[House Report 105-578]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
105th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 105-578
_______________________________________________________________________
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 1999
_______
June 16, 1998.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Packard, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 4059]
The Committee on Appropriations submits the following
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making
appropriations for military construction, family housing, and
base realignments and closures for the Department of Defense
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999.
CONTENTS
Page
Summary of Committee Recommendation.............................. 2
Conformance With Authorization Bill.............................. 3
Permanent Party Unaccompanied Personnel Housing.................. 3
Fiscal Year 1999 Barracks Request................................ 4
Child Development Centers........................................ 5
Child Care Services--Outsourcing Initiative...................... 6
Hospital and Medical Facilities.................................. 6
Environmental Compliance Projects................................ 7
Proposed Financing via Prior Year Savings........................ 8
Transfer Authority............................................... 8
Advance Appropriations........................................... 8
Real Property Maintenance........................................ 9
DOD Activities in Naples, Italy.................................. 10
Korea Master Plan................................................ 10
Program, Project and Activity.................................... 11
Planning and Budgeting........................................... 11
Metric Conversion................................................ 11
Military Construction:
Army......................................................... 11
Navy......................................................... 13
Air Force.................................................... 14
Defense-wide................................................. 14
Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied
Housing Improvement Fund................................. 16
Reserve Components........................................... 17
NATO Security Investment Program................................. 19
Family Housing Overview.......................................... 20
Family Housing:
Army......................................................... 25
Navy......................................................... 26
Air Force.................................................... 27
Defense-wide................................................. 28
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund............ 28
Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense.............................. 30
Base Realignment and Closure:
Overview..................................................... 31
Part I....................................................... 37
Part II...................................................... 37
Part III..................................................... 37
Part IV...................................................... 37
Changes in Application of Existing Law........................... 38
Compliance with Rule XIII--Clause 3.............................. 40
Appropriations Not Authorized by Law............................. 40
Transfer of Funds................................................ 41
Rescission of Funds.............................................. 41
Constitutional Authority......................................... 41
Comparisons With Budget Resolution............................... 41
Advance Spending Authority....................................... 42
Five-Year Projection of Outlays.................................. 42
Financial Assistance............................................. 42
State List....................................................... 42
Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority.................... 60
Summary of Committee Recommendation
The Administration's fiscal year 1999 budget request of
$7,784,074,000 represents a decrease of $1,424,394,000, or 15
percent, from the fiscal year 1998 appropriation of
$9,208,468,000. The request includes $2,570,040,000 for
military construction, $3,477,330,000 for family housing and
$1,730,704,000 for activities associated with base closure and
realignment.
While there are aspects of the budget request that help to
solve the long-term infrastructure problems faced by the
Department of Defense, the Committee has some concerns over the
request. For example, the Administration has committed itself
to a serious barracks revitalization program. Yet, the request
for barracks construction is $198,245,000 below last year's
appropriation. And, family housing construction and operation
and maintenance accounts are reduced by $385,768,000. The
budget request would provide $592,846,000 for family housing
construction, a reduction of $262,274,000 from current levels.
Of this amount, $270,103,000 is requested for construction of
new family housing units, a reduction of $168,686,000 or 38
percent, from current spending. And, the request for
improvements to existing family housing units is reduced by
$95,588,000, or 23 percent from the current program. In
addition, the budget request would reduce maintenance of family
housing units a total of $68,086,000.
The Committee believes it is imperative to address the
severe backlog in readiness, revitalization and quality of life
projects. The Committee has recommended an additional
$450,000,000 above the Administration's fiscal year 1999 budget
request to fund the planning and construction of several
barracks, family housing and operational facilities.
The total recommended appropriation for fiscal year 1999 is
$8,234,074,000, a reduction of $974,394,000, or 11 percent,
from fiscal year 1998 funding and an increase of $450,000,000
above the fiscal year 1999 budget request. The appropriation
includes $2,990,817,000 for military construction,
$3,506,553,000 for family housing and $1,730,704,000 for
activities associated with base closure and realignment. The
following table provides a breakout of the highlights of the
bill:
FY 1998 net appropriation............................. $9.2 billion
President's Request................................... 7.8 billion
Subcommittee Recommendation........................... 8.2 billion
Decrease below FY 1998................................ 974 million
Increase over President's Request..................... 450 million
Military Construction: $3.0 billion (37% of total bill),
including:
$635 million for barracks
$31 million for child development centers
$206 million for hospital and medical facilities
$93 million for environmental compliance
$47 million for the energy conservation improvement program
$125 million for the chemical weapons demilitarization
program
$169 million for NATO Security Investment Program
$309 million for Guard and Reserve components
Family Housing: $3.5 billion (43% of total bill), including:
$392 million for new family housing units, and for
improvements to existing units
$242 million for Public-Private Ventures of family housing
$2.8 billion for operation and maintenance of existing units
Base Realignment and Closure: $1.7 billion (21% of total bill),
including:
$233 million for military construction and family housing
$698 million for environmental cleanup
$768 million for operations and maintenance
Conformance With Authorization Bill
The House passed the National Defense Authorization Act for
1999 (H.R. 3616) on May 21, 1998 by a vote of 357-60, which
contains authorization for the military construction, family
housing and base realignment and closure accounts included in
this bill. Because Senate and conference action on the
authorization had not been completed at the time this bill was
prepared, the Committee is considering only projects
recommended for authorization. All projects included in this
bill are approved subject to authorization.
Permanent Party Unaccompanied Personnel Housing
The Department of Defense estimates that 43 percent of the
enlisted force and 27 percent of the officers are single or
unaccompanied personnel. Although 32 percent live in private
off-base housing, the Department has over 390,252 men and women
living in permanent party unaccompanied personnel housing.
Approximately one-half of the barracks were built 30 or more
years ago, with an average age of over 40 years. And, over
77,000 spaces are still serviced by gang latrines. Of the total
inventory approximately 36% are considered substandard and
continuous maintenance is necessary to deal with such problems
as asbestos, corroded pipes, inadequate ventilation, faulty
heating and cooling systems, and peeling lead-based paint.
In fiscal year 1997, the respective Services deficit count
due to the lack of barracks spaces to house single service
members or the need to replace or improve current spaces was
238,000. As a result of the Congressional initiative to
accelerate the barracks revitalization effort, current deficit
estimates have been reduced to 154,628 single service members.
The Department of Defense estimates current total costs to
achieve desired end states at $8,650,000,000, as compared to
$14,280,000,000 in fiscal year 1997. And, the timetable to
accomplish the revitalization has decreased from over twenty
years to thirteen years.
The Committee understands that improving troop housing does
not lie solely in new construction and renovations. Retiring
the backlog of maintenance and repair, which is under the
jurisdiction of the National Security Subcommittee, and an
adequate funding commitment to prevent future backlogs plays an
important role in this process. It is necessary to use many
different approaches to help meet the unaccompanied housing
need. The challenge is for a sustained overall commitment, at
funding levels that will reduce the backlog of substandard
spaces, reduce the housing deficits, and increase the quality
of living conditions in a reasonable period of time.
fiscal year 1999 barracks request
The Department of Defense has requested $566,722,000 to
construct or modernize 33 barracks in fiscal year 1999. This is
a reduction of $198,245,000 from the enacted fiscal year 1998
appropriation.
The Committee has approved the request of $566,722,000 in
full. In order to help alleviate the deficit, an additional
$67,950,000 is recommended. The total appropriation for
unaccompanied housing recommended in this bill is $634,672,000.
The following troop housing construction projects are
recommended for fiscal year 1999:
FISCAL YEAR 1999 TROOP HOUSING PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location Request Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army:
Georgia--Fort Benning............. 28,600,000 28,600,000
Hawaii--Schofield Barracks........ 47,500,000 47,500,000
Kentucky--Fort Campbell........... 41,000,000 41,000,000
Missouri--Fort Leonard Wood....... 0 23,000,000
North Carolina--Fort Bragg........ 47,000,000 47,000,000
North Carolina--Fort Bragg........ 0 10,600,000
Oklahoma--Fort Sill............... 20,500,000 20,500,000
Texas--Fort Sam Houston........... 21,800,000 21,800,000
Virginia--Fort Eustis............. 36,531,000 36,531,000
Germany--Schweinfurt.............. 18,000,000 18,000,000
Korea--Camp Casey................. 13,400,000 13,400,000
Korea--Camp Castle................ 18,226,000 18,226,000
Korea--Camp Humphreys............. 8,500,000 8,500,000
Korea--Camp Stanley............... 5,800,000 5,800,000
---------------------------------
Subtotal, Army.................. 306,857,000 340,457,000
=================================
Navy/Marine Corps/Naval Reserve:
Arizona--Yuma Marine Corps Air
Station.......................... 11,010,000 11,010,000
California--Camp Pendleton Marine
Corps Base....................... 12,400,000 12,400,000
California--Camp Pendleton Marine
Corps Base....................... 15,840,000 15,840,000
California--Miramar MCAS.......... 29,570,000 29,570,000
California--Naval Facility San
Clemente......................... 8,350,000 8,350,000
Hawaii--Kaneohe Bay............... 27,410,000 27,410,000
Hawaii--NSB Pearl Harbor.......... 8,060,000 8,060,000
Louisiana--New Orleans NAS........ 0 9,520,000
Mississippi--Gulfport Naval
Construction Battalion Center.... 10,670,000 10,670,000
South Carolina--Parris Island
Marine Corps Recruit Depot....... 0 8,030,000
Texas--Ingleside NS............... 0 12,200,000
Greece--Souda Bay Crete Naval
Support Activity................. 5,260,000 5,260,000
---------------------------------
Subtotal, Navy.................. 128,570,000 158,320,000
=================================
Air Force/Air Force Reserve:
Alabama--Maxwell AFB.............. 12,765,000 12,765,000
Florida--Eglin AFB................ 7,866,000 7,866,000
Florida--Homestead ARB............ 0 4,600,000
Idaho--Mountain Home AFB.......... 8,897,000 8,897,000
Mississippi--Keesler AFB.......... 29,770,000 29,770,000
Nevada--Nellis AFB................ 6,378,000 6,378,000
Oklahoma--Tinker AFB.............. 9,100,000 9,100,000
Texas--Lackland AFB............... 6,800,000 6,800,000
Germany--Spangdalem AB............ 9,501,000 9,501,000
Korea--Kunsan AB.................. 5,958,000 5,958,000
Korea--Osan AB.................... 7,496,000 7,496,000
United Kingdom--RAF Lakenheath.... 15,838,000 15,838,000
United Kingdom--RAF Mildenhall.... 10,926,000 10,926,000
---------------------------------
Subtotal, Air Force............. 131,295,000 135,895,000
=================================
Total........................... 566,722,000 634,672,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Child Development Centers
The Committee has recommended an additional $7,900,000
above the budget estimate of $23,148,000 for a total
appropriation of $31,048,000 for new construction, or
improvements, for child development centers. The Office of the
Secretary of Defense established a goal of providing quality
child care to 65% of the potential need in 1992. The Army met
the 65% goal this year. The Marine Corps expects to reach the
goal by 2002, and the Air Force and Navy are programmed to
reach 65% by 2003. The Committee notes that to optimally meet
the Department's demand an 80 percent goal must be achieved.
The Committee recognizes the increased importance of these
centers due to the rising number of single military parents,
dual military couples and military personnel with a civilian
employed spouse. The Department is encouraged to maintain all
efforts possible to meet 80 percent of the child care need.
