75 251
107 th Congress
Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session
107 207
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2002
September 20, 2001.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. Hobson , from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the
following
REPORT
[To accompany H.R. 2904]
The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in
explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for military
construction, family housing, and base realignments and closures for the
Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002.
CONTENTS
Purpose of the Bill 2
Conformance With Authorization Bill
2
Summary of Committee Recommendation
3
Items of Special Interest
6
Military Housing
6
Historic Properties
7
Overseas Military Construction
7
Building to Private Sector Standards
8
Contingency Funding
9
Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization
9
Fiscal Year 2002 Barracks Request
9
Child Development Centers
11
Hospital and Medical Facilities
12
Military Construction:
Army
13
Navy
13
Air Force
14
Defense-wide
14
Army National Guard
15
Air National Guard
16
Army Reserve
16
Naval Reserve
17
Air Force Reserve
17
NATO Security Investment Program
17
Family Housing Overview
18
Family Housing:
Army
20
Navy
21
Air Force
22
Defense-wide
22
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund
23
Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense
23
Base Realignment and Closure
24
General Provisions
25
Changes in Application of Existing Law
27
Definition of Program, Project and Activity
28
Appropriations Not Authorized by Law
28
Transfer of Funds
29
Rescission of Funds
29
Constitutional Authority
29
Comparisons With Budget Resolution
29
Five-Year Projection of Outlays
30
Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments
30
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives
30
Full Committee Votes
30
State List
30
Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
The Military Construction Appropriation Bill provides funding for
planning, design, construction, alteration, and improvement of military
facilities worldwide, both for active and reserve forces. Additionally,
the bill appropriates amounts for construction, alteration, improvement,
operation, and maintenance of military family housing, and for payments
against past housing mortgage indebtedness. The bill provides funds for
the U.S. share of the NATO Security Investment Program (NSIP). Finally,
the bill provides funds to implement base realignments and closures
(BRAC) and impact assistance in communities where BRACs cause property
values to decrease.
CONFORMANCE WITH AUTHORIZATION BILL
On August 1, 2001, the House Armed Services Committee marked up H.R.
2586, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2002. At
this time, conference action on the legislation has not occurred;
therefore, projects in this bill are approved subject to authorization.
SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $10,500,000,000 in new budget (obligational)
authority for the Department of Defense, Military Construction
Appropriation Bill. This recommendation is $528,688,000 above the
President's request and $1,563,502,000 above the fiscal year 2001
appropriation. The following table summarizes the amounts recommended in
the bill compared to amounts appropriated in fiscal year 2001.
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
TERRORIST ATTACKS OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2001
The Committee fully supports the President, Departments, and agencies
in all their efforts to recover from and respond to the terrorist
attacks of September 11, 2001, on the United States. The Committee is
committed to working with the Defense Department to ensure necessary
resources are available for reconstructing the Pentagon and improving
the anti-terrorism and force protection measures of defense facilities
at home and abroad.
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST
For the most part, the President's budget request is a great
improvement over past requests. The request increases the military
construction budget by $1,034,814,000, or 11 percent, above the fiscal
year 2001 enacted level of $8,936,498,000; decreases the current
facility replacement rate of 192 years to 101 years, and maintains the
goals of improving barracks and base housing by 2008 and 2010
respectively.
However, military installations face other challenges not addressed
by the request. For example, according to the Installations Readiness
Report (IRR), 69% of Department of Defense (DoD) facilities continue to
be rated C 3 (deficiencies that prevent performing some missions) or C 4
(major facility deficiencies that preclude accomplishing the mission
satisfactorily). Likewise, while the new replacement rate is better
under this budget, it falls short of the Department's goal of 67 years,
and even further than commercially-acceptable rates. Finally, the budget
fails to implement a consistent, comprehensive strategy for maintaining
and recapitalizing facilities so that mission performance and quality of
life for troops and their families are not compromised. To ameliorate
these problems, DoD should consider the pros and cons of implementing an
aggressive asset management program that provides for effective and
routine maintenance, as well as for adequate recapitalization of
facilities, and determine whether it could be effectively implemented on
military installations.
MILITARY HOUSING
The Committee is pleased with the Administration's commitment to
execute the Military Housing Privatization Initiative. However, once
again, this budget fails to address several issues associated with the
initiative. First, budget scoring of the alternative authorities is
inconsistent and is not always based on sound financial principles. DoD
is directed to work with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to
compare the current scoring methodology with similar federal housing
programs, and to report the findings to the appropriate Congressional
committees by March 15, 2002. This exercise should be helpful to OMB
when it reexamines the scoring matrix for this program.
Second, because most privatization contracts are fifty years in
length, the Committee believes that monitoring and enforcing contractual
obligations will be paramount to program success. Each service should
begin to develop capacity in this area. Similarly, because the
initiative involves complex and complicated real estate transactions
dissimilar to the traditional military housing program, each service
should develop expertise in this area.
Finally, in the fiscal year 2001 appropriation bill, the Committee
directed each service to submit a Family Housing Master Plan no later
than July 1, 2001. Currently, only the Army's plan has been received by
the Committee. The information contained in these plans is vital because
it enables the Committee to understand how each service intends to meet
the goal of eliminating all inadequate housing by fiscal year 2010.
Therefore, the Committee urges the Navy and Air Force to submit their
plans on time in the future.
HISTORIC PROPERTIES
As noted in the past, the Committee is concerned with the inordinate
expenditures associated with improving and maintaining historically
significant properties. The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
requires the Department to manage those units listed on the National
Historic Register, as well as any units that meet the criteria of being
potentially eligible for listing, in a way that preserves their historic
significance and integrity. In the future, these costs will grow as the
number of properties eligible for listing on the Register grows. In the
next five years alone, the Department will have approximately 38,000
structures that reach 50 years of age.
To reduce the costs associated with maintaining historic properties,
the Department should pursue innovative funding sources and operating
methods. Several examples were discussed during the Historic Properties
hearing on March 15, 2001, such as expanded gift acceptance authority,
leasing to third parties like the Park Service, and demolition where
appropriate.
During the hearing, the General Accounting Office (GAO) reported that
inventory control systems available to the services are inaccurate. The
Committee recommends the services work with the Office of the Deputy
Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment) to develop
better inventory controls and a plan that addresses the increasing
number of aging structures. Furthermore, the Committee directs the
Department to conduct a seminar on working with State Historic
Preservation Offices. Finally, the Committee directs the Department to
pursue a cooperative agreement with the National Trust for Historic
Preservation for Cold War era housing, such as Capehart, Wherry and
Lustron homes, that is similar to the 1986 programmatic memorandum of
agreement on World War II wooden buildings.
OVERSEAS MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
This year, the Committee held several hearings about the condition of
overseas military installations and facilities. The Commanders-in-Chief
of the European, Pacific, and Korean Commands provided testimony.
General Joseph Ralston, Admiral Dennis Blair, and General Thomas
Schwartz testified their top two spending priorities were military
construction and real property maintenance, and the Committee commends
them for their leadership.
