[House Report 105-133]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
105th Congress Rept. 105-133
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session Part 1
_______________________________________________________________________
DEFENSE REFORM ACT OF 1997
_______
R E P O R T
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ON
H.R. 1778
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
June 17, 1997.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY
One Hundred Fifth Congress
FLOYD D. SPENCE, South Carolina, Chairman
BOB STUMP, Arizona RONALD V. DELLUMS, California
DUNCAN HUNTER, California IKE SKELTON, Missouri
JOHN R. KASICH, Ohio NORMAN SISISKY, Virginia
HERBERT H. BATEMAN, Virginia JOHN M. SPRATT, Jr., South
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah Carolina
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado OWEN PICKETT, Virginia
JIM SAXTON, New Jersey LANE EVANS, Illinois
STEVE BUYER, Indiana GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi
TILLIE K. FOWLER, Florida NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts
JAMES TALENT, Missouri ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
TERRY EVERETT, Alabama JANE HARMAN, California
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland PAUL McHALE, Pennsylvania
HOWARD ``BUCK'' McKEON, California PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
RON LEWIS, Kentucky ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
J.C. WATTS, Jr., Oklahoma SILVESTRE REYES, Texas
MAC THORNBERRY, Texas TOM ALLEN, Maine
JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana VIC SNYDER, Arkansas
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia JIM TURNER, Texas
VAN HILLEARY, Tennessee F. ALLEN BOYD, Jr., Florida
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida ADAM SMITH, Washington
WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North LORETTA SANCHEZ, California
Carolina JAMES H. MALONEY, Connecticut
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
SONNY BONO, California CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas
JIM RYUN, Kansas
MICHAEL PAPPAS, New Jersey
BOB RILEY, Alabama
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada
Andrew K. Ellis, Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
PURPOSE AND SUMMARY.............................................. 25
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY-............................................. 26
EXPLANATION OF THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENT........................... 26
PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND......................................... 26
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS-..................................... 28
TITLE I--DEFENSE PERSONNEL REFORMS............................... 28
Section 101--Reduction in Personnel Assigned to Management
Headquarters and Headquarters Support Activities......... 28
Section 102--Additional Reduction in Defense Acquisition
Workforce................................................ 29
Section 103--Change in Required Reduction in Annuity for
Certain Defense Acquisition Personnel Who Are Separated
Before Age 55............................................ 30
Section 104--Separation Pay for Defense Acquisition
Personnel................................................ 31
Section 105--Personnel Reductions in United States
Transportation Command-.................................. 31
TITLE II--DEFENSE BUSINESS PRACTICE REFORMS...................... 32
Subtitle A--Competitive Procurement Requirements............. 32
Section 201--Competitive Procurement of Finance and
Accounting Services-..................................... 32
Section 202--Competitive Procurement of Services to Dispose
of Surplus Defense Property.............................. 32
Section 203--Competitive Procurement of Functions Performed
by Defense Information Systems Agency.................... 32
Section 204--Competitive Procurement of Printing and
Duplication Services-.................................... 33
Section 205--Competitive Procurement of Certain Ophthalmic
Services................................................. 33
Section 206--Increased Use by Defense Agencies of
Contractors to Perform Commercial and Industrial Type
Functions................................................ 33
Subtitle B--Reform of Conversion Process..................... 34
Section 211--Development of Standard Forms Regarding
Performance Work Statement and Request for Proposal for
Conversion of Certain Operational Functions of Military
Installations............................................ 34
Section 212--Study and Notification Requirements for
Conversion of Commercial and Industrial Type Functions to
Contractor Performance................................... 35
Section 213--Collection and Retention of Cost Information
Data on Contracted Out Services and Functions............ 35
Subtitle C--Other Reforms.................................... 35
Section 221--Reduction in Overhead Costs of Inventory
Control Points-.......................................... 35
Section 222--Consolidation of Procurement Technical
Assistance and Electronic Commerce Technical Assistance.. 36
Section 223--Permanent Authority Regarding Conveyance of
Utility Systems-......................................... 37
TITLE III--DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL REFORMS......................... 37
Subtitle A--Superfund Reforms Generally...................... 37
Section 301--Revision of Methods of Remediation............ 37
Section 302--Requirement to Consider Reasonably Anticipated
Future Land Use.......................................... 37
Section 303--Limitation on Criminal Liability of Federal
Officers, Employees and Agents........................... 38
Section 304--State Role at Federal Facilities.............. 38
Subtitle B--Superfund and Other Environmental Law Reforms
Applicable to Department of Defense or Department of Energy 38
Section 311--Standards for Remedial Actions Conducted at
Defense Facilities Not on the National Priorities List... 38
Section 312--Authority of Secretary of Defense and
Secretary of Energy to Terminate Long-Term Operation and
Maintenance of Remedial Actions and Corrective Actions... 39
Section 313--Notification to Congress of Costs of
Department of Energy Environmental Compliance Agreements. 39
Section 314--Clean Air Act Standards for Military Sources.. 39
Section 315--Authority of Administrator of Environmental
Protection Agency with Respect to Application of Solid
Waste Disposal Act to Military Munitions................. 39
TITLE IV--MISCELLANEOUS ADDITIONAL DEFENSE REFORMS............... 40
Section 401--Long-Term Charter Contracts for Acquisition of
Auxiliary Vessels for the Department of Defense.......... 40
Section 402--Fiber Optics Based Telecommunications Linkage
of Military Installations................................ 40
Section 403--Repeal of Requirement For Contractor
Guarantees on Major Weapon Systems....................... 41
Section 404--Requirements Relating to Micro-Purchases of
Commercial Items-........................................ 41
Section 405--Availability of Simplified Procedures to
Commercial Item Procurements............................. 42
Section 406--Termination of the Armed Services Patent
Advisory Board-.......................................... 42
Section 407--Coordination of Department of Defense Criminal
Investigations and Audits................................ 43
Section 408--Department of Defense Boards, Commissions, and
Advisory Committees...................................... 43
TITLE V--COMMISSION ON DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND STREAMLINING-.... 44
OVERVIEW....................................................... 44
Section 501--Establishment of Commission................... 45
Section 502--Duties of Commission.......................... 45
Section 503--Reports-...................................... 46
Section 504--Powers........................................ 46
Section 505--Commission Procedures......................... 46
Section 506--Personnel Matters............................. 46
Section 507--Miscellaneous Administrative Provisions-...... 46
Section 508--Funding-...................................... 46
Section 509--Termination of the Commission................. 46
COMMITTEE POSITION............................................... 47
FISCAL DATA-..................................................... 47
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE........................... 47
COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE........................................ 53
INFLATION IMPACT STATEMENT..................................... 53
OVERSIGHT FINDINGS............................................... 53
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT............................... 54
STATEMENT OF FEDERAL MANDATES.................................... 54
ROLL CALL VOTE................................................... 54
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED............ 56
DISSENTING VIEWS OF RONALD V. DELLUMS............................ 89
105th Congress Rept. 105-133
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session Part 1
_______________________________________________________________________
DEFENSE REFORM ACT OF 1997
_______
June 17, 1997.--Ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Spence, from the Committee on National Security, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 1778]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on National Security, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 1778) to reform the Department of Defense, having
considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment
and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu
thereof the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Defense Reform Act
of 1997''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act is as
follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Congressional defense committees defined.
TITLE I--DEFENSE PERSONNEL REFORMS
Sec. 101. Reduction in personnel assigned to management headquarters
and headquarters support activities.
Sec. 102. Additional reduction in defense acquisition workforce.
Sec. 103. Change in required reduction in annuity for certain defense
acquisition personnel who are separated before age 55.
Sec. 104. Separation pay for defense acquisition personnel.
Sec. 105. Personnel reductions in United States Transportation Command.
TITLE II--DEFENSE BUSINESS PRACTICES REFORMS
Subtitle A--Competitive Procurement Requirements
Sec. 201. Competitive procurement of finance and accounting services.
Sec. 202. Competitive procurement of services to dispose of surplus
defense property.
Sec. 203. Competitive procurement of functions performed by Defense
Information Systems Agency.
Sec. 204. Competitive procurement of printing and duplication services.
Sec. 205. Competitive procurement of certain ophthalmic services.
Sec. 206. Increased use by Defense Agencies of contractors to perform
commercial and industrial type functions.
Subtitle B--Reform of Conversion Process
Sec. 211. Development of standard forms regarding performance work
statement and request for proposal for conversion of certain
operational functions of military installations.
Sec. 212. Study and notification requirements for conversion of
commercial and industrial type functions to contractor performance.
Sec. 213. Collection and retention of cost information data on
contracted out services and functions.
Subtitle C--Other Reforms
Sec. 221. Reduction in overhead costs of Inventory Control Points.
Sec. 222. Consolidation of procurement technical assistance and
electronic commerce technical assistance.
Sec. 223. Permanent authority regarding conveyance of utility systems.
TITLE III--DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL REFORMS
Subtitle A--Superfund Reforms Generally
Sec. 301. Revision of methods of remediation.
Sec. 302. Requirement to consider reasonably anticipated future land
use.
Sec. 303. Limitation on criminal liability of Federal officers,
employees, and agents.
Sec. 304. State role at Federal facilities.
Subtitle B--Superfund and Other Environmental Law Reforms Applicable to
Department of Defense or Department of Energy
Sec. 311. Standards for remedial actions conducted at defense
facilities not on the National Priorities List.
Sec. 312. Authority of Secretary of Defense and Secretary of Energy to
terminate long-term operation and maintenance of remedial actions and
corrective actions.
Sec. 313. Notification to Congress of costs of Department of Energy
environmental compliance agreements.
Sec. 314. Clean Air Act standards for military sources.
Sec. 315. Authority of Administrator of Environmental Protection Agency
with respect to application of Solid Waste Disposal Act to military
munitions.
TITLE IV--MISCELLANEOUS ADDITIONAL DEFENSE REFORMS
Sec. 401. Long-term charter contracts for acquisition of auxiliary
vessels for the Department of Defense.
Sec. 402. Fiber-optics based telecommunications linkage of military
installations.
Sec. 403. Repeal of requirement for contractor guarantees on major
weapon systems.
Sec. 404. Requirements relating to micro-purchases of commercial items.
Sec. 405. Availability of simplified procedures to commercial item
procurements.
Sec. 406. Termination of the Armed Services Patent Advisory Board.
Sec. 407. Coordination of Department of Defense criminal investigations
and audits.
Sec. 408. Department of Defense boards, commissions, and advisory
committees.
TITLE V--COMMISSION ON DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND STREAMLINING
Sec. 501. Establishment of Commission.
Sec. 502. Duties of Commission.
Sec. 503. Reports.
Sec. 504. Powers.
Sec. 505. Commission procedures.
Sec. 506. Personnel matters.
Sec. 507. Miscellaneous administrative provisions.
Sec. 508. Funding.
Sec. 509. Termination of the Commission.
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL DEFENSE COMMITTEES DEFINED.
For purposes of this Act, the term ``congressional defense
committees'' means--
(1) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on
Appropriations of the Senate; and
(2) the Committee on National Security and the Committee on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives.
TITLE I--DEFENSE PERSONNEL REFORMS
SEC. 101. REDUCTION IN PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS
AND HEADQUARTERS SUPPORT ACTIVITIES.
(a) In General.--(1) Chapter 3 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new section:
``Sec. 130a. Management headquarters and headquarters support
activities personnel: limitation
``(a) Limitation.--Effective October 1, 2001, the number of
management headquarters and headquarters support activities personnel
in the Department of Defense may not exceed the 75 percent of the
baseline number.
``(b) Phased Reduction.--The number of management headquarters and
headquarters support activities personnel in the Department of
Defense--
``(1) as of October 1, 1998, may not exceed 90 percent of the
baseline number;
``(2) as of October 1, 1999, may not exceed 85 percent of the
baseline number; and
``(3) as of October 1, 2000, may not exceed 80 percent of the
baseline number.
``(c) Baseline Number.--In this section, the term `baseline number'
means the number of management headquarters and headquarters support
activities personnel in the Department of Defense as of October 1,
1997.
``(d) Management Headquarters and Headquarters Support Activities
Personnel Defined.--In this section:
``(1) The term `management headquarters and headquarters
support activities personnel' means military and civilian
personnel of the Department of Defense who are assigned to, or
employed in, functions in management headquarters activities or
in management headquarters support activities.
``(2) The terms `management headquarters activities' and
`management headquarters support activities' have the meanings
given those terms in Department of Defense Directive 5100.73,
entitled `Department of Defense Management Headquarters and
Headquarters Support Activities', as in effect on November 12,
1996.
``(e) Limitation on Reassignment of Functions.--In carrying out
reductions in the number of personnel assigned to, or employed in,
management headquarters and headquarters support activities in order to
comply with this section, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries
of the military departments may not reassign functions in order to
evade the requirements of this section.
``(f) Flexibility.--If the Secretary of Defense determines, and
certifies to Congress, that the limitation in subsection (b) with
respect to any fiscal year would adversely affect United States
national security, the Secretary may waive the limitation under that
subsection with respect to that fiscal year. If the Secretary of
Defense determines, and certifies to Congress, that the limitation in
subsection (a) during fiscal year 2001 would adversely affect United
States national security, the Secretary may waive the limitation under
that subsection with respect to that fiscal year. The authority under
this subsection may be used only once, with respect to a single fiscal
year.''.
(2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is amended
by adding at the end the following new item:
``130a. Management headquarters and headquarters support activities
personnel: limitation.''.
(b) Implementation Report.--Not later than January 15, 1998, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report--
(1) containing a plan to achieve the personnel reductions
required by section 130a of title 10, United States Code, as
added by subsection (a); and
(2) including the recommendations of the Secretary
regarding--
(A) the revision, replacement, or augmentation of
Department of Defense Directive 5100.73, entitled
``Department of Defense Management Headquarters and
Headquarters Support Activities'', as in effect on
November 12, 1996; and
(B) the revision of the definitions of the terms
``management headquarters activities'' and ``management
headquarters support activities'' under that Directive
so that those terms apply uniformly throughout the
Department of Defense.
(c) Codification of Prior Permanent Limitation on OSD Personnel.--(1)
Chapter 4 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the
end a new section 143 consisting of--
(A) a heading as follows:
``Sec. 143. Office of the Secretary of Defense personnel: limitation'';
and
(B) a text consisting of the text of subsections (a) through
(f) of section 903 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2617).
(2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is amended
by adding at the end the following new item:
``143. Office of the Secretary of Defense personnel: limitation.''.
(3) Section 903 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2617) is repealed.
SEC. 102. ADDITIONAL REDUCTION IN DEFENSE ACQUISITION WORKFORCE.
(a) In General.--(1) Chapter 87 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new section:
``Sec. 1765. Limitations on number of personnel
``(a) Limitation.--Effective October 1, 2001, the number of defense
acquisition personnel may not exceed the baseline number reduced by
124,000.
``(b) Phased Reduction.--The number of the number of defense
acquisition personnel--
``(1) as of October 1, 1998, may not exceed the baseline
number reduced by 40,000;
``(2) as of October 1, 1999, may not exceed the baseline
number reduced by 80,000; and
``(3) as of October 1, 2000, may not exceed the baseline
number reduced by 102,000.
``(c) Baseline Number.--For purposes of this section, the baseline
number is the total number of defense acquisition personnel as of
October 1, 1997.
``(d) Defense Acquisition Personnel Defined.--(1) In this section,
the term `defense acquisition personnel' means military and civilian
personnel (other than civilian personnel described in paragraph (2))
who are assigned to, or employed in, acquisition organizations of the
Department of Defense (as specified in Department of Defense
Instruction numbered 5000.58 dated January 14, 1992).
``(2) Such term does not include civilian employees of the Department
of Defense who are employed at a maintenance depot.''.
(2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is amended
by adding at the end the following new item:
``1765. Limitations on number of personnel.''.
(b) Implementation Report.--Not later than January 15, 1998, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report--
(1) containing a plan to achieve the personnel reductions
required by section 1765 of title 10, United States Code, as
added by subsection (a); and
(2) containing any recommendations (including legislative
proposals) that the Secretary considers necessary to fully
achieve such reductions.
(c) Technical Reference Correction.--Section 1721(c) of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by striking out ``November 25, 1988''
and inserting in lieu thereof ``November 12, 1996''.
SEC. 103. CHANGE IN REQUIRED REDUCTION IN ANNUITY FOR CERTAIN DEFENSE
ACQUISITION PERSONNEL WHO ARE SEPARATED BEFORE AGE
55.
(a) Alternative Reduction.--In the case of a civilian employee of the
Department of Defense described in subsection (b) who is separated
during fiscal year 1998 in the manner described in section 8336(d) of
title 5, United States Code, the resulting reduction in annuity
required to be made under section 8339(h) of such title shall be \1/12\
of 1 percent for each full month the employee is under 55 years of age
at the date of separation (rather than \1/6\ of 1 percent).
(b) Eligible Defense Acquisition Personnel.--A civilian employee of
the Department of Defense referred to in subsection (a) is a civilian
employee who, as of the date of separation--
(1) is covered by the definition of ``defense acquisition
personnel'' in section 1765(d) of title 10, United States Code,
as added by section 102;
(2) is serving in grade GS-13 of the General Schedule or
above; and
(3) is 50 years of age or older.
(c) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply if the civilian
employee accepts separation pay--
(1) under section 5597 of title 5, United States Code; or
(2) under section 104.
(d) Reporting Requirements.--(1) Not later than March 31, 1998, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report specifying--
(A) the number of civilian employees of the Department of
Defense (by age and grade) who have received the alternative
annuity reduction authorized by this section; and
(B) the anticipated number of such employees who will receive
the alternative annuity reduction during fiscal year 1998.
(2) Not later than December 1, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to Congress a final report covering fiscal year 1998 and
containing the information required by paragraph (1)(A).
SEC. 104. SEPARATION PAY FOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION PERSONNEL.
(a) Availability of Separation Pay.--The Secretary of Defense may
offer separation pay under this section to a civilian employee of the
Department of Defense who--
(1) is covered by the definition of ``defense acquisition
personnel'' in section 1765(d) of title 10, United States Code,
as added by section 102;
(2) is separated during fiscal year 1998 in the manner
described in section 8336(d) of title 5, United States Code;
and
(3) does not receive separation pay under the authority of
section 5597 of title 5, United States Code.
(b) Payment, Amount, and Terms.--Subsections (d) and (g) of section
5597 of title 5, United States Code, shall apply with respect to the
manner in which, the amount of, and terms under which separation pay is
provided under this section.
(c) Effect on Other Separation Pay Authority.--The authority provided
in this section may not be used to reduce the extent to which
separation pay is provided during fiscal year 1998 under section 5597
of title 5, United States Code, as proposed in the budget of the
President for fiscal year 1998 submitted to Congress pursuant to
section 1105 of title 31, United States Code.
(d) Relationship to Other Special Authority.--A civilian employee who
receives separation pay under this section may not also receive a
change under section 103 in the reduction otherwise made to the
employee's annuity under section 8339(h) of title 5, United States
Code.
(e) Report.--In the report required for fiscal year 1998 under
section 4436(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484; 5 U.S.C. 5597 note), the Secretary of
Defense shall include, as a separate portion of the report, information
on the manner in which the authority provided in this section was
implemented and the effectiveness and costs of carrying out the
authority.
SEC. 105. PERSONNEL REDUCTIONS IN UNITED STATES TRANSPORTATION COMMAND.
(a) Purpose of Limitation.--The purpose of the limitation on the
number of United States Transportation Command personnel established by
section 165(d) of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection
(b), is to recognize and continue the effort of the Secretary of
Defense to eliminate administrative duplication and inefficiencies in
the United States Transportation Command.
(b) Limitation.--Section 165 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) Limitation on United States Transportation Command Personnel.--
(1) Effective October 1, 1998, the number of United States
Transportation Command personnel may not exceed 66,238.
``(2) In this subsection, the term `United States Transportation
Command personnel' means military and civilian personnel who are
assigned to, or employed in, the United States Transportation Command
(including the components of that combatant command).''.
(c) Source of Reductions.--(1) In reducing the number of United
States Transportation Command personnel in order to meet the limitation
required by section 165(d) of title 10, United States Code, as added by
subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense shall limit such reductions to
United States Transportation Command personnel described in paragraph
(2).
(2) The United States Transportation Command personnel referred to in
paragraph (1) are members of the Armed Forces and civilian personnel of
the Department of Defense who are assigned to, or employed in, the
United States Transportation Command (including the components of that
combatant command) and who are in one of the following occupational
classifications established to group similar occupations and work
positions into a consistent structure:
(A) Enlisted members in the Functional Support and
Administration classification (designated as occupational code
5XX), as described in Department of Defense Instruction 1312.1,
dated August 9, 1995, regarding ``Department of Defense
Occupational Information Collection and Reporting''.
(B) Officers in the General Officers and Executives
classification (designated as occupational code 1XX),
Administrators (designated as occupational code 7XX), and
Supply, Procurement, and Allied Officers classification
(designated as occupational code 8XX), as described in such
instruction.
(C) Civilian personnel in the Program Management
classification (designated as occupational code GS-0340),
Accounting and Budget classification (designated as
occupational code GS-0500 and related codes), Business and
Industry classification (designated as occupational code GS-
1100 and related codes), and Supply classification (designated
as occupational code GS-2000 and related codes), as described
in Office of Personnel Management document El-12, dated
November 1, 1995, entitled ``Federal Occupational Groups''.
TITLE II--DEFENSE BUSINESS PRACTICES REFORMS
Subtitle A--Competitive Procurement Requirements
SEC. 201. COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT OF FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICES.
(a) Competitive Procurement Required.--Chapter 165 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
``Sec. 2784. Competitive procurement of finance and accounting services
``(a) Competitive Procurement Required.--Beginning not later than
October 1, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall competitively procure
finance and accounting services for the Department of Defense,
including nonappropriated fund instrumentalities of the Department of
Defense. The Secretary shall establish procedures to conduct
competitions among private-sector sources and the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service and other interested Federal agencies. Such
procedures shall not permit a component of the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service to compete against any other component of the
Defense Finance and Accounting Service to provide such finance and
accounting services.
``(b) Improvement of Competitive Ability.--Before conducting a
competition under subsection (a) for the procurement of finance and
accounting services that are being provided by a component of the
Defense Finance and Accounting Service, the Secretary of Defense shall
provide the component with an opportunity to establish its most
efficient organization.
``(c) Reporting Requirements.--Not later than 90 days after the end
of each fiscal year in which finance and accounting services are
competitively procured under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense
shall submit to Congress a report specifying the total volume of
finance and accounting services procured by the Department of Defense
during that fiscal year--
``(1) from sources within the Department of Defense;
``(2) from private-sector sources; and
``(3) from other sources in the Federal Government.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of
such chapter is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
``2784. Competitive procurement of finance and accounting services.''.
SEC. 202. COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT OF SERVICES TO DISPOSE OF SURPLUS
DEFENSE PROPERTY.
(a) Competitive Procurement Required.--(1) Chapter 153 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 2572 the
following new section:
``Sec. 2573. Competitive procurement of services to dispose of surplus
property
``(a) Competitive Procurement of Services.--Beginning not later than
October 1, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall competitively procure
services for the Department of Defense in connection with the disposal
of surplus property at each site at which the Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service operates. The Secretary shall establish procedures to
conduct competitions among private-sector sources and the Defense
Reutilization and Marketing Service and other interested Federal
agencies for the performance of all such services at a particular site.
``(b) Improvement of Competitive Ability.--Before conducting a
competition under subsection (a) for the procurement of services
described in such subsection that are being provided by a component of
the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service, the Secretary of
Defense shall provide the component with an opportunity to establish
its most efficient organization.
``(c) Reporting Requirements.--Not later than 90 days after the end
of each fiscal year in which services for the disposal of surplus
property are competitively procured under subsection (a), the Secretary
of Defense shall submit to Congress a report specifying--
``(1) the type and volume of such services procured by the
Department of Defense during that fiscal year from the Defense
Reutilization and Marketing Service and from other sources;
``(2) the former sites of the Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service operated during that fiscal year by
contractors (other than the Defense Reutilization and Marketing
Service); and
``(3) the total amount of any fees paid by such contractors
in connection with the performance of such services during that
fiscal year.
``(d) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to alter the requirements regarding the identification or
demilitarization of an item of excess property or surplus property of
the Department of Defense before the disposal of the item.
``(e) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `surplus property' means any personal excess
property which is not required for the needs and the discharge
of the responsibilities of all Federal agencies and the
disposal of which is the responsibility of the Department of
Defense.
``(2) The term `excess property' means any personal property
under the control of the Department of Defense which is not
required for its needs and the discharge of its
responsibilities, as determined by the Secretary of Defense.''.
(2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is amended
by inserting after the item relating to section 2572 the following new
item:
``2573. Competitive procurement of services to dispose of surplus
property.''.
(b) Implementation Report.--Not later than March 1, 1998, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report--
(1) containing a plan to implement the competitive
procurement requirements of section 2573 of title 10, United
States Code, as added by subsection (a); and
(2) identifying other functions of the Defense Reutilization
and Marketing Service that the Secretary considers suitable for
performance by private-sector sources.
SEC. 203. COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT OF FUNCTIONS PERFORMED BY DEFENSE
INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY.
(a) Competitive Procurement Required.--(1) Chapter 146 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
``Sec. 2474. Competitive procurement of information services
``(a) Competitive Procurement Required.--Beginning not later than
October 1, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall competitively procure
those commercial and industrial type functions performed before that
date by the Defense Information Systems Agency. The Secretary shall
establish procedures to conduct competitions among private-sector
sources and the Defense Information Systems Agency and other interested
Federal agencies.
``(b) Improvement of Competitive Ability.--Before conducting a
competition under subsection (a) for the procurement of information
services that are being provided by a component of the Defense
Information Systems Agency, the Secretary of Defense shall provide the
component with an opportunity to establish its most efficient
organization.
``(c) Exception for Classified Functions.--(1) The requirement of
subsection (a) shall not apply to the procurement of services involving
a classified function performed by the Defense Information Systems
Agency.