The following child development center projects are
provided for fiscal year 1999:
FISCAL YEAR 1999 CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTERS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location Request Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army:
California--Fort Irwin............ 0 5,100,000
Belgium........................... 6,300,000 6,300,000
Germany--Kitzingen Family Housing
(Wuerzburg)...................... 4,250,000 4,250,000
---------------------------------
Subtotal, Army.................. 10,550,000 15,650,000
=================================
Navy/Naval Reserve:
Florida--Key West NAS............. 3,730,000 3,730,000
Georgia--Albany Marine Corps
Logistics Base................... 0 2,800,000
North Carolina--Cherry Point
Marine Corps Air Station......... 4,420,000 4,420,000
---------------------------------
Subtotal, Navy.................. 8,150,000 10,950,000
=================================
Air Force/Air Force Reserve:
Maryland--Andrews AFB............. 4,448,000 4,448,000
---------------------------------
Subtotal, Air Force............. 4,448,000 4,448,000
=================================
Total........................... 23,148,000 31,048,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Child Care Services--Outsourcing Initiative
The Department is conducting demonstration projects to
review ways of providing child care services by using third
party contracting. Currently the Navy is purchasing spaces in
accredited child development centers by buying down the cost
for military families. The Navy has awarded contracts in
Jacksonville, Florida; Norfolk, Virginia; San Diego,
California; and Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. The Defense Logistics
Agency is testing the management and operation of a military-
constructed child development center by a private contractor in
Dayton, Ohio. The Committee supports these efforts and directs
the Department to report on the status and success of these
demonstration projects, and any other efforts for third party
contracting by February 1, 1999.
Hospital and Medical Facilities
The budget request includes $206,732,000 for 25 projects
and for unspecified minor construction to provide hospital and
medical facilities, including both treatment facilities and
medical support facilities. The Committee recommends full
funding for the requested items for fiscal year 1999 as
follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location Project title Request Recommended
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California--Camp Pendleton...................... Medical/Dental Cl Repl (Margarita) 3,100,000 3,100,000
California--Camp Pendleton...................... Medical/Dental Cl Repl (San Mateo) 3,200,000 3,200,000
California--Edwards AFB......................... Aerospace Medical Clinic Add/Alt.. 6,000,000 6,000,000
California--San Diego Naval Hospital Water Storage Tank................ 1,350,000 1,350,000
California--Travis AFB.......................... Patient Movement Items Ops & Dist 1,700,000 1,700,000
Center.
Florida--Eglin AFB.............................. Central Energy Plant.............. 9,200,000 9,200,000
Florida--Pensacola NAS.......................... Hospital Addition/Alteration/LSU.. 25,400,000 25,400,000
Georgia--Moody AFB.............................. CMF Alteration/Dental Cl Add...... 11,000,000 11,000,000
Georgia--Fort Stewart........................... Medical/Dental Clinic Replacement. 10,400,000 10,400,000
Louisiana--Barksdale AFB........................ Clinic Addition/Alteration........ 3,450,000 3,450,000
Mississippi--Keesler AFB........................ Bioenvironmental Eng Fac Repl..... 700,000 700,000
New Mexico--Holloman AFB........................ War Readines Material Warehouse... 1,300,000 1,300,000
North Carolina--Fort Bragg...................... 44th Medical Brigade WRM Warehouse 6,500,000 6,500,000
North Dakota--Grand Forks AFB................... Medical/Dental Clinic Add/Alt..... 5,600,000 5,600,000
Pennsylvania--Carlisle Barracks................. Health Clinic Addition............ 4,678,000 4,678,000
Texas--Fort Hood................................ Blood Donor Center................ 3,100,000 3,100,000
Texas--Fort Hood................................ Primary Care Clinic............... 11,000,000 11,000,000
Virginia--Cheatham Annex........................ Fleet Hosp Spt Ops Operational 9,400,000 9,400,000
Warehouse.
Virginia--Cheatham Annex........................ Fleet Hosp Support Operation Admin 1,900,000 1,900,000
Office.
Virginia--Portsmouth Naval Hospital Hospital Replacement Phase X...... 17,954,000 17,954,000
Washington--Bangor Naval Submarine Base Disease Vector Ecology & Control 5,700,000 5,700,000
Center.
Washington--Bremerton Naval Hospital Hospital Addition/Alteration...... 28,000,000 28,000,000
Washington--McChord AFB Clinic/WRM Warehouse Replacement.. 20,000,000 20,000,000
Italy--Sigonella Naval Air Station Flight Line Dispensary............ 5,300,000 5,300,000
United Kingdom--Royal Air Force Lakenheath Hospital Annex Replacement........ 10,800,000 10,800,000
---------------------------
Total..................................... ................................ 206,732,000 206,732,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental Compliance Projects
The total budget request and appropriation for 18 projects
needed to meet environmental compliance is $92,534,000. The
Federal Facilities Compliance Act requires all federal
facilities to meet both federal and State standards. These
projects are considered Class I violations and are out of
compliance; have received an enforcement action from the
Environmental Protection Agency, the State, or local authority;
and/or a compliance agreement has been signed or consent order
received. Environmental projects that areClass I violations are
required to be funded, and therefore are placed at the top of the
priority list.
Following is a listing of all environmental compliance
projects funded in this bill:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installtion Project title Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army:
Fort Lewis, WA................ Tank Trail Erosion 2,000,000
Mitigation, Yakima
Range.
Navy:
PWC Pearl Harbor, HI.......... Sewer Outfall 22,877,000
Extension.
PWC Pearl Harbor, HI.......... Steam Condensate 6,090,000
Return System.
NSWC Div, Indian Head, MD..... Annealing Oven 6,680,000
Facility.
NETC Newport, RI.............. Boiler Plate 5,630,000
Modifications.
Air Force:
Maxwell AFB, AL............... Fire Training 1,837,000
Facility.
Eglin AFB, FL................. Fire Training 1,823,000
Facility.
MacDill AFB, FL............... Fire Training 2,494,000
Facility.
Kirtland AFB, NM.............. Fire Training 1,774,000
Facility.
Grand Forks AFB, ND........... Fire Training 2,686,000
Facility.
Vance AFB, OK................. Fire Training 1,823,000
Facility.
Defense Logisitics Agency:
DFSP Jacksonville Annex, FL... Replace Fuel Tanks, 11,020,000
Mayport Annex.
DFSP Jacksonville, FL......... Replace Fuel Tanks.. 11,000,000
DFSP Camp Shelby, MS.......... Replace Bulk Fuel 5,300,000
Facility.
DFSP Fort Sill, OK............ Replace Fuel Storage 3,500,000
Facility.
Various Locations............. Conforming Storage 1,300,000
Facility.
Air National Guard:
Alpena County National Airport Sanitary Lines...... 3,900,000
Hector Field.................. Regional Fireman 800,000
Training Facility.
---------------
Total....................... .................... 92,534,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Financing of Current Year Programs Via Prior Year Savings
The budget request for fiscal year 1999 proposed partial
financing of current year programs via prior year savings, as
follows:
Family Housing, Army.................................. $1,639,000
Family Housing, Navy and Marine Corps................. 6,323,000
Family Housing, Air Force............................. 7,584,000
-----------------
Total.............................................. 15,546,000
If program execution has resulted in identifiable prior
year savings within individual projects, the correct financing
method is to detail such savings and to request rescissions of
funds by account and by fiscal year. The Committee directs the
Department to follow the conventional rescission procedure in
future budget submissions.
Transfer Authority
The budget request proposed a general provision which would
allow the transfer of up to $200,000,000 between any accounts
in the bill, and this could be accomplished at the
determination of the Secretary of Defense and upon the approval
of OMB. Congress would be given an ``after the fact''
notification. The Committee believes that the existing
reprogramming procedures are sufficient in solving urgent, high
priority funding problems within available resources and denies
this request.
Advance Appropriations
The Department of Defense has requested advance
appropriations in the amount of $568,550,000. Advance
appropriations have not been requested in the past for large
construction projects such as replacement hospitals, chemical
demilitarization facilities, and comprehensive weapons beddown
programs. A noteworthy example is the Portsmouth Naval Hospital
for which the tenth and final increment is requested in fiscal
year 1999. It is clearly impossible to project costs and
execution schedules that far into the future. The Committee's
experience with reprogramming requests is sufficient to
demonstrate that cost estimates a single year into the future
may be less than fully reliable.
In addition, specific projects were not listed in the C-1
as phased projects and contained no documentation of which
projects were to receive advance appropriations. For example,
the West Point Cadet Physical Development Center was requested
at $12,000,000 for fiscal year 1999. The state listing made no
mention that this was Phase I of an $85,000,000 project.
Following is a breakout of the individual projects which total
the $568,550,000 advance appropriation request. The Committee
denies all of the advance appropriations and directs the
Department to request these funds in the appropriate fiscal
year.
ADVANCE APPROPRIATIONS INCLUDED IN FY 1999 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION BUDGET
REQUEST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Account and fiscal year Amount Location/project
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MilCon, Army:
2000........................ $72,000,000 Pine Bluff, AR:
Ammunition
Demilitarization
Facility, Phase IV.
2000........................ 60,750,000 Newport, IN: Ammunition
Demilitarization
Facility, Phase II.
2000........................ 13,000,000 Fort Leavenworth, KS:
Disciplinary Barrackes,
Phase III.
2000........................ 58,500,000 Aberdeen, MD: Ammunition
Demilitarization
Facility, Phase II.
2000........................ 29,000,000 West Point, NY: Cadet
Physical Development
Center, Phase II.
2000........................ 9,000,000 Umatilla, OR: Ammunition
Demilitarization
Facility, Phase V.
2000........................ 15,000,000 Fort Hood, TX: Railhead
Facility, Phase II.
2000........................ 36,000,000 Roi Namur, Kwajalein:
Power Plant, Phase II.
--------------
Subtotal.................. 293,250,000 ........................
==============
MilCon, Army:
2001........................ 17,000,000 Pine Bluff, AR:
Ammunition
Demilitarization
Facility, Phase V.
2001........................ 87,500,000 Newport, IN: Ammunition
Demilitarization
Facility, Phase III.
2001........................ 85,000,000 Aberdeen, MD: Ammunition
Demilitarization
Facility, Phase III.
--------------
Subtotal.................. 189,500,000 ........................
==============
MilCon, Army:
2002........................ 13,800,000 Newport, IN: Ammunition
Demilitarization
Facility, Phase IV.
2002........................ 14,500,000 Aberdeen, MD: Ammunition
Demilitarization
Facility, Phase IV.
2002........................ 44,000,000 West Point, NY: Cadet
Physical Development
Center, Phase III.
--------------
Subtotal.................. 72,300,000 ........................
==============
MilCon, Navy:
2000........................ 13,500,000 Norfolk NS, VA: Berthing
Pier, Phase II.
==============
Grand total............... 568,550,000 ........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Real Property Maintenance
The Department is directed to continue to provide the real
property maintenance backlog at all installations for which
there is a requested construction project in future budget
submissions. This information is to be provided on Form 1390.
In addition, for all troop housing requests, the Form 1391 is
to continue to show all real property maintenance conducted in
the past two years and all future requirements for
unaccompanied housing at that installation.
Real Property Maintenance: Reporting Requirement
The Service Secretary concerned is directed to notify the
Military Construction Subcommittee of the Appropriations
Committee before carrying out any repair project with an
estimated cost in excess of $10,000,000. Further, the Committee
continues to expect the general rules for repairing a facility
under Operation and Maintenance account funding will be as
follows:
Components of the facility may be repaired by replacement,
and such replacement can be up to current standards or codes.
Interior rearrangements and restorations may be included as
repair, but additions, new facilities, and functional
conversions must be performed as military construction
projects.
Such projects may be done concurrent with repair projects,
as long as the final conjunctively funded project is a complete
and usable facility.
DOD Activities in Naples, Italy
The Secretary of Defense is to report to the Committee on
the current status of the relocation of the 16th Air Force
Headquarters from Aviano Air Base, Italy to Naples, Italy and
the move of Commander in Chief US Naval Forces, Europe from
London, England to Naples, Italy. In particular, OSD is
directed to look at the feasibility of using the newly
constructed facilities at the Naval Support Activity,
Capodichino, Italy in lieu of leased facilities. This report
should be submitted to the Committee no later than December 1,
1998.