Despite being unable to include a substantial increase in overseas
construction projects, the Committee would like to highlight several
items of interest. First, the European Command priorities of better
housing and vehicle maintenance facilities are duly warranted. Further,
the Committee commends General Ralston and his staff for their efforts
to close and consolidate bases scattered throughout Europe and to find
alternative funding sources. The Committee believes the Command would
benefit from a consolidated European master plan, and encourages DoD and
General Ralston to consider the feasibility of developing a master plan
and report the findings to the Committee.
Admiral Blair testified that as the Pacific Command becomes more
strategically important, its installations would require substantial
upgrades, particularly in the area of technology. In addition, he
emphasized the need to improve the living conditions throughout the
Command, particularly in Korea, in order to retain highly trained troops
and staff.
General Schwartz concurred with Admiral Blair, testifying that some
of the worst housing and working conditions in the Pacific Command are
in Korea. To ameliorate the conditions, General Schwartz has developed a
Land Partnership Plan that consolidates many existing camps and
relocates troops to more suitable areas. The Committee commends him for
his efforts and will review the plan when the Quadrenniel Defense Review
(QDR), which will discuss force structure requirements in Korea, is
submitted to Congress.
Finally, the Committee notes that the Korean Special Measures
Agreement (SMA) will be re-negotiated in the near future. DoD is
encouraged to aggressively pursue additional host nation funding
consistent with the overall congressional goal of seventy-five percent
contained in the 1998 Defense Authorization bill.
ENERGY EFFICIENCIES
The Committee encourages energy efficiency and the maximum use of
energy produced from noncarbon and renewable sources at military
installations. The Committee is aware that the Department of Defense is
mandated to comply with Executive Order 13123 (``Greening the Government
Through Efficient Energy Management'') to meet energy management
requirements, reduce greenhouse gases, and expand the use of renewable
sources.
To assist DOD in complying with the Executive Order, and to build
upon the effort to expand the use of noncarbon and renewable sources,
the Committee directs that not later than January 1, 2003, the Secretary
of Defense shall submit to Congress a plan to achieve at military
installations the goals specified in sections 201, 202, and 203 of
Executive Order 13123 (64 Fed. Reg. 30851; 42 U.S.C. 8251 note),
relating to greenhouse gases reduction goals and energy efficiency
improvement goals, by maximizing the use of (1) energy efficiency
products and services and (2) energy produced from noncarbon and
renewable sources.
BUILDING TO PRIVATE SECTOR STANDARDS
Section 2803 of the National Defense Authorization Act, 2001 (Public
Law 106 398) repealed the military family housing square footage
limitations included in Section 2826 of title 10, United States Code.
These limitations were in place for many years and were inconsistent
with housing constructed in the private sector.
Waiving these limitations should create incentives for the military
departments to replace large, inefficient housing units with more energy
efficient and appropriately sized homes to meet the needs of military
families. For instance, some General and Flag Officer Quarters (GFOQs)
exceed 5,000 square feet because they were built for other purposes many
decades ago. Because many of these homes are approaching 50 years of
age, the minimum age for inclusion on the National Historic Preservation
list, they would require special handling for maintenance and repair
requirements. As a result, the costs to maintain and improve these homes
generally exceed the costs for new homes built in the private sector.
The Committee directs the Department to replace larger, inefficient
housing units with housing built to private sector standards wherever
feasible. Building to local private sector standards could save the
Department the added cost and burden of maintaining historic homes.
Furthermore, when executing projects included in the fiscal year 2002
appropriation, the Committee expects the Department to construct housing
to community standards rather than to the standards previously included
in Section 2826 of title 10, United States Code.
CONTINGENCY FUNDING
Most construction projects include a five percent reserve account to
offset any unexpected project costs, called contingency costs. Last
year, the Department did not include contingency costs in their budget
request in an attempt to reduce the overall budget request. This year,
however, the Department has requested funds sufficient to cover these
costs for every project, and the Committee commends them for taking this
action.
SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION, AND MODERNIZATION
The Department is directed to continue describing on form 1390, the
backlog of Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization needs at
installations with future construction projects. For troop housing
requests, the form 1391 should describe any Sustainment, Restoration,
and Modernization conducted in the past two years, and future
requirements for unaccompanied housing at that installation.
Additionally, the forms should include English equivalent measurements
for projects presented in metric measurement. Finally, the rules for
funding repairs of facilities under the Operation and Maintenance
account are described below:
Components of the facility may be repaired by replacement, and such
replacement can be up to current standards or codes.
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 concurrently with repair projects, as long
as the final conjunctively funded project is a complete and usable
facility.
The appropriate service secretary shall notify the appropriate
Committees 21 days prior to carrying out any repair project with an
estimated cost in excess of $7,500,000.
FISCAL YEAR 2002 BARRACKS REQUEST
The Committee recommends appropriating $1,200,525,000 to construct or
modernize 15,466 barracks spaces in fiscal year 2002. This
recommendation is $35,090,000 above the request, and $391,325,000 above
the amount enacted in fiscal year 2001. This recommendation also
constructs or renovates an additional 1,854 barracks spaces, and
maintains the departmental goal of eliminating all inadequate barracks
by 2008.
The following troop housing construction projects are recommended for
fiscal year 2002:
FISCAL YEAR 2002 TROOP HOUSING PROJECTS
Location Request Recommended
Army: $45,000,000 $45,000,000
--------------- ---------------
Subtotal, Army 524,000,000 542,700,000
=============== ===============
Navy/Marine Corps: 21,200,000 21,200,000
--------------- ---------------
Subtotal, Navy 448,935,000 456,265,000
=============== ===============
Air Force: 11,800,000 11,800,000
--------------- ---------------
Subtotal, Air Force 192,500,000 192,500,000
=============== ===============
Navy Reserve: 0 9,060,000
--------------- ---------------
Subtotal, Navy Reserve 0 9,060,000
=============== ===============
Total 1,165,435,000 1,200,525,000
CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTERS
The Committee recommends $42,660,000 for child development centers.
This is $17,200,000 above the budget request, and $466,000 below last
year's enacted level.
Child Development Centers (CDCs) remain critically important for
military families, especially single parents, dual-income families, and
spouses left behind during deployments, and the Committee commends the
individual services on the quality of care CDCs provide. However, the
Committee remains concerned with the limited number of spaces and hours
available at these centers, and encourages the service components to
expand service and increase hours where demand warrants it, and to
provide acceptable alternatives where it does not.
The following child development center projects are provided for
fiscal year 2002:
FISCAL YEAR 2002 CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTERS
Location Request Recommended
Army: $6,800,000 $6,800,000
------------ -------------
Subtotal, Army 19,400,000 25,900,000
============ =============
Navy/Marine Corps: 6,060,000 6,060,000
------------ -------------
Subtotal, Navy 6,060,000 6,060,000
============ =============
Air Force: 0 6,200,000
------------ -------------
Subtotal, Air Force 0 10,700,000
============ =============
Total 25,460,000 42,660,000
HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL FACILITIES
Consistent with the budget request, the Committee recommends
appropriating $198,826,000 for hospitals and medical facilities. The
request includes $193,300,000 for 22 projects, and $5,526,000 for
unspecified minor construction. The recommended appropriation is
$57,589,000 above last year's enacted level.
The Committee recognizes and commends the Army's application of
population-based planning and industry-based facility assessments in
their development of medical and other facility infrastructure repair
and recapitalization requirements. The Committee is interested in how
DoD interprets and further develops requirements into rational,
life-cycle based investments to support the Defense Health Program.
Using the GAO findings in Report NS/IAD 99 100 that outline the needs of
DoD infrastructure, the Department is directed to provide to the
appropriate Committees a strategy for medical facility and installation
asset management and funding by May 15, 2002.
The following hospital and medical facilities are recommended for
fiscal year 2002:
Location Project Title Request Recommended
Alaska-Fort Wainwright Hospital Replacement (Phase III) $18,500,000 $18,500,000
California-Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base Fleet Hospital Support Facilities 3,150,000 3,150,000
California-Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base Replace Medical/Dental Clinic (Horno) 4,300,000 4,300,000
California-Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base Replace Medical/Dental Clinic (Las Flores) 3,800,000 3,800,000
California-Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base Replace Medical/Dental Clinic (Las Pulgas) 4,050,000 4,050,000
California-Twentynine Palms Hospital LDRP Conversion 1,600,000 1,600,000
Colorado-Schriever AFB Medical/Dental Clinic 4,000,000 4,000,000
Florida-Hurlburt Field Add/Alter Medical/Dental Clinic 8,800,000 8,800,000
Florida-Mayport Naval Station Replace Medical/Dental Clinic 24,000,000 24,000,000
Georgia-Albany Marine Corps Logistics Base Replace Medical/Dental Clinic 5,800,000 5,800,000
Georgia-Fort Stewart Consolidated Troop Medical Clinic 11,000,000 11,000,000
Maryland-Andrews AFB Add/Alter Medical/Dental Clinic 7,300,000 7,300,000
Maryland-Andrews AFB Branch Medical/Dental Clinic Relocation 2,950,000 2,950,000
New Mexico-Holloman AFB Medical Clinic Alteration 5,700,000 5,700,000
Texas-Dyess AFB Medical Treatment Facility Alteration 3,300,000 3,300,000
Texas-Fort Hood Add/Alter Hospital 12,200,000 12,200,000
Virginia-Norfolk Add/Alter Branch Medical Clinic 21,000,000 21,000,000
Washington-Whidbey Island Naval Air Station Water Survival Facility 6,600,000 6,600,000
Wyoming-F. E. Warren AFB Medical Clinic Alteration 2,700,000 2,700,000
Germany-Heidelberg Hospital Addition/Clinic Alteration 28,000,000 28,000,000
Greenland-Thule AB Composite Medical Facility Replacement 10,800,000 10,800,000
Portugal-Lajes Field Dental Clinic Replacement 3,750,000 3,750,000
Various Unspecified Minor Construction 5,526,000 5,526,000
--------------------------------------------- -------------- -------------
Total 198,826,000 198,826,000
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, ARMY
xlFiscal year 2001:
Appropriation $907,243,000
Miscellaneous Appropriation (P.L. 106 554) 26,941,000
Supplemental Appropriation (P.L. 107 20) 9,144,000
Total 943,328,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 1,760,541,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 1,702,934,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation +759,606,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate -57,607,000
The Committee recommends a total of $1,702,934,000 for Military
Construction, Army, for fiscal year 2002. This is a decrease of
$57,607,000 below the budget request and an increase of $759,606,000
above the fiscal year 2001 appropriation.
The budget request proposes, as it has for several years, that
chemical demilitarization projects be appropriated in this account.
However, the Committee recommends that the request of $172,500,000 be
appropriated in the ``Military Construction, Defense-wide'' account, in
order to better track expenses, and to avoid distorting the size of the
Army's military construction program.
Pennsylvania-Tobyhanna Army Depot: Training and Conference Center.
--Of the additional amount provided for planning and design within this
account, the Committee directs that not less than $225,000 be made
available to design this facility.
Worldwide Classified-Classified Location: Classified Project. --The
Military Construction Appropriations Act, 2000 (Public Law 106 52)
appropriated $36,400,0000 for a classified project at a classified
location. This project has been cancelled. As a result, the Committee
rescinds $36,400,000 from the ``Military Construction, Army'' account.
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, NAVY
xlFiscal year 2001:
Appropriation $926,224,000
Supplemental Appropriation (P.L. 107 20) 3,187,000
Total 929,411,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 1,071,408,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 1,134,660,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation +205,249,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate +63,252,000
The Committee recommends a total of $1,134,660,000 for Military
Construction, Navy, for fiscal year 2002. This is an increase of
$63,252,000 above the budget request and an increase of $205,249,000
above the fiscal year 2001 appropriation. The Committee rescinds
$19,588,000 of unobligated planning and design funds from this account.
These funds will be used to offset unfunded Navy BRAC requirements.
California-Monterey Naval Postgraduate School: Replacement of
Spanagel Hall. --The Committee is aware that a new academic facility is
needed at the Naval Postgraduate School. Spanagel Hall is almost 50
years old and is costly to maintain. Furthermore, the facility suffers
from substandard classrooms and laboratories incapable of supporting
today's advanced technologies. A new facility is critical to the
continued success of graduate education for the Navy. Therefore, the
Committee encourages the Navy to make this project a priority and
program the requirement within the Future Years Defense Plan.
Mississippi-Meridian NAS: Airfield Lighting. --The Committee is
aware that the existing airfield electrical distribution system at the
Meridian Naval Air Station (NAS) is 40 years old and impedes flight
operations. In addition, the current lighting system in place at
Meridian NAS does not meet Naval Air Systems Command criteria.
Therefore, the Committee encourages the Navy to make this project a
priority within the Future Years Defense Plan.
Washington-Keyport Naval Undersea Warfare Center .--The Committee
understands that a Center for Integrated Undersea Warfare (USW) Systems
Dependability is needed at the Keyport Naval Undersea Warfare Center to
integrate all range communications and worldwide communication links for
the Northwest Range Complex and ensure access to the Complex for all
fleet and Navy customers. Consequently, the Committee encourages the
Navy to make this project a priority within the Future Years Defense
Program.
Japan-Camp Schwab: 3rd Marine Expeditionary Force Training Facility.
--With the additional funds provided for Unspecified Minor Construction,
the Committee directs the Navy to execute a project in the amount of
$1,490,000 to provide this facility.
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE
xlFiscal year 2001:
Appropriation $868,294,000
Miscellaneous Appropriation (P.L. 106 554) 11,974,000
Supplemental Appropriation (P.L. 107 20) 5,065,000
Total 885,333,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 1,068,250,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 1,185,220,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation +299,887,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate +116,970,000
The Committee recommends a total of $1,185,220,000 for Military
Construction, Air Force, for fiscal year 2002. This is an increase of
$116,970,000 above the budget request and an increase of $299,887,000
above the fiscal year 2001 appropriation.