``(2) In this subsection, the term `classified function' means any
telecommunications or information services that--
``(A) involve intelligence activities;
``(B) involve cryptologic activities related to national
security;
``(C) involve command and control of military forces;
``(D) involve equipment that is an integral part of a weapon
or weapons system; or
``(E) are critical to the direct fulfillment of military or
intelligence missions (other than routine administrative and
business applications, such as payroll, finance, logistics, and
personnel management applications).
``(d) Reporting Requirements.--Not later than 90 days after the end
of each fiscal year in which services are competitively procured under
subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a
report specifying the type and volume of such services procured by the
Department of Defense during that fiscal year--
``(1) from sources within the Department of Defense;
``(2) from private-sector sources; and
``(3) from other sources in the Federal Government.''.
(2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is amended
by adding at the end the following new item:
``2474. Competitive procurement of information services.''.
(b) Implementation Report.--Not later than March 1, 1998, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report--
(1) containing a plan to implement the competitive
procurement requirements of section 2474 of title 10, United
States Code, as added by subsection (a);
(2) describing the services currently provided by the Defense
Information Systems Agency that will be affected by such
requirements; and
(3) describing the manner in which the Secretary proposes to
change the support infrastructure of the Defense Information
Systems Agency to meet such requirements.
SEC. 204. COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT OF PRINTING AND DUPLICATION SERVICES.
(a) Extension.--Subsection (a) of section 351 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat.
266) is amended--
(1) by striking out ``and 1997'' and inserting in lieu
thereof ``through 1998''; and
(2) by striking out ``Defense Printing Service'' and
inserting in lieu thereof ``Defense Automation and Printing
Service''.
(b) Prohibition on Surcharge for Services.--Such section is further
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) Prohibition on Imposition of Surcharge.--The Defense Automation
and Printing Service may not impose a surcharge on any printing and
duplication service for the Department of Defense that is procured from
a source outside of the Department.''.
SEC. 205. COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT OF CERTAIN OPHTHALMIC SERVICES.
(a) Competitive Procurement Required.--Beginning not later than
October 1, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall competitively procure
from private-sector sources, or other sources outside of the Department
of Defense, all ophthalmic services related to the provision of single
vision and multivision eyeware for members of the Armed Forces, retired
members, and certain covered beneficiaries under chapter 55 of title
10, United States Code, who would otherwise receive such ophthalmic
services through the Department of Defense.
(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to the extent that the
Secretary of Defense determines that the use of sources within the
Department of Defense to provide such ophthalmic services--
(1) is necessary to meet the readiness requirements of the
Armed Forces; or
(2) is more cost effective.
(c) Completion of Existing Orders.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to
orders for ophthalmic services received on or before September 30,
1998.
SEC. 206. INCREASED USE BY DEFENSE AGENCIES OF CONTRACTORS TO PERFORM
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL TYPE FUNCTIONS.
(a) Increased Use Required.--Section 2461 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following new
subsection:
``(g) Increased Use of Contractors By Defense Agencies.--(1) In each
fiscal year beginning after September 30, 1999, not less than 33
percent of the commercial and industrial type functions of the Defense
Agencies shall be performed by private contractors. The Secretary of
Defense may achieve this goal before that date.
``(2) In this subsection, the term `Defense Agency' means a program
activity specified in the table entitled `Program and Financing' for
operation and maintenance, Defense-wide activities, in the budget of
the President transmitted to Congress for fiscal year 1998 pursuant to
section 1105 of title 31 (and any successor of such activity).''.
(b) Implementation Plan.--Not later than March 1, 1998, the Secretary
of Defense shall submit to Congress a plan to accomplish the increased
rate of outsourcing required by subsection (g) of section 2461 of title
10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a). The plan shall
identify the specific Defense Agency functions to be considered for
contractor performance, the number of military and civilian positions
affected, and relevant milestones for the outsourcing of the identified
functions.
Subtitle B--Reform of Conversion Process
SEC. 211. DEVELOPMENT OF STANDARD FORMS REGARDING PERFORMANCE WORK
STATEMENT AND REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR CONVERSION
OF CERTAIN OPERATIONAL FUNCTIONS OF MILITARY
INSTALLATIONS.
(a) Standard Forms Required.--Chapter 146 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 2474, as added by section
203, the following new section:
``Sec. 2475. Military installations: use of standard forms in
conversion process
``(a) Standardization of Requirements.--(1) The Secretary of Defense
shall develop standard forms (to be known as a `standard performance
work statement' and a `standard request for proposal') to be used in
the consideration for conversion to contractor performance of those
commercial services and functions at military installations that have
been converted to contractor performance at a rate of 50 percent or
more, as determined under subsection (c).
``(2) A separate standard form shall be developed for each service
and function covered by paragraph (1) and the forms shall be used
throughout the Department of Defense in lieu of the performance work
statement and request for proposal otherwise required under the
procedures and requirements of Office of Management and Budget Circular
A-76 (or any successor administrative regulation or policy).
``(3) The Secretary shall develop and implement the standard forms
not later than October 1, 1998.
``(b) Inapplicability of Elements of OMB Circular A-76.--On and after
October 1, 1998, the procedures and requirements of Office of
Management and Budget Circular A-76 regarding performance work
statements and requests for proposals shall not apply with respect to
the conversion to contractor performance at a military installation of
a service or function for which a standard form is required under
subsection (a).
``(c) Determination of Contractor Performance Percentage.--In
determining the percentage at which a particular commercial service or
function at military installations has been converted to contractor
performance, the Secretary of Defense shall take into consideration all
military installations and use the final estimate of the percentage of
contractor performance of services and functions contained in the most
recent commercial and industrial activity inventory database
established under Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76.
``(d) Exclusion of Multi-Function Conversion.--If a commercial
service or function for which a standard form is developed under
subsection (a) is combined with another service or function (for which
such a form is not required) for purposes of considering the services
and functions at the military installation for conversion to contractor
performance, a standard form developed under subsection (a) may not be
used in the conversion process in lieu of the procedures and
requirements of Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 regarding
performance work statements and requests for proposals.
``(e) Effect on Other Laws.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to supersede any other requirements or limitations,
specifically contained in this chapter, on the conversion to contractor
performance of activities performed by civilian employees of the
Department of Defense.
``(f) Military Installation Defined.--In this section, the term
`military installation' means a base, camp, post, station, yard,
center, homeport facility for any ship, or other activity under the
jurisdiction of the Department of Defense, including any leased
facility.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of
such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section
2474, as added by section 203, the following new item:
``2475. Military installations: use of standard forms in conversion
process.''.
SEC. 212. STUDY AND NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR CONVERSION OF
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL TYPE FUNCTIONS TO
CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE.
(a) Notification.--Section 2461 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by striking out subsections (a) and (b) and inserting in lieu
thereof the following new subsections:
``(a) Notification of Conversion Study.--(1) In the case of a
commercial or industrial type function of the Department of Defense
that on October 1, 1980, was being performed by Department of Defense
civilian employees, the Secretary of Defense shall notify Congress of
any decision to study the function for possible conversionto
performance by a private contractor. The notification shall include
information regarding the anticipated length and cost of the study.
``(2) A study of a commercial or industrial type function for
possible conversion to contractor performance shall include the
following:
``(A) A comparison of the performance of the function by
Department of Defense civilian employees and by private
contractor to determine whether contractor performance will
result in savings to the Government over the life of the
contract.
``(B) An examination of the potential economic effect on
employees who would be affected by the conversion, and the
potential economic effect on the local community and the United
States if more than 75 employees perform the function.
``(C) An examination of the effect of contracting for
performance of the function on the military mission of the
function.
``(b) Notification of Conversion Decision.--If, as a result of the
completion of a study under subsection (a) regarding the possible
conversion of a function to performance by a private contractor, a
decision is made to convert the function to contractor performance, the
Secretary of Defense shall notify Congress of the conversion decision.
The notification shall--
``(1) indicate that the study conducted regarding conversion
of the function to performance by a private contractor has been
completed;
``(2) certify that the comparison required by subsection
(a)(2)(A) as part of the study demonstrates that the
performance of the function by a private contractor will result
in savings to the Government over the life of the contract;
``(3) certify that the entire comparison is available for
examination; and
``(4) contain a timetable for completing conversion of the
function to contractor performance.''.
(b) Waiver for Small Functions.--Subsection (d) of such section is
amended by striking out ``45 or fewer'' and inserting in lieu thereof
``20 or fewer''.
SEC. 213. COLLECTION AND RETENTION OF COST INFORMATION DATA ON
CONTRACTED OUT SERVICES AND FUNCTIONS.
(a) Collection and Retention Required.--Section 2463 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (a) and (b) as subsections
(b) and (c), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after the section heading the following new
subsection:
``(a) Requirements in Connection With Conversion to Contractor
Performance.--With respect to each contract converting the performance
of a service or function of the Department of Defense to contractor
performance (and any extension of such a contract), the Secretary of
Defense shall collect, during the term of the contract or extension,
but not to exceed five years, cost information data regarding
performance of the service or function by private contractor employees.
The Secretary shall provide for the permanent retention of information
collected under this subsection.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Such section is further amended--
(1) in subsection (b), as redesignated by subsection (a)(1)--
(A) by striking out the subsection heading and
inserting in lieu thereof ``Requirements in Connection
With Return to Employee Performance.--''; and
(B) by striking out ``to which this section applies''
and inserting in lieu thereof ``described in subsection
(c),''; and
(2) in subsection (c), as redesignated by subsection (a)(1)--
--
(A) by striking out the subsection heading and
inserting in lieu thereof ``Covered Fiscal Years.--'';
and
(B) by striking out ``This section'' and inserting in
lieu thereof ``Subsection (b)''.
(c) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading of such section is amended
to read as follows:
``Sec. 2463. Collection and retention of cost information data on
contracted out services and functions
(2) The item relating to such section in the table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 146 of title 10, United States Code, is amended to
read as follows:
``2463. Collection and retention of cost information data on contracted
out services and functions.''.
Subtitle C--Other Reforms
SEC. 221. REDUCTION IN OVERHEAD COSTS OF INVENTORY CONTROL POINTS.
(a) Reduction in Costs Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall take
such actions as may be necessary to reduce the annual overhead costs of
the supply management activities of the Defense Logistics Agency and
the military departments (known as Inventory Control Points) so that
the annual overhead costs are not more than eight percent of annual net
sales at standard price by the Inventory Control Points.
(b) Time To Achieve Reduction.--The Secretary shall achieve the cost
reductions required by subsection (a) not later than September 30,
2000.
(c) Implementation Plan.--Not later than March 1, 1998, the Secretary
of Defense shall submit to Congress a plan to achieve the reduction in
overhead costs required by subsection (a).
(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
(1) The term ``overhead costs'' means the total expenses of
the Inventory Control Points, excluding--
(A) annual materiel costs; and
(B) military and civilian personnel related costs,
defined as personnel compensation and benefits under
the March 1996 Department of Defense Financial
Management Regulations, Volume 2A, Chapter 1, Budget
Account Title File (Object Classification Name/Code),
object classifications 200, 211, 220, 221, 222, and
301.
(2) The term ``net sales at standard price'' has the meaning
given that term in the March 1996 Department of Defense
Financial Management Regulations, Volume 2B, Chapter 9, and
displayed in ``Exhibit Fund--14 Revenue and Expenses'' for the
supply management business areas.
SEC. 222. CONSOLIDATION OF PROCUREMENT TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND
ELECTRONIC COMMERCE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.
(a) Consolidation of Assistance.--Chapter 142 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended as follows:
(1) Sections 2412, 2414, 2417, and 2418 are each amended by
inserting ``and electronic commerce'' after ``procurement''
each place it appears.
(2) Section 2413 is amended--
(A) in subsection (b), by striking out ``procurement
technical assistance'' and inserting in lieu thereof
``both procurement technical assistance and electronic
commerce technical assistance''; and
(B) in subsection (c), by inserting ``and electronic
commerce'' after ``procurement''.
(b) Requirement To Use Competitive Procedures.--Section 2413 of such
title is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d) The Secretary shall use competitive procedures in entering into
cooperative agreements under subsection (a).''.
(c) Limitation on Use of Funds.--Section 2417 of such title is
amended--
(1) by striking out ``The Director'' and inserting in lieu
thereof the following:
``(b) Administrative Costs.--The Director''; and
(2) by inserting before subsection (b) (as designated by
paragraph (1)) the following:
``(a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--In any fiscal year the Secretary
of Defense may use for the program authorized by this chapter only
funds specifically appropriated for the program for that fiscal
year.''.
(d) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading for chapter 142 of such
title is amended to read as follows:
``CHAPTER 142--PROCUREMENT AND ELECTRONIC COMMERCE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM''.
(2) The tables of chapters at the beginning of subtitle A, and at the
beginning of part IV of subtitle A, of such title are each amended by
striking out the item relating to chapter 142 and inserting in lieu
thereof the following:
``142. Procurement and Electronic Commerce Technical 2411''.
Assistance Program.
(3) The heading for section 2417 of such title is amended to read as
follows:
``Sec. 2417. Funding provisions''.
(4) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 142 of such
title is amended by striking out the item relating to section 2417 and
inserting in lieu thereof the following:
``2417. Funding provisions.''.
SEC. 223. PERMANENT AUTHORITY REGARDING CONVEYANCE OF UTILITY SYSTEMS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 159 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by inserting after section 2687 the following new section:
``Sec. 2688. Utility systems: permanent conveyance authority
``(a) Conveyance Authority.--The Secretary of a military department
may convey a utility system, or part of a utility system, under the
jurisdiction of the Secretary to a municipal, private, regional,
district, or cooperative utility company or other entity. The
conveyance may consist of all right, title, and interest of the United
States in the utility system or such lesser estate as the Secretary
considers appropriate to serve the interests of the United States.
``(b) Utility System Defined.--In this section, the term `utility
system' includes the following:
``(1) Electrical generation and supply systems.
``(2) Water supply and treatment systems.
``(3) Wastewater collection and treatment systems.
``(4) Steam or hot or chilled water generation and supply
systems.
``(5) Natural gas supply systems.
``(6) Sanitary landfills or lands to be used for sanitary
landfills.
``(7) Similar utility systems.
``(c) Consideration.--(1) The Secretary of a military department may
accept consideration received for a conveyance under subsection (a) in
the form of a cash payment or a reduction in utility rate charges for a
period of time sufficient to amortize the monetary value of the utility
system, including any real property interests, conveyed.
``(2) Cash payments received shall be credited to an appropriation
account designated as appropriate by the Secretary of Defense. Amounts
so credited shall be available for the same time period as the
appropriation credited and shall be used only for the purposes
authorized for that appropriation.
``(d) Congressional Notification.--A conveyance may not be made under
subsection (a) until--
``(1) the Secretary of the military department concerned
submits to the appropriate committees of Congress (as defined
in section 2801(c)(4) of this title) a report containing an
economic analysis (based upon accepted life-cycle costing
procedures approved by the Secretary of Defense) which
demonstrates that the full cost to the United States of the
proposed conveyance is cost-effective when compared with
alternative means of furnishing the same utility systems; and
``(2) a period of 21 days has elapsed after the date on which
the report is received by the committees.
``(e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary of the military
department concerned may require such additional terms and conditions
in a conveyance entered into under subsection (a) as the Secretary
considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United States.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of
such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section
2687 the following new item:
``2688. Utility systems: permanent conveyance authority.''.
TITLE III--DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL REFORMS
Subtitle A--Superfund Reforms Generally
SEC. 301. REVISION OF METHODS OF REMEDIATION.
Section 121(b) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9621(b)) is amended
by striking out paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting in lieu thereof
the following:
``(1) Methods of remediation.--(A) Remedies selected at
individual facilities shall be protective of human health and
the environment over the longterm. A remedial action may
achieve protection of human health and the environment through--
``(i) treatment that reduces the toxicity, mobility,
or volume of hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants;
``(ii) containment or other engineering controls to
limit exposure;
``(iii) a combination of treatment and containment;
or
``(iv) other methods of protection.
``(B) The method or methods of remediation appropriate for a
given facility shall be determined through the evaluation of
remedial alternatives and the selection process under paragraph
(2). When determining the appropriate remedial method,
treatment is to be preferred for hot spots as defined under
paragraph (2)(C).
``(2) Appropriate remedial action.--
``(A) In general.--The President shall identify and
select an appropriate remedy that minimizes exposures
by comparing alternative remedies and balancing the
following factors with respect to each such remedy:
``(i) The effectiveness of the remedy,
including its implementability.
``(ii) The long-term reliability of the
remedy, that is, its capability to achieve
long-term protection of human health and the
environment considering the preference for
treatment of hot spots.
``(iii) The short-term risk posed by the
implementation of the remedy to the affected
community, to those engaged in the cleanup
effort, and to the environment.
``(iv) The acceptability of the remedy to the
affected community.
``(v) The reasonableness of the cost of the
remedy.
``(vi) The results of any risk assessments
conducted with respect to the remedy.
``(vii) The costs, both direct and indirect,
of the remedy.
``(B) Deferral of remedial action.--The President may
defer the selection of a remedial action if the
President determines that--
``(i) the hazardous substance, pollutant, or
contaminant can be contained in a manner
sufficient to protect human health and the
environment; and
``(ii) an innovative technology is expected
to be available in the near future that will
provide a more cost-effective remedy.
``(C) Hot spots.--The following shall apply to the
remediation of hot spots:
``(i) For purposes of this section, the term
`hot spot' means a discrete area within a
facility that contains hazardous substances,
pollutants or contaminants (I) that are present
in high concentrations, are highly mobile, and
cannot be reliably contained; or (II) that
would present a significant risk to human
health or the environment. The President shall
develop guidelines for the identification of
hot spots. Such guidelines shall recommend
appropriate field investigations that will not
require extraordinarily complex or costly
measures.
``(ii) In determining an appropriate remedy
for hot spots, the President shall consider the
factors under subparagraph (A). With respect to
the factor in clause (v) of subparagraph (A),
the President shall use a higher threshold for
evaluating the reasonableness of costs for hot
spot treatment relative to the remediation of
non-hot spot materials.
``(iii) The President shall select a remedy
requiring treatment of materials constituting
hot spots to the maximum extent practicable,
consistent with the protection of human health
and the environment. In such instances, the
President shall select an interim containment
remedy for such hot spot subject to adequate
monitoring and public reporting to ensure its
continued integrity and shall review the
interim containment remedy in accordance with
subsection (c). When the appropriate treatment
technology becomes available, as determined by
the President, that remedy shall be considered
in accordance with this section.
``(iv) Notwithstanding the presence of a hot
spot, the President may select a final
containment remedy for hot spots at landfills
and mining sites or similar facilities under
the following circumstances:
``(I) The hot spot is small relative
to the overall volume of waste or
contamination being addressed, the hot
spot is not readily identifiable and
accessible, and without the presence of
the hot spot containment would have
been selected as the appropriate
remedyunder subparagraph (A) for the larger body of waste or area of
contamination in which the hot spot is located.
``(II) The volume and areal extent of
the hot spot is extraordinary compared
to other facilities, and it is highly
unlikely due to the size and other
characteristics of the hot spot that
any treatment technology will be
developed that could be implemented at
reasonable cost.
Where final containment for a hot spot is selected, the
President shall publish an explanation of the basis for that
decision.
``(3) Generic remedies.--In order to streamline the remedy
selection process and to facilitate rapid voluntary action, the
President shall establish, taking into account the reasonably
anticipated future land uses at the facility and the factors
enumerated in paragraph (1)(A)(i), cost-effective generic
remedies for categories of facilities, and expedited procedures
that include community involvement for selecting generic
remedies at an individual facility. To be eligible for
selection at a facility, a generic remedy shall be protective
of human health and the environment at that facility. In
appropriate cases, the President may select a generic remedy
without considering alternatives to the generic remedy.
``(4) Institutional controls.--Whenever the President selects
a remedial action which relies on restrictions on the use of
land, water, or other resources to achieve protection of human
health and the environment, the President shall specify the
nature of the restrictions required to achieve such
protections, including restrictions on the permissible uses of
land, prohibitions on specified activities upon the property,
restrictions on the drilling of wells or the use of ground
water, or restrictions on the use of surface water, and may
ensure that such restrictions are incorporated into a hazardous
substance easement. In reviewing remedial action alternatives
which would require the use of such restrictions and providing
opportunity for public comment on those alternatives, the
President shall identify the nature of any institutional
controls that would be required to implement such restrictions,
known or anticipated affected persons, the likely duration of
such restrictions, and the anticipated costs of acquiring any
appropriate hazardous substance easements and enforcing the
appropriate restrictions.''.
SEC. 302. REQUIREMENT TO CONSIDER REASONABLY ANTICIPATED FUTURE LAND
USE.
Section 121(b) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9621(b)) is further
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(5) Land use.--(A) Before selecting a remedy under
subsection (a), the President shall identify the reasonably
anticipated future uses of land at a facility as required by
this Act. In identifying reasonably anticipated future land
uses, the President shall consider factors that include the
factors listed in subparagraph (B). In the case of a military
installation that is not scheduled for closure or realignment,
the President shall consider such factors to the maximum extent
practicable.
``(B) The factors referred to in subparagraph (A) are as
follows:
``(i) Views expressed by members of the affected
community.
``(ii) With respect to a Federal facility scheduled
for closure or a portion of a Federal facility
scheduled for transfer from the ownership or control of
the Federal Government to another entity, any joint
consensus recommendation of a technical review
committee established for a facility of the Department
of Defense pursuant to section 2705(c) of title 10,
United States Code, a restoration advisory board
established for such a facility pursuant to section
2705(d) of such title, a local land use redevelopment
authority, and another appropriate State agency, or,
with respect to a defense nuclear facility of the
Department of Energy, a citizen advisory board.
``(iii) The land use history of the facility and
surrounding properties, the current land uses of the
facility and surrounding properties, recent development
patterns in the area where the facility is located, and
population projections for that area.
``(iv) Federal or State land use designations,
including Federal facilities and national parks, State
ground water or surface water recharge areas
established under a State's comprehensive protection
plan for ground water or surface water, and
recreational areas.
``(v) The current land use zoning and future land use
plans of the local government with land use regulatory
authority.
``(vi) The potential for economic redevelopment.
``(vii) The proximity of the contamination to
residences, sensitive populations or ecosystems,
natural resources, or areas of unique historic or
cultural significance.
``(viii) Current plans for the facility by the
property owner or owners, not including potential
voluntary remedial measures.''.
SEC. 303. LIMITATION ON CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF FEDERAL OFFICERS,
EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS.
Section 120 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9620) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(k) Criminal Liability.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this Act or any other law, an officer, employee, or agent of the United
States shall not be held criminally liable for a failure to comply, in
any fiscal year, with a requirement to take a response action at a
facility that is owned or operated by a department, agency, or
instrumentality of the United States, under this Act, the Solid Waste
Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.), or any other Federal or State
law unless--
``(1) the officer, employee, or agent has not fully performed
any direct responsibility or delegated responsibility that the
officer, employee, or agent had under Executive Order 12088 (42
U.S.C. 4321 note) or any other delegation of authority to
ensure that a request for funds sufficient to take the response
action was included in the President's budget request under
section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, for that fiscal
year; or
``(2) appropriated funds were available to pay for the
response action.''.
SEC. 304. STATE ROLE AT FEDERAL FACILITIES.
Subsection (g) of section 120 of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9620) is
amended to read as follows:
``(g) Transfer of Authorities.--
``(1) State application for transfer of authorities.--A State
may apply to the Administrator to exercise the authorities
vested in the Administrator under subsections (e) and (h)
(other than subsection (h)(2)) of this section at any or all
facilities owned or operated by any department, agency, or
instrumentality of the United States (including the executive,
legislative, and judicial branches of government), including
the authority--
``(A) to review and approve all documents prepared in
connection with any such investigation and study;
``(B) to review and select remedies pursuant to
subsection (e)(4)(A); and
``(C) to enter into agreements with departments,
agencies, and instrumentalities of the United States in
accordance with subsection (e)(2), and to enter into
consent decrees with other potentially responsible
parties in accordance with subsection (e)(6).
``(2) Transfer of authorities.--(A) The Administrator may
enter into a contract or cooperative agreement to transfer some
or all of the authorities described in paragraph (1) if the
Administrator makes the determinations in subparagraph (B) and
the State agrees to the conditions in subparagraph (C).
``(B) The determinations to be made by the Administrator
under subparagraph (A) are the following:
``(i) The State has the ability to exercise such
authorities in accordance with this Act, including
adequate legal authority, financial and personnel
resources, organization, and expertise.
``(ii) The State demonstrates experience in
exercising similar authorities.
``(C) The conditions to be agreed to by the State under
subparagraph (A) are the following:
``(i) The State will not redelegate any of the
authorities transferred to it by the Administrator,
except as provided in the transfer agreement.
``(ii) In the case of a State that is authorized to
implement a State hazardous waste program pursuant to
section 3006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C.
6926), the State will not exercise the authorities
under that Act at the same time and at the same site as
it exercises the authorities transferred to it under
this subsection, with respect to a release or threat of
release being addressed by the authorities transferred
to it.
``(iii) The State will exercise the authorities
transferred to it with respect to each department,
agency, and instrumentality of the United States in the
same manner and to the same extent, both procedurally
and substantively, as it exercises the authorities with
respect to any non-Federal entity.
``(3) Effect of authorization under solid waste disposal
act.--In the review by the Administrator of an application of a
State for transfer of authorities under this subsection, if the
State is authorized to implement a State hazardous waste
program pursuant to section 3006 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act (42 U.S.C. 6926), the following provisions apply:
``(A) With respect to a State that is a signatory to
an interagency agreement under subsection (e)(2) that
is in effect on the effective date of this subsection,
the Administrator, in making the determinations
referred to in paragraph (2), shall accord substantial
weight to the State's hazardous waste program
authorization and the Administrator's findings in
approving such authorization.
``(B) With respect to a State whose authorization
under such section 3006 includes authorization to
implement the corrective action provisions of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act, the Administrator shall approve the
application and provide for the orderly transfer of
authorities as expeditiously as possible, but in no
case later than 6 months after the date of receipt of
the application, unless the parties agree to another
deadline.
``(4) Effect of transfer.--Any State to which authorities are
transferred under this subsection shall not be deemed to be an
agent of the President but shall exercise such authorities in
its own name, and the Administrator may transfer to a State
only those authorities of the Administrator identified in this
subsection.