Korea Master Plan
Over the past 40 years there have been a number of
facilities master plans for the Korean Peninsula. These plans
have been adjusted many times as the force structure has
evolved to respond to the changing threat, and, in particular,
as obsolete equipment has been retired and modern systems have
been fielded.
A new facilities master plan (dated July 31, 1997) has been
submitted to the Committee during January of 1998, and this
document is intended to serve as a 20-year plan. The Committee
commends United States Forces Korea (USFK) on this Theater
Master Plan, which is designed to link all proposed near-term
capital investments with the long-term strategic outlook. This
process has promise for bringing more discipline into the
programming and budgeting cycles.
The Committee is disappointed that there is still a large
inventory of inadequate facilities being utilized by U.S.
forces stationed in Korea. Two major inhibitors to programming
and budgeting for replacement facilities have been constant
change in the force structure mix and attendant relocation of
units among installations. This has had the effect of making it
very likely that a new unit moving into existing installation
will not find barracks and/or support facilities that meet its
requirements. The Committee supports the introduction of modern
weapons and equipment as a force multiplier, and recognizes
that such changes will drive facilities requirements to some
extent. However, many force structure changes and relocations
have been made at the direction of Army leadership, and have
been modified by changes in leadership with insufficient
attention to facilities requirements.
The current policy of USFK is to minimize the number of
installations, to move out of the cities, to build around
``hub'' installations, and to privatize infrastructure
operations where feasible. The Committee supports these
efforts, but is concerned about the potential for significant
and adverse facilities impacts. The Committee believes that
force stability is key to ensuring that soldiers and airmen are
provided adequate facilities in which to live and work.
The Committee will expect to be kept fully informed of
modifications to the Theater Master Plan (dated July 31, 1997),
and will expect any modifications to include detailed listing
of any proposed unit relocations and equipment changes as well
as cost/benefit analyses of such relocations and changes.
Further, the Committee will expect that all future requests for
construction projects on the Korean peninsula will be in
support of this Theater Master Plan, and that any change,
adjustment, deviation, or exception from this Theater Master
Plan will be justified in detail to the Military Construction
Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee.
Program, Project and Activity
For the purposes of the Balanced Budget and Emergency
Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177) as amended by
the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation
Act of 1987, (Public Law 100-119), the term ``Program, Project
and Activity'' will continue to be defined as the appropriation
account.
Planning and Budgeting
The Committee relies on officials in the Department of
Defense to provide the most honest assessment of competing
facilities needs, based on the most informed judgment of
military requirements. The Committee understands and supports
the process the Department employs to identify requirements, to
prioritize those requirements, and to live within budgetary
constraints. It is the view of the Committee that the best way
to accomplish this task is to have a disciplined long-range
planning process, with annual adjustments to meet changing
circumstances. The Committee supports efforts within the
Services and within the Under Secretary of Defense
(Comptroller) to formulate and present a coherent Future Years
Defense Plan at the project level of detail, and encourages
efforts to reconcile annual adjustments in this plan.
Metric Conversion
The Committee directs the Comptroller of the Department of
Defense to assure that any Form 1390/1391 which is presented as
justification in metric measurement shall include
parenthetically the English measurement.
Military Construction, Army
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation.......................... $714,377,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................... 790,876,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 780,599,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation...................... +66,222,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate........................... -10,277,000
The Committee recommends a total of $780,599,000 for
Military Construction, Army for fiscal year 1999. This is a
decrease of $10,277,000 below the budget request for fiscal
year 1999, and an increase of $66,222,000 above the
appropriation for 1998.
chemical demilitarization program
The budget request proposes that a total of $125,300,000
should be appropriated under the ``Military Construction,
Army'' account for chemical demilitarization facilities. As in
prior years, the Committee recommends that these amounts be
appropriated under the ``Military Construction, Defense-wide''
account, in order to facilitate the tracking of expenses for
the Chemical Demilitarization Program, and to avoid distorting
the size of the Army's military construction program. It is the
Committee's view that this is an accounting decision, and that
it will have no impact on the operation of the program or on
administrative overhead expenses within the Office of the
Secretary of Defense.
california--fort irwin: defense access roads
The Committee is aware of serious safety issues caused by
the publicly accessible road network used by the National
Training Center at Fort Irwin, California, as well as the
operational constraints imposed by this road network. The
Committee understands that there is an increased volume of
traffic associated with the installation, and that a
deteriorating safety situation has caused numerous accidents,
including fatalities. The Secretary of the Army should review
this situation and consider recommending that these roads be
designated as defense access roads, and report his findings to
the Committee by September 11, 1998.
florida--miami: southcom headquarters and land acquisition
At the time the U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) relocated
from Panama, the Committee received assurances that no Military
Construction or Family Housing investment would be required to
accomplish the relocation, and that any and all facilities
would be acquired by lease. The budget request includes
$26,700,000 to purchase a facility adjacent to the Miami
International Airport that is currently being leased as the
SOUTHCOM headquarters. The building was occupied under an
interim lease, and the Army signed a final lease on February
27, 1998. This final lease provides for a firm term of ten
years, with annual payments subject to the availability of
funds, and the lease does not include a buy-out provision.
In the aftermath of the Khobar Towers and Oklahoma City
incidents, the Defense Special Weapons Agency conducted a force
protection assessment and determined that the existing leased
building requires a 19 acre security buffer. The Army then
determined that acquisition of such a buffer would require
approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). OMB
determined that the combined leases for the building and land
met its criteria and policy considerations requiring either
purchase or a capital lease. Therefore, OMB directed the Army
to include a budget request for the purchase of both the
building and the land.
This is a special case, in that the headquarters building
is not located on a military installation. The Committee is
concerned that the Army decided on this location, lacking a
security perimeter that would have been inherent to any
existing military installation. The selected location also
lacked supporting facilities such as unaccompanied housing,
family housing, commissary, child care, medical facilities,
dependent schools, and morale and welfare facilities. Further,
planned construction of an additional runway at Miami
International Airport will put the leased building in the glide
path 100 percent of the time (a violation of Department of
Defense guidelines).
The Committee recommends no funds for acquisition of either
the leased building or additional land. The Secretary of
Defense is directed to report by January 15, 1999, on plans for
acquisition of leased land for a security buffer, if required,
as well as on consideration of relocating the SOUTHCOM
headquarters from this leased location to an existing military
installation.
massachusetts--westover air reserve base: military entrance processing
station
The Committee is concerned about potential slippage in the
Army's plan to provide a Military Entrance Processing Station
at Westover Air Reserve Base. Therefore, the Army is directed
to accelerate the design of this project, and to include the
required construction funding in its fiscal year 2000 budget
request.
new jersey--fort monmouth: traffic study
The Committee is concerned over reports of severe traffic
congestion at the main gate to Fort Monmouth, at the
intersection of New Jersey Route 35 and Tinton Avenue. The Army
is directed to report to the Committee by January 15, 1999 on
traffic impacts outside the main gate, and on the need for on-
post and off-post traffic improvements.
italy--camp darby
The Secretary of the Army is directed to report to the
Committee by December 1, 1998 on the current and future use of
Camp Darby, Italy. This report should include the status of all
NATO Security Investment Program funds to be expended at this
installation.
korea--camp casey: physical fitness center
The Committee is aware that the existing physical fitness
center at Camp Casey is antiquated and under-sized to support
an authorized fiscal year 1998 military population of 6,069.
The existing facility is a 37-year-old quonset hut structure,
requiring constant maintenance, is energy inefficient, and at
25,644 square feet is severely undersized to serve the soldiers
stationed at Camp Casey. The Army is directed to accelerate
design and include this physical fitness center in the fiscal
year 2000 budget request.
Military Construction, Navy
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation.......................... $683,666,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................... 468,150,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 570,643,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation...................... -113,023,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate........................... +102,493,000
The Committee recommends a total of $570,643,000 for
Military Construction, Navy for fiscal year 1999. This is an
increase of $102,493,000 above the budget request for fiscal
year 1999, and a decrease of $113,023,000 below the
appropriation for fiscal year 1998.
california--corona fleet analysis detachment: measurement science
laboratory
The Navy is directed to accelerate the design of the
Measurement Science Laboratory, and to include funding for this
project in its fiscal year 2000 budget request.
california--port hueneme: combat systems integration lab
The Navy is directed to accelerate the design of the Combat
Systems Integration Lab at the Port Hueneme Division of the
Naval Surface Warfare Center, and to include funding for this
project in its fiscal year 2000 budget request.
Military Construction, Air Force
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation.......................... $701,855,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................... 454,810,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 550,475,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation...................... -151,380,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate........................... +95,665,000
The Committee recommends a total of $550,475,000 for
Military Construction, Air Force for fiscal year 1999. This is
an increase of $95,665,000 above the budget request for fiscal
year 1999, and a decrease of $151,380,000 below the
appropriation for fiscal year 1998.
kansas--McConnell afb: kc-135 squadron operations/aircraft maintenance
unit #3
The Air Force is directed to accelerate the design of the
KC-135 Squadron Operations/Aircraft Maintenance Unit #3 project
at McConnell AFB, and to include the required construction
funding in its fiscal year 2000 budget request.
new york--rome laboratory: consolidated intelligence and reconnaissance
laboratory
The Committee is aware of the planned construction of a
consolidated Intelligence and Reconnaissance Laboratory at the
Air Force's Research Laboratory in Rome, New York, which will
create operational and economic efficiencies in place of
current structures available for this mission. The Air Force is
directed to accelerate the design of this project, and to
include the required construction funding in its fiscal year
2000 budget request.
Military Construction, Defense-wide
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation.......................... $646,342,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................... 491,675,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 611,075,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation...................... -35,267,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate........................... +119,400,000
The Committee recommends a total of $611,075,000 for
Military Construction, Defense-wide for fiscal year 1999. This
is an increase of $119,400,000 above the budget request for
fiscal year 1999 and a decrease of $35,267,000 below the
appropriation for fiscal year 1998.
CHEMICAL WEAPONS DEMILITARIZATION PROGRAM
The budget request includes a total of $125,300,000 for the
following funding increments for the chemical weapons
demilitarization program for fiscal year 1999:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Installation Project Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arkansas......... Pine Bluff Arsenal... Ammunition $16,500,000
demilitarizatio
n facility
(Phase III).
Indiana.......... Newport AAP.......... Ammunition 27,500,000
demilitarizatio
n facility
(Phase I).
Indiana.......... Newport AAP.......... Ammunition 2,000,000
demilitarizatio
n support.
Maryland......... Aberdeen PG.......... Ammunition 26,500,000
demilitarizatio
n facility
(Phase I).
Maryland......... Aberdeen PG.......... Ammunition 1,850,000
demilitarizatio
n support.
Oregon........... Umatilla AD.......... Ammunition 50,950,000
demilitarizatio
n facility
(Phase IV).
-------------
Total........ ..................... ................ 125,300,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The budget request proposes that these amounts should be
appropriated under the ``Military Construction, Army'' account.
As in prior years, the Committee recommends that these amounts
be appropriated under the ``Military Construction, Defense-
wide'' account, in order to facilitate the tracking of expenses
for the Chemical Demilitarization Program, and to avoid
distorting the size of the Army's military construction
program.
