From the House Reports Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] 104th Congress Report HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 104-591 _______________________________________________________________________ MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 1997 _______ May 23, 1996.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed _______________________________________________________________________ Mrs. Vucanovich, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the following R E P O R T [To accompany H.R. 3517] 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, 1997. CONTENTS Page Summary of Committee Recommendation.............................. 2 Conformance with Authorization Bill.............................. 3 Permanent Party Unaccompanied Personnel Housing.................. 3 Child Development Centers........................................ 6 Hospital and Medical Facilities.................................. 7 Environmental Compliance Projects................................ 8 Demolition of Excess Facilities.................................. 8 Crumbling Infrastructure......................................... 9 European Construction............................................ 10 Real Property Maintenance........................................ 10 Program, Project and Activity.................................... 10 Military Construction: Army......................................................... 11 Navy......................................................... 12 Air Force.................................................... 13 Defense-wide................................................. 14 Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund................................... 20 Reserve Components........................................... 21 NATO Security Investment Program................................. 24 Family Housing Overview.......................................... 24 Family Housing: Army......................................................... 29 Navy......................................................... 30 Air Force.................................................... 31 Defense-wide................................................. 33 Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund............ 33 Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense.............................. 34 Base Realignment and Closure: Overview..................................................... 34 Part I....................................................... 43 Part II...................................................... 43 Part III..................................................... 44 Part IV...................................................... 44 General Provisions............................................... 44 Changes in Application of Existing Law........................... 45 Compliance with Rule XIII--Clause 3.............................. 47 Appropriations Not Authorized by Law............................. 47 Transfer of Funds................................................ 48 Rescission of Funds.............................................. 48 Inflationary Impact Statement.................................... 48 Comparisons with Budget Resolution............................... 48 Advance Spending Authority....................................... 48 Five-Year Projection of Outlays.................................. 48 Financial Assistance............................................. 49 State List....................................................... 49 Summary of Committee Recommendation The Administration's fiscal year 1997 budget request of $9,132,309,000 represents a decrease of $2,044,700,000, or 18 percent, from the fiscal year 1996 appropriation of $11,177,009,000. While there are aspects of the budget request that help to solve the long-term infrastructure problems faced by the Department of Defense, the Committee has some concerns about the budget request overall. For example, the Administration has committed itself to a serious barracks revitalization program. Yet, the request for barracks construction is $64,492,000 below last year's appropriation. And, family housing construction and operation and maintenance accounts are reduced by $405,339,000. The budget request would provide $714,246,000 for family housing construction, a reduction of $228,878,000 from current levels. Of this amount, $369,587,000 is requested for construction of new family housing units, a reduction of $97,337,000, or 21 percent, from current spending. And, the request for improvements to existing family housing units is reduced by $131,177,000, or 30 percent from the current program. In addition, the budget request would reduce maintenance of family housing units a total of $112,331,000. The lack of funding commitment by the Administration's proposal is especially of concern due to the findings of the Quality of Life Task Force, chaired by former Secretary of the Army Jack Marsh. In its report, the task force noted that 62 percent of troop housing spaces and 64 percent of family housing units are currently unsuitable. The Department of Defense estimates the cost of correcting these deficiencies to be approximately $40,000,000,000. The Committee believes it is imperative to address the severe backlog in readiness, revitalization and quality of life projects. The Committee has recommended an additional $900,000,000 above the Administration's fiscal year 1997 budget request to fund the planning and construction of several barracks, family housing and operational facilities. Included in this additional funding is: --$214,116,000 for 21 additional unaccompanied housing projects; --$303,152,000 for new construction and improvements to family housing units, benefitting approximately 3,700 military families; --$100,000,000 to bring family housing maintenance of real property in line with current spending; --$28,260,000 for nine child development centers; --$25,000,000 to support the privatization of family housing and unaccompanied personnel housing; --$155,990,000 for operational and training facilities for the active components; and, --$84,066,000 for operational, training, environmental compliance and safety related activities for the reserve components. The total recommended appropriation for fiscal year 1997 is $10,032,309,000, a reduction of $1,144,700,000, or ten percent, from fiscal year 1996 funding and an increase of $900,000,000 above the fiscal year 1997 budget request. Conformance with Authorization Bill The House passed H.R. 3230, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1997, on May 15, 1996, which contains the authorization for the military construction, family housing and base realignment and closure accounts included in this bill. Because action on the authorization had not been completed at the time this bill was prepared, the Committee is considering only projects recommended for authorization in H.R. 3230. All projects included in this bill are approved subject to authorization. Permanent Party Unaccompanied Personnel Housing The Department of Defense estimates that 44 percent of the enlisted force and 27 percent of the officers are single or unaccompanied personnel. Although 18 percent live in private off-base housing, the Department has over 612,000 men and women living in permanent party unaccompanied personnel housing. Approximately one-half of the barracks were built 30 or more years ago, with an average age of over 40 years. And, 116,000 spaces are still serviced by gang latrines. Of the total inventory over 62% are considered substandard and continuous maintenance is necessary to deal with such problems as asbestos, corroded pipes, inadequate ventilation, faulty heating and cooling systems, and peeling lead-based paint. The following chart, compiled by the Department of Defense, provides a breakout by Service of the deficit of new construction, replacement and renovation: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- New construction Replacement Renovation Total deficit deficit deficit ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Army......................................................... 800 50,000 78,000 128,800 Navy......................................................... 30,000 7,000 35,600 72,600 Air Force.................................................... 29,000 3,000 700 32,700 Marine Corps................................................. 11,005 14,270 33,016 58,291 -------------------------------------------------- Total.................................................. 70,805 74,270 147,316 292,391 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Department estimates with approximately 238,000 unaccompanied permanent party personnel housed in barracks with open bay, gang latrine, or three-per-room configurations, and with the cost to construct a ``1 plus 1'' living space under the new standard estimated at $52,000, approximately $12,400,000,000 is necessary to buy out this deficit. It will take over twenty years to implement the ``1 plus 1'' standard and achieve desired end states. The Committee understands that improving troop housing does not lie solely in new construction and renovations. Retiring the backlog of maintenance and repair, which is under the jurisdiction of the National Security Subcommittee, and an adequate funding commitment to prevent future backlogs plays an important role in this process. It is necessary to use many different approaches to help meet the unaccompanied housing need. The challenge is for a sustained overall commitment, at funding levels that will reduce the backlog of substandard spaces, reduce the housing deficits, and increase the quality of living conditions in a reasonable period of time. In addition to construction funding, the Committee has also recommended $10,000,000 for start-up costs to the Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund which is discussed in detail later in this report. It is the Committee's intention that the Department aggressively apply these new authorities to obtain and use private capital to improve bachelor living conditions in a more reasonable time frame. defense science board task force on quality of life The Defense Science Board Task Force on Quality of Life, chaired by the Honorable John O. Marsh, Jr. cited five major issues affecting the standard of living for single and unaccompanied service members. These issues include broad policies for bachelor housing; policy governing required and allowed residents in barracks; suitability criteria for bachelor housing; funding for bachelor housing; and management and operation of barracks. The Committee agrees that these issues are inter-related and must be addressed as a package. Many options presented by the Task Force can be accomplished within the Department and do not require legislative action. The Department is to submit to the Committee a thorough implementation plan for these recommendations by January 15, 1997. ``1 plus 1'' barracks standard In November 1995, the Secretary of Defense approved the new barracks construction standard, referred to as ``1 plus 1''. This standard would provide a module consisting of two 118 net square feet (NSF) rooms, a bath and a kitchenette. Two E1's through E4's would be assigned to the module (each having a private 118 NSF room) and share a bath and a kitchenette. One E5 through E9 would be assigned to a module which would provide a private bath, kitchenette and a living room. The estimated cost for this standard is $52,000 per space. The Committee notes that while the Services strongly endorse the ``1 plus 1'' concept, concrete funding goals need to be established and maintained to meet the standard in a timely manner. The Navy and Air Force have adequately programmed for fiscal year 1997, yet the Army has only programmed 85% of its requirement. While there are many competing factors, such as failing infrastructure, there is a necessity to reduce the troop housing deficits and the Committee expects the Services to program properly to eliminate this deficit, even if it means granting a waiver to the ``1 plus 1'' concept. The Committee strongly believes that the development of barracks standard implementation master plans, installation-by- installation, is necessary. The Air Force has already embarked on such an effort and, therefore, the Committee directs the Army, Navy and Marine Corps to initiate such master plans. The Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Installations is to monitor this action and report to the Committee by December 16, 1996 of the individual Service's progress. In addition, the Committee encourages the individual Services to seek to establish site adaptable design for the new barrack standard whenever possible. This should result in significant savings in planning and design for barracks projects. The Department is to report to the Committee by February 1, 1997 on its efforts to standardize design. fiscal year 1997 barracks request The Department of Defense has requested $561,638,000 to construct or modernize 41 barracks in fiscal year 1997. This is a reduction of $64,492,000 from the enacted fiscal year 1996 appropriation. The Committee strongly supports a steady flow of funding to rectify the housing situation and directs the Department to maintain current funding levels in its fiscal year 1998 budget request. The Committee has approved the request of $561,638,000 in full. In order to maintain current funding levels and to help alleviate the deficit, an additional $214,116,000 is recommended. The locations were determined by service priorities and all projects are capable of construction during fiscal year 1997. The total appropriation for unaccompanied housing recommended in this bill is $775,754,000. The following troop housing construction projects are recommended for fiscal year 1997: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Location Request Recommended ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Army: Fort Huachuca, Arizona........ 0 $21,000,000 Fort Carson, Colorado......... $13,000,000 13,000,000 Fort Benning, Georgia......... 44,000,000 44,000,000 Fort McPherson, Georgia....... 0 9,100,000 Fort Riley, Kansas............ 26,000,000 26,000,000 Fort Campbell, Kentucky....... 35,000,000 35,000,000 Fort Knox, Kentucky........... 0 20,500,000 Fort Hood, Texas.............. 35,000,000 35,000,000 Fort Lewis, Washington........ 49,000,000 49,000,000 Taylor Barracks, Mannheim, Germany...................... 0 9,300,000 Spinelli Barracks, Mannheim, Germany...................... 0 8,100,000 Camp Casey, Korea............. 16,000,000 16,000,000 Camp Red Cloud, Korea......... 14,000,000 14,000,000 ------------------------------------- Subtotal, Army.............. 232,000,000 300,000,000 ===================================== Navy/Naval Reserve: Yuma MCAS, Arizona............ 0 14,600,000 Camp Pendleton, California.... 10,100,000 10,100,000 Camp Pendleton, California.... 11,800,000 11,800,000 Camp Pendleton, California.... 12,500,000 12,500,000 Port Hueneme, California...... 0 7,700,000 San Clemente, California...... 17,000,000 17,000,000 New London, Connecticut....... 10,600,000 10,600,000 Washington Naval District, District of Columbia......... 19,300,000 19,300,000 Kaneohe Bay MCAS, Hawaii...... 0 20,080,000 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.......... 19,600,000 19,600,000 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.......... 30,500,000 30,500,000 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.......... 5,390,000 5,390,000 Great Lakes, Illinois......... 22,900,000 22,900,000 Great Lakes NH, Illinois...... 0 15,200,000 Crane NSWC, Indiana........... 0 5,000,000 New Orleans NSA, Louisiana.... 0 8,956,000 Fallon NAS, Nevada............ 0 14,800,000 Camp Lejeune, North Carolina.. 5,190,000 5,190,000 Ingleside, Texas.............. 9,600,000 9,600,000 Dahlgren NSWC, Virginia....... 0 8,030,000 Dam Neck FCTC, Virginia....... 0 7,000,000 Everett, Washington........... 10,940,000 10,940,000 Souda Bay (Crete), Greece..... 7,050,000 7,050,000 Souda Bay (Crete), Greece..... 0 4,000,000 Sigonella, Italy.............. 15,700,000 15,700,000 ------------------------------------- Subtotal, Navy.............. 208,170,000 313,536,000 ===================================== Air Force: Luke AFB, Arizona............. 0 6,700,000 Travis AFB, California........ 7,980,000 7,980,000 Travis AFB, California........ 0 8,250,000 Peterson AFB, Colorado........ 8,350,000 8,350,000 Eglin AFB Aux 9, Florida...... 6,825,000 6,825,000 Robins AFB, Georgia........... 0 4,000,000 Mountain Home AFB, Idaho...... 0 9,300,000 McConnell AFB, Kansas......... 8,480,000 8,480,000 McConnell AFB, Kansas......... 0 7,100,000 Andrews AFB, Maryland......... 5,990,000 5,990,000 Keesler AFB, Mississippi...... 14,465,000 14,465,000 McGuire AFB, New Jersey....... 8,080,000 8,080,000 Seymour Johnson AFB, North Carolina..................... 1,925,000 1,925,000 Charleston AFB, South Carolina 8,180,000 8,180,000 Brooks AFB, Texas............. 0 5,400,000 Dyess AFB, Texas.............. 5,895,000 5,895,000 Lackland AFB, Texas........... 4,613,000 4,613,000 McChord AFB, Washington....... 5,390,000 5,390,000 Ramstein AB, Germany.......... 5,370,000 5,370,000 Osan AB, Korea................ 9,780,000 9,780,000 Incirlik AB, Turkey........... 1,740,000 1,740,000 RAF Lakenheath, UK............ 7,950,000 7,950,000 RAF Lakenheath, UK............ 4,260,000 4,260,000 RAF Mildenhall, UK............ 6,195,000 6,195,000 ------------------------------------- Subtotal, Air Force......... 