Delaware-Dover Air Force Base. --The Committee recognizes that an
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) compliant fire
station and a modern control tower at Dover Air Force Base are vital to
the mission capability of our armed services. Funding for these projects
will increase safety, efficiency, and effectiveness of Dover Air Force
Base. The Committee considers these projects as top priorities, and
encourages the Air Force to include this project in the Future Years
Defense Plan.
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, DEFENSE-WIDE
xlFiscal year 2001:
Appropriation $812,839,000
Supplemental Appropriation (P.L. 107 20) -14,376,000
Total 798,463,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 694,558,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 852,808,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation +54,345,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate +158,250,000
The Committee recommends a total of $852,808,000 for Military
Construction, Defense-wide, for fiscal year 2002. This is an increase of
$158,250,000 above the budget request and an increase of $54,345,000
above the fiscal year 2001 level.
Aruba-Forward Operating Location. --Division B, Title III, Chapter 3
of the Military Construction Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 106
246) appropriated a total of $10,250,000 to construct a Forward
Operating Location in Aruba. This requirement is no longer needed.
Therefore, the Committee rescinds $10,250,000 from the ``Military
Construction, Defense-wide'' account.
Chemical Demilitarization. --The 1986 National Defense Authorization
Act (Public Law 99 145) authorized the Chemical Demilitarization program
for the purpose of destroying all U.S. stockpiled chemical agents and
weapons by April 29, 2007. In 1991, Congress expanded the law to include
the destruction of chemical warfare material not part of the stockpile,
such as buried munitions and former weapons production facilities. The
Department of the Army is the agent responsible for program management
and oversight. As requested by the President, the Committee recommends
appropriating $172,500,000 for chemical demilitarization projects, which
is $2,900,000 below the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2001. The
following chart displays the fiscal year 2002 funding increments:
State Installation Project Request Recommended
Arkansas Pine Bluff Arsenal Ammunition Demilitarization Facility (Phase VI) $26,000,000 $26,000,000
Colorado Pueblo Depot Ammunition Demilitarization Facility (Phase III) 11,000,000 11,000,000
Indiana Newport Army Ammunition Plant Ammunition Demilitarization Facility (Phase IV) 66,000,000 66,000,000
Kentucky Blue Grass Army Depot Ammunition Demilitarization Facility (Phase II) 3,000,000 3,000,000
Maryland Aberdeen Proving Ground Ammunition Demilitarization Facility (Phase IV) 66,500,000 66,500,000
------------- -------------
Total 172,500,000 172,500,000
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
xlFiscal year 2001:
Appropriation $281,097,000
Miscellaneous Appropriation (P.L. 106 554) 4,490,000
Total 285,587,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 267,389,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 313,348,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation +27,761,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate +45,959,000
The Committee recommends a total of $313,348,000 for Military
Construction, Army National Guard, for fiscal year 2002. This is an
increase of $45,959,000 above the budget request and an increase of
$27,761,000 above the fiscal year 2001 appropriation.
Arkansas-Warren: Readiness Center. --The Committee is aware that a
new armory is needed to accommodate various classrooms, offices and
utility-related rooms for the 3rd Battalion 153 Infantry in Warren,
Arkansas. The Committee encourages the Army National Guard to make this
project a priority within the Future Years Defense Plan.
Michigan-Shiawassee County: Readiness Center. --The Committee
understands that a readiness center in Shiawassee County, Michigan would
alleviate the problems currently associated with soldiers assigned to an
overcrowded, substandard, and aged facility in nearby Owosso. Therefore,
the Committee encourages the Army National Guard to make this project a
priority within the Future Years Defense Plan.
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AIR NATIONAL GUARD
xlFiscal year 2001:
Appropriation $203,381,000
Supplemental Appropriation (P.L. 107 20) 6,700,000
Total 210,081,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 149,072,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 198,803,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation -11,278,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate +49,731,000
The Committee recommends a total of $198,803,000 for Military
Construction, Air National Guard, for fiscal year 2002. This is an
increase of $49,731,000 above the budget request and a decrease of
$11,278,000 below the fiscal year 2001 appropriation.
Montana-Malmstrom AFB: Training and Mobility Storage Facility. --The
Committee understands that a training and mobility storage facility is
needed for the Montana Air National Guard's 219th Red Horse team for
storage of mobility equipment, cargo preparation and processing,
equipment maintenance, and an indoor team training area. Consequently,
the Committee encourages the Air National Guard to make this project a
priority within the Future Years Defense Plan.
South Carolina-McEntire Air National Guard Station: Joint
Headquarters. --Of the additional amount provided for planning and
design in this account, the Committee directs that not less than
$1,331,000 be made available to design this facility.
Delaware-New Castle County Airport .--The Committee recognizes that
an upgraded parking apron/taxiway for the Air National Guard at New
Castle County Airport is vital to the mission capability of our armed
services. Funding for this project will increase safety, efficiency, and
effectiveness of the Air National Guard at New Castle County Airport.
The Committee considers this project a top priority, and encourages the
Air National Guard to include the project in the Future Years Defense
Plan.
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, ARMY RESERVE
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation $108,499,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 111,404,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 167,769,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation +59,270,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate +56,365,000
The Committee recommends a total of $167,769,000 for Military
Construction, Army Reserve, for fiscal year 2002. This is an increase of
$56,365,000 above the budget request and an increase of $59,270,000
above the fiscal year 2001 appropriation.
Pennsylvania-Johnstown: Security Improvements. --With the additional
funds provided for Unspecified Minor Construction, the Committee directs
the Army Reserve to execute a project in the amount of $500,000 to
improve security at this location.
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, NAVAL RESERVE
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation $61,931,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 33,641,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 61,426,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation -505,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate +27,785,000
The Committee recommends a total of $61,426,000 for Military
Construction, Naval Reserve, for fiscal year 2002. This is an increase
of $27,785,000 above the budget request and a decrease of $505,000 below
the fiscal year 2001 appropriation. The Committee rescinds $925,000 of
unobligated planning and design funds from this account. These funds
will be used to offset unfunded Navy BRAC requirements.
Louisiana-New Orleans Joint Reserve Base: Joint Reserve Center and
Runway Extension. --The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the second
phase of the Joint Reserve Center at the New Orleans Joint Reserve Base
(JRB). This joint use center will include the Army Reserve and other
reserve components. As stated in the House Report accompanying the
fiscal year 2001 Military Construction Appropriations Bill (Report 106
614), this multi-service center can dramatically increase deployment,
mobilization, and training capabilities. In addition to this project,
the Department of the Navy is encouraged to complete design of the
4,000-foot runway extension project at the New Orleans JRB and make the
project a priority within the Future Years Defense Plan.
