Senate Report 108-82 - MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATION BILL, 2004

[Senate Report 108-82]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

Calendar No. 176
108th Congress Report
SENATE
1st Session 108-82

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

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATION BILL, 2004
_______

June 26, 2003.--Ordered to be printed

_______

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

R E P O R T

[To accompany S. 1357]

The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1357)
making appropriations for military construction, family
housing, and base realignment and closure for the Department of
Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and for
other purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends that
the bill do pass.

Total of bill as reported to Senate..................... $9,196,000,000
Amount of 2004 budget estimate.......................... 9,117,281,000
Amount of 2003 appropriations........................... 10,698,800,000
The bill as reported to the Senate:
Over the budget estimate, 2004...................... 78,719,000
Below appropriations for fiscal year 2003........... 1,502,800,000

C O N T E N T S

----------
Page
Background:
Purpose of the bill.......................................... 3
Comparative statement........................................ 3
Compliance with section 308 of the Budget Control Act........ 9
Committee recommendation......................................... 9
Items of special interest........................................ 10
Military construction, Army...................................... 20
Military construction, Navy...................................... 21
Military construction, Air Force................................. 22
Military construction, Defense-wide.............................. 23
Military construction, Reserve components........................ 25
NATO Security Investment Program................................. 27
Family housing overview.......................................... 28
Family housing, Army............................................. 28
Family housing, Navy and Marine Corps............................ 29
Family housing, Air Force........................................ 30
Family housing, Defense-wide..................................... 31
Family housing improvement fund.................................. 31
Base realignment and closure account, part IV.................... 32
General provisions............................................... 34
Compliance with paragraph 7, rule XVI of the Standing Rules of
the Senate..................................................... 35
Compliance with paragraph 7(c), rule XXVI of the Standing Rules
of the Senate.................................................. 35
Compliance with paragraph 12, rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of
the Senate..................................................... 36
Project listing by location...................................... 36

BACKGROUND

Purpose of the Bill

The Military Construction appropriation bill provides
necessary funding for the planning, design, construction,
alteration, and improvement of military facilities worldwide,
both for Active and Reserve Forces. It also finances the
construction, alteration, improvement, operation, and
maintenance of military family housing, including payments
against past housing mortgage indebtedness. Certain types of
community impact assistance may be provided, as well as
assistance to members of the military who face loss on the sale
of private residences due to installation realignments and
closures. The bill is also the source for the U.S. share of the
NATO Security Investment Program. In addition, the bill
provides funding to implement base closures and realignments
authorized by law.

Comparative Statement

The Committee recommends appropriations totaling
$9,196,000,000 for fiscal year 2004 military construction,
family housing, and base closure. The following table displays
the Committee recommendation in comparison with the current
fiscal year, and the President's fiscal year 2004 request.

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY
[In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increase (+) or decrease (-) compared
Committee with--
Item 2003 enacted Budget estimate recommendation ---------------------------------------
2003 enacted Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military construction, Army......................... 1,472,022 1,602,060 1,255,155 -216,867 -346,905
Defense emergency response fund [DERF].......... 211,688 .................. .................. -211,688 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal...................................... 1,683,710 1,602,060 1,255,155 -428,555 -346,905

Rescission...................................... -49,376 -66,050 -183,615 -134,239 -117,565
Supplemental appropriations (Public Law 108-11). 2,000 .................. .................. -2,000 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 1,636,334 1,536,010 1,071,540 -564,794 -464,470

Military construction, Navy......................... 1,095,698 1,147,537 1,195,659 +99,961 +48,122
Defense emergency response fund [DERF].......... 209,430 .................. .................. -209,430 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal...................................... 1,305,128 1,147,537 1,195,659 -109,469 +48,122

Rescission...................................... -1,340 -14,679 -39,322 -37,982 -24,643
Supplemental appropriations (Public Law 108-11). 48,100 .................. .................. -48,100 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 1,351,888 1,132,858 1,156,337 -195,551 +23,479

Military construction, Air Force.................... 891,650 830,671 1,056,377 +164,727 +225,706
Defense emergency response fund [DERF].......... 188,597 .................. .................. -188,597 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal...................................... 1,080,247 830,671 1,056,377 -23,870 +225,706

Rescission...................................... -13,281 .................. .................. +13,281 ..................
Rescission (Public Law 108-7)................... -18,600 .................. .................. +18,600 ..................
Supplemental appropriations (Public Law 108-11). 152,900 .................. .................. -152,900 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 1,201,266 830,671 1,056,377 -144,889 +225,706

Military construction, Defense-wide................. 836,345 695,298 712,567 -123,778 +17,269
Defense emergency response fund [DERF].......... 33,300 .................. .................. -33,300 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal...................................... 869,645 695,298 712,567 -157,078 +17,269

Rescissions..................................... -2,976 -997 -32,680 -29,704 -31,683
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 866,669 694,301 679,887 -186,782 -14,414
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Active components...................... 5,056,157 4,193,840 3,964,141 -1,092,016 -229,699

Military construction, Army National Guard.......... 241,377 168,298 304,085 +62,708 +135,787

Military construction, Air National Guard........... 194,880 60,430 221,013 +26,133 +160,583
Defense emergency response fund [DERF].......... 8,933 .................. .................. -8,933 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 203,813 60,430 221,013 +17,200 +160,583

Military construction, Army Reserve................. 100,554 68,478 73,979 -26,575 +5,501

Military construction, Naval Reserve................ 67,804 28,032 34,742 -33,062 +6,710
Defense emergency response fund [DERF].......... 7,117 .................. .................. -7,117 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 74,921 28,032 34,742 -40,179 +6,710

Military construction, Air Force Reserve............ 63,650 44,312 57,426 -6,224 +13,114
Defense emergency response fund [DERF].......... 3,576 .................. .................. -3,576 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal...................................... 67,226 44,312 57,426 -9,800 +13,114

Miscellaneous appropriations (Public Law 108-7). 18,600 .................. .................. -18,600 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 85,826 44,312 57,426 -28,400 +13,114
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Reserve components..................... 706,491 369,550 691,245 -15,246 +321,695
===================================================================================================
Total, Military construction.................. 5,762,648 4,563,390 4,655,386 -1,107,262 +91,996
Appropriations............................ (5,185,580) (4,645,116) (4,911,003) (-274,577) (+265,887)
Defense emergency response fund........... (662,641) .................. .................. (-662,641) ..................
Rescissions............................... (-85,573) (-81,726) (-255,617) (-170,044) (-173,891)
===================================================================================================
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security 167,200 169,300 169,300 +2,100 ..................
Investment Program.................................

Family housing construction, Army................... 280,356 409,191 409,191 +128,835 ..................
Rescission...................................... -4,920 -52,300 -52,300 -47,380 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 275,436 356,891 356,891 +81,455 ..................

Family housing operation and maintenance, Army...... 1,106,007 1,043,026 1,043,026 -62,981 ..................

Family housing construction, Navy and Marine Corps.. 376,468 184,193 184,193 -192,275 ..................
Rescission...................................... -2,652 .................. -3,585 -933 -3,585
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 373,816 184,193 180,608 -193,208 -3,585

Family housing operation and maintenance, Navy and 861,788 852,778 852,778 -9,010 ..................
Marine Corps.......................................

Family housing construction, Air Force.............. 684,824 657,065 657,065 -27,759 ..................
Rescission...................................... -8,782 -19,347 -29,039 -20,257 -9,692
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 676,042 637,718 628,026 -48,016 -9,692

Family housing operation and maintenance, Air Force. 833,419 834,468 834,468 +1,049 ..................
Defense emergency response fund [DERF].......... 29,631 .................. .................. -29,631 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal...................................... 863,050 834,468 834,468 -28,582 ..................
Supplemental appropriations (Public Law 108-11). 1,800 .................. .................. -1,800 ..................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................... 864,850 834,468 834,468 -30,382 ..................

Family housing construction, Defense-wide........... 5,480 350 350 -5,130 ..................
Family housing operation and maintenance, Defense- 42,395 49,440 49,440 +7,045 ..................
wide...............................................
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement 2,000 300 300 -1,700 ..................
Fund...............................................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Family housing......................... 4,207,814 3,959,164 3,945,887 -261,927 -13,277
===================================================================================================

Base realignment and closure account................ 561,138 370,427 370,427 -190,711 ..................
General provision (sec. 118)........................ .................. 55,000 55,000 +55,000 ..................
===================================================================================================
Grand total:
New budget (obligational) authority....... 10,698,800 9,117,281 9,196,000 -1,502,800 +78,719
Appropriations........................ (10,108,455) (9,270,654) (9,536,541) (-571,914) (+265,887)
Defense emergency response fund....... (692,272) .................. .................. (-692,272) ..................
Rescissions........................... (-101,927) (-153,373) (-340,541) (-238,614) (-187,168)
===================================================================================================
SUMMARY OF APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS

Military Construction, Army......................... 1,636,334 1,536,010 1,071,540 -564,794 -464,470
Military Construction, Navy......................... 1,351,888 1,132,858 1,156,337 -195,551 +23,479
Military Construction, Air Force.................... 1,201,266 830,671 1,056,377 -144,889 +225,706
Military Construction, Defense-wide................. 866,669 694,301 679,887 -186,782 -14,414
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Active components...................... 5,056,157 4,193,840 3,964,141 -1,092,016 -229,699

Military Construction, Army National Guard.......... 241,377 168,298 304,085 +62,708 +135,787
Military Construction, Air National Guard........... 203,813 60,430 221,013 +17,200 +160,583
Military Construction, Army Reserve................. 100,554 68,478 73,979 -26,575 +5,501
Military Construction, Naval Reserve................ 74,921 28,032 34,742 -40,179 +6,710
Military Construction, Air Force Reserve............ 85,826 44,312 57,426 -28,400 +13,114
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Reserve components..................... 706,491 369,550 691,245 -15,246 +321,695
===================================================================================================
Total, Military Construction.................. 5,762,648 4,563,390 4,655,386 -1,107,262 +91,996
===================================================================================================
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security 167,200 169,300 169,300 +2,100 ..................
Investment Program.................................
===================================================================================================
Family Housing, Army:
Construction.................................... 275,436 356,891 356,891 +81,455 ..................
Operation and Maintenance....................... 1,106,007 1,043,026 1,043,026 -62,981 ..................
Family Housing, Navy and Marine Corps:
Construction.................................... 373,816 184,193 180,608 -193,208 -3,585
Operation and Maintenance....................... 861,788 852,778 852,778 -9,010 ..................
Family Housing, Air Force:
Construction.................................... 676,042 637,718 628,026 -48,016 -9,692
Operation and Maintenance....................... 864,850 834,468 834,468 -30,382 ..................
Family Housing, Defense-wide:
Construction.................................... 5,480 350 350 -5,130 ..................
Operation and Maintenance....................... 42,395 49,440 49,440 +7,045 ..................
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement 2,000 300 300 -1,700 ..................
Fund...............................................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Family Housing......................... 4,207,814 3,959,164 3,945,887 -261,927 -13,277

Base Realignment and Closure Account................ 561,138 370,427 370,427 -190,711 ..................
General provision................................... .................. 55,000 55,000 +55,000 ..................
===================================================================================================
Grand Total................................... 10,698,800 9,117,281 9,196,000 -1,502,800 +78,719
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Compliance With Section 308 of the Budget Control Act

Section 308(a) of the Budget and Impoundment Control Act of
1974 (Public Law 93-344) requires that the Committee include in
its report a comparison of its recommendations with levels
contained in the first concurrent resolution. Appropriate data
are reflected below:

BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL
PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
AMENDED
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget authority Outlays
---------------------------------------------------------
Committee Amount of Committee Amount of
allocation \1\ bill allocation \1\ bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee
allocations to its subcommittees of amounts in the
Budget Resolution for 2004: Subcommittee on Military
Construction:
Discretionary..................................... 9,196 9,196 10,297 \1\ 10,273
Projection of outlays associated with the
recommendation:
2004.............................................. .............. ........... .............. \2\ 2,593
2005.............................................. .............. ........... .............. 3,376
2006.............................................. .............. ........... .............. 1,883
2007.............................................. .............. ........... .............. 722
2008 and future years............................. .............. ........... .............. 622
Financial assistance to State and local governments NA ........... NA ...........
for 2004............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\2\ Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.

NA: Not applicable.

Committee Recommendation

The Committee recommends new fiscal year 2004
appropriations of $9,196,000,000. This is $78,719,000 over the
budget request, and $1,502,800,000 below the appropriations for
fiscal year 2003. The basis for this recommendation is
contained in the following ``Items of special interest,'' and
under the discussions pertaining to each individual
appropriation. Complete project detail is provided in the
tables at the end of the report.

ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

HEARINGS

The Subcommittee on Military Construction held a hearing on
the fiscal year 2004 budget request during March 2003. The
subcommittee heard testimony from representatives of the
military services and defense agencies concerning fiscal year
2004 budget priorities and base realignment and closure [BRAC]
issues. The subcommittee also held a hearing in March on the
BRAC process, with testimony from Defense Department officials
and from representatives of communities which have undergone
BRAC. In April, the subcommittee held a hearing in which the
commanders of United States forces in Europe and Korea
testified about their visions for revising the structure of
military base facilities in their respective commands.

SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The budget request for fiscal year 2004 reflects a decrease
of $1,581,519,000 from the amount enacted in fiscal year 2003.
The Committee recommends an additional $78,719,000 above
the fiscal year 2004 budget request. The total recommended
appropriation for fiscal year 2004 is $9,196,000,000, a
decrease of $1,502,800,000 from fiscal year 2003 funding.

OVERSEAS MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

The budget request included over $1,000,000,000 for
military construction at U.S. installations outside the United
States, much of it destined for facilities constructed for
prosecution of the cold war. For several years, the Committee
has expressed concern that our overseas basing structure has
not been updated to reflect the realities of the post-cold war
world. Our Nation is dealing with new threats, new strategies,
new force structure, new deployment concepts, and new
geopolitical realities, yet a basing structure born of and
rationalized for the cold war endures. The Committee has
questioned the wisdom of continuing to expend taxpayer dollars
on overseas facilities that may not be appropriate to the
Nation's future military needs. To spur the Defense Department
to address this issue, in its report accompanying the Fiscal
Year 2002 Military Construction Appropriations Act, the
Committee directed the Defense Department to submit a report on
its overseas basing master plan no later than April 1, 2002;
that report has not yet been received.
The Defense Department continues to study the question and
has underway an overseas basing and presence study that will
lead to, among other things, recommendations for a major
overhaul of the United States overseas basing structure. Like
the overseas basing master plan due to Congress, that study has
yet to be completed, but in testimony before the Military
Construction Subcommittee in April, two of the combatant
commanders--General James Jones, Supreme Allied Commander,
Europe and Commander of United States European Command, and
General Leon LaPorte, Commander of United States Forces,
Korea--presented their visions for military basing in their
respective areas of responsibility. General Jones described a
concept for Europe that featured fewer large bases, several
smaller, more austere bases in forward locations, and greater
use of rotational forces in and out of these facilities instead
of permanent stationing of large forces with the attendant
support infrastructure. General LaPorte described a vision for
Korea in which United States forces are consolidated at a
greatly reduced number of facilities, located further south on
the Korean peninsula than at present.
As part of the effort to realign overseas basing, the
Secretary of Defense asked the combatant commanders to review
whether the enacted fiscal year 2003 military construction
program and their fiscal year 2004 military construction budget
requests supported the emerging concept for the operation of
U.S. military forces in their respective areas of
responsibility. That review resulted in a budget amendment
which rescinded or deleted $531,000,000 in fiscal year 2003 and
fiscal year 2004 projects at various overseas locations and
proposed new construction in an equal amount, approximately
$276,000,000 of which was overseas.
The Committee commends both the commanders and the
Department for identifying construction projects that are not
in accord with the emerging outlines of a new overseas basing
structure. Moreover, the Committee was impressed by the
combatant commanders' boldness and creativity in reassessing
basing needs, and believes that their respective visions hold
great promise for a more efficient and effective basing
structure that will enhance the ability of the United States to
meet new threats. The Committee believes that when fully
developed, this vision will provide a sound basis on which
Congress and the administration will be able to determine the
future of our overseas basing structure.
The Committee recognizes that at this point the vision has
not yet been developed into a comprehensive plan on which
decisions to pursue new construction initiatives can prudently
be based. The overseas basing and presence study involves far
more than military facilities. According to public statements
of Defense Department officials, it will result in potentially
dramatic changes in the disposition of U.S. forces abroad,
including where they are based, how they operate, how they move
to and from their theaters of operations, and even the number
of forces deployed in specific theaters. In various press
accounts, administration officials have acknowledged
considering: new bases in Australia; Navy ships ported in
Vietnam; increased United States troop presence in Malaysia and
Singapore; bases in Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia, as well as
Senegal, Ghana, Mali, and Kenya; bases on territory of the
former Soviet Union; a rotational model for circulating forces
in and out of overseas bases; significant reductions to force
levels in Germany; and a major relocation and possible
reduction to forces in the Republic of Korea. Summarizing the
extent of the changes under consideration, the Under Secretary
of Defense for Policy stated that ``Everything is going to move
everywhere.'' If the sweeping changes under consideration are
to be implemented, they will require extensive diplomatic
efforts both in the nations in which the United States seeks a
new presence and in those in which it will reduce or reshape
its presence.
Because a comprehensive plan is not yet developed, the
Committee is unwilling to undertake extensive new military
construction projects that would begin the implementation of
that plan without a thorough and deliberate review by Congress.
The Committee is particularly concerned about projects proposed
for Korea in the budget amendment submitted May 1, 2003. For
example:
--The amendment proposes to build three new barracks on
privately held land, which the United States does not
control, adjacent to Camp Humphreys. The Minister of
National Defense of the Republic of Korea has committed
to obtaining the land for use by the United States. The
Committee applauds and appreciates the commitment of
the Korean Government, but it is not confident the land
will in fact be acquired in time to support execution
of these projects in fiscal year 2004.
--The budget amendment proposes to build at Camp Humphreys a
fitness center, first appropriated for Camp Kyle in the
fiscal year 2000 Act, then ``realigned'' to Camp
Bonifas in fiscal year 2003, and now ``realigned''
again to Camp Humphreys. The Committee is concerned
that the repeated movement of this fitness center
indicates it is a project in search of a home rather
than part of a comprehensive and sound plan to support
military requirements.
--The budget amendment proposes to realign a middle school
from Seoul to Camp Humphreys. This building was
designed as a three story structure because of space
limitations in the urban environment for which it was
intended, but Department officials have indicated that
this may not be an appropriate design for a school at a
location where similarly restrictive land constraints
do not necessarily exist.
--The budget amendment proposed to ``realign'' a barracks
project from the K-16 airfield to Camp Humphreys.
Subsequent to the budget amendment submission, however,
the Committee was informed by Army officials that this
request was in error, that the barracks was still
required at K-16, and a correction to the budget
amendment would be forthcoming. Then the Committee was
then advised that a correction would not be issued, and
the ``realignment'' request would stand.
The Committee has similar reservations about proposed
construction in Europe. For example, the budget request
includes a number of projects in areas in Germany that,
according to public statements of Army and other Defense
Department officials, are likely to see significant force level
reductions. Military officials also have stated that it is
unclear whether it is feasible to implement the rotational unit
concept that is central to the emerging vision of the U.S.
overseas presence.
Evaluated against a backdrop of uncertainty about
fundamental aspects of a revised overseas basing structure
which the Department has yet to propose, including the number
of troops that these facilities will be required to support,
these examples indicate to the Committee that the Defense
Department's overseas basing and presence plan is not yet
sufficiently mature to enable the Committee to commit with
confidence to extensive new construction. Thus the Committee
has declined to fund much of the new construction in Europe and
Korea requested in the May 1, 2003 budget amendment.
The Committee's actions do not indicate dissatisfaction
with the general direction in which the Department appears to
be headed. To the contrary, the Committee welcomes what it
regards as a refreshing and overdue effort to think creatively
about this issue. The Committee looks forward to receiving and
evaluating the Department's full recommendations once they
become available. Although the Committee expects that the
Fiscal Year 2005 Military Construction Act will be the vehicle
by which new overseas construction initiatives will be
implemented, it does not rule out the possibility of
considering pressing military construction needs in a
supplemental appropriation. However, the Committee is insistent
that before any such decisions are taken, the Department's plan
be finished and presented to Congress with sufficient time for
deliberate consideration.

OVERSEAS BASING COMMISSION

In keeping with the Committee's continuing concern about
the Nation's overseas basing, the Committee recommends a
provision that would establish a commission to conduct a
thorough study of matters related to U.S. military facility
structure overseas. The Commission on the Review of the
Overseas Military Facility Structure of the United States would
consist of eight members appointed by the congressional
leadership. The Commission would be authorized to hold hearings
and receive information from Federal agencies in order to
assess whether the current U.S. overseas basing structure is
adequate to execute current missions, and to assess the
feasibility of closures, realignments, or establishment of new
installations overseas to meet emerging defense requirements.
The Commission would not preclude in any way the Defense
Department's ongoing efforts to develop a comprehensive and
integrated global presence and basing strategy. Rather, it
would provide Congress an independent view of the Nation's
overseas basing requirements to aid it in its oversight role.
The Commission would submit a report to the President and
Congress by August 30, 2004, containing findings, conclusions,
and recommendations for legislation and administrative actions,
as well as a proposal for an overseas basing strategy to meet
current and future requirements.

COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLANS FOR OVERSEAS MILITARY FACILITIES
INFRASTRUCTURE

The Committee is concerned about the use of military
construction budget authority for construction projects at
bases that may soon be obsolete due to changes being considered
in overseas presence and basing. To ensure that military
construction funding is devoted to facilities needed to meet
firm future requirements, the Committee directs the Department
of Defense to (1) prepare detailed comprehensive master plans
for the changing infrastructure requirements for U.S. military
facilities within each of its overseas regional commands; the
plans should, at a minimum identify precise facility
requirements, and the status of properties being returned to
host nations. The plans also should identify funding
requirements and the division of funding responsibilities
between the United States and cognizant host nations; and (2)
provide, with each yearly MILCON budget submission to the
congressional defense committees through fiscal year 2008, a
report on the status of those plans and their implementation.
The first such report shall be provided with the fiscal year
2005 MILCON budget submission and updated each succeeding year
to reflect changes to the plans involving specific construction
projects being added, canceled, modified, or funding for those
projects being redirected to other needs, and justification for
such changes. During this period, the Committee also directs
the General Accounting Office to monitor the infrastructure
master plans being developed and implemented for the overseas
regional commands and to provide the congressional defense
committees with a report by May 15 of each year giving their
assessment of the status of the plans, associated costs,
burden-sharing implications, and other relevant information
involving property returns to host nations, restoration issues,
and residual values.

IMPACT OF MILITARY HOUSING PRIVATIZATION ON LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS

This Committee has supported the Department of Defense
program to privatize military family housing. The Department
has shown that private sector financing, ownership, operation,
and maintenance of military housing can help to eliminate
inadequate housing faster than could otherwise be achieved.
However, the Committee is concerned about the impact of
privatization projects on local school districts. In most
instances, the children of families living in military-owned
housing located on military installations attend schools
operated by local school districts. Because the children live
on non-taxed Federal property, the government compensates the
local school districts through payment of impact funds
averaging about $2,000 per student. Privatization of the on-
base housing could result in the classification of the property
being changed from Federal to non-Federal. Such a change could
result in the impact funds paid to the local school districts
dropping significantly--to about $200 per student.
Privatization projects could also impact local school districts
by changing the number or geographic dispersion of the children
of military families in local communities thus affecting the
size and location of needed schools. For example, the
privatization project at Fort Hood, Texas, is estimated to
create a need for three more schools in the local school
district.
Consequently, the Secretary of Defense shall report to
congressional defense committees by March 15, 2004, on the
impact of privatization of military family housing on local
school districts, and options for addressing local school
requirements resulting from the privatization. The report
should include an assessment of whether establishing military
charter schools on Department of Defense installations--modeled
on the example of Belle Chasse Academy at the Naval Air Station
Joint Reserve Base, New Orleans--could productively help to
alleviate the impact of housing privatization on local school
districts. The Comptroller General shall report on his
evaluation of the Secretary's report within 60 days of its
issuance and make recommendations, if needed, to help ensure
that the impacts from privatization on local school districts
are mitigated.

PERCHLORATE

The Committee is growing increasingly concerned about the
potential impact of perchlorate contamination at installations
that have been closed through the BRAC process as well as at
active and inactive defense sites. Perchlorate, a chemical used
in solid rocket propellant, has been identified by the
Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] as an unregulated toxin.
Perchlorate contamination has been found in drinking water
supplies in 29 States, including California, Texas, Colorado,
Maryland, and Massachusetts. More than 300 groundwater wells in
California are contaminated with perchlorate, as is the
Colorado River, which supplies drinking water to more than
15,000,000 people in the Southwest.
According to the EPA, the Department of Defense and the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration are responsible
for 90 percent of the perchlorate produced in the United
States. Although the EPA last year concluded in a draft
assessment that perchlorate could pose a risk to human health
at drinking water concentrations of just one part per billion,
the Federal Government has yet to set a drinking water standard
for perchlorate. Therefore, no remediation standard exists. The
EPA assessment has been referred to the National Academy of
Sciences for review, which could significantly delay the
establishment of a national drinking water standard for
perchlorate.
The Committee recognizes that, absent a state or Federal
standard for perchlorate, the Department of Defense is under no
legal obligation to remediate perchlorate contamination at
defense sites. However, the Committee is disappointed that the
Department has been unresponsive to requests to test for
perchlorate at BRAC properties or other defense sites.
To ensure that the Department is prepared to respond
quickly and appropriately once a perchlorate standard is
determined, the Committee directs that the Department take the
following actions:
(1) Submit to the congressional defense committees no later
than December 31, 2003, a report on the activities of the
Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee of the Department of
Defense that was established in January 1998 and was originally
chartered to facilitate and coordinate accurate accounts of
technological issues (occurrence, health effects, treatability
and waste stream handling, analytical detection, and ecological
impacts) related to perchlorate contamination of drinking water
supplies and irrigation water supplies and to create
information transfer links for interagency and
intergovernmental activities regarding such areas of concern.
The report shall cover all activities that were identified in
the memorandum of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Environmental Security), dated January 24, 2001, to the
Secretaries of the military departments and the Director of the
Defense Logistics Agency.
(2) Identify sources of perchlorate on BRAC properties and
develop a plan to remediate perchlorate contamination on BRAC
sites that can be implemented rapidly once State or Federal
perchlorate standards are set. The Department shall report to
the congressional defense committees on its perchlorate
findings and remediation action plan no later than March 30,
2004.

CONFORMANCE WITH AUTHORIZATION BILL

The Committee strongly supports the authorization-
appropriation process. However, the Committee has reported the
appropriation bill prior to completion of the authorization
process. Therefore, the Committee has provided construction
funds for specific projects which were included in the Senate-
passed version of the National Defense Authorization Act for
fiscal year 2004 and projects subject to authorization.

REPROGRAMMING RULES/CRITERIA

The following rules apply for all military construction and
family housing reprogrammings. A project or account (including
the sub-elements of an account) which has been specifically
reduced by the Congress in acting on the appropriation request
is considered to be a congressional interest item. A prior
approval reprogramming is required for any increase to an item
that has been specifically reduced by the Congress.
Accordingly, no below threshold reprogrammings to an item
specifically reduced by the Congress are permitted.
The reprogramming criteria that apply to military
construction projects (25 percent of the funded amount or
$2,000,000 which-ever is less) continue to apply to new housing
construction projects and to improvements over $2,000,000. To
provide the individual Services the flexibility to proceed with
construction contracts without disruption or delay, the costs
associated with environmental hazard remediation such as
asbestos removal, radon abatement, lead-based paint removal or
abatement, and any other legislated environmental hazard
remediation may be excluded, provided that such remediation
requirements could not be reasonably anticipated at the time of
budget submission. This exclusion applies to projects
authorized in the budget year, and also projects authorized in
prior years for which construction contracts have not been
completed.
Furthermore, in instances where a prior approval
reprogramming request for a project or account has been
approved by the Committee, the amount approved becomes the new
base for any future increase or decrease via below threshold
reprogrammings (provided that the project or account is not a
congressional interest item).

TRANSFER AUTHORITY

The budget request proposed a general provision which would
allow the transfer of appropriations for military family
housing for a given military service to appropriations
available for pay and allowance of military personnel of the
same service, to be merged with and to be available for the
same purposes and period of time as the account to which
transferred. The Committee believes that existing reprogramming
procedures are sufficient in solving urgent funding problems
and denies this request.

BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE

The Committee has included $370,427,000 for the ``Base
realignment and closure'' account, an amount equal to the
budget request.

BARRACKS CONSTRUCTION

The fiscal year 2004 budget request includes $1,211,800,000
to construct or modernize 43 barracks projects.
The Committee recommends $1,068,100,000 for barracks
construction projects in fiscal year 2004, a decrease of
$143,700,000 from the budget request.

BARRACKS CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location/Project Request Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army:
Alaska:
Fort Richardson Barracks Complex $33,000,000 $33,000,000
D Street, Ph 3 (144 spaces)....
Fort Richardson Barracks Complex .............. 8,200,000
(60 spaces)....................
Fort Wainwright Barracks Luzon 21,500,000 21,500,000
Avenue (144 spaces)............
Georgia:
Fort Stewart Barracks Complex 49,000,000 49,000,000
Perimeter Road (576 spaces)....
Fort Stewart Barracks (Phase I) 17,000,000 17,000,000
(298 spaces)...................
Hawaii:
Schofield Barracks, Barracks 49,000,000 49,000,000
Complex Capron Road, Ph 2 (180
spaces)........................
Schofield Barracks, Barracks 49,000,000 49,000,000
Complex Quad E (150 spaces)....
Kansas: Fort Riley Barracks Complex 40,000,000 40,000,000
Graves Street (312 spaces).........
Kentucky: Fort Campbell Barracks 49,000,000 49,000,000
Complex Range Road, Ph 2 (372
spaces)............................
North Carolina:
Fort Bragg Barracks Complex 47,000,000 47,000,000
Bastogne Drive, Ph 1 (448
spaces)........................
Fort Bragg Barracks Complex 38,000,000 38,000,000
Butner Road, Ph 4 (240 spaces).
Fort Bragg Barracks D Area, Ph 4 17,000,000 17,000,000
(384 spaces)...................
New York:
Fort Drum Barracks 10200 Area 22,500,000 22,500,000
(276 spaces)...................
Fort Drum Barracks Complex 49,000,000 49,000,000
Wheeler Sack AAF (240 spaces)..
Texas: Fort Hood Barracks Complex 47,000,000 47,000,000
67th & Battalion Ave (480 spaces)..
Washington: Fort Lewis Barracks 48,000,000 48,000,000
Complex 17th & B St, Ph 3 (300
spaces)............................
Germany:
Grafenwoehr, Brigade Complex 30,000,000 ..............
Barracks.......................
Heidelberg, Hospital Barracks... 17,000,000 ..............
Vilsek, Barracks Complex (Phase 12,000,000 ..............
I).............................
Korea:
Camp Humphreys (Realigned from 41,000,000 ..............
Camp Casey)....................
Camp Humphreys (Realigned from 35,000,000 ..............
Camp Casey)....................
Camp Humphreys (Realigned from 29,000,000 ..............
Camp Hovey)....................
-------------------------------
Subtotal, Army................ 740,000,000 584,200,000
===============================
Navy:
California:
Camp Pendleton Bachelor Enlisted 22,900,000 22,900,000
Quarters San Mateo (400 spaces)
Monterey Bachelor Officer 35,600,000 35,600,000
Quarters (280 spaces)..........
San Nicolas Island Transient 6,200,000 6,200,000
Quarters (32 spaces)...........
San Diego Bachelor Enlisted 42,700,000 42,700,000
Quarters Homeport Ashore (500
spaces)........................
Twentynine Palms Bachelor 26,100,000 26,100,000
Enlisted Quarters (384 spaces).
Illinois:
Great Lakes Recruit Barracks 31,600,000 31,600,000
(1056 spaces)..................
Great Lakes Recruit Barracks 34,100,000 34,100,000
(1056 spaces)..................
Rhode Island: Newport Bachelor 16,100,000 16,100,000
Enlisted Quarters Replacement
(NAPS) (360 spaces)................
Virginia: Norfolk Bachelor Enlisted 46,700,000 46,700,000
Quarters Shipboard Ashore, Ph II
(500 spaces).......................
United Kingdom: Saint Mawgan 7,100,000 7,100,000
Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (48
spaces)............................
-------------------------------
Subtotal, Navy & Marine Corps..... 269,100,000 269,100,000
===============================
Air Force:
Alabama: Maxwell AFB SOS Dormitory, 13,400,000 13,400,000
Ph 3 (162 spaces)..................
Alaska: Eielson AFB Dormitory (96 13,900,000 13,900,000
spaces)............................
California: Beale AFB Global Hawk 13,300,000 13,300,000
Dormitory (96 spaces)..............
North Carolina: Seymour Johnson AFB 9,500,000 9,500,000
Dormitory (144 spaces).............
Ohio: Wright-Patterson AFB Dormitory 10,500,000 10,500,000
(144 spaces).......................
South Carolina: Charleston AFB 8,900,000 8,900,000
Dormitory (144 spaces).............
Texas:
Goodfellow AFB Student Dormitory 18,100,000 18,100,000
(200 spaces)...................
Lackland AFB Student Dormitory 21,000,000 21,000,000
(200 spaces)...................
Lackland AFB Student Dormitory 35,300,000 35,300,000
(300 spaces)...................
Sheppard AFB Student Dormitory 28,600,000 28,600,000
(300 spaces)...................
Korea: Osan AB Dormitory (156 16,600,000 16,600,000
spaces)............................
United Kingdom: Royal AF Lakenheath 13,600,000 13,600,000
Dormitory (120 spaces).............
-------------------------------
Subtotal, Air Force............... 202,700,000 202,700,000
===============================
Air National Guard:
Virginia: Camp Pendleton Troop .............. 2,500,000
Training Quarters (Red Horse) (40
spaces)............................
Air Force Reserve:
New York: Niagara Falls ARS Visiting .............. 9,600,000
Officer's Quarters (65 spaces).....
Subtotal, Reserve Components...... .............. 12,100,000
-------------------------------
Total Barracks Construction....... 1,211,800,000 1,068,100,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

BARRACKS PRIVATIZATION AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES

The General Accounting Office [GAO] issued a report in June
2003 that discussed opportunities for DOD to reduce costs in
the unaccompanied housing program (Military Housing:
Opportunities That Should Be Explored to Improve Housing and
Reduce Costs for Unmarried Junior Service members, GAO--03-602,
June 10, 2003). GAO found that DOD and the services had not
fully explored barracks privatization to determine whether the
concept could provide a better economic value to the government
than the use of military construction financing, and that DOD
and the military services had not taken advantage of
opportunities to potentially reduce their housing costs for
unmarried service members through use of residential
construction practices in government-owned barracks
construction and better utilization of existing government-
owned barracks. GAO recommended that the Secretary of Defense
promote a coordinated, focused effort to determine the
feasibility and cost effectiveness of barracks privatization
and that DOD undertake engineering studies to resolve questions
about the use of residential construction practices, issue
guidance to direct the maximum use of required existing
barracks space, and identify and eliminate any barracks space
determined to be excess. DOD generally agreed with the
recommendations.
The Committee believes that the report's recommendations
should be implemented without delay and directs the Secretary
of Defense to provide a progress report to the Committee by
March 1, 2004. The progress report should detail actions taken
in response to the recommendations and itemize any budgetary
savings achieved as a result of implementing the
recommendations.

REAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE REPORTING REQUIREMENT

The Committee recommends a continuation of the following
general rules for repairing a facility under Operations and
Maintenance account funding:
Components of the facility may be repaired by replacement,
and such replacement can be up to current standards or code.
Interior arrangements 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.
The appropriate Service Secretary shall submit a 21-day
notification prior to carrying out any repair project with an
estimated cost in excess of $7,500,000.
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
requests. 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 2 years and all future requirements for unaccompanied
housing at that installation.

CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTERS

The fiscal year 2003 budget request includes $3,646,000 for
one child development center project. The Committee recommends
$16,096,000 for a total of three projects.

Military Construction, Army

Appropriations, 2003.................................... $1,636,334,000
Budget estimate, 2004................................... 1,536,010,000
Committee recommendation (including rescission)......... 1,071,540,000

The Committee recommends $1,071,540,000 for the Army for
fiscal year 2004. This is a decrease of $464,470,000 from the
budget request for fiscal year 2004. (See State tables at the
end of the report for complete program recommendations.)
The Committee fully expects contracts for the following
projects to be awarded, as early in fiscal year 2004 as
practical:
Water Treatment Facility, Hawthorne Army Depot, Nevada.--Of
the funds provided in this account for minor construction
involving urgent life, health, and safety issues, the Committee
directs that $2,950,000 be made available for the construction
of this facility. Hawthorne's surface water and well water are
out of compliance with State environmental and drinking water
standards, and the facility recently received notice from the
Nevada Division of Health that the surface water system must be
brought into compliance by May 21, 2004. In addition to
constructing this treatment facility to address the surface
water issues, the Committee also urges the Department to
include the necessary funding for a new and urgently needed
treatment facility for drinking water at Hawthorne in the
fiscal year 2005 budget request.
Chaffee (Main) Gate, Fort Bliss, Texas.--Of the funds
provided for minor construction in this account, the Committee
directs that $910,000 be made available for the construction of
this gate.
Chapel Expansion, Fort Wainwright, Alaska.--Of the funds
provided for minor construction in this account, the Committee
directs that $1,500,000 be made available for the construction
of this chapel expansion.
Dining Facilities Renovation, Fort Knox, Kentucky.--Of the
funds provided for planning and design in this account, the
Committee directs that $178,000 be made available for the
design of the facilities.
Gymnasium Addition, Fort Wainwright, Alaska.--Of the funds
provided for minor construction in this account, the Committee
directs that $1,500,000 be made available for the construction
of this gymnasium addition.
Replace Ship Creek Bridge, Fort Richardson, Alaska.--Of the
funds provided for minor construction in this account, the
Committee directs that $1,500,000 be made available for the
construction of this bridge.
Robert E. Lee (Main) Gate, Fort Bliss, Texas.--Of the funds
provided for minor construction in this account, the Committee
directs that $1,200,000 be made available for the construction
of this gate.
Tactical Equipment Shop, Fort Bliss, Texas.--Of the funds
provided for planning and design in this account, the Committee
directs that $663,000 be made available for the design of this
facility.
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Maintenance Facility, Donnelly
Training Area, Alaska.--Of the funds provided for minor
construction in this account, the Committee directs that
$1,500,000 be made available for the construction of this
facility.
Urban Assault Course (101st Airborne Division), Fort
Campbell, Kentucky.--Of the funds provided for planning and
design in this account, the Committee directs that $239,000 be
made available for the design of this facility.
Wheeled Vehicle Rebuild Facility, Red River Army Depot,
Texas.--Of the funds provided for planning and design in this
account, the Committee directs that $2,890,000 be made
available for the design of this facility.
Battery Test Facility, Fort Monmouth, New Jersey.--Of the
funds provided for planning and design in this account, the
Committee directs that $182,000 be made available for the
design of this facility.
Conversion of Former Officer's Club, Fort Campbell,
Kentucky.--Of the funds provided for minor construction in this
account, the Committee directs that $1,500,000 be made
available for the conversion of the former officers' club into
an Army Community Center.

Military Construction, Navy

Appropriations, 2003.................................... $1,351,888,000
Budget estimate, 2004................................... 1,132,858,000
Committee recommendation (including rescission)......... 1,156,337,000

The Committee recommends $1,156,337,000 for Navy and Marine
Corps military construction for fiscal year 2004. This amount
is an increase of $23,479,000 from the fiscal year 2004 budget
request. (See State tables at the end of the report for
complete program recommendations.)
The Committee fully expects contracts for the following
projects to be awarded, as early in fiscal year 2003 as
practical:
Blue Angels Hangar, Pensacola Naval Air Station, Florida.--
Of the funds provided for planning and design in this account,
the Committee directs that $1,400,000 be made available for the
design of this facility.
Engineering Management and Logistics Facility, Carderock
Naval Special Warfare Center, Maryland.--Of the funds provided
for planning and design in this account, the Committee directs
that $1,500,000 be made available for the design of this
facility.
Structural Shop Consolidation, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard,
New Hampshire.--Of the funds provided for planning and design
in this account, the Committee directs that $1,500,000 be made
available for the design of this facility.
Suspect Cargo Handling Facility, Norfolk Naval Shipyard,
Virginia.--Of the funds provided for minor construction in this
account, the Committee directs that $1,420,000 be made
available for the construction of this facility.
Range Operations Complex, Pacific Missile Range Facility,
Hawaii.--Of the funds provided for planning and design in this
account, the Committee directs that $1,250,000 be made
available for the design of this facility.
Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technology Support
Facility, Indian Head Naval Special Warfare Center, Maryland.--
Of the funds provided for planning and design in this account,
the Committee directs that $1,200,000 be made available for the
design of this facility.

Military Construction, Air Force

Appropriations, 2003.................................... $1,201,266,000
Budget estimate, 2004................................... 830,671,000
Committee recommendation................................ 1,056,377,000

The Committee recommends $1,056,377,000 for the Air Force
in fiscal year 2004. This is an increase of $225,706,000 from
the fiscal year 2004 budget request. (See State tables at the
end of the report for complete program recommendations.)
The Committee fully expects contracts for the following
projects to be awarded, as early in fiscal year 2004 as
practical:
Addition/Alteration to Fitness Center, Malmstrom AFB,
Montana.--Of the funds provided for planning and design in this
account, the Committee directs that $684,000 be made available
for the design of this facility.
Addition/Alteration to Training Annex Fire Station,
Lackland AFB, Texas.--Of the funds provided for minor
construction in this account, the Committee directs that
$950,000 be made available for the construction of this annex.
Air Mobility Operations Group [AMOG] Global Reach
Deployment Center, Travis AFB, California.--Of the funds
provided for planning and design in this account, the Committee
directs that $1,350,000 be made available for the design of
this facility.
Child Development Center, Charleston Air Force Base, South
Carolina.--Of the funds provided for planning and design in
this account, the Committee directs that $500,000 be made
available for the design of this facility.
Combat Offload Ramp, Lakehurst Naval Air Station, New
Jersey.--Of the funds provided for planning and design in this
account, the Committee directs that $400,000 be made available
for the design of this facility.
Consolidated Software Support Facility, Hill Air Force
Base, Utah.--Of the funds provided for planning and design in
this account, the Committee directs that $1,710,000 be made
available for the design of this facility.
Corrosion Control Facility, Malmstrom AFB, Montana.--Of the
funds provided for planning and design in this account, the
Committee directs that $504,000 be made available for the
design of this facility.
Elevated Basic Military Training [BMT] Troop Walk at
Carswell Avenue, Lackland AFB, Texas.--Of the funds provided
for minor construction in this account, the Committee directs
that $756,000 be made available for the construction of this
elevated walkway.
Fire Crash Rescue Station, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio.--Of
the funds provided for planning and design in this account, the
Committee directs that $990,000 be made available for the
design of this facility.
Fire Department Addition, Laughlin AFB, Texas.--Of the
funds provided for minor construction in this account, the
Committee directs that $450,000 be made available for the
construction of this addition.
Fitness Center, Goodfellow AFB, Texas.--Of the funds
provided for minor construction in this account, the Committee
directs that $1,475,000 be made available for the construction
of this facility.
Mission Support Complex, Fairchild Air Force Base,
Washington.--Of the funds provided for planning and design in
this account, the Committee directs that $1,200,000 be made
available for the design of this facility.
Repair Alaska Command Headquarters, Elmendorf AFB,
Alaska.--Of the funds provided for planning and design in this
account, the Committee directs that $3,000,000 be made
available for the design of this facility.
Replace Working Dog Kennel, Elmendorf AFB, Alaska.--Of the
funds provided for minor construction in this account, the
Committee directs that $1,400,000 be made available for the
construction of this kennel.
Squadron Operations Facility, Laughlin AFB, Texas.--Of the
funds provided for planning and design in this account, the
Committee directs that $200,000 be made available for the
design of this facility.
War Reserve Material Storage Facility, Holloman AFB, New
Mexico.--Of the funds provided for planning and design in this
account, the Committee directs that $1,026,000 be made
available for the design of this facility.

Military Construction, Defense-wide

Appropriations, 2003.................................... $866,679,000
Budget estimate, 2004................................... 694,301,000
Committee recommendation (including rescissions)........ 679,887,000

The Committee recommends $679,887,000 for projects
considered within the ``Defense-wide'' account. The amount
recommended is an decrease of $39,914,000 from the fiscal year
2004 budget request. (See State tables at the end of the report
for complete program recommendations.)
The Committee fully expects contracts for the following
projects to be awarded, as early in fiscal year 2004 as
possible.
Biometrics Training Center, Bridgeport, West Virginia.--Of
the funds provided for planning and design in this account, the
Committee directs that $1,400,000 be made available for the
design of this facility.
DOD Hospital [TRICARE], Denver, Colorado.--Of the funds
provided for planning and design in this account, the Committee
directs that $4,000,000 be made available for the design of
this facility.
Tripler Army Hospital, Biomedical Center, Honolulu,
Hawaii.--Of the funds provided for planning and design in this
account, the Committee directs that $4,600,000 be made
available for the design of this facility.

MEDICAL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM

The fiscal year 2004 budget request includes $161,699,000
for seven major construction projects plus planning and design,
and unspecified minor construction. The Committee recommends a
total of $170,299,000, which fully funds the budget request and
provides additional planning and design funding.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location/project title Request Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska: Fort Wainwright, Hospital $71,600,000 $71,600,000
Replacement (Phase V)..................
Colorado: U.S. Air Force Academy, 21,500,000 21,500,000
Hospital Addition/Alteration...........
Connecticut: New London, Dental Clinic 6,400,000 6,400,000
Replacement............................
District of Columbia: Anacostia, Medical/ 15,714,000 15,714,000
Dental Clinic Conversion...............
District of Columbia: Walter Reed Army 9,000,000 9,000,000
Medical Center, Energy Plant...........
Germany: Grafenwoehr, Dispensary/Dental 12,585,000 12,585,000
Clinic Addition/Alteration.............
Guam: Andersen Air Force Base, Medical/ 24,900,000 24,900,000
Dental Clinic Replacement..............
-------------------------------
Total............................. 161,699,000 161,699,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONTINGENCY CONSTRUCTION

The Committee has provided $8,960,000 for the Secretary of
Defense ``Contingency construction'' account in accordance with
the budget request. This account provides funds which may be
used by the Secretary of Defense for unforeseen facility
requirements. The Committee believes that the funding provided
in the account is adequate to meet the needs of the Department.

ENERGY CONSERVATION INVESTMENT PROGRAM

The Committee recommends the full budget request of
$69,500,000 for the Energy Conservation Investment Program
[ECIP] and commends the Department for emphasizing the
importance of this innovative program. The Defense Department
accounts for three fourths of Federal energy consumption. In
2001, the Department spent $6,800,000,000 on energy use,
including fuels. According to DoD, ECIP projects improve energy
and water efficiency in existing facilities and produce average
savings of four dollars for every dollar invested. The
Department has estimated that up to $420,000,000 in energy cost
savings could be produced as a result of the proposed fiscal
year 2004 ECIP investment.
The Committee is particularly pleased to note the inclusion
of several renewable energy projects in the fiscal year 2004
ECIP program, including the acquisition of geothermal heat
pumps at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, and wind generators at Vandenberg
Air Force Base, California, and F.E. Warren Air Force Base,
Wyoming. The Committee is aware that acquisition of renewable
energy is often the most cost effective means of reaching
energy conservation goals, and encourages the use of ECIP
funding for that purpose.
In fiscal year 2002, the Committee provided $10,000,000 to
fund an assessment of the regional potential of renewable
energy generation, transmission, and distribution by industry
on or near Department of Defense installations in the United
States (Senate Report 107-68). The Committee directs that of
the funds included in the fiscal year 2004 ECIP account,
$2,500,000 be used to continue this important work. The
Committee further directs that the Air Force continue to serve
as program management lead for the assessment. The report
should include proposals to coordinate and accelerate renewable
energy development and utilization, focused on building
capability according to the potential within each of the
services. Because of the complexity and scope of the
assessment, the Committee agrees to provide additional time for
completion of the study. The Department is therefore directed
to provide the congressional defense committees an interim
report no later than October 30, 2003, and a final report no
later than July 31, 2004.

Military Construction, Reserve Components

Appropriations, 2003.................................... $706,491,000
Budget estimate, 2004................................... 369,550,000
Committee recommendation................................ 691,245,000

The Committee recommends $691,245,000 for military
construction projects for the Guard and Reserve components.
This amount is $321,695,000 above the fiscal year 2004 budget
request. This increase reflects the Committee's continued
strong support for the Guard and Reserve.
The Committee's recommended action on each Reserve
component project is reflected in the State list at the end of
this report.
The Committee recommends approval of military construction,
Reserve component as outlined in the following table:

RESERVE COMPONENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component Request Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard..................... $168,298,000 $304,085,000
Air National Guard...................... 60,430,000 221,013,000
Army Reserve............................ 68,478,000 73,979,000
Naval Reserve........................... 28,032,000 34,742,000
Air Force Reserve....................... 44,312,000 57,426,000
-------------------------------
Total............................. 369,550,000 691,245,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Committee has added funding for specific Reserve
component planning and design initiatives. The Committee
recommendation also provides additional funding over the budget
request for minor construction activities for the Reserve
components.
The Committee fully expects contracts for the following
projects to be awarded, as early in fiscal year 2004 as
practical:

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD

Army National Guard Aviation Support Facility, North Little
Rock, Arkansas.--The committee understands the need to upgrade
the aviation facilities at Camp Robinson at North Little Rock,
Arkansas and urges the Department to include this facility in
the fiscal year 2005 budget request.
Aviation Support Facility, Grand Island, Nebraska.--Of the
funds provided for planning and design in this account, the
Committee directs that $1,555,000 be made available for the
design of this facility.
Aviation Support Facility, Kingston, Rhode Island.--Of the
funds provided for planning and design in this account, the
Committee directs that $2,014,000 be made available for the
design of this facility.
Aviation Support Facility, Rochester, New York.--Of the
funds provided for planning and design in this account, the
Committee directs that $1,549,000 be made available for the
design of this facility.
Aviation Support Facility, Whiteman Air Force Base,
Missouri.--Of the funds provided for planning and design in
this account, the Committee directs that $1,769,000 be made
available for the design of this facility.
Federal Scout Readiness Center, Angoon, White Mountain,
Alaska.--Of the funds provided for minor construction in this
account, the Committee directs that $1,018,000 be made
available for the construction of this center.
Federal Scout Storage Facilities, Manokotak, Toksook Bay,
Napaskiak, Alaska.--Of the funds provided for minor
construction in this account, the Committee directs that
$246,000 be made available for the construction of these
facilities.
Information Systems Facility, Colchester, Camp Johnson,
Vermont.--Of the funds provided for planning and design in this
account, the Committee directs that $498,000 be made available
for the design of this facility.
Maneuver Training Center, Ammunition Supply Point, Fort
Smith, Fort Chaffee, Arkansas.--The Committee understands the
need to upgrade the facilities at Fort Chaffee in Fort Smith,
Arkansas and urges the Department to include this facility in
the fiscal year 2005 budget request.
Organizational Maintenance Shops, Hamilton, Ohio.--Of the
funds provided for minor construction in this account, the
Committee directs that $1,500,000 be made available for the
construction of this facility.
Pistol Range Replacement, Marseilles, Illinois.--Of the
funds provided for minor construction in this account, the
Committee directs that $1,100,000 be made available for the
construction of this facility.
Readiness Center, Camp Dodge, Iowa.--Of the funds provided
for minor construction in this account, the Committee directs
that $1,500,000 be made available for the construction of this
facility.
Readiness Center, Monticello, Mississippi.--Of the funds
provided for planning and design in this account, the Committee
directs that $515,000 be made available for the design of this
facility.
Readiness Center, Pascagoula, Mississippi.--Of the funds
provided for planning and design in this account, the Committee
directs that $356,000 be made available for the design of this
facility.
Readiness Center, Sacramento, California.--Of the funds
provided for planning and design in this account, the Committee
directs that $306,000 be made available for the design of this
facility.
Readiness Center, Watertown, South Dakota.--Of the funds
provided for planning and design in this account, the Committee
directs that $1,228,000 be made available for the design of
this facility.
TASS Barracks, Gowen Field, Idaho.--Of the funds provided
for minor construction in this account, the Committee directs
that $1,140,000 be made available for the construction of this
facility.
Unit Training & Equipment Site, Souix Falls, South
Dakota.--Of the funds provided for planning and design in this
account, the Committee directs that $758,000 be made available
for the design of this facility.
Readiness Center/Maintenance Shop, Iowa City, Iowa.--Of the
funds provided for planning and design in this account, the
Committee directs that $830,000 be made available for the
design of this facility.

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AIR NATIONAL GUARD

C-5 Upgrades, Martinsburg, West Virginia.--Of the funds
provided for planning and design in this account, the Committee
directs that $5,000,000 be made available for the design of
facilities required to support the C-5 program.
Mobility Storage Warehouse Addition, Kulis, Alaska.--Of the
funds provided for minor construction in this account, the
Committee directs that $1,000,000 be made available for the
construction of this addition.
Munitions Administration Facility, Klamath Falls, Oregon.--
Of the funds provided for minor construction in this account,
the Committee directs that $1,350,000 be made available for the
construction of this facility.
Repair Maintenance Shops, Fargo, North Dakota.--Of the
funds provided for minor construction in this account, the
Committee directs that $1,400,000 be made available for the
construction of these facilities.
Air Mobilization Facility, Burlington, Vermont.--Of the
funds provided for planning and design in this account, the
Committee directs that $443,000 be made available for the
design of this facility.

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, U.S. ARMY RESERVE

Reserve Center, Eau Claire, Wisconsin.--Of the funds
provided for planning and design in this account, the Committee
directs that $631,000 be made available for the design of this
facility.

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE RESERVE

Headquarters Building, 911th Airlift Wing, Pittsburgh Air
Reserve Station, Pennsylvania.--Of the funds provided for
planning and design in this account, the Committee directs that
$684,000 be made available for the design of this facility.
Upgrade Utilities, March Air Reserve Base, California.--Of
the funds provided for minor construction in this account, the
Committee directs that $1,444,000 be made available for the
construction of these upgrades.
Squadron Operations Center, Barksdale AFB, Louisiana.--Of
the funds provided for planning and design in this account, the
Committee directs that $426,000 be made available for the
design of this facility.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization

SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2003.................................... $167,200,000
Budget estimate, 2004................................... 169,300,000
Committee recommendation................................ 169,300,000

The Committee has provided $169,300,000 for the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO] Security Investment Program
for fiscal year 2004, fully funding the budget request.
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 program,
unless Congress is notified 21 days in advance of the
obligation of funds. In addition, the Committee's intent is
that section 122 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.

MISSILE DEFENSE STUDIES

The Committee has been made aware that approximately
$44,000,000 in funds appropriated for the NATO Security
Investment Program in past years have been expended on studies
examining the feasibility of theater ballistic missile defense
for NATO. While the Committee fully supports the development
and fielding of missile defense systems, it believes missile
defense studies are an inappropriate expenditure of funds
intended to provide critically needed infrastructure to the
Alliance. Accordingly, the Committee directs that no funds
appropriated in this or any other Act for the NATO Security
Investment Program be obligated or expended for missile defense
studies.

Family Housing Overview

The Committee has provided $3,945,887,000 for family
housing construction, operations and maintenance, and the
Department's family housing improvement fund. This amount is
$13,277,000 below the fiscal year 2004 budget request and
$261,927,000 below the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2003.

Family Housing, Army

Appropriations, 2003.................................... $1,381,443,000
Budget estimate, 2004................................... 1,399,917,000
Committee recommendation (including rescission)......... 1,399,917,000

The Committee recommends a total of $1,399,917,000 for
family housing, Army, in fiscal year 2004. This is equal to the
fiscal year 2004 budget request.

CONSTRUCTION

The Committee recommends $220,673,000 for new construction,
as shown below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location/project Request Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska:
Fort Wainwright, (100 Units)........ $44,000,000 $44,000,000
Fort Wainwright (40 Units).......... 20,000,000 20,000,000
Arizona:
Fort Huachuca, (60 Units)........... 4,000,000 4,000,000
Fort Huachuca Replace (160 Units)... 27,000,000 27,000,000
Kansas:
Fort Riley (32 Units)............... 8,300,000 8,300,000
Fort Riley (30 Units)............... 8,400,000 8,400,000
Kentucky: Fort Knox (178 Units)......... 41,000,000 41,000,000
New Mexico: White Sands Missile Range 14,600,000 14,600,000
(58 Units).............................
Oklahoma:
Fort Sill (50 Units)................ 10,000,000 10,000,000
Fort Sill (70 Units)................ 15,373,000 15,373,000
Virginia: Fort Lee (90 Units)........... 18,000,000 18,000,000
-------------------------------
Total............................. 220,673,000 220,673,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS

The following projects are to be accomplished within the
amounts provided for construction improvements:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location/project Requested Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New York:
Fort Drum (Privatization 2,272 $52,000,000 $52,000,000
Units).............................
USMA (56 Units)..................... 530,000 530,000
Pennsylvania: Carlisle Barracks 22,000,000 22,000,000
(Privatization 316 Units)..............
Texas:
Fort Bliss (Privatization 2,776 38,000,000 38,000,000
Units).............................
Fort Sam Houston (Privatization 926 6,600,000 6,600,000
Units).............................
Utah:
Dugway Proving Ground (162 Units)... 8,100,000 8,100,000
Dugway Proving Ground (29 Units).... 3,200,000 3,200,000
Germany:
Baumholder (112 Units).............. 11,600,000 11,600,000
Baumholder (96 Units)............... 14,000,000 14,000,000
-------------------------------
Total............................. 156,030,000 156,030,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Family Housing, Navy and Marine Corps

Appropriations, 2003.................................... $1,235,604,000
Budget estimate, 2004................................... 1,036,971,000
Committee recommendation (including rescission)......... 1,033,386,000

The Committee recommends $1,033,386,000 for family housing,
Navy and Marine Corps, in fiscal year 2004. This amount is
$3,585,000 below the fiscal year 2004 budget request.

CONSTRUCTION

The Committee recommends $155,366,000 for new construction,
as shown below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location/project Requested Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
California: Lemoore (187 Units)......... $41,585,000 $41,585,000
Florida: Pensacola (25 Units)........... 3,197,000 3,197,000
North Carolina:
Camp Lejeune (161 Units)............ 21,537,000 21,537,000
Camp Lejeune (358 Units)............ 46,244,000 46,244,000
Cherry Point (339 Units)............ 42,803,000 42,803,000
-------------------------------
Total............................. 155,366,000 155,366,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS

The following projects are to be accomplished within the
amounts provided for construction improvements:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location/project Requested Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona: Yuma (Privatization 821 Units). $12,654,000 $12,654,000
California: Lemoore (3 Units)........... 331,000 331,000
Maryland: Annapolis (51 Units).......... 6,737,000 6,737,000
Japan: Iwakuni (44 Units)............... 724,000 724,000
-------------------------------
Total............................. 20,446,000 20,446,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Family Housing, Air Force

Appropriations, 2003.................................... $1,540,892,000
Budget estimate, 2004................................... 1,472,186,000
Committee recommendation (including rescission)......... 1,462,494,000

The Committee recommends $1,462,494,000 for family housing,
Air Force, in fiscal year 2004, which is $9,692,000 below the
budget request.

CONSTRUCTION

The Committee recommends $399,598,000 for new construction,
as requested, as shown below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location/project Requested Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona: Davis Monthan AFB (93 Units)... $19,357,000 $19,357,000
California: Travis AFB (56 Units)....... 12,723,000 12,723,000
Delaware: Dover AFB (112 Units)......... 19,601,000 19,601,000
Florida: Eglin AFB (279 Units).......... 32,166,000 32,166,000
Idaho: Mountain Home AFB (186 Units).... 37,126,000 37,126,000
Maryland: Andrews AFB (50 Units)........ 20,233,000 20,233,000
Missouri: Whiteman AFB (100 Units)...... 18,221,000 18,221,000
Montana: Malmstrom AFB (94 Units)....... 19,368,000 19,368,000
North Carolina: Seymour Johnson AFB (138 18,336,000 18,336,000
Units).................................
North Dakota:
Grand Forks AFB (144 Units)......... 29,550,000 29,550,000
Minot AFB (200 Units)............... 41,117,000 41,117,000
South Dakota: Ellsworth AFB (75 Units).. 16,240,000 16,240,000
Texas:
Dyess AFB (116 Units)............... 19,973,000 19,973,000
Randolph AFB (96 Units)............. 13,754,000 13,754,000
Korea: Osan AB (111 Units).............. 44,765,000 44,765,000
Portugal: Lajes Field (42 Units)........ 13,428,000 13,428,000
United Kingdom: RAF Lakenheath (89 23,640,000 23,640,000
Units).................................
-------------------------------
Total............................. 399,598,000 399,598,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS

The following projects are to be accomplished within the
amounts provided for construction improvements:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location/project Requested Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona: Luke AFB (Privatization 874 ( \1\ ) ( \1\ )
Units).................................
California: Los Angeles AFB (279 Units). $19,483,000 $19,483,000
Hawaii: Hickam AFB (90 Units)........... 26,955,000 26,955,000
Oklahoma:
Altus AFB (Privatization 966 Units). 3,093,000 3,093,000
Tinker AFB (Privatization 730 Units) 14,338,000 14,338,000
South Carolina: Shaw AFB (Privatization 3,087,000 3,087,000
1,702 Units)...........................
Texas: Sheppard AFB (Privatization 1,288 17,736,000 17,736,000
Units).................................
Washington: McChord AFB (Privatization ( \1\ ) ( \1\ )
950 Units).............................
Wyoming: FE Warren AFB (Privatization 5,391,000 5,391,000
265 Units).............................
Germany: Ramstein AB (216 Units)........ 62,211,000 62,211,000
Guam: Andersen AFB (165 Units).......... 24,456,000 24,456,000
Japan:
Kadena AB (122 Units)............... 24,224,000 24,224,000
Install Government Furnished 565,000 565,000
Materials......................
Misawa AB, Install Government 405,000 405,000
Furnished Materials................
Yokota AB, (263 Units).............. 26,035,000 26,035,000
Funded from Prior Year Savings.......... -4,000,000 -4,000,000
-------------------------------
Total............................. 223,979,000 223,979,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ No cost to the government privatization.

Family Housing, Defense-wide

Appropriations, 2003.................................... $49,875,000
Budget estimate, 2004................................... 50,090,000
Committee recommendation................................ 50,090,000

The Committee recommends $50,090,000 for family housing,
Defense-wide, in fiscal year 2004. This amount is equal to the
budget request. Specific details are included in the tables at
the end of the report.

Family Housing Improvement Fund

Appropriations, 2003.................................... $2,000,000
Budget estimate, 2004................................... 300,000
Committee recommendation................................ 300,000

The Committee recommends $300,000 for the Family Housing
Improvement Fund. This amount is equal to the budget request.

Base Realignment and Closure Account Overview

The Congress has appropriated a net total of
$22,587,164,000 for the Base Realignment and Closure [BRAC]
program for fiscal years 1990 through 2003. For fiscal year
2004, the Committee recommends $370,427,000, an amount equal to
the budget request, with the explicit understanding that the
appropriated funds are to be supplemented in fiscal year 2004
with $21,300,000 in prior year unobligated balances and
$68,000,000 in land sale revenue, as proposed by the
Department.
In appropriating these funds, the Committee continues to
provide the Department with the flexibility to allocate funds
by Service, by function, and by installation. The Committee
recognizes the complexity of the base realignment and closure
process, and particularly of the environmental clean up
requirements, and believes that it is important to give the
Department a significant degree of flexibility in order to
execute the program efficiently.
The following table displays the total amount appropriated
for each round of base closure, including amounts recommended
for fiscal year 2004.

BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
[Total funding, fiscal year 1990 through fiscal year 2004]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 1990 Fiscal year 2004
through fiscal Fiscal year 2003 Committee Total
year 2002 enacted recommended
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part I.............................. $2,684,557,000 ( \1\ ) ( \1\ ) $2,684,557,000
Part II............................. 4,915,636,000 ( \1\ ) ( \1\ ) 4,915,636,000
Part III............................ 7,269,267,000 ( \1\ ) ( \1\ ) 7,269,267,000
Part IV............................. 7,156,566,000 $561,138,000 $370,427,000 8,088,131,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................... 22,026,026,000 561,138,000 370,427,000 22,957,591,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Not Applicable.

Since the start of the current process for Base Realignment
and Closure, Military Construction Appropriations Acts have
appropriated a net total of $22,587,164,000 for the entire
program for fiscal years 1990 through 2003. The total amount
appropriated combined with the Committee recommendation for
fiscal year 2004 Base Realignment and Closure is
$22,957,591,000.

BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACCOUNT, PART IV

Appropriations, 2003.................................... $561,138,000
Budget estimate, 2004................................... 370,427,000
Committee recommendation................................ 370,427,000

The Committee recommends a total of $370,427,000 for the
base realignment and closure account, part IV. This is a
decrease of $190,711,000 from the fiscal year 2003
appropriation. However, the fiscal year 2004 BRAC budget also
assumes an additional $21,300,000 from prior year unobligated
balances and $68,000,000 from Navy land sale revenue, which is
to be used to increase the Navy's BRAC budget. With the
additional monies, the funding for BRAC environmental cleanup
and caretaker costs totals $459,727,000. The Military
Departments have assured the Committee that this level of
funding is adequate to address urgent BRAC requirements for
fiscal year 2004.
Expeditious cleanup of environmental contaminants at closed
or realigned bases remains a priority of the Committee. In the
past two years, the Committee has been able to increase
appropriations over the President's budget request to expedite
environmental cleanup. This year, the Department anticipates
that revenue from land sales will significantly supplement the
BRAC budget request, and will enable the Department to meet or
exceed its requirements for fiscal year 2004 BRAC environmental
remediation.
The Navy, for example, recently completed the public sale
of approximately 235 acres at the former Marine Corps Air
Station at Tustin, California. According to the Navy, the sale
generated $208,500,000 in revenue, about four times as much as
all previous Navy BRAC property sales. The Committee commends
the Navy for pursuing public land sales where circumstances
permit to complement and enhance the public benefit and
economic development conveyance program.
Existing statutes require BRAC land sale revenue to be
deposited into the Department of Defense BRAC account, which
funds BRAC activities for all of the military services and
defense agencies. To ensure equity and provide an incentive for
the military services to pursue public sales of BRAC property
when warranted, the Committee directs the Department of Defense
to apply BRAC land sale revenue to the Military Department that
earned the revenue to be used to accelerate environmental
cleanup of that Department's remaining BRAC sites. The
Committee intends for the revenue from land sales to be used to
supplement, not offset, funds appropriated by Congress to the
BRAC account.
As the Department prepares to undertake a new round of BRAC
in fiscal year 2005, it is imperative that the environmental
cleanup of sites that were closed or realigned under previous
BRAC rounds be completed as expeditiously as possible. The
Navy's BRAC budget for fiscal year 2004, including $68,000,000
in land sale revenue and unobligated balances from previous
years, totals $180,600,000. However, the Navy estimates that it
could execute an additional $250,000,000 in fiscal year 2004
for environmental cleanup. Likewise, the Air Force could
execute $64,700,000 in environmental cleanup projects in fiscal
year 2004 above its budget allocation of $198,700,000. The Army
estimates that it could execute $42,400,000 for BRAC clean up
in fiscal year 2004 in addition to its budget allocation of
$67,500,000.
Clearly, the backlog of BRAC environmental remediation
requirements continues to be a problem for the Department, and
for the communities in which the contaminated property is
located. The Committee intends to monitor carefully the
effectiveness of using BRAC land sale revenues to accelerate
the cleanup process. In the meantime, the Committee directs the
Department to provide sufficient resources in future budget
requests to expedite the environmental cleanup of existing BRAC
property.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

The following lists general provisions proposed by the
Committee. The Committee recommends inclusion of several
proposals which have been incorporated in previous
appropriations acts, provisions requested by the Defense
Department, and new provisions. The Committee recommendations
are as follows:
Sec. 101. Restricts payments under a cost-plus-a-fixed-fee
contract for work, except in cases of contracts for
environmental restoration at base closure sites.
Sec. 102. Permits use of funds for hire of passenger motor
vehicles.
Sec. 103. Permits use of funds for defense access roads.
Sec. 104. Prohibits construction of new bases inside the
continental United States for which specific appropriations
have not been made.
Sec. 105. Limits the use of funds for purchase of land or
land easements.
Sec. 106. 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.
Sec. 107. Limits the use of minor construction funds to
transfer or relocate activities among installations.
Sec. 108. Prohibits the procurement of steel unless
American producers, fabricators, and manufacturers have been
allowed to compete.
Sec. 109. Prohibits payments of real property taxes in
foreign nations.
Sec. 110. Prohibits construction of new bases overseas
without prior notification.
Sec. 111. Establishes a threshold for American preference
of $500,000 relating to architect and engineering services.
Sec. 112. 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 Sea.
Sec. 113. Requires notification of military exercises
involving construction in excess of $100,000.
Sec. 114. Limits obligations during the last 2 months of
the year.
Sec. 115. Permits funds appropriated in prior years to be
available for construction authorized during the current
session of Congress.
Sec. 116. Permits the use of expired or lapsed funds to pay
the cost of supervision for any project being completed with
lapsed funds.
Sec. 117. Permits obligation of funds from more than 1
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.
Sec. 118. Allows expired funds to be transferred to the
``Foreign currency fluctuations, construction, defense''
account.
Sec. 119. Directs the Department to report annually on
actions taken to encourage other nations to assume a greater
share of the common defense budget.
Sec. 120. Allows transfer of proceeds from earlier base
realignment and closure accounts to the continuing base
realignment and closure accounts.
Sec. 121. Permits the transfer of funds from Family Housing
Construction accounts to the DOD Family Housing Improvement
Fund.
Sec. 122. Restricts the use of funds for the Partnership
for Peace Program.
Sec. 123. Requires the Secretary of Defense to notify the
congressional defense committees of all family housing
privatization solicitations and agreements which contain any
clause providing consideration for base realignment and
closure, force reductions and extended deployments.
Sec. 124. Provides transfer authority to the Homeowners
Assistance Program.
Sec. 125. Requires that all Military Construction
Appropriations Acts be the sole funding source of all operation
and maintenance for family housing, including flag and general
officer quarters, and limits the repair on flag and general
officer quarters to $35,000 per year without prior notification
to the defense committees.
Sec. 126. Limits funds from being transferred from this
appropriation measure into any new instrumentality without
authority from an appropriation Act.
Sec. 127. Prohibits funds appropriated for the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program from
being obligated or expended for the purpose of missile defense
studies.
Sec. 128. Establishes a commission to review the overseas
military facility structure of the United States and provide a
report of its findings to the President and Congress no later
than August 30, 2004.

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE

Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on
general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment
to the House bill ``which proposes an item of appropriation
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously
passed by the Senate during that session.''
The Committee bill as recommended contains no such
provisions.

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(C), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE

Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on June 26, 2003,
the Committee ordered reported an original Military
Construction Appropriations bill, 2004, subject to amendment
and subject to its budget allocations, by a recorded vote of
29-0, a quorum being present. The vote was as follows:
Yeas Nays
Chairman Stevens
Mr. Cochran
Mr. Specter
Mr. Domenici
Mr. Bond
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Burns
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Gregg
Mr. Bennett
Mr. Campbell
Mr. Craig
Mrs. Hutchison
Mr. DeWine
Mr. Brownback
Mr. Byrd
Mr. Inouye
Mr. Hollings
Mr. Leahy
Mr. Harkin
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Reid
Mr. Kohl
Mrs. Murray
Mr. Dorgan
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Johnson
Ms. Landrieu

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE
SENATE

Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by
the committee.''
The Committee bill as recommended contains no such
provisions.

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee Change from
Installation and project Budget recommen- budget
request dation estimate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALABAMA

ARMY: REDSTONE ARSENAL: 5,500 5,500 ............
VIBRATION DYNAMIC TEST
FACILITY.....................
AIR FORCE: MAXWELL AFB: 13,400 13,400 ............
SQUADRON OFFICER COLLEGE
DORMITORY (PHASE III)........
DEFENSE-WIDE: REDSTONE ............ 20,000 +20,000
ARSENAL: ADMIN/OPS COMPLEX,
MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY PH III
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD:
FORT MC CLELLAN: FIRE 1,873 1,873 ............
STATION..................
FORT PAYNE: READINESS 3,648 3,648 ............
CENTER ADDITION/
ALTERATION...............
MOBILE: ARMED FORCES 2,943 2,943 ............
RESERVE CENTER (PHASE II)
SPRINGVILLE: READINESS 3,365 3,365 ............
CENTER ADDITION/
ALTERATION...............
VINCENT: READINESS CENTER 3,353 3,353 ............
ADDITION/ALTERATION......
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, ALABAMA.......... 34,082 54,082 +20,000

ALASKA

ARMY:
FORT RICHARDSON:
BARRACKS COMPLEX--D 33,000 33,000 ............
STREET (PHASE III)...
BARRACKS.............. ............ 8,200 +8,200
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE ............ 2,500 +2,500
SHOP.................
FORT WAINWRIGHT:
ALERT HOLDING AREA 32,000 32,000 ............
FACILITY.............
AMMUNITION SUPPLY 10,600 10,600 ............
POINT UPGRADE........
BARRACKS COMPLEX-- 21,500 21,500 ............
LUZON AVENUE.........
MILITARY OPERATIONS ON 11,200 11,200 ............
URBAN TERRAIN
FACILITY.............
MULTI-PURPOSE TRAINING 47,000 47,000 ............
RANGE COMPLEX........
PALLET PROCESSING 16,500 16,500 ............
FACILITY.............
AIR FORCE:
EIELSON AFB:
DORMITORY............. 13,914 13,914 ............
JOINT SECURITY FORCES ............ 15,800 +15,800
COMPLEX..............
REPAIR/EXPAND ENROUTE 19,060 19,060 ............
RAMP.................
ELMENDORF AFB: MAINTENANCE 2,000 2,000 ............
FACILITY.................
DEFENSE-WIDE:
EIELSON AFB: REPLACE 17,000 17,000 ............
HYDRANT FUEL SYSTEM......
FORT WAINWRIGHT: HOSPITAL 71,600 71,600 ............
REPLACEMENT (PHASE V)....
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: JUNEAU: ............ 3,100 +3,100
ORGANIZATION MAINTENANCE SHOP
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, ALASKA........... 295,374 324,974 +29,600

ARIZONA

NAVY:
YUMA MARINE CORPS AIR
STATION:
AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE 14,250 14,250 ............
HANGAR...............
STATION ORDNANCE AREA 7,980 7,980 ............
(PHASE II)...........
AIR FORCE:
DAVIS-MONTHAN AFB:
C-130 APRON/SHOULDERS. 1,954 1,954 ............
HH-60 SQUADRON 6,004 6,004 ............
OPERATIONS/AIRCRAFT
MAINT UNIT...........
MISSION READY SUPPLY 1,906 1,906 ............
PARTS WAREHOUSE......
LUKE AIR FORCE BASE: LAND ............ 14,300 +14,300
ACQUISITION MODIFICATION.
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, ARIZONA.......... 32,094 46,394 +14,300

ARKANSAS

AIR FORCE:
LITTLE ROCK AFB:
C-130 OPERATIONS 2,478 2,478 ............
TRAINING FACILITY....
C-130J ADD/ALTER 1,144 1,144 ............
HANGAR 280...........
CHILD DEVELOPMENT ............ 3,750 +3,750
CENTER...............
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: WARREN: ............ 3,610 +3,610
READINESS CENTER.............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, ARKANSAS......... 3,622 10,982 +7,360

CALIFORNIA

NAVY:
CAMP PENDLETON MARINE
CORPS BASE:
BACHELOR ENLISTED 22,930 22,930 ............
QUARTERS--SAN MATEO..
TERTIARY SEWAGE 24,960 24,960 ............
TREATMENT PLANT
(PHASE II)...........
CHINA LAKE NAVAL AIR 12,890 12,890 ............
WARFARE CENTER: AIRFIELD
PAVEMENTS UPGRADE........
LEMOORE NAVAL AIR STATION:
INTEGRATED MAINTENANCE 24,610 24,610 ............
HANGAR...............
OPERATIONAL TRAINER 9,900 9,900 ............
FACILITY.............
MIRAMAR MARINE CORPS AIR 4,740 4,740 ............
STATION: AIRCRAFT FIRE
AND RESCUE STATION.......
MONTEREY NAVAL 35,550 35,550 ............
POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL:
BACHELOR OFFICER QUARTERS
NORTH ISLAND NAVAL AIR
STATION:
SQUADRON OPERATIONS 35,590 35,590 ............
FACILITY.............
TAXIWAY/AIR TRAFFIC 13,650 13,650 ............
CONTROL TOWER........
POINT MUGU: AIRCRAFT TEST ............ 3,000 +3,000
STAND....................
SAN NICOLAS ISLAND NAVAL 6,150 6,150 ............
AIR WEAPONS STATION:
TRANSIENT QUARTERS.......
SAN CLEMENTE NAVAL AIR 18,940 18,940 ............
FACILITY: OPERATIONAL
ACCESS--SHORE BOMBARDMENT
AREA.....................
SAN DIEGO: BACHELOR 42,710 42,710 ............
ENLISTED QUARTERS--
HOMEPORT ASHORE..........
TWENTYNINE PALMS:
BACHELOR ENLISTED 26,100 26,100 ............
QUARTERS.............
EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE 2,290 2,290 ............
OPERATIONS CENTER....
AIR FORCE:
BEALE AFB:
GLOBAL HAWK DORMITORY. 13,342 13,342 ............
GLOBAL HAWK UPGRADE 8,958 8,958 ............
DOCK.................
EDWARDS AFB: JOINT STRIKE 19,060 19,060 ............
FIGHTER COMPLEX (PHASE I)
LOS ANGELES AFB: AREA B ............ 5,000 +5,000
MAIN GATE COMPLEX........
VANDENBERG AFB: 16,500 ............ -16,500
CONSOLIDATED FITNESS
CENTER...................
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD:
BAKERSFIELD: READINESS 5,495 5,495 ............
CENTER...................
LOS ALAMITOS: REPLACE ............ 21,000 +21,000
UTILITIES INFRASTRUCTURE,
PHASE I..................
NAVAL RESERVE: NORTH ISLAND 15,973 15,973 ............
NAVAL AIR STATION: C-40
AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR..
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, CALIFORNIA....... 360,338 372,838 +12,500

COLORADO

AIR FORCE:
BUCKLEY AFB: UPGRADE BASE 6,957 6,957 ............
INFRASTRUCTURE (PHASE
III).....................
PETERSON AFB: ADD/ALTER ............ 10,200 +10,200
MISSION SUPPORT FACILITY.
U.S. AIR FORCE ACADEMY: 21,500 21,500 ............
HOSPITAL ADDITION/
ALTERATION...............
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: FORT ............ 4,500 +4,500
CARSON: CENTENNIAL TRAINING
SITE, PHASE II, III (DESIGN).
AIR NATIONAL GUARD: BUCKLEY 6,900 6,900 ............
AFB: CIVIL ENGINEER COMPLEX..
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, COLORADO......... 35,357 50,057 +14,700

CONNECTICUT

NAVY: NEW LONDON NAVAL ............ 3,000 +3,000
SUBMARINE BASE: TOMAHAWK
MISSILE MAGAZINE.............
DEFENSE-WIDE: NEW LONDON NAVAL 6,400 6,400 ............
SUBMARINE BASE: DENTAL CLINIC
REPLACEMENT..................
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD:
NEWTOWN MILITARY 2,167 2,167 ............
RESERVATION: WORKING
ANIMAL BUILDING..........
STONE RANCH MILITARY 2,422 2,422 ............
RESERVATION: FIRE STATION
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, CONNECTICUT...... 10,989 13,989 +3,000

DELAWARE

AIR FORCE: DOVER AFB: AIR ............ 8,500 +8,500
TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER........
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, DELAWARE......... ............ 8,500 +8,500

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

NAVY: MARINE BARRACKS, 8TH AND 1,550 1,550 ............
I: MOTOR TRANSPORT FACILITY
ADDITION.....................
AIR FORCE: BOLLING AFB: AIR 9,300 9,300 ............
FORCE CENTRAL ADJUDICATION
FACILITY.....................
DEFENSE-WIDE:
WASHINGTON NAVY YARD: 15,714 15,714 ............
MEDICAL/DENTAL CLINIC
CONVERSION/RENOVATION....
WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL 9,000 9,000 ............
CENTER: HOSPITAL ENERGY
PLANT ADDITION...........
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, DISTRICT OF 35,564 35,564 ............
COLUMBIA.............

FLORIDA

NAVY:
BLOUNT ISLAND: LAND 115,711 115,711 ............
ACQUISITION..............
JACKSONVILLE NAVAL AIR 3,190 3,190 ............
STATION: AIRFIELD
PERIMETER SECURITY.......
PANAMA CITY COASTAL 9,550 9,550 ............
SYSTEMS STATION: LITTORAL
WARFARE RESEARCH COMPLEX.
WHITING FIELD NAVAL AIR 4,830 4,830 ............
STATION: CLEAR ZONE LAND
ACQUISITION..............
AIR FORCE:
HURLBURT FIELD:
AFC2TIG SYSTEM/WARRIOR 19,400 19,400 ............
SCHOOL COMPLEX.......
SPECIAL TACTICS 7,800 7,800 ............
ADVANCED SKILLS
TRAINING FACILITY....
PATRICK AFB: SECURITY ............ 8,800 +8,800
FORCES OPERATIONS
FACILITY.................
TYNDALL AFB: F-22 PARKING 6,195 6,195 ............
APRON/RUNWAY EXTENSION...
DEFENSE-WIDE:
EGLIN AFB: REPLACE JET 4,800 4,800 ............
FUEL STORAGE COMPLEX.....
HURLBURT FIELD:
REPLACE FUEL PIER..... 3,500 3,500 ............
AC-130 SQUADRON 6,000 6,000 ............
OPERATIONS/AIRCRAFT
MAINT UNIT...........
MACDILL AFB: ADD/ALTER 25,500 25,500 ............
BUILDING 501A............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, FLORIDA.......... 206,476 215,276 +8,800

GEORGIA

ARMY:
FORT BENNING: MULTI- 30,000 30,000 ............
PURPOSE TRAINING RANGE
COMPLEX..................
FORT GORDON: TRAINING ............ 4,350 +4,350
SUPPORT CENTER...........
FORT STEWART:
BARRACKS (PHASE I).... 17,000 17,000 ............
BARRACKS COMPLEX-- 49,000 49,000 ............
PERIMETER ROAD.......
COMMAND AND CONTROL 25,050 ............ -25,050
FACILITY.............
PHYSICAL FITNESS 15,500 15,500 ............
TRAINING CENTER......
NAVY:
KINGS BAY NAVAL SUBMARINE
BASE:
RIFLE RANGE........... 8,170 8,170 ............
WATERFRONT SECURITY 3,340 3,340 ............
FORCE FACILITY
ADDITION.............
AIR FORCE:
MOODY AFB: C-130 ............ 7,600 +7,600
MAINTENANCE HANGAR.......
ROBINS AFB:
CORROSION CONTROL 25,731 25,731 ............
PAINT FACILITY.......
J-STARS FLIGHT 2,954 2,954 ............
SIMULATOR FACILITY...
DEFENSE-WIDE: FORT BENNING: 2,100 ............ -2,100
PHYSICAL EVALUATION CENTER...
ARMY RESERVE: FORT GILLEM: ORG 7,620 7,620 ............
MAINT SHOP/DIRECT SUPPORT/
PARTS WHSE/STORAGE...........
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, GEORGIA.......... 186,465 171,265 -15,200

HAWAII

ARMY:
HELEMANO MILITARY
RESERVATION:
LAND EASEMENT......... 1,400 1,400 ............
POHAKULOA TNG AREA ............ 17,000 +17,000
SADDLE RD ACCESS,
PHASE III............
SCHOFIELD BARRACKS:
BARRACKS COMPLEX-- 49,000 49,000 ............
CAPRON ROAD (PHASE
II)..................
BARRACKS COMPLEX--QUAD 49,000 49,000 ............
E....................
INFORMATION SYSTEMS 18,000 18,000 ............
FACILITY.............
LAND ACQUISITION...... 19,400 19,400 ............
MISSION SUPPORT 33,000 33,000 ............
TRAINING FACILITY....
NAVY:
LUALUALEI NAVAL MAGAZINES: 6,320 6,320 ............
ORDNANCE HOLDING AREAS...
PEARL HARBOR:
PERIMETER SECURITY 7,010 7,010 ............
LIGHTING.............
WATERFRONT 32,180 32,180 ............
IMPROVEMENTS.........
AIR FORCE:
HICKAM AFB:
C-17 CONSOLIDATED 7,529 7,529 ............
MAINTENANCE COMPLEX..
C-17 CORROSION CONTROL/ 30,400 30,400 ............
MAINTENANCE FACILITY.
C-17 FLIGHT SIMULATOR 5,623 5,623 ............
FACILITY.............
C-17 KUNTZ GATE AND 3,050 3,050 ............
ROAD.................
C-17 SQUADRON 10,674 10,674 ............
OPERATIONS FACILITY..
C-17 SUPPORT UTILITIES 4,098 4,098 ............
(PHASE I)............
ELECTRICAL ............ 6,800 +6,800
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM..
EXPAND STRATEGIC 10,102 10,102 ............
AIRLIFT RAMP.........
DEFENSE-WIDE: HICKAM AFB: 14,100 14,100 ............
REPLACE HYDRANT FUEL SYSTEM..
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, HAWAII........... 300,886 324,686 +23,800

IDAHO

AIR FORCE:
MOUNTAIN HOME AFB:
726TH AIR CONTROL ............ 9,800 +9,800
SQUADRON COMPLEX.....
FITNESS CENTER 5,337 5,337 ............
ADDITION.............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, IDAHO........ 5,337 15,137 +9,800

ILLINOIS

NAVY:
GREAT LAKES NAVAL TRAINING
CENTER:
BATTLE STATION 13,200 13,200 ............
TRAINING FACILITY
(PHASE I)............
RECRUIT BARRACKS...... 31,600 31,600 ............
RECRUIT BARRACKS...... 34,130 34,130 ............
AIR FORCE: SCOTT AFB: SHILOH 1,900 1,900 ............
GATE.........................
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: ............ 3,750 +3,750
GALESBURG: READINESS CENTER..
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, ILLINOIS......... 80,830 84,580 +3,750

INDIANA

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD:
CAMP ATTERBURY: READINESS 2,849 2,849 ............
CENTER ADDITION..........
ELKHART: READINESS CENTER 1,770 1,770 ............
ADDITION.................
GARY:
LIMITED AVIATION ............ 15,581 +15,581
SUPPORT FACILITY.....
READINESS CENTER 1,417 1,417 ............
ADDITION.............
SOUTH BEND: READINESS 1,496 1,496 ............
CENTER ADDITION..........
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, INDIANA.......... 7,532 23,113 +15,581

IOWA

AIR NATIONAL GUARD:
SIOUX CITY: UPGRADE ............ 2,000 +2,000
RUNWAYS/TAXIWAYS PHASE II
SIOUX GATEWAY AIRPORT: KC- 6,091 6,091 ............
135 FIRE CRASH/RESCUE
STATION..................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, IOWA............. 6,091 8,091 +2,000

KANSAS

ARMY:
FORT LEAVENWORTH: LEWIS 28,000 28,000 ............
AND CLARK INSTRUCTIONAL
FACILITY (PHASE I).......
FORT RILEY:
BARRACKS COMPLEX-- 40,000 40,000 ............
GRAVES STREET........
COMBINED ARMS ............ 13,600 +13,600
COLLECTIVE TRAINING
FACILITY PH II.......
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: KANSAS 2,982 2,982 ............
CITY: READINESS CENTER
ADDITION/ALTERATION..........
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, KANSAS........... 70,982 84,582 +13,600

KENTUCKY

ARMY:
FORT CAMPBELL: BARRACKS 49,000 49,000 ............
COMPLEX--RANGE ROAD
(PHASE II)...............
FORT KNOX:
DINING FACILITY....... ............ 10,000 +10,000
MODIFIED RECORD FIRE RANGE 3,500 3,500 ............
DEFENSE-WIDE: FORT CAMPBELL: 7,800 7,800 ............
FLIGHT SIMULATOR FACILITY....
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD:
GREENVILLE: FIRE STATION.. 2,238 2,238 ............
MAYSVILLE: READINESS 4,997 4,997 ............
CENTER...................
RICHMOND: READINESS CENTER 756 756 ............
ADDITION.................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, KENTUCKY......... 68,291 78,291 +10,000

LOUISIANA

ARMY:
FORT POLK:
AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE 34,000 34,000 ............
HANGAR...............
ALERT HOLDING AREA 8,400 8,400 ............
FACILITY.............
ARMS STORAGE FACILITY. 1,350 1,350 ............
MISSION TRAINING 27,000 27,000 ............
SUPPORT FACILITY.....
SHOOT HOUSE........... 1,250 1,250 ............
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: 18,579 18,579 ............
PINEVILLE: CONSOLIDATED
MAINTENANCE FACILITY (PHASE
I)...........................
AIR NATIONAL GUARD: NAS/JRB ............ 6,300 +6,300
NEW ORLEANS: VEHICLE
MAINTENANCE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
FACILITY.....................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, LOUISIANA........ 90,579 96,879 +6,300

MAINE

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: BANGOR: ............ 14,900 +14,900
AVIATION SUPPORT FACILITY,
PHASE II.....................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, MAINE............ ............ 14,900 +14,900

MARYLAND

ARMY:
ABERDEEN: CHEM/BIO SAMPLE ............ 13,000 +13,000
RECEPTION FACILITY.......
FORT MEADE: DINING 9,600 9,600 ............
FACILITY.................
NAVY:
INDIAN HEAD NAVAL SURFACE 14,850 14,850 ............
WARFARE CENTER: WATER
SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS......
PATUXENT RIVER NAVAL AIR 24,370 24,370 ............
WARFARE CENTER: JOINT
STRIKE FIGHTER TEST AND
SUPPORT FACILITIES.......
DEFENSE-WIDE: FORT MEADE: 1,842 1,842 ............
CRITICAL UTILITY CONTROL
(PHASE II-B).................
ARMY RESERVE: FORT MEADE: 19,710 19,710 ............
RESERVE CENTER/OMS/WAREHOUSE
(PHASE I)....................
AIR FORCE RESERVE:
ANDREWS AFB:
ALTER AIRCRAFT 2,900 2,900 ............
MAINTENANCE SHOPS....
HYDRANT FUEL SYSTEM... 7,375 7,375 ............
UPGRADE AIRFIELD 835 835 ............
PAVEMENTS............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, MARYLAND..... 81,482 94,482 +13,000

MASSACHUSETTS

AIR NATIONAL GUARD: OTIS ............ 11,000 +11,000
(FALMOUTH): FIRE CRASH/RESCUE
STATION......................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, MASSACHUSETTS.... ............ 11,000 +11,000

MICHIGAN

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD:
CALUMET: SINGLE UNIT NG ............ 3,370 +3,370
READINESS CENTER.........
JACKSON: READINESS CENTER. 5,591 5,591 ............
AIR NATIONAL GUARD:
ALPENA: DINING FACILITY... ............ 8,500 +8,500
SELFRIDGE ANGB:
JOINT MEDICAL TRAINING ............ 9,600 +9,600
FACILITY.............
PASS AND ID/VISITORS ............ 4,000 +4,000
CENTER...............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, MICHIGAN..... 5,591 31,061 +25,470

MINNESOTA

AIR NATIONAL GUARD: DULUTH: ............ 9,000 +9,000
AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE FACILITY
MODERNIZATION................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, MINNESOTA........ ............ 9,000 +9,000

MISSISSIPPI

NAVY: MERIDIAN NAVAL AIR 4,570 4,570 ............
STATION: FIRE AND RESCUE
STATION......................
AIR FORCE:
COLUMBUS AFB: AIR TRAFFIC ............ 5,500 +5,500
CONTROL TOWER............
KEESLER AFB: CHILD ............ 2,900 +2,900
DEVELOPMENT CENTER.......
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD:
CAMP SHELBY: REGIONAL 7,733 7,733 ............
MILITARY EDUCATIONAL
CENTER (PHASE I)........
GULFPORT: ORGANIZATIONAL ............ 4,650 +4,650
MAINTENANCE SHOPS........
AIR NATIONAL GUARD: CAMP 7,409 7,409 ............
SHELBY: C-17 ASSAULT RUNWAY..
AIR FORCE RESERVE: KEESLER 6,650 6,650 ............
AFB: FUEL CELL MAINTENANCE
HANGAR.......................
NAVAL RESERVE: PASCAGOULA: ............ 6,100 +6,100
LITTORAL SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM
FAC- ILITY...................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, MISSISSIPPI...... 26,362 45,512 +19,150

MISSOURI

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: KANSAS 4,947 4,947 ............
CITY: READINESS CENTER.......
AIR NATIONAL GUARD: ROSECRANS ............ 8,000 +8,000
FIELD: AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
TRAINING COMPLEX.............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, MISSOURI......... 4,947 12,947 +8,000

MONTANA

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD:
BILLINGS: ORGANIZATIONAL 1,209 1,209 ............
MAINTENANCE SHOP ADDITION
KALISPELL:
ARMED FORCES RESERVE ............ 9,020 +9,020
CENTER...............
ORGANIZATIONAL 706 706 ............
MAINTENANCE SHOP
ADDITION.............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, MONTANA.......... 1,915 10,935 +9,020

NEBRASKA

DEFENSE-WIDE: OFFUTT AFB: 13,400 13,400 ............
REPLACE HYDRANT FUEL SYSTEM..
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD:
CAMP ASHLAND: CONSTRUCT ............ 3,000 +3,000
FRONTAGE LEVEE SEGMENT...
COLUMBUS: READINESS CENTER 618 618 ............
ADDITION/ALTERATION......
NORFOLK: FIRE STATION..... 1,068 1,068 ............
OMAHA:
ARMY RESERVE CENTER ............ 3,100 +3,100
LAND ACQUISITION.....
READINESS CENTER...... 5,804 5,804 ............
YORK: READINESS CENTER 758 758 ............
ALTERATION...............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, NEBRASKA......... 21,648 27,748 +6,100

NEVADA

NAVY: FALLON NAVAL AIR ............ 4,700 +4,700
STATION: HIGH EXPLOSIVE
MAGAZINES....................
AIR FORCE: NELLIS AFB: VEHICLE ............ 11,800 +11,800
MAINTENANCE COMPLEX..........
DEFENSE-WIDE: NELLIS AFB: 12,800 12,800 ............
HYDRANT FUEL SYSTEM..........
AIR NATIONAL GUARD: RENO: ............ 9,000 +9,000
REPLACE COMMUNICATION AND
SECURITY FORCES FACILITY.....
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, NEVADA........... 12,800 38,300 +25,500

NEW HAMPSHIRE

AIR NATIONAL GUARD: PEASE ANG ............ 6,100 +6,100
BASE: FIRE STATION...........
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, NEW HAMPSHIRE.... ............ 6,100 +6,100

NEW JERSEY

NAVY:
EARLE NAVAL WEAPONS 26,740 26,740 ............
STATION: GENERAL PURPOSE
BERTHING PIER REPLACEMENT
LAKEHURST NAVAL AIR 20,681 20,681 ............
WARFARE CENTER:
ELECTROMAGNETIC AIRCRAFT
LAUNCHING SYSTEM FACILITY
AIR FORCE:
MCGUIRE AFB:
C-17 MAINTENANCE 6,862 6,862 ............
TRAINING DEVICE
FACILITY.............
C-17 ROADS AND 4,765 4,765 ............
UTILITIES............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, NEW JERSEY... 59,048 59,048 ............

NEW MEXICO

AIR FORCE:
CANNON AFB:
AEROSPACE GROUND ............ 7,700 +7,700
EQUIPMENT COMPLEX....
INSTALL APPROACH ............ 1,300 +1,300
LIGHTS, RUNWAY 13....
TULAROSA RADAR TEST SITE: 3,600 3,600 ............
UPGRADE RADAR TEST
FACILITY.................
KIRTLAND AFB: ARSENIC 6,957 6,957 ............
TREATMENT SYSTEMS........
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: 2,533 2,533 ............
ALBUQUERQUE: READINESS CENTER
ADDITION/ALTERATION..........
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, NEW MEXICO....... 13,090 22,090 +9,000

NEW YORK

ARMY:
FORT DRUM:
BARRACKS--10200 AREA.. 22,500 22,500 ............
BARRACKS COMPLEX-- 49,000 49,000 ............
WHEELER SACK AAF
(PHASE I)............
MOUNTAIN RAMP 11,000 11,000 ............
EXPANSION............
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD:
ROCHESTER: READINESS 4,332 4,332 ............
CENTER ADDITION/
ALTERATION...............
UTICA: ORGANIZATIONAL 3,261 3,261 ............
MAINTENANCE SHOP.........
AIR FORCE RESERVE: NIAGRA ARS: ............ 9,600 +9,600
VISITING AIRMAN'S QUARTERS...
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, NEW YORK......... 90,093 99,693 +9,600

NORTH CAROLINA

ARMY:
FORT BRAGG:
BARRACKS COMPLEX-- 47,000 47,000 ............
BASTOGNE DRIVE (PHASE
I)...................
BARRACKS COMPLEX-- 38,000 38,000 ............
BUTNER ROAD (PHASE
IV)..................
BARRACKS-D AREA (PHASE 17,000 17,000 ............
IV)..................
NAVY:
CAMP LEJEUNE MARINE CORPS
BASE:
CONSOLIDATED ARMORIES. 10,270 10,270 ............
HEADQUARTERS AND 6,300 6,300 ............
ACADEMIC INSTRUCTION
FACILITY.............
OPERATIONS AND 12,880 12,880 ............
TRAINING FACILITIES..
MCAS CHERRY POINT: LAND ............ 1,270 +1,270
ACQUISITION..............
NEW RIVER MARINE CORPS AIR 6,240 6,240 ............
STATION: WATER TREATMENT
FAC- ILITY...............
AIR FORCE:
POPE AFB:
C-130J 2-BAY HANGAR... 15,629 15,629 ............
C-130J UPGRADE HANGAR 2,716 2,716 ............
6....................
C-130J/30 RAMP UPGRADE 1,239 1,239 ............
C-130J/30 TECH 4,431 4,431 ............
TRAINING FACILITY....
SEYMOUR JOHNSON AFB:
BOUNDARY FENCE........ 1,500 1,500 ............
DORMITORIES........... 9,530 9,530 ............
FIRE/CRASH RESCUE ............ 11,400 +11,400
STATIONS.............
DEFENSE-WIDE: CAMP LEJEUNE: 15,259 15,259 ............
NEW MAINSIDE PRIMARY SCHOOL..
FORT BRAGG:
BATTALION AND COMPANY 4,200 4,200 ............
HEADQUARTERS.........
COMPANY OPERATIONS 1,500 1,500 ............
FACILITY ADDITION....
JOINT OPERATIONS 19,700 19,700 ............
COMPLEX..............
MAZE AND FACADE....... 2,400 2,400 ............
TRAINING COMPLEX...... 8,500 8,500 ............
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD:
ASHEVILLE: READINESS 6,251 6,251 ............
CENTER...................
LENOIR: READINESS CENTER.. 5,184 5,184 ............
MORRISVILLE: FIRE STATION. 1,306 1,306 ............
SALISBURY: FIRE STATION... 926 926 ............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, NORTH CAROLINA... 237,961 250,631 +12,670

NORTH DAKOTA

AIR FORCE:
MINOT AFB:
ADD/ALTER MISSILE 3,050 3,050 ............
MAINTENANCE VEHICLE
FACILITY.............
FITNESS CENTER........ ............ 9,500 +9,500
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: BISMARCK: 1,873 1,873 ............
READINESS CENTER ADDITION....
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, NORTH DAKOTA..... 4,923 14,423 +9,500

OHIO

AIR FORCE: WRIGHT-PATTERSON 10,500 10,500 ............
AFB: DORMITORY...............
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: CAMP ............ 5,560 +5,560
SHERMAN, CHILLICOTHE:
READINESS CENTER.............
ARMY RESERVE: CLEVELAND: 21,595 21,595 ............
RESERVE CENTER/OMS/AMSA/
STORAGE......................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, OHIO............. 32,095 37,655 +5,560

OKLAHOMA

ARMY:
FORT SILL:
CONSOLIDATED 13,000 13,000 ............
MAINTENANCE COMPLEX
(PHASE II)...........
MODIFIED RECORD FIRE 3,500 3,500 ............
RANGE................
AIR FORCE:
ALTUS AFB: C-17 MODIFY 1,144 1,144 ............
SIMULATOR BAYS...........
TINKER AFB:
BUILDING 3001 19,060 19,060 ............
REVITALIZATION (PHASE
I)...................
CONSOLIDATED ............ 7,500 +7,500
INTEGRATION SUPPORT
FACILITY.............
VANCE AFB: CONSOLIDATED ............ 15,000 +15,000
LOGISTICS COMPLEX........
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, OKLAHOMA..... 36,704 59,204 +22,500

OREGON

AIR FORCE RESERVE:
PORTLAND IAP:
ALTER FLIGHTLINE 2,900 2,900 ............
FACILITIES...........
FIRE/CRASH RESCUE 4,300 4,300 ............
STATION..............
HYDRANT REFUELING 3,050 3,050 ............
SYSTEM (PHASE II)....
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, OREGON....... 10,250 10,250 ............

PENNSYLVANIA

NAVY: PHILADELPHIA FOUNDRY: ............ 10,200 +10,200
UPGRADE LARGE PROPELLER SHOP
BLDG 546.....................
DEFENSE-WIDE:
HARRISBURG IAP: C130J 3,000 3,000 ............
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
FACILITY.................
NEW CUMBERLAND DEFENSE 27,000 27,000 ............
DISTRIBUTION DEPOT:
REPLACE GENERAL PURPOSE
WAREHOUSES...............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, PENNSYLVANIA... 30,000 40,200 +10,200

RHODE ISLAND

NAVY:
NEWPORT NAVAL STATION:
BACHELOR ENLISTED 16,140 16,140 ............
QUARTERS REPLACEMENT.
IMPROVE GATE I ............ 2,550 +2,550
SECURITY.............
UNDERWATER WEAPON 10,890 10,890 ............
SYSTEMS LABORATORY...
AIR NATIONAL GUARD: QUONSET 18,500 18,500 ............
STATE AIRPORT: REPLACE
COMPOSITE AIRCRAFT
MAINTENANCE COMPLEX..........
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, RHODE ISLAND..... 45,530 48,080 +2,550

SOUTH CAROLINA

AIR FORCE:
CHARLESTON AFB: DORMITORY. 8,863 8,863 ............
SHAW AFB: DEPLOYMENT ............ 8,500 +8,500
PROCESSING CENTER........
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, SOUTH CAROLINA... 8,863 17,363 +8,500

SOUTH DAKOTA

AIR FORCE: ELLSWORTH AFB: B-1 ............ 9,300 +9,300
WEAPONS SYSTEM TRAINING
FACILITY.....................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, SOUTH DAKOTA..... ............ 9,300 +9,300

TENNESSEE

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: ............ 8,100 +8,100
NASHVILLE: READINESS CENTER,
PHASE I......................
AIR NATIONAL GUARD:
MEMPHIS INTERNATIONAL ............ 5,000 +5,000
AIRPORT: C-5 MAINTENANCE
SHOPS CONVERSION.........
NASHVILLE: COMPOSITE ............ 11,000 +11,000
AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE
COMPLEX, PHASE II.......
MCGHEE-TYSON: FIRE STATION/ ............ 6,000 +6,000
SECURITY FORCES FACILITY.
ARMY RESERVE: NASHVILLE: 8,955 8,955 ............
RESERVE CENTER/OMS/UNHEATED
STORAGE......................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, TENNESSEE........ 8,955 39,055 +30,100

TEXAS

ARMY:
FORT HOOD:
BARRACKS COMPLEX--67TH 47,000 47,000 ............
ST AND BATTALION AVE.
URBAN ASSAULT COURSE.. 2,800 2,800 ............
NAVY: CORPUS CHRISTI NAVAL AIR ............ 7,070 +7,070
STATION: NS INGLESIDE:
HEADQUARTERS, MINE WARFARE
COMMAND......................
AIR FORCE:
GOODFELLOW AFB:
FIRE TRAINING 1,863 1,863 ............
CLASSROOM FACILITY...
STUDENT DORMITORY..... 18,107 18,107 ............
LACKLAND AFB:
CHILD DEVELOPMENT ............ 8,700 +8,700
CENTER PHASE II......
STUDENT DORMITORY..... 20,966 20,966 ............
STUDENT DORMITORY..... 35,260 35,260 ............
RANDOLPH AFB:
FITNESS CENTER........ ............ 13,600 +13,600
STUDENT DORMITORY..... 28,590 28,590 ............
DEFENSE-WIDE: LAUGHLIN AFB: 4,688 4,688 ............
REPLACE TRUCK FUEL LOADING
FACILITY.....................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, TEXAS............ 159,274 188,644 +29,370

UTAH

AIR FORCE:
HILL AFB:
AEF DEPLOYMENT CENTER. ............ 5,900 +5,900
MUNITIONS MAINTENANCE 1,000 1,000 ............
FACILITY.............
REPLACE MUNITIONS 13,000 13,000 ............
STORAGE IGLOOS.......
SMALL DIAMETER BOMB 1,811 1,811 ............
STORAGE IGLOOS.......
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, UTAH......... 15,811 21,711 +5,900

VERMONT

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: SOUTH 23,827 23,827 ............
BURLINGTON: ARMY AVIATION
SUPPORT FACILITY.............
AIR NATIONAL GUARD: ............ 5,400 +5,400
BURLINGTON: AIR MOBILIZATION
FACILITY.....................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, VERMONT.......... 23,827 29,227 +5,400

VIRGINIA

ARMY: FORT MYER: VEHICLE 9,000 9,000 ............
MAINTENANCE FACILITY.........
NAVY:
ARLINGTON: PHYSICAL 1,970 1,970 ............
FITNESS CENTER ADDITION..
DAHLGREN NAVAL SURFACE
WARFARE CENTER:
OPERATIONS CENTER 20,520 20,520 ............
ADDITION.............
WEAPONS DYNAMIC RDT&E ............ 3,500 +3,500
CENTER...............
LITTLE CREEK NAVAL 3,810 3,810 ............
AMPHIBIOUS BASE: GATE 1
IMPROVEMENTS.............
NORFOLK:
AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE 36,460 36,460 ............
HANGAR...............
BACHELOR ENLISTED 46,730 46,730 ............
QUARTERS--HOMEPORT
ASHORE (PHASE II)....
CRANE/WEIGHT HANDLING 17,770 17,770 ............
EQUIPMENT SHOP.......
PIER 11 REPLACEMENT 27,610 27,610 ............
(PHASE I)............
QUANTICO MARINE CORPS
BASE:
NETWORK OPERATIONS ............ 14,420 +14,420
CENTER...............
WEAPONS TRAINING 3,700 3,700 ............
BATTALION LOAD AND
TEST FACILITY........
AIR FORCE:
LANGLEY AFB:
F-22 CLEAR WATER RINSE 2,383 2,383 ............
PAD..................
F-22 SQUADRON 20,013 20,013 ............
OPERATIONS/AMU/HANGAR
F-22 VERTICAL WING 2,573 2,573 ............
TANK STORAGE.........
DEFENSE-WIDE:
ARLINGTON: PENTAGON 38,086 38,086 ............
ATHLETIC CENTER
RESTORATION PROJECT......
DAM NECK FLEET COMBAT
TRAINING CENTER:
MISSION SUPPORT 5,600 5,600 ............
FACILITY.............
SMALL ARMS RANGE...... 9,681 9,681 ............
LITTLE CREEK ............ 9,000 +9,000
OPERATIONS CENTER....
FORT BELVOIR: DEFENSE 25,700 25,700 ............
THREAT REDUCTION CENTER
(PHASE II)...............
LANGLEY AFB: REPLACE 13,000 13,000 ............
HYDRANT FUEL SYSTEM......
AIR NATIONAL GUARD: CAMP ............ 2,500 +2,500
PENDLETON: TROOP TRAINING
QUARTERS (RED HORSE).........
NAVAL RESERVE: QUANTICO: 9,497 9,497 ............
RESERVE CENTER...............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, VIRGINIA......... 294,103 323,523 +29,420

WASHINGTON

ARMY:
FORT LEWIS:
BARRACKS COMPLEX--17TH 48,000 48,000 ............
AND B STREET (PHASE
III).................
DEPLOYMENT STAGING 2,650 2,650 ............
FACILITY.............
SHOOT HOUSE........... 1,250 1,250 ............
NAVY:
BANGOR NAVAL SUBMARINE
BASE:
SERVICE PIER UPGRADE 33,820 33,820 ............
AND BUILDING ADDITION
WATERFRONT SECURITY 6,530 6,530 ............
FORCE FACILITY.......
INDIAN ISLAND NAVAL 2,240 2,240 ............
MAGAZINES: ORDNANCE
TRANSFER FACILITY........
AIR FORCE: MCCHORD AFB: 19,000 19,000 ............
UPGRADE MISSION SUPPORT
CENTER (PHASE II)............
DEFENSE-WIDE: MCCHORD AFB: 8,100 8,100 ............
BULK FUEL STORAGE TANKS......
AIR NATIONAL GUARD: CAMP ............ 7,500 +7,500
MURRAY: RED HORSE MEDICAL TNG
COM- PLEX....................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, WASHINGTON....... 121,590 129,090 +7,500

WEST VIRGINIA

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: ELEANOR: ............ 4,000 +4,000
ROAD SECURITY FORCE
PROTECTION MODIFICATION......
AIR NATIONAL GUARD:
MARTINSBURG:
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL ............ 5,800 +5,800
TOWER................
C-5 PARKING APRON, JET ............ 20,000 +20,000
FUEL STORAGE, HYDRANT
SYS..................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, WEST VIRGINIA ............ 29,800 +29,800

WISCONSIN

ARMY RESERVE: FORT MCCOY: ............ 4,340 +4,340
BATTLE SIMULATION CENTER.....
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, WISCONSIN........ ............ 4,340 +4,340

WYOMING

AIR FORCE: F. E. WARREN AFB: ............ 10,000 +10,000
STORMWATER DRAINAGE SYSTEM
PHASE I......................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, WYOMING.......... ............ 10,000 +10,000

BAHRAIN

NAVY: BAHRAIN NAVAL SUPPORT 18,030 18,030 ............
ACTIVITY: OPERATIONS CONTROL
CENTER.......................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, BAHRAIN.......... 18,030 18,030 ............

GERMANY

ARMY:
GRAFENWOEHR:
BRIGADE COMPLEX-- 30,000 ............ -30,000
BARRACKS AND MAINT/
SUPPORT..............
BRIGADE COMPLEX--TROOP 46,000 ............ -46,000
SUPPORT FACILITIES...
HEIDELBERG: BARRACKS-- 17,000 ............ -17,000
HEIDELBERG HOSPITAL......
HOHENFELS: PHYSICAL 13,200 ............ -13,200
FITNESS TRAINING CENTER..
VILSECK: BARRACKS COMPLEX 12,100 ............ -12,100
(PHASE I)................
AIR FORCE:
RAMSTEIN AB:
CIVIL ENGINEERING 6,250 ............ -6,250
MIDFIELD COMPLEX.....
CONSOLIDATE 1ST COMBAT 19,713 19,713 ............
COMMUNICATIONS
SQUADRON (PHASE II)..
FITNESS CENTER ANNEX.. 15,903 15,903 ............
SPANGDAHLEM AB:
FIRE STATION ANNEX AND 3,865 ............ -3,865
TRAINING FACILITY....
PASSENGER TERMINAL.... 1,546 ............ -1,546
DEFENSE-WIDE:
GRAFENWOEHR:
DISPENSARY/DENTAL 12,585 12,585 ............
CLINIC ADDITION/
ALTERATION...........
ELEMENTARY AND MIDDLE 36,247 18,616 -17,631
SCHOOL...............
HEIDELBERG: ELEMENTARY 3,086 3,086 ............
SCHOOL...................
STUTTGART: FORWARD STATION 11,400 11,400 ............
COMPLEX..................
VILSECK: ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1,773 1,773 ............
RENOVATION/ADDITION......
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, GERMANY.......... 230,668 83,076 -147,592

GUAM

NAVY: GUAM: DEFENSE-WIDE: 24,900 24,900 ............
ANDERSEN AFB: MEDICAL/DENTAL
CLINIC REPLACEMENT...........
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, GUAM............. 24,900 24,900 ............

ITALY

ARMY:
AVIANO AB:
JOINT DEPLOYMENT 15,500 15,500 ............
FACILITY (PHASE I)...
JOINT DEPLOYMENT 13,000 ............ -13,000
FACILITY (PHASE II)..
LIVORNO: VEHICLE 22,000 22,000 ............
MAINTENANCE FACILITY.....
NAVY:
LA MADALENA NAVAL SUPPORT 39,020 39,020 ............
FACILITY: CONSOLIDATE
SANTO STEFANO FACILITIES.
SIGONELLA NAVAL AIR
STATION:
BASE OPERATIONS 34,070 34,070 ............
SUPPORT FACILITIES
(PHASE I)............
BASE OPERATIONS 14,679 ............ -14,679
SUPPORT FACILITIES
(PHASE II)...........
AIR FORCE:
AVIANO AB:
REMOVE AIRFIELD 7,730 7,730 ............
OBSTRUCTION--SOUTH
RAMP.................
MUNITIONS 5,301 5,301 ............
ADMINISTRATION
FACILITY.............
ZULU ARM/DEARM PAD.... 994 994 ............
DEFENSE-WIDE:
SIGONELLA NAVAL AIR 13,969 13,969 ............
STATION: ELEMENTARY AND
HIGH SCHOOL ADDITIONS/
RENOVATIONS..............
VICENZA: ELEMENTARY AND 16,374 16,374 ............
HIGH SCHOOL ADDITIONS/
RENOVATIONS..............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, ITALY............ 182,637 154,958 -27,679

KOREA

ARMY:
CAMP HUMPHREYS:
BARRACKS COMPLEX...... 35,000 ............ -35,000
BARRACKS COMPLEX...... 41,000 ............ -41,000
BARRACKS COMPLEX...... 29,000 ............ -29,000
AIR FORCE:
KUNSAN AB: UPGRADE 7,059 7,059 ............
HARDENED AIRCRAFT
SHELTERS.................
OSAN AB: DORMITORY........ 16,638 16,638 ............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, KOREA............ 128,697 23,697 -105,000

KWAJALEIN

ARMY:
KWAJALEIN ATOLL: VEHICLE 9,400 9,400 ............
PAINT AND PREP FACILITY..
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, KWAJALEIN........ 9,400 9,400 ............

PORTUGAL

AIR FORCE: LAJES FIELD: ADD/ 4,086 4,086 ............
ALTER FITNESS CENTER.........
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, PORTUGAL......... 4,086 4,086 ............

TURKEY

AIR FORCE: INCIRLIK AB: 3,262 ............ -3,262
CONSOLIDATED COMMUNICATIONS
FACILITY.....................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, TURKEY........... 3,262 ............ -3,262

UNITED KINGDOM

NAVY: SAINT MAWGAN: BACHELOR 7,070 7,070 ............
ENLISTED QUARTERS............
AIR FORCE:
RAF MILDENHALL:
CHILD DEVELOPMENT 3,646 3,646 ............
CENTER ANNEX.........
POST OFFICE........... 3,592 3,592 ............
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 3,320 3,320 ............
COMPLEX..............
RAF LAKENHEATH:
ADD/ALT CRASH FIRE 2,667 2,667 ............
STATION..............
COMMUNICATIONS 8,436 8,436 ............
FACILITY.............
DORMITORY............. 13,606 13,606 ............
FAMILY SUPPORT CENTER. 5,878 5,878 ............
MOBILITY CARGO 11,900 11,900 ............
PROCESSING CENTER....
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, UNITED 60,115 60,115 ............
KINGDOM............

WAKE ISLAND

AIR FORCE:
WAKE ISLAND:
REPAIR AIRFIELD 14,000 14,000 ............
PAVEMENT (PHASE III).
UPGRADE ISLAND-WIDE 10,000 10,000 ............
INFRASTRUCTURE (PHASE
I)...................
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, WAKE ISLAND.. 24,000 24,000 ............

NATO

NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT 169,300 169,300 ............
PROGRAM......................

WORLDWIDE CLASSIFIED

ARMY: CLASSIFIED LOCATION: 178,700 ............ -178,700
CLASSIFIED PROJECT...........
AIR FORCE:
CLASSIFIED LOCATION:
CLASSIFIED PROJECT.... 3,250 3,250 ............
PREDATOR B-SQUADRON 25,731 25,731 ............
OPS/AMU AND HANGAR...
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, WORLDWIDE 207,681 28,981 -178,700
CLASSIFIED.........

WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED

ARMY:
UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE
LOCATIONS:
HOST NATION SUPPORT... 22,000 22,000 ............
PLANNING AND DESIGN... 100,710 112,645 +11,935
UNSPECIFIED MINOR 20,000 32,560 +12,560
CONSTRUCTION.........
RESCISSION (PUBLIC LAW -66,050 -142,200 -76,150
107-249).............
RESCISSION (PUBLIC LAW ............ -24,000 -24,000
107-64)..............
RESCISSION (PUBLIC LAW ............ -17,415 -17,415
106-246).............
NAVY:
UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE
LOCATIONS:
PLANNING AND DESIGN... 65,612 77,283 +11,671
UNSPECIFIED MINOR 12,334 13,754 +1,420
CONSTRUCTION.........
OUTLYING LANDING FIELD 27,610 27,610 ............
FACILITIES (PHASE I).
RESCISSION (PUBLIC LAW -14,679 -27,213 -12,534
107-249).............
RESCISSION (PUBLIC LAW ............ -12,109 -12,109
107-64)..............
AIR FORCE:
UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE
LOCATIONS:
PLANNING AND DESIGN... 79,116 112,075 +32,959
UNSPECIFIED MINOR 12,000 17,020 +5,020
CONSTRUCTION.........
DEFENSE-WIDE:
UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE
LOCATIONS:
CONTINGENCY 8,960 8,960 ............
CONSTRUCTION.........
ENERGY CONSERVATION 69,500 69,500 ............
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM..
RESCISSION (PUBLIC LAW -997 -32,680 -31,683
107-249).............
PLANNING AND DESIGN:
SPECIAL OPERATIONS 14,768 14,768 ............
COMMAND..........
DEPARTMENT OF 6,500 6,500 ............
DEFENSE DEPENDENT
EDUCATION........
TRICARE MANAGEMENT 18,616 27,216 +8,600
ACTIVITY.........
UNDISTRIBUTED..... 20,997 22,397 +1,400
-----------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, 60,881 70,881 +10,000
PLANNING AND
DESIGN.........
UNSPECIFIED MINOR
CONSTRUCTION:
SPECIAL OPERATIONS 2,723 2,723 ............
COMMAND..........
MISSILE DEFENSE 2,600 600 -2,000
AGENCY...........
DEFENSE FINANCE 1,500 1,500 ............
AND ACCOUNTING
SERVICE..........
UNDISTRIBUTED..... 3,000 3,000 ............
JOINT CHIEFS OF 6,330 6,330 ............
STAFF............
-----------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, 16,153 14,153 -2,000
UNSPECIFIED
MINOR
CONSTRUCTION...

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD:
UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE
LOCATIONS:
PLANNING AND DESIGN... 26,570 48,612 +22,042
UNSPECIFIED MINOR 1,451 7,955 +6,504
CONSTRUCTION.........
AIR NATIONAL GUARD:
UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE
LOCATIONS:
PLANNING AND DESIGN... 16,030 36,163 +20,133
UNSPECIFIED MINOR 5,500 9,250 +3,750
CONSTRUCTION.........
ARMY RESERVE:
UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE
LOCATIONS:
PLANNING AND DESIGN... 7,712 8,873 +1,161
UNSPECIFIED MINOR 2,886 2,886 ............
CONSTRUCTION.........
NAVAL RESERVE: UNSPECIFIED 2,562 3,172 +610
WORLDWIDE LOCATIONS: PLANNING
AND DESIGN...................
AIR FORCE RESERVE:
UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE
LOCATIONS:
PLANNING AND DESIGN... 11,142 13,212 +2,070
UNSPECIFIED MINOR 5,160 6,604 +1,444
CONSTRUCTION.........
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, WORLDWIDE 492,163 459,551 -32,612
UNSPECIFIED........

FAMILY HOUSING, ARMY

ALASKA:
FORT WAINWRIGHT (100 44,000 44,000 ............
UNITS)...................
FORT WAINWRIGHT (40 UNITS) 20,000 20,000 ............
ARIZONA:
FORT HUACHUCA (160 UNITS). 27,000 27,000 ............
FORT HUACHUCA (60 UNITS).. 14,000 14,000 ............
KANSAS:
FORT RILEY (32 UNITS)..... 8,300 8,300 ............
FORT RILEY (30 UNITS)..... 8,400 8,400 ............
KENTUCKY: FORT KNOX (178 41,000 41,000 ............
UNITS).......................
NEW MEXICO: WHITE SANDS 14,600 14,600 ............
MISSILE RANGE (58 UNITS).....
OKLAHOMA:
FORT SILL (50 UNITS)...... 10,000 10,000 ............
FORT SILL (70 UNITS)...... 15,373 15,373 ............
VIRGINIA: FORT LEE (90 UNITS). 18,000 18,000 ............
CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS..... 156,030 156,030 ............
PLANNING AND DESIGN........... 32,488 32,488 ............
RESCISSION (PUBLIC LAW 107- -52,300 -52,300 ............
249).........................
-----------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, CONSTRUCTION.. 356,891 356,891 ............

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE:
UTILITIES ACCOUNT......... 167,332 157,332 -10,000
SERVICES ACCOUNT.......... 46,735 46,735 ............
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT........ 86,326 96,326 +10,000
MISCELLANEOUS ACCOUNT..... 1,311 1,311 ............
FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT....... 44,658 44,658 ............
LEASING................... 234,471 234,471 ............
MAINTENANCE OF REAL 432,605 432,605 ............
PROPERTY.................
MORTGAGE INSURANCE PREMIUM 1 1 ............
HOUSING PRIVATIZATION 29,587 29,587 ............
SUPPORT COSTS............
-----------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, OPERATION AND 1,043,026 1,043,026 ............
MAINTENANCE............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, FAMILY HOUSING, 1,399,917 1,399,917 ............
ARMY...................

FAMILY HOUSING, NAVY AND
MARINE CORPS

CALIFORNIA: LEMOORE (187 41,585 41,585 ............
UNITS).......................
FLORIDA: PENSACOLA (25 UNITS). 3,197 3,197 ............
NORTH CAROLINA:
CHERRY POINT (339 UNITS).. 42,803 42,803 ............
CAMP LEJEUNE (161 UNITS).. 21,537 21,537 ............
CAMP LEJEUNE (358 UNITS).. 46,244 46,244 ............
CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS..... 20,446 20,446 ............
PLANNING AND DESIGN........... 8,381 8,381 ............
RESCISSION (PUBLIC LAW 107- ............ -3,585 -3,585
249).........................
-----------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, CONSTRUCTION.. 184,193 180,608 -3,585

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE:
UTILITIES ACCOUNT......... 164,556 154,556 -10,000
FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT....... 25,462 25,462 ............
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT........ 78,325 78,325 ............
MISCELLANEOUS ACCOUNT..... 807 807 ............
SERVICES ACCOUNT.......... 62,730 62,730 ............
LEASING................... 132,433 132,433 ............
MAINTENANCE OF REAL 377,792 387,792 +10,000
PROPERTY.................
MORTGAGE INSURANCE PREMIUM 64 64 ............
HOUSING PRIVATIZATION 10,609 10,609 ............
SUPPORT COSTS............
-----------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, OPERATION AND 852,778 852,778 ............
MAINTENANCE............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, FAMILY HOUSING, 1,036,971 1,033,386 -3,585
NAVY AND MARINE CORPS..

FAMILY HOUSING, AIR FORCE

ARIZONA: DAVIS-MONTHAN AFB (93 19,357 19,357 ............
UNITS).......................
CALIFORNIA: TRAVIS AFB (56 12,723 12,723 ............
UNITS).......................
DELAWARE: DOVER AFB (112 19,601 19,601 ............
UNITS).......................
FLORIDA: EGLIN AFB (279 UNITS) 32,166 32,166 ............
IDAHO: MOUNTAIN HOME AFB (186 37,126 37,126 ............
UNITS).......................
MARYLAND: ANDREWS AFB (50 20,233 20,233 ............
UNITS).......................
MISSOURI: WHITEMAN AFB (100 18,221 18,221 ............
UNITS).......................
MONTANA: MALMSTROM AFB (94 19,368 19,368 ............
UNITS).......................
NORTH CAROLINA: SEYMOUR 18,336 18,336 ............
JOHNSON AFB (138 UNITS)......
NORTH DAKOTA:
GRAND FORKS AFB (144 29,550 29,550 ............
UNITS)...................
MINOT AFB (200 UNITS)..... 41,117 41,117 ............
SOUTH DAKOTA: ELLSWORTH AFB 16,240 16,240 ............
(75 UNITS)...................
TEXAS:
DYESS AFB (116 UNITS)..... 19,973 19,973 ............
RANDOLPH AFB (96 UNITS)... 13,754 13,754 ............
KOREA: OSAN AB (111 UNITS).... 44,765 44,765 ............
PORTUGAL: LAJES FIELD (42 13,428 13,428 ............
UNITS).......................
UNITED KINGDOM: RAF LAKENHEATH 23,640 23,640 ............
(89 UNITS)...................
CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS..... 223,979 223,979 ............
PLANNING AND DESIGN........... 33,488 33,488 ............
RESCISSION (PUBLIC LAW 107- -19,347 -19,347 ............
249).........................
RESCISSION (PUBLIC LAW 105- ............ -9,692 -9,692
237).........................
-----------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, CONSTRUCTION.. 637,718 628,026 -9,692

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE:
UTILITIES ACCOUNT......... 132,651 142,651 +10,000
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT........ 70,083 60,083 -10,000
SERVICES ACCOUNT.......... 26,070 26,070 ............
FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT....... 43,006 43,006 ............
MISCELLANEOUS ACCOUNT..... 2,527 2,527 ............
LEASING................... 119,908 119,908 ............
MAINTENANCE OF REAL 395,650 395,650 ............
PROPERTY.................
MORTGAGE INSURANCE PREMIUM 37 37 ............
PRIVATIZATION SUPPORT 44,536 44,536 ............
COSTS....................
-----------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, OPERATION AND 834,468 834,468 ............
MAINTENANCE............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, FAMILY HOUSING, 1,472,186 1,462,494 -9,692
AIR FORCE..............

FAMILY HOUSING, DEFENSE-WIDE

CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS 50 50 ............
(NSA)........................
PLANNING AND DESIGN (DLA)..... 300 300 ............
-----------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, CONSTRUCTION.. 350 350 ............

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE:
UTILITIES ACCOUNT (NSA)... 413 413 ............
FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT (NSA). 112 112 ............
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT (NSA).. 13 13 ............
MISCELLANEOUS ACCOUNT 51 51 ............
(NSA)....................
SERVICES ACCOUNT (NSA).... 405 405 ............
LEASING (NSA)............. 11,987 11,987 ............
MAINTENANCE OF REAL 2,528 2,528 ............
PROPERTY (NSA)...........
FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT (DIA). 3,844 3,844 ............
LEASING (DIA)............. 27,225 27,225 ............
UTILITIES ACCOUNT (DLA)... 412 412 ............
FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT (DLA). 32 32 ............
SERVICES ACCOUNT (DLA).... 72 72 ............
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT (DLA).. 289 289 ............
MAINTENANCE OF REAL 2,057 2,057 ............
PROPERTY (DLA)...........
-----------------------------------------
SUBTOTAL, OPERATION AND 49,440 49,440 ............
MAINTENANCE............
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, FAMILY HOUSING, 49,790 49,790 ............
DEFENSE-WIDE...........

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FAMILY
HOUSING IMPROVEMENT FUND

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FAMILY 300 300 ............
HOUSING IMPROVEMENT FUND.....

BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
ACCOUNT

BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE 370,427 370,427 ............
ACCOUNT......................

GENERAL PROVISIONS

GENERAL PROVISION (SEC. 118).. 55,000 55,000 ............
=========================================

GRAND TOTAL............. 9,117,281 9,196,000 +78,719
=========================================
RECAPITULATION

ARMY.......................... 1,602,060 1,255,155 -346,905
RESCISSION................ -66,050 -183,615 -117,565
NAVY.......................... 1,147,537 1,195,659 +48,122
RESCISSION................ -14,679 -39,322 -24,643
AIR FORCE..................... 830,671 1,056,377 +225,706
DEFENSE-WIDE.................. 695,298 712,567 +17,269
RESCISSION................ -997 -32,680 -31,683
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD........... 168,298 304,085 +135,787
AIR NATIONAL GUARD............ 60,430 221,013 +160,583
ARMY RESERVE.................. 68,478 73,979 +5,501
NAVAL RESERVE................. 28,032 34,742 +6,710
AIR FORCE RESERVE............. 44,312 57,426 +13,114
-----------------------------------------
TOTAL, MILITARY 4,563,390 4,655,386 +91,996
CONSTRUCTION...........

NATO INFRASTRUCTURE........... 169,300 169,300 ............
FAMILY HOUSING, ARMY.......... 1,399,917 1,399,917 ............
(CONSTRUCTION)............ (409,191) (409,191) ............
(RESCISSION).......... (-52,300) (-52,300) ............
(OPERATION AND (1,043,026) (1,043,026) ............
MAINTENANCE).............
FAMILY HOUSING, NAVY AND 1,036,971 1,033,386 -3,585
MARINE CORPS.................
(CONSTRUCTION)............ (184,193) (184,193) ............
(RESCISSION).......... ............ (-3,585) (-3,585)
(OPERATION AND (852,778) (852,778) ............
MAINTENANCE).............
FAMILY HOUSING, AIR FORCE..... 1,472,186 1,462,494 -9,692
(CONSTRUCTION)............ (657,065) (657,065) ............
(RESCISSION).......... (-19,347) (-29,039) (-9,692)
(OPERATION AND (834,468) (834,468) ............
MAINTENANCE).............
FAMILY HOUSING, DEFENSE-WIDE.. 49,790 49,790 ............
(CONSTRUCTION)............ (350) (350) ............
(OPERATION AND (49,440) (49,440) ............
MAINTENANCE).............
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FAMILY 300 300 ............
HOUSING IMPROVEMENT FUND.....
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE 370,427 370,427 ............
ACCOUNT......................
GENERAL PROVISION............. 55,000 55,000 ............
=========================================
GRAND TOTAL............. 9,117,281 9,196,000 +78,719
------------------------------------------------------------------------