121,468,000 162,218,000 ===================================== Total....................... 561,638,000 775,754,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Child Development Centers The Committee has recommended an additional $28,260,000 above the budget estimate of $6,165,000 for a total appropriation of $34,425,000 for new construction, or improvements, for child development centers. The Committee recognizes the increased importance of these centers due to the rising number of single military parents, dual military couples and military personnel with a civilian employed spouse. The following child development center projects are provided for fiscal year 1997: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Location Request Recommended ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Army: Fort Carson, Colorado......... 0 $4,550,000 Fort Eustis, Virginia......... 0 3,550,000 Darmstadt (Lincoln Village), Germany...................... 0 7,300,000 ------------------------------------- Subtotal.................... 0 15,400,000 ===================================== Navy/Naval Reserve: Twentynine Palms MarCorp Air- Grnd Comb Ctr, California.... $4,020,000 4,020,000 Albany MCLB, Georgia.......... 0 1,630,000 Kings Bay NSB, Georgia........ 0 1,550,000 New Orleans NSA, Louisiana.... 0 1,330,000 Fallon NAS, Nevada............ 0 1,400,000 New River MCAS, North Carolina 0 3,250,000 ------------------------------------- Subtotal.................... 4,020,000 13,180,000 ===================================== --Air Force: F.E. Warren AFB, Wyoming...... 0 3,700,000 Robins AFB, Georgia........... 2,145,000 2,145,000 ------------------------------------- Subtotal.................... 2,145,000 5,845,000 ===================================== Total....................... 6,165,000 34,425,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hospital and Medical Facilities The budget request includes $332,642,000 for 14 projects and for unspecified minor construction to provide hospital and medical facilities, including both treatment facilities and medical research and development facilities. The Committee recommends a total of $312,642,000 for the requested items. The reduction of $20,000,000 from the budget request is the result of limiting funds for the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research to the amount of construction that can be executed during fiscal year 1997. The following hospital and medical projects are provided for fiscal year 1997: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Location Project title Recommended ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Alabama-Maxwell AFB............ Ambulatory Health Care $25,000,000 Center, Phase II. California-Camp Pendleton MCB.. Branch Medical Clinic 3,300,000 (Edson Range)-. California-NAS Lemoore......... Hospital Replacement---- 38,000,000 . Florida-Key West NAS........... Medical/Dental Clinic 13,600,000 Replacement--. Maryland-Andrews AFB........... Life Safety/Emergency 15,500,000 Room Upgrade--. Maryland-Forest Glen (Walter Reed Army Institute of Research).................... Army Institute of 72,000,000 Research, Phase IV. North Carolina-Fort Bragg...... Cons Troop Med Clinic 11,400,000 (Smoke Bomb Hill)----. Hospital Replacement, 89,000,000 Phase IV-----. South Carolina-Charleston AFB.. WRM/BEE Facility---.... 1,300,000 Texas-Fort Bliss............... Life Safety Upgrade----- 6,600,000 . Texas-Fort Hood................ Social Work Services 1,950,000 Clinic----. Virginia-Norfolk NAS........... Environmental 1,250,000 Preventive Med Unit Addition-. Virginia-Portsmouth Naval Hospital Replacement, 24,000,000 Hospital. Phase VIII-. Bahrain Island-ASU Bahrain..... Medical/Dental Clinic--- 4,600,000 -. Worldwide-Various Locations.... Unspecified Minor 5,142,000 Construction--. --------------- Total.................... ....................... 312,642,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Environmental Compliance Projects The total budget request and appropriation for 31 projects needed to meet environmental compliance is $88,298,000. The Federal Facilities Compliance Act requires all federal facilities to meet both federal and State standards. These projects are considered Class I violations and are out of compliance; have received an enforcement action from the Environmental Protection Agency, the State, or local authority; and/or a compliance agreement has been signed or consent order received. Environmental projects that are Class I violations are required to be funded, and therefore are placed at the top of the priority list. Following is a listing of all environmental compliance projects funded in this bill: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Installation Project title Recommended ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Army: Fort Lewis, WA............. Tank Trail Erosion $2,000,000 Mitigation. Navy: NSB New London, CT......... Hazardous Materials 3,230,000 Warehouse. MCB Camp Lejeune, NC....... Wastewater Treatment 3,230,000 Plant (Phase III). NS Norfolk, VA............. Oily Waste Collection 10,200,000 System. NAWC Patuxent River, MD.... Wastewater Treatment 1,270,000 Plant Upgrade. NS San Diego, CA........... Oily Waste Collection 7,050,000 Facility. MCCOMBDEV Quantico,VA...... Sanitary Landfill...... 8,930,000 Air Force: Arnold AFB, TN............. Upgrade Engine Test 3,790,000 Facility Refrig System. Barksdale AFB, LA.......... Upgrade Sanitary Sewer 2,390,000 System. Beale AFB, CA.............. Landfill Closure....... 6,735,000 Edwards AFB, CA............ Convert Boilers........ 3,120,000 Elmendorf AFB, AK.......... Upgrade Storm Drainage 2,095,000 System. Langley AFB, VA............ Upgrade Sanitary Sewer 2,845,000 System. Little Rock AFB, AR........ Upgrade Sanitary Sewer 2,535,000 System. Minot AFB, ND.............. Underground Fuel 3,940,000 Storage Tanks, Missile Facility. Pope AFB, NC............... Upgrade Sanitary Sewer 2,065,000 System. Shaw AFB, SC............... Upgrade Sanitary Sewer 2,365,000 System. Army National Guard: Camp Atterbury, IN......... Central Vehicle Wash 4,747,000 Facility. Air National Guard: Jacksonville IAP, FL....... Upgrade Heating Plants 680,000 and Chillers. Fort Wayne IAP, IN......... Upgrade Drainage System 480,000 Barnes Municipal Apt, MA... Upgrade Heating 500,000 Distribution System. Selfridge ANGB, MI......... Upgrade Heating Systems 3,000,000 Francis S. Gabreski Apt, NY- Aircraft Washing and 659,000 . Deicing Facility---. Fort Worth JRB, TX......... Fuel Cell and Corrosion 3,450,000 Control Facility---. Volk Field ANGB, WI........ Upgrade Sanitary Sewer 850,000 System. Puerto Rico IAP, PR........ Refueling Vehicle Shop 450,000 and Paint Bay- --. Air Force Reserve: Homestead ARB, FL.......... Fire Training Facility. 1,300,000 Niagara Falls ARS, NY...... Fire Training Facility. 1,600,000 Deicing Facility....... 342,000 Youngstown ARS, OH......... Fire Training Facility. 1,500,000 Billy Mitchell Field, WI... Improve Storm Drainage 950,000 System. --------------- Total.................... ....................... 88,298,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Demolition of Excess Facilities The Committee has recommended a total of $30,000,000 for the purpose of demolishing excess facilities. The authority for such demolition is contained in H.R. 3230, as passed the House on May 15, 1996. Such funds may only be used when the Service Secretary has determined that the facility is excess to the needs of the military department or agency concerned and not suitable for reuse. Any demolition project exceeding $500,000 may not be carried out under this appropriation unless approved in advance by the Service Secretary and a 21-day notification is submitted to the Appropriations Committees. The Committee notes that demolition projects involving military family housing, those as a result of a base closure and realignment action and as a result of environmental contamination may not be executed with funds appropriated under this category. In addition, this appropriation is in no way meant to preclude the inclusion of demolition of facilities as an integral part of a specific military construction project when the demolition is required for accomplishment of the intent of that construction project. These funds are to be used solely for demolition purposes and it is the Committee's intention they will not be used as a source for reprogrammings. However, savings from specific projects may be reprogrammed for this purpose, not to exceed 125% of the original appropriation as contained in the enabling legislation. The individual Service Secretaries are to report to the Committee on Appropriations the overall strategy for use of these funds within thirty days of enactment of this Act. The Committee recommends a total of $30,000,000 for demolition distributed as follows: Component Recommendation Army.................................................... $10,000,000 Navy.................................................... 10,000,000 Air Force............................................... 10,000,000 -------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________ Total............................................... 30,000,000 Crumbling Infrastructure At their core, military installations are very similar to cities. They rely upon transportation networks such as railroads, vehicular roads, air operations, and seaport facilities. They cannot function without communications systems--telephone lines (both open and secure), satellite uplinks and downlinks. They require more mundane but essential day-to-day support--water and sewer systems, electrical generation and distribution systems, and climate control. The Committee is concerned over indications that military construction projects to provide such infrastructure support do not receive sufficient priority. It appears that there is great interest in improving the physical plant of the Department of Defense, with too little attention paid to the supporting infrastructure. Reports are beginning to surface regarding aging installations with crumbling supporting facilities. This deteriorating base infrastructure has serious implications for the ability of the military to meet mission requirements. The Department has recognized this need in the case of the Pentagon building itself, and has embarked on a multi-year effort to renovate the facility and its infrastructure. The Committee supports this initiative, but notes that most military installations pre-date the Pentagon building, and suffer similar deficiencies or worse. The Committee encourages the Department and the Services to assess the need for installation-wide infrastructure projects and to program and budget for this work. European Construction The Committee has recommended the requested $127,071,000 and an additional $48,800,000, for a total of $175,871,000 for construction in Europe. This includes 25 quality of life and 10 operational projects. Since fiscal year 1990, U.S. troops stationed in Europe have drawn-down from 314,200 personnel to 109,000 and the number of installations has been significantly reduced from 1,387 to 582. The reshaping of U.S. force structure and installations is complete. While overall infrastructure have been reduced, the European Command is faced with increased demands on quality of life facilities and the need for changing, modernizing, or increasing operational facility requirements. Obsolete WWII-era utilities do not match modern loads and require frequent and costly repair and maintenance. Outdated electrical, heating, sanitary and water distribution systems are endemic throughout the European Command. And, safety and environmental concerns exist at older facilities that are in need of revitalization and modernization. Deplorable family housing conditions exist and require immediate attention. The majority of these units have never been renovated since they were built in the 1950s. Of the 35,885 family housing units in the inventory, 29,764 or 83% of the total inventory is in need of renovation at an estimated cost of over $3,000,000,000. The Command's unaccompanied personnel housing inventory is 37,624 spaces with 15,540, or 41%, classified as substandard and still serviced by gang latrines, and 21,390, or 58%, in need of renovation. Now that a stable European force structure is in place, and facing frequent deployments, it is imperative to reinvest in quality of life and operational facilities, both essential components of readiness, in Europe. While the Committee realizes the benefits of the Payment-in-Kind and residual value programs, it strongly believes these must be supplemented with traditional military construction and family housing funds. Funding for improvements in Europe must be made in order not to deprive our service members and their families of decent living and working conditions. Real Property Maintenance In future budget submissions, the Department is directed to provide the real property maintenance backlog at all installations for which there is a requested construction project. This information is to be provided on Form 1390. In addition, for all troop housing requests, the Form 1391 is to show all real property maintenance conducted in the past two years and all future requirements for unaccompanied housing at that installation. Program, Project and Activity For the purposes of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177) as amended by the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act of 1987, (Public Law 100-119), the term ``Program, Project and Activity'' will continue to be defined as the appropriation account. Military Construction, Army Fiscal year 1996:- Appropriation....................................... $633,814,000- Rescission.......................................... -6,385,000-- Net............................................. 627,429,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 434,723,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 603,584,000 Comparison with:- Fiscal year 1996 net appropriation.................. -23,845,000- Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... +168,861,000 The Committee recommends a total of $603,584,000 for Military Construction, Army for fiscal year 1997. This is an increase of $168,861,000 above the budget request for fiscal year 1997, and a decrease of $23,845,000 below the net appropriation for 1996. California--Barstow-Daggett: Heliport The Committee recommends $7,000,000 to complete funding of a heliport for the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, California, to be located at Barstow-Daggett, California. Additional funds for this project are available from prior year unobligated appropriations. The Committee notes that section 2105 of the Defense Authorization Act of 1997 (H.R. 3230, as passed the House on May 15, 1996) corrects the authorized uses of funds appropriated for fiscal years 1995 and 1996 for construction of an air field at Barstow-Daggett, in order to permit the use of such amounts for the construction of a heliport facility at the same location for maintenance and repair of equipment assigned to the National Training Center and Fort Irwin. The Committee concurs with this correction, and directs that fiscal year 1994 planning and design funds in the amount of $2,400,000, as well as fiscal year 1995 funds in the amount of $10,000,000 and fiscal year 1996 funds in the amount of $10,000,000 shall be available for construction of this heliport in lieu of the air field. No reprogramming request is required to accomplish the execution of this project. Military Traffic Management Command Relocations The 1995 Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC IV) recommended closing the Bayonne, New Jersey Military Ocean Terminal and relocating the Military Traffic Management Command Eastern Area Command Headquarters and the traffic management portion of the 1301st Major Port Command ``to a location to be determined''. The Commission's report also recommended closing the Oakland, California Army Base and relocating the Military Traffic Management Command Western Area Command Headquarters and the 1302nd Major Port Command ``to locations to be determined''. No notification has been submitted to Congress regarding the plans for these relocations. Therefore the Army is directed to report to the Committee on the current status of these relocations, options considered for receiving locations, the approximate number of civilian and military personnel to be transferred, the military construction requirement (if any), and the timetable for relocation and closure. This report is to be submitted not later than January 1, 1997. european construction The Secretary of the Army is directed to report to the Committee on Appropriations by January 1, 1997 on the overall condition of Army facilities and family housing in Europe. This report is to contain a thorough review of the needs, along with what construction is necessary to rectify the deplorable existing conditions. The Committee has recommended $44,800,000 for two barracks projects, three family housing improvement projects and one child development center. It is imperative that the Army begin to program and budget for the necessary projects in fiscal year 1998 to begin to address this deficiency. Southern Command The Panama Canal Treaty of 1977 requires the withdrawal of United States military forces from Panama by December 31, 1999, including the relocation of the Southern Command (SOUTHCOM). The Army plans to relocate SOUTHCOM headquarters to the Miami, Florida area with personnel movements occurring from March to October 1997, and the main body of the headquarters personnel moving in September of 1997. This entire SOUTHCOM headquarters relocation will be accomplished by lease, with no military construction appropriations requirement. The Committee directs the Army to report by January 1, 1997, on the book value of all facilities returned to the Government of Panama through September 30, 1996. In addition, the Committee directs the Army to report on the status of negotiations toward a base rights agreement and a Status of Forces Agreement that will take effect on January 1, 2000. This report is to be submitted by January 1, 1997, and semi-annually thereafter. Korea The Army's ``Headquarters, Real Property Planning and Analysis'' system shows a total facilities deficit of $5,600,000,000 in Korea, of which $721,700,000 is for barracks. The Committee directs the Army to report on this finding in some detail, together with the plan for correcting this deficiency through a combination of military construction funding, host nation funding via the Combined Defense Improvement Program (CDIP) and the Republic of Korea Funded Construction (ROKFC) program, and other approaches. This report is to be submitted by January 1, 1997. Military Construction, Navy (including rescissions) Fiscal year 1996: Appropriation....................................... $554,636,000 Rescission.......................................... -6,385,000 Net............................................. 548,251,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 525,346,000 Committee recommendation in the bill: Appropriation....................................... 724,476,000 Rescissions......................................... -12,000,000 Net............................................. 712,476,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 net appropriation.................. +164,225,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... +187,130,000 The Committee recommends a net total of $712,476,000 for Military Construction, Navy for fiscal year 1997. This is an increase of $187,130,000 above the budget request for fiscal year 1997, and an increase of $164,225,000 above the net appropriation for fiscal year 1996. rescissions The budget request included a general reduction to the fiscal year 1997 Navy Military Construction account of $12,000,000. The Committee has denied this general reduction and has recommended rescissions totaling $12,000,000 resulting from contract savings or previously approved projects which are no longer required. The following projects are the sources for the rescissions: Fiscal Year 1992: Iceland-NAS Keflavik: Fuel Facilities (Phase VII)... $6,900,000 Fiscal Year 1993: Virginia-Naval Supply Center, Norfolk: Cold Storage Warehouse......................................... 2,800,000 Fiscal Year 1994: Pennsylvania-Naval Shipyard Philadelphia: Asbestos Removal Facility.................................. 2,300,000 Pollution Abatement Projects The Navy is directed to provide individual 1391 budget justification documents for each future pollution abatement project. New Jersey--NWS Earle: Explosive Truck Holding Yard and Pier 4 Extension The Committee approves the reprogramming request dated March 28, 1996 in the amount of $2,300,000 for the Explosive Truck Holding Yard at Earle NWS, New Jersey. This project provides a safe, well-lit, consolidated controlled access facility for 60 ordnance loaded trucks, the minimum essential for loading a U.S. AOE or AE during normal peace time operations. Funding of $1,290,000 was originally included in the fiscal year 1994 appropriations bill. The Committee understands that an extension to pier 4 is necessary at the Naval Weapons Station, Earle, New Jersey. The Navy is to report to the Committee on the need for this extension and its plans, including possible NATO funding, for construction by September 16, 1996. Military Construction, Air Force Fiscal year 1996: Appropriation....................................... $587,234,000 Rescissions......................................... -15,150,000 Net............................................. 572,084,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 603,059,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 678,914,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 net appropriation.................. +106,830,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... +75,855,000 The Committee recommends a total of $678,914,000 for Military Construction, Air Force for fiscal year 1997. This is an increase of $75,855,000 above the budget request for fiscal year 1997, and an increase of $106,830,000 above the net appropriation for fiscal year 1996. california--mcclellan afb: flood control measures The budget request includes $8,795,000 for flood control measures at McClellan AFB, California. The Committee notes that both the House National Security Committee and the Senate Armed Services Committee have denied authorization for this project. Therefore, appropriations for this purpose are not recommended in this bill. oklahoma--vance air force base The Committee is aware of several needs at Vance Air Force Base, Oklahoma, including a Base Engineering Complex, alterations to the Physical Fitness Center and alterations to the Consolidated Logistics Complex. The Air Force is to report to the Committee on the need for these projects and its plans for construction by September 16, 1996. Military Construction, Defense-wide Fiscal year 1996: Appropriation....................................... $640,357,000 Rescissions......................................... -41,866,000 Net............................................. 598,491,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 812,945,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 772,345,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 net appropriation.................. +173,854,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... -40,600,000 The Committee recommends a total of $772,345,000 for Military Construction, Defense-wide for fiscal year 1997. This is a decrease of $40,600,000 below the budget request for fiscal year 1997 and an increase of $173,854,000 above the net appropriation for fiscal year 1996. Phase-Funded Project Maryland--Forest Glen (WRAIR): Army Institute of Research, Phase IV The budget request includes $92,000,000 as the full and final phase of funding for the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR) at Forest Glen, Maryland. However, the amount of construction that can be executed during fiscal year 1997 totals $72,000,000. It is the Committee's long standing policy to limit annual appropriations for military construction projects to the amount of construction that can be executed during a single fiscal year. Therefore, the Committee recommends $72,000,000 for this on-going work for fiscal year 1997, which is a reduction of $20,000,000 from the budget request. This reduction will have no effect on the pace of construction and will not delay the completion date for this project. The Department of Defense is directed to include the appropriate amount for this project in the fiscal year 1998 budget request. Maryland--Fort Meade: Friendship Annex III Purchase The Friendship Annex III building (FANX III) was built to suit the National Security Agency's special purpose needs. The building contains approximately 420,000 square feet and has been under lease since 1970. The current terms of the lease, which was renegotiated in 1991, contain the option to purchase the building at a fixed price of $25,200,000 during the period of September 1, 1997 through March 1, 1998, and this amount is included in the budget request. The Committee is concerned that the National Security Agency expended $32,971,000 to renovate FANX III in advance of the purchase of the building. This renovation was included in the cost of the lease, which is funded as an operation and maintenance expense, rather than as a military construction expense. Had the Agency undertaken the renovation and acquisition of FANX III as a lease-purchase arrangement, or as a straightforward purchase of an existing building, regular procedure would have required prior notice to (and approval of) Congress. As structured by the Agency, the transaction avoided all Congressional approval and virtually all Congressional notification requirements. An acquisition report covering the lease renegotiation was submitted to Congress on August 30, 1991, but it did not identify the cost of renovation, nor did it reflect that the improvements were to be paid for as they were made, as opposed to being amortized over the expected 25- year life of the lease. No specific statutory authority existed for the renovation of FANX III. The lease renegotiation was executed in 1991, during a period of historically significant Department of Defense downsizing, with two rounds of base closures yet to be conducted in 1993 and 1995. Excess facilities were being disposed of throughout the country, and this process continues. The Committee is in the process of conducting a thorough investigation of the National Security Agency's facilities requirements. Pending the results of this investigation, the Committee recommends denying funds in the amount of $25,200,000 for the purchase of FANX III. Ohio--Defense Construction Supply Center (Columbus): Construct Entrance Roadway (DBOF) The budget request includes $600,000 to construct an entrance roadway at the Defense Construction Supply Center in Columbus, Ohio. This project is required due to a substantial increase in the number and concentration of personnel at the Center. It is the Committee's view that this work should have been included in the cost of either the Columbus Operations Center project or the DFAS Operations Facility project, because these personnel create the requirement. The Committee reluctantly recommends providing for this work to be accomplished as a separate military construction project, as requested. Contingency Construction The budget request includes $9,500,000 for the contingency construction account, which provides for urgent unforeseen military facilities requirements as authorized by 10 USC 2804. This account funded a single project in fiscal year 1992, no projects in fiscal years 1993 through 1995, and a single project to date in fiscal year 1996. Unobligated balances of prior years' appropriations totaling $9,741,000 remain available for contingency construction. Therefore, the Committee recommends $4,500,000 for this account for fiscal year 1997, which is a reduction of $5,000,000 from the budget request. Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools The budget request does not include funds for projects in support of the Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools (formerly known as ``Section 6'' schools), despite requirements totaling $125,501,000. The Committee directs the Department of Defense to report by January 1, 1997 on this construction requirement, including a prioritized list of projects (by location) to correct deficiencies, and encourages inclusion of such projects in the budget request for fiscal year 1998. Overseas Elementary, Junior High, and High Schools The budget request does not include funds for projects in support of the 172 overseas schools operated by the Department of Defense Education Activity. The Committee directs the Department of Defense to report by January 1, 1997 on construction requirements in support of these schools, including a prioritized list of projects (by location) to correct deficiencies, and encourages inclusion of such projects in the budget request for fiscal year 1998. Defense Finance and Accounting Service The Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) is in the process of consolidating its activities into five regional centers and 21 operating locations. This effort includes a major construction project to provide office and support space for the Columbus, Ohio Center and the Financial Systems Activity, Columbus, Ohio. This project is being phase funded in three increments, as follows: Fiscal Year In millions of dollars 1996.............................................................. $37.4 1997.............................................................. 20.8 1998.............................................................. 14.2 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________ Total......................................................... 72.4 In addition, DFAS has programmed the following military construction projects at operating locations: Fiscal year and location In millions of dollars 1997--Norton AFB/San Bernardino, CA............................... $13.8 1997--Orlando, FL................................................. 2.6 1997--Rock Island, IL............................................. 14.4 1997--Loring AFB/Limestone, ME.................................... 6.9 1997--Offutt AFB/Omaha, NE........................................ 7.0 1997--Griffiss AFB/Rome, NY....................................... 10.2 1997--Gentile AFB/Dayton, OH...................................... 11.4 1997--Charleston, SC.............................................. 6.2 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________ Subtotal (including Columbus, OH)............................. 93.3 ================================================================= ________________________________________________ 1998--Honolulu, HI................................................ 11.2 1998--Columbus, OH................................................ 14.2 1998--Memphis, TN................................................. 5.8 1998--Norfolk, VA................................................. 13.1 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________ Subtotal...................................................... 44.3 ================================================================= ________________________________________________ 1999--Fort Ord, CA................................................ 20.0 1999--Chanute AFB, IL............................................. 10.6 1999--Lexington, KY............................................... 8.6 1999--Fort Sill, OK............................................... 12.8 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________ Subtotal...................................................... 52.0 ================================================================= ________________________________________________ Total..................................................... 189.6 The Committee notes that a number of these projects are located at closing military installations, and constitute renovations of old facilities for new purposes, reutilizing federally owned assets without impacting the spirit and letter of base closure requirements. The Committee also notes that upon completion of this three-year program, all military construction requirements of the Defense Finance and Accounting Service will have been met. The Committee recommends approval of the requested projects for fiscal year 1997. Defense Fuels Supply Center The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) has been assigned the responsibility for programming the military construction requirements related to serving as the designated bulk petroleum manager for the Department of Defense. In fiscal year 1997, such projects consume 84 percent of DLA's project, and only two non-fuels projects are requested by DLA. The Committee is concerned that no budgetary resources were transferred from the other components of the Department to DLA at the time of the assignment of this responsibility, and that other components realized a windfall at DLA's expense. The Department is urged to review this situation in order to assure that depot/storage facilities and operational facilities of DLA are not neglected. Italy--Sigonella NAS: Extend Hydrant Fuel System Spain--Moron AB: Replace Hydrant Fuel System The budget request includes $6,100,000 for a fuels project at Sigonella Naval Air Station, Italy, and $12,958,000 for a fuels project at Moron Air Base, Spain. The Committee recommends approving these projects, contingent upon the submission of precautionary prefinancing statements to NATO for reimbursement of these expenses. The Committee strongly supports the development of a NATO capabilities package for Strategic Refueling in order to secure routine NATO financing of such projects. Energy Conservation Improvement Program (ECIP) The Energy Conservation Improvement Program (ECIP) provides financing for individual projects that are evaluated, prioritized on the basis of technical merit and return on investment, and presented individually to Congress for approval. The budget request includes $47,765,000 as the level of effort for this program for fiscal year 1997. The primary benefits of the program include improved facility conditions, reduced environmental pollution, and utility and maintenance cost reduction. The Department is governed by two directives, the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-486) and Executive Order 12902. These directives require the Department to identify and accomplish all energy conservation measures that pay back in ten years or less. The Department has surveyed its physical plant and has identified approximately $4 billion of needed investment to accomplish all identified conservation measures. There are several means available for performing this work. Some is done in conjunction with on-going repair and replacement programs, some through utility company investments, some through energy performance contracts, some through operations and maintenance projects and individual Service energy programs, and some through the Energy Conservation Improvement Program (ECIP). Generally, ECIP is reserved for larger projects which deserve closer Departmental scrutiny. Such items have high savings-to-investment ratios, and also include a small number of projects that support other goals of the Energy Policy Act such as renewable energy and water conservation. The Committee notes that the Department currently uses 12.4 percent less energy per square foot of occupied buildings than it did in 1985, saving over $380 million in utility bills in 1995. The Committee believes that this is a sound return on investment, and recommends full funding of the requested level of $47,765,000 for this program. The Committee will expect that each individual project will continue to be supported with an economic analysis to show the savings-to-investment ratio and the simple payback, and that life-cycle cost analyses will continue to be performed as projects are modified by additional information and design detail. Most importantly, the Committee will expect the Department to give great consideration to further reduction in the payback period, especially in such difficult to quantify areas as renewable energy, water conservation, emerging technologies, and contribution to environmental pollution prevention. The Committee is aware of the Department's efforts to develop a multi-media energy manager's training program in partnership with a larger private consortium. The Committee supports the use of appropriated funds to improve the level of technical and programmatic knowledge of Defense energy managers, as well as design engineers and architects, and the leveraging of Federal funds through participation in public/ private partnerships such as this. Therefore, the Committee will expect the Department to continue to contribute such sums as may be required for the on-going computer-based energy manager training software package in order to complete this work. Chemical Weapons Demilitarization Program The budget request includes a total of $131,621,000 for the following funding increments for the chemical weapons demilitarization program for fiscal year 1997: Arkansas: Pine Bluff Arsenal Ammunition demilitarization facility, Phase II.. $46,000,000 Colorado: Pueblo Depot Activity Ammunition demilitarization facility, Phase I... 17,497,000 Oregon: Umatilla Depot Activity Ammunition demilitarization facility, Phase II.. 64,000,000 Unspecified Worldwide Location: Planning and Design................................. \1\ 4,124,000 -------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________ Total........................................... 131,621,000 \1\ In addition to this amount, prior year unobligated funds totaling $6,876,000 will be used to fund fiscal year 1997 planning and design requirements. The Committee takes note that this budget request is limited to the amount of construction that can be put in place during fiscal year 1997, and therefore recommends fully funding the request. The following chart displays the scope of the military construction investment in the overall chemical demilitarization program: CHEMICAL DEMILITARIZATION PROGRAM MILITARY CONSTRUCTION COSTS [In millions of dollars, fiscal year] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1995 & Location Prior 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Total ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Johnston Atoll.......................... $50.0 ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... $50.0 Chemical Demil Training Facility, Aberdeen, MD........................... 16.1 ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... 16.1 Tooele Facilities, UT................... 198.0 ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... 198.0 Anniston Facilities, AL................. 164.3 ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... 164.3 Umatilla Facility, OR................... 12.0 ....... $64.0 $92.0 $20.0 ....... ....... 188.0 Umatilla Depot Support, OR.............. 11.1 ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... 11.1 Pine Bluff Facility, AR................. 3.0 ....... 46.0 61.0 8.0 ....... ....... 118.0 Pine Bluff Depot Support, AR............ 15.0 ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... 15.0 Pueblo Facility, CO..................... ....... ....... 17.5 60.0 97.5 ....... ....... 175.0 Pueblo Depot Support, CO................ 6.3 ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... 6.3 Blue Grass Facility, KY................. ....... ....... ....... 48.7 100.0 $33.3 ....... 182.0 Blue Grass Depot Support, KY............ ....... ....... ....... 7.8 ....... ....... ....... 7.8 Aberdeen Facility, MD................... ....... ....... ....... ....... 45.5 50.0 $23.5 119.0 Aberdeen Depot Support, MD.............. ....... ....... ....... 9.0 ....... ....... ....... 9.0 Newport Facility, IN.................... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... 30.1 43.5 73.6 Newport Depot Support, IN............... ....... ....... ....... ....... 2.1 ....... ....... 2.1 Planning and Design..................... ....... $13.0 4.1 9.7 4.7 2.0 ....... 33.5 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Total............................. 475.8 13.0 131.6 288.2 277.8 115.4 67.0 1,368.8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following chart displays the timetable and the milestones for completion of the chemical demilitarization program: CHEMICAL DEMILITARIZATION PROGRAM TIMETABLE AND MILESTONES [In fiscal years]----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Start of Start of Location Construction Systemization Operations ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Johnson Atoll...................................... .............. .............. 3rd Qtr 90-1st Qtr 00 Tooele, UT......................................... 4th Qtr 89 4th Qtr 93 3rd Qtr 96-3rd Qtr 03 Anniston, AL....................................... 4th Qtr 96 3rd Qtr 99 2nd Qtr 01-1st Qtr 05 Umatilla, OR....................................... 4th Qtr 96 4th Qtr 99 3rd Qtr 01-4th Qtr 04 Pine Bluff, AR..................................... 4th Qtr 96 3rd Qtr 99 2nd Qtr 01-3rd Qtr 04 Pueblo, CO......................................... 3rd Qtr 97 2nd Qtr 00 1st Qtr 02-3rd Qtr 04 Blue Grass, KY..................................... 2nd Qtr 98 1st Qtr 01 4th Qtr 02-3rd Qtr 04 Aberdeen, MD....................................... 2nd Qtr 99 3rd Qtr 01 1st Qtr 03-3rd Qtr 03 Newport, IN........................................ 2nd Qtr 00 3rd Qtr 02 1st Qtr 04-3rd Qtr 04 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- military construction, defense-wide: administrative provision Statutory language included under this account provides that the Secretary of Defense may transfer funds from this account to the military construction and family housing accounts. The Committee directs that any exercise of this authority must fall under the Committee's standing procedures for approval of reprogramming requests. Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... 0 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 0 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... $10,000,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 appropriation...................... +10,000,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... +10,000,000 The Committee recommends a total of $10,000,000 for the Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund for fiscal year 1997. This is an increase of $10,000,000 above the budget request for fiscal year 1997, and an increase of $10,000,000 above the appropriation for fiscal year 1996. The Committee has not approved the request for a new general provision allowing transfer of funds into this account, and in lieu thereof has provided an initial appropriation of $10,000,000 and transfer authority within the appropriation paragraph. Overview The National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1996, P.L. 104-106, established new authorities to increase the use of the private sector and capital to improve unaccompanied housing. The new authorities include: direct loans and loan guarantees to private developers; leasing of new housing; investments in nongovernmental entities; rental guarantees; differential lease payments and conveyance or lease of existing property and facilities. The Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund will be used to build or renovate unaccompanied housing, mixing or matching the various authorities contained in the authorization, and utilize private capital and expertise to the maximum extent possible. This fund is to contain appropriated and transferred funds from military construction accounts, and the total value in budget authority of all contracts and investments undertaken may not exceed $150,000,000. Sources for transfers into the funds are solely to be derived from funds appropriated for the acquisition or construction of military unaccompanied housing. Transfers into the fund are authorized contingent upon a 30-day notification by the Secretary of Defense to the appropriate committees of Congress. Proceeds from investments, leases, and conveyances are to be deposited into this Fund, and any use of the Fund is subject to annual appropriations. The Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund is to be administered as a single account without fiscal year limitations and the authority to enter into contracts and partnerships and to make investments shall expire on September 30, 2000. Reporting Requirements The Committee reiterates the reporting requirements contained in the enabling legislation. The Service Secretary concerned may not enter into any contract until after the end of the 21-day period beginning on the date the Secretary concerned submits written notice of the nature and terms of the contract to the appropriate Committees of Congress. In the future, budget justification documents are to display project and administrative costs. No transfer of appropriated funds into the account may take place until after the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date the Secretary of Defense submits written notice and justification for the transfer to the appropriate Committees of Congress. The Appropriations Committee expects to receive prior notification of all such transfers of funds. In addition, the Department is to report to the Committee on Appropriations, within sixty days after enactment of this Act, it's framework for leveraging these resources. Military Construction, Reserve Components Fiscal year 1996: Appropriation....................................... $436,647,000 Rescission.......................................... -6,700,000 Net............................................. 429,947,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 194,091,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 294,693,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 net appropriation.................. -135,254,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... +100,602,000 The Committee recommends a total of $294,693,000 for Military Construction, Reserve Components for fiscal year 1997. This is an increase of $100,602,000 above the budget request for fiscal year 1997, and a decrease of $135,254,000 below the net appropriation for 1996. The Committee's recommended action on each Reserve Component is reflected in the State list at the end of this report. The Committee recommends approval of Military Construction, as follows: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Component Request Recommended ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Army National Guard............... $7,600,000 - $41,316,000 Air National Guard-............... 75,394,000 - 118,394,000 Army Reserve...................... 48,459,000 50,159,000 Naval Reserve..................... 10,983,000 33,169,000 Air Force Reserve-................ 51,655,000 51,655,000 ------------------------------------- Total......................... 194,091,000 294,693,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ connecticut--groton: building codes and fire suppression Funds were authorized and appropriated in fiscal year 1995 for additions and alterations to the aviation repair depot at Groton, Connecticut. The Committee understands that this project requires an additional $5,647,000 due to changes in building codes and fire suppression requirements. The Committee directs the Army National Guard to submit the appropriate scope and cost variation reports to the appropriate committees in order to carry out the necessary changes to this project. illinois--decatur: helicopter landing pads and taxilanes The Committee directs the Army National Guard to execute a project to provide helicopter landing pads and taxilanes at the Decatur, Illinois Army Aviation Support Facility using funds available for unspecified minor construction. The estimated cost of this project is $575,000. mississippi--various locations, south mississippi: beddown avenger system The National Guard Bureau directed a reorganization of units in South Mississippi from Field Artillery to Air Defense Artillery (the Avenger air defense system). This reorganization created the need for additions, alterations, and new construction at several locations. The fiscal year 1994 appropriations act included $5,204,000 for a project to accomplish this work. An unfavorable bidding climate and changes in scope requirements would necessitate overruns at the full scope of work. Contracts have been awarded at reduced scope, with additives totaling $5,464,000. The Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit the appropriate scope and cost variation reports to the appropriate committees in order to accomplish the full scope of work expeditiously. virginia--richlands: organizational maintenance shop The Committee is aware that additional funds will be required to complete the construction of the Organizational Maintenance Shop at Richlands, Virginia. The Army National Guard is encouraged to submit a reprogramming request to complete work on this project. regional education The Committee directs the Army National Guard to review the facilities needs for the Combat Arms Training Brigade for Region C to carry out its assigned regional educational missions, and to report by January 1, 1997 on a cost-effective proposal for meeting these mission requirements. unobligated balances The Committee is very concerned over the continuing poor execution rates for the military construction programs of the Reserve Components. According to the appendices to the budget requests for fiscal years 1996 and 1997, the following amounts will remain unobligated at the end of each fiscal year: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1994 actual- 1995 actual- 1996 1997 Component estimate- estimate ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Army National Guard-........................................ $366- $277- $232- $100 Air National Guard-......................................... 238- 218- 221- 168 Army Reserve-............................................... 121- 85- 50- 28 Naval Reserve-.............................................. 60- 28- 17- 7 Air Force Reserve-.......................................... 43- 33- 28- 31 --------------------------------------------------- Total-................................................ 828- 641- 548- 334 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Committee understands that these amounts remain available for completion of prior year approved budget plans, that funds remain available for five years, and that the Reserve Components face a number of difficult challenges in program execution. However, the Committee will expect to see increased attention given to assure that contracts are awarded during the fiscal year in which funds are provided. The Committee intends to follow closely the Annual Report on Design and Construction Progress and the reinstated semi-annual submission of Audit Trail Documents in order to track improvement in program execution.-- Unawarded Armory Projects The Army National Guard has not yet awarded twenty-three armory projects (or armory projects combined with other facilities, such as organizational maintenance shops or reserve centers) for which funds were appropriated for fiscal years 1992 through 1995. Due to this backlog of unawarded projects, the Committee recommended no new armory construction in fiscal year 1996, and again recommends no such projects for fiscal year 1997. The unawarded projects are at the following locations and in the following amounts, according to information available in Department of Defense accounting reports as of April, 1996 (the most recent information available): ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Current Fiscal year, State and location Amount working appropriated estimate ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1992, OH, Toledo........................ $3,183,000 $3,820,000 1993, PA, Indiana....................... 1,700,000 1,391,000 1993, OR, Le Grande..................... 3,049,000 3,049,000 1993, FL, Craig Field (Jacksonville).... 1,480,000 1,192,000 1993, AL, Union Springs................. 800,000 800,000 1993, AL, Tuscaloosa.................... 2,273,000 2,273,000 1994, TN, Sevierville................... 1,352,000 1,103,000 1994, PA, Johnstown..................... 3,309,000 3,143,000 1994, IN, Evansville.................... 6,050,000 6,050,000 1994, CA, Van Nuys...................... 6,518,000 6,518,000 1995, WY, Torrington.................... 5,300,000 5,300,000 1995, TN, Rogersville................... 1,820,000 1,820,000 1995, TN, Springfield................... 1,115,000 1,102,000 1995, TN, Chattanooga................... 1,604,000 1,602,000 1995, TN, Johnson City.................. 6,019,000 6,019,000 1995, TN, Linden........................ 1,097,000 1,097,000 1995, PA, Westmoreland County........... 3,594,000 3,548,000 1995, OH, Ravenna....................... 4,500,000 4,500,000 1995, PA, Armstrong County.............. 1,982,000 1,982,000 1995, NV, Washoe County................. 5,520,000 5,520,000 1995, ME, Augusta....................... 3,900,000 3,900,000 1995, MA, Taunton....................... 2,900,000 2,900,000 1995, CO, Denver........................ 5,000,000 4,772,000 ------------------------------- Total............................. 74,065,000 73,401,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program Fiscal year 1996: Appropriation....................................... $161,000,000 Supplemental Appropriation.......................... +37,500,000 Net............................................. 198,500,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 197,000,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 177,000,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 net appropriation.................. -21,500,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... -20,000,000 The Committee recommends a total of $177,000,000 for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program. This is a decrease of $20,000,000 below the budget request for fiscal year 1997 and a decrease of $21,500,000 below the net appropriation for fiscal year 1996. For 1997, the NATO nations have agreed on a funding level of approximately $890,700,000. Of this amount, the U.S. requirement is based on a cost share which averages about 26%. In addition to the recommended appropriation of $177,000,000, approximately $11,000,000 is expected to be available from recoupments from prior year U.S. funded work, and from deobligation of NATO funds for previously obligated projects that were reduced in scope or canceled. The Committee reiterates the directive contained in House Report 104-137. The Department of Defense is directed to report to the Committees on Appropriations, on a quarterly basis, the following information: (1) NATO nations share of construction costs based on fund authorizations; (2) NATO nations shares of procurement costs based on fund authorizations; and (3) A listing of all obligations incurred that quarter broken out by infrastructure category and procurement category. This listing should show the total project costs, the U.S. cost share and all other NATO nations cost shares. Family Housing Overview The need for military family housing has changed with the all-volunteer structure of the force. In the mid-1950s forty- two percent of the force was married, compared to sixty-one percent today. The percentage of service members with families will continue to grow, and the nature of an all-volunteer force implies greater expectations for the availability, size and amenities of family housing. At the same time, the Department is faced with a changing military environment due to overseas reductions, domestic base closures, major force reductions, and increased deployments. Today, the family housing program is even more important because it provides a quality of life incentive which attracts and retains dedicated individuals to serve in the military. However, the housing deficiencies are a severe disincentive to reenlistment. Testimony before the Committee states that it costs over $26,000 to recruit and train an enlisted soldier for the first assignment. This investment is lost each time a soldier must be replaced. The Committee has no question that housing is directly linked to readiness, morale and retention. While this Committee has focused on the need for adequate family housing over the years, resources have been scarce. This problem has recently been brought to the forefront with several articles in the press and an increased focus by the Department of Defense. The family housing crisis exists today due to the majority of housing in the Department's inventory being substandard; high cost areas where housing deficits exist; and problems young families are facing who cannot afford to live in local communities. DOD policy is that married couples will live off-base when the economy can support them, and about two-thirds, or 614,928 families, reside off-base. Where there is sufficient affordable housing in the community and commuting distances are not over one hour, most of these families are doing well. However, 12 percent of military families living in civilian communities are in substandard housing. This is often the case when rents are excessive or a family can only afford to live in distant, isolated, and sometimes unsafe neighborhoods. This is occurring more often because housing allowances are covering only 75 percent of the cost of civilian housing, on average. Many younger families only have one car and are faced with driving distances of over an hour to the installation. In some instances, families are choosing to remain separated simply because suitable, affordable housing is not available at a new assignment. The Department of Defense has a total of 350,799 on-base housing units in its inventory, with an average age of 33 years. Two-thirds of the inventory is over 30 years old and requires a substantial annual investment to meet maintenance requirements. Over the years, the majority of these homes have gone without adequate maintenance and repair. And over fifty percent of the inventory, or 184,295 units, is in need of major improvements or replacement at a total cost of $16,591,388,000. Unsuitable units require a major investment in maintenance and repair to correct deteriorated infrastructure, provide basic living standards and meet contemporary code requirements for electrical and mechanical systems, and for energy efficiency. Examples provided to the Committee of a typical scenario military families face include: severe health and safety deficiencies such as electrical systems and water pipes needing replacement; non-working or inefficient heating and cooling systems; nails coming through the ceilings and floors; kitchen cabinets water-logged and sinking; ceiling and wall paint chipped and peeling; screens with holes in them; doors coming apart; malfunctioning smoke detectors; light fixtures broken, and stoves and ovens with elements not working. The current backlog of deferred maintenance and repair totals in excess of $4,565,000,000. When housing units are not adequately maintained, eventually they must be closed and abandoned or demolished. Families who could have been housed in these units must then live off-base. In turn, this creates an additional expense for payment of housing allowances. Aside from the problems confronting the current inventory, the Department estimates a new construction deficit of 48,428 units at a cost of $6,126,032,000. The Secretary of Defense proposed, and Congress has approved, a plan for a private sector initiative which is discussed later in this report. The Committee is hopeful this initiative will be successful and help to resolve the new construction deficit in a timely manner. It will be necessary to use many different approaches to help meet the current family housing need. The challenge is for a sustained overall commitment, at funding levels that will reduce the backlog of inadequate houses, reduce the housing deficits, and increase the quality of living conditions in a reasonable period of time. The Department estimates it will take over $27,000,000,000 to correct the existing problem. The following chart provides a Service breakout of the current family housing deficit, both in units and in cost of new construction, replacement, improvements and deferred maintenance and repair: DEFICITS (CURRENT PROJECTIONS) [In thousand of dollars] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Deferre New maintenance ---------------- construction Replace Improve and repair end Grand total FY 96 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Army: Number of Units............. 4,415 31,200 46,800 .............. 82,415 Costs-...................... $596,602-- $4,212,000- $3,042,000-- $621,000- $8,471,602 Navy: Number of Units-............ 14,700- 6,400-- 26,400- -- 47,500 Costs....................... $1,930,000- $953,200- $1,812,400- $2,400,000-- $7,095,000 Air Force: Number of Units-............ 18,000- 20,600- 44,000- .............. 82,600 Costs--..................... $2,160,000- $2,472,000- $3,520,000-- $944,000-- $9,096,000- Marine Corps: Number of Units-............ 11,313- 697-- 8,198-- -- 20,208 Costs--..................... $1,439,430- $164,821- $414,967-- $600,000-- $2,619,218 Total: Number of Units-............ 48,428- 58,897- 125,398-- -- 232,723 Costs-...................... $6,126,032- $7,802,021- $8,789,367- $4,565,000- $27,282,420 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- construction overview The Committee is concerned over the fiscal year 1997 budget request for family housing new construction, construction improvements and planning of $714,346,000. The Secretary of Defense has made housing one of his main priorities, yet the Department's budget represents a reduction of $228,878,000, or 24%, from the fiscal year 1996 appropriation for new construction and construction improvements. The Committee strongly believes it is imperative that construction funding levels must be maintained, along with any privatization efforts, to help resolve the serious family housing deficits. Therefore, the Committee recommends total funding of $1,017,498,000 for family housing construction for fiscal year 1997. This represents an increase of $74,274,000 over the fiscal year 1996 appropriation and an increase of $303,152,000 over the budget request. new housing construction The fiscal year 1997 request is $369,087,000 to build 2,297 units of new family housing for all Services. This is $97,927,000 or 21 percent, under the fiscal year 1996 enacted level. The Committee has approved all requested projects for new housing construction. In addition, the Committee has recommended an additional $159,702,000 to build 1,426 units of new family housing. The total appropriation for new construction is $528,789,000 and will provide 3,723 new units. Details of the Committee's recommendations for new construction are provided in this report under the individual component accounts. The Committee expects that none of the approved projects will be reduced in scope. It is the understanding of the Committee, that upon a 30- day notification from the Secretary of Defense, and approval of the Committee, funds appropriated for a new construction project may be transferred to the Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund for the purpose of a private sector pilot project at the same location. The Committee will consider reprogramming requests for any authorized new construction project for which funds have not been appropriated in prior years. construction improvements A total of $309,654,000 has been requested for post- acquisition construction for all services to improve 4,075 housing units. This is a decrease of $131,177,000, or 30 percent, from the fiscal year 1996 enacted level. Post- acquisition construction is focused on modernizing existing units that are uneconomical to repair. The Committee recommends full funding of the request. In addition, the Committee has provided an additional $143,450,000 for construction improvement projects which are listed in this report under the individual component accounts, to improve an additional 2,251 units. The total appropriation for post-acquisition construction is $453,104,000 and will improve 6,326 units of family housing. It is the understanding of the Committee, that upon a 30- day notification from the Secretary of Defense, and approval of the Committee, funds appropriated for a construction improvement project may be transferred to the Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund for the purpose of a private sector pilot project at the same location. The Committee continues the restriction on the amount invested in improving foreign source housing units. The three- year limitation on overseas units is $35,000. If the components intend to program improvements to specific units which exceed $35,000 over a period of three years, total funding should be requested in one year. The justification for each unit should identify all improvements and major maintenance work done in the past three years, and all improvements and major maintenance planned in the following three years. operation and maintenance The fiscal year 1997 request for operation and maintenance expenses totals $3,087,144,000, a decrease of $176,461,000, from the fiscal year 1996 appropriation. These accounts provide for annual expenditures for maintenance and repair, furnishings, management, services, utilities, leasing, interest, mortgage insurance and miscellaneous expenses. Of the total request for operation and maintenance, $1,463,752,000 is for maintenance and repair of existing housing, a reduction of $112,331,000 from fiscal year 1996 levels. While the Committee agrees with the reduction of $64,130,000 to the majority of the accounts, it has serious reservations over the requested reduction of $112,331,000 to the maintenance of real property accounts. Testimony from representatives of the Department verifies that this request is driven by budget constraints, not by actual need. Therefore, the Committee has recommended an additional $100,000,000 for the maintenance real property accounts, distributed as follows: Army: $45,000,000; Navy $44,000,000; and Air Force $11,000,000. The total recommended appropriation for operation and maintenance is $3,187,144,000. This represents an increase of $100,000,000 above the budget request and a reduction of $76,461,000 from the fiscal year 1996 enacted level. Expenditures from this account for general and flag officer quarters are to be reported in accordance with the guidelines previously established and reiterated later in this report. The Committee also continues the direction that the details of all other expenditures from this account which exceed $15,000 per unit, per year for major maintenance and repair of non-general and flag officer quarters be included as part of the justification material. The general provision limiting obligations from this account to no more than 20 percent of the total in the last two months of the fiscal year is included in this year's bill. The Committee continues the restriction on the transfer of funds between the operation and maintenance accounts. The limitation is ten percent to all primary accounts and subaccounts. Such transfers are to be reported to the Committee within thirty days of such action. general and flag officer quarters The existing reporting requirements for general and flag officer quarters continue in full force and effect, in order to control expenditures for high cost quarters. The purpose of these requirements is to ensure that the total amount of all obligations for maintenance and repair (excluding operations) on each general or flag officer quarters is limited to $25,000 per year, unless specifically included in the annual budget justification material. This continues the policy initiated in 1984 and developed and elaborated over several years, to ensure that separate controls are established for orderly planning and programming to accomplish this work. Recognizing the uncertainties involved in accurately forecasting ``change in occupancy'' work, the Committee continues the following previously established notification requirement. The Committee must be notified when maintenance and repair costs for a unit will exceed the amount submitted in the budget justification by 25 percent or $5,000, whichever is less. The Committee must also be notified when maintenance and repair costs will exceed $25,000 for a unit not requested in the budget justification. Notifications of each proposed expenditure must be submitted over the signature of the Service Secretary for case- by-case review and approval. Each Service is directed to continue to limit out-of-cycle submissions to one per year, except for situations which are justified as emergencies or safety-related. leasing reporting requirement The Committee continues the reporting requirement for both domestic and foreign leases. For domestic leases (not funded by the Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund), the Department is directed to report quarterly on the details of all new or renewal domestic leases entered into during the previous quarter which exceed $12,000 per unit per year, including certification that less expensive housing was not available for lease. For foreign leases, the Department is directed to: perform an economic analysis on all new leases or lease/ contract agreements where more than 25 units are involved; report the details of any new or renewal lease exceeding $20,000 per year (as adjusted for foreign currency fluctuation from October 1, 1987, but not adjusted for inflation), 21 days prior to entering into such an agreement; and base leasing decisions on the economic analysis. exclusion of asbestos and lead-based paint removal from maintenance and repair limits The Committee continues the requirement of an after-the- fact notification where asbestos and/or lead-based paint removal costs cause the maintenance and repair thresholds of $15,000 for a military family housing unit, or $25,000 for a General or Flag Officer Quarters, to be exceeded. The notification shall include work, scope, cost break-out and other details pertinent to asbestos and/or lease-based paint removal work and shall be reported on a semi-annual basis. reprogramming criteria The reprogramming criteria that apply to military construction projects (25 percent of the funded amount or $2,000,000, whichever is less) also apply to new housing construction projects and to improvement projects over $2,000,000. Family Housing, Army Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $1,452,252,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 1,287,479,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 1,434,069,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 appropriation...................... -18,183,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... +146,590,000 The Committee recommends a total of $1,434,069,000 for Family Housing, Army for fiscal year 1997. This is an increase of $146,590,000 above the budget request for fiscal year 1997, and a decrease of $18,183,000 below the appropriation for fiscal year 1996. construction The Committee recommends $59,190,000 for new construction, instead of $38,300,000, as requested, as shown below: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Location/Project--- Requested- Recommended ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Alabama: Redstone Arsenal (70 units)........................... 0 $8,000,000 Hawaii: Schofield Barracks (54 units)........................... $10,000,000 10,000,000 North Carolina: Fort Bragg (88 units)........................... 9,800,000 9,800,000 Pennsylvania: Tobyhanna AD (200 units)........................... 0 890,000 Texas: Fort Bliss, Phase I (70 units) 0 12,000,000 Fort Hood (140 units)......... 18,500,000 18,500,000 ------------------------------------- Total....................... 38,300,000 59,190,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Construction Improvements The following projects are to be accomplished within the additional amount provided above the budget request for construction improvements: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Number of Location/Project units- Recommended ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Alabama--Fort Rucker...................... 256- $18,000,000 Kentucky--Fort Campbell................... 200 18,700,000 Louisiana--Fort Polk...................... 250-- 7,200,000 Oklahoma--Fort Sill....................... 328 14,400,000 Pennsylvania--Tobyhanna AD................ 42-- 2,300,000 Germany--Kefurt and Craig, Stuttgart...... 120- 7,300,000 Germany--Baumholder Family Village........ 64-- 4,600,000 Germany--Ben Franklin Village, Mannheim... 136-- 8,200,000 ----------------------------- Total............................... 1,396 80,700,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Maintenance of real property The budget request includes $525,893,000 for maintenance of real property, a reduction of $106,399,000 from the fiscal year 1996 appropriation. The Committee recommends an increase of $45,000,000 providing a total of $579,893,000. Family Housing, Navy and Marine Corps Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $1,573,387,000 Fiscal Year 1997 estimate............................... 1,417,967,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 1,590,697,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 appropriation...................... +17,310,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... +172,730,000 The Committee recommends a total of $1,590,697,000 for Family Housing, Navy and Marine Corps for fiscal year 1997. This is an increase of $172,730,000 above the budget request for fiscal year 1997, and an increase of $17,310,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1996. Construction The Committee recommends $300,730,000 for new construction, instead of $197,700,000, as requested, as shown below: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Location/Project Requested- Recommended ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Arizona: MCAS Yuma (Community Center).......................... $709,000- $709,000 California: Camp Pendleton (202 units).... 19,483,000 29,483,000 Lemoore NAS (276 units)....... 39,837,000 39,837,000 San Diego PWC (466 units)..... 48,719,000 63,429,000 Twenty-Nine Palms (Community Center)...................... 1,982,000 1,982,000 Twenty-Nine Palms (Housing Office)...................... 956,000 956,000 Florida: Mayport NS (100 units)... 0 10,000,000 Hawaii: Kaneohe Bay (54 units)........ 11,676,000 11,676,000 PWC Pearl Harbor (264 units).. 52,586,000 52,586,000 Maine; Brunswick NAS Phase I (72 units)........................... 0 10,925,000 Maryland: Patuxent River (Community Center)............... 1,233,000 1,233,000 North Carolina: Camp Lejeune (Community Center)...................... 845,000 845,000 Camp Lejeune MCB (125 units).. 0 13,360,000 South Carolina: Beaufort MCAS (200 units)........................... 0 19,110,000 Texas: Corpus Christi Naval Complex (156 units).................. 0 17,425,000 Kingsville NAS Phase I (32 units)....................... 0 7,550,000 Virginia: Wallops Island (20 units)..... 2,975,000 2,975,000 Northwest (Community Center).. 741,000 741,000 Washington: Puget Sound (100 units)........................... 15,015,000 15,015,000 Washington: Bangor (Housing Office).......................... 934,000 934,000 ------------------------------------- Total....................... 197,691,000 300,771,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Construction Improvements The following projects are to be accomplished within the additional amount provided above the budget request for construction improvements: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Number of Location/Project-- units- Recommended ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hawaii--Pearl Harbor PWC.................. 54 $6,650,000 Mississippi--Meridian NAS................. 160- 6,600,000 Texas--Fort Worth JRB..................... 55 2,400,000 Washington--Whidbey Island NAS............ 150 10,000,000 ----------------------------- Total............................... 419 25,650,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Maintenance of real property The budget request includes $508,632,000 for maintenance of real property, a reduction of $25,391,000 from the fiscal year 1996 appropriation. The Committee recommends an increase of $44,000,000, providing a total of $552,632,000. Family Housing, Air Force Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $1,146,951,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 1,060,710,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 1,144,542,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 appropriation...................... -2,409,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... +83,832,000 The Committee recommends a total of $1,144,542,000 for Family Housing, Air Force for fiscal year 1997. This is an increase of $83,832,000 above the budget request for fiscal year 1997, and a decrease of $2,409,000 below the appropriation for fiscal year 1996. Construction The Committee recommends $168,828,000 for new construction, instead of $133,096,000, as requested, as shown below: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Location/Project--- Requested- Recommended ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Alaska: Eielson AFB (Fire Station).... $2,950,000 $2,950,000 Eielson AFB (72 units)........ 21,127,000 21,127,000 California: Beale AFB (56 units).......... 8,893,000- 8,893,000 Los Angeles AFB (25 units).... 0- 6,425,000 Travis AFB (70 units)......... 8,631,000- 8,631,000 Vandenberg AFB (112 units).... 20,891,000 20,891,000 District of Columbia: Bolling AFB (40 units)....................... 5,000,000- 5,000,000 Florida: Eglin AFB (Hurlbert Field).... 249,000 249,000 MacDill AFB (56 units)........ 8,822,000 8,822,000 Patrick AFB (Housing Maintenance Facility)........ 853,000- 853,000 Patrick AFB (Housing Warehouse)................... 756,000 756,000 Patrick AFB (Replace Housing Office)...................... 821,000- 821,000 Tyndall AFB (42 units)........ 0- 6,000,000 Georgia: Robins AFB (46 units).... 0 - 5,252,000 Louisiana: Barksdale AFB (80 Units)........................... 9,570,000- 9,570,000 Massachusetts: Hanscom AFB Phase III (32 units)................... 0- 5,100,000 Missouri: Whiteman AFB (68 units). 9,600,000- 9,600,000 Nevada: Nellis AFB Phase III (50 units)........................... 0- 7,955,000 New Mexico: Kirtland AFB (50 units)........................... 5,450,000- 5,450,000 North Dakota: Grand Forks AFB (66 units).... 7,784,000- 7,784,000 Minot AFB (46 units).......... 8,740,000- 8,740,000 Texas: Lackland AFB (82 units)....... 6,500,000- 11,500,000 Lackland AFB (Replace Housing Office)...................... 450,000- 450,000 Lackland AFB (Replace Maintenance Facility)........ 350,000- 350,000 Washington: McChord AFB (40 units) 5,659,000- 5,659,000 ------------------------------------- Total....................... 133,096,000 168,828,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Construction Improvements The following projects are to be accomplished within the additional amount provided above the request for construction improvements: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Number of Location units Recommended ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Florida--Eglin AFB........................ 112 $8,600,000 Ohio--Wright-Patterson AFB................ 52- 6,000,000 Texas--Laughlin AFB....................... 180- 15,000,000 Utah--Hill AFB............................ 92- 7,500,000 ----------------------------- Total............................... 436 37,100,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Maintenance of real property The budget request includes $428,087,000 for maintenance of real property, an increase of $19,116,000 from the fiscal year 1996 appropriation. The Committee recommends an increase of $11,000,000, providing a total of $439,087,000. Family Housing, Defense-wide Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $34,239,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 35,334,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 35,334,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 appropriation...................... +1,095,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... 0 The Committee recommends a total of $35,334,000 for Family Housing, Defense-wide for fiscal year 1997. This is equal to the budget request for fiscal year 1997, and an increase of $1,095,000 above the appropriation for fiscal year 1996. Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $22,000,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 20,000,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 35,000,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 appropriation...................... +13,000,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... +15,000,000 The Committee recommends a total of $35,000,000 for the Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund for fiscal year 1997. This is an increase of $15,000,000 above the budget request for fiscal year 1997, and an increase of $13,000,000 above the appropriation for fiscal year 1996. Overview The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (P.L. 104-106) addresses the family housing crisis by authorizing a five year private sector pilot project to replace or renovate approximately 200,000 units of family housing within the United States, its territories and possessions, and in Puerto Rico, but not overseas. New authority is granted to: guarantee mortgage payments and rental contracts to developers as incentives to build family housing; authorize commercial- style lease agreements for family housing; and engage in joint ventures with developers to construct family housing on government property. The Family Housing Improvement Fund will be used to build or renovate family housing, mixing or matching various authorities in the authorization, and utilizing private capital and expertise to the maximum extent possible. The Fund is to contain appropriated and transferred funds from family housing construction accounts, and the total value in budget authority of all contracts and investments undertaken may not exceed $850,000,000. Proceeds from investments, leases, and conveyances are to be deposited into this Fund, and any use of the Fund is subject to annual appropriations. The Family Housing Improvement Fund is to be administered as a single account without fiscal year limitations. This new authority to enter into contracts and partnerships and to make investments shall expire on September 30, 2000. Reporting Requirements In the future, budget justification documents are to display project and administrative costs. The Committee reiterates the reporting requirements contained in the enabling legislation. The Service Secretary concerned may not enter into any contract until after the end of the 21-day period beginning on the date the Secretary concerned submits written notice of the nature and terms of the contract to the appropriate committees of Congress. In addition, no transfer of appropriated funds into the account may take place until after the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date the Secretary of Defense submits written notice and justification for the transfer to the appropriate committees of Congress. The Appropriations Committee expects to receive prior notification of all such transfers of funds. Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $75,586,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 36,181,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 36,181,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 appropriation...................... -39,405,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... 0 The Committee recommends the budget request of $36,181,000 for the Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense, a decrease of $39,405,000 from the fiscal year 1996 appropriation. The Homeowners Assistance Fund is a non-expiring revolving fund which finances a program for providing assistance to homeowners by reducing their losses incident to the disposal of their homes when military installations at or near where they are serving or employed are ordered to be closed or the scope of operations is reduced. The Fund was established in recognition of the fact that base closure and reduction actions can have serious economic effects on local communities. The Fund receives funding from several sources: appropriations, borrowing authority, reimbursable authority, prior fiscal year unobligated balances, revenue from sale of acquired properties, and recovery of prior year obligations. Recent base closure and realignment actions have had a significant impact on this account. The total estimated requirements for fiscal year 1997 are $163,400,000. Funding for this requirement will come from the following sources: appropriations in the amount of $36,181,000; estimated revenue of $127,219,000; and prior year carryover of $21,060,000. Base Realignment and Closure Overview The Congress has appropriated, to date, $13,373,198,000 for the Base Realignment and Closure program since fiscal year 1990. In the bill for fiscal year 1997, the Committee is recommending total funding of $2,507,474,000 under three accounts, as requested. These funds are necessary to ensure closure schedules can be met and anticipated savings will be realized. In addition, funding is essential for accelerated cleanup which is necessary for reuse of surplus properties and future job creation. The Committee, in appropriating such funds, has provided the Department with the flexibility to allocate funds by Service, by function and by base. The Committee, in recognizing the complexities of realigning and closing bases and providing for environmental restoration, has provided such flexibility to allow the Office of the Secretary of Defense to monitor the program execution of the Services and to redistribute unobligated balances as appropriate to avoid delays and to effect timely execution of realignment and closures along with environmental restoration. The following table displays the total amount appropriated for each round of base closure including amounts recommended for fiscal year 1997: BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE [Total funding, fiscal year 1990 through fiscal year 1997] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fiscal year 1990 through fiscal Fiscal year 1996 Fiscal year 1997 Total year 1995 enacted recommended ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Part I-............................. $2,672,830,000 NA NA $2,672,830,000 Part II \1\......................... 3,875,310,000- $964,843,000- $352,800,000 5,192,953,000 Part III \2\........................ 2,927,166,000 2,148,480,000 971,925,000 6,047,571,000 Part IV............................. NA 784,569,000- 1,182,749,000- 1,967,318,000 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total......................... 9,475,306,000 3,897,892,000 2,507,474,000 15,880,672,000 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Includes transfer of $133,000,000 from ``Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense.'' \2\ Includes: Rescission of $507,692,000 (P.L. 103-211); rescission of $32,000,000 (P.L. 104-6). environmental restoration Since the start of the current process for Base Realignment and Closure, Military Construction Appropriations Acts have appropriated a total of $13,373,198,000 for the entire program for fiscal years 1990 through 1996. Within this total, the Department has allocated $3,307,800,000 for activities associated with environmental restoration. The Committee is concerned that the design and cost of environmental restoration efforts should be tailored to match the proposed re-use of an installation in order to assure that costs are reasonable and affordable. Therefore, the Committee continues to recommend statutory language to establish a ceiling on the level of funding for environmental restoration, unless the Secretary of Defense determines additional obligations are necessary and notifies the Committees on Appropriations of his determination and the necessary reasons for the increase. The following table displays the statutory ceiling established by the Committee and is equal to the Department's execution plan for fiscal year 1997. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ceiling on Account- Total program environmental restoration costs ------------------------------------------------------------------------ BRAC II-.......................... $352,800,000- $223,789,000- BRAC III-......................... 971,925,000- 351,967,000 BRAC IV-.......................... 1,182,749,000- 200,841,000 ------------------------------------- Total....................... 2,507,474,000 776,597,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Committee directs the Department of Defense to devote the maximum amount of resources to actual cleanup and, to the greatest extent possible, to limit resources expended on administration, support, studies, and investigations. construction projects The Department of Defense has requested a total of $861,956,000 within the fiscal year 1997 budget request for base realignment and closure for construction projects funded under the Base Realignment and Closure Accounts, Parts II, III, and IV. The Committee recommends full funding for these important projects. The Committee finds it important that the Congress be advised of any programmatic changes and therefore continues the requirement that any change in a project shall be considered a change in a specifically authorized and appropriated project and all limitations and notification procedures shall apply to these construction projects in the same manner as within the ``Active and Reserve Component'' accounts. The Committee provides approval and appropriated funds for the following construction projects as contained in Executive Summary of Justification Data submitted to Congress March 1996: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ BRAC Amount Component/State/project description round (thousands) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Army BRAC III construction, fiscal year 1997: Texas: Fort Bliss: Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Hangar (46592) III $4,700 ------------ Subtotal Army Texas............... ....... 4,700 ============ Total for Army BRAC III construction, fiscal year 1997: ....... 4,700 ============ Army BRAC IV construction, fiscal year 1997: Alabama: Anniston Army Depot: EOD Operations Facility (34665)....... IV 1,700 ------------ Subtotal Army Alabama............. ....... 1,700 ============ Arizona: Fort Huachuca: Building 61801 Renovation (46212)..... IV 400 Warehouse (46235)..................... IV 800 ------------ Subtotal Army Arizona............. ....... 1,200 ============ District of Columbia: Walter Reed Army Medical Center: Nurse Training Facility (46342)....... IV 1,500 ------------ Subtotal Army District of Columbia ....... 1,500 ============ Maryland: Fort Detrick: Administrative Facility (46197)....... IV 6,800 General Purpose Storage (46204)....... IV 1,150 ============ Subtotal Army Maryland............ ....... 7,950 Missouri: Fort Leonard Wood: Chemical Defense Training Facility (45893).............................. IV 28,000 General Instruction Facility (46090).. IV 58,000 Applied Instruction Facility (46091).. IV 32,000 Unaccompanied Enlisted Housing (46092) IV 58,000 ------------ Subtotal Army Missouri............ ....... 176,000 ============ New Jersey: Fort Monmouth: Administrative Facility (45981)....... IV 2,200 ------------ Subtotal Army New Jersey.......... ....... 2,200 ============ New York: Fort Totten: Storage Facility (46258).............. IV 1,900 ------------ Subtotal Army New York............ ....... 1,900 ============ Oklahoma: McAlester Army Ammunition Plant: Universal Functional Test Range (45911).............................. IV 1,950 General and Applied Instruction Facility (45956)..................... IV 6,100 Administrative Facility (45955)....... IV 14,200 ------------ Subtotal Army Oklahoma............ ....... 22,250 ============ South Carolina: Fort Jackson: DOD Polygraph Institute (45839)....... IV 4,600 ------------ Subtotal Army South Carolina...... ....... 4,600 ============ Virginia: Fort Belvoir: Administrative Facility (45858)....... IV 7,500 ------------ Subtotal Army Virginia............ ....... 7,500 ============ Washington: Fort Lewis: Center for Health Promotion (46056)... IV 3,050 ------------ Subtotal Army Washington.......... ....... 3,050 ============ Various Locations: Planning and Design....................... IV 9,790 ============ Total for Army BRAC IV construction, fiscal year 1997..................... ....... 239,640 ============ Army BRAC IV family housing, fiscal year 1997: Missouri: Fort Leonard Wood: General Officer Quarters (38174)...... ....... 430 ------------ Total for Army BRAC IV family housing, fiscal year 1997........ ....... 430 ============ Navy BRAC III construction, fiscal year 1997: California: Fleet ASW Training Center, San Diego: Gymnasium (387T)...................... III 3,400 Marine Corps Air Station, Camp Pendleton: Warehouse and Special Storage Facilities (029T).................... III 6,080 Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar: Storage Facilities (007T)............. III 9,820 Tactical Van Pad Facility (012T)...... III 15,500 Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (013T)..... III 59,883 Naval Air Station Lemoore: Administrative Office (186T).......... III 1,500 ------------ Subtotal Navy California.......... ....... 96,183 ============ District of Columbia: Commandant Naval District, Washington: Headquarters Building Renovation (001T)............................... III 2,000 Strategic Systems Programs Office, Washington: Building Renovation (001T)............ III 14,580 ------------ Subtotal Navy District of Columbia ....... 16,580 ============ Florida: Army Reserve Center, Orlando: Facility Modifications (001T)......... III 2,683 Naval Air Station, Jacksonville: Aviation Physiology Training (831T)... III 2,270 ------------ Subtotal Navy Florida............. ....... 4,953 ============ Georgia: Naval Air Station, Atlanta: Marine Reserve Training Facility (906T)............................... III 9,100 ------------ Subtotal Navy Georgia............. ....... 9,100 ============ Hawaii: Marine Corps Air Station, Kaneohe Bay: Aircraft Parking Apron (268T)......... III 14,562 Maintenance Hangar Alterations (270T). III 31,400 Building Renovations (271T)........... III 2,500 Building Additions and Renovations (272T)............................... III 1,300 Aviation Supply Facilities (274T)..... III 2,700 Training Facility (276T).............. III 8,600 Bachelor Quarters (286T).............. III 26,900 Helicopter Landing Pad (287T)......... III 400 Hazardous Storehouse and Waste Transfer Facility (288T)............. III 5,100 Ordnance Facilities (297T)............ III 1,400 Tactical Support Facility (297T)...... III 10,500 Utilities Upgrade (504T).............. III 5,100 Ordnance Facilities (508T)............ III 2,100 ------------ Subtotal Navy Hawaii.............. ....... 112,562 Nevada: Naval Air Station, Fallon: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (Phase II) (308T)............................... III 9,830 ------------ Subtotal Navy Nevada.............. ....... 9,830 ============ South Carolina: Marine Corps Air Station, Beaufort: Hangar Renovation (396T).............. III 1,900 ------------ Subtotal Navy South Carolina...... ....... 1,900 ============ Tennessee: Naval Air Station, Memphis: Building Alterations (326T)........... III 17,510 Building Alterations (325T)........... III 7,100 ------------ Subtotal Navy Tennessee........... ....... 24,610 ============ Texas: Naval Air Station, Fort Worth: Child Development Center (121T)....... III 2,010 ------------ Subtotal Navy Texas............... ....... 2,010 ============ Virginia: Naval Station, Norfolk: Administrative Facility (360T)........ III 1,000 Naval Air Station, Oceana: Engine Maintenance Shop Addition (457T)............................... III 480 ------------ Subtotal Navy Virginia............ ....... 1,480 ============ Washington: Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island: Ground Support Equipment Shop (600T).. III 2,700 Sonobuoy Storage Facility (615T)...... III 600 ------------ Subtotal Navy Washington.......... ....... 3,300 ============ Midway Island: Naval Air Facility: Demolition (402T)..................... III 3,000 ------------ Subtotal Navy Midway Island....... ....... 3,000 ============ Total for Navy BRAC III construction, fiscal year 1997... ....... 285,508 ============ Navy BRAC III family housing, fiscal year 1997: Florida: Naval Air Station, Pensacola: Family Housing (406T)................. III 9,845 ------------ Subtotal Navy Florida............. ....... 9,845 ============ Washington: Naval Submarine Base, Bangor: Family Housing (404T)................. III 4,672 Family Housing (405T)................. III 6,454 ------------ Subtotal Navy Washington.......... ....... 11,126 ============ Total for Navy BRAC III family housing, fiscal year 1997........ ....... 20,971 ============ Navy BRAC IV Construction, fiscal year 1997: California: Naval Air Station, North Island: Maintenance Training Facility (829U).. IV 3,780 Naval Aviation Depot, North Island: Engineering Support Office Modifications (832U)................. IV 844 Engineering Support Offices (830U).... IV 721 Naval Weapon Station, Concord: Secure Warehouse (999U)............... IV 15,400 ------------ Subtotal Navy California.......... ....... 20,745 ============ District of Columbia: Commandant, Naval District Washington: Parking Garage (104U)................. IV 8,900 Logistics Support Facility (101U)..... IV 2,400 Public Works Facility (102U).......... IV 1,900 ------------ Subtotal Navy District of Columbia ....... 13,200 ============ Florida: Naval Explosive Diving Unit, Panama City: Manned Diving Physiology (366U)....... IV 1,870 ------------ Subtotal Navy Florida............. ....... 1,870 ============ Maryland: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock: Materials Processing Facility (181U).. IV 1,450 Magnetic Fields Facility (182U)....... IV 6,400 ------------ Subtotal Navy Maryland............ ....... 7,850 ============ Pennsylvania: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Philadelphia: Advance Machine R&D Facility (184U)... IV 5,400 ------------ Subtotal Navy Pennsylvania........ ....... 5,400 ============ South Carolina: Naval Weapon Station, Charleston: Medical/Dental Clinic Expansion (019U) IV 3,464 ------------ Subtotal Navy South Carolina...... ....... 3,464 ============ Tennessee: Naval Air Station, Memphis: Building Modifications (328U)......... IV 4,744 ------------ Subtotal Navy Tennessee........... ....... 4,744 ============ Virginia: Naval Air Station, Oceana: Flight Simulator Building Addition (160U)............................... IV 9,044 Corrosion Control Hangar (576U)....... IV 4,800 F/A 18 Aviation Maintenance Additions (164U)............................... IV 2,700 Renovate/Addition Training Facility (161U)............................... IV 5,700 ------------ Subtotal Navy Virginia............ ....... 22,244 ============ Washington: Naval Shipyard, Puget Sound: Ship Maintenance Facilities (334U).... IV 1,840 ------------ Subtotal Navy Washington.......... ....... 1,840 ============ Various Locations: Planning and design....................... ....... 9,700 ============ Total for Navy BRAC IV construction, fiscal year 1997... ....... 91,057 ============ Air Force BRAC II construction, fiscal year 1997: California: Beale AFB: Add/Alter Civil Engineering Facilities (BAEY950204R1)....................... II 900 Add/Alter Operations Facility (BAEY950200R1)....................... II 460 Alter Logistics Facilities (BAEY950201R1)....................... II 520 Add/Alter Support Facility (BAEY939108)......................... II 300 Vandenberg AFB: Campus Utilities (XUMU963007)......... II 2,900 ------------ Subtotal Air Force California..... ....... 5,080 ============ Colorado: Buckley Air National Guard Base: Enlisted Dormitory (CRWU953050)....... II 8,150 ------------ Subtotal Air Force Colorado....... II 8,150 ============ Indiana: Grissom ARB: Munitions Storage (CTGC959019)........ II 1,500 ------------ Subtotal Air Force Indiana........ ....... 1,500 ============ Mississippi: Keesler AFB: Physical Fitness Center (MAHG913034).. II 690 ------------ Subtotal Air Force Mississippi.... II 690 ============ Ohio: Rickenbacker Air National Guard Base: Alter Base Maintenance Shops (NLZG939686)......................... II 1,950 Alter Support Shops (NLZG939687)...... II 2,000 Alter Fuel System Maintenance Dock (NLZG939700)......................... II 1,200 Jet Fuel Storage/Distribution (NLZG939729)......................... II 9,000 Wright-Patterson AFB: National Airborne Operations Center Complex (ZHTV943204)................. II 5,100 ------------ Subtotal Air Force Ohio........... ....... 19,250 ============ Texas: Lackland AFB: Add/Alter Physical Fitness Center (MPLS913337)......................... II 1,600 Alter Technical Training Facility (MPYJ953260)......................... II 2,250 Sheppard AFB: Add to Chapel (VNVP933025)............ II 700 ------------ Subtotal Air Force Texas.......... ....... 4,550 ============ Various Locations: Planning and Design (BCL97RD4)............ ....... 580 ============ Total for Air Force BRAC II construction, fiscal year 1997... ....... 39,800 ============ Air Force BRAC II family housing, fiscal year 1997: Oklahoma: Altus AFB: Family Housing (AGGN954015)........... II 22,973 ------------ Total for Air Force BRAC II family housing, fiscal year 1997........ ....... 22,973 ============ Air Force BRAC III construction, fiscal year 1997: California: March AFB: Alter Combat Camera (PCZP960606)...... III 1,200 Travis AFB: Upgrade Roads (XDAT953320)............ III 2,400 ------------ Subtotal Air Force California..... ....... 3,600 ============ Idaho: Mountain Home AFB: Air Control Squad Complex (QYZH973020) III 3,500 ------------ Subtotal Air Force Idaho.......... ....... 3,500 ============ New Jersey: McGuire AFB: Public Health Facility (PTFL943174)... III 4,000 Upgrade Roads (PTFL943167)............ III 3,000 ------------ Subtotal Air Force New Jersey..... ....... 7,000 ============ New York: Griffiss AFB: Alter Support Facilities (JREZ940056). III 750 Alter Consolidated Logistics Facility (JREZ940055)......................... III 2,550 ------------ Subtotal Air Force New York....... ....... 3,300 ============ Total for Air Force BRAC III construction, fiscal year 1997... ....... 17,400 ============ Air Force BRAC III family housing, fiscal year 1997: New Jersey: McGuire AFB: Improve Family Housing (PTFL954000X).. III 15,884 ------------ Total for Air Force BRAC III Family Housing, fiscal year 1997. ....... 15,884 ============ Air Force BRAC IV construction, fiscal year 1997: California: Edwards AFB: Add/Alter Avionics Research Laboratory (FSPM973506)......................... IV 890 March AFB: Add/Alter Communication/Electronic Training Complex (PCZP959603)........ IV 640 ------------ Subtotal Air Force California..... ....... 1,530 ============ Florida: MacDill AFB: Add/Alter Fuel Maintenance Facility (NVZR973722)......................... IV 2,900 Alter Squadron Operations Facility (NVZR973718)......................... IV 2,500 Alter Corrosion Control (NVZR973721).. IV 5,000 Alter Maintenance Facilities (NVZR973723)......................... IV 800 Patrick AFB: Pararescue Training Facility (SXHT959002)......................... IV 2,650 Maintenance Facilities (SXHT959011)... IV 500 Add/Alter Corrosion Control Facility (SXHT959004)......................... IV 2,750 ------------ Subtotal Air Force Florida........ ....... 17,100 ============ Mississippi: Columbus AFB: T-37 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar (EEPZ973006)......................... IV 1,100 ------------ Subtotal Air Force Mississippi.... ....... 1,100 ============ New York: Fort Drum: Runway/Apron/Instrument Landing System (WOXG959609)......................... IV 46,000 ------------ Subtotal Air Force New York....... ....... 46,000 ============ Texas: Carswell Naval Air Station/Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base: Numbered Air Force Headquarters (DDPF959004)......................... IV 4,300 Security Police Training Facility (DDPF959006)......................... IV 720 Laughlin AFB: Add to Child Development Center (MXDP973003R1)....................... IV 350 ------------ Subtotal Air Force Texas.......... ....... 5,370 ============ Various Locations: Planning and Design (BCL97RD4)............ ....... 5,543 ============ Total for Air Force BRAC IV construction, fiscal year 1997... ....... 76,643 ============ Defense Logistics Agency BRAC III construction, fiscal year 1997: California: Defense Contract Management District West, El Segundo: Administrative Building............... III 5,200 ------------ Subtotal DLA California........... ....... 5,200 ============ Pennsylvania: Aviation Supply Office, Philadelphia: Convert Facilities for Defense Personnel Support Center............. III 31,950 ------------ Subtotal DLA Pennsylvania......... ....... 31,950 ============ Various Locations: Planning and Design....................... ....... 500 ============ Total for DLA BRAC III construction, fiscal year 1997... ....... 37,650 ============ Defense Logistics Agency BRAC IV Construction, fiscal year 1997: California: Defense Distribution Region West, Tracy: Hazardous Material Storage Addition to Warehouse 28......................... IV 9,300 ------------ Total for DLA BRAC IV construction, fiscal year 1997... ....... 9,300 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Base Realignment and Closure, Part I The Committee notes that fiscal year 1995 was the last year for appropriations into this account. Base Realignment and Closure, Part II Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $964,843,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 352,800,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 352,800,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 appropriation...................... -612,043,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... 0 The Committee recommends a total of $352,800,000 for Base Realignment and Closure, Part II for fiscal year 1997. This is equal to the budget request for fiscal year 1997 and a decrease of $612,043,000 below the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1996. Below is the recommended distribution of funds as requested: Activity Amount Military Construction................................... $39,800,000 Family Housing.......................................... 22,973,000 Environmental........................................... 223,789,000 Operations and Maintenance.............................. 65,684,000 Military Personnel (PCS)................................ 0 Other................................................... 554,000 Revenues................................................ 0 -------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________ Total............................................... 352,800,000 Base Realignment and Closure, Part III Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $2,148,480,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 971,925,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 971,925,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 appropriation...................... -1,176,555,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... 0 The Committee recommends a total of $971,925,000 for Base Realignment and Closure, Part III for fiscal year 1997. This is equal to the budget request for fiscal year 1997 and a decrease of $1,176,555,000 below the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1996. Below is the recommended distribution of funds as requested: Activity Amount Military Construction................................... $345,258,000 Family Housing.......................................... 36,855,000 Environmental........................................... 351,967,000 Operations and Maintenance.............................. 425,350,000 Military Personnel (PCS)................................ 27,524,000 Other................................................... 28,918,000 Revenues................................................ (243,947,000) -------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________ Total............................................... 971,925,000 Base Realignment and Closure, Part IV Fiscal year 1996 appropriation.......................... $784,569,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate............................... 1,182,749,000 Committee recommendation in the bill.................... 1,182,749,000 Comparison with: Fiscal year 1996 appropriation...................... +398,180,000 Fiscal year 1997 estimate........................... 0 The Committee recommends a total of $1,182,749,000 for Base Realignment and Closure, Part IV for fiscal year 1997. This is equal to the budget request for fiscal year 1997 and an increase of $398,180,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1996. Below is the recommended distribution of funds as requested: Activity Amount Military Construction................................... $416,640,000 Family Housing.......................................... 1,624,000 Environmental........................................... 200,841,000 Operations and Maintenance.............................. 541,079,000 Military Personnel (PCS)................................ 3,581,000 Other................................................... 18,984,000 Revenues................................................ 0 -------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________ Total............................................... 1,182,749,000 General Provisions The bill carries a number of routine General Provisions that have been included for several years. Changes in Application of Existing Law Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of Representatives, the following statements are submitted describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill which directly or indirectly change the application of existing law. Language is included in various parts of the bill to continue on-going activities which require annual authorization or additional legislation, which to date has not been enacted. The bill includes a number of provisions which place limitations on the use of funds in the bill or change existing limitations and which might, under some circumstances, be construed as changing the application of existing law. The bill provides that appropriations shall remain available for more than one year for some programs for which the basic authority legislation does not presently authorize such extended availability. A provision of the ``Military Construction, Defense-wide'' account which permits the Secretary of Defense to transfer funds to other accounts for military construction or family housing. A new account has been established, ``Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund'', for arrangements with private developers to provide affordable, timely housing for unaccompanied service members. A provision is included which permits the Secretary of Defense to transfer funds from other construction accounts. A provision of the ``Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund'', which permits the Secretary of Defense to transfer funds from other family housing accounts. A provision of the ``Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part II'' states that not more than $223,789,000 of the funds appropriated shall be available solely for environmental restoration. A provision of the ``Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part III'' states that not more than $351,967,000 of the funds appropriated shall be available solely for environmental restoration. A provision of the ``Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part IV'' states that not more than $200,841,000 of the funds appropriated shall be available solely for environmental restoration. Section 101 of the General Provisions states that none of the funds appropriated in Military Construction Appropriations Acts shall be expended for payments under a cost-plus-a-fixed- fee contract for work, where cost estimates exceed $25,000, to be performed within the United States, except Alaska, without the specific approval in writing of the Secretary of Defense, except in the case of contracts for environmental restoration at base closure sites. Section 102 of the General Provisions permits use of funds for hire of passenger motor vehicles. Section 103 of the General Provisions permits use of funds for Defense Access Roads. Section 104 of the General Provisions prohibits construction of new bases inside the continental United States for which specific appropriations have not been made. Section 105 of the General Provisions limits the use of funds for purchase of land or land easements. Section 106 of the General Provisions prohibits the use of funds to acquire land, prepare a site, or install utilities for any family housing except housing for which funds have been made available. Section 107 of the General Provisions limits the use of minor construction funds to transfer or relocate activities among installations. Section 108 of the General Provisions prohibits the procurement of steel unless American producers, fabricators, and manufacturers have been allowed to compete. Section 109 of the General Provisions prohibits payment of real property taxes in foreign nations. Section 110 of the General Provisions prohibits construction of new bases overseas without prior notification. Section 111 of the General Provisions establishes a threshold for American preference of $500,000 relating to architect and engineer services in Japan, in any NATO member country, and in the Arabian Gulf. Section 112 of the General Provisions establishes preference for American contractors for military construction in the United States territories and possessions in the Pacific and on Kwajalein Atoll, or in the Arabian Gulf. Section 113 of the General Provisions requires the Secretary of Defense to give prior notice to Congress of military exercises involving construction in excess of $100,000. Section 114 of the General Provisions limits obligations during the last two months of the fiscal year. Section 115 of the General Provisions permits funds appropriated in prior years to be available for construction authorized during the current session of Congress. Section 116 of the General Provisions permits the use of expired or lapsed funds to pay the cost of supervision for any project being completed with lapsed funds. Section 117 of the General Provisions permits obligation of funds from more than one fiscal year to execute a construction project, provided that the total obligation for such project is consistent with the total amount appropriated for the project. Section 118 of the General Provisions allows expired funds to be transferred to the ``Foreign Currency Fluctuations, Construction, Defense'' account. Section 119 of the General Provisions directs the Secretary of Defense to report annually regarding the specific actions to be taken during the current fiscal year to encourage other member nations of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Japan, Korea, and United States allies in the Arabian Gulf to assume a greater share of the common defense burden. Section 120 of the General Provisions allows transfer of proceeds from ``Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part I'' to the continuing Base Realignment and Closure accounts. Section 121 of the General Provisions prohibits expenditure of funds except in compliance with the Buy American Act. Section 122 of the General Provisions states the Sense of the Congress notifying recipients of equipment or products authorized to be purchased with financial assistance provided in this Act to purchase American-made equipment and products. Section 123 of the General Provisions permits the transfer of funds from the Base Realignment and Closure accounts to the ``Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense.'' The Committee recommends deleting the following General Provisions which were included in the fiscal year 1996 Military Construction Appropriations Act (P.L. 104-32): Section 124, regarding the Army's use of George AFB as the interim airhead for the National Training Center at Fort Irwin until Barstow-Daggett reaches Initial Operational Capability as the permanent airhead. Section 125, regarding the Army's conveyance of remaining surplus property at the former Fort Sheridan to the Fort Sheridan Joint Planning Committee or its successor, for fair market value. Compliance With Rule XIII--Clause 3 In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the House of Representatives, the Committee reports that it recommends no changes in existing law made by the bill, as reported. Appropriations Not Authorized by Law Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in the accompanying bill which are not authorized by law: Military Construction, Army Military Construction, Navy Military Construction, Air Force Military Construction, Defense-wide Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund Military Construction, Army National Guard Military Construction, Air National Guard Military Construction, Army Reserve Military Construction, Naval Reserve Military Construction, Air Force Reserve North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program Family Housing, Construction, Army Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Army- Family Housing, Construction, Navy and Marine Corps Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Navy and Marine Corps Family Housing, Construction, Air Force Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Family Housing, Construction, Defense-wide Family Housing, Operation and Maintenance, Defense-wide Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund Homeowners Assistance Fund, Defense Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part II Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part III Base Realignment and Closure Account, Part IV The Committee notes that authorization for appropriations in this bill is contained in H.R. 3230, which passed the House on May 15, 1996. It is anticipated the authorization will be enacted into law later this year. Transfer of Funds Pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule X of the House of Representatives, a statement is required describing the transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill. Sections 115, 118, 120, and 123 of the General Provisions, and language included under ``Military Construction, Defense-wide'' and Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund'' and ``Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund'' provide certain transfer authority. Rescission of Funds In compliance with clause 1(b) of rule X of the House of Representatives, the Committee reports that it recommends rescissions in the amount of $12,000,000 under ``Military Construction, Navy.'' Inflationary Impact Statement Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the House of Representatives, the Committee estimates that enactment of this bill would have no overall inflationary impact on prices and costs in the operation of the national economy. Comparisons with Budget Resolution Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as amended, requires that the report accompanying a bill providing new budget authority contain a statement detailing how that authority compares with the reports submitted under section 602(b) of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget for the fiscal year. This information follows: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 602(b) Allocation This bill --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Budget authority Outlays Budget authority Outlays ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discretionary....................... $10,033 $10,430 $10,032 $10,429 Mandatory........................... 0 0 0 0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Advance Spending Authority This bill provides no advance spending authority. Five-Year Projection of Outlays In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as amended, the following information was provided to the Committee by the Congressional Budget Office. [In thousands of dollars] Budget authority, fiscal year 1997...................... $10,032,000 Outlays: 1997................................................ 3,225,000 1998................................................ 3,209,000 1999................................................ 1,933,000 2000................................................ 980,000 2001 and beyond..................................... 685,000 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)(D) of Public Law 93- 344, the new budget authority and outlays provided by the accompanying bill for financial assistance to State and local governments are as follows: [In millions of dollars] New budget authority.................................... 0 Fiscal year 1997 outlays resulting therefrom............ 0 State List The following is a complete listing, by State and country, of the Committee's recommendations for military construction and family housing projects: <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>