[Senate Report 118-14]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                       Calendar No. 38
118th Congress     }                                     {      Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session       }                                     {      118-14
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     


                     MILITARY SPOUSE EMPLOYMENT ACT

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                   COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND

                          GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                              to accompany

                                 S. 349

                TO AMEND TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, TO
                AUTHORIZE THE APPOINTMENT OF SPOUSES OF
             MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES WHO ARE ON ACTIVE
              DUTY, DISABLED, OR DECEASED TO POSITIONS IN
                  WHICH THE SPOUSES WILL WORK REMOTELY







[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]







                 April 27, 2023.--Ordered to be printed
                             _________
                              
                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
                 
39-010                   WASHINGTON : 2023 













        COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                   GARY C. PETERS, Michigan, Chairman
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware           RAND PAUL, Kentucky
MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire         RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona              JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada                  MITT ROMNEY, Utah
ALEX PADILLA, California             RICK SCOTT, Florida
JON OSSOFF, Georgia                  JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut      ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas

                   David M. Weinberg, Staff Director
                    Zachary I. Schram, Chief Counsel
            Lena C. Chang, Director of Governmental Affairs
              Devin M. Parsons, Professional Staff Member
           William E. Henderson III, Minority Staff Director
              Christina N. Salazar, Minority Chief Counsel
                  Andrew J. Hopkins, Minority Counsel
                     Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk












                                                       Calendar No. 38
118th Congress     }                                     {      Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session       }                                     {      118-14

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



 
                     MILITARY SPOUSE EMPLOYMENT ACT

                                _______
                                

                 April 27, 2023.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Peters, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
                    Affairs, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 349]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs, to which was referred the bill (S. 349) to amend title 
5, United States Code, to authorize the appointment of spouses 
of members of the Armed Forces who are on active duty, 
disabled, or deceased to positions in which the spouses will 
work remotely, having considered the same, reports favorably 
thereon with an amendment and recommends that the bill, as 
amended, do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                    Page
  I. Purpose and Summary.............................................. 1
 II. Background and Need for the Legislation.......................... 2
III. Legislative History.............................................. 5
 IV. Section-by-Section Analysis of the Bill, as Reported............. 6
  V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact.................................. 6
 VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................ 7
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 7

                         I. Purpose and Summary

    S. 349, the Military Spouse Employment Act, would clarify 
that agencies can hire military spouses into fully remote 
positions. This will support the ability of military spouses to 
maintain their position in a federal career regardless of 
military relocations or transfers. The bill amends an existing 
section of title 5, United States Code that provides federal 
agency heads with the authority to appoint military spouses to 
federal employment noncompetitively. The amending language adds 
a definition of ``remote work'' and specifies that the 
appointment authority applies to positions in which the spouse 
will engage in remote work. The bill also directs the 
Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct a study on 
agency use of remote work.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\On August 3, 2022, the Committee approved S. 4337, the Military 
Spouse Employment Act, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. 
That bill, as reported, is substantially similar to S. 349, except that 
S. 349 includes the addition of a section requiring a GAO study on 
remote work. Accordingly, this committee report is, in many respects, 
similar to the committee report for S. 4337. See S. Rept. 117-178.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

              II. Background and Need for the Legislation

    Half of active duty servicemembers are married, including 
two-thirds of active duty officers.\2\ Military spouses serve 
as the backbone of military families, fulfilling myriad 
household needs around the service demands of active duty 
members. They also play an important role in the decision of 
the servicemember to remain in or leave the military.\3\ 
Studies indicate that the wellbeing of military spouses impacts 
how committed the married servicemember is to military 
service.\4\ A significant factor affecting military spouse 
wellbeing and the overall wellbeing of a military family is the 
spouse having the option to find and sustain meaningful 
employment.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\Department of Defense, 2021 Demographics: Profile of the 
Military Community (2022) (download.militaryonesource.mil/12038/MOS/
Reports/2021-demographics-report.pdf).
    \3\Blue Star Families, 2021 Military Family Lifestyle Survey: 
Comprehensive Report (2022) (bluestarfam.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/
03/BSF_MFLS_Results2021_ComprehensiveReport_
3_22.pdf).
    \4\U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation, Military Spouses in the 
Workplace (2020) (www.hiringourheroes.org/resources/military-spouses-
in-the-workplace-2020/).
    \5\Id. at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Military spouses, however, are more likely to be unemployed 
compared to their civilian counterparts.\6\ According to a 2022 
survey, military spousal unemployment rates are four to six 
times higher than the national average.\7\ Similarly, 31% of 
the unemployed military spouse respondents have described 
experiencing unemployment for 27 weeks or longer, which is a 
rate of long-term unemployment that is three times higher than 
that of the civilian population.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\RAND Corporation, Enhancing Family Stability During a Permanent 
Change of Station: A Review of Disruptions and Policies (2018) 
(www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2304.html).
    \7\Blue Star Families, 2022 Military Family Lifestyle Survey: 
Comprehensive Report (2023) (bluestarfam.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/
03/BSF_MFLS_Spring23_Full_Report_Digital.pdf).
    \8\ U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation, supra note 4, at 29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Over the past half a century, the proportion of dual-earner 
households in the United States has risen significantly, more 
than doubling between 1960 and 2000 from 25% to 60% and 
remaining above 50% of U.S. households for the past two 
decades.\9\ Middle-class households increasingly rely on two 
incomes for food, transportation, education, child care, and 
other expenditures.\10\ These same trends impact military 
households as well.\11\ Around 68% of unemployed military 
spouse respondents to the 2021 Military Family Lifestyle Survey 
conducted by Blue Star Families described their financial 
situation as causing them ``some stress'' or a ``great deal of 
stress,'' compared to 44% of employed spouses.\12\ In a 
Military Family Advisory Network Survey, military and veteran 
family respondents stated that financial hardship due to 
spousal unemployment was a key driver in negatively affecting 
the health of military marriages.\13\ A dual income for 
military families can ease financial stress by allowing them to 
build a safety net and plan for longer-term financial 
goals.\14\ Spouse employment is also correlated with spouses 
gaining a sense of purpose and other positive impacts to their 
overall wellbeing.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\Jonathan Fisher and Nathaniel Johnson, The Two-Income Trap: Are 
Two-Earner Households More Financially Vulnerable?, Center for Economic 
Studies (June 2019) (www2.census.gov/ces/wp/2019/CES-WP-19-19.pdf); 
Comparing characteristics and selected expenditures of dual- and 
single-income households with children, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 
(Sep. 2020) (www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2020/article/comparing-
characteristics-and-selected-expenditures-of-dual-and-single-income-
households-with-children.htm).
    \10\U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Comparing characteristics and 
selected expenditures of dual- and single-income households with 
children (Sep. 2020) (www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2020/article/comparing-
characteristics-and-selected-expenditures-of-dual-and-single-income-
households-with-children.htm).
    \11\U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation, supra note 4, at 20.
    \12\Blue Star Families, supra note 3, at 15.
    \13\Military Family Advisory Network, Military Family Support 
Programming Survey: 2021 Results (July 14, 2022) (www.mfan.org/wp-
content/uploads/2022/07/MFAN-Programming-Survey-Results.pdf).
    \14\U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation, supra note 4, at 25.
    \15\Id. at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    According to annual Military Family Lifestyle Surveys, 
military spouse employment has ranked as the top issue for 
active duty spouses for the fourth year in a row.\16\ The issue 
of spouse employment has surpassed the ranking of other 
pressing issues, such as servicemember time away from family, 
children's education, relocation, and military pay.\17\ Spouse 
employment is also a top-five issue for active duty 
servicemembers and veteran spouses.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\Blue Star Families, 2022 Military Family Lifestyle Survey: 
Comprehensive Report (2023) (bluestarfam.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/
03/BSF_MFLS_Spring23_Full_Report_Digital.pdf); Blue Star Families, 2021 
Military Family Lifestyle Survey: Comprehensive Report (2022) 
(bluestarfam.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/
BSF_MFLS_Results2021_ComprehensiveReport_
3_22.pdf); Blue Star Families, 2020 Military Family Lifestyle Survey: 
ComprehensiveReport (bluestarfam.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/
BSF_MFLS_CompReport_FULL.pdf); Blue Star Families, 2019 Military Family 
Lifestyle Survey: Comprehensive Report (bluestarfam.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/03/BSF-2019-Survey-Comprehensive-Report-Digital-
rev200305.pdf).
    \17\Blue Star Families, supra note 7, at 11.
    \18\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Even when military spouses find employment, they often 
experience underemployment or hold the job for a shorter tenure 
due to military-related reasons. In 2022, 62% of employed 
active duty spouses surveyed by Blue Star Families reported 
they were underemployed.\19\ Types of underemployment include 
working in positions that do match the individual's educational 
background, skills, or training, or positions with fewer hours 
than desired or that do not provide a livable wage.\20\ In 
addition, the 2021 Military Family Lifestyle Survey found that 
one-third of employed active duty spouse respondents indicated 
they would need to look for a job within the next 12 months due 
to a military relocation or permanent change-of-station 
(PCS).\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\Id. at 79.
    \20\U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation, supra note 4, at 17.
    \21\Blue Star Families, supra note 3, at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Military-related barriers to spouse employment include the 
unpredictable schedule of the servicemember, access to 
affordable child care, and the frequency of relocations due to 
PCS moves.\22\ According to Department of Defense data, over 
80% of active duty spouses experience a PCS move during their 
partner's military career, and one-third have gone through a 
PCS move over the past 12 months.\23\ Research indicates that 
PCS moves can cause spousal unemployment, underemployment, loss 
of earnings, and delays in employment, particularly when the 
spouse needs to obtain a new credential at the new 
location.\24\ For around 35% of affected spouses, it takes 
seven or more months to find new employment after a PCS 
move.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \22\Id. at 66.
    \23\Department of Defense, 2019 Survey of Active Duty Spouses: 
Infographic on Spouse Education and Employment (May 1, 2020) 
(www.opa.mil/research-analysis/spouse-family/military-spouse-survey-
survey-reports-briefings/2019-survey-of-active-duty-spouses-
infographics/2019-
survey-of-active-duty-spouses-infographic-on-spouse-education-and-
employment/).
    \24\RAND Corporation, supra note 6, at ix.
    \25\Department of Defense, supra note 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Remote work opportunities can help military spouses avoid 
some of the negative impacts that military-related barriers to 
employment, such as PCS, have on their ability to find and stay 
at a job aligned with their qualifications, by giving them 
greater flexibility to work from any location. Among active 
duty spouse respondents to the Military Family Lifestyle Survey 
who identified spousal employment as a top issue, 44% noted 
that ``remote work opportunities'' would best address their 
concerns.\26\ Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, rates 
of remote working have significantly increased, even as offices 
started to reopen.\27\ There has also been a notable increase 
in remote working driven by the employee relocating to a 
different geographic area.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\Blue Star Families, supra note 3, at 67.
    \27\Pew Research Center, COVID-19 Pandemic Continues to Reshape 
Work in America (Feb. 16, 2022) (www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/
2022/02/16/covid-19-pandemic-continues-to-
reshape-work-in-america/).
    \28\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The federal government has also seen a significant increase 
in the number of eligible employees remote working compared to 
before the pandemic.\29\ The Office of Personnel Management 
(OPM) has been developing policy guidance, resources, technical 
support, and training to leverage the lessons learned during 
the pandemic, particularly related to hybrid work 
environments.\30\ In 2021, for the first time in ten years, OPM 
updated its guidance for agencies on implementing effective 
telework and remote work flexibility.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\Office of Personnel Management, Future of Work (www.opm.gov/
policy-data-oversight/
future-of-work/) (accessed Aug. 12, 2022).
    \30\Id.
    \31\Office of Personnel Management, 2021 Guide to Telework and 
Remote Work in the Federal Government (Nov. 2021) (chcoc.gov/sites/
default/files/Telework-Guide-2021_0.pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Senator Lankford inquired about the potential benefits of 
federal remote work opportunities for military spouses seeking 
employment during a March 2022 hearing conducted by the Senate 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs' 
Subcommittee on Government Operations and Border Management, 
entitled ``Chief Human Capital Officers at 20: What is Needed 
to Empower CHCOs to Ensure HR Practices Support Agencies'' 
Mission Success.''\32\ Subcommittee Ranking Member Lankford 
asked the panel about the higher percentages of federal 
employees who are teleworking or remote working and about the 
access of military spouses and individuals in rural areas.\33\ 
Mr. Steve Lenkart, Executive Director of the National 
Federation of Federal Employees, replied that ``remote work 
opens up a world of possibilities'' and is ``absolutely the 
gold standard for a lot of our military spouses that keep 
moving around with their spouses.''\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\Senate Subcommittee on Government Operations and Border 
Management, Hearing on Chief Human Capital Officers at 20: What is 
Needed to Empower CHCOs to Ensure HR Practices Support Agencies' 
Mission Success, 117th Cong. (Mar. 2, 2022) (S. Hrg. 117-252).
    \33\Id.
    \34\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Congress and Presidents have previously enacted policies to 
help increase the number of employment opportunities available 
to military spouses. In 2008, President George W. Bush issued 
an Executive Order to provide federal agencies with the 
authority to appoint spouses who relocate due to a PCS into 
positions in the civil service without needing to fulfill a 
number of competitive hiring requirements usually required for 
such positions.\35\ The National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2013 codified the authorization initiated by the 
Bush Executive Order by establishing a new section 3330d of 
title 5, United States Code, regarding the noncompetitive 
appointment of military spouses.\36\ The National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 and the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 further amended section 
3330d, including to temporarily expand the noncompetitive 
hiring authority to all military spouses.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \35\Exec. Order No. 13473, 73 Fed. Reg. 56703 (Sep. 25, 2008).
    \36\National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013, Pub. 
L. 112-239, Sec. 566(a) (2013).
    \37\National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, Pub. 
L. 114-328, Sec. 1131 (2016); John S. McCain National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, Pub. L. 115-232, Sec. 573 
(2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Military Spouse Employment Act would further amend 
section 3330d to clarify the applicability of remote work to 
federal agencies' noncompetitive hiring authority for military 
spouses. The bill adds a definition of ``remote work'' and adds 
this term to the subsection describing the hiring authority. 
The bill aims to increase the number of remote work 
opportunities in the federal government for military spouses, 
which would enable spouses to continue their careers in the 
civil service even as they experience PCS relocations.

                        III. Legislative History

    Senator James Lankford (R-OK) introduced S. 349, the 
Military Spouse Employment Act, on February 9, 2023, with 
original cosponsors Senator Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ), Senator Deb 
Fischer (R-NE), and Senator Angus King (I-ME). The bill was 
referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs. Senator Rick Scott (R-FL) and Senator Maggie Hassan 
(D-NH) joined as additional cosponsors on March 28, 2023.
    The Committee considered S. 349 at a business meeting on 
March 29, 2023. At the business meeting, Ranking Member Paul 
offered an amendment to the bill as well as a modification to 
that amendment due to negotiations with the Chairman. The Paul 
amendment as modified directs the GAO to conduct a study 
regarding the use of remote work by agencies. The modification 
to the Paul amendment struck language in the amendment that 
would have inserted a section in the bill to specify that no 
additional funds are authorized to be appropriated for the 
purpose of carrying out this legislation. The modification also 
made additions to the subject matter within the GAO study 
directive, including the use of remote work in agency 
recruitment and retention efforts, the geographic locations of 
employees who work remotely, and the impact of remote work on 
agency spending on federal office space. The Committee adopted 
the modification to the Paul amendment by voice vote, with 
Senators Peters, Hassan, Rosen, Padilla, Ossoff, Blumenthal, 
Paul, Lankford, Romney, Scott, and Hawley present. The 
Committee adopted the Paul amendment as modified by voice vote 
with Senators Peters, Hassan, Rosen, Padilla, Ossoff, 
Blumenthal, Paul, Lankford, Romney, Scott, and Hawley present. 
The bill, as amended by the Paul amendment as modified, was 
ordered reported favorably by roll call vote of 11 yeas to 0 
nays, with Senators Peters, Hassan, Rosen, Padilla, Ossoff, 
Blumenthal, Paul, Lankford, Romney, Scott, and Hawley voting in 
the affirmative, and with Senators Carper, Sinema, Johnson, and 
Marshall voting yea by proxy, for the record only.

        IV. Section-by-Section Analysis of the Bill, as Reported


Section 1. Short title

    This section establishes the short title of the bill as the 
``Military Spouse Employment Act.''

Section 2. Appointment of military spouses

    This section amends section 3330d of title 5, United States 
Code, to add definitions of ``remote work'' and ``telework'' 
for the purposes of this section. The bill also adds language 
to the subsection describing the authority of the heads of 
federal agencies to appoint military spouses to positions 
noncompetitively. The language specifies that the authority 
includes appointments to positions in which military spouses 
engage in remote work.

Section 3. GAO study and report

    Subsection (a) provides definitions for the terms 
``agency,'' ``employee,'' ``remote work,'' and ``telework'' in 
the context of the section.
    Subsection (b) requires the GAO, within 18 months after 
enactment of this bill, to conduct a study and publish a report 
regarding the use of remote work by agency. The report shall 
include a discussion of what is known regarding: (1) the number 
of agency employees who are engaging in remote work; (2) the 
role of remote work in agency recruitment and retention 
efforts; (3) the geographic location of employees who engage in 
remote work; (4) the effect remote work has on how often 
employees report to officially established agency locations; 
and (5) how the use of remote work has affected federal office 
space utilization and spending.

                   V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact

    Pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 11(b) of rule 
XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has 
considered the regulatory impact of this bill and determined 
that the bill will have no regulatory impact within the meaning 
of the rules. The Committee agrees with the Congressional 
Budget Office's statement that the bill contains no 
intergovernmental or private sector mandates as defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no costs 
on state, local, or tribal governments.

             VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    S. 349 would authorize federal agencies to hire, without 
going through competitive processes, the spouses of members of 
the U.S. Armed Forces on active duty and spouses of disabled or 
deceased members of the armed forces when those spouses apply 
for remote work positions. That change would not affect the 
total number of people the federal government employs, nor 
would it affect their compensation. However, agencies might 
modify administrative processes when implementing the bill. CBO 
estimates that the costs to make those changes would be 
insignificant.
    Most agencies would fund those costs from discretionary 
appropriations. However, enacting the bill also could affect 
direct spending by some agencies that are allowed to use fees, 
receipts from the sale of goods, and other collections to cover 
operating costs. CBO estimates that any net changes in direct 
spending by those agencies would be negligible because most of 
them can adjust amounts collected to reflect changes in 
operating costs.
    The bill also would require the Government Accountability 
Office to report on the use of remote work by federal agencies. 
CBO estimates that satisfying that requirement would cost $1 
million over the 2023-2028 period. Such spending would be 
subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Dawn Sauter 
Regan. The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy 
Director of Budget Analysis.
                                         Phillip L. Swagel,
                             Director, Congressional Budget Office.

       VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in brackets, new matter is 
printed in italic, and existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

UNITED STATES CODE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE 5--GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND EMPLOYEES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART III--EMPLOYEES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBPART B--EMPLOYMENT AND RETENTION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 33--EXAMINATION, SELECTION, AND PLACEMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SUBCHAPTER I--EXAMINATION, CERTIFICATION, AND APPOINTMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SEC. 3330D. APPOINTMENT OF MILITARY SPOUSES.

    (a) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) * * *
          (2) * * *
          (3) The term ``remote work'' refers to a particular 
        type of telework under which an employee is not 
        expected to report to an officially established agency 
        location on a regular and recurring basis.
          [(3)](4) The term ``spouse of a disabled or deceased 
        member of the Armed Forces'' means an individual--
                  (A) who is married to a member of the Armed 
                Forces who--
                          (i) is retired, released, or 
                        discharged from the Armed Forces; and
                          (ii) on the date on which the member 
                        retires, is released, or is discharged, 
                        has a disability rating of 100 percent 
                        under the standard schedule of rating 
                        disabilities in use by the Department 
                        of Veterans Affairs; or
                  (B) who--
                          (i) was married to a member of the 
                        Armed Forces on the date on which the 
                        member dies while on active duty in the 
                        Armed Forces; and
                          (ii) has not remarried.
          (5) The term ``telework'' has the meaning given the 
        term in section 6501.
    (b) Appointment Authority.--The head of an agency may 
appoint noncompetitively--
          (1) a spouse of a member of the Armed Forces on 
        active duty; [or]
          (2) a spouse of a disabled or deceased member of the 
        Armed Forces[.]; or
          (3) a spouse of a member of the Armed Forces on 
        active duty, or a spouse of a disabled or deceased 
        member of the Armed Forces, to a position in which the 
        spouse will engage in remote work.
    (c) Special Rules Regarding Spouse of a Disabled or 
Deceased Member of the Armed Forces.--
          (1) In general.--An appointment of an eligible spouse 
        as described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of subsection 
        [(a)(3)](a)(4) is not restricted to a geographical 
        area.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                                  [all]