122 of the General Provisions states the Sense of 
the Congress notifying recipients of equipment or products 
authorized to be purchased with financial assistance provided 
in this Act to purchase American-made equipment and products.
    Section 123 of the General Provisions permits the transfer 
of funds among the ``Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense'' and 
the Base Realignment and Closure accounts.
    Section 124 of the General Provisions directs the Army to 
use George AFB as the interim airhead for the National Training 
Center at Fort Irwin until Barstow-Daggett reaches Initial 
Operational Capability as the permanent airhead.
    Section 125 of the General Provisions requires the Army to 
convey a portion of the former Fort Sheridan, Illinois to the 
Lake County Forest Preserve District, in consideration for 
which the District shall provide maintenance and care to the 
remaining Fort Sheridan cemetery. This section also permits the 
Army to convey remaining surplus property at the former Fort 
Sheridan to the Fort Sheridan Joint Planning Committee or its 
successor, for fair market value.
    The Committee recommends deleting the following General 
Provisions which were included in the fiscal year 1995 Military 
Construction Appropriations Act (P.L. 103-307), because these 
provisions are no longer required [section numbers refer to 
P.L. 103-307]:
    Section 114, regarding Family Housing Management Account 
transfers.
    Section 122, regarding supplemental appropriations act 
provisions for Guam earthquake.
    Section 123, regarding cancellation of budgetary resources 
based on procurement reform.
    Section 126, regarding fraudulent use of ``made in 
America'' labels.
    Section 127, regarding Naval Reserve Center land 
conveyance.
    Section 128, regarding Army research facility land 
conveyance.

                  Compliance With Rule XIII--Clause 3
    In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the House of 
Representatives, the Committee reports that it recommends no 
changes in existing law made by the bill, as reported.
                  Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

    Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of 
Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations 
in the accompanying bill which are not authorized by law:
    Military Construction, Army
    Military Construction, Navy
    Military Construction, Air Force
    Military Construction, Defense-Wide
    Military Construction, Army National Guard
    Military Construction, Air National Guard
    Military Construction, Army Reserve
    Military Construction, Naval Reserve
    Military Construction, Air Force Reserve
    North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment 
Program
    Family Housing, Construction, Army
    Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Army
    Family Housing, Construction, Navy and Marine Corps
    Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Navy and Marine 
Corps
    Family Housing, Construction, Air Force
    Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
    Family Housing, Construction, Defense-Wide
    Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
    Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund
    Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense
    Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part II
    Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part III
    Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part IV

    The Committee notes that authorization for appropriations 
in this bill is contained in H.R. 1530, reported by the 
National Security Committee on May 24, 1995. It is anticipated 
the authorization will be enacted into law later this year.

                           Transfer of Funds

    Pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule X of the House of 
Representatives, a statement is required describing the 
transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill. Sections 
115, 118, 120, and 123 of the General Provisions, and language 
included under ``Military Construction, Defense-Wide'' and 
``Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund'' 
provide certain transfer authority.

                          Rescission of Funds

    In compliance with clause 1(b) of rule X of the House of 
Representatives, the Committee reports that it recommends no 
rescissions in the bill, as reported.

                     Inflationary Impact Statement

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the House of 
Representatives, the Committee estimates that enactment of this 
bill would have no overall inflationary impact on prices and 
costs in the operation of the national economy.

                   Comparisons With Budget Resolution

    Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and 
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as 
amended, requires that the report accompanying a bill providing 
new budget authority contain a statement detailing how that 
authority compares with the reports submitted under section 
602(b) of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent 
resolution on the budget for the fiscal year. This information 
follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                602(b) Allocation                         This bill             
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Budget authority       Outlays        Budget authority       Outlays     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary.......................            $11,198             $9,613            $11,198             $9,613
Mandatory...........................                  0                  0                  0                  0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       Advance Spending Authority

    This bill provides no advance spending authority.

                    Five-Year Projection of Outlays

    In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the 
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 
(Public Law 93-344), as amended, the following information was 
provided to the Committee by the Congressional Budget Office:
                        [In thousands of dollars]

Budget authority, fiscal year 1996......................     $11,197,995
Outlays:
    1996................................................       3,126,178
    1997................................................       3,287,378
    1998................................................       2,157,623
    1999................................................       1,404,004
    2000 and beyond.....................................       1,222,812

    The bill will not affect the levels of revenues, tax 
expenditures, direct loan obligations, or primary loan 
guarantee commitments under existing law.

          Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments

    In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(D) of Public Law 93-
344, the new budget authority and outlays provided by the 
accompanying bill for financial assistance to State and local 
governments are as follows:
                        [In millions of dollars]

New budget authority....................................               0
Fiscal year 1996 outlays resulting therefrom............               0
                               State List

    The following is a complete listing, by State and country, 
of the Committee's recommendations for military construction 
and family housing projects: