For other versions of this document, see http://wikileaks.org/wiki/CRS-RL31310 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Order Code RL31310 Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Appropriations for FY2003: Military Construction Updated February 12, 2003 Daniel H. Else Analyst in National Defense Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional Research Service ~ The Library of Congress Appropriations are one part of a complex federal budget process that includes budget resolutions, appropriations (regular, supplemental, and continuing) bills, rescissions, and budget reconciliation bills. The process begins with the President's budget request and is bound by the rules of the House and Senate, the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (as amended), the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, and current program authorizations. This report is a guide to one of the 13 regular appropriations bills that Congress considers each year. It is designed to supplement the information provided by the House and Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittees. It summarizes the current legislative status of the bill, its scope, major issues, funding levels, and related legislative activity. The report lists the key CRS staff relevant to the issues covered and related CRS products. This report is updated as soon as possible after major legislative developments, especially following legislative action in the committees and on the floor of the House and Senate. NOTE: A Web version of this document with active links is available to congressional staff at: [http://www.crs.gov/products/appropriations/apppage.shtml]. Appropriations for FY2003: Military Construction Summary The military construction (MilCon) appropriations bill provides funding for (1) military construction projects in the United States and overseas; (2) military family housing operations and construction; (3) U.S. contributions to the NATO Security Investment Program; and (4) the bulk of base realignment and closure (BRAC)costs. On February 4, 2002, the Administration submitted a $379 billion FY2003 defense budget request. Of this, $9.0 billion was designated for accounts falling within the jurisdiction of the Appropriations Committees' subcommittees on military construction. This request was approximately $1.7 billion less than that appropriated for FY2002. The decrease resulted from a $2.1 billion reduction in domestic military construction that was offset somewhat by increases for family housing and for building at military installations overseas. The Department of Defense stated that some projects were withheld anticipating the FY2005 base realignments and closures (BRAC) round. To offset the decrease, DOD increased its request to maintain and rehabilitate existing defense property (funded from other appropriations) by approximately $677 million above the amount enacted in FY2002. $4.2 billion of this year's request is devoted to military construction projects. According to the President's current national defense budget estimate, requests for these same accounts are expected to rise to $12.7 billion by FY2007. Amendments to the FY2003 military construction appropriation are included in H.J.Res. 2 of the 108th Congress. In a separate action for the Defense Emergency Response Fund (DERF), the Administration requested an additional $594 million (subsequently raised to $717 million) in military construction budget authority. This report contains information on how this has been apportioned between the services. For the current status of DERF legislation, see CRS Report RL31305, Authorization and Appropriations for FY2003: Defense, by Stephen Daggett and Amy Belasco. Authorization of military construction is included within the defense authorization bill. The House passed its version of the bill (H.R. 4546) on May 10. The Senate Armed Services Committee marked its authorization bill (S. 2514) and reported it on May 15. The Senate substituted the text of S. 2514 for that of H.R. 4546, passed the amended bill, and appointed conferees on June 27, 2002. The House further amended the bill and appointed conferees on July 26. Conferees began meeting on September 5, 2002, reporting the bill on November 12 (H.Rept. 107-772). The President enacted the bill as P.L. 107-314 on December 2. Military construction appropriations markup by the House Appropriations Committee occurred on June 24. The bill (H.R. 5011) was introduced on June 25 and passed on June 26. The Senate Appropriations Committee marked its version of the bill (S. 2709) on June 27. On July 17, the Senate substituted the language of S. 2709 for that of H.R. 5011, passed the amended bill on July 18, and appointed conferees. The House rejected the Senate amendment on September 10. The House and Senate adopted the conference report (H.Rept. 107-731) on October 10 and 11, respectively, and the bill was enacted by the President on October 23 as P.L. 107-249. This report will be updated as necessary. Key Policy Staff CRS Telephone Area of Expertise Name Division and E-Mail Base Closure David Lockwood FDT* 7-7621 dlockwood@crs.loc.gov Defense Acquisition Valerie Grasso FDT 7-7617 vgrasso@crs.loc.gov Def. Budget, Mil. Con./ Daniel H. Else FDT 7-4996 Defense Industry delse@crs.loc.gov Defense Budget Amy Belasco FDT 7-7627 abelasco@crs.loc.gov Defense Reform Gary Pagliano FDT 7-1750 gpagliano@crs.loc.gov Guard and Reserve Issues Lawrence Kapp FDT 7-7609 lkapp@crs.loc.gov * FDT = Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division of the Congressional Research Service. Contents Most Recent Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Content of Annual Military Construction Appropriations and Defense Authorization Bills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Status