The following chart displays the scope of the military
construction investment in the overall chemical
demilitarization program:
CHEMICAL DEMILITARIZATION PROGRAM MILITARY CONSTRUCTION COSTS
[Current year dollars in millions/fiscal year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY97
Project and FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 Total
prior
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM-Chem Demil Training Facility........ 16.1 ........ ........ ........ ...... ...... ...... 16.1
Tooele, UT Facility.................... 198.0 ........ ........ ........ ...... ...... ...... 198.0
Anniston, AL Facility.................. 150.0 9.9 ........ 7.0 ...... ...... ...... 166.9
Depot Support.......................... 14.3 ........ ........ ........ ...... ...... ...... 14.3
Umatilla, OR Facility.................. 76.0 57.43 51.0 9.0 ...... ...... ...... 193.43
Depot Support.......................... 11.2 ........ ........ ........ ...... ...... ...... 11.2
Pine Bluff AR Facility................. 49.0 ........ 16.5 72.0 17.0 ...... ...... 154.5
Depot Support.......................... ...... 10.0 ........ ........ ...... ...... ...... 10.0
Pueblo, CO \1\ Facility................ ...... ........ ........ 12.0 52.0 96.5 34.0 194.5
Depot Support.......................... 6.3 ........ ........ ........ ...... ...... ...... 6.3
Blue Grass, KY Facility................ ...... ........ ........ 12.0 52.0 92.0 30.8 186.8
Depot Support.......................... ...... ........ ........ 11.2 ...... ...... ...... 11.2
Aberdeen, MD Facility.................. ...... ........ 26.5 58.5 85.0 14.5 ...... 184.5
Depot Support.......................... ...... ........ 1.85 ........ ...... ...... ...... 1.85
Newport, IN Facility................... ...... ........ 27.5 60.75 87.5 13.8 ...... 189.55
Depot Support.......................... ...... ........ 2.0 ........ ...... ...... ...... 2.0
Planning & Design...................... 105.3 9.2 ........ ........ ...... ...... ...... 114.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................ 626.2 86.53 125.35 242.45 293.5 216.8 64.8 1,665.63
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Funding requirement may change pending assessment of Assembled Chemical Weapon Assessment Program in
consonance with Public Law 104-208.
The following chart displays the timetable and the
milestones for completion of the chemical demilitarization
program:
CHEMICAL DEMILITARIZATION PROGRAM TIMETABLE AND MILESTONES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location Start of construction Start of systemization Operations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Johnston Atoll \1\................... ....................... ....................... 3QFY90-4QFY00
Tooele, UT........................... ....................... ....................... 4QFY96-4QFY03
Anniston, AL......................... 3QFY97................. 2QFY00................. 2QFY02-1QFY06
Umatilla, OR......................... 3QFY97................. 3QFY00................. 2QFY02-3QFY05
Pine Bluff, AR....................... 4QFY98................. 3QFY01................. 2QFY03-3QFY06
Pueblo, CO \2\....................... On Hold................ ....................... On Hand
Blue Grass, KY \2\................... On Hold................ ....................... .......................
Aberdeen, MD \3\..................... 1QFY99................. 3QFY02................. 2QFY04-1QFY05
Newport, IN \3\...................... 1QFY99................. 4zQFY02................ 3QFY04-1QFY05
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Full-scale operations began 2QFY94.
\2\ Schedule on-hold as directed by Public Law 104-208 pending technology evaluation by Program Manager for
Assembled Chemical Weapon Assessment.
\3\ Schedule represents employment of neutralization-based technology. Start of construction milestones
represents the ``start of design/build'' effort.
energy conservation investment program
In future budget submissions, the Committee will expect
project-level information on the Energy Conservation Investment
Program (ECIP) to be presented in tabular form, rather than in
Form 1391 level of detail.
energy recovery controller units
The Committee is aware of the possibility of significant
energy cost savings through the use of energy recovery
controller units in military family housing units. The
Department is directed to explore this technology, and to
evaluate the savings to investment ratios and payback periods
related to the possible use of such units in the San Diego,
California, area. The Committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to report the findings of this evaluation by January
15, 1999.
Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund
Two years ago, the Committee initiated and appropriated
$5,000,000 for the Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement
Fund in order to demonstrate its support for privatization. The
Committee notes that the Program and Financing statement for
the Fund shows that the full $5,000,000 available in this
account will be obligated during fiscal year 1998. The
Committee is concerned that the market for private development
of barracks is minimal and that the Department has not yet
identified any requirements against the $5,000,000 appropriated
in fiscal year 1997. The Secretary of Defense is to report to
the Committee by December 1, 1998 on the progress and
feasibility of continuing this initiative.
Overview
The National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year
1996, P.L. 104-106, established new authorities to increase the
use of the private sector and capital to improve unaccompanied
housing. The authorities include: direct loans and loan
guarantees to private developers; leasing of new housing;
investments in nongovernmental entities; rental guarantees;
differential lease payments and conveyance or lease of existing
property and facilities.
The Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund will be
used to build or renovate unaccompanied housing, mixing or
matching the various authorities contained in the
authorization, and utilize private capital and expertise to the
maximum extent possible. This fund is to contain appropriated
and transferred funds from military construction accounts, and
the total value in budget authority of all contracts and
investments undertaken may not exceed $150,000,000. Sources for
transfers into the funds are solely to be derived from funds
appropriated for the acquisition or construction of military
unaccompanied housing. Transfers into the fund are authorized
contingent upon a 30-day notification by the Secretary of
Defense to the appropriate committees of Congress. Proceeds
from investments, leases, and conveyances are to be deposited
into this Fund, and any use of the Fund is subject to annual
appropriations. The Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement
Fund is to be administered as a single account without fiscal
year limitations and the authority to enter into contracts and
partnerships and to make investments shall expire on September
30, 2000.
Reporting Requirements
The Committee notes Section 124 of the General Provisions
of this bill requires the Secretary of Defense to notify
Congressional Committees sixty days prior to issuing a
solicitation for a contract with the private sector for
unaccompanied military personnel housing.
The Service Secretary concerned may not enter into any
contract until after the end of the 21-day period beginning on
the date the Secretary concerned submits written notice of the
nature and terms of the contract to the appropriate Committees
of Congress. To clarify existing reporting requirements, this
21-day notification requirement applies to any project,
regardless of whether it is financed entirely by transfer of
funds into the Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund,
or it is fully financed within funds available in the Military
Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund, or it is funded by
combining transferred funds with funds available in the Fund.
Budget justification documents are to display project and
administrative costs. No transfer of appropriated funds into
the account may take place until after the end of the 30-day
period beginning on the date the Secretary of Defense submits
written notice and justification for the transfer to the
appropriate Committees of Congress. The Appropriations
Committee expects to receive prior notification of all such
transfers of funds.
Military Construction, Reserve Components
Fiscal year 1998:
Appropriation....................................... $460,533,000
Supplemental Appropriation.......................... 3,700,000
Total............................................. 464,233,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................... 179,529,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 309,025,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 total appropriation................ -155,208,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate........................... +129,496,000
The Committee recommends a total of $309,025,000 for
Military Construction, Reserve Components for fiscal year 1999.
This is an increase of $129,496,000 above the budget request
for fiscal year 1999, and a decrease of $155,208,000 below the
total appropriation for fiscal year 1998.
The Committee's recommended action on each Reserve
Component is reflected in the State list at the end of this
report.
The Committee recommends approval of Military Construction,
as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component Request Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard................... $47,675,000 $70,338,000
Air National Guard.................... 34,761,000 97,701,000
Army Reserve.......................... 71,287,000 71,894,000
Naval Reserve......................... 15,271,000 33,721,000
Air Force Reserve..................... 10,535,000 35,371,000
---------------------------------
Total........................... 179,529,000 309,025,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard
Annual Reporting Requirement--Backlog
The Committee directs the Secretary of the Army and the
Director of the Army National Guard to continue to make a joint
report annually on the current backlog of facilities
requirements of the Army National Guard to be submitted
concurrently with the annual budget request.
annual reporting requirement--armory infrastructure
The Secretary of the Army, the Director of the National
Guard Bureau, and the Director of the Army National Guard are
directed to continue to report jointly to the Committee by
January 1, 1999 on the status of armory infrastructure.
california--los angeles/azusa: readiness center
The Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to report
by January 15, 1999 on the plan and schedule for the
consolidation and replacement of existing armories in Los
Angeles, California.
west virginia--camp dawson (kingwood): readiness center
Funding for this project was appropriated in fiscal year
1998. The project was proposed for line-item veto, and was re-
submitted in the budget request for fiscal year 1999.
Subsequently, Congress overrode the proposed line-item veto.
Therefore, the project is fully funded and no further funding
is required.
Air National Guard
unspecified minor construction
Within funds provided for Unspecified Minor Construction,
the Committee directs the Air National Guard to carry out
projects to upgrade the control tower and to upgrade airfield
facilities at the Stanly County Airport in North Carolina.
Army Reserve
utah--salt lake city: u.s. army reserve center/organizational
maintenance shop
The fiscal year 1998 appropriations bill provided
$12,714,000 for this relocation effort. However, the project
was proposed for line-item veto, and was re-submitted in the
budget request for fiscal year 1999. Subsequently, Congress
overrode the proposed line-item veto. Therefore, the amount
included in the budget request is not required, but an
increment above the fiscal year 1998 appropriation is required.
Therefore, the Committee recommends $5,076,000 as the second
phase of funding for this project, to match the total
authorized amount of $17,790,000.
future years defense plan
It is the Committee's view that section 123 of Public Law
104-196 constitutes a continuing permanent requirement for the
Army National Guard and the Air National Guard to present the
Future Years Defense Plan to Congress concurrent with the
President's budget submission for each fiscal year. The
Committee will expect subsequent submissions of the Future
Years Defense Plan to include explanatory notes justifying any
modification of prior year plans.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................ $152,600,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................. 185,000,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................. 169,000,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation.................... +16,400,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate......................... -16,000,000
The Committee recommends a total of $169,000,000 for the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program
(NSIP). This is a decrease of $16,000,000 below the budget
request for fiscal year 1999 and an increase of $16,400,000
above the appropriation for fiscal year 1998.
For 1999, the NATO nations have agreed on a funding level
of approximately $730,000,000. Of this amount, the U.S.
requirement is based on a cost share which averages about 26%.
In addition to the recommended appropriation of
$169,000,000,approximately $11,000,000 is expected to be available from
recoupments from prior year U.S. funded work, and from deobligation of
NATO funds for previously obligated projects that were reduced in scope
or canceled.
The Committee continues to support full U.S. participation
in the NSIP program. Recent expenditures do not support fiscal
year 1999 expenditures as foreseen by the Department of
Defense. The foreign currency fluctuation has increased the
value of the U.S. dollar against most other NATO nation's
currencies. Also, additional recoupments of the U.S.
prefinanced funds should be realized. Therefore, the Committee
has reduced the budget request by $16,000,000 and notes that
this is a $16,400,000 increase above fiscal year 1998. This
funding should be sufficient to satisfy the Secretary's
commitments to NATO.
The Department of Defense is directed to continue to report
to the Committees on Appropriations, on a quarterly basis, the
following information:
(1) NATO nations share of construction costs based on
fund authorizations;
(2) NATO nations shares of procurement costs based on
fund authorizations; and
(3) A listing of all obligations incurred that
quarter broken out by infrastructure category and
procurement category. This listing should show the
total project costs, the U.S. cost share and all other
NATO nations cost shares.
NATO Expansion
The Committee continues the requirement that no funds will
be used for projects (including planning and design) related to
the enlargement of NATO and the Partnership for Peace, unless
Congress is notified 21 days in advance of the obligation of
funds. In addition, the Committee's intent is that Section 110
of the General Provisions shall apply to this program.
The Department of Defense is directed to identify
separately the level of effort anticipated for NATO enlargement
and for Partnership for Peace for that fiscal year in future
budget justifications.
Family Housing
Overview
The need for military family housing has changed with the
all-volunteer structure of the force. In the mid-1950s forty-
two percent of the force was married, compared to sixty-one
percent today. The percentage of service members with families
will continue to grow, and the nature of an all-volunteer force
implies greater expectations for the availability, size and
amenities of family housing. At the same time, the Department
is faced with a changing military environment due to overseas
reductions, domestic base closures, major force reductions, and
increased deployments.
Today, the family housing program is even more important
because it provides a quality of life incentive which attracts
and retains dedicated individuals to serve in the military.