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE RESERVE
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation $36,510,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 53,732,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 81,882,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation +45,372,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate +28,150,000
The Committee recommends a total of $81,882,000 for Military
Construction, Air Force Reserve, for fiscal year 2002. This is an
increase of $28,150,000 above the budget request and an increase of
$45,372,000 above the fiscal year 2001 appropriation.
C 17 Facilities. --Of the additional amount provided for planning
and design within this account, the Committee directs that no less than
$3,000,000 be made available for planning and site assessments of March
AFB and Wright-Patterson AFB in order to provide long-term support for C
17 aircraft within Air Force Reserve Command operations.
NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation $171,622,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 162,600,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 162,600,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation -9,022,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 0
The NATO Security Investment Program (NSIP) is paid for with annual
contributions by NATO member countries. The program finances the costs
of construction needed to support the roles of the major NATO commands.
The investments cover facilities such as airfields, fuel pipelines and
storage, harbors, communications and information systems, radar and
navigational aids, and military headquarters. The U.S. share of the NSIP
for fiscal year 2002 is $199,000,000, or roughly 25% of the total NSIP
program amount of $802,000,000.
Consistent with the budget request, the Committee recommends
$162,600,000 for the NSIP, which is a decrease of $9,022,000 below the
appropriation for fiscal year 2001. To offset the total U.S. share of
the program, $11,000,000 from projected savings from recoupments of
pre-financed projects, and $25,000,000 from prior year obligations, are
available for expenditure.
In each year since 1997, the U.S. has been forced to temporarily
block authorization of projects due to shortfalls in U.S. obligation
authority. The Committee is concerned that the U.S. has been placed in
this position, and has been assured by DoD that the total U.S. program
share of $199,000,000 is sufficient to preclude similar action in the
future. Nevertheless, the Committee intends to monitor the program, and
directs DoD to notify the Committee within 30 days after taking such
action.
FAMILY HOUSING OVERVIEW
Historically, housing for military personnel and their families has
been a low priority for DoD. Consequently, the inventory is old and in
most cases is substandard. Currently, DoD estimates that 180,000 of the
300,000 military family housing units it owns and operates are
substandard, and that it would cost more than $16 billion to improve or
replace them.
In testimony before this subcommittee on March 8, 2001, senior
enlisted service members stated that housing was one of the most
important factors soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines consider when
deciding whether to remain on active duty or to leave the service.
Military spouses who testified before the subcommittee echoed these
statements.
To ameliorate the costs associated with providing decent housing,
Congress authorized the Military Housing Privatization Initiative. The
initiative's intent is to create more housing quickly, to attract
private capital, and to make the private sector responsible for
providing routine maintenance for the term of the contract. Whether the
initiative has been successful is still unclear.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends funding of $1,165,309,000 for family housing
construction for fiscal year 2002, an increase of $50,880,000 above the
budget request, and $261,224,000 above the fiscal year 2001
appropriation. The following chart provides a service component breakout
of the current family housing deficit, both in units and in cost of new
construction, replacement, and improvements:
DEFICITS (CURRENT PROJECTIONS)
[Dollars in thousands]
New construction Replacement Improvement Grand total
Army: 1,368 3,724 26,769 31,861
Navy: 15,600 5,569 18,801 39,970
Marine Corps: 9,449 8,501 7,805 25,755
Air Force: 6,000 26,300 32,900 65,200
Total DOD: 32,417 44,094 86,275 162,786
The fiscal year 2002 request for operation and maintenance totals
$2,939,969,000. The operations and maintenance accounts provide for
annual family housing expenditures for maintenance and repair,
furnishings, management, services, utilities, leasing, interest,
mortgage insurance, and miscellaneous expenses. The Committee recommends
a total of $2,908,409,000 for fiscal year 2002 which is $31,560,000
below the President's request and $154,876,000 above the fiscal year
2001 appropriation.
UTILITY ESTIMATES
The Committee includes a total reduction of $30,000,000 to the
following appropriations because current utility rates are more
favorable than the Department predicted when it submitted its fiscal
year 2002 budget request:
Family Housing Operations and Maintenance, Army -$11,000,000
Family Housing Operations and Maintenance, Navy and Marine Corps -8,000,000
Family Housing Operations and Maintenance, Air Force -11,000,000
--------------
Total -$30,000,000
FOREIGN CURRENCY SAVINGS
Once again, the Committee directs that savings from foreign currency
re-estimates be used to maintain existing family housing units. The
Comptroller is directed to report to the Committee on how these savings
are allocated by December 1, 2002. Likewise, only 10% of funds made
available to the construction account and operation and maintenance
accounts may be transferred between the accounts. Such transfers must be
reported to the Committee within thirty days of such action.
LEASING REPORTING REQUIREMENT
The Committee continues the reporting requirement for both domestic
and foreign leases. For domestic leases (not funded by the Defense
Family Housing Improvement Fund), the Department is directed to report
quarterly on the details of all new or renewal domestic leases entered
into during the previous quarter which exceed $12,000 per unit per year,
including certification that less expensive housing was not available
for lease. For foreign leases, the Department is directed to: perform an
economic analysis on all new leases or lease/contract agreements where
more than 25 units are involved; report the details of new or renewal
lease that exceeds $20,000 per year (as adjusted for foreign currency
fluctuation from October 1, 1987, but not adjusted for inflation) 21
days prior to entering into such an agreement; and base leasing
decisions on the economic analysis.
REPROGRAMMING CRITERIA
The reprogramming criteria that apply to military construction
projects (25 percent of the funded amount or $2,000,000, whichever is
less) also apply to new housing construction projects and improvement
projects over $2,000,000.
FAMILY HOUSING CONSTRUCTION, ARMY
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation $235,437,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 291,542,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 294,042,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation +58,605,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate +2,500,000
The Committee recommends a total of $294,042,000 for Family Housing
Construction, Army, for fiscal year 2002. This appropriation is an
increase of $2,500,000 above the budget request, and an increase of
$58,605,000 above the fiscal year 2001 appropriation. The appropriation
includes $61,700,000 to construct new family housing units, $220,750,000
to improve existing units, and $11,592,000 for planning and design.
California-Presidio of Monterey: Residential Communities Initiative.
--The military family housing at the Presidio of Monterey is scheduled
for privatization under the Residential Communities Initiative (RCI)
program in fiscal year 2002. The scope of the planned project is 1,675
housing units. The National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year
2000 (Public Law 106 65) included a provision, which expanded the types
of entities eligible to participate in the Military Housing
Privatization Initiative (MHPI) to include a State or local government,
or a housing authority of a State or local government. Therefore, the
Committee expects that governmental entities, specifically local housing
authorities, shall have standing to submit proposals and compete fairly
for the privatization of military family housing at the Presidio of
Monterey in California.
FAMILY HOUSING OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY
xlFiscal year 2001:
Appropriation $949,655,000
Supplemental Appropriation (P.L. 107 20) 26,480,000
Total 976,135,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 1,108,991,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 1,096,431,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 total appropriation +120,296,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate -12,560,000
The Committee recommends a total of $1,096,431,000 for Family Housing
Operations and Maintenance, Army, for fiscal year 2002. This
appropriation is a decrease of $12,560,000 below the budget request, and
an increase of $120,296,000 above the fiscal year 2001 appropriation.
Maintenance and Repair: General Quarters. --The Committee defers
$1,560,000 from the maintenance and repair account until further
justification is provided for two general officer quarters projects.
Specifically, the Committee defers $1,200,000 for the maintenance and
repair of Quarters 3 at Fort McNair in Washington, DC; and $360,000 for
the maintenance and repair of Quarters 1000 at Camp Zama in Japan.
FAMILY HOUSING CONSTRUCTION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation $417,235,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 304,400,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 334,780,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 total appropriation -82,455,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate +30,380,000
The Committee recommends a total of $334,780,000 for Family Housing,
Navy and Marine Corps, for fiscal year 2002. This is an increase of
$30,380,000 above the budget request, and a decrease of $82,455,000
below the fiscal year 2001 appropriation. The appropriation includes
$124,847,000 to construct new family housing units, $203,434,000 to
improve existing units, and $6,499,000 for planning and design.
Construction Improvements. --Of the amount provided for construction
improvements, the Secretary of the Navy is directed to execute the
following projects: $11,840,000 for whole-site revitalization (69 units)
at Barking Sands Pacific Missile Range Facility in Hawaii, $6,940,000
for whole house revitalization (124 units) at Westover Air Reserve Base
in Massachusetts, and $1,600,000 to renovate Quarters 1 and Quarters 3
at 8th and I Marine Barracks in Washington, DC.
Washington, DC--8th and I Marine Barracks: Historic Residences.
--The Committee notes the Secretary of the Navy is authorized to use
funds received pursuant to section 2601 of title 10, United States Code,
for the construction, improvement, repair, and maintenance of historic
residences located at the 8th and I Marine barracks. The Committee
directs the Secretary of the Navy to use funds received pursuant to this
authority to offset the total cost of all construction improvement
projects at 8th and I Marine Barracks included in the fiscal year 2002
appropriation.
FAMILY HOUSING OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS
xlFiscal year 2001:
Appropriation $879,625,000
Supplemental Appropriation (P.L. 107 20) 20,300,000
Total 899,925,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 918,095,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 910,095,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 total appropriation +10,170,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate -8,000,000
The Committee recommends a total of $910,095,000 for Family Housing
Operations and Maintenance, Navy and Marine Corps, for fiscal year 2002.
This appropriation is a decrease of $8,000,000 below the budget request,
and an increase of $10,170,000 above the fiscal year 2001 appropriation.
FAMILY HOUSING CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation $251,413,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 518,237,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 536,237,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation +284,824,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate +18,000,000
The Committee recommends a total of $536,237,000 for Family Housing
Construction, Air Force, for fiscal year 2002. This appropriation is an
increase of $18,000,000 above the budget request, and an increase of
$284,824,000 above the fiscal year 2001 appropriation. The appropriation
includes $140,800,000 to construct new family housing units,
$370,879,000 to improve existing units, and $24,558,000 for planning and
design.
Construction Improvements. --Of the amount provided for construction
improvements, the Secretary of the Air Force is directed to execute the
following project: $18,000,000 for Whole Neighborhood Revitalization
(164 units) at Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri.
FAMILY HOUSING OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
xlFiscal year 2001:
Appropriation $819,061,000
Supplemental Appropriation (P.L. 107 20) 13,625,000
Total 832,686,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 869,121,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 858,121,000
Comparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 total appropriation +25,435,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate -11,000,000
The Committee recommends a total of $858,121,000 for Family Housing
Operations and Maintenance, Air Force, for fiscal year 2002. This
appropriation is a decrease of $11,000,000 below the budget request, and
an increase of $25,435,000 above the fiscal year 2001 appropriation.
FAMILY HOUSING, DEFENSE-WIDE
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation $44,787,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 44,012,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 44,012,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation -775,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 0
Consistent with the budget request, the Committee recommends
$44,012,000 for Family Housing, Defense-wide, for fiscal year 2002. This
amount is a decrease of $775,000 below the appropriation for fiscal year
2001. Of this amount $250,000 is for construction, $43,762,000 is for
operations and maintenance.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FAMILY HOUSING IMPROVEMENT FUND
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation 0
Fiscal year 2002 estimate $2,000,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 2,000,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation +2,000,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 0
The Family Housing Improvement Fund is used to build or renovate
family housing by mixing or matching various authorities in the
authorization, and by utilizing private capital and expertise to the
maximum extent possible. The fund, administered as a single account
without fiscal year limitations, contains appropriated and transferred
funds from family housing construction accounts. The total value in
budget authority of all contracts and investments undertaken may not
exceed $850,000,000. Proceeds from investments, leases, and conveyances
are deposited into this fund, and any use of the fund is subject to
annual appropriations. The authority to utilize the alternative
authorities is due to expire on December 31, 2004; however, the
Committee supports the House Armed Services Committee proposal to make
the authorities permanent.
Consistent with the budget request, the Committee recommends
$2,000,000 for the Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund
for fiscal year 2002, which is $2,000,000 above the fiscal year 2001
appropriation. The Department is directed to continue providing
quarterly status reports on each privatization project.
HOMEOWNERS ASSISTANCE FUND, DEFENSE
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation 0
Fiscal year 2002 estimate $10,119,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 10,119,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation +10,119,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 0
The Homeowners Assistance Fund is a non-expiring revolving fund which
provides assistance to homeowners. The fund was established in
recognition that base closure and reduction actions cause adverse
economic impacts on local communities. Service members may access the
fund when military installations are closed or operations are reduced,
and the value of their home diminishes accordingly. The fund receives
funding from several sources: appropriations, borrowing authority,
reimbursable authority, prior fiscal year unobligated balances, revenue
from sale of acquired properties, and recovery of prior year
obligations.
Consistent with the budget request, the Committee appropriates
$10,119,000 for the Homeowners Assistance Fund for fiscal year 2002,
which is $10,119,000 above the appropriation for fiscal year 2001.
Total Fund requirements for fiscal year 2002 are estimated to be
$31,615,000. Additional amounts will be derived from transfers from the
Base Realignment and Closure account, revenue from sales of acquired
property, and prior year unobligated balances.
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACCOUNT
xlFiscal year 2001:
Appropriation $1,022,115,000
Supplemental Appropriation (P.L. 107 20) 9,000,000
Total 1,031,115,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate $532,200,000
Committee recommendation in the bill 552,713,000
xlComparison with:
Fiscal year 2001 appropriation -478,402,000
Fiscal year 2002 estimate 20,513,000
The Defense Authorization Amendments and Base Closure and Realignment
Act of 1988 (Public Law 100 526) and the Defense Base Closure and
Realignment Act of 1990 (Public Law 101 510) enacted legislation that
instituted four base realignment and closure (BRAC) rounds between 1988
and 1995 for the purposes of reducing excess military bases and
infrastructure. The BRAC rounds closed 97 of 495 major domestic
installations, realigned several other facilities, and are estimated to
save $15.5 billion through fiscal year 2001. BRAC legislation requires
DoD to fund the environmental restoration and caretaker costs for
facilities closed in previous BRAC rounds.
The Committee is recommending $552,713,000 for the Base Realignment
and Closure Account for fiscal year 2002, which is $478,402,000 below
the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2001, and $20,513,000 above the
President's request. The additional amount is for previously unfunded
cleanup requirements at Navy BRAC sites. Of the total amount provided,
$544,983,000 is for environmental restoration and caretaker costs of
facilities closed under previous rounds of BRAC. Also included in the
appropriation is $7,730,000 that will be transferred during execution to
the Homeowner's Assistance Program to provide assistance to military
personnel and civilian homeowners affected by base closures.
The Congress has appropriated, to date, a net total of
$21,141,854,000 for the BRAC program from fiscal years 1990 through
2001. Within this total, the Department has allocated $6,868,497,000 for
activities associated with environmental restoration.
The Committee, in appropriating such funds, has provided the
Department with the flexibility to allocate funds by service component,
by functions and by base. Recognizing the complexities of providing for
environmental restoration of properties, the Committee has provided
flexibility to allow the Office of the Secretary of Defense to monitor
program execution to redistribute unobligated balances as appropriate to
avoid delays, and to effect timely execution of environmental cleanup
responsibilities.
California-Fort Ord: Affordable Housing. --There are circumstances
under which local reuse authorities stand to generate substantial
revenues from the conveyance of closed or realigned bases and the
facilities on the installation. In those instances, it is appropriate
for the authority to work cooperatively with the services, and state and
local governments, to ensure that those revenues are directed towards
public purposes.
For example, in Monterey County, California, the local base reuse
authority stands to generate substantial revenues from the conveyance of
Fort Ord by developing new homes on open land as well as retrofitting
existing homes on the base, for which the authority paid nothing, and
selling this housing at prices that reflect the market rates in the
area. Though the plan of the reuse authority is well-intentioned, the
area suffers from a serious shortage of housing that is affordable for
lower and middle-income families. The median home price in the area is
$400,000, which is simply unaffordable to working families making 60 or
80 percent of area median income.
Clearly, it is in the best interests of the local reuse authority and
government to find ways to make affordable homes available for hard
working families, particularly when the property is being conveyed at no
cost to the community. There are many housing programs--private and
public--that undertake multi-income projects with little effort and
minimal effects on profit margins. The reuse authority in Monterey
County is urged to consider including such a program in its overall
reuse plan. In addition, the authority is urged to increase the amount
of affordable housing at the former Fort Ord.
California-Fort Ord: Hazardous Waste from Building Removal. --The
Committee is concerned about the environmental challenges associated
with the base closure re-use issues at the former Fort Ord in California
and the disposal of lead-based paint (LBP), asbestos, and
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) that will be generated during building
removal. Accordingly, the Army shall develop, demonstrate, and validate
innovative technologies to specifically address the remediation of LBP,
asbestos, and PCBs generated from the 12th Street Corridor building
removal at Fort Ord. These technologies may include, but are not
necessarily limited to, thermochemical conversion processes. A
successful technology solution from this effort will also be beneficial
for other closed or realigned defense installations facing similar
challenges.
The Department of the Army shall work with the Fort Ord Reuse
Authority in its efforts to advance the 12th Street Corridor Project and
report on the progress of these technology efforts as part of the
mandated Environmental Quality Technology Report to Congress until this
project is completed, at which time a final report specifically focused
on this initiative will be provided to Congress which should make
suggestions for further building removal activities.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
The Administration proposed eliminating several general provisions
enacted in P.L. 106 246: sections 111, 113, 119, 121, 122, 124, 125, and
128 139. The Committee recommends retaining every provision except for
sections 128 139. Additionally, the Administration proposed a new
provision that allowed the transfer of up to $67,000,000 among any
accounts in the bill. The Committee did not include this provision.
General Provisions included in the bill are as follows:
Section 101 of the General Provisions limits DoD from spending funds
appropriated in this Act for payments under a cost-plus-a-fixed-fee
contract for construction where cost estimates exceed $25,000. An
exception for Alaska is provided.
Section 102 of the General Provisions permits the hire of passenger
motor vehicles.
Section 103 of the General Provisions permits funds to be expended on
the construction of defense access roads under certain circumstances.
Section 104 of the General Provisions prohibits construction of new
bases inside the continental United States without a specific
appropriation.
Section 105 of the General Provisions limits the use of funds for
purchase of land or land easements that exceed 100% of value.
Section 106 of the General Provisions prohibits the use of funds to
acquire land, prepare sites, or install utilities for family housing
except housing for which funds have been appropriated.
Section 107 of the General Provisions limits the use of minor
construction funds to be transferred or relocated from one installation
to another.
Section 108 of the General Provisions prohibits the procurement of
steel unless American producers, fabricators, and manufacturers have
been allowed to compete.
Section 109 of the General Provisions limits appropriations from
being used to pay real property taxes in foreign nations.
Section 110 of the General Provisions prohibits construction of new
bases overseas without prior notification.
Section 111 of the General Provisions establishes a preference for
American architectural and engineering services where the services are
in Japan, NATO member countries, and the Arabian Gulf.
Section 112 of the General Provisions establishes a preference for
American contractors for military construction in the United States
territories and possessions in the Pacific and on Kwajalein Atoll, or in
the Arabian Gulf, except bids by Marshallese contractors for military
construction on Kwajalein Atoll.
Section 113 of the General Provisions requires the Secretary of
Defense to give prior notice to Congress of military exercises where
construction costs exceed $100,000.
Section 114 of the General Provisions limits obligations to no more
than 20% during the last two months of the fiscal year.
Section 115 of the General Provisions permits DoD to make available
funds appropriated in prior years for new projects authorized during the
current session of Congress.
Section 116 of the General Provisions permits the use of expired or
lapsed funds to pay the cost of supervision for any project being
completed with lapsed funds.
Section 117 of the General Provisions permits obligation of funds
from more than one fiscal year to execute a construction project,
provided that the total obligation for such project is consistent with
the total amount appropriated for the project.
Section 118 of the General Provisions allows expired funds to be
transferred to the ``Foreign Currency Fluctuations, Construction,
Defense'' account.
Section 119 of the General Provisions requires the Secretary of
Defense to report annually on actions taken during the current fiscal
year to encourage other member nations of the NATO, Japan, Korea, and
United States allies in the Arabian Gulf to assume a greater share of
defense costs.
Section 120 of the General Provisions authorizes the transfer of
proceeds from ``Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part I'' to the
continuing Base Realignment and Closure accounts.
Section 121 of the General Provisions prohibits the availability of
funds to any entity that violates the Buy American Act.
Section 122 of the General Provisions states the Sense of the
Congress notifying recipients of equipment or products authorized to be
purchased with financial assistance provided in this Act to purchase
American-made equipment and products.