of Ongoing Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Elective Quality of Life Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Environmental Remediation on Closed Military Bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Efficient Facilities Initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Bill Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Appropriations Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 House Appropriations Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Senate Appropriations Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Conference Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Changes in Project Funding during the Legislative Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Key Policy Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Overall and Specific Account Funding Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Military Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Defense Emergency Response Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Additional Omnibus Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Major Funding Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Supplemental Legislation for FY2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Military Construction Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Defense Authorization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Omnibus Appropriation Bill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 For Additional Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 CRS Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Selected World Wide Web Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 List of Figures Figure 1. Guard and Reserve Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Figure 2. Military Construction Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 List of Tables Table 1. Status of Military Construction Appropriations, FY2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Table 2. Budget Authority by Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Table 3. Domestic Military Construction, Active Duty and Reserves . . . . . . . . . 11 Table 4. Sustainment Funding Trend, FY2001-FY2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Table 5. DERF Military Construction Allocation by Account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Table 6. Military Construction Appropriations, FY1999-FY2003 . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Table 7. Military Construction Appropriations by Account: FY2002-FY2003 . . 22 Table 8. Military Construction FY2003 Appropriations by Account; Congressional Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Table 9. Congressional Additions to Annual DOD Budget Requests for National Guard and Reserve Military Construction, FY1993-FY2003 . . . . 24 Table 10. Changes in Project Funding, Military Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Table 11. Changes in Project Funding, Military Family Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Appropriations for FY2003: Military Construction Most Recent Developments The President submitted his fiscal year 2003 budget request to Congress on February 4, 2002. The House Subcommittee on Military Construction forwarded its markup to the full Appropriations Committee on June 12, which completed its mark on June 24. The bill (H.R. 5011, H.Rept. 107-533) was introduced to the House on June 25, considered on June 27, and passed 426-1 (Roll No. 277). The Senate received the bill on June 28. The Senate Appropriations Committee marked its version (S. 2709, S.Rept. 107-202) on June 27 and reported on July 3. The Senate substituted the text of S. 2709 and passed the amended H.R. 5011 on July 18 (96-3), appointed conferees, and informed the House of its action. The House rejected the Senate amendment on September 10, 2002, and appointed conferees. Conferees met on October 8. The House accepted the conference report (H.Rept. 107-731) 419-0 on October 10 (Roll No. 458). The Senate adopted the conference report by unanimous consent on October 11. The bill was sent to the President on October 18 and enacted on October 23 as P.L. 107-249, one of the two appropriations bills enacted during the second session of the 107th Congress. Defense authorization legislation (H.R. 4546) cleared the House Committee on Armed Services and passed by recorded vote (359-58) on May 10.1 It was received by the Senate on May 14. Equivalent authorization legislation (S. 2514) was marked up by the Senate Committee on the Armed Services on May 9 and reported with additional and minority views on May 15 (S.Rept. 107-151). S. 2514 was debated and amended in the Senate between June 19 and June 27, when it passed with amendments 97-2 (Record Vote No. 165). Its text was incorporated into H.R. 4546 and passed by unanimous consent. On July 25, the House amended the Senate amendment and appointed conferees. The Senate disagreed to the amendment and appointed conferees. Conferees met on September 5 and reported the bill to the House on November 12 (H.Rept. 107-772), where it was agreed to by voice vote. The Defense Authorization Bill was enacted into law (P.L. 107-314) by the President on December 2, 2002. Text relating to military construction was added by the Senate to H.J.Res. 2 (Omnibus Appropriation, introduced at the opening of the 108th Congress). Conferees began meeting on February 10, 2003 (see below). 