However, the housing deficiencies are a severe disincentive to
reenlistment. Testimony before the Committee states that it
costs over $34,200 to recruit and train and enlist a member of
the Army for the first assignment. This investment is lost each
time a soldier must be replaced. The Committee has no question
that housing is directly linked to readiness, morale and
retention.
While this Committee has focused on the need for adequate
family housing over the years, resources have been scarce. The
family housing crisis exists today due to the majority of
housing in the Department's inventory being substandard; high
cost areas where housing deficits exist; and problems young
families are facing who cannot afford to live in local
communities.
DOD policy is that married couples will live off-base when
the economy can support them, and about two-thirds of all
military families do reside off-base. Where there is sufficient
affordable housing in the community and commuting distances are
not over one hour, most of these families are doing well.
However, 12 percent of military families living in civilian
communities are in substandard housing. This is often the case
when rents are excessive or a family can only afford to live in
distant, isolated, and sometimes unsafe neighborhoods. This is
occurring more often because housing allowances are covering
only 80 percent of the cost of civilian housing, on average.
Many younger families only have one car and are faced with
driving distances of over an hour to the installation. In some
instances, families are choosing to remain separated simply
because suitable, affordable housing is not available at a new
assignment.
The Department of Defense has a total of 313,000 on-base
housing units in its inventory, with an average age of 36
years. Two-thirds of the inventory is over 30 years old and
requires a substantial annual investment to meet maintenance
requirements. Over the years, the majority of these homes have
gone without adequate maintenance and repair. And over fifty
percent of the inventory, or 187,810 units, is in need of major
improvements or replacement at a total cost of $15,064,808,000.
Unsuitable units require a major investment in maintenance
and repair to correct deteriorated infrastructure, provide
basic living standards and meet contemporary code requirements
for electrical and mechanical systems, and for energy
efficiency. Examples provided to the Committee of a typical
scenario military families face include: severe health and
safety deficiencies such as electrical systems and water pipes
needing replacement; non-working or inefficient heating and
cooling systems; nails coming through the ceilings and floors;
kitchen cabinets water-logged and sinking; ceiling and wall
paint chipped and peeling; screens with holes in them; doors
coming apart; malfunctioning smoke detectors; light fixtures
broken, and stoves and ovens with elements not working. The
current backlog of deferred maintenance and repair totals in
excess of $2,780,000,000. When housing units are not adequately
maintained, eventually they must be closed and abandoned or
demolished. Families who could have been housed in these units
must then live off-base. In turn, this creates an additional
expense for payment of housing allowances.
Aside from the problems confronting the current inventory,
the Department estimates a new construction deficit of 51,330
units at a cost of $5,309,274,000. It will be necessary to use
many different approaches to help meet the current family
housing need. The challenge is for a sustained overall
commitment, at funding levels that will reduce the backlog of
inadequate houses, reduce the housing deficits, and increase
the quality of living conditions in a reasonable period of
time. The Department estimates it will take over
$20,374,082,000 to correct the existing problem.
The following chart provides a Service breakout of the
current family housing deficit, both in units and in cost of
new construction, replacement, improvements and deferred
maintenance and repair:
DEFICITS (CURRENT PROJECTIONS)
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New
construction Replacement Improvement Grand total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army:
Number of Units......................... 10,322 87,027 ............... 97,349
Costs................................... $1,300,000 $5,700,000 ............... $7,000,000
Navy:
Number of Units......................... 15,000 4,500 22,800 42,300
Costs................................... $681,100 $695,800 $1,447,800 $2,824,700
Air Force:
Number of Units......................... 16,000 30,000 31,000 77,000
Costs................................... $2,016,000 $3,780,000 $2,480,000 $8,276,000
Marine Corps:
Number of Units......................... 10,008 511 11,972 22,491
Costs................................... $1,312,174 $114,639 $846,569 $2,273,382
Total DoD:
Number of Units......................... 51,330 122,038 65,772 239,140
Costs................................... $5,309,274 $10,290,439 $4,774,369 $20,374,082
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
construction overview
The Committee is concerned over the fiscal year 1999 budget
request for family housing new construction and construction
improvements of $592,846,000. Housing continues to be a top
priority, yet the Department's budget represents a reduction of
$262,274,000 or 31%, from the fiscal year 1998 appropriation
for new construction and construction improvements. The
Committee strongly believes it is imperative that construction
funding levels must be maintained, along with any privatization
efforts, to help resolve the serious family housing deficits.
The Committee recommends total funding of $642,196,000 for
family housing construction and improvements for fiscal year
1999, an increase of $49,350,000 above the budget request.
However, of this amount $235,438,000 has been funded under the
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund.
new housing construction
The fiscal year 1999 request is $270,103,000 to build 1666
units of new family housing for all Services. This is
$166,686,000 or 38 percent, under the fiscal year 1998 enacted
level. The Committee has approved all requested projects for
new construction. In addition, the Committee has recommended an
additional $30,550,000 to construct 205 units of new family
housing. The total appropriation for new construction is
$300,653,000. However, of this amount $105,484,000 has been
funded under the Department of Defense Family Housing
Improvement Fund. Details of the Committee's recommendations
for new construction are provided in this report under the
individual component accounts and the Department of Defense
Family Housing Improvement Fund. The Committee expects that
none of the approved projects will be reduced in scope.
It is the understanding of the Committee, that upon a 30-
day notification from the Secretary of Defense, and approval of
the Committee, funds appropriated for a new construction
project may be transferred to the Defense Family Housing
Improvement Fund for the purpose of a private sector pilot
project at the same location.
construction improvements
A total of $322,743,000 has been requested for post-
acquisition construction for all services to improve 4028
housing units. This is a decrease of $95,588,000, or 23
percent, from the fiscal year 1998 enacted level. Post-
acquisition construction is focused on modernizing existing
units that are uneconomical to repair. In addition, the
Committee has provided an additional $18,800,000 for
construction improvement projects which are listed in this
report under the individual component accounts, to improve an
additional units. The total appropriation for post-acquisition
construction is $341,543,000 and will improve 4303 units of
family housing. However, of this amount $129,954,000 has been
funded under the Department of Defense Family Housing
Improvement Fund.
It is the understanding of the Committee, that upon a 30-
day notification from the Secretary of Defense, and approval of
the Committee, funds appropriated for a construction
improvement project may be transferred to the Defense Family
Housing Improvement Fund for the purpose of a private sector
pilot project at the same location.
The Committee continues the restriction on the amount
invested in improving foreign source housing units. The three-
year limitation on overseas units is $35,000. If the components
intend to program improvements to specific units which exceed
$35,000 over a period of three years, total funding should be
requested in one year. The justification for each unit should
identify all improvements and major maintenance work done in
the past three years, and all improvements and major
maintenance planned in the following three years.
operation and maintenance
The fiscal year 1999 request for operation and maintenance
expenses totals $2,846,920,000, a decrease of $133,110,000 from
the fiscal year 1998 appropriation. The Committee recommends an
appropriation of $2,835,093,000 for fiscal year 1999. These
accounts provide for annual expenditures for maintenance and
repair, furnishings, management, services, utilities, leasing,
interest, mortgage insurance and miscellaneous expenses. Of the
total request for operation and maintenance, $1,272,567,000 is
for maintenance and repair of existing housing, a reduction of
$68,086,000 from fiscal year 1998 levels.
The Committee directs that any savings from foreign
currency re-estimations in the family housing operation and
maintenance accounts be applied for maintenance of existing
family housing units. The Comptroller is directed to report to
the Committee on the allocation of this savings by December 1,
1998.
Expenditures from this account for general and flag officer
quarters are to be reported in accordance with the guidelines
previously established and reiterated later in this report. The
Committee also continues the direction that the details of all
other expenditures from this account which exceed $15,000 per
unit, per year for major maintenance and repair of non-general
and flag officer quarters be included as part of the
justification material. The general provision limiting
obligations from this account to no more than 20 percent of the
total in the last two months of the fiscal year is included in
this year's bill.
The Committee continues the restriction on the transfer of
funds between the operation and maintenance accounts. The
limitation is ten percent to all primary accounts and
subaccounts. Such transfers are to be reported to the Committee
within thirty days of such action.
general and flag officer quarters
The existing reporting requirements for general and flag
officer quarters continue in full force and effect, in order to
control expenditures for high cost quarters. The purpose of
these requirements is to ensure that the total amount of all
obligations for maintenance and repair (excluding operations)
on each general or flag officer quarters is limited to $25,000
per year, unless specifically included in the annual budget
justification material. This continues the policy initiated in
1984 and developed and elaborated over several years, to ensure
that separate controls are established for orderly planning and
programming to accomplish this work.
Recognizing the uncertainties involved in accurately
forecasting ``change in occupancy'' work, the Committee
continues the following previously established notification
requirement. The Committee must be notified when maintenance
and repair costs for a unit will exceed the amount submitted in
the budget justification by 25 percent or $5,000, whichever is
less. The Committee must also be notified when maintenance and
repair costs will exceed $25,000 for a unit not requested in
the budget justification.
Notifications of each proposed expenditure must be
submitted over the signature of the Service Secretary for case-
by-case review and approval. Each Service is directed to
continue to limit out-of-cycle submissions to one per year,
except for situations which are justified as emergencies or
safety-related.
leasing reporting requirement
The Committee continues the reporting requirement for both
domestic and foreign leases. For domestic leases (not funded by
the Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund), the Department is
directed to report quarterly on the details of all new or
renewal domestic leases entered into during the previous
quarter which exceed $12,000 per unit per year, including
certification that less expensive housing was not available for
lease. For foreign leases, the Department is directed to:
perform an economic analysis on all new leases or lease/
contract agreements where more than 25 units are involved;
report the details of any new or renewal lease exceeding
$20,000 per year (as adjusted for foreign currency fluctuation
from October 1, 1987, but not adjusted for inflation), 21 days
prior to entering into such an agreement; and base leasing
decisions on the economic analysis.
exclusion of asbestos and lead-based paint removal from maintenance and
repair limits
The Committee continues the requirement of an after-the-
fact notification where asbestos and/or lead-based paint
removal costs cause the maintenance and repair thresholds of
$15,000 for a military family housing unit, or $25,000 for a
General or Flag Officer Quarters, to be exceeded. The
notification shall include work, scope, cost break-out and
other details pertinent to asbestos and/or lead-based paint
removal work and shall be reported on a semi-annual basis.
reprogramming criteria
The reprogramming criteria that apply to military
construction projects (25 percent of the funded amount or
$2,000,000, whichever is less) also apply to new housing
construction projects and to improvement projects over
$2,000,000.
family housing--fiscal year 2000 budget submission
The Committee directs the Comptroller of Defense to
thoroughly review the Service Component's, particularly the
Navy's, budget submissions for fiscal year 2000 to ensure that
all family housing maintenance and construction improvements
are funded in the appropriate sub-accounts.
family housing master plans
The individual components are in the process of developing
family housing master plans to meet the goal of eliminating the
inadequate housing inventory by 2010 using the combination of
traditional construction, privatization and demolition. The Air
Force intends to have its Family Housing Master Plan completed
by December 1998. The Committee will expect to be advised as
these plans develop.
Family Housing, Army
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................ $1,337,868,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................. 1,208,173,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................. 1,180,537,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation.................... -157,331,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate......................... -27,636,000
The Committee recommends a total of $1,180,537,000 for
Family Housing, Army for fiscal year 1999. This is a decrease
of $27,636,000 below the budget request for fiscal year 1999,
and a decrease of $157,331,000 below the appropriation for
fiscal year 1998. However, a total of $41,400,000 has been
funded under the Department of Defense Family Housing
Improvement Fund.
construction
The Committee recommends $41,700,000 for new construction,
instead of $70,100,000, as requested, as shown below. The
Committee notes that projects totalling $41,400,000 are funded
under the DOD Family Housing Improvement Fund.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location/Project Number of Units Requested Recommended
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army:
Alabama--Redstone Arsenal................................ 118 14,000,000 14,000,000
Hawaii--Schofield Barracks............................... 64 14,700,000 14,700,000
North Carolina--Fort Bragg............................... (170) 19,800,000 \1\ 0
Texas--Fort Hood......................................... (154) 21,600,000 \1\ 0
Virginia--Fort Lee....................................... 80 0 13,000,000
--------------------------------------------------
Total, Army............................................ 262 70,100,000 41,700,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Projects funded under DOD Family Housing Improvement Fund.