``(5) Deadlines.--Except as provided in paragraph (3)(B), the
Administrator shall make a determination on an application from
a State under this subsection not later than 90 days after the
date the Administrator receives the application.
``(6) Withdrawal of authorities.--
``(A) In general.--The Administrator may withdraw the
authorities transferred under this subsection in whole
or in part if the Administrator determines--
``(i) that the State, in whole or in part, is
exercising such authorities in a manner clearly
inconsistent with the requirements of this Act;
or
``(ii) in the case of a State that was
approved under paragraph (3)(B), that the State
is no longer authorized to implement the
corrective action provisions of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act.
``(B) Requirement of written notice.--At least 90
days before withdrawing any such transferred
authorities from a State, the Administrator shall
provide to the State a written explanation of the
reasons for the proposed withdrawal and afford an
opportunity to the State to discuss the withdrawal and
to propose actions to correct any deficiencies.
``(7) Enforcement and remedy selection.--
``(A) In general.--An interagency agreement under
this section between a State (including States which
are parties to such agreements through the exercise of
the Administrator's authorities pursuant to a
cooperative agreement or contract under this
subsection) and any department, agency, or
instrumentality of the United States, shall be
enforceable by the State or the Federal department,
agency, or instrumentality in the United States
district court for the district in which the facility
is located. The district court shall have the
jurisdiction to enforce compliance with any provision,
standard, regulation, condition, requirement, order, or
final determination which has become effective under
such agreement, and to impose any appropriate civil
penalty provided for any violation of the agreement,
not to exceed $25,000 per day.
``(B) Failure to concur in remedy selection.--
``(i) In general.--At Federal facilities
where the Administrator's authorities under
subsection (e)(4) have been transferred to the
State pursuant to this section, and the State
does not concur in the remedy selection
proposed by the Federal agency, the parties
shall enter into dispute resolution as provided
in the interagency agreement, provided that the
final level for such disputes concerning remedy
selection shall be to the head of the Federal
department, agency, or instrumentality and the
Governor of the State.
``(ii) State remedy selection.--If no
agreement is reached between the head of the
Federal department, agency, or instrumentality
and the Governor, the State may issue the final
determination, except that the State shall pay
or assure the payment of any additional costs
attributable to carrying out the remedial
action selected by the State.
``(8) Limitation.--Except for authorities that are
transferred by the Administrator to a State pursuant to this
subsection, or that are transferred by the Administrator to an
officer or employee of the Environmental Protection Agency, no
authority vested in the Administrator under this section may be
transferred, by Executive order of the President or otherwise,
to any other officer or employee of the United States or to any
other person. Except as necessary to specifically implement the
transfer of the Administrator's authorities to a State pursuant
to this subsection, nothing in this subsection shall be
construed as altering, modifying, or impairing in any manner,
or authorizing the unilateral modification of, any terms of any
agreement, permit, administrative, or judicial order, decree,
or interagency agreement existing on the effective date of this
subsection. Any other modifications or revisions of an
interagency agreement entered into under this section shall
require the consent of all parties to such agreement, and
absent such consent the agreement shall remain unchanged.
Nothing in this subsection shall affect the exercise by a State
of any other authorities that may be applicable to facilities
in such State.''.
Subtitle B--Superfund and Other Environmental Law Reforms Applicable to
Department of Defense or Department of Energy
SEC. 311. STANDARDS FOR REMEDIAL ACTIONS CONDUCTED AT DEFENSE
FACILITIES NOT ON THE NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST.
Section 2701(c) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding
at the end the following new paragraph:
``(4) Exemption of remedial actions conducted at facilities
not listed on the national priorities list from certain
requirement.--Notwithstanding subsection (a)(2) and paragraph
(1) of this subsection, the requirement of section 121(d)(2) of
CERCLA (42 U.S.C. 9621(d)(2)) relating to the attainment of a
relevant and appropriate standard, requirement, criteria, or
limitation shall not apply to a remedial action conducted at a
facility under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense if
the facility is not listed on the National Priorities List
under CERCLA.''.
SEC. 312. AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND SECRETARY OF ENERGY TO
TERMINATE LONG-TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF
REMEDIAL ACTIONS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS.
(a) Remedial Actions.--Section 120 of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9621), as
amended by section 303, is further amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(l) Termination of Long-Term Operation and Maintenance.--The
Secretary of Defense, with respect to any site or facility of the
Department of Defense, and the Secretary of Energy, with respect to any
site or facility of the Department of Energy, may terminate the long-
term operation and maintenance of a completed remedial action in any
case in which the Secretary determines, with the concurrence of the
Administrator or appropriate State or local authorities, that the
release or threat of release of hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants at the site or facility is no longer a threat to human
health and the environment.''.
(b) Corrective Actions.--Section 3004(u) of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act (42 U.S.C. 6924(u)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``The Secretary of Defense, with respect to any site or facility of the
Department of Defense, and the Secretary of Energy, with respect to any
site or facility of the Department of Energy, may terminate the long-
term operation and maintenance of a completed corrective action in any
case in which the Secretary determines, with the concurrence of the
Administrator or appropriate State or local authorities, that the
release of hazardous waste or constituents at the site or facility is
no longer a threat to human health and the environment.''.
SEC. 313. NOTIFICATION TO CONGRESS OF COSTS OF DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE AGREEMENTS.
(a) Notice to Congress.--The Secretary of Energy may not enter into
an environmental compliance agreement, or agree to a major modification
of such an agreement, until after the Secretary submits to Congress the
following information with respect to the agreement or modification:
(1) The total cost of carrying out the agreement or
modification, and the total cost of other options considered
for carrying out the requirements that are the subject of the
agreement or modification.
(2) An estimate of the budget authority and outlays, by year,
required while the agreement or modification is in effect.
(3) The projected cost of carrying out each milestone in the
agreement or modification, and the schedule for the initiation
of activities under each milestone.
(4) An estimate of the monetary penalties that may be
assessed by the Environmental Protection Agency or the State
concerned against the Department of Energy for failure to
adhere to the terms of the compliance agreement.
(b) Definition.--In this section, the term ``environmental compliance
agreement'' means an interagency agreement under section 120(e)(2) of
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9620(e)(2)) entered into by the Secretary of
Energy, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, and
the State in which a facility of the Department of Energy is located
that provides for compliance by the Department of Energy at that
facility with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.).
(c) Calculation of 90 Days.--For purposes of subsection (a), the
continuity of a session of Congress is broken only by an adjournment of
the Congress sine die, and the days on which either House is not in
session because of an adjournment of more than three days to a day
certain are excluded in the computation of the 90-day period.
SEC. 314. CLEAN AIR ACT STANDARDS FOR MILITARY SOURCES.
(a) Continued Effectiveness of Exemptions.--Any exemption described
in subsection (b) for property owned or operated by the Armed Forces
that is in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act shall remain
in effect with respect to any covered requirement that is adopted after
such date of enactment.
(b) Covered Exemptions.--Subsection (a) applies to any exemption from
a covered requirement that is issued--
(1) by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency pursuant to rulemaking authority under the Clean Air Act
(42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.); or
(2) by a State in its State implementation plan for that Act.
(c) Covered Requirements.--In this section, the term ``covered
requirement'' means a requirement referred to in section 118(a) of the
Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7418(a)) that relates to ozone or particulate
matter.
SEC. 315. AUTHORITY OF ADMINISTRATOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WITH RESPECT TO APPLICATION OF SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
ACT TO MILITARY MUNITIONS.
Section 3004(y) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6924(y))
is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
``(2) The Administrator shall exempt unexpended military munitions
from regulation under this Act upon a finding by the Administrator that
such military munitions are subject to management under another Federal
law or regulation and that such other federal law or regulation is
sufficiently protective of human health and the environment so as to
make additional regulation under this Act duplicative or
unnecessary.''.
TITLE IV--MISCELLANEOUS ADDITIONAL DEFENSE REFORMS
SEC. 401. LONG-TERM CHARTER CONTRACTS FOR ACQUISITION OF AUXILIARY
VESSELS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.
(a) Program Authorization.--Chapter 631 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
``Sec. 7233. Auxiliary vessels: authority for long-term charter
contracts
``(a) Authorized Contracts.--After September 30, 1998, the Secretary
of the Navy, subject to subsection (b), may enter into a contract for
the long-term lease or charter of a newly built surface vessel, under
which the contractor agrees to provide a crew for the vessel for the
term of the long-term lease or charter, for any of the following:
``(1) The combat logistics force of the Navy.
``(2) The strategic sealift program of the Navy.
``(3) Other auxiliary support vessels for the Department of
Defense.
``(b) Contracts Required To Be Authorized by Law.--A contract may be
entered into under this section with respect to specific vessels only
if the Secretary is specifically authorized by law to enter into such a
contract with respect to those vessels.
``(c) Funds for Contract Payments.--The Secretary may make payments
for contracts entered into under this section using funds available for
obligation during the fiscal year for which the payments are required
to be made. Any such contract shall provide that the United States will
not be required to make a payment under the contract (other than a
termination payment, if required) before October 1, 2000.
``(d) Budgeting Provisions.--Any contract entered into under this
section shall be treated as a multiyear service contract and as an
operating lease for purposes of any provision of law relating to the
Federal budget and Federal budget accounting procedures, including part
C of title II of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act
of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 900 et seq.), and any regulation or directive
(including any directive of the Office of Management and Budget)
prescribed with respect to the Federal budget and Federal budget
accounting procedures.
``(e) Term of Contract.--In this section, the term `long-term lease
or charter' means a lease, charter, service contract, or conditional
sale agreement with respect to a vessel the term of which (including
any option period) is for a period of 20 years or more.
``(f) Option To Buy.--A contract entered into under the authority of
this section may contain options for the United States to purchase one
or more of the vessels covered by the contract at any time during, or
at the end of, the contract period (including any option period) upon
payment of an amount not in excess of the unamortized portion of the
cost of the vessels plus amounts incurred in connection with the
termination of the financing arrangements associated with the vessels.
``(g) Domestic Construction.--The Secretary shall require in any
contract entered into under this section that each vessel to which the
contract applies--
``(1) shall have been constructed in a shipyard within the
United States; and
``(2) upon delivery, shall be documented under the laws of
the United States.
``(h) Vessel Crewing.--The Secretary shall require in any contract
entered into under this section that the crew of any vessel to which
the contract applies be comprised of private sector commercial
mariners.
``(i) Contingent Waiver of Other Provisions of Law.--A contract
authorized by this section may be entered into without regard to
section 2401 or 2401a of this title if the Secretary of Defense makes
the following findings with respect to that contract:
``(1) The need for the vessels or services to be provided
under the contract is expected to remain substantially
unchanged during the contemplated contract or option period.
``(2) There is a reasonable expectation that throughout the
contemplated contract or option period the Secretary of the
Navy (or, if the contract is for services to be provided to,
and funded by, another military department, the Secretary of
that military department) will request funding for the contract
at the level required to avoid contract cancellation.
``(3) The use of such contract or the exercise of such option
is in the interest of the national defense.
``(j) Source of Funds for Termination Liability.--If a contract
entered into under this section is terminated, the costs of such
termination may be paid from--
``(1) amounts originally made available for performance of
the contract;
``(2) amounts currently available for operation and
maintenance of the type of vessels or services concerned and
not otherwise obligated; or
``(3) funds appropriated for those costs.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of
such chapter is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
``7233. Auxiliary vessels: authority for long-term charter
contracts.''.
SEC. 402. FIBER-OPTICS BASED TELECOMMUNICATIONS LINKAGE OF MILITARY
INSTALLATIONS.
(a) Installation Required.--In at least one metropolitan area of the
United States containing multiple military installations of one or more
military department or Defense Agency, the Secretary of Defense shall
provide for the installation of fiber-optics based telecommunications
technology to link as many of the installations in the area as
practicable in a privately dedicated telecommunications network.The
Secretary shall use a competitive process to provide for the
installation of the telecommunications network through one or more new
contracts.
(b) Features of Network.--The telecommunications network shall
provide direct access to local and long distance telephone carriers,
allow for transmission of both classified and unclassified information,
and take advantage of the various capabilities of fiber-optics based
telecommunications technology.
(c) Time for Installation.--The telecommunications network or
networks to be installed under this section shall be installed and
operational not later than September 30, 1999.
(d) Report on Implementation.--Not later than March 1, 1998, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report on the implementation of subsections (a) and (b),
including the metropolitan area or areas selected for the
telecommunications network, the estimated cost of the network, and
potential areas for the future use of such fiber-optics based
telecommunications technology.
SEC. 403. REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT FOR CONTRACTOR GUARANTEES ON MAJOR
WEAPON SYSTEMS.
(a) Repeal.--Section 2403 of title 10, United States Code, is
repealed.
(b) Clerical and Conforming Amendments.--(1) The table of sections at
the beginning of chapter 141 of such title is amended by striking out
the item relating to section 2403.
(2) Section 803 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2604; 10 U.S.C. 2430 note) is
amended--
(A) in subsection (a), by striking out ``2403,'';
(B) by striking out subsection (c); and
(C) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (c).
SEC. 404. REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO MICRO-PURCHASES OF COMMERCIAL ITEMS.
(a) In General.--Section 2304 of title 10, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(l) Micro-Purchases.--(1) A contracting officer may not award a
contract or issue a purchase order to buy commercial items for an
amount equal to or less than the micro-purchase threshold unless a
member of the Senior Executive Service or a general or flag officer
makes a written determination that--
``(A) the source or sources available for the commercial item
do not accept a preferred micro-purchase method, and the
contracting officer is seeking a source that does accept such a
method; or
``(B) the nature of the commercial item necessitates a
contract or purchase order so that terms and conditions can be
specified.
``(2) In this subsection:
``(A) The term `micro-purchase threshold' has the meaning
provided in section 32 of the Office of Federal Procurement
Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 428).
``(B) The term `preferred micro-purchase method' means the
use of the Government-wide commercial purchase card or any
other method for carrying out micro-purchases that Secretary of
Defense prescribes in the regulations implementing this
subsection.
``(3) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations to
implement this subsection. The regulations shall include such
additional preferred methods of carrying out micro-purchases, and such
exceptions to the requirement of paragraph (1), as the Secretary
considers appropriate.''.
(b) Effective Date.--Subsection (l) of section 2304 of title 10,
United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with
respect to micro-purchases made on or after October 1, 1997.
SEC. 405. AVAILABILITY OF SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURES TO COMMERCIAL ITEM
PROCUREMENTS.
(a) Armed Services Acquisitions.--Section 2304(g) of title 10, United
States Code, is amended in paragraph (1)(B) by striking out ``only''.
(b) Civilian Agency Acquisitions.--Section 303(g) of the Federal
Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (41 U.S.C. 253(g)) is
amended in paragraph (1)(B) by striking out ``only''.
SEC. 406. TERMINATION OF THE ARMED SERVICES PATENT ADVISORY BOARD.
(a) Termination of Board.--The organization within the Department of
Defense known as the Armed Services Patent Advisory Board is
terminated. No funds available for the Department of Defense may be
used for the operation of that Board after the date specified in
subsection (c).
(b) Transfer of Functions.--All functions performed on the day before
the date of the enactment of this Act by the Armed Services Patent
Advisory Board (includingperformance of the responsibilities of the
Department of Defense for security review of patent applications under
chapter 17 of title 35, United States Code) shall be transferred to the
Defense Technology Security Administration.
(c) Effective Date.--Subsection (a) shall take effect at the end of
the 120-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 407. COORDINATION OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS
AND AUDITS.
(a) Board on Criminal Investigations.--Chapter 7 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
``Sec. 182. Board on Criminal Investigations
``(a) Establishment.--(1) There is in the Department of Defense a
Board on Criminal Investigations. The Board consists of the following
officials:
``(A) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command,
Control, Communications, and Intelligence.
``(B) The head of the Army Criminal Investigation Command.
``(C) The head of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service.
``(D) The head of the Air Force Office of Special
Investigations.
``(2) To ensure cooperation between the military department criminal
investigative organizations and the Defense Criminal Investigative
Service, the Inspector General of the Department of Defense shall serve
as a nonvoting member of the Board.
``(b) Functions of Board.--The Board shall provide for coordination
and cooperation between the military department criminal investigative
organizations so as to avoid duplication of effort and maximize
resources available to the military department criminal investigative
organizations.
``(c) Regional Working Groups.--The Board shall establish working
groups at the regional level to address and resolve issues of
jurisdictional responsibility that may arise regarding criminal
investigations involving a military department criminal investigative
organization. A working group shall consist of managers or supervisors
of the military department criminal investigative organizations who
have the authority to make binding decisions regarding
whichorganization will conduct a particular criminal investigation or
whether a criminal investigation should be conducted jointly.
``(d) Authority of Assistant Secretary.--In the event that a regional
working group or the Board is unable to resolve an issue of
investigative responsibility, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence shall have the
responsibility to make a final determination regarding the issue.
``(e) Military Department Criminal Investigative Organization
Defined.--In this section, the term `military department criminal
investigative organization' means any of the following:
``(1) The Army Criminal Investigation Command.
``(2) The Naval Criminal Investigative Service.
``(3) The Air Force Office of Special Investigations.''.
(b) Board on Audits.--Such chapter is further amended by inserting
after section 182, as added by subsection (a), the following new
section:
``Sec. 183. Board on Audits
``(a) Establishment.--(1) There is in the Department of Defense a
Board on Audits. The Board consists of the following officials:
``(A) The Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller).
``(B) The Auditor General of the Army.
``(C) The Auditor General of the Navy.
``(D) The Auditor General of the Air Force.
``(E) The director of the Defense Contract Audit Agency.
``(2) To ensure cooperation between the defense auditing
organizations and the Office of the Inspector General of the Department
of Defense, the Inspector General of the Department of Defense shall
serve as a nonvoting member of the Board.
``(b) Functions of Board.--The Board shall provide for coordination
and cooperation between the defense auditing organizations so as to
avoid duplication of effort and maximize resources available to the
defense auditing organizations.
``(c) Regional Working Groups.--The Board shall establish working
groups at the regional level to address and resolve issues of
jurisdictional responsibility that may arise regarding audits involving
a defense auditing organization. A working group shall consist of
managers or supervisors of the defense auditing organizations who have
the authority to make binding decisions regarding which defense
auditing organization will conduct a particular audit or whether an
audit should be conducted jointly.
``(d) Authority of Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller).--In the
event that a regional working group or the Board is unable to resolve
an issue of jurisdictional responsibility, the Under Secretary of
Defense (Comptroller) shall have the responsibility to make a final
determination regarding the issue.
``(e) Defense Auditing Organization Defined.--In this section, the
term `defense auditing organization' means any of the following:
``(1) The Army Audit Agency.
``(2) The Naval Audit Service.
``(3) The Air Force Audit Agency.
``(4) The Defense Contract Audit Agency.''.
(c) Working Guidance.--Not later than December 31, 1997, the
Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such policies as may be necessary
for the operation of the Board on Criminal Investigations and the Board
on Audits established pursuant to the amendments made by this section.
(d) Clerical Amendments.--The table of sections at the beginning of
such chapter is amended by adding at the end the following new items:
``182. Board on Criminal Investigations.
``183. Board on Audits.''.
SEC. 408. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND ADVISORY
COMMITTEES.
(a) Termination of Existing Advisory Committees.--(1) Effective
December 31, 1998, any advisory committee established in, or
administered or funded (in whole or in part) by, the Department of
Defense that (A) is in existence on the day before the date of the
enactment of this Act, and (B) was not established by law, or expressly
continued by law, after January 1, 1995, is terminated.
(2) For purposes of this section, the term ``advisory committee''
means an entity that is subject to the provisions of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.).
(b) Report on Committees For Which Continuation Is Requested.--Not
later than March 1, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to
Congress a report setting forth those advisory committees subject to
subsection (a) that the Secretary proposes to continue. The Secretary
shall include in the report, for each such committee, the justification
for continuing the committee and a statement of the costs of such
continuation over the next four fiscal years. The Secretary shall
include in the report a proposal for any legislation that may be
required for the continuations proposed in the report.
(c) Policy for Future DOD Advisory Committees.--(1) Chapter 7 of
title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section
183, as added by section 407(b), the following new section:
``Sec. 184. Boards, commissions, and other advisory committees:
limitations
``(a) Limitation on Establishment.--No advisory committee may be
established in, or administered or funded (in whole or in part) by, the
Department of Defense except as specifically provided by law after the
date of the enactment of this section.
``(b) Termination of Advisory Committees.--Each advisory committee of
the Department of Defense (whether established by law, by the
President, or by the Secretary of Defense) shall terminate not later
than the expiration of the four-year period beginning on the date of
its establishment or on the date of the most recent continuation of the
advisory committee by law.
``(c) Exception for Temporary Advisory Committees.--Subsection (a)
does not apply to an advisory committee established for a period of one
year or less for the purpose (as set forth in the charter of the
advisory committee) of examining a matter that is critical to the
national security of the United States.
``(d) Annual Report.--Not later than March 1 of each year (beginning
in 1999), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on
advisory committees of the Department of Defense. In each such report,
the Secretary shall identify each advisory committee that the Secretary
proposes to support during the next fiscal year and shall set forth the
justification for each such committee and the projected costs for that
committee for the next fiscal year. In the case of any advisory
committee that is to terminate in the year following the year in which
the report is submitted pursuant to subsection (b) and that the
Secretary proposes be continued by law, the Secretary shall include in
the report a request for continuation of the committee and a
justification and cost estimate for such continuation.
``(e) Advisory Committee Defined.--In this section, the term
`advisory committee' means an entity that is subject to the provisions
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.).''.
(2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is amended
by inserting after the item relating to section 183, as added by
section 407(d), the following new item:
``184. Boards, commissions, and other advisory committees:
limitations.''.
TITLE V--COMMISSION ON DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND STREAMLINING
SEC. 501. ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION.
(a) Establishment.--There is hereby established a commission to be
known as the ``Commission on Defense Organization and Streamlining''
(hereinafter in this title referred to as the ``Commission'').
(b) Composition.--The Commission shall be composed of nine members,
appointed as follows:
(1) Two members shall be appointed by the chairman of the
Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives.
(2) Two members shall be appointed by the ranking minority
party member of the Committee on National Security of the House
of Representatives.
(3) Two members shall be appointed by the chairman of the
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.
(4) Two members shall be appointed by the ranking minority
party member of the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.
(5) One member, who shall serve as chairman of the
Commission, shall be appointed by at least three of the Members
of Congress referred to paragraphs (1) through (4) acting
jointly.
(c) Qualifications.--Members of the Commission shall be appointed
from among private United States citizens with knowledge and expertise
in organization and management matters.
(d) Period of Appointment; Vacancies.--Members shall be appointed for
the life of the Commission. Any vacancy in the Commission shall be
filled in the same manner as the original appointment.
(e) Initial Organization Requirements.--(1) All appointments to the
Commission shall be made not later than 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
(2) The Commission shall convene its first meeting not later than 30
days after the date on which all members of the Commission have been
appointed.
(f) Security Clearances.--The Secretary of Defense shall expedite the
processing of appropriate security clearances for members of the
Commission.
SEC. 502. DUTIES OF COMMISSION.
(a) In General.--(1) The Commission shall examine the missions,
functions, and responsibilities of the Office of the Secretary of
Defense, the management headquarters and headquarters support
activities of the military departments and Defense Agencies, and the
various acquisition organizations of the Department of Defense (and the
relationships among such Office, activities, and organizations).
(2) On the basis of such examination, the Commission shall propose
alternative organizational structures and alternative allocations of
authorities as it considers appropriate.
(b) Duplication and Redundancy.-- In carrying out its duties, the
Commission shall identify areas of duplication and recommend options to
streamline, reduce, and eliminate redundancies.
(c) Special Requirements Regarding Office of Secretary.--The
examination of the missions, functions, and responsibilities of the
Office of the Secretary of Defense shall include the following:
(1) An assessment of the appropriate functions of the Office
and whether the Office of the Secretary of Defense or some of
its component parts should be organized along mission lines.
(2) An assessment of the adequacy of the present
organizational structure to efficiently and effectively support
the Secretary in carrying out responsibilities in a manner that
ensures civilian authority in the Department of Defense.
(3) An assessment of the extent of unnecessary duplication of
functions between the Office of the Secretary of Defense and
the Joint Staff.
(4) An assessment of the extent of unnecessary duplication of
functions between the Office of the Secretary of Defense and
the military departments.
(5) An assessment of the appropriate number of Under
Secretaries of Defense, Assistant Secretaries of Defense,
Deputy Under Secretaries of Defense, and Deputy Assistant
Secretaries of Defense.
(6) An assessment of any benefits or efficiencies derived
from decentralizing certain functions currently performed by
the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
(d) Special Requirements Regarding Headquarters.--The examination of
the missions, functions, and responsibilities of the management
headquarters and headquarters support activities of the military
departments and Defense Agencies shall include the following:
(1) An assessment on the adequacy of the present headquarters
organization structure to efficiently and effectively support
the mission of the military departments and the Defense
Agencies.
(2) An assessment of options to reduce the number of
personnel assigned to such headquarters staffs and headquarters
support activities.
(3) An assessment of the extent of unnecessary duplication of
functions between the Office of the Secretary of Defense and
headquarters staffs of the military departments and the Defense
Agencies.
(4) An assessment of the possible benefits that could be
derived from further functional consolidation between the
civilian secretariat of the military departments and the staffs
of the military service chiefs.
(5) An assessment of the possible benefits that could be
derived from reducing the number of civilian officers in the
military departments who are appointed by and with the advice
and consent of the Senate.
(e) Special Requirements Regarding Acquisition Organizations.--The
examination of the missions, functions, and responsibilities of the
various acquisition organizations of the Department of Defense shall
include the following:
(1) An assessment of benefits of consolidation or selected
elimination of Department of Defense acquisition organizations.
(2) An assessment of the opportunities to streamline the
defense acquisition infrastructure that were realized as a
result of the enactment of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining
Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-355) and the Clinger-Cohen Act of
1996 (divisions D and E of Public Law 104-106) or as result of
other acquisition reform initiatives implemented
administratively during the period from 1993 through 1997.
(3) An assessment of such other defense acquisition
infrastructure streamlining or restructuring options as the
Commission considers appropriate.
(f) Cooperation From Government Officials.--In carrying out its
duties, the Commission should receive the full and timely cooperation
of the Secretary of Defense and any other United States Government
official responsible for providing the Commission with analyses,
briefings, and other information necessary for the fulfillment of its
responsibilities.
SEC. 503. REPORTS.
The Commission shall submit to Congress an interim report containing
its preliminary findings and conclusions not later than March 15, 1998,
and a final report containing its findings and conclusions not later
than July 15, 1998.
SEC. 504. POWERS.
(a) Hearings.--The Commission or, at its direction, any panel or
member of the Commission, may, for the purpose of carrying out the
provisions of this title, hold hearings, sit and act at times and
places, take testimony, receive evidence, and administer oaths to the
extent that the Commission or any panel or member considers advisable.
(b) Information.--The Commission may secure directly from the
Department of Defense and any other Federal department or agency
information that the Commission considers necessary to enable the
Commission to carry out its responsibilities under this title.
SEC. 505. COMMISSION PROCEDURES.
(a) Meetings.--The Commission shall meet at the call of the Chairman.
(b) Quorum.--(1) Five members of the Commission shall constitute a
quorum other than for the purpose of holding hearings.
(2) The Commission shall act by resolution agreed to by a majority of
the members of the Commission.
(c) Commission.--The Commission may establish panels composed of less
than full membership of the Commission for the purpose of carrying out
the Commission's duties. The actions of each such panel shall be
subject to the review and controlof the Commission. Any findings and
determinations made by such a panel shall not be considered the
findings and determinations of the Commission unless approved by the
Commission.
(d) Authority of Individuals To Act for Commission.--Any member or
agent of the Commission may, if authorized by the Commission, take any
action which the Commission is authorized to take under this title.
SEC. 506. PERSONNEL MATTERS.
(a) Pay of Members.--Members of the Commission shall serve without
pay by reason of their work on the Commission.
(b) Travel Expenses.--The members of the Commission shall be allowed
travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates
authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57
of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular
places of business in the performance of services for the Commission.
(c) Staff.--(1) The chairman of the Commission may, without regard to
the provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing appointments
in the competitive service, appoint a staff director and such
additional personnel as may be necessary to enable the Commission to
perform its duties. The appointment of a staff director shall be
subject to the approval of the Commission.
(2) The chairman of the Commission may fix the pay of the staff
director and other personnel without regard to the provisions of
chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of title 5, United States
Code, relating to classification of positions and General Schedule pay
rates, except that the rate of pay fixed under this paragraph for the
staff director may not exceed the rate payable for level V of the
Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such title and the rate of pay
for other personnel may not exceed the maximum rate payable for grade
GS-15 of the General Schedule.
(d) Detail of Government Employees.--Upon request of the chairman of
the Commission, the head of any Federal department or agency may
detail, on a nonreimbursable basis, any personnel of that department or
agency to the Commission to assist it in carrying out its duties.
(e) Procurement of Temporary and Intermittent Services.--The chairman
of the Commission may procure temporary and intermittent services under
section 3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, at rates for
individuals which do not exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate
of basic pay payable for level V of the Executive Schedule under
section 5316 of such title.
SEC. 507. MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.
(a) Postal and Printing Services.--The Commission may use the United
States mails and obtain printing and binding services in the same
manner and under the same conditions as other departments and agencies
of the Federal Government.
(b) Miscellaneous Administrative and Support Services.--The Secretary
of Defense shall furnish the Commission, on a reimbursable basis, any
administrative and support services requested by the Commission.
SEC. 508. FUNDING.
Funds for activities of the Commission shall be provided from amounts
appropriated for the Department of Defense for operation and
maintenance for Defense-wide activities for fiscal year 1998. Upon
receipt of a written certification from the Chairman of the Commission
specifying the funds required for the activities of the Commission, the
Secretary of Defense shall promptly disburse to the Commission, from
such amounts, the funds required by the Commission as stated in such
certification.
SEC. 509. TERMINATION OF THE COMMISSION.
The Commission shall terminate 60 days after the date of the
submission of its final report under section 503.
Amendment to H.R. 1119, as Reported, Offered by Mr. Chambliss of
Georgia
At the end of title X (page 360, after line 8), insert the
following new section:
SEC. --. STUDY OF POLICY TO IMPLEMENT PARITY OF OFFICERS.
The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on the
differing percentages of officers among the Army, Navy, Air Force, and
Marine Corps. The Secretary shall set forth in the report--
(1) a description of the reasons for differing percentages of
officers and the justification for those differences; and
(2) a proposed policy for the implementation of a requirement
to achieve parity of officers as a percentage of personnel
among those military services, if a decision is made to achieve
such parity.
At the end of title I (page 23, before line 7), insert the
following new section:
SEC. --. REDUCTION IN AIR FORCE PROCUREMENT ACCOUNTS.
The amounts specified in paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 103
are hereby reduced by a total of $689,000,000, to be applied against
such paragraphs on a pro rata basis.
Purpose and Summary
H.R. 1778, the Defense Reform Act of 1997, would make
organizational, structural, business practice, acquisition,
environmental and other policy reforms designed to permit the
Department of Defense and Department of Energy defense programs
to operate more effectively and efficiently.
Legislative History
H.R. 1778 was introduced on June 4, 1997 and was referred
to the Committee on National Security, the Committees on
Commerce, and the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure. The introduction of this bill culminated
several months of work on the subject of reforming our nation's
defense establishment, much of which coincided with work
preparatory to consideration of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998. In recognition of the
importance of defense reform, consideration of a separate bill,
apart from the annual defense authorization bill was deemed
appropriate.
On February 26, 1997, the Committee on National Security
held a hearing to consider defense reform in general. Testimony
was received from: Honorable John P. White, Deputy Secretary of
Defense and Honorable Paul Kaminski, Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Technology. A second hearing, focusing on
H.R. 1778, was conducted on June 17, 1998.
On June 11, 1997, the Committee on National Security met to
consider H.R. 1778. The committee agreed to an amendment in the
nature of a substitute and ordered the bill, as amended,
reported favorably to the House by voice vote.
Explanation of the Committee Amendment
The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a
substitute during the consideration of H.R. 1778. The remainder
of the report discusses the bill, as amended.
Purpose and Background
Consistent with the recently concluded bipartisan balanced
budget agreement, the fiscal year 1998 defense budget will
represent the 13th straight year of real decline in defense
spending. However, persistent shortfalls in critical defense
modernization, readiness and quality of life accounts totaling
billions of dollars over the Future Years Defense Program
remain with no realistic prospect of solution within the
existing budgetary framework. Exacerbating the situation, U.S.
military forces have been reduced by one-third over the last
ten years and the recently released Quadrennial Defense Review
(QDR) recommends further force reductions, even though U.S.
forces are busier than they have ever been.
The starkness of the realities facing the defense budget
have dramatically increased the imperative to aggressively
pursue reforms in how the Department of Defense is organized,
resourced and conducts its day to day business. While the drive
to achieve meaningful defense reform has existed for decades,
the results have been mixed with only marginal improvements
achieved.
During the 104th Congress, the committee initiated a number
of reforms in the areas of acquisition policy, infrastructure
and support services, and DOD organization. These reforms were
intended to increase the overall efficiency of the Department
while, at the same time, preserving the critical military
combat capability.
In the acquisition policy area, this committee streamlined
and made more cost efficient the acquisition process through
reforms of a number of antiquated and restrictive federal
acquisition laws. The committee also mandated numerous studies
and pilot programs in the area of infrastructure and support
services in an effort to determine the benefits of shifting
responsibility for providing certain support services from the
public sector to the private. Given the Department's critical
national security mission, the committee recognizes there will
always be important support functions that must be performed,
in part or in whole, by DOD employees. However, with spending
on infrastructure and support services accounting for nearly 60
percent of the defense budget, the committee believes that
reality should not stand in the way of moving aggressively to
achieve greater efficiencies in non-critical support functions
such as printing, payroll and travel, just to cite a few.
With respect to DOD organization, the committee is
disappointed and concerned that its efforts to effect reform in
this area, undertaken with a cooperative spirit, have been met
with hostility and consistent non-compliance with statutory
direction. The facts underlying the need for DOD organizational
reform have not changed. In the same ten year period that
active duty military forces have been reduced by 33 percent,
the size of the staff and support personnel assigned to the
Office of the Secretary of Defense has increased by over 40
percent. This trend of growth in the administrative support
functions of the Department undermine the credibility of any
internal effort to attack the widely recognized imbalance
between combat forces and support infrastructure.
The committee acknowledges the QDR's review of defense
reform issues and resulting initiatives. However, the committee
notes with disappointment the lack of detail and specifics on
implementation of these initiatives. Further, while the
committee commends Secretary Cohen's commitment to taking on
defense reform through the establishment of the Task Force on
Defense Reform, the committee notes that the results of that
new review will not be known until late this year.
This legislation builds on past committee initiatives to
effect reform in the Department of Defense. It undertakes a
number of organizational, structural, defense business
practice, acquisition and policy reforms that will make the
Department operate more efficiently.
The committee notes that, in implementing the provisions of
this bill, the Secretary of Defense may apply any applicable
workyear reductions or outsourcing actions resulting from
sections 201, 202, 203, 205, 206, and 221 of this bill to the
relevant headquarters reductions, acquisition workforce
reductions and defense agency outsourcing goals required by
sections 101, 102, and 206, respectively. Further, the
committee is aware that there may be a ``double counting''
effect, whereby a position being eliminated may, for example,
fall into both an acquisition workforce and headquarters
definition. It is the committee's intent that reductions in the
workforce resulting from this bill shall count toward all
relevant affected functions or organizations.
Section-by-Section Analysis
TITLE I--ORGANIZATIONAL AND STRUCTURAL REFORMS
Section 101--Reduction in personnel assigned to management headquarters
and headquarters support activities
This section would require a 25 percent reduction in
management headquarters and headquarters support personnel, as
defined in DOD Instruction 5100.73, over four years and
implemented on an annual basis. In execution of this section,
the Department would base its reductions upon personnel levels
as of October 1, 1997. This section would also require the
Secretary of Defense to examine DOD Instruction 5100.73 and
make recommendations to Congress by January 15, 1998 on a
revised directive that uniformly applies a DOD-wide definition
of management headquarters and headquarters support functions.
The committee continues to be concerned with the size and
cost of the Department's management headquarters and
headquarters support activities. Ten years after the enactment
of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization
Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-433), the committee believes that
the Department requires a further reexamination of the
structure and size of its management headquarters and
headquarters support activities to eliminate unnecessary
duplication, outdated modes of organization, and wasteful
inefficiencies.
The committee unsuccessfully sought to engage the
Department in the 104th Congress on the appropriate size,
composition and structure of its Military Department
Headquarters staffs. The committee notes with concern that the
Department has yet to submit the report and recommendations
required by section 904 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201). While the
Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) has cited reducing and
streamlining management headquarters and headquarters support
activities as a priority, it has postponed implementation of
reductions until another internal study reviews the issue and
makes recommendations to the Secretary of Defense by August 29,
1997.
The committee is encouraged with the QDR's assertion that
the reduction of layers of oversight at headquarters and
operational commands and elimination of management and support
personnel will yield 10,000 military and 14,000 civilian
positions. The committee concurs with the need to drawdown
unnecessary infrastructure and supports the Department in this
regard. However, the committee is concerned the Department may
not have an accurate understanding of the costs associated with
management headquarters and headquarters support activities.
Specifically, the committee questions whether the Department is
relying upon the proper definition and whether the governing
DOD directive is being adequately implemented. The committee is
aware of several organizations that have not been reported by
DOD as management headquarters or headquarters support, but
appear to be performing those functions. These organizations
include the Air Force Studies and Analyses Agency, U.S. Army's
Forces Command Field Support Activity, Air Combat Command's
Studies and Analyses Squadron, and the U.S. Atlantic Command's
Information Systems Support Group. Furthermore, the committee
understands only a portion of the headquarters staffs of the
DOD Inspector General and some Defense Agencies are reported by
DOD as being management headquarters or headquarters support.
In addition, none of the headquarters of the numbered air
forces are currently reported (although they were in the past),
and the Navy's Program Executive Offices apparently have not
been reported in spite of the DOD directive requiring their
inclusion.
The committee understands the Department intends to address
the inadequacies of the current definition of management
headquarters and headquarters support activities in its August
29, 1997 report to the Secretary and looks forward to specific
recommendations to rectify this situation.
Section 102--Additional reduction in defense acquisition workforce
This section would require the Department of Defense to
reduce its acquisition workforce by 42 percent by October 1,
2001, based upon projected fiscal year 1997 endstrength, in
order to achieve the reductions necessary to take full
advantage of legislated acquisition reforms, free up resources
for other unfunded priorities and spur needed streamlining in
the defense acquisition infrastructure. This provision would
also require the Secretary of Defense to submit an
implementation plan to Congress by January 15, 1998, containing
any recommendations to include legislative proposals the
Secretary considers necessary to fully achieve such reductions.
In the 104th Congress, the committee addressed specific
concerns with the size and number of acquisition organizations
and positions relative to the declining Department of Defense
(DOD) budget and modernization program. Many of the acquisition
reforms initiated by the committee were intended to ultimately
reduce costs both to the private sector as well as the federal
government. Full implementation of acquisition reforms can, and
should, also result in fundamental changes and reductions in
the structure of the Department's acquisition organizations.
Specifically, it was the intent of the committee in relieving
the Department from the burden of administering various
antiquated and restrictive federal procurement laws that
substantially fewer acquisition personnel would be required.
In seeking to establish a balance between the Department's
diminished modernization program and the Department's
acquisition bureaucracy, the committee supported moderate
reductions in acquisition personnel in section 906 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public
Law 104-106) and section 902 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201).
The committee understands that in implementing these
reductions, the Department exceeded the Congressional mandates
in fiscal year 1996 and plans to do so again in fiscal year
1997.
In addition to seeking overall reductions in personnel, the
committee sought to engage the Department in determining the
appropriate structure of its future acquisition workforce.
Section 906 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106) required the Department
to examine consolidation and reorganization options and report
to Congress on its recommendations. Unfortunately, the report
provided by the Department demonstrated no real effort to
consider the various organizational and management options
identified by the law and, not surprisingly, failed to propose
significant alterations to the current acquisition
infrastructure.
The committee notes that the 1995 Commission on Roles and
Missions (CORM) sharply criticized the Department's acquisition
organizations for maintaining redundant staffs and facilities
for many types of common acquisition support activities.
Therefore, the committee rejects the Department's conclusion in
its report to Congress pursuant to section 906 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-
106) that it hasadequately assessed and implemented options for
restructuring its acquisition organizations for the purposes of
improved efficiency.
The committee strongly disagrees with the Department's
assertion that increased downsizing of the workforce would
place at risk the ability of the Department to equip combat
forces and modernize against future threats. Rather, the
committee regards the disproportionate size of the defense
acquisition personnel workforce and infrastructure relative to
the dramatically reduced procurement accounts as a serious
drain upon current and future resources. The committee believes
that the Department's continued refusal to restructure and
streamline acquisition infrastructure will result in the
continued squandering of limited resources urgently needed to
address modernization, readiness and quality of life
shortfalls. In order to obtain independent analysis of these
issues and develop specific alternative organizational options,
elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends a provision
establishing the Commission on Defense Organization and
Streamlining to examine these critical issues.
The committee understands the Department's current plan
will result in an acquisition workforce of approximately
269,000 by October 1, 2000, using the definition included in
section 906 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106). Further, the Department
has stated plans to reduce its acquisition workforce in excess
of 20,000 positions in fiscal year 1997. This section would
result in a reduction of 95,000 acquisition positions in excess
of the Department's current plan over the next four years and,
specifically, reduce 40,000 personnel in fiscal years 1998 and
1999, and 22,000 in fiscal years 2000 and 2001.
The provision would exempt from the required reductions
personnel who are employed at maintenance depots. In addition,
the committee expects the personnel covered under the Defense
Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act of 1990 (DAWIA) will be
protected, to the extent possible, from overall reductions
required in this section.
Section 103--Change in required reduction in annuity for certain
defense acquisition personnel who are separated before age 55
This section would waive 50 percent of the early retirement
penalty in fiscal year 1998 only for certain defense
acquisition personnel who separate from the Department of
Defense as a result of the reductions mandated by section 102
of this bill. It is the committee's intent to provide the
Department of Defense with additional tools to help facilitate
the needed reductions in a manner which results in the most
appropriate acquisition workforce.
The committee understands that this provision, and section
104 which follows, are separation inducements only applicable
in the first year of a mandatory four year reduction. The
committee believes the Department must have the necessary
management tools to shape the acquisition workforce to conserve
resources and to maximize efficiencies, and therefore,
encourages the Department to seek similar relief in coming
years. The committee intends to closely monitor the
implementation of this section and section 104 to ensure
equitable implementation across the agencies and military
departments.
Section 104--Separation pay for defense acquisition personnel
This section would establish an additional, one-year buyout
authority, separate and apart from existing Department of
Defense (DOD) buyout authority, to provide separation pay
incentives only to certain acquisition workforce employees
impacted by the reductions contained within section 102 of this
bill. The committee believes the Department should be provided
appropriate management devices to implement these reductions
equitably while retaining the necessary skill levels and
organizational capacity.
Section 105--Personnel reductions in United States Transportation
Command
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
reduce administrative duplication and inefficiencies in the
United States Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM) and eliminate
1,000 positions across USTRANSCOM components in addition to the
reductions identified in the fiscal year 1998 budget request.
Despite the creation of USTRANSCOM, studies by the General
Accounting Office and USTRANSCOM, have reported that traffic
management processes within the Department of Defense (DOD)
remain fragmented, duplicative, and inefficient, primarily due
to the lack of integrated and standard business practices.
Personnel in each transportation component continue to perform
similar and duplicative functions, resulting in different
component staff separately negotiating rates and processing
claims often related to the same shipment.
The committee is aware that USTRANSCOM is reviewing options
to improve the management of customer requirements and billing
through contracted studies and the Joint Mobility Control
Group. The committee believes that the current transportation
management issues require more aggressive solutions and
encourages the use of standardized business practices that
utilize leading edge technologies. In so doing, the committee
believes that USTRANSCOM services will improve, transportation
and financing systems will be easier to understand, and scarce
resources will be used more efficiently throughout USTRANSCOM.
This provision, therefore, directs the Secretary of Defense
to reduce the USTRANSCOM workforce to 66,238, or 1,000 workers
below the current fiscal year 1997 levels. The Secretary should
also ensure that the smaller components in USTRANSCOM do not
receive a disproportionate share of this reduction. These
reductions would not affect the Department's overall
endstrength level.
TITLE II--DEFENSE BUSINESS PRACTICE REFORMS
Subtitle A--Competitive Procurement Requirements
Section 201--Competitive procurement of finance and accounting services
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
competitively procure finance and accounting services currently
provided by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service from
among government and private sector sources.
The committee believes that there exists a robust
capability for the provision of financial and accounting
services in the private sector. There are no unique
requirements of the Department of Defense for finance and
accounting services that preclude the provision of such
services by the private sector. In light of these
considerations, the committee believes that a fulland open
competition between both government and private sector sources for the
provision of such services is appropriate.
Section 202--Competitive procurement of services to dispose of surplus
defense property
This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to
competitively procure the Defense Reutilization and Marketing
Service (DRMS) function of disposing of surplus property, by
October 1, 1998, provide a plan, by March 1, 1998, for
implementing this section and identify other DRMS functions
that lend themselves to outsourcing.
Studies by both the Department of Defense (DOD) and the
National Performance Review identified DRMS as a non-inherently
governmental function to be considered for outsourcing. The
committee is aware that the Defense Logistics Agency announced
a streamlining strategy for DRMS in April 1997. Consistent with
this strategy, the committee recommends competing all of the
DRMS surplus property sales functions starting in fiscal year
1999. The sale of this property is the last step in the DRMS
disposal process, following the proper coding,
demilitarization, reutilization, transfer, and donation of
property as performed by DRMS federal employees. Prior to this
date, the committee directs the Secretary to allow the affected
agency or programs to establish their most efficient
organizational structure in order to compete with the private
sector. The committee expects that standard management systems
will be implemented in the surplus sales function to ensure
adequate oversight of the function by DRMS, and that all
necessary information should be made available to the private
sector in order to fully support the sale of surplus property.
Section 203--Competitive procurement of functions performed by defense
information systems agency
This section would require that the Secretary of Defense
competitively procure all of the Defense Information System
Agency's (DISA) unclassified, non-inherently governmental
commercial and industrial type activities by October 1, 1998,
and provide a report, by March 1, 1998, on implementing this
requirement.
The committee recognizes that DISA has played a crucial
role in providing telecommunication and computer support to the
Department of Defense. However, the combination of a
deregulated telecommunications industry and mature computer
sector means most of DISA's services are widely available in
the private sector, often at significantly lower costs. Current
DISA services duplicated by the private sector include data
processing operations, automated systems support, technical
support, help centers, software development,
telecommunications, and executive software management. For
these reasons, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to compete these functions.
As part of the competition process, the Secretary shall
allow the affected program to establish their most efficient
organizational structure for the competitions. In order to
ensure continuity of customer service, the committee recommends
allowing DISA to complete all customer orders received by
September 30, 1998.
Section 204--Competitive procurement of printing and duplication
services
This section would extend, through fiscal year 1998,
section 351 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201) which directed the
Defense Printing Service, now known as the Defense Automation
and Printing Service (DAPS), to competitively procure at least
70 percent of its printing and duplication work from private
sector sources. This section would also eliminate the current
surcharges levied by the DAPS for handling printing orders that
are sent to the Government Printing Office (GPO) or to private
contractors.
Although DAPS successfully outsourced 70 percent of its
services in fiscal year 1996, the committee has received few
assurances that this success represents a permanent change in
DAPS business practices. Additionally, the committee has
learned that DAPS has placed a surcharge on all customer orders
DAPS passes on to its contractors. According to the Air Force
and Army, DAPS does not provide any direct value-added services
for this surcharge.
Section 205--Competitive procurement of certain ophthalmic services
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
contract for ophthalmic services related to providing military
members with single vision and multi-vision eyewear, except
those services needed to meet readiness requirements or those
that can be accomplished more cost-effectively by the
Department of Defense. This provision is based on a
recommendation made jointly by the U.S. Army Audit Agency and
Naval Audit Service.
Section 206--Increased use by Defense agencies of contractors to
perform commercial and industrial type functions
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
outsource a minimum of 33 percent of commercial services in the
defense agencies by fiscal year 2000 and provide, by March 1,
1998, a plan to accomplish the increased rate of outsourcing
required by this section.
The committee is concerned that outsourcing opportunities
are not being fully explored by defense agencies. According to
the Department of Defense, the defense agencies outsourced only
10 percent of their commercial and industrial activities in
fiscal year 1996 and estimate 14 percent of these activities
will be outsourced in fiscal year 1997. In comparison, during
fiscal year 1996 and estimated for fiscal year 1997, the
military departments outsourced between 33 to 61 percent of
their commercial activities.
Subtitle B--Reform of Conversion Process
Section 211--Development of standard forms regarding performance work
statement and request for proposal for conversion of certain
operational functions of military installations
This section would require, by October 1, 1998, the
creation of standard Office of Management and Budget Circular
A-76 performance work statement (PWS) and request for proposal
(RFP) requirements for each base operations function and
service that the military departments have previously studied
and currently outsource on an average of 50 percent or more
across all the military departments. The standard PWS and RFP
would render the A-76 requirements, as they relate to PWS and
RFP, inapplicable at that time. The committee is aware that
within the military services, there is little consistency for
outsourcing non-inherently governmental base operations
functions and services. Specifically, the military services
conduct A-76 studies on activities that are similar, if not
exactly the same, as extensively studied and outsourced
functions in their own service or in the other military
services. This practice unnecessarily duplicates effort and is
costly.
As discussed in a General Accounting Office report, ``Base
Operations: Challenges Confronting DOD as It Renews Emphasis on
Outsourcing,'' (GAO NSIAD 97-86), the development of standard
``templates'' based on previous A-76 studies of similar
functional areas, would save the military services time and
resources in outsourcing these functions. The following chart
illustrates the base operations commercial activities that were
outsourced in fiscal year 1996, highlighting the activities
that were outsourced an average of 50 percent or more.
[Amounts in percent]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Marine
Base operating activity Force Army Corps \1\ Navy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural Resource.................. (\2\) 45 0 64
Advertising and Public Relations.. (\2\) 0 0 1
Financial & Payroll............... 10 0 0 29
Debt Collection................... (\2\) 0 (\2\) 1
Bus services...................... (\2\) 48 0 32
Laundry and Dry Cleaning.......... 100 85 81 94
Custodial Services................ 100 88 82 86
Pest Management................... 23 22 0 37
Refuse Collection & Disposal
Services......................... 96 84 67 81
Food Services..................... 88 88 42 39
Furniture Repair.................. 0 10 (\2\) 100
Office Equipment Maintenance and
Repair........................... 100 75 18 100
Motor Vehicle Operation........... 51 16 0 11
Motor Vehicle Maintenance......... 47 30 0 21
Fire Prevention & Protection...... 1.4 3 0 1
Military Clothing................. (\2\) 24 58 0
Guard Service..................... 5 22 0 14
Electrical Plants & Systems O&M... 18 17 .02 4
Heating Plants & Systems O&M...... 0 38 .01 5
Water Plants and Systems O&M...... (\2\) 32 .02 14
Sewage & Waste Plants O&M......... 14 27 0 18
Air Conditioning & Refrigeration
Plants........................... 7 15 30 37
Other Utilities O&M............... 21 25 0 24
Supply Operations................. 26 9 .03 12
Warehousing & Distribution of
Publications..................... (\2\) 0 0 7
Transportation Management Services 25 6 .02 9
Museum Operations................. (\2\) 4 0 0
Contractor-Operated Parts Stores &
Civil Engineering Supply Stores.. 100 71 100 (\2\)
Other Installation Services....... 8 10 14 22
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Marine Corps figures are as of July 1996; all others are as of the
end of fiscal year 1996.
\2\ Not reported.
Note.--Percentages represent the portion of the workforce that is
outsourced for a given function.
Source: GAO analysis of services' commercial activities inventory
databases.
Section 212--Study and notification requirements for conversion of
commercial and industrial type functions to contractor
performance
This section would amend section 2461 of title 10, United
States Code, to streamline the Department of Defense reporting
to Congress on outsourcing activities. The committee believes
that the current reporting requirements are burdensome to the
point of impeding certain outsourcing reviews.
Section 213--Collection and retention of cost information data on
contracted out services and functions
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
collect cost information on all outsourced activities for five
years after a contract is awarded and create a permanent
storage site for the data.
The committee is concerned with the poor and often lacking
data collection for outsourced activities. Department of
Defense (DOD) regulations currently require only three years
collection of cost information data for all outsourced
activities. According to the General Accounting Office, only
the Department of the Air Force consistently follows the data
collection guidelines. As a result of these inconsistencies,
DOD rarely collects or keeps data on outsourced activities. The
committee believes that data collection of previous and ongoing
outsourcing activities within the DOD is crucial to identifying
and developing accurate savings estimates of these activities.
Subtitle C--Other Reforms
Section 221--Reduction in overhead costs of inventory control points
This section would require the Department of Defense (DOD)
inventory control points (ICP) to reduce their overhead costs
to eight percent of net sales by the end of fiscal year 2000,
and provide a plan, by March 1, 1998, for achieving this goal.
The current costs of overhead within the DOD inventory
control points is significantly greater than the private
sector. Even after taking into account the need to maintain a
wartime capacity, these costs are excessive. The committee
believes that the ICP management and work processes are ideal
business re-engineering candidates, given the extensive
commercial market for these services and the recent
improvements in private sector practices. In doing so, DOD is
encouraged to review the General Accounting Office reports
comparing DOD's inventory management practices with leading
industry practices (GAO/NSIAD 96-5 and 96-156) for revising the
way ICPs provide supply services. DOD should make extensive use
of such commercial options as consolidation and outsourcing--
particularly prime vendor and virtual prime vendor deliveries
for most repairable, hardware, and consumable items. The use of
prime and virtual prime vendors provide the benefit of lowering
distribution, warehousing, and inventory costs, which reduces
the customer rates in the supply and distribution business
areas of the working capital funds.
Section 222--Consolidation of procurement technical assistance and
electronic commerce technical assistance
This section would create the Procurement and Electronic
Commerce Technical Assistance Program by combining services of
the current Electronic Commerce Resource Centers (ECRC) and the
Procurement Technical Assistance Centers (PTAC).
During the last couple of years, the acquisition community
has instituted several reforms aimed at streamlining and
removing barriers to the federal acquisition process. The
passage of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994
(Public Law 103-335) and the Federal Acquisition Reform Act of
1996 (Division D of Public Law 104-106), along with
administrative actions taken by the Executive Branch to
streamline the acquisition process have helped to fundamentally
change the federal acquisition system. However, despite these
reforms, little has changed for the DOD programs that support
small business, particularly ECRC and PTAC.
Recent findings by the DOD Office of Inspector General
(OIG) (Electronic Commerce Resource Centers, Report No. 97-090
and Department of Defense Procurement Technical Assistance
Cooperative Agreement Program, report No. 97-007) argue that
the ECRC ``has not been efficient or cost effective in
promoting'' the use of electronic commerce or electronic data
interchange technologies between small businesses and
government organizations. The DOD-OIG also states that PTAC is
not complying with its authorizing language in section 2415 of
title 10, United States Code, regarding the requirement to
award grants based on the comparative ranking of applicants and
equitably distribute grants across the Defense Contract
Administration Service regions. Finally, the OIG concluded that
both ECRC and PTAC functions overlap with services provided
elsewhere in the government. For these reasons, the committee
believes the programs should be consolidated to improve service
delivery and ensure the future of the program is consistent
with the rest of the acquisition community.
Section 223--Permanent authority regarding conveyance of utility
systems
This section would authorize the secretary of a military
department to convey, with or without consideration, a utility
system, or part of a utility system, to a municipal, private,
regional, district, or cooperative utility company or other
entity. Such utility systems may include electrical generation
and supply systems, water supply and treatment systems,
wastewater collection and treatment system, steam, hot or
chilled water generation and supply systems, natural gas supply
systems, and sanitary landfills or lands to be used for
sanitary landfills. The provision would require the secretary
concerned to submit a 21-day notice-and-wait announcement, to
include a report containing an economic analysis of the
proposed conveyance, to Congress prior to entering into any
agreement to convey a utility system.
TITLE III--ENVIRONMENTAL REFORMS
Subtitle A--Superfund Reforms Generally
Section 301--Revision of methods of remediation
This section would amend section 121 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA or Superfund) (42 U.S.C. 9621) in order to eliminate
the preference that exists in current law for the permanent
treatment of contaminated sites undergoing environmental
cleanup. Remedies selected at individual facilities would be
required to be protective of human health and the environment
and would be required to provide long term reliability at
reasonable cost. Rather than a blanket preference for permanent
treatment, this section would establish a preference for the
cleanup of so called ``hot spots,'' discrete areas within a
facility that contain hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants in high concentrations that are mobile and pose a
significant threat to human health or the environment. In
addition, this section would authorize the President to
establish cost-effective generic remedies and expedited cleanup
procedures for categories of facilities.
Section 302--Requirement to consider reasonably anticipated future land
use
This section would amend section 121 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA
or Superfund) (42 U.S.C. 9621) to require that, before a
cleanup remedy is selected at a Superfund site, the reasonably
anticipated future land use of that site must be identified and
taken into consideration. In identifying the reasonably
anticipated future land use, the President would be required to
take into account several factors, including views of the
affected community, land use history of the facility, zoning
requirements and potential for redevelopment. In the case of
active military installations, these factors would be
considered to the maximum extent practicable.
Section 303--Limitation on criminal liability of Federal officers,
employees and agents
This section would amend section 120 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA
or Superfund) (42 U.S.C. 9620) to provide that an officer,
employee or agent of the United States shall not be held
criminally liable for the failure to comply with a legal
requirement to take a response action under CERCLA, Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), or another state or
federal law at federal facilities unless the officer, employee
or agent fails to perform some assigned responsibility to
ensure that the funds needed to perform the response action
were requested or appropriated funds were available to pay for
the response action.
Section 304--State role at Federal facilities
This section would amend section 120 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA
or Superfund) (42 U.S.C. 9620) to redefine the role of states
in the environmental cleanup of federal facilities. States
would be permitted to apply to the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for authorization to
control cleanup at federal facilities. Approval by the EPA
would depend upon a determination that a state has the ability
to and experience in the exercise cleanup authorities under
CERCLA. In addition, the Administrator of the EPA would be
authorized to withdraw authorities transferred to a state if
the state exercised such authorities in a manner inconsistent
with CERCLA or if the state lost its authorization to implement
the corrective action provisions of the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA). Interagency agreements between the
states, EPA and a federal department or agency would be
enforceable in federal court by the states, and a civil penalty
of up to $25,000 per day would be authorized for violations of
the law. In the event of state nonconcurrence in remedy
selection, a formal dispute resolution process would be
authorized. If no agreement can be reached concerning remedy
selection, the state would be authorized to make a final
determination, although the state would have to pay the
incremental costs associated with implementation of the remedy
chosen by the state.
Subtitle B--Superfund and Other Environmental Law Reforms Applicable to
Department of Defense or Department Of Energy
Section 311--Standards for remedial actions conducted at Defense
facilities not on the National Priorities List
Under section 2701 of title 10, United States Code, the
Department of Defense is required to cleanup its contaminated
sites, including those not on the National Priorities List
(NPL), in accordance with the requirements of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA
or Superfund), including all relevant and appropriate cleanup
requirements. This section would amend section 2701 to provide
that the Department of Defense need only follow those
procedures associated with cleanup under CERCLA at Superfund
sites listed on the NPL.
Section 312--Authority of Secretary of Defense and Secretary of Energy
to terminate long-term operation and maintenance of remedial
actions and corrective actions
This section would amend section 120 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA
or Superfund) (42 U.S.C. 9620) to authorize the Secretary of
Defense, in the case of a defense facility, and the Secretary
of Energy, in the case of a Department of Energy facility, to
terminate the long term operation and maintenance of a
completed remedial action, in any case in which the Secretary
and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) or the appropriate state authorities determine that the
release or threat of release of hazardous substances,
pollutants or contaminants at the site or facility is
sufficiently remediated so as to pose no further danger to
human health and the environment.
Section 313--Notification to Congress of costs of Department of Energy
Environmental Compliance Agreements
This section would provide that the Secretary of Energy may
not enter into an environmental compliance agreement, or agree
to a major modification of such an agreement, until at least 90
legislative days after the secretary submits to Congress
information about the total cost of carrying out the agreement
or modifications thereto, projected milestone costs and the
anticipated date of completion of performance milestones, an
estimate of the annual budgetary authority and outlays
associated with implementation of the agreement or
modification, and an estimate of the cost of any monetary
penalties that may be assessed in theevent of noncompliance
with the agreement. Environmental compliance agreements are interagency
agreements entered into pursuant to section 120(e) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA).
Section 314--Clean Air Act Standards for certain military operations
This section would continue Clean Air Act exemptions
granted for property owned or operated by the armed forces by
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Act or by
states under state implementation plans, despite the
promulgation of new Clean Air Act standards relating to ozone
and particulate matter. This provision is intended to ensure
recognition of the importance of military necessity and the
imperative not to handicap military operations, such as those
involving live fire exercises or off-road training, that may
cause temporary nonattainment of air quality standards.
Section 315--Application of Solid Waste Disposal Act to stored military
munitions
This section would amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42
U.S.C. 6924) to clarify the authority of the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency to exempt unexpended
military munitions from regulation under that Act upon a
finding that such munitions are subject to management under
another federal law or regulation which is sufficient to ensure
protection of human health and the environment.
TITLE IV--MISCELLANEOUS REFORMS
Section 401--Long-term charter contracts for acquisition of auxiliary
vessels for the Department of Defense
This section would remove several restrictions placed on
the Secretary of Defense that currently impede his ability to
enter into contracts for the long-term charter of ships built
in the United States to meet Department of Defense (DOD)
auxiliary fleet requirements. Specifically, this section would
grant the Secretary of the Navy general and permanent authority
to enter into contracts for the long term charter of certain
classes of logistics, sealift and other support vessels. The
Secretary would, however, be required to receive Congressional
authorization to enter into contracts for specific vessels. It
would also remove the requirement to include the termination
liability in the budget request for a 20-year lease or charter,
would allow the Secretary to request funds to cover only the
annual lease payment of a vessel in the fiscal year in which
the payment will actually be made, and would eliminate the role
of the Office of Management and Budget in reviewing DOD long-
term charter proposals.
By removing these and other restrictions, the Secretary
would be able to enter into long-term charters for DOD
auxiliary ships which have been built with private sector
funds. This program would be virtually identical to the highly
successful build and charter program which was used to provide
the Marine Corps with its maritime prepositioning ships in the
mid-1980s and the Military Sealift Command (MSC) with its T-5
tankers. It would offer the opportunity to replace the aging
fleet of MSC auxiliary ships and to replace the prepositioned
ammunition container ships for the Army and Air Force in a
timely manner.
Section 402--Fiber optics based telecommunications linkage of military
installations
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
competitively procure and install a dedicated fiber-optics-
based network telecommunication service at a minimum of one
high military density locale, and report by March 1, 1998 on
the implementation of this section.
The communications market has witnessed a rapid change in
the last decade. Driven by such proven technologies as fiber-
optics and semiconductors, this change has also significantly
reduced the cost of telecommunication services while providing
greater flexibility and security. Fiber-optics technology, in
particular, is used extensively for telecommunications services
by the nation's intelligence agencies and to upgrade the base
telecommunications infrastructure at four Marine Corps bases in
fiscal year 1998.
The committee is aware that fiber-optics technology can
also be used to create continuous telecommunication links in
areas where there are several similar Department of Defense
(DOD) users. Such links could eliminate all Federal
Communication Commission (FCC) regulated tolls for
communication between the DOD customers and reduce the access
tolls for local and long distance calls. In August 1996, the
Department of the Navy implemented a pilot study linking, by
fiber-optics, the telecommunications services at eleven
installations in the Norfolk, Virginia area. An April 1997
Department of the Navy audit report concluded that improved
management and services related to this pilot could generate an
estimated $21 million in savings, or 22 percent of total costs,
over the next six years.
The committee is concerned that DOD has not demonstrated
sufficient vision and planning to take full advantage of these
cost-effective technologies and a deregulated
telecommunications market. Therefore, this section would
require the Secretary of Defense to compete among both
regulated and unregulated companies for the installation, in at
least one area within the United States that contains multiple
military facilities and installations, a fiber-optics based
telecommunications network linking identified military
facilities and installations and achieve operational capability
for this network on or before September 30, 1999. The committee
is aware that such networks are capable of providing all forms
of communication including voice telephony, data applications,
video teleconferencing, imaging, and video transmission. The
committee believes that the Secretary, in contracting for this
fiber-optics telecommunications network, should take advantage
of the range of capabilities of this technology wherever
feasible and affordable.
Section 403--Repeal of requirement for contractor guarantees on major
weapon systems
This section would repeal section 2403 of title 10, United
States Code, which requires that a contract for the production
of a weapon system contain written guarantees unless a waiver
is obtained at the Assistant Secretary of Defense level. It
also requires Congressional notification in certain
circumstances.
Based on work performed by the General Accounting Office
and other analysis, the committee is convinced that this
provision has not contributed to the effective protection of
the taxpayer's interest. To the contrary, the body of evidence
supports the conclusion that thisprovision has led to sizable
expenditures by the Department of Defense in the course of purchasing
contractor guarantees with little or no concomitant benefit in return.
In recommending the repeal of this provision, however, the committee is
cognizant of the continuing ability of the Secretary of Defense to
pursue contractor guarantees on weapon system acquisitions where it is
determined that such an arrangement would protect the government's
interest and encourages the Secretary to take such a step wherever
warranted.
Section 404--Requirements relating to micro-purchases of commercial
items
This section would impose a limitation on the use of
contracts or purchase orders for commercial items of a value
equal to or below the micro-purchase threshold of $2,500 unless
a member of the Senior Executive Service or a general or flag
office makes a written determination such a contract is
necessary. The provision would also grant the Secretary of
Defense the discretion to prescribe regulations specifying any
further circumstances that may necessitate the use contracts or
purchase orders below the micro-purchase threshold.
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
not taken advantage of the authorities provided by the Federal
Acquisition and Streamlining Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-712)
in dispensing with the administrative burden associated with
transactions which occur at or below the micro-purchase
threshold. While representing the bulk of the contract actions
processed by the Department's financial and contract management
bureaucracy, such purchases constitute a small fraction of the
value of transactions executed by the Department on an annual
basis. The committee believes that aggressive implementation of
the micro-purchase threshold authority and of this provision
could yield significant savings in eliminating a portion of the
administrative overhead associated with defense purchases.
Section 405--Availability of simplified procedures to commercial item
procurements
This section would amend existing law to modify the
circumstances under which a contracting officer could utilize
simplified procedures for the procurement of commercial items.
Currently, the authority to utilize simplified procedures above
the simplified acquisition threshold of $100,000 is limited by
a requirement for the contracting officer to make a
determination that ``only'' commercial items will be proposed
for a given procurement. Given that this kind of prospective
determination is difficult to make, the restriction serves as
an impediment to utilizing above-threshold simplified
procedures as intended by the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996
(Division D of Public Law 104-106). This situation is
particularly critical given that this authority for above-
threshold simplified procedures was extended by Congress on a
three-year test basis. Therefore, the committee believes it is
critical that the Department be afforded a realistic
opportunity to implement the flexibility and potential benefits
realized through the use simplified procedures for commercial
item procurements above the simplified acquisition threshold in
order to determine whether such authority should be considered
on a more permanent basis.
Section 406--Termination of the Armed Services Patent Advisory Board
This section would terminate the Armed Services Patent
Advisory Board and transfer its functions to the Defense
Technology Security Administration (DTSA). The Armed Services
Patent Advisory Board is currently responsible for coordinating
security reviews of patent applications to determine if they
contain sensitive technical information, the public release of
which would be detrimental to national security. In performing
this function, the Board fulfills the role assigned to the
Department of Defense under chapter 17 of title 35, United
States Code. The Patent Advisory Board is an unfunded program
and as such, is staffed with personnel from the legal offices
of the military departments.
The committee notes that DTSA carries out nearly the same
technology security review function when reviewing export
license applications to determine if the technologies involved
would harm national security if exported to foreign entities.
In fact, DTSA and the Patent Advisory Board confer with many of
the same technical experts at field activities of the military
departments. The DTSA staff possesses technical knowledge that
enable it to prescreen items before resorting to military field
activities for analyses. A DTSA review can therefore be more
expeditious than reviews coordinated by the Patent Advisory
Board, since Board personnel are primarily legal staff members
with limited knowledge of defense technologies. While the
committee recognizes that as an unfunded program the Board's
termination would not necessarily result in cost savings, the
committee believes that transfer of the security review
function to DTSA would result in more expeditious and thorough
reviews.
Section 407--Coordination of Department of Defense criminal
investigations and audits
This section would authorize the Department of Defense
(DOD) Criminal Investigative Service's Board on Investigations
with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control,
Communications and Intelligence as executor. This provision
would also create a similar board for the audit agencies with
the DOD Undersecretary for Defense (Comptroller) as its
executor.
The committee commends the DOD criminal investigative
services on their efforts to increase coordination, reduce
duplication, and improve the overall management of resources
through the Board on Investigations and the Regional Fraud
Working Groups. The committee believes the creation of a Board
on Audit would generate the same benefits, allowing DOD to
better handle the increasing workload from the Chief Financial
Officers Act and the changing accounting systems. The committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to finalize the working
guidance for the operation of both boards no later than
December 31, 1997. The committee believes that DOD is best
served by a productive and coordinated effort between the
service departments and the DOD Office of Inspector General.
Section 408--Department of Defense boards, commissions, and advisory
committees
This section would eliminate, by December 31, 1998, all
governing authorities for Department of Defense (DOD) advisory
committees other than those established in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106) or
subsequent authorizations. This provision would also require
DOD to submit to Congress a report and a legislative proposal,
due March 1, 1998, identifying advisory committees that warrant
support and including justification and projected costs
associated with specific advisory committees.
The committee is aware the Department has, in response to
Presidential Executive Order 12838, ``Termination and
Limitation of Federal Advisory Committees,'' reduced
discretionary boards and commissions by almost one-third since
1993. In compliance with section 1054 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106),
the Department submitted a report to Congress on the merits of
remaining DOD boards and commissions. The Department failed,
however, to propose any significant further elimination of its
advisory committees. The committee notes the current 53
discretionary and statutorily established boards and
commissions, to include the Advisory Group on Electron Devices,
Armed Forces Epidemiological Board, and Inland Waterways Users
Board, will cost an estimated $16.2 million in fiscal year
1997. The committee is concerned that many of the Department's
remaining statutory and discretionary boards and commissions
may have outlived their original purpose.
The committee recognizes the value of readily available
expertise in the execution of the Department's duties.
Accordingly, this section would allow the Department of Defense
to establish advisory committees for one year or less in
duration without Congressional authorization for the stated
purpose of examining issues critical to national security.
TITLE V--COMMISSION ON DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND STREAMLINING
overview
The post-Cold War global security environment has witnessed
dramatic reductions in the size and capability of the U.S.
military force structure while the organizational composition
of the Department, especially at the management level, has
remained largely unchanged. Since 1987, the Army has lost eight
active divisions, the Navy has decommissioned three carriers
and over 200 ships, and the Air Force has cut 12 active and
five reserve tactical wings. Notably, 1997 active duty
personnel levels are actually equivalent to 1950 pre-Korean War
levels. Meanwhile, from 1985 to 1996, the Office of the
Secretary increased its staff 40 percent, military department
headquarters continue to maintain redundant staffs, and, in
spite of a 70 percent drop in procurement accounts since 1985,
the Department's acquisition infrastructure has remained
largely static.
The committee maintains that the Department currently has
sufficient authority to reorganize and restructure itself but
has demonstrated little willingness to pursue such reforms. Not
since the passage of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of
Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-433) has the
defense establishment undergone significant scrutiny and
reform.
To address these trends, the committee undertook a number
of initiatives during the 104th Congress to encourage and
compel the Department to focus on these matters and arrive at
its own options and solutions. The committee deliberately chose
not to legislate specific prescriptive remedies on the belief
that the Department was better suited to develop such detail on
its own. Therefore, the committee provided the Department with
broad guidance and, where possible, relief from existing
statutory limitations and dictates on organizational matters.
To the committee's continuing disappointment, the Department's
response to these efforts has ranged from passive resistance to
outright defiance of statutory direction. After two years of
attempting a preferred approach of cooperation and
collaboration, the committee finds itself no further along in
effecting the necessary change in the Department's management
and organizational structure.
Section 501--Establishment of commission
In an effort to increase understanding and provide the
Congress with implementation options for reforming the
Department of Defense, this subtitle would establish a
commission to be known as the ``Commission on Defense
Reorganization and Streamlining.'' The committee believes an
independent commission would serve to further the cause of
fundamental and much-needed defense organizational reform. The
commission would consist of nine members who are private
citizens with knowledge and expertise in organization and
management matters. Two members would be appointed by the
chairman of the House National Security Committee, two members
would be appointed by the ranking member of the House National
Security Committee, two members would be appointed by the
chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and two
members would be appointed by the ranking member of the Senate
Armed Services Committee.
This section would also provide for three of the four
appointing chairmen and ranking members to designate a
commission chairman. In addition, this section provides for
filling vacancies, and describes the initial organizational
requirements of the commission. It would require that all
members of the commission be required to hold appropriate
security clearances. The committee notes, however, that it is
not the intent of this subsection to disqualify those
individuals who do not currently hold clearances but who could
be provided appropriate clearances in a short period of time.
The committee expects that in such circumstances the government
would move to secure the necessary clearances as expeditiously
as possible.
Section 502--Duties of commission
This section would establish the duties of the commission,
which would be to make recommendations to increase overall
organizational effectiveness of the Department of Defense. The
commission shall examine the missions, functions,
responsibilities, and relationships therein, of the Office of
the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the management headquarters and
headquarters support activities of the Military Departments and
the Defense Agencies, and the Department's various acquisition
organizations and propose alternative organizational structures
and alternative allocation of authorities where it deems
appropriate. In carrying out its duties, the commission shall
identify areas of duplication and recommend options to
streamline, reduce, and eliminate redundancies.
This section would also require that the commission receive
full and timely cooperation of any U.S. government official
responsible for providing the commission with information
necessary to the fulfillment of its responsibilities.
Section 503--Reports
This section would direct the commission to submit an
interim report to the Congress by March 15, 1998, and a final
report by July 15, 1998, on its findings and conclusions, with
a provision for the incorporation of dissenting views.
Section 504--powers
This section would establish the commission's authority to
hold hearings, take testimony, and receive evidence. The
provision would also authorize the commission to secure any
information from the Department of Defense and other federal
agencies as the commission deems necessary to carry out its
responsibilities.
Section 505--Commission procedures
This section would establish the procedures by which the
commission shall conduct its business, describe the number of
members required for a quorum and authorize the commission to
establish panels for the purpose of carrying out the
commission's duties.
Section 506--Personnel matters
This section would establish personnel policies for the
commission. Members of the commission would serve without pay.
The provision would authorize:
(1) Reimbursement of expenses, including per diem in
lieu of subsistence, for travel in the performance of
services for the commission;
(2) The chairman to appoint a staff director, subject
to the approval of the commission, and such additional
personnel as may also be necessary for the commission
to perform its duties;
(3) The pay of the staff director and other
personnel;
(4) Federal government employees to be detailed to
the commission on a non-reimbursable basis and;
(5) The chairman to procure temporary and
intermittent services.
Section 507--Miscellaneous administrative provisions
This section would allow the commission to use the United
States mails and to obtain printing and binding services in
accordance with the procedures used by other federal agencies.
The provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to
furnish the commission with administrative and support
services, as requested, on a reimbursable basis.
Section 508--Funding
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
provide such sums as may be necessary for the activities of the
commission in fiscal year 1998.
Section 509--Termination of the commission
This section would terminate the commission 60 days after
the date of the submission of its report.
Committee Position
On June 11, 1997, the Committee on National Security, a
quorum being present, approved H.R. 1778, as amended, by voice
vote, a quorum being present.
Fiscal Data
Pursuant to clause 7 of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, the committee attempted to ascertain annual
outlays resulting from the bill during fiscal year 1998 and the
four following fiscal years. The results of such efforts are
reflected in the cost estimate prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 403 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, which is included in this
report pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(C) of House Rule XI.
Congressional Budget Office Estimate
In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, the cost estimate
prepared by the Congressional Budget Office and submitted
pursuant to section 403(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974 is as follows:
June 13, 1997.
Hon. Floyd Spence,
Chairman, Committee on National Security,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1778, the Defense
Reform Act of 1997.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Jeanette
Deshong and Valerie Barton.
Sincerely,
June E. O'Neill, Director.
H.R. 1778--Defense Reform Act of 1997
Summary: H.R. 1778 would reduce the number of personnel in
the Department of Defense (DoD) who work on the acquisition of
weapons and supplies, transportation, and management. It would
allow competition between private and public entities for the
performance of certain functions; allow long-term leases for
certain naval vessels; and change other administrative
practices in DoD. H.R. 1778 would also reform laws governing
environmental programs as they apply toDoD and the Department
of Energy (DOE).
Assuming that future appropriations are reduced to reflect
the cost savings resulting from the bill, CBO estimates that
spending subject to annual appropriations would decline by
about $25 million in 1998 and by $15.5 billion over the 1998-
2002 period. The bill would raise direct spending by $49
million in 1998 and $429 million over the five-year period.
Because the bill would affect direct spending in 1998, pay-as-
you-go procedures would apply.