Section 123 of the General Provisions permits the transfer of funds
from Family Housing, Construction accounts to the DOD Family Housing
Improvement Fund.
Section 124 of the General Provisions limits the obligation of funds
for Partnership for Peace Programs.
Section 125 of the General Provisions requires the Secretary of
Defense to notify congressional defense committees of all family housing
privatization solicitations and agreement which contain any clause
providing consideration for base realignment and closure, force
reductions, and extended deployments.
Section 126 of the General Provisions provides transfer authority to
the Homeowners Assistance Program.
Section 127 of the General Provisions requires that appropriations
from this Act be the sole source of all operation and maintenance for
flag and general officer quarter houses and limits the repair on these
quarters to $25,000 per year.
Section 128 of the General Provisions requires the Army, Navy, Marine
Corps, and Air Force to submit a Family Housing Master Plan to the
appropriate committees of Congress by July 1, 2002.
Section 129 of the General Provisions authorizes additional funds for
a project at Masirah Island Airfield in Oman.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT REQUIREMENTS
The following items are included in accordance with various
requirements of the rules of the House of Representatives.
CHANGES IN APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, the following statements are submitted describing the
effect of provisions in the accompanying bill that directly or
indirectly change the application of existing law.
Language is included in various parts of the bill to continue
on-going activities that require annual authorization or additional
legislation, which to date has not been enacted.
The bill includes a number of provisions which place limitations on
the use of funds in the bill or change existing limitations and which
might, under some circumstances, be construed as changing the
application of existing law.
Language is included that enables various appropriations to remain
available for more than one year for some programs for which the basic
authority legislation does not presently authorize such extended
availability.
Language is included under Military Construction, Defense-wide, which
permits the Secretary of Defense to transfer funds to other accounts for
military construction or family housing.
Language is included under Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part
IV, limiting the amount of funds that shall be available solely for
environmental restoration.
Language is included under the General Provisions authorizing
additional funds for a project at Masirah Island Airfield in Oman.
DEFINITION OF PROGRAM, PROJECT AND ACTIVITY
For the purposes of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control
Act of 1985 (Public Law 99 177) as amended by the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act of 1987 (Public Law 100
119), and by the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 (Public Law 101 508),
the following information provides the definitions of the terms
``program, project and activity'' for appropriations contained in the
Military Construction Appropriations Act. The term ``program, project,
and activity'' shall include the most specific level of budget items,
identified in the Military Construction Appropriations Act, 2002, the
accompanying House and Senate reports, and the conference report of the
joint explanatory statement of the managers of the committee of
conference.
In carrying out any sequestrations, the Department of Defense (DoD)
and related agencies shall carry forth the sequestration order in a
manner that would not adversely affect or alter Congressional policies
and priorities established for the DoD and the related agencies, and no
program, project, and activity should be eliminated or reduced to a
level of funding that would adversely affect DoD ability to effectively
continue any program, project, and activity.
APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in the
accompanying bill which are not authorized by law:
[Dollars in thousands]
Agency/Program Last year of authorization Authorization level Appropriations in last year of authorization Appropriations in this bill
Military Construction, Army 2001 $943,328 $943,328 $1,702,934
Military Construction, Navy 2001 929,411 929,411 1,134,660
Military Construction, Air Force 2001 885,333 885,333 1,185,220
Military Construction, Defense-wide 2001 798,463 798,463 852,808
Military Construction, Army National Guard 2001 285,587 285,587 313,348
Military Construction, Air National Guard 2001 210,081 210,081 198,803
Military Construction, Army Reserve 2001 108,499 108,499 167,769
Military Construction, Naval Reserve 2001 61,931 61,931 61,426
Military Construction, Air Force Reserve 2001 36,510 36,510 81,882
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program 2001 171,622 171,622 162,600
Family Housing, Construction, Army 2001 235,437 235,437 294,042
Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Army 2001 976,135 976,135 1,096,431
Family Housing, Construction, Navy and Marine Corps 2001 417,235 417,235 334,780
Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Navy and Marine Corps 2001 899,925 899,925 910,095
Family Housing, Construction, Air Force 2001 251,413 251,413 536,237
Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Air Force 2001 832,686 832,686 858,121
Family Housing, Defense-wide 2001 44,787 44,787 44,012
Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund 2001 0 0 2,000
Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense 2001 0 0 10,119
Base Realignment and Closure 2001 1,031,115 1,031,115 552,713
TRANSFER OF FUNDS
Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, a statement is required describing the transfer of
funds provided in the accompanying bill. Sections 115, 118, 120, 123,
126, and 129 of the General Provisions, and language included under
``Military Construction, Defense-wide'' provide certain transfer
authority.
RESCISSION OF FUNDS
In compliance with clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee recommends rescissions of:
Military Construction, Army--$36,400,000
Military Construction, Navy--$19,588,000
Military Construction, Naval Reserve--$925,000
Military Construction, Defense-Wide--$10,250,000
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY
Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives states that:
Each report of a committee on a bill or joint
resolution of a public character shall include a statement
citing the specific powers granted to the Congress in the
Constitution to enact the law proposed by the bill or joint
resolution.
The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to report this
legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I of the Constitution
of the United States of America which states:
No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in
consequence of Appropriations made by law * * *
Appropriations contained in this bill are made pursuant to this
specific power granted by the Constitution.
COMPARISONS WITH BUDGET RESOLUTION
Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an explanation of compliance with section
308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of
1974 (Public Law 93 344), as amended, which requires that the report
accompanying a bill providing new budget authority contain a statement
detailing how that authority compares with the reports submitted under
section 302 of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent
resolution on the budget for the fiscal year from the Committee's
section of 302(a) allocation.
[In millions of dollars]
302(b) allocation This bill
Budget authority Outlays Budget authority Outlays
Discretionary $10,500 $9,203 $10,500 $9,202
Mandatory
FIVE-YEAR PROJECTION OF OUTLAYS
In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional Budget
and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93 344), as amended, the
following table contains five-year projections associated with the
budget authority provided in the accompanying bill:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget authority, fiscal year 2002 $10,500,000
Outlays:
2,690,000
4,042,000
2,337,000
785,000
598,000
The bill will not affect the levels of revenues, tax expenditures,
direct loan obligations, or primary loan guarantee commitments under
existing law.
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional Budget
and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93 344), as amended, the
financial assistance to State and local governments is as follows:
[In millions of dollars]
New budget authority 0
Fiscal year 2000 outlays resulting therefrom 0
STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, the following is a statement of general performance
goals and objectives for which this measure authorizes funding:
The Committee on Appropriations considers program performance,
including a program's success in developing and attaining
outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding
recommendations.
FULL COMMITTEE VOTES
Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House
of Representatives, the results of each roll call vote on an amendment
or on the motion to report, together with the names of those voting for
and those voting against, are printed below:
There were no recorded votes.
STATE LIST
The following is a complete listing, by State and country, of the
Committee's recommendations for military construction and family housing
projects:
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