Construction Improvements
The following project is to be accomplished within the
additional amount provided for construction improvements:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location/Project Number of units Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kentucky--Fort Campbell........... 104 8,800,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Housing, Navy and Marine Corps
Fiscal year 1998:
Appropriation....................................... $1,370,336,000
Supplemental appropriation.......................... 18,100,000
Total............................................. 1,388,436,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................... 1,196,083,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 1,045,750,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 total appropriation................ -342,686,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate........................... -150,333,000
The Committee recommends a total of $1,045,750,000 for
Family Housing, Navy and Marine Corps for fiscal year 1999.
This is a decrease of $150,333,000 below the budget request for
fiscal year 1999, and a decrease of $342,686,000 below the
total appropriation for fiscal year 1998. However, a total of
$160,333,000 has been funded under the Department of Defense
Family Housing Improvement Fund.
Construction
The Committee recommends $29,125,000 for new construction,
instead of $59,504,000, as requested, as shown below. The
Committee notes that a project in the amount of $30,379,000 is
funded under DOD Family Housing Improvement Fund.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location/Project Number of units Requested Recommended
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navy:
California-Lemoore Naval Air Station......................... (162) 30,379,000 \1\ 0
Hawaii-Naval Complex, Oahu................................... 150 29,125,000 29,125,000
--------------------------------------------------
Total, Navy............................................ 150 59,504,000 29,125,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Project funded under DOD Family Housing Improvement Fund.
Construction Improvements
The following project is to be accomplished within the
additional amount provided for construction improvements:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location/Project Number of units Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
California--Camp Pendleton........ 171 10,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee notes that $129,954,000 in requested
construction improvements has been funded under the Department
of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund. Those projects are
listed under that section of this report.
washington--naval station puget sound, everett: real property
conveyance
Section 125 of this bill provides an appropriation of
$6,000,000 in proceeds from the sale of land and family housing
units at Paine Field. This funding will be used to acquire
additional housing units for Naval Station Everett, as part of
the follow-on Public Private Venture project at Everett.
Family Housing, Air Force
Fiscal year 1998:
Appropriation....................................... $1,125,943,000
Supplemental appropriation.......................... 2,400,000
Total............................................. 1,128,343,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................... 1,016,030,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 993,084,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 total appropriation................ -135,259,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate........................... -22,946,000
The Committee recommends a total of $993,084,000 for Family
Housing, Air Force for fiscal year 1999. This is a decrease of
$22,946,000 below the budget request for fiscal year 1999, and
a decrease of $135,259,000 below the total appropriation for
fiscal year 1998. However, a total of $33,705,000 has been
funded under the Department of Defense Family Housing
Improvement Fund.
Construction
The Committee recommends $124,344,000 for new construction,
instead of $140,499,000 as requested, as shown below. The
Committee notes that project totalling $33,705,000 are funded
under the DOD Family Housing Improvement Fund.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location/Project Number of units Requested Recommended
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Force:
Alabama--Maxwell AFB..................................... 143 16,300,000 16,300,000
Alaska--Eielson AFB...................................... 46 12,932,000 12,932,000
California--Edwards AFB.................................. 48 12,580,000 12,580,000
California--Vandenberg AFB............................... 95 18,499,000 18,499,000
Delaware--Dover AFB...................................... (55) 8,998,000 \1\ 0
Florida--MacDill AFB..................................... 48 7,609,000 7,609,000
Florida--Patrick AFB..................................... (46) 9,692,000 \1\ 0
Florida--Tyndall AFB..................................... 122 14,500,000 14,500,000
Nebraska--Offutt AFB..................................... ............... 900,000 900,000
Nebraska--Offutt AFB..................................... ............... 870,000 870,000
Nebraska--Offutt AFB..................................... 90 12,212,000 12,212,000
Nevada--Nellis AFB....................................... 60 0 10,550,000
New Mexico--Kirtland AFB................................. 37 6,400,000 6,400,000
Ohio--Wright Patterson AFB............................... (40) 5,600,000 \1\ 0
Texas--Dyess AFB......................................... (64) 9,415,000 \1\ 0
Texas--Sheppard AFB...................................... 65 0 7,000,000
Washington--Fairchild AFB................................ ............... 1,692,000 1,692,000
Washington--Fairchild AFB................................ 14 2,300,000 2,300,000
--------------------------------------------------
Total, Air Force....................................... 768 140,499,000 124,344,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Project funded under DDD Family Housing Improvement Fund.
operation and maintenance
The request of $789,995,000 has been reduced by $4,791,000,
as contained in the House-passed authorization bill. It is the
Committee's intent that the appropriation of $388,659,000 for
the maintenance of real property not be reduced.
Family Housing, Defense-wide
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................ $37,674,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................. 37,244,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................. 37,244,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation.................... -430,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate......................... 0
The Committee recommends a total of $37,244,000 for Family
Housing, Defense-wide for fiscal year 1999. This is equal to
the budget request for fiscal year 1999, and a decrease of
$430,000 below the appropriation for fiscal year 1998.
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................ $0
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................. 7,000,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................. 242,438,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation.................... +242,438,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate......................... +235,438,000
The Committee recommends a total of $242,438,000 for the
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund for
fiscal year 1999. This is an increase of $235,438,000 above the
budget request for fiscal year 1999, and an increase of
$242,438,000 above the appropriation for fiscal year 1998. Of
the total appropriation, the Committee recommends a limitation
of $7,000,000 on total administrative expenses of the Housing
Revitalization Support Office, as requested. In addition, the
Committee recommends appropriations of $235,438,000 under the
Family Housing Improvement Fund rather than the Family Housing,
Construction accounts as requested for those projects that the
Department notified the Committee on May 15, 1998 that it
intends to execute under privatization authorities. The
projects are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Construction
Service, State and Installation construction improvements Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army:
North Carolina--Fort Bragg.................................. $19,800,000 .............. ..............
Texas--Fort Hood............................................ 21,600,000 .............. ..............
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal Army............................................. 41,400,000 0 41,400,000
===============================================
Navy:
California:
Lemoore NAS............................................. 30,379,000 2,089,000 ..............
Monterey NPGS........................................... .............. 7,016,000 ..............
San Diego CNB........................................... .............. 24,798,000 ..............
San Diego CNB........................................... .............. 4,851,000 ..............
Connecticut--New London NSB................................. .............. 6,321,000 ..............
Illinois--Great Lakes CNB................................... .............. 12,632,000 ..............
Maryland:
Annapolis USNA.......................................... .............. 4,340,000 ..............
Annapolis USNA.......................................... .............. 4,304,000 ..............
New Jersey--Earle NWS....................................... .............. 6,723,000 ..............
Pennsylvania--Willow Grove NAS.............................. .............. 598,000 ..............
Texas--Corpus Christi NAS................................... .............. 7,558,000 ..............
Virginia--Norfolk PWC....................................... .............. 8,010,000 ..............
Washington--Whidbey Island NAS.............................. .............. 9,764,000 ..............
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Navy............................................ 30,379,000 99,004,000 129,383,000
===============================================
Marine Corps:
North Carolina
Camp Lejeune MCB........................................ .............. 17,417,000 ..............
Cherry Point MCAS....................................... .............. 13,533,000 ..............
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Marine Corps.................................... 0 30,950,000 30,950,000
===============================================
Subtotal, Navy and Marine Corps........................... 30,379,000 129,954,000 160,333,000
===============================================
Air Force:
Delaware--Dover AFB......................................... 8,998,000 .............. ..............
Florida--Patrick AFB........................................ 9,692,000 .............. ..............
Ohio--Wright-Patterson AFB.................................. 5,600,000 .............. ..............
Texas--Dyess AFB............................................ 9,415,000 .............. ..............
-----------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Air Force....................................... 33,705,000 0 33,705,000
===============================================
Grand Total............................................... 105,484,000 129,954,000 235,438,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
overview
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996
(P.L. 104-106) addressed the family housing crisis by
authorizing a five year private sector pilot project to replace
or renovate approximately 200,000 units of family housing
within the United States, its territories and possessions, and
in Puerto Rico, but not overseas. Authority was granted to:
guarantee mortgage payments and rental contracts to developers
as incentives to build family housing; authorize commercial-
style lease agreements for family housing; and engage in joint
ventures with developers to construct family housing on
government property.
The Family Housing Improvement Fund is used to build or
renovate family housing, mixing or matching various authorities
in the authorization, and utilizing private capital and
expertise to the maximum extent possible. The Fund is to
contain appropriated and transferred funds from family housing
construction accounts, and the total value in budget authority
of all contracts and investments undertaken may not exceed
$850,000,000. Proceeds from investments, leases, and
conveyances are to be deposited into this Fund, and any use of
the Fund is subject to annual appropriations. The Family
Housing Improvement Fund is to be administered as a single
account without fiscal year limitations. This authority to
enter into contracts and partnerships and to make investments
shall expire on September 30, 2000.
administrative costs
The Committee continues its intent that the sole source of
funds available for planning, administrative, and oversight
costs relating to military family housing privatization
initiatives be provided from the appropriations contained in
this account. Administrative costs have been limited to
$7,000,000 for fiscal year 1999.
reporting requirements
Budget justification documents are to continue to display
project and administrative costs. In addition, projects slated
for Public-Private Ventures are to be requested under the
Family Housing Improvement Fund instead of the Family Housing,
Construction accounts.
The Committee notes Section 124 of the General Provisions
of this bill which requires the Secretary of Defense to notify
Congressional Committees sixty days prior to issuing a
solicitation for a contract with the private sector for
military family housing.
The Service Secretary concerned may not enter into any
contract until after the end of the 21-day period beginning on
the date the Secretary concerned submits written notice of the
nature and terms of the contract to the appropriate committees
of Congress.
To clarify existing reporting requirements, this 21-day
notification requirement applies to any project, regardless of
whether it is financed entirely by transfer of funds into the
Family Housing Improvement Fund, or it is fully financed within
funds available in the Family Housing Improvement Fund, or it
is funded by combining transferred funds with funds available
in the Family Housing Improvement Fund.
In addition, no transfer of appropriated funds into the
account may take place until after the end of the 30-day period
beginning on the date the Secretary of Defense submits written
notice and justification for the transfer to the appropriate
committees of Congress. The Appropriations Committee expects to
receive prior notification of all such transfers of funds.
Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................ $0
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................. 12,800,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................. 7,500,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation.................... +7,500,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate......................... -5,300,000
The Committee recommends $7,500,000 for the Homeowners
Assistance Fund. This is a decrease of $5,300,000 below the
budget request for fiscal year 1999, and an increase of
$7,500,000 above the appropriation for fiscal year 1998.
Requirements for fiscal year 1998 were financed by revenue and
prior year carryover.
The Homeowners Assistance Fund is a non-expiring revolving
fund which finances a program for providing assistance to
homeowners by reducing their losses incident to the disposal of
their homes when military installations at or near where they
are serving or employed are ordered to be closed or the scope
of operations is reduced. The Fund was established in
recognition of the fact that base closure and reduction actions
can have serious economic effects on local communities. The
Fund receives funding from several sources: appropriations,
borrowing authority, reimbursable authority, prior fiscal year
unobligated balances, revenue from sale of acquired properties,
and recovery of prior year obligations.
The total estimated requirements for fiscal year 1999 are
estimated at $109,735,000 and will be funded with
appropriations, revenue from sales of acquired property and
prior year unobligated balances. The Committee has reduced the
budget request by $5,300,000 based on estimated unobligated
balances at the end of fiscal year 1999.