1 A companion bill, H.R. 4547, authorizing the $10.0 billion incremental funding for ongoing operations in the war on terrorism (the "war reserve fund") specified in H.Con.Res. 353 was introduced on April 26, referred to committee on July 24, and incorporated into H.R. 4546 on July 25. CRS-2 Background Content of Annual Military Construction Appropriations and Defense Authorization Bills The Department of Defense (DOD) manages the world's largest dedicated infrastructure, covering more than 40,000 square miles of land and a physical plant worth more than $500 billion. The military construction appropriations bill provides a large part of the funding to enhance and maintain this infrastructure. The bill funds construction projects and some of the facility sustainment, restoration and modernization of the active Army, Navy and Marine Corps, Air Force, and their reserve components;2 additional defense-wide construction; U.S. contributions to the NATO Security Investment Program (formerly known as the NATO Infrastructure Program);3 and military family housing operations and construction. The bill also provides funding for the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) account, which finances most base realignment and closure costs, including construction of new facilities for transferred personnel and functions and environmental cleanup at closing sites.4 The military construction appropriations bill is one of several annual pieces of legislation that provide funding for national defense. Other major appropriation legislation includes the defense appropriations bill, which provides funds for all non- construction military activities of the Department of Defense and constitutes more than 90% of national security-related spending, and the energy and water development appropriations bill, which provides funding for atomic energy defense activities of the Department of Energy and for civil projects carried out by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Two other appropriations bills, VA-HUD-Independent 2 Facility sustainment, restoration, and modernization (SRM) includes the repair and maintenance of buildings, structures, warehouses, roadways, runways, aprons, railway tracks, utility plants, and their associated distribution systems, plus minor construction (cost not to exceed $500 thousand) to create new facilities or expand, alter, or convert existing facilities. A large part of the funding dedicated to the SRM function is requested not as part of the military construction appropriation, but rather as part of the Operations and Maintenance account within the annual defense appropriation. 3 The NATO Security Investment program is the U.S. contribution to Alliance funds for the construction of facilities and the procurement of equipment essential to the wartime support of operational forces in the common defense of the NATO area. Facilities funded by this program include airfields, naval bases, signal and telecom installations, pipelines, war headquarters, as well as early warning radar and missile installations. The U.S. contributes approximately 25% of the total annual NSIP assessment, with the rest coming from the other members of the North Atlantic Alliance. 4 Virtually all costs associated with the latest completed BRAC round (that of FY1995) have been funded. The bulk of current BRAC appropriations (before the next round commences in FY2005) will be dedicated to environmental remediation of closed military installations. CRS-3 Agencies and Commerce-Justice-State, also include small amounts for national defense.5 No funds may be expended by any agency of the federal government before they are appropriated.6 In addition, for nearly half a century Congress has forbidden the Department of Defense to obligate funds for any project or program until specific authorization is granted.7 This explains why, for defense funds, both authorization and appropriations bills are required. Two separate defense appropriations bills are written annually, a "Military Construction Appropriations Act" dedicated to military construction, and a "National Defense Appropriations Act" covering all other defense appropriations.8 Normally only one "National Defense Authorization Act" is passed each year to authorize both of these appropriations.9 Therefore, major debates over defense policy and funding issues, including military construction, can be associated with any of these bills. Because issues in the defense authorization and appropriations bills intertwine, this report includes salient parts of the authorization bill in its discussion of the military construction appropriation process. The separate military construction appropriations bill dates to the late 1950s. Traditionally, military construction was funded through annual defense or supplemental appropriations bills. However, the Korean War prompted a surge of military construction, followed by a steady increase in military construction appropriations. Given the strong and enduring security threat posed by the Soviet Union, a relatively high level of spending on military infrastructure appeared likely to continue. The appropriations committees established military construction subcommittees and created a separate military construction bill. The first stand-alone military construction bill was written for FY1959 (P.L. 85-852). Military construction appropriations are not the sole source of funds available to defense agencies for facility investment. The defense appropriations bill funds so- called minor construction and property maintenance within its operations and maintenance accounts. In addition, construction and maintenance of Morale, Welfare, and Recreation-related facilities are partially funded through proceeds of commissaries, recreation user fees, and other non-appropriated income. 5 See CRS Report RL31005, Appropriations and Authorization for FY2002: Defense, by Amy Belasco, Mary Tyszkiewicz, and Stephen Daggett, for details on the defense authorization and appropriation process. 6 Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 of the U.S. Constitution. 7 See 10 USC 114. 