H.R. 1778 contains one intergovernmental mandate as defined
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA). CBO
estimates that there would be no costs to comply with this
mandate over the next five years. The bill contains no private-
sector mandates.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The following
table shows the estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 1778 except
for the effects of titles II and IV, which CBO does not have
enough information to estimate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal years, in millions of dollars--
-----------------------------------------------------------
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
By Fiscal Year, in Millions of Dollars
Spending Under Current Law for Operation and
Maintenance:
Estimated authorization level \1\............... 90,880 90,880 90,880 90,880 90,880 90,880
Estimated outlays............................... 90,720 90,070 90,170 90,188 90,236 90,305
Proposed Changes:
Estimated authorization level................... 0 -26 -1,661 -3,406 -4,668 -5,889
Estimated outlays............................... 0 -25 -1,612 -3,354 -4,630 -5,852
Spending Under the Bill for Operation and
Maintenance:
Estimated authorization level \1\............... 90,880 90,854 89,219 87,474 86,212 84,991
Estimated outlays............................... 90,720 90,045 88,558 86,834 85,606 84,453
DIRECT SPENDING
Spending Under Current Law for Federal Civilian
Retirement:
Estimated budget authority...................... 41,906 43,851 45,994 48,246 50,590 53,092
Estimated outlays............................... 41,822 43,764 45,903 48,151 50,490 52,989
Proposed Changes:
Estimated budget authority...................... 0 49 100 103 106 71
Estimated outlays............................... 0 49 100 103 106 71
Spending Under the Bill for Federal Civilian
Retirement:
Estimated budget authority...................... 41,906 43,900 46,094 48,349 50,696 53,163
Estimated outlays............................... 41,822 43,813 46,003 48,254 50,596 53,060
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--The direct spending costs of this legislation fall within budget function 600 (income security). The
authorization of appropriations falls within budget function 050 (national defense).
\1\ The 1997 level is the amount appropriated for that year. Amounts for fiscal years 1998 through 2002 are
subject to future appropriations action. The current law amounts shown here assume that appropriations under
current law remain at the 1997 level. If they are adjusted for inflation, these amounts would grow at a rate
of about $3 billion a year, but the estimated changes would remain as shown.
Title I--Defense personnel reforms
Title I would reduce the number of civilian personnel
employed by DoD. By October 1, 2001, the number of personnel
assigned to management headquarters and headquarters support
activities could not exceed 75 percent of the number as of
October 1, 1997. Similarly, section 102 would reduce the
defense acquisition workforce by 124,000 over four years.
Section 105 would limit the number of personnel employed by the
United States Transportation Command (TRANSCOM) to 66,238,
which is 1,000 lower than current end strength projections for
1997.
Current and projected end strengths for military personnel
are close to the minimum levels required by current law.
Therefore, CBO assumes that under title I civilian employees
would leave the workforce while military personnel would be
reassigned to other activities within DoD. Thus, all separation
costs and subsequent salary savings derive from reductions in
civilian employment levels. To determine how many civilians
would leave employment, CBO assumes that military and civilian
positions in management headquarters and TRANSCOM would be
eliminated in the same proportion. Because the acquisition
workforce is composed primarily of civilians, CBO assumes that
civilians would comprise nearly all of the reduction required
by section 102. In total, CBO estimates that DOD's civilian
workforce would be reduced by nearly 130,000 over the four-year
period, relative to the number of civilian employees on October
1, 1997. This estimate shows the savings from reducing the
workforce by about 100,000 employees, assuming that a reduction
of about 30,000 will occur under current law consistent with
the Administration's plans.
In 1998, spending subject to appropriations would be lower
by about $26 million--a fraction of the ultimate savings
because separation costs would nearly offset savings to DoD
from having fewer employees. In 2002, however, the proposed
workforce reductions would produce savings of nearly $6
billion.
CBO expects that at first more junior personnel earning
about $43,000 annually wouldleave the workforce. After a two-
year transition period, the savings for each cohort would reflect the
current average compensation, which CBO estimates would average about
$53,000 per person in 1998 dollars. After 5 years, when all
consolidations and reorganizations are complete, DoD would achieve full
savings from all personnel reductions.
CBO estimates that termination costs would offset some of
the savings in the first few years. The estimate assumes that
about 4 percent of the workforce voluntarily leaves employment
each year. The other departing employees would receive a one-
time severance payment of about $23,000 in 1998 dollars. This
estimate is based on severance packages reported by DoD and
other federal agencies for personnel who are not eligible for
retirement.
Most civilian separations would occur through a reduction
in force that would make former employees eligible for
separation benefits. In addition, the bill specifies other
benefits for personnel eligible to retire. In fiscal year 1998,
section 103 would allow the Secretary of Defense to offer
senior civilian members of the acquisition workforce who are
between ages 50 and 55 a higher annuity than under current law.
Under current law, such retirees would have their annuity
reduced by 2 percentage points for every year they are younger
than 55 years of age. The bill would lower that reduction to 1
percent per year. Eligible personnel would have the option of
retiring with the higher annuity or retiring under current law
and receiving separation pay of $25,000.
CBO estimates that about 3,300 senior personnel would
retire early under the bill, at an average retired pay of
$29,000 in 1998. Direct spending costs of this provision--for
additional annuity payments--would be about $100 million per
year through 2001. Because those personnel would reach their
normal retirement age by 2003, CBO estimates that those costs
would decrease to about $71 million in 2002.
Title II--Defense business practices reforms
Title II would open several activities within DoD to
competitive procurement from private and public entities; set
certain requirements for the process of engaging contractors to
perform functions currently carried out by government
employees; and mandate efficiencies in certain logistic
functions. CBO estimates that these provisions would lead to
some budgetary savings, but cannot estimate the amount. The
activities targeted by these provisions employ a significant
portion of DOD's employees and cost several billion dollars
each year. Thus budgetary effects that are small in percentage
terms could still represent significant amounts in dollar
terms. Because the bill would postpone some competitions until
organizations within DoD could be reconfigured, any savings
would not occur immediately. Continued government supervision
or regulation of contractors would also tend to reduce savings
if the competitions lead to greater provision of goods and
services by the private sector.
Title II would allow DoD to convey all or part of
government-owned utility systems to other public or private
entities in exchange for cash payments or lower utility rates.
This provision would represent an asset sale and direct
spending because DoD would be allowed to spend the proceeds.
Receipts and spending would offset each other, however, for no
net budgetary effect. Nevertheless, both the receipts from any
sale and utility charges that are below DOD's current costs
could reduce the need for appropriated funding. Based on
criteria established in the 1998 budget resolution, CBO has
determined that proceeds from these asset sales should be
counted in the budget totals for purposes of Congressional
scoring. Under the Balanced Budget Act, however, the proceeds
of asset sales are not counted for pay-as-you-go purposes, and
only the additional spending would be recorded on the pay-as-
you-go scorecard. CBO does not have enough information to
estimate these budgetary impacts.
Title III--Defense environmental reforms
Title III would amend the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA),
commonly known as the Superfund Act, which governs the cleanup
of sites contaminated with hazardous substances--including
federally owned sites where routine operations have ceased.
Subtitle A would establish new procedures for the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to use when selecting appropriate
remedial actions (cleanup methods) at Superfund sites. This
section also would allow states to apply to EPA for
authorization to assume all federal responsibilities for
overseeing the cleanup of federally owned Superfund sites.
Finally, Subtitle B would exempt certain DoD facilities from
CERCLA's cleanup requirements.
CBO estimates that enactment of H.R. 1778 could reduce the
cost of individual Superfund cleanups, but would not lead to a
reduction in total CERCLA-related federal costs for several
years. EPA is already attempting to implement some of the
changes proposed by the bill, such as a consideration of future
land use, using presumptive remedies, and a greater role for
states in the program. Moreover, we believe that any cost
savings achievable at individual federal Superfund projects
would be applied to the enormous backlog of federal and
nonfederal sites waiting to be addressed.
The Departments of Energy and Defense (DOE and DoD) are
responsible for most of the government's efforts to clean up
hazardous waste. Together these agencies have identified
thousands of sites that must be decontaminated and restored.
These include former nuclear weapons manufacturing facilities
that rank among the nation's most challenging and complex
cleanup efforts because of the combined presence of radioactive
and other hazardous wastes at these sites. Funding for DOE and
DoD Superfund activities in 1997 is about $3.7 billion. Of this
amount, roughly 60 percent funds remedial actions, while the
remainder funds investigations and studies.
In addition, the Department of the Interior and the Forest
Service face large potential Superfund cleanup liabilities.
These agencies do not anticipate incurring significant
remediation costs until after 2000.
The changes this bill would make in the process of
selecting remedies could reduce the cost of Superfund cleanup
efforts at federally owned sites. These changes, however, would
not dramatically affect spending at sites where cleanup work is
underway because remedies have already been selected at those
sites. Most of the changes in the Superfund program that would
be made by Title III could affect cleanup spending at federal
sites where remedial actions will commence in two to four
years. Thus, significant cost savings at individual federal
sites would not begin immediately. Furthermore, the backlog of
federal sites with hazardous wastes requiring cleanup is so
large that any savings attributable to reductions in the cost
of Superfund remedies at individual sites would probably not
lead to a reduction in total federal spending for cleanups for
many years.
It is also unlikely that enactment of H.R. 1778 would lead
to a reduction in EPA's Superfund budget. While the changes in
the remedy selection process could reduce the cost ofSuperfund
cleanup efforts at nonfederal sites, most such expenses are borne by
private parties who are responsible for these costs under CERCLA. In
1997, EPA received appropriations of $1.4 billion for its Superfund
program. These funds cover the costs to administer the program, conduct
research, enforce CERCLA, and clean up nonfederal sites when necessary.
Enactment of H.R. 1778 could reduce the cost of cleaning up individual
nonfederal sites. But total EPA spending over the next several years
would probably not be affected because nearly 1,000 sites are currently
on EPA's National Priorities List of Superfund sites requiring final
cleanup action.
Title IV--Miscellaneous additional Defense reforms
Title IV contains provisions affecting long-term leases of
naval vessels, telecommunications linkages, terms and
procedures for some government purchases, and various boards,
commissions, and advisory committees. By itself, this title
would probably lead to budgetary savings because of provisions
to terminate certain organizations and to modify procurement
practices or requirements. The most significant budgetary
impact, however, would stem from subsequent legislation on
long-term ship leases that section 401 of this bill would
anticipate.
Section 401 would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
enter into long-term commitments to either lease newly built
surface vessels or contract for services employing such
vessels; in either case the contract may include an option for
the Navy to purchase the vessel. Contracts under this section
would have to be specifically authorized in subsequent
legislation, but section 401 would define how that legislation
would be scored for the purposes of budgetary enforcement.
Under current practices, a contract authorized under this
section would probably be considered either a capital lease or
a lease-purchase arrangement. As a result, a large amount of
budget authority would be required in the first year. If the
arrangement is a lease-purchase, the budget would record all
outlays in the first year for contracts on existing vessels and
over the expected construction period for contracts to acquire
new vessels. If section 401 is enacted, however, the subsequent
authorization would be scored as a multiyear service contract
or as an operating lease, thus reducing the amount of initial
budget authority needed from the full cost of the contract to
only the first-year cost.
Title V--Commission on Defense organization and streamlining
Title V would establish a nine-member commission to study
ways to streamline various components of DoD, including the
Office of the Secretary of Defense, the headquarters of the
military departments, and the various acquisition-related
organizations within DoD. The commission would issue a report
by July 15, 1998, and would terminate its activities 60 days
later.
Members of the commission would serve without pay, but
would be reimbursed for travel and other expenses. The staff of
the commission would consist of paid personnel appointed by its
chairman, as well personnel detailed from federal agencies. The
bill would not limit the size of the staff or the expenses that
it could incur. Funding would be provided from 1998
appropriations for operations and maintenance of defense
agencies. Assuming the commission has a 10-member staff, CBO
estimates that costs, including overhead, would total about $1
million in 1998.
Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 sets up pay-as-you-go
procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or
receipts through 1998. CBO estimates that enactment of H.R.
1778 would result in $49 million in additional direct spending
in fiscal year 1998.
Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal governments:
Title III of H.R. 1778 would exempt some DoD facilities from
certain state remediation requirements. This preemption of
authority would constitute a mandate on state governments under
UMRA. However, CBO estimates that enactment of this provision
would have no short-run impact on the budgets of state
governments; it would simply lower the level of cleanup
standards applicable to affected federal defense facilities. In
the long run, it is possible that the lower standards could
lead to additional state costs. At this point, CBO has no basis
for estimating the timing or the magnitude of such potential
costs.
Several other provisions in H.R. 1778, while not mandates,
could affect the budgets of state and local governments. The
bill would amend the federal Superfund program to expand the
list of cleanup methods and allow for a site's future land use
to be taken into consideration when selecting the level of
cleanup. Should individual cleanups become less expensive as a
result of these changes, state and local governments' share of
cleanup costs could also go down. H.R. 1778 would allow states
greater control over cleanups of hazardous waste sites on
federal facilities. States could apply to the EPA for the
authority to select cleanup methods and to enter into
agreements with federal agencies and other potentially
responsible parties for the completion of the cleanups. Under
current law, states can participate in the planning and
selection of cleanup methods at federal facilities, but they
cannot assume any of these responsibilities for the federal
government.
In addition, the bill contains a provision that would make
it easier for secretaries of military departments to convey
utility systems under their jurisdiction to municipal,
regional, or district utility companies or other entities by
establishing permanent authority for such conveyances.
Estimated impact on the private-sector: H.R. 1778 contains
no private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Cost: Title I: Jeannette
Deshong and Valerie Barton; Title II: Dawn Sauter; Title III:
Kim Cawley; Title IV: Kent Christensen and Dawn Sauter; and
Title V: Kent Christensen. Impact on State, Local, and Tribal
Governments: Karen McVey and Pepper Santalucia. Impact on the
Private Sector: Frances M. Lussier.
Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Committee Cost Estimate
Pursuant to clause 7(a) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the committee generally concurs with
the estimate as contained in the report of the Congressional
Budget Office.
Inflation Impact Statement
Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the committee concludes that the bill
would have no significant inflationary impact.
Oversight Findings
With respect to clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, this legislation results from
hearings and other oversight activities conducted by the
committee pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X.
With respect to clause 2(l)(3)(B) of rule XI of the Rules
of the House of Representatives and section 308(a)(1) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this legislation does not
include any new spending or credit authority, nor does it
provide for any increase or decrease in tax revenues or
expenditures. The bill does, however, authorize appropriations.
Other fiscal features of this legislation are addressed in the
estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974.
With respect to clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the committee has not received
a report from the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight
pertaining to the subject matter of H.R. 1778.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Pursuant to rule XI, clause 2(l)(4) of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the committee finds the authority for
this legislation in Article I, Section 8 of the United States
Constitution.
Statement of Federal Mandates
Pursuant to section 423 of Public Law 104-4, this
legislation contains no federal mandates with respect to state,
local, and tribal governments, nor with respect to the private
sector. Similarly, the bill provides no federal
intergovernmental mandates.
Roll Call Vote
In accordance with clause 2(l)(2)(B) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, roll call and voice
votes were taken with respect to the committee's consideration
of H.R. 1178. The record of this roll call vote is attached to
this report.
The committee ordered H.R. 1178 reported to the House with
a favorable recommendation by voice vote, a quorum being
present.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed
to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is
printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed
is shown in roman):
TITLE 10, UNITED STATES CODE
* * * * * * *
Subtitle A--General Military Law
* * * * * * *
PART IV--SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT
* * * * * * *
[142. Procurement Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreement
Program................................................... 2411]
142. Procurement and Electronic Commerce Technical Assistance
Program................................................... 2411
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 3--GENERAL POWERS AND FUNCTIONS
Sec.
121. Regulations.
* * * * * * *
130a. Management headquarters and headquarters support activities
personnel: limitation.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 130a. Management headquarters and headquarters support activities
personnel: limitation
(a) Limitation.--Effective October 1, 2001, the number of
management headquarters and headquarters support activities
personnel in the Department of Defense may not exceed the 75
percent of the baseline number.
(b) Phased Reduction.--The number of management headquarters
and headquarters support activities personnel in the Department
of Defense--
(1) as of October 1, 1998, may not exceed 90 percent
of the baseline number;
(2) as of October 1, 1999, may not exceed 85 percent
of the baseline number; and
(3) as of October 1, 2000, may not exceed 80 percent
of the baseline number.
(c) Baseline Number.--In this section, the term ``baseline
number'' means the number of management headquarters and
headquarters support activities personnel in the Department of
Defense as of October 1, 1997.
(d) Management Headquarters and Headquarters Support
Activities Personnel Defined.--In this section:
(1) The term ``management headquarters and
headquarters support activities personnel'' means
military and civilian personnel of the Department of
Defense who are assigned to, or employed in, functions
in management headquarters activities or in management
headquarters support activities.
(2) The terms ``management headquarters activities''
and ``management headquarters support activities'' have
the meanings given those terms in Department of Defense
Directive 5100.73, entitled ``Department of Defense
Management Headquarters and Headquarters Support
Activities'', as in effect on November 12, 1996.
(e) Limitation on Reassignment of Functions.--In carrying out
reductions in the number of personnel assigned to, or employed
in, management headquarters and headquarters support activities
in order to comply with this section, the Secretary of Defense
and the Secretaries of the military departments may not
reassign functions in order to evade the requirements of this
section.
(f) Flexibility.--If the Secretary of Defense determines, and
certifies to Congress, that the limitation in subsection (b)
with respect to any fiscal year would adversely affect United
States national security, the Secretary may waive the
limitation under that subsection with respect to that fiscal
year. If the Secretary of Defense determines, and certifies to
Congress, that the limitation in subsection (a) during fiscal
year 2001 would adversely affect United States national
security, the Secretary may waive the limitation under that
subsection with respect to that fiscal year. The authority
under this subsection may be used only once, with respect to a
single fiscal year.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 4--OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
* * * * * * *
143. Office of the Secretary of Defense personnel: limitation.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 143. Office of the Secretary of Defense personnel: limitation
(a) Permanent Limitation on OSD Personnel.--Effective October
1, 1999, the number of OSD personnel may not exceed 75 percent
of the baseline number.
(b) Phased Reduction.--The number of OSD personnel--
(1) as of October 1, 1997, may not exceed 85 percent
of the baseline number; and
(2) as of October 1, 1998, may not exceed 80 percent
of the baseline number.
(c) Baseline Number.--For purposes of this section, the term
``baseline number'' means the number of OSD personnel as of
October 1, 1994.
(d) OSD Personnel Defined.--For purposes of this section, the
term ``OSD personnel'' means military and civilian personnel of
the Department of Defense who are assigned to, or employed in,
functions in the Office of the Secretary of Defense (including
Direct Support Activities of that Office and the Washington
Headquarters Services of the Department of Defense).
(e) Limitation on Reassignment of Functions.--In carrying out
reductions in the number of personnel assigned to, or employed
in, the Office of the Secretary of Defense in order to comply
with this section, the Secretary of Defense may not reassign
functions solely in order to evade the requirements contained
in this section.
(f) Flexibility.--If the Secretary of Defense determines, and
certifies to Congress, that the limitation in subsection (b)
with respect to any fiscal year would adversely affect United
States national security, the Secretary may waive the
limitation under that subsection with respect to that fiscal
year. If the Secretary of Defense determines, and certifies to
Congress, that the limitation in subsection (a) during fiscal
year 1999 would adversely affect United States national
security, the Secretary may waive the limitation under that
subsection with respect to that fiscal year. The authority
under this subsection may be used only once, with respect to a
single fiscal year.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 6--COMBATANT COMMANDS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 165. Combatant commands: administration and support
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(d) Limitation on United States Transportation Command
Personnel.--(1) Effective October 1, 1998, the number of United
States Transportation Command personnel may not exceed 66,238.
(2) In this subsection, the term ``United States
Transportation Command personnel'' means military and civilian
personnel who are assigned to, or employed in, the United
States Transportation Command (including the components of that
combatant command).
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 7--BOARDS, COUNCILS, AND COMMITTEES
Sec.
171. Armed Forces Policy Council.
* * * * * * *
182. Board on Criminal Investigations.
183. Board on Audits.
184. Boards, commissions, and other advisory committees: limitations.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 182. Board on Criminal Investigations
(a) Establishment.--(1) There is in the Department of Defense
a Board on Criminal Investigations. The Board consists of the
following officials:
(A) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command,
Control, Communications, and Intelligence.
(B) The head of the Army Criminal Investigation
Command.
(C) The head of the Naval Criminal Investigative
Service.
(D) The head of the Air Force Office of Special
Investigations.
(2) To ensure cooperation between the military department
criminal investigative organizations and the Defense Criminal
Investigative Service, the Inspector General of the Department
of Defense shall serve as a nonvoting member of the Board.
(b) Functions of Board.--The Board shall provide for
coordination and cooperation between the military department
criminal investigative organizations so as to avoid duplication
of effort and maximize resources available to the military
department criminal investigative organizations.
(c) Regional Working Groups.--The Board shall establish
working groups at the regional level to address and resolve
issues of jurisdictional responsibility that may arise
regarding criminal investigations involving a military
department criminal investigative organization. A working group
shall consist of managers or supervisors of the military
department criminal investigative organizations who have the
authority to make binding decisions regarding which
organization will conduct a particular criminal investigation
or whether a criminal investigation should be conducted
jointly.
(d) Authority of Assistant Secretary.--In the event that a
regional working group or the Board is unable to resolve an
issue of investigative responsibility, the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Command, Control, Communications, and
Intelligence shall have the responsibility to make a final
determination regarding the issue.
(e) Military Department Criminal Investigative Organization
Defined.--In this section, the term ``military department
criminal investigative organization'' means any of the
following:
(1) The Army Criminal Investigation Command.
(2) The Naval Criminal Investigative Service.
(3) The Air Force Office of Special Investigations.
Sec. 183. Board on Audits
(a) Establishment.--(1) There is in the Department of Defense
a Board on Audits. The Board consists of the following
officials:
(A) The Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller).
(B) The Auditor General of the Army.
(C) The Auditor General of the Navy.
(D) The Auditor General of the Air Force.
(E) The director of the Defense Contract Audit
Agency.
(2) To ensure cooperation between the defense auditing
organizations and the Office of the Inspector General of the
Department of Defense, the Inspector General of the Department
of Defense shall serve as a nonvoting member of the Board.
(b) Functions of Board.--The Board shall provide for
coordination and cooperation between the defense auditing
organizations so as to avoid duplication of effort and maximize
resources available to the defense auditing organizations.
(c) Regional Working Groups.--The Board shall establish
working groups at the regional level to address and resolve
issues of jurisdictional responsibility that may arise
regarding audits involving a defense auditing organization. A
working group shall consist of managers or supervisors of the
defense auditing organizations who have the authority to make
binding decisions regarding which defense auditing organization
will conduct a particular audit or whether an audit should be
conducted jointly.
(d) Authority of Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller).--
In the event that a regional working group or the Board is
unable to resolve an issue of jurisdictional responsibility,
the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall have the
responsibility to make a final determination regarding the
issue.
(e) Defense Auditing Organization Defined.--In this section,
the term ``defense auditing organization'' means any of the
following:
(1) The Army Audit Agency.
(2) The Naval Audit Service.
(3) The Air Force Audit Agency.
(4) The Defense Contract Audit Agency.
Sec. 184. Boards, commissions, and other advisory committees:
limitations
(a) Limitation on Establishment.--No advisory committee may
be established in, or administered or funded (in whole or in
part) by, the Department of Defense except as specifically
provided by law after the date of the enactment of this
section.
(b) Termination of Advisory Committees.--Each advisory
committee of the Department of Defense (whether established by
law, by the President, or by the Secretary of Defense) shall
terminate not later than the expiration of the four-year period
beginning on the date of its establishment or on the date of
the most recent continuation of the advisory committee by law.
(c) Exception for Temporary Advisory Committees.--Subsection
(a) does not apply to an advisory committee established for a
period of one year or less for the purpose (as set forth in the
charter of the advisory committee) of examining a matter that
is critical to the national security of the United States.
(d) Annual Report.--Not later than March 1 of each year
(beginning in 1999), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to
Congress a report on advisory committees of the Department of
Defense. In each such report, the Secretary shall identify each
advisory committee that the Secretary proposes to support
during the next fiscal year and shall set forth the
justification for each such committee and the projected costs
for that committee for the next fiscal year. In the case of any
advisory committee that is to terminate in the year following
the year in which the report is submitted pursuant to
subsection (b) and that the Secretary proposes be continued by
law, the Secretary shall include in the report a request for
continuation of the committee and a justification and cost
estimate for such continuation.
(e) Advisory Committee Defined.--In this section, the term
``advisory committee'' means an entity that is subject to the
provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C.
App.).
* * * * * * *
PART II--PERSONNEL
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 87--DEFENSE ACQUISITION WORKFORCE
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER V--GENERAL MANAGEMENT PROVISIONS
Sec.
1761. Management information system.
* * * * * * *
1765. Limitations on number of personnel.
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER II--DEFENSE ACQUISITION POSITIONS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1721. Designation of acquisition positions
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Management Headquarters Activities.--The Secretary also
shall designate as acquisition positions under subsection (a)
those acquisition-related positions which are in management
headquarters activities and in management headquarters support
activities. For purposes of this subsection, the terms
``management headquarters activities'' and ``management
headquarters support activities'' have the meanings given those
terms in Department of Defense Directive 5100.73, entitled
``Department of Defense Management Headquarters and
Headquarters Support Activities'', dated [November 25, 1988]
November 12, 1996.
* * * * * * *
SUBCHAPTER V--GENERAL MANAGEMENT PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
Sec. 1765. Limitations on number of personnel
(a) Limitation.--Effective October 1, 2001, the number of
defense acquisition personnel may not exceed the baseline
number reduced by 124,000.
(b) Phased Reduction.--The number of the number of defense
acquisition personnel--
(1) as of October 1, 1998, may not exceed the
baseline number reduced by 40,000;
(2) as of October 1, 1999, may not exceed the
baseline number reduced by 80,000; and
(3) as of October 1, 2000, may not exceed the
baseline number reduced by 102,000.
(c) Baseline Number.--For purposes of this section, the
baseline number is the total number of defense acquisition
personnel as of October 1, 1997.
(d) Defense Acquisition Personnel Defined.--(1) In this
section, the term ``defense acquisition personnel'' means
military and civilian personnel (other than civilian personnel
described in paragraph (2)) who are assigned to, or employed
in, acquisition organizations of the Department of Defense (as
specified in Department of Defense Instruction numbered 5000.58
dated January 14, 1992).
(2) Such term does not include civilian employees of the
Department of Defense who are employed at a maintenance depot.
* * * * * * *
PART IV--SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT
Chap. Sec.
131. Planning and Coordination................................ 2201
* * * * * * *
[142. Procurement Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreement
Program................................................... 2411]
142. Procurement and Electronic Commerce Technical Assistance
Program................................................... 2411
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 137--PROCUREMENT GENERALLY
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2304. Contracts: competition requirements
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g)(1) In order to promote efficiency and economy in
contracting and to avoid unnecessary burdens for agencies and
contractors, the Federal Acquisition Regulation shall provide
for--
(A) special simplified procedures for purchases of
property and services for amounts not greater than the
simplified acquisition threshold; and
(B) special simplified procedures for purchases of
property and services for amounts greater than the
simplified acquisition threshold but not greater than
$5,000,000 with respect to which the contracting
officer reasonably expects, based on the nature of the
property or services sought and on market research,
that offers will include [only] commercial items.
* * * * * * *
(l) Micro-Purchases.--(1) A contracting officer may not award
a contract or issue a purchase order to buy commercial items
for an amount equal to or less than the micro-purchase
threshold unless a member of the Senior Executive Service or a
general or flag officer makes a written determination that--
(A) the source or sources available for the
commercial item do not accept a preferred micro-
purchase method, and the contracting officer is seeking
a source that does accept such a method; or
(B) the nature of the commercial item necessitates a
contract or purchase order so that terms and conditions
can be specified.
(2) In this subsection:
(A) The term ``micro-purchase threshold'' has the
meaning provided in section 32 of the Office of Federal
Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 428).
(B) The term ``preferred micro-purchase method''
means the use of the Government-wide commercial
purchase card or any other method for carrying out
micro-purchases that Secretary of Defense prescribes in
the regulations implementing this subsection.
(3) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations to
implement this subsection. The regulations shall include such
additional preferred methods of carrying out micro-purchases,
and such exceptions to the requirement of paragraph (1), as the
Secretary considers appropriate.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 141--MISCELLANEOUS PROCUREMENT PROVISIONS
* * * * * * *
Sec.
2381. Contracts: regulations for bids.
* * * * * * *
[2403. Major weapon systems: contractor guarantees.]
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2403. Major weapon systems: contractor guarantees
[(a) In this section:
[(1) The term ``weapon system'' means items that can
be used directly by the armed forces to carry out
combat missions and that cost more than $100,000 or for
which the eventual total procurement cost is more than
$10,000,000. Such term does not include commercial
items sold in substantial quantities to the general
public.
[(2) The term ``prime contractor'' means a party that
enters into an agreement directly with the United
States to furnish part or all of a weapon system.
[(3) The term ``design and manufacturing
requirements'' means structural and engineering plans
and manufacturing particulars, including precise
measurements, tolerances, materials, and finished
product tests for the weapon system being produced.
[(4) The term ``essential performance requirements'',
with respect to a weapon system, means the operating
capabilities or maintenance and reliability
characteristics of the system that are determined by
the Secretary of Defense to be necessary for the system
to fulfill the military requirement for which the
system is designed.
[(5) The term ``component'' means any constituent
element of a weapon system.
[(6) The term ``mature full-scale production'' means
the manufacture of all units of a weapon system after
the manufacture of the first one-tenth of the eventual
total production or the initial production quantity of
such system, whichever is less.
[(7) The term ``initial production quantity'' means
the number of units of a weapon system contracted for
in the first year of full-scale production.
[(8) The term ``head of an agency'' has the meaning
given that term in section 2302 of this title.
[(b) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the head
of an agency may not after January 1, 1985, enter into a
contract for the production of a weapon system unless each
prime contractor for the system provides the United States with
written guarantees that--
[(1) the item provided under the contract will
conform to the design and manufacturing requirements
specifically delineated in the production contract (or
in any amendment to that contract);
[(2) the item provided under the contract, at the
time it is delivered to the United States, will be free
from all defects in materials and workmanship;
[(3) the item provided under the contract will
conform to the essential performance requirements of
the item as specifically delineated in the production
contract (or in any amendment to that contract); and
[(4) if the item provided under the contract fails to
meet the guarantee specified in clause (1), (2), or
(3), the contractor will at the election of the
Secretary of Defense or as otherwise provided in the
contract--
[(A) promptly take such corrective action as
may be necessary to correct the failure at no
additional cost to the United States; or
[(B) pay costs reasonably incurred by the
United States in taking such corrective action.
[(c) The head of the agency concerned may not require
guarantees under subsection (b) from a prime contractor for a
weapon system, or for a component of a weapon system, that is
furnished by the United States to the contractor.
[(d) Subject to subsection (e)(1), the Secretary of Defense
may waive part or all of subsection (b) in the case of a weapon
system, or component of a weapon system, if the Secretary
determines--
[(1) that the waiver is necessary in the interest of
national defense; or
[(2) that a guarantee under that subsection would not
be cost effective.
The Secretary may not delegate authority under this subsection
to any person who holds a position below the level of Assistant
Secretary of Defense or Assistant Secretary of a military
department.
[(e)(1) Before making a waiver under subsection (d) with
respect to a weapon system that is a major defense acquisition
program for the purpose of section 2432 of this title, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
committees specified in paragraph (2) notice in writing of his
intention to waive any or all of the requirements of subsection
(b) with respect to that system and shall include in the notice
an explanation of the reasons for the waiver.
[(2) The committees referred to in paragraph (1) are--
[(A) the Committee on Armed Services and the
Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and
[(B) the Committee on National Security and the
Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives.
[(f) The requirement for a guarantee under subsection (b)(3)
applies only in the case of a contract for a weapon system that
is in mature full-scale production. However, nothing in this
section prohibits the head of the agency concerned from
negotiating a guarantee similar to the guarantee described in
that subsection for a weapon system not yet in mature full-
scale production. When a contract for a weapon system not yet
in mature full-scale production is not to include the full
guarantee described in subsection (b)(3), the Secretary shall
comply with the notice requirements of subsection (e).
[(g) Nothing in this section prohibits the head of the agency
concerned from--
[(1) negotiating the specific details of a guarantee,
including reasonable exclusions, limitations and time
duration, so long as the negotiated guarantee is
consistent with the general requirements of this
section;
[(2) requiring that components of a weapon system
furnished by the United States to a contractor be
properly installed so as not to invalidate any warranty
or guarantee provided by the manufacturer of such
component to the United States;
[(3) reducing the price of any contract for a weapon
system or other defense equipment to take account of
any payment due from a contractor pursuant to subclause
(B) of subsection (b)(4);
[(4) in the case of a dual source procurement,
exempting from the requirements of subsection (b)(3) an
amount of production by the second source contractor
equivalent to the first one-tenth of the eventual total
production by the second source contractor; and
[(5) using written guarantees to a greater extent
than required by this section, including guarantees
that exceed those in clauses (1), (2), and (3) of
subsection (b) and guarantees that provide more
comprehensive remedies than the remedies specified
under clause (4) of that subsection.
[(h)(1) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary to carry out this section.
[(2) The regulations shall include the following:
[(A) Guidelines for negotiating contractor guarantees
that are reasonable and cost effective, as determined
on the basis of the likelihood of defects and the
estimated cost of correcting such defects.
[(B) Procedures for administering contractor
guarantees.
[(C) Guidelines for determining the cases in which it
may be appropriate to waive the requirements of this
section.
[(3) This section does not apply to the Coast Guard or to the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration.]
* * * * * * *
[CHAPTER 142--PROCUREMENT TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
PROGRAM]
CHAPTER 142--PROCUREMENT AND ELECTRONIC COMMERCE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM
Sec.
2411. Definitions.
* * * * * * *
[2417. Administrative costs.]
2417. Funding provisions.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2412. Purposes
The purposes of the program authorized by this chapter are--
(1) to increase assistance by the Department of
Defense to eligible entities furnishing procurement and
electronic commerce technical assistance to business
entities; and
(2) to assist eligible entities in the payment of the
costs of establishing and carrying out new procurement
and electronic commerce technical assistance programs
and maintaining existing procurement and electronic
commerce technical assistance programs.
Sec. 2413. Cooperative agreements
(a) * * *
(b) Under any such cooperative agreement, the eligible entity
shall agree to sponsor programs to furnish [procurement
technical assistance] both procurement technical assistance and
electronic commerce technical assistance to business entities
and the Secretary shall agree to defray not more than one-half
of the eligible entity's cost of furnishing such assistance
under such programs, except that in the case of a program
sponsored by such an entity that provides services solely in a
distressed area the Secretary may agree to furnish more than
one-half, but not more than three-fourths, of such cost with
respect to such program.
(c) In entering into cooperative agreements under subsection
(a), the Secretary shall assure that at least one procurement
and electronic commerce technical assistance program is carried
out in each Department of Defense contract administration
services region during each fiscal year.
(d) The Secretary shall use competitive procedures in
entering into cooperative agreements under subsection (a).
Sec. 2414. Limitation
(a) In General.--The value of the assistance furnished by the
Secretary to any eligible entity to carry out a procurement and
electronic commerce technical assistance program under a
cooperative agreement under this chapter during any fiscal year
may not exceed--
(1) in the case of a program operating on a Statewide
basis, other than a program referred to in clause (3)
or (4), $300,000;
(2) in the case of a program operating on less than a
Statewide basis, other than a program referred to in
clause (3) or (4), $150,000;
(3) in the case of a program operated wholly within
one service area of the Bureau of Indian Affairs by an
eligible entity referred to in section 2411(1)(D) of
this title, $150,000; or
(4) in the case of a program operated wholly within
more than one service area of the Bureau of Indian
Affairs by an eligible entity referred to in section
2411(1)(D) of this title, $300,000.
(b) Determinations on Scope of Operations.--A determination
of whether a procurement and electronic commerce technical
assistance program is operating on a Statewide basis or on less
than a Statewide basis or is operated wholly within one or more
service areas of the Bureau of Indian Affairs by an eligible
entity referred to in section 2411(1)(D) of this title shall be
made in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary
of Defense.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2417. Administrative costs]
Sec. 2417. Funding provisions
(a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--In any fiscal year the
Secretary of Defense may use for the program authorized by this
chapter only funds specifically appropriated for the program
for that fiscal year.
[The Director] (b) Administrative Costs.--The Director of the
Defense Logistics Agency may use, out of the amount
appropriated for a fiscal year for operation and maintenance
for the procurement and electronic commerce technical
assistance program authorized by this chapter, an amount not
exceeding three percent of such amount to defray the expenses
of administering the provisions of this chapter during such
fiscal year.
Sec. 2418. Authority to provide certain types of technical assistance
(a) The procurement and electronic commerce technical
assistance furnished by eligible entities assisted by the
Department of Defense under this chapter may include technical
assistance relating to contracts entered into with (1) Federal
departments and agencies other than the Department of Defense,
and (2) State and local governments.
(b) An eligible entity assisted by the Department of Defense
under this chapter also may furnish information relating to
assistance and other programs available pursuant to the Defense
Conversion, Reinvestment, and Transition Assistance Act of
1992.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 146--CONTRACTING FOR PERFORMANCE OF CIVILIAN COMMERCIAL OR
INDUSTRIAL TYPE FUNCTIONS
Sec.
2461. Commercial or industrial type functions: required studies and
reports before conversion to contractor performance.
2462. Contracting for certain supplies and services required when cost
is lower.
[2463. Reports on savings or costs from increased use of DOD civilian
personnel.]
2463. Collection and retention of cost information data on contracted
out services and functions.
* * * * * * *
2474. Competitive procurement of information services.
2475. Military installations: use of standard forms in conversion
process.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2461. Commercial or industrial type functions: required studies
and reports before conversion to contractor
performance
[(a) Required Notice to Congress.--A commercial or industrial
type function of the Department of Defense that on October 1,
1980, was being performed by Department of Defense civilian
employees may not be converted to performance by a private
contractor unless the Secretary of Defense provides to Congress
in a timely manner--
[(1) notification of any decision to study such
function for possible performance by a private
contractor;
[(2) a detailed summary of a comparison of the cost
of performance of such function by Department of
Defense civilian employees and by private contractor
which demonstrates that the performance of such
function by a private contractor will result in a cost
savings to the Government over the life of the contract
and a certification that the entire cost comparison is
available;
[(3) a certification that the Government calculation
for the cost of performance of such function by
Department of Defense civilian employees is based on an
estimate of the most efficient and cost effective
organization for performance of such function by
Department of Defense civilian employees; and
[(4) a report, to be submitted with the certification
required by paragraph (3), showing--
[(A) the potential economic effect on
employees affected, and the potential economic
effect on the local community and Federal
Government if more than 75 employees are
involved, of contracting for performance of
such function;
[(B) the effect of contracting for
performance of such function on the military
mission of such function; and
[(C) the amount of the bid accepted for the
performance of such function by the private
contractor whose bid is accepted and the cost
of performance of such function by Department
of Defense civilian employees, together with
costs and expenditures which the Government
will incur because of the contract.
[(b) Congressional Notification of Decision To Convert.--If,
after completion of the studies required for completion of the
certification and report required by paragraphs (3) and (4) of
subsection (a), a decision is made to convert the function to
contractorperformance, the Secretary of Defense shall notify
Congress of such decision.]
(a) Notification of Conversion Study.--(1) In the case of a
commercial or industrial type function of the Department of
Defense that on October 1, 1980, was being performed by
Department of Defense civilian employees, the Secretary of
Defense shall notify Congress of any decision to study the
function for possible conversion to performance by a private
contractor. The notification shall include information
regarding the anticipated length and cost of the study.
(2) A study of a commercial or industrial type function for
possible conversion to contractor performance shall include the
following:
(A) A comparison of the performance of the function
by Department of Defense civilian employees and by
private contractor to determine whether contractor
performance will result in savings to the Government
over the life of the contract.
(B) An examination of the potential economic effect
on employees who would be affected by the conversion,
and the potential economic effect on the local
community and the United States if more than 75
employees perform the function.
(C) An examination of the effect of contracting for
performance of the function on the military mission of
the function.
(b) Notification of Conversion Decision.--If, as a result of
the completion of a study under subsection (a) regarding the
possible conversion of a function to performance by a private
contractor, a decision is made to convert the function to
contractor performance, the Secretary of Defense shall notify
Congress of the conversion decision. The notification shall--
(1) indicate that the study conducted regarding
conversion of the function to performance by a private
contractor has been completed;
(2) certify that the comparison required by
subsection (a)(2)(A) as part of the study demonstrates
that the performance of the function by a private
contractor will result in savings to the Government
over the life of the contract;
(3) certify that the entire comparison is available
for examination; and
(4) contain a timetable for completing conversion of
the function to contractor performance.
* * * * * * *
(d) Waiver for Small Functions.--Subsections (a) through (c)
shall not apply to a commercial or industrial type function of
the Department of Defense that is being performed by [45 or
fewer] 20 or fewer Department of Defense civilian employees.
* * * * * * *
(g) Increased Use of Contractors By Defense Agencies.--(1) In
each fiscal year beginning after September 30, 1999, not less
than 33 percent of the commercial and industrial type functions
of the Defense Agencies shall be performed by private
contractors. The Secretary of Defense may achieve this goal
before that date.
(2) In this subsection, the term ``Defense Agency'' means a
program activity specified in the table entitled `Program and
Financing' for operation and maintenance, Defense-wide
activities, in the budget of the President transmitted to
Congress for fiscal year 1998 pursuant to section 1105 of title
31 (and any successor of such activity).
[(g)] (h) Inapplicability During War or Emergency.--The
provisions of this section shall not apply during war or during
a period of national emergency declared by the President or
Congress.
* * * * * * *
[Sec. 2463. Reports on savings or costs from increased use of DOD
civilian personnel]
Sec. 2463. Collection and retention of cost information data on
contracted out services and functions
(a) Requirements In Connection With Conversion to Contractor
Performance.--With respect to each contract converting the
performance of a service or function of the Department of
Defense to contractor performance (and any extension of such a
contract), the Secretary of Defense shall collect, during the
term of the contract or extension, but not to exceed five
years, cost information data regarding performance of the
service or function by private contractor employees. The
Secretary shall provide for the permanent retention of
information collected under this subsection.
[(a) In General.--] (b) Requirements In Connection With
Return to Employee Performance.--Whenever during a fiscal year
[to which this section applies] described in subsection (c),
the performance of a commercial or industrial type activity of
the Department of Defense that is being performed by 50 or more
employees of a private contractor is changed to performance by
civilian employees of the Department of Defense, the Secretary
of Defense shall maintain data in which a comparison is made of
the estimated costs of (1) continued performance of such
activity by private contractor employees, and (2) performance
of such activity by civilian employees of the Department of
Defense.
[(b) Applicability of Section.--This section] (c) Covered
Fiscal Years.--Subsection (b) applies only with respect to a
fiscal year during which there is no statutory limit (commonly
known as an ``end strength'') on the number of civilian
employees that may be employed by the Department of Defense as
of the last day of that fiscal year.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2474. Competitive procurement of information services
(a) Competitive Procurement Required.--Beginning not later
than October 1, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall
competitively procure those commercial and industrial type
functions performed before that date by the Defense Information
Systems Agency. The Secretary shall establish procedures to
conduct competitions among private-sector sources and the
Defense Information Systems Agency and other interested Federal
agencies.
(b) Improvement of Competitive Ability.--Before conducting a
competition under subsection (a) for the procurement of
information services that are being provided by a component of
the DefenseInformation Systems Agency, the Secretary of Defense
shall provide the component with an opportunity to establish its most
efficient organization.
(c) Exception for Classified Functions.--(1) The requirement
of subsection (a) shall not apply to the procurement of
services involving a classified function performed by the
Defense Information Systems Agency.
(2) In this subsection, the term ``classified function''
means any telecommunications or information services that--
(A) involve intelligence activities;
(B) involve cryptologic activities related to
national security;
(C) involve command and control of military forces;
(D) involve equipment that is an integral part of a
weapon or weapons system; or
(E) are critical to the direct fulfillment of
military or intelligence missions (other than routine
administrative and business applications, such as
payroll, finance, logistics, and personnel management
applications).
(d) Reporting Requirements.--Not later than 90 days after the
end of each fiscal year in which services are competitively
procured under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall
submit to Congress a report specifying the type and volume of
such services procured by the Department of Defense during that
fiscal year--
(1) from sources within the Department of Defense;
(2) from private-sector sources; and
(3) from other sources in the Federal Government.
Sec. 2475. Military installations: use of standard forms in conversion
process
(a) Standardization of Requirements.--(1) The Secretary of
Defense shall develop standard forms (to be known as a
``standard performance work statement'' and a ``standard
request for proposal'') to be used in the consideration for
conversion to contractor performance of those commercial
services and functions at military installations that have been
converted to contractor performance at a rate of 50 percent or
more, as determined under subsection (c).
(2) A separate standard form shall be developed for each
service and function covered by paragraph (1) and the forms
shall be used throughout the Department of Defense in lieu of
the performance work statement and request for proposal
otherwise required under the procedures and requirements of
Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 (or any successor
administrative regulation or policy).
(3) The Secretary shall develop and implement the standard
forms not later than October 1, 1998.
(b) Inapplicability of Elements of OMB Circular A-76.--On and
after October 1, 1998, the procedures and requirements of
Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 regarding
performance work statements and requests for proposals shall
not apply with respect to the conversion to contractor
performance at a military installation of a service or function
for which a standard form is required under subsection (a).
(c) Determination of Contractor Performance Percentage.--In
determining the percentage at which a particular commercial
service or function at military installations has been
converted to contractor performance, the Secretary of Defense
shall take into consideration all military installations and
use the final estimate of the percentage of contractor
performance of services and functions contained in the most
recent commercial and industrial activity inventory database
established under Office of Management and Budget Circular A-
76.
(d) Exclusion of Multi-Function Conversion.--If a commercial
service or function for which a standard form is developed
under subsection (a) is combined with another service or
function (for which such a form is not required) for purposes
of considering the services and functions at the military
installation for conversion to contractor performance, a
standard form developed under subsection (a) may not be used in
the conversion process in lieu of the procedures and
requirements of Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76
regarding performance work statements and requests for
proposals.
(e) Effect on Other Laws.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to supersede any other requirements or limitations,
specifically contained in this chapter, on the conversion to
contractor performance of activities performed by civilian
employees of the Department of Defense.
(f) Military Installation Defined.--In this section, the term
``military installation'' means a base, camp, post, station,
yard, center, homeport facility for any ship, or other activity
under the jurisdiction of the Department of Defense, including
any leased facility.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 153--EXCHANGE OF MATERIAL AND DISPOSAL OF OBSOLETE, SURPLUS, OR
UNCLAIMED PROPERTY
Sec.
2571. Interchange of property and services.
2572. Documents, historical artifacts, and condemned or obsolete combat
materiel: loan, gift, or exchange.
2573. Competitive procurement of services to dispose of surplus
property.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2573. Competitive procurement of services to dispose of surplus
property
(a) Competitive Procurement of Services.--Beginning not later
than October 1, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall
competitively procure services for the Department of Defense in
connection with the disposal of surplus property at each site
at which the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service
operates. The Secretary shall establish procedures to conduct
competitions among private-sector sources and the Defense
Reutilization and Marketing Service and other interested
Federal agencies for the performance of all such services at a
particular site.
(b) Improvement of Competitive Ability.--Before conducting a
competition under subsection (a) for the procurement of
services described in such subsection that are being provided
by a component of the Defense Reutilization and Marketing
Service, the Secretary of Defense shall provide the component
with an opportunity to establish its most efficient
organization.
(c) Reporting Requirements.--Not later than 90 days after the
end of each fiscal year in which services for the disposal of
surplus property are competitively procured under subsection
(a), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report
specifying--
(1) the type and volume of such services procured by
the Department of Defense during that fiscal year from
the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service and
from other sources;
(2) the former sites of the Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service operated during that fiscal year by
contractors (other than the Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Service); and
(3) the total amount of any fees paid by such
contractors in connection with the performance of such
services during that fiscal year.
(d) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to alter the requirements regarding the
identification or demilitarization of an item of excess
property or surplus property of the Department of Defense
before the disposal of the item.
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``surplus property'' means any personal
excess property which is not required for the needs and
the discharge of the responsibilities of all Federal
agencies and the disposal of which is the
responsibility of the Department of Defense.
(2) The term ``excess property'' means any personal
property under the control of the Department of Defense
which is not required for its needs and the discharge
of its responsibilities, as determined by the Secretary
of Defense.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 159--REAL PROPERTY; RELATED PERSONAL PROPERTY; AND LEASE OF
NONEXCESS PROPERTY
Sec.
2661. Miscellaneous administrative provisions relating to real
property.
* * * * * * *
2688. Utility systems: permanent conveyance authority.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2688. Utility systems: permanent conveyance authority
(a) Conveyance Authority.--The Secretary of a military
department may convey a utility system, or part of a utility
system, under the jurisdiction of the Secretary to a municipal,
private, regional, district, or cooperative utility company or
other entity. The conveyance may consist of all right, title,
and interest of the United States in the utility system or such
lesser estate as the Secretary considers appropriate to serve
the interests of the United States.
(b) Utility System Defined.--In this section, the term
``utility system'' includes the following:
(1) Electrical generation and supply systems.
(2) Water supply and treatment systems.
(3) Wastewater collection and treatment systems.
(4) Steam or hot or chilled water generation and
supply systems.
(5) Natural gas supply systems.
(6) Sanitary landfills or lands to be used for
sanitary landfills.
(7) Similar utility systems.
(c) Consideration.--(1) The Secretary of a military
department may accept consideration received for a conveyance
under subsection (a) in the form of a cash payment or a
reduction in utility rate charges for a period of time
sufficient to amortize the monetary value of the utility
system, including any real property interests, conveyed.
(2) Cash payments received shall be credited to an
appropriation account designated as appropriate by the
Secretary of Defense. Amounts so credited shall be available
for the same time period as the appropriation credited and
shall be used only for the purposes authorized for that
appropriation.
(d) Congressional Notification.--A conveyance may not be made
under subsection (a) until--
(1) the Secretary of the military department
concerned submits to the appropriate committees of
Congress (as defined in section 2801(c)(4) of this
title) a report containing an economic analysis (based
upon accepted life-cycle costing procedures approved by
the Secretary of Defense) which demonstrates that the
full cost to the United States of the proposed
conveyance is cost-effective when compared with
alternative means of furnishing the same utility
systems; and
(2) a period of 21 days has elapsed after the date on
which the report is received by the committees.
(e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary of the
military department concerned may require such additional terms
and conditions in a conveyance entered into under subsection
(a) as the Secretary considers appropriate to protect the
interests of the United States.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 160--ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2701. Environmental restoration program
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) Responsibility for Response Actions.--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(4) Exemption of remedial actions conducted at
facilities not listed on the national priorities list
from certain requirement.--Notwithstanding subsection
(a)(2) and paragraph (1) of this subsection, the
requirement of section 121(d)(2) of CERCLA (42 U.S.C.
9621(d)(2)) relating to the attainment of a relevant
and appropriate standard, requirement, criteria, or
limitation shall not apply to a remedial action
conducted at a facility under the jurisdiction of the
Secretary of Defense if the facility is not listed on
the National Priorities List under CERCLA.
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 165--ACCOUNTABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY
* * * * * * *
Sec.
2771. Final settlement of accounts: deceased members.
* * * * * * *
2784. Competitive procurement of finance and accounting services.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 2784. Competitive procurement of finance and accounting services
(a) Competitive Procurement Required.--Beginning not later
than October 1, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall
competitively procure finance and accounting services for the
Department of Defense, including nonappropriated fund
instrumentalities of the Department of Defense. The Secretary
shall establish procedures to conduct competitions among
private-sector sources and the Defense Finance and Accounting
Service and other interested Federal agencies. Such procedures
shall not permit a component of the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service to compete against any other component of
the Defense Finance and Accounting Service to provide such
finance and accounting services.
(b) Improvement of Competitive Ability.--Before conducting a
competition under subsection (a) for the procurement of finance
and accounting services that are being provided by a component
of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service, the Secretary of
Defense shall provide the component with an opportunity to
establish its most efficient organization.
(c) Reporting Requirements.--Not later than 90 days after the
end of each fiscal year in which finance and accounting
services are competitively procured under subsection (a), the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report
specifying the total volume of finance and accounting services
procured by the Department of Defense during that fiscal year--
(1) from sources within the Department of Defense;
(2) from private-sector sources; and
(3) from other sources in the Federal Government.
* * * * * * *
Subtitle C--Navy and Marine Corps
* * * * * * *
PART IV--GENERAL ADMINISTRATION
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 631--SECRETARY OF THE NAVY: MISCELLANEOUS POWERS AND DUTIES
Sec.
7204. Schools near naval activities: financial aid.
* * * * * * *
7233. Auxiliary vessels: authority for long-term charter contracts.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 7233. Auxiliary vessels: authority for long-term charter contracts
(a) Authorized Contracts.--After September 30, 1998, the
Secretary of the Navy, subject to subsection (b), may enter
into a contract for the long-term lease or charter of a newly
built surface vessel, under which the contractor agrees to
provide a crew for the vessel for the term of the long-term
lease or charter, for any of the following:
(1) The combat logistics force of the Navy.
(2) The strategic sealift program of the Navy.
(3) Other auxiliary support vessels for the
Department of Defense.
(b) Contracts Required To Be Authorized by Law.--A contract
may be entered into under this section with respect to specific
vessels only if the Secretary is specifically authorized by law
to enter into such a contract with respect to those vessels.
(c) Funds for Contract Payments.--The Secretary may make
payments for contracts entered into under this section using
funds available for obligation during the fiscal year for which
the payments are required to be made. Any such contract shall
provide that the United States will not be required to make a
payment under the contract (other than a termination payment,
if required) before October 1, 2000.
(d) Budgeting Provisions.--Any contract entered into under
this section shall be treated as a multiyear service contract
and as an operating lease for purposes of any provision of law
relating to the Federal budget and Federal budget accounting
procedures, including part C of title II of the Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 900 et
seq.), and any regulation or directive (including any directive
of the Office of Management and Budget) prescribed with respect
to the Federal budget and Federal budget accounting procedures.
(e) Term of Contract.--In this section, the term ``long-term
lease or charter'' means a lease, charter, service contract, or
conditional sale agreement with respect to a vessel the term of
which (including any option period) is for a period of 20 years
or more.
(f) Option To Buy.--A contract entered into under the
authority of this section may contain options for the United
States to purchase one or more of the vessels covered by the
contract at any time during, or at the end of, the contract
period (including any option period) upon payment of an amount
not in excess of the unamortized portion of the cost of the
vessels plus amounts incurred in connection with the
termination of the financing arrangements associated with the
vessels.
(g) Domestic Construction.--The Secretary shall require in
any contract entered into under this section that each vessel
to which the contract applies--
(1) shall have been constructed in a shipyard within
the United States; and
(2) upon delivery, shall be documented under the laws
of the United States.
(h) Vessel Crewing.--The Secretary shall require in any
contract entered into under this section that the crew of any
vessel to which the contract applies be comprised of private
sector commercial mariners.
(i) Contingent Waiver of Other Provisions of Law.--A contract
authorized by this section may be entered into without regard
to section 2401 or 2401a of this title if the Secretary of
Defense makes the following findings with respect to that
contract:
(1) The need for the vessels or services to be
provided under the contract is expected to remain
substantially unchanged during the contemplated
contract or option period.
(2) There is a reasonable expectation that throughout
the contemplated contract or option period the
Secretary of the Navy (or, if the contract is for
services to be provided to, and funded by, another
military department, the Secretary of that military
department) will request funding for the contract at
the level required to avoid contract cancellation.
(3) The use of such contract or the exercise of such
option is in the interest of the national defense.
(j) Source of Funds for Termination Liability.--If a contract
entered into under this section is terminated, the costs of
such termination may be paid from--
(1) amounts originally made available for performance
of the contract;
(2) amounts currently available for operation and
maintenance of the type of vessels or services
concerned and not otherwise obligated; or
(3) funds appropriated for those costs.
* * * * * * *
----------
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997
* * * * * * *
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
* * * * * * *
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS
Subtitle A--Acquisition Management
* * * * * * *
SEC. 803. AUTHORITY TO WAIVE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FOR DEFENSE
ACQUISITION PILOT PROGRAMS.
(a) Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may waive sections
2399, [2403,] 2432, and 2433 of title 10, United States Code,
in accordance with this section for any defense acquisition
program designated by the Secretary of Defense for
participation in the defense acquisition pilot program
authorized by section 809 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2430
note).
* * * * * * *
[(c) Contractor Guarantees for Major Weapons Systems.--The
Secretary of Defense may waive the requirements of section 2403
of title 10, United States Code, for such a defense acquisition
program if an alternative guarantee is used that ensures high
quality weapons systems.]
[(d)] (c) Selected Acquisition Reports.--The Secretary of
Defense may waive the requirements of sections 2432 and 2433 of
title 10, United States Code, for such a defense acquisition
program if the Secretary provides a single annual report to
Congress at the end of each fiscal year that describes the
status of the program in relation to the baseline description
for the program established under section 2435 of such title.
* * * * * * *
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
Subtitle A--General Matters
* * * * * * *
[SEC. 903. REDUCTION OF PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
OF DEFENSE.
[(a) Permanent Limitation on OSD Personnel.--Effective
October 1, 1999, the number of OSD personnel may not exceed 75
percent of the baseline number.
[(b) Phased Reduction.--The number of OSD personnel--
[(1) as of October 1, 1997, may not exceed 85 percent
of the baseline number; and
[(2) as of October 1, 1998, may not exceed 80 percent
of the baseline number.
[(c) Baseline Number.--For purposes of this section, the term
``baseline number'' means the number of OSD personnel as of
October 1, 1994.
[(d) OSD Personnel Defined.--For purposes of this section,
the term ``OSD personnel'' means military and civilian
personnel of the Department of Defense who are assigned to, or
employed in, functions in the Office of the Secretary of
Defense (including Direct Support Activities of that Office and
the Washington Headquarters Services of the Department of
Defense).
[(e) Limitation on Reassignment of Functions.--In carrying
out reductions in the number of personnel assigned to, or
employed in, the Office of the Secretary of Defense in order to
comply with this section, the Secretary of Defense may not
reassign functions solely in order to evade the requirements
contained in this section.
[(f) Flexibility.--If the Secretary of Defense determines,
and certifies to Congress, that the limitation in subsection
(b) with respect to any fiscal year would adversely affect
United States national security, the Secretary may waive the
limitation under that subsection with respect to that fiscal
year. If the Secretary of Defense determines, and certifies to
Congress, that the limitation in subsection (a) during fiscal
year 1999 would adversely affect United States national
security, the Secretary may waive the limitation under that
subsection with respect to that fiscal year. The authority
under this subsection may be used only once, with respect to a
single fiscal year.
[(g) Repeal of Prior Requirement.--Section 901(d) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public
Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 401) is repealed.]
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 351 OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR
1996
SEC. 351. COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT OF PRINTING AND DUPLICATION SERVICES.
(a) Requirement for Competitive Procurement.--Except as
provided in subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense shall,
during fiscal years 1996 [and 1997] through 1998 and consistent
with the requirements of title 44, United States Code,
competitively procure printing and duplication services from
private-sector sources for the performance of at least 70
percent of the total printing and duplication requirements of
the [Defense Printing Service] Defense Automation and Printing
Service.
* * * * * * *
(d) Prohibition on Imposition of Surcharge.--The Defense
Automation and Printing Service may not impose a surcharge on
any printing and duplication service for the Department of
Defense that is procured from a source outside of the
Department.
----------
COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT
OF 1980
TITLE I--HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES RELEASES, LIABILITY, COMPENSATION
* * * * * * *
SEC. 120. FEDERAL FACILITIES.
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(g) Transfer of Authorities.--Except for authorities
which are delegated by the Administrator to an officer or
employee of the Environmental Protection Agency, no authority
vested in the Administrator under this section may be
transferred, by executive order of the President or otherwise,
to any other officer or employee of the United States or to any
other person.]
(g) Transfer of Authorities.--
(1) State application for transfer of authorities.--A
State may apply to the Administrator to exercise the
authorities vested in the Administrator under
subsections (e) and (h) (other than subsection (h)(2))
of this section at any or all facilities owned or
operated by any department, agency, or instrumentality
of the United States (including the executive,
legislative, and judicial branches of government),
including the authority--
(A) to review and approve all documents
prepared in connection with any such
investigation and study;
(B) to review and select remedies pursuant to
subsection (e)(4)(A); and
(C) to enter into agreements with
departments, agencies, and instrumentalities of
the United States in accordance with subsection
(e)(2), and to enter into consent decrees with
other potentially responsible parties in
accordance with subsection (e)(6).
(2) Transfer of authorities.--(A) The Administrator
may enter into a contract or cooperative agreement to
transfer some or all of the authorities described in
paragraph (1) if the Administrator makes the
determinations in subparagraph (B) and the State agrees
to the conditions in subparagraph (C).
(B) The determinations to be made by the
Administrator under subparagraph (A) are the following:
(i) The State has the ability to exercise
such authorities in accordance with this Act,
including adequate legal authority, financial
and personnel resources, organization, and
expertise.
(ii) The State demonstrates experience in
exercising similar authorities.
(C) The conditions to be agreed to by the State under
subparagraph (A) are the following:
(i) The State will not redelegate any of the
authorities transferred to it by the
Administrator, except as provided in the
transfer agreement.
(ii) In the case of a State that is
authorized to implement a State hazardous waste
program pursuant to section 3006 of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6926), the State
will not exercise the authorities under that
Act at the same time and at the same site as it
exercises the authorities transferred to it
under this subsection, with respect to a
release or threat of release being addressed by
the authorities transferred to it.
(iii) The State will exercise the authorities
transferred to it with respect to each
department, agency, and instrumentality of the
United States in the same manner and to the
same extent, both procedurally and
substantively, as it exercises the authorities
with respect to any non-Federal entity.
(3) Effect of authorization under solid waste
disposal act.--In the review by the Administrator of an
application of a State for transfer of authorities
under this subsection, if the State is authorized to
implement a State hazardous waste program pursuant to
section 3006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C.
6926), the following provisions apply:
(A) With respect to a State that is a
signatory to an interagency agreement under
subsection (e)(2) that is in effect on the
effective date of this subsection, the
Administrator, in making the determinations
referred to in paragraph (2), shall accord
substantial weight to the State's hazardous
waste program authorization and the
Administrator's findings in approving such
authorization.
(B) With respect to a State whose
authorization under such section 3006 includes
authorization to implement the corrective
action provisions of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act, the Administrator shall approve the
application and provide for the orderly
transfer of authorities as expeditiously as
possible, but in no case later than 6 months
after the date of receipt of the application,
unless the parties agree to another deadline.
(4) Effect of transfer.--Any State to which
authorities are transferred under this subsection shall
not be deemed to be an agent of the President but shall
exercise such authorities in its own name, and the
Administrator may transfer to a State only those
authorities of the Administrator identified in this
subsection.
(5) Deadlines.--Except as provided in paragraph
(3)(B), the Administrator shall make a determination on
an application from a State under this subsection not
later than 90 days after the date the Administrator
receives the application.
(6) Withdrawal of authorities.--
(A) In general.--The Administrator may
withdraw the authorities transferred under this
subsection in whole or in part if the
Administrator determines--
(i) that the State, in whole or in
part, is exercising such authorities in
a manner clearly inconsistent with the
requirements of this Act; or
(ii) in the case of a State that was
approved under paragraph (3)(B), that
the State is no longer authorized to
implement the corrective action
provisions of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act.
(B) Requirement of written notice.--At least
90 days before withdrawing any such transferred
authorities from a State, the Administrator
shall provide to the State a written
explanation of the reasons for the proposed
withdrawal and afford an opportunity to the
State to discuss the withdrawal and to propose
actions to correct any deficiencies.
(7) Enforcement and remedy selection.--
(A) In general.--An interagency agreement
under this section between a State (including
States which are parties to such agreements
through the exercise of the Administrator's
authorities pursuant to a cooperative agreement
or contract under this subsection) and any
department, agency, or instrumentality of the
United States, shall be enforceable by the
State or the Federal department, agency, or
instrumentality in the United States district
court for the district in which the facility is
located. The district court shall have the
jurisdiction to enforce compliance with any
provision, standard, regulation, condition,
requirement, order, or final determination
which has become effective under such
agreement, and to impose any appropriate civil
penalty provided for any violation of the
agreement, not to exceed $25,000 per day.
(B) Failure to concur in remedy selection.--
(i) In general.--At Federal
facilities where the Administrator's
authorities under subsection (e)(4)
have been transferred to the State
pursuant to this section, and the State
does not concur in the remedy selection
proposed by the Federal agency, the
parties shall enter into dispute
resolution as provided in the
interagency agreement, provided that
the final level for such disputes
concerning remedy selection shall be to
the head of the Federal department,
agency, or instrumentality and the
Governor of the State.
(ii) State remedy selection.--If no
agreement is reached between the head
of the Federal department, agency, or
instrumentality and the Governor, the
State may issue the final
determination, except that the State
shall pay or assure the payment of any
additional costs attributable to
carrying out the remedial action
selected by the State.
(8) Limitation.--Except for authorities that are
transferred by the Administrator to a State pursuant to
this subsection, or that are transferred by the
Administrator to an officer or employee of the
Environmental Protection Agency, no authority vested in
the Administrator under this section may be
transferred, by Executive order of the President or
otherwise, to any other officer or employee of the
United States or to any other person. Except as
necessary to specifically implement the transfer of the
Administrator's authorities to a State pursuant to this
subsection, nothing in this subsection shall be
construed as altering, modifying, or impairing in any
manner, or authorizing the unilateral modification of,
any terms of any agreement, permit, administrative, or
judicial order, decree, or interagency agreement
existing on the effective date of this subsection. Any
other modifications or revisions of an interagency
agreement entered into under this section shall require
the consent of all parties to such agreement, and
absent such consent the agreement shall remain
unchanged. Nothing in this subsection shall affect the
exercise by a State of any other authorities that may
be applicable to facilities in such State.
(k) Criminal Liability.--Notwithstanding any other provision
of this Act or any other law, an officer, employee, or agent of
the United States shall not be held criminally liable for a
failure to comply, in any fiscal year, with a requirement to
take a response action at a facility that is owned or operated
by a department, agency, or instrumentality of the United
States, under this Act, the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C.
6901 et seq.), or any other Federal or State law unless--
(1) the officer, employee, or agent has not fully
performed any direct responsibility or delegated
responsibility that the officer, employee, or agent had
under Executive Order 12088 (42 U.S.C. 4321 note) or
any other delegation of authority to ensure that a
request for funds sufficient to take the response
action was included in the President's budget request
under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, for
that fiscal year; or
(2) appropriated funds were available to pay for the
response action.
(l) Termination of Long-Term Operation and Maintenance.--The
Secretary of Defense, with respect to any site or facility of
the Department of Defense, and the Secretary of Energy, with
respect to any site or facility of the Department of Energy,
may terminate the long-term operation and maintenance of a
completed remedial action in any case in which the Secretary
determines, with the concurrence of the Administrator or
appropriate State or local authorities, that the release or
threat of release of hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants at the site or facility is no longer a threat to
human health and the environment.
SEC. 121. CLEANUP STANDARDS.
(a) * * *
(b) General Rules.--[(1) Remedial actions in which
treatment which permanently and significantly reduces the
volume, toxicity or mobility of the hazardous substances,
pollutants, and contaminants is a principal element, are to be
preferred over remedial actions not involving such treatment.
The offsite transport and disposal of hazardous substances or
contaminated materials without such treatment should be the
least favored alternative remedial action where practicable
treatment technologies are available. The President shall
conduct an assessment of permanent solutions and alternative
treatment technologies or resource recovery technologies that,
in whole or in part, will result in a permanent and significant
decrease in the toxicity, mobility, or volume of the hazardous
substance, pollutant, or contaminant. In making such
assessment, the President shall specifically address the long-
term effectiveness of various alternatives. In assessing
alternative remedial actions, the President shall, at a
minimum, take into account:
[(A) the long-term uncertainties associated with land
disposal;
[(B) the goals, objectives, and requirements of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act;
[(C) the persistence, toxicity, mobility, and
propensity to bioaccumulate of such hazardous
substances and their constituents;
[(D) short- and long-term potential for adverse
health effects from human exposure;
[(E) long-term maintenance costs;
[(F) the potential for future remedial action costs
if the alternative remedial action in question were to
fail; and
[(G) the potential threat to human health and the
environment associated with excavation, transportation,
and redisposal, or containment.
The President shall select a remedial action that is protective
of human health and the environment, that is cost effective,
and that utilizes permanent solutions and alternative treatment
technologies or resource recovery technologies to the maximum
extent practicable. If the President selects a remedial action
not appropriate for a preference under this subsection, the
President shall publish an explanation as to why a remedial
action involving such reductions was not selected.
[(2) The President may select an alternative remedial action
meeting the objectives of this subsection whether or not such
action has been achieved in practice at any other facility or
site that has similar characteristics. In making such a
selection, the President may take into account the degree of
support for such remedial action by parties interested in such
site.]
(1) Methods of remediation.--(A) Remedies selected at
individual facilities shall be protective of human
health and the environment over the long term. A
remedial action may achieve protection of human health
and the environment through--
(i) treatment that reduces the toxicity,
mobility, or volume of hazardous substances,
pollutants, or contaminants;
(ii) containment or other engineering
controls to limit exposure;
(iii) a combination of treatment and
containment; or
(iv) other methods of protection.
(B) The method or methods of remediation appropriate
for a given facility shall be determined through the
evaluation of remedial alternatives and the selection
process under paragraph (2). When determining the
appropriate remedial method, treatment is to be
preferred for hot spots as defined under paragraph
(2)(C).
(2) Appropriate remedial action.--
(A) In general.--The President shall identify
and select an appropriate remedy that minimizes
exposures by comparing alternative remedies and
balancing the following factors with respect to
each such remedy:
(i) The effectiveness of the remedy,
including its implementability.
(ii) The long-term reliability of the
remedy, that is, its capability to
achieve long-term protection of human
health and the environment considering
the preference for treatment of hot
spots.
(iii) The short-term risk posed by
the implementation of the remedy to the
affected community, to those engaged in
the cleanup effort, and to the
environment.
(iv) The acceptability of the remedy
to the affected community.
(v) The reasonableness of the cost of
the remedy.
(vi) The results of any risk
assessments conducted with respect to
the remedy.
(vii) The costs, both direct and
indirect, of the remedy.
(B) Deferral of remedial action.--The
President may defer the selection of a remedial
action if the President determines that--
(i) the hazardous substance,
pollutant, or contaminant can be
contained in a manner sufficient to
protect human health and the
environment; and
(ii) an innovative technology is
expected to be available in the near
future that will provide a more cost-
effective remedy.
(C) Hot spots.--The following shall apply to
the remediation of hot spots:
(i) For purposes of this section, the
term `hot spot' means a discrete area
within a facility that contains
hazardous substances, pollutants or
contaminants (I) that are present in
high concentrations, are highly mobile,
and cannot be reliably contained; or
(II) that would present a significant
risk to human health or the
environment. The President shall
develop guidelines for the
identification of hot spots. Such
guidelines shall recommend appropriate
field investigations that will not
require extraordinarily complex or
costly measures.
(ii) In determining an appropriate
remedy for hot spots, the President
shall consider the factors under
subparagraph (A). With respect to the
factor in clause (v) of subparagraph
(A), the President shall use a higher
threshold for evaluating the
reasonableness of costs for hot spot
treatment relative to the remediation
of non-hot spot materials.
(iii) The President shall select a
remedy requiring treatment of materials
constituting hot spots to the maximum
extent practicable, consistent with the
protection of human health and the
environment. In such instances, the
President shall select an interim
containment remedy for such hot spot
subject to adequate monitoring and
public reporting to ensure its
continued integrity and shall review
the interim containment remedy in
accordance with subsection (c). When
the appropriate treatment technology
becomes available, as determined by the
President, that remedy shall be
considered in accordance with this
section.
(iv) Notwithstanding the presence of
a hot spot, the President may select a
final containment remedy for hot spots
at landfills and mining sites or
similar facilities under the following
circumstances:
(I) The hot spot is small
relative to the overall volume
of waste or contamination being
addressed, the hot spot is not
readily identifiable and
accessible, and without the
presence of the hot spot
containment would have been
selected as the appropriate
remedy under subparagraph (A)
for the larger body of waste or
area of contamination in which
the hot spot is located.
(II) The volume and areal
extent of the hot spot is
extraordinary compared to other
facilities, and it is highly
unlikely due to the size and
other characteristics of the
hot spot that any treatment
technology will be developed
that could be implemented at
reasonable cost.
Where final containment for a hot spot is selected, the
President shall publish an explanation of the basis for
that decision.
(3) Generic remedies.--In order to streamline the
remedy selection process and to facilitate rapid
voluntary action, the President shall establish, taking
into account the reasonably anticipated future land
uses at the facility and the factors enumerated in
paragraph (1)(A)(i), cost-effective generic remedies
for categories of facilities, and expedited procedures
that include community involvement for selecting
generic remedies at an individual facility. To be
eligible for selection at a facility, a generic remedy
shall be protective of human health and the environment
at that facility. In appropriate cases, the President
may select a generic remedy without considering
alternatives to the generic remedy.
(4) Institutional controls.--Whenever the President
selects a remedial action which relies on restrictions
on the use of land, water, or other resources to
achieve protection of human health and the environment,
the President shall specify the nature of the
restrictions required to achieve such protections,
including restrictions on the permissible uses of land,
prohibitions on specified activities upon the property,
restrictions on the drilling of wells or the use of
ground water, or restrictions on the use of surface
water, and may ensure that such restrictions are
incorporated into a hazardous substance easement. In
reviewing remedial action alternatives which would
require the use of such restrictions and providing
opportunity for public comment on those alternatives,
the President shall identify the nature of any
institutional controls that would be required to
implement such restrictions, known or anticipated
affected persons, the likely duration of such
restrictions, and the anticipated costs of acquiring
any appropriate hazardous substance easements and
enforcing the appropriate restrictions.
(5) Land use.--(A) Before selecting a remedy under
subsection (a), the President shall identify the
reasonably anticipated future uses of land at a
facility as required by this Act. In identifying
reasonably anticipated future land uses, the President
shall consider factors that include the factors listed
in subparagraph (B). In the case of a military
installation that is not scheduled for closure or
realignment, the President shall consider such factors
to the maximum extent practicable.
(B) The factors referred to in subparagraph (A) are
as follows:
(i) Views expressed by members of the
affected community.
(ii) With respect to a Federal facility
scheduled for closure or a portion of a Federal
facility scheduled for transfer from the
ownership or control of the Federal Government
to another entity, any joint consensus
recommendation of a technical review committee
established for a facility of the Department of
Defense pursuant to section 2705(c) of title
10, United States Code, a restoration advisory
board established for such a facility pursuant
to section 2705(d) of such title, a local land
use redevelopment authority, and another
appropriate State agency, or, with respect to a
defense nuclear facility of the Department of
Energy, a citizen advisory board.
(iii) The land use history of the facility
and surrounding properties, the current land
uses of the facility and surrounding
properties, recent development patterns in the
area where the facility is located, and
population projections for that area.
(iv) Federal or State land use designations,
including Federal facilities and national
parks, State ground water or surface water
recharge areas established under a State's
comprehensive protection plan for ground water
or surface water, and recreational areas.
(v) The current land use zoning and future
land use plans of the local government with
land use regulatory authority.
(vi) The potential for economic
redevelopment.
(vii) The proximity of the contamination to
residences, sensitive populations or
ecosystems, natural resources, or areas of
unique historic or cultural significance.
(viii) Current plans for the facility by the
property owner or owners, not including
potential voluntary remedial measures.
* * * * * * *
----------
SECTION 3004 OF THE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ACT
standards applicable to owners and operators of hazardous waste
treatment, storage, and disposal facilities
Sec. 3004. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(u) Continuing Releases at Permitted Facilities.--
Standards promulgated under this section shall require, and a
permit issued after the date of enactment of the Hazardous and
Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 by the Administrator or a State
shall require, corrective action for all releases of hazardous
waste or constituents from any solid waste management unit at a
treatment, storage, or disposal facility seeking a permit under
this subtitle, regardless of the time at which waste was placed
in such unit. Permits issued under section 3005 shall contain
schedules of compliance for such corrective action (where such
corrective action cannot be completed prior to issuance of the
permit) and assurances of financial responsibility for
completing such corrective action. The Secretary of Defense,
with respect to any site or facility of the Department of
Defense, and the Secretary of Energy, with respect to any site
or facility of the Department of Energy, may terminate the
long-term operation and maintenance of a completed corrective
action in any case in which the Secretary determines, with the
concurrence of the Administrator or appropriate State or local
authorities, that the release of hazardous waste or
constituents at the site or facility is no longer a threat to
human health and the environment.
* * * * * * *
(y) Munitions.--(1) * * *
(2) The Administrator shall exempt unexpended military
munitions from regulation under this Act upon a finding by the
Administrator that such military munitions are subject to
management under another Federal law or regulation and that
such other federal law or regulation is sufficiently protective
of human health and the environment so as to make additional
regulation under this Act duplicative or unnecessary.
[(2)] (3) For purposes of this subsection, the term
``military munitions'' includes chemical and conventional
munitions.
----------
SECTION 301 OF THE FEDERAL PROPERTY AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES ACT OF
1949
(a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(g)(1) In order to promote efficiency and economy in
contracting and to avoid unnecessary burdens for agencies and
contractors, the Federal Acquisition Regulation shall provide
for--
(A) * * *
(B) special simplified procedures for purchases of
property and services for amounts greater than the
simplified acquisition threshold but not greater than
$5,000,000 with respect to which the contracting
officer reasonably expects, based on the nature of the
property or services sought and on market research,
that offers will include [only] commercial items.
* * * * * * *
DISSENTING VIEWS
The reform package, developed by the committee in an effort
to advance a discussion on possible reforms to the way in which
the defense and energy departments conduct their business,
simply could not pass environmental muster in my judgment. In
addition, the White House, the Department of Defense, the
Department of Energy and many state attorneys general,
environmental and labor groups raised objections both with the
substance of this package and with the process by which it was
developed.
In this regard, it is regrettable that the committee failed
to delete Title III, the environmental reform sections, when a
motion by Mr. Spratt to strike the title was rejected by the
committee.
Hearings in the National Security Committee on this package
are deserved before action should proceed on the bill further.
Ronald V. Dellums.