Base Realignment and Closure
overview
The Congress has appropriated, to date, a net total of
$17,807,526,000 for the Base Realignment and Closure program
for fiscal years 1990 through 1998. In the bill for fiscal year
1999, the Committee is recommending total funding of
$1,730,704,000 under two accounts, as requested. These funds
are necessary to ensure closure schedules can be met and
anticipated savings will be realized. In addition, funding is
essential for accelerated cleanup which is necessary for reuse
of surplus properties and future job creation.
The Committee, in appropriating such funds, has provided
the Department with the flexibility to allocate funds by
Service, by function and by base. The Committee, in recognizing
the complexities of realigning and closing bases and providing
for environmental restoration, has provided such flexibility to
allow the Office of the Secretary of Defense to monitor the
program execution of the Services and to redistribute
unobligated balances as appropriate to avoid delays and to
effect timely execution of realignment and closures along with
environmental restoration.
The following table displays the total amount appropriated
for each round of base closure including amounts recommended
for fiscal year 1999:
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
[Total funding, fiscal year 1990 through fiscal year 1999]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 1990
through fiscal Fiscal year 1998 Fiscal year 1999 Total
year 1997 enacted\3\ recommended
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part I.............................. $2,672,830,000 NA NA $2,672,830,000
Part II \1\......................... 5,157,562,000 $116,754,000 NA 5,274,316,000
Part III \2\........................ 5,971,933,000 768,702,000 $433,464,000 7,174,099,000
Part IV............................. 1,944,347,000 1,175,398,000 1,297,240,000 4,416,985,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................... 15,746,672,000 2,060,854,000 1,730,704,000 19,538,230,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes transfer of $133,000,000 from ``Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense.''
\2\ Includes: Rescission of $507,692,000 (P.L. 103-211); rescission of $32,000,000 (P.L. 104-6).
\3\ Includes rescissions enacted in Public Law 105-18, as follows: Part II--$35,391,000; Part III--$75,638,000;
and Part IV--$22,971,000.
environmental restoration
Since the start of the current process for Base Realignment
and Closure, Military Construction Appropriations Acts have
appropriated a net total of $17,807,526,000 for the entire
program for fiscal years 1990 through 1998. Within this total,
the Department has allocated $4,984,400,000 for activities
associated with environmental restoration.
The Committee is concerned that the design and cost of
environmental restoration efforts should be tailored to match
the proposed re-use of an installation in order to assure that
costs are reasonable and affordable. Therefore, the Committee
continues to recommend statutory language to establish a
ceiling on the level of funding for environmental restoration,
unless the Secretary of Defense determines additional
obligations are necessary and notifies the Committees on
Appropriations of his determination and the necessary reasons
for the increase.
The following table displays the statutory ceiling
established by the Committee and is equal to the Department's
execution plan for fiscal year 1999.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ceiling on
environmental
Account Total program restoration
costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BRAC III.............................. $433,464,000 $271,800,000
BRAC IV............................... 1,297,240,000 426,036,000
---------------------------------
Total........................... 1,730,704,000 697,836,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee directs the Department of Defense to devote
the maximum amount of resources to actual cleanup and, to the
greatest extent possible, to limit resources expended on
administration, support, studies, and investigations.
california--army base, rio visa
The Committee is aware of two major problems at the Army
Base in Rio Visa, California, slated for closure by the 1995
Base Realignment and Closure Commission, that present a serious
threat to human safety. These include severely deteriorated
buildings which have exposed asbestos panels and present lead
paint dangers and hazardous motor oil and underground storage
tank wastes that necessitate environmental cleanup. The
Committee expects the Department of the Army to demolish the
unsafe buildings and complete the environmental cleanup within
existing appropriations in an expedited fashion to ensure
conveyance of the base. The Army is directed to report to the
Committee by July 15, 1998 on this matter.
california--norton air force base
The Committee is concerned that thirty-one buildings,
covering 52.9 acres, of the former Norton AFB were built
between 1940 and 1945 and contain great quantities of asbestos
and lead based paint which present a threat to human safety.
The Committee expects the Air Force to use remaining BRAC I
funds to safely demolish these contaminated structures labeled
A through H. The Air Force is directed to report to the
Committee by July 15, 1998 on this matter.
california--presidio of san francisco
The Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to report
by January 15, 1999 on the current status of environmental
remediation activities at the Presidio of San Francisco,
including the estimated dates for completion of such
activities.
california--treasure island
The Committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to report
by January 15, 1999 on the planned disposition of ramps, access
roads, and rights of way from the San Francisco Bay Bridge to
the Treasure Island Naval Station, including an evaluation of
the need for seismic upgrades and the possible transfer of such
property to the State of California.
florida--naval research laboratory underwater sound reference
detachment
The Committee is aware that the Sound Lab is a unique
situation in that it is surrounded for a significant distance
on all sides by residential development. Serious concern exists
for the safety of children in the area since the community will
have very easy access to Lake Gem Mary after the Navy departs
the area. The Committee expects the Navy to demolish the two
large metal docks that extend into the center of the lake with
remaining BRAC I funds to ensure a tragedy will not occur at
the Lake. The Navy is directed to report to the Committee by
July 15, 1998 on this matter.
Kentucky--Louisville Naval Ordnance Station: Environmental Restoration
The Secretary of the Navy is directed to report to the
Committee by January 15, 1999 on the current status of ongoing
efforts at the Louisville Naval Ordnance Station, with emphasis
on the following activities:
Contaminated floor removal/replacement;
Environmental sampling;
Electrical distribution system maintenance;
Removal and disposal of contaminated materials and debris;
Completion of Navy operational closure requirements; and
Groundwater remediation (ensuring that ongoing operations
at the facility are unimpeded by the appropriate
remediation of metals contaminated groundwater).
This report is to include the estimated dates for
completion of all remediation activities.
Future Costs of Environmental Restoration
Since the first appropriations were enacted for the Base
Realignment and Closure Program in fiscal year 1990, the
Committee has been concerned that the full cost of this effort
should be clearly defined and displayed. In hearings before the
Committee this year, the Department has testified that, upon
completion of the Base Realignment and Closure Program, it
intends to program and budget for all further costs of
environmental restoration at base realignment and closure sites
in the Operations and Maintenance accounts. The Committee
strongly objects to this approach, based on the Department's
estimate that such requirements will total $686,900,000 in
fiscal year 2001 and approximately $500,000,000 annually
thereafter until completion.
In order to continue the consolidation of all expenses
related to base realignment and closure, the Department is
directed to submit a legislative proposal for the establishment
of a Treasury account entitled ``Base Realignment and Closure
Environmental Restoration''. Further, the Department is
directed to program and budget for environmental restoration
efforts related to the four rounds of Base Realignment and
Closure performed from 1988 through 1995 under such account for
all such expenses.
construction projects
The Department of Defense has requested a total of
$232,719,000 within the fiscal year 1999 budget request for
base realignment and closure for construction projects funded
under the Base Realignment and Closure Accounts, Parts III and
IV. The Committee recommends full funding for these important
projects. The Committee provides approval and appropriated
funds for the following construction projects as contained in
Executive Summary of Justification Data submitted to Congress
February, 1998, as subsequently revised and as modified by
reprogramming actions requested through May 26, 1998:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BRAC Amount
Component/State/Project description round (thousands)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navy BRAC III Construction, Fiscal Year 1999:
Nevada:
Naval Air Station, Fallon:
Bachelor Officer Quarters Phase II (P-
XX1T)................................ III 11,100
------------
Subtotal Navy BRAC III Nevada....... ....... 11,100
============
Total for Navy BRAC III
Construction, Fiscal Year 1999..... ....... 11,100
============
Army BRAC IV Construction, Fiscal Year 1999:
Alaska:
Fort Greely:
Munitions Storage Facility (PN 47461). IV 1,550
------------
Subtotal Army Alaska................ ....... 1,550
============
Colorado:
Fitzsimons Army Medical Center:
Warehouse Addition (PN 47653)......... IV 1,550
Reserve Center (PN 50296)............. IV 2,750
------------
Subtotal Army Colorado.............. ....... 4,300
============
Indiana:
Crane Army Ammunition Activity:
Surveillance Test Facility (PN 50057). IV 1,850
------------
Subtotal Army Indiana............... ....... 1,850
============
Maryland:
Fort Detrick:
Physical Fitness Center (PN 48153).... IV 3,050
Fort Meade:
Administrative Facility (PN 46307).... IV 12,000
Administrative Facility Renovation (PN
47770)............................... IV 2,900
Administrative Facility (PN 47237).... IV 6,300
------------
Subtotal Army Maryland.............. ....... 24,250
============
New York:
Fort Totten:
Storage Facility (PN 46258)........... IV 1,900
------------
Subtotal Army New York.............. ....... 1,900
============
Pennsylvania:
Letterkenny Army Depot:
Enclave Fencing (PN 49714)............ IV 1,150
------------
Subtotal Army Pennsylvania.......... ....... 1,150
============
Virginia:
Fort Pickett:
Reserve Center (PN 46354)............. IV 3,100
Fort Lee:
WAC Museum (PN 50091)................. IV 2,400
------------
Subtotal Army Virginia.............. ....... 5,500
============
Various Locations:
Program Management........................ IV 2,350
------------
Subtotal Army Various................... ....... 2,350
============
Total for Army BRAC IV Construction,
Fiscal Year 1999....................... ....... 42,850
============
Army BRAC IV Family Housing Construction, FY 1999:
Alaska:
Fort Wainwright:
Family Housing (4 units) (PN 47530)... IV 1,700
------------
Total Army BRAC IV Family Housing
Construction, Fiscal Year 1999..... ....... 1,700
============
Navy BRAC IV Construction, Fiscal Year 1999:
California:
Naval Air Weapons Station, Point Mugu:
Aviation Support Facilities (260U).... IV 1,500
Maintenance and Training Facilities... IV 12,800
------------
Subtotal Navy California............ ....... 14,300
============
District of Columbia:
Naval District of Washington:
NAVSEASYSCOM Headquarters Building
Relocation (009U).................... IV 71,543
------------
Subtotal Navy District of Columbia.. ....... 71,543
============
Hawaii:
Naval Telecommunications Center, Makalapa:
Building Addition (935U).............. IV 920
------------
Subtotal Navy Hawaii................ ....... 920
============
Massachusetts:
Naval Security Group Activity, Boston:
Defense Courier Service Building
(935U)............................... IV 850
------------
Subtotal Navy Massachusetts......... ....... 850
============
Tennessee:
Naval Support Activity, Memphis:
Building Renovation (329U)............ IV 4,200
------------
Subtotal Navy Tennessee............. 4,200 4,200
============
Texas:
Naval Air Station, Corpus Christi:
Sled Ramp Facility and Land
Acquisition (421U)................... IV 13,313
------------
Subtotal Navy Texas................. ....... 13,313
============
Virginia:
Naval Station, Norfolk:
Building Renovations and Alterations
(317U)............................... IV 3,970
Naval Air Station, Oceana:
Strike Fighter Weapons School
Additions (163U)..................... IV 4,073
------------
Subtotal Navy Virginia.............. ....... 8,043
============
Total for Navy BRAC IV Construction,
Fiscal Year 1999................... ....... 113,169
============
Air Force BRAC IV Construction, Fiscal Year 1999:
New York:
Stewart International Airport, Newburgh:
Communications Training Complex (WHAY
95963)............................... IV 6,000
------------
Subtotal Air Force New York......... ....... 6,000
============
Oklahoma:
Tinker AFB:
Alter Product Management (WWYK990032). IV 2,300
Alter Engine Test Cell (WWYK993200)... IV 3,800
Add/Alter Fuel Air Facility
(WWYK993201A)........................ IV 1,300
------------
Subtotal Air Force Oklahoma......... ....... 7,400
============
Texas:
Kelly AFB:
Security Fence/Gates (MBPB993205R1)... IV 400
Vehicle OPS/Maintenance Complex
(MBPB993213R1)....................... IV 6,200
Fuel Operations Facility
(MBPB993214R1)....................... IV 1,200
Reconfigure Utility Systems
(MBPB993230)......................... IV 2,500
------------
Subtotal Air Force Texas............ ....... 10,300
============
Utah:
Hill AFB:
Gas Turbine Engine Test Cells
(KRSM993009)......................... IV 2,100
Alter Produce Management/Composites
Beddown (KRSM983102)................. IV 5,300
F-117 Radar Facility (KRSM983002)..... IV 1,100
------------
Subtotal Air Force Utah............. ....... 8,500
============
Various Locations:
Planning and Design (BCL99RD4)............ IV 700
============
Total Air Force BRAC IV Construction, FY
1999................................... ....... 32,900
============
Defense Logistics Agency BRAC IV Construction, FY
1999:
Utah:
Defense Distribution Depot, Hill AFB,
Utah:
General Purpose Warehouse............. IV 31,000
------------
Subtotal Defense Logistics Agency
Utah............................... ....... 31,000
============
Total DLA BRAC IV Construction, FY
1999............................... ....... $31,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative Provisions
The Department of Defense is required to notify the
appropriate Committees of Congress 21 days prior to the
initiation of any new project which has not been included in
the Department's budget request for the current (or any
previous) fiscal year. If the Department wishes to finance a
previously approved prior year project in the current fiscal
year, no notification is required.