8 The relevant subcommittees of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees are Military Construction (for the military construction appropriation) and Defense (for the national defense appropriation). 9 The Subcommittee on Military Installations and Facilities in the House Armed Services Committee and the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support in the Senate Armed Services Committee draft legislation to authorize military construction appropriations. CRS-4 Several special accounts are included within the military construction appropriation. Among these are the Homeowners Assistance Fund (Defense),10 and the Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund,11 both of which perform functions ancillary to the direct building of military infrastructure. Most funds appropriated by Congress each year must be obligated in that fiscal year. Military construction appropriations, though, are an exception. Because of the long-term nature of construction projects, these funds can generally be obligated for up to five fiscal years. Consideration of the military construction budget begins when the President's budget is delivered to Congress each year, usually in early February. This year, the President submitted his budget request on February 4, 2002. Status of Ongoing Initiatives Elective Quality of Life Construction. In recent years, attention has been focused on funding improvements to military housing, workplaces, and installation infrastructure (such as roads, utility services, and the like). Subcommittee hearings during previous congressional sessions contained lengthy discussions of the leveraging of appropriated funds through the privatization of utility services at military installations and of some military family housing.12 Subcommittees have also addressed the allocation of sufficient budget authority to support improved housing and workplace quality at overseas bases. During the mid-1990s, the Department of Defense evaluated more than half of its existing family housing as being substandard. In 1996, then-Secretary of Defense William Cohen set FY2010 as the target date for the elimination of all substandard military housing. Private development was seen as a way to speed refurbishment or 10 The Homeowners Assistance Fund (Defense) was established by the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966 (42 USC 3374). It authorizes the Secretary of Defense to acquire the title to, or to reimburse for certain losses upon the sale of, one- and two-family homes owned by federal employees located at or near military installations ordered closed in whole or in part. 11 10 USC 2883 (Department of Defense Housing Funds) is part of subchapter IV (Alternative Authority for Acquisition and Improvement of Military Housing) of the basic law governing the armed forces. It establishes two independent funds: the Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund and the Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund (unaccompanied members of the military are either unmarried or are married but separated geographically from their families). The funds are sustained by direct appropriation, fund transfers made by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of the Navy from other accounts, proceeds from certain title conveyances or the lease of federal military family housing property, or other financial activity associated with either military family or unaccompanied housing. These funds may be used for the planning, construction, or improvement of military housing as provided for under this particular subchapter of Title 10. 12 CRS Report RL31039, Military Housing Privatization Initiative: Background and Issues for Congress, by Daniel H. Else, provides a background to the military's housing privatization program. CRS-5 replacement while concurrently reducing the burden on appropriated funds, and Congress authorized DOD to use a set of "alternative" business practices in its negotiations with private contractors, to include the creation of long-term public- private joint ventures at locations where they might prove beneficial. Since 1996, when the first agreement was concluded at Naval Air Station Corpus Christi/Naval Air Station Kingsville, Texas, contracts for sixteen separate projects have been awarded under this "Military Housing Privatization Initiative." These range in size from 150 housing units in Phase II of the venture at Naval Air Station Kingsville, Texas, to 5,912 units at Fort Hood, Texas. Projects covering 24,518 housing units are now underway at installations operated by all four military services. An additional 41,503 units in 26 projects are currently pending solicitation, and another 32 projects with 54,193 units are being planned.13 DOD is exploring ways to extend the privatization program to include the improvement of some unaccompanied housing.14 In 1996, DOD set a target of FY2010 for the elimination of all substandard military housing. With recent increases in budget authority appropriated by Congress, DOD has revised this target date to bring it forward to FY2007. The FY2003 budget authority request of $4.25 billion for military family housing exceeds the FY2002 enactment by $151 million. DOD also created a Defense Reform Initiative (DRI) during the 1990s in order remove itself from ownership, management, and responsibility for the operation of the public utilities at as many military bases as feasible.15 Congress authorized the service secretaries to do this by conveying these utilities to private ownership by a local utility company or other entity.16 The award of privatization contracts is expected to be completed by September 30, 2003.17 Integrated with quality of life construction is the consolidation of overseas military facilities. By reducing the number of small installations and combining personnel onto fewer large bases, DOD