Base Realignment and Closure, Part I
The Committee notes that fiscal year 1995 was the last year
for appropriations into this account.
Base Realignment and Closure, Part II
The Committee notes that fiscal year 1998 was the last year
for appropriations into this account.
Base Realignment and Closure, Part III
Fiscal year 1998:
Appropriation....................................... $768,702,000
Supplemental appropriation.......................... 1,020,000
Total............................................. 769,722,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................... 433,464,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 433,464,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 total appropriation................ -336,258,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate........................... 0
The Committee recommends a total of $433,464,000 for Base
Realignment and Closure, Part III for fiscal year 1999. This is
equal to the budget request for fiscal year 1999 and a decrease
of $336,258,000 below the total amount appropriated for fiscal
year 1998. Below is the recommended distribution of funds:
Activity Amount
Military Construction................................. $11,100,000
Family Housing........................................ 0
Environmental......................................... 271,800,000
Operations and Maintenance............................ 140,778,000
Military Personnel (PCS).............................. 9,734,000
Other................................................. 52,000
Revenues.............................................. 0
-----------------
Total........................................... $433,464,000
Base Realignment and Closure, Part IV
Fiscal year 1998:
Appropriation....................................... $1,175,398,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate............................... 1,297,240,000
Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 1,297,240,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation...................... +121,842,000
Fiscal year 1999 estimate........................... 0
The Committee recommends a total of $1,297,240,000 for Base
Realignment and Closure, Part IV for fiscal year 1999. This is
equal to the budget request for fiscal year 1999 and an
increase of $121,842,000 above the amount appropriated for
fiscal year 1998. Below is the recommended distribution of
funds:
Activity Amount
Military Construction................................. $219,919,000
Family Housing........................................ 1,700,000
Environmental......................................... 426,036,000
Operations and Maintenance............................ 627,344,000
Military Personnel (PCS).............................. 12,598,000
Other................................................. 9,643,000
Revenues.............................................. 0
-----------------
Total........................................... $1,297,240,000
Changes in Application of Existing Law
Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of
Representatives, the following statements are submitted
describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill
which directly or indirectly change the application of existing
law.
Language is included in various parts of the bill to
continue on-going activities which require annual authorization
or additional legislation, which to date has not been enacted.
The bill includes a number of provisions which place
limitations on the use of funds in the bill or change existing
limitations and which might, under some circumstances, be
construed as changing the application of existing law.
The bill provides that appropriations shall remain
available for more than one year for some programs for which
the basic authority legislation does not presently authorize
such extended availability.
A provision of the ``Military Construction, Defense-wide''
account which permits the Secretary of Defense to transfer
funds to other accounts for military construction or family
housing.
A provision of the ``Base Realignment and Closure Account,
Part III'' states that not more than $271,800,000 of the funds
appropriated shall be available solely for environmental
restoration.
A provision of the ``Base Realignment and Closure Account,
Part IV'' states that not more than $426,036,000 of the funds
appropriated shall be available solely for environmental
restoration.
Section 101 of the General Provisions states that none of
the funds appropriated in Military Construction Appropriations
Acts shall be expended for payments under a cost-plus-a-fixed-
fee contract for construction, where cost estimates exceed
$25,000, to be performed within the United States, except
Alaska, without the specific approval in writing of the
Secretary of Defense.
Section 102 of the General Provisions permits use of funds
for hire of passenger motor vehicles.
Section 103 of the General Provisions permits use of funds
for Defense Access Roads.
Section 104 of the General Provisions prohibits
construction of new bases inside the continental United States
for which specific appropriations have not been made.
Section 105 of the General Provisions limits the use of
funds for purchase of land or land easements.
Section 106 of the General Provisions prohibits the use of
funds to acquire land, prepare a site, or install utilities for
any family housing except housing for which funds have been
made available.
Section 107 of the General Provisions limits the use of
minor construction funds to transfer or relocate activities
among installations.
Section 108 of the General Provisions prohibits the
procurement of steel unless American producers, fabricators,
and manufacturers have been allowed to compete.
Section 109 of the General Provisions prohibits payment of
real property taxes in foreign nations.
Section 110 of the General Provisions prohibits
construction of new bases overseas without prior notification.
Section 111 of the General Provisions establishes a
threshold for American preference of $500,000 relating to
architect and engineer services in Japan, in any NATO member
country, and in the Arabian Gulf.
Section 112 of the General Provisions establishes
preference for American contractors for military construction
in the United States territories and possessions in the Pacific
and on Kwajalein Atoll, or in the Arabian Gulf, except bids by
Marshallese contractors for military construction on Kwajalein
Atoll.
Section 113 of the General Provisions requires the
Secretary of Defense to give prior notice to Congress of
military exercises involving construction in excess of
$100,000.
Section 114 of the General Provisions limits obligations
during the last two months of the fiscal year.
Section 115 of the General Provisions permits funds
appropriated in prior years to be available for construction
authorized during the current session of Congress.
Section 116 of the General Provisions permits the use of
expired or lapsed funds to pay the cost of supervision for any
project being completed with lapsed funds.
Section 117 of the General Provisions permits obligation of
funds from more than one fiscal year to execute a construction
project, provided that the total obligation for such project is
consistent with the total amount appropriated for the project.
Section 118 of the General Provisions allows expired funds
to be transferred to the ``Foreign Currency Fluctuations,
Construction, Defense'' account.
Section 119 of the General Provisions directs the Secretary
of Defense to report annually regarding the specific actions to
be taken during the current fiscal year to encourage other
member nations of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization,
Japan, Korea, and United States allies in the Arabian Gulf to
assume a greater share of the common defense burden.
Section 120 of the General Provisions allows transfer of
proceeds from ``Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part I''
to the continuing Base Realignment and Closure accounts.
Section 121 of the General Provisions prohibits expenditure
of funds except in compliance with the Buy American Act.
Section 122 of the General Provisions states the Sense of
the Congress notifying recipients of equipment or products
authorized to be purchased with financial assistance provided
in this Act to purchase American-made equipment and products.
Section 123 of the General Provisions permits the transfer
of funds from Family Housing, Construction accounts to the DOD
Family Housing Improvement Fund.
Section 124 of the General Provisions requires the
Secretary of Defense to notify Congressional Committees sixty
days prior to issuing a solicitation for a contract with the
private sector for military family housing or military
unaccompanied housing.
Section 125 of the General Provisions appropriates
$6,000,000 in previously authorized proceeds from the sale of
land and family housing units at Paine Field, Washington.
Section 126 of the General Provisions states the sense of
Congress regarding the naming of a road at Fort Bragg, North
Carolina.
The Committee recommends deleting the following General
Provisions which were included in the fiscal year 1998 Military
Construction Appropriations Act (Public Law 105-45), because
these provisions are no longer required [section numbers refer
to sections contained in Public Law 105-45]:
Section 124 stating that the sole source of planning,
administrative, and oversight costs incurred by the Housing
Revitalization Support Office must come from the DOD Family
Housing Improvement Fund. This provision is no longer required
because it is now contained in the appropriations paragraph for
the ``Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund''
account.
Section 125 reducing the appropriation of various accounts
in the bill.
Section 126 regarding a Special Forces Training Facility at
Key West Naval Air Station, Florida.
Section 127 regarding the lease of property on Waipio
Peninsula, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Compliance With Rule XIII--Clause 3
In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the House of
Representatives, the Committee reports that it recommends no
changes in existing law made by the bill, as reported.
Appropriations Not Authorized by Law
Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of
Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations
in the accompanying bill which are not authorized by law:
Military Construction, Army
Military Construction, Navy
Military Construction, Air Force
Military Construction, Defense-wide
Military Construction, Army National Guard
Military Construction, Air National Guard
Military Construction, Army Reserve
Military Construction, Naval Reserve
Military Construction, Air Force Reserve
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security
Investment Program
Family Housing, Construction, Army
Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Army
Family Housing, Construction, Navy and Marine Corps
Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Navy and Marine
Corps
Family Housing, Construction, Air Force
Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
Family Housing, Construction, Defense-wide
Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund
Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part III
Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part IV
The Committee notes that authorization for appropriations
in this bill is contained in H.R. 3616, which passed the House
on May 21, 1998. It is anticipated the authorization will be
enacted into law later this year.
Transfer of Funds
Pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule X of the House of
Representatives, a statement is required describing the
transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill. Sections
115, 118, 120, and 123 of the General Provisions, and language
included under ``Military Construction, Defense-wide'' provide
certain transfer authority.
Rescission of Funds
In compliance with clause 1(b) of rule X of the House of
Representatives, the Committee reports that it recommends no
rescissions in the bill, as reported.
Constitutional Authority
Clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives states that:
Each report of a committee on a bill or joint
resolution of a public character, shall include a
statement citing the specific powers granted to the
Congress in the Constitution to enact the law proposed
by the bill or joint resolution.
The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to
report this legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I
of the Constitution of the United States of America which
states:
No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in
consequence of Appropriations made by law * * *
Appropriations contained in this bill are made pursuant to
this specific power granted by the Constitution
Comparisons With Budget Resolution
Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as
amended, requires that the report accompanying a bill providing
new budget authority contain a statement detailing how that
authority compares with the reports submitted under section
302(b) of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent
resolution on the budget for the fiscal year. This information
follows:
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
302(b) Allocation This bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget authority Outlays Budget authority Outlays
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary....................... $8,235 $9,100 $8,234 $8,963
Mandatory........................... 0 0 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advance Spending Authority
This bill provides no advance spending authority.
Five-Year Projection of Outlays
In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974
(Public Law 93-344), as amended, the following information was
provided to the Committee by the Congressional Budget Office.
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget authority, fiscal year 1999.................... $8,234,000
Outlays:
1999.............................................. 2,615,000
2000.............................................. 2,739,000
2001.............................................. 1,557,000
2002.............................................. 787,000
2003 and beyond................................... 395,000
The bill will not affect the levels of revenues, tax
expenditures, direct loan obligations, or primary loan
guarantee commitments under existing law.
Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments
In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of Public Law 93-
344, the new budget authority and outlays provided by the
accompanying bill for financial assistance to State and local
governments are as follows:
[In millions of dollars]
New budget authority.................................. 0
Fiscal year 1998 outlays resulting therefrom.......... 0
State List
The following is a complete listing, by State and country,
of the Committee's recommendations for military construction
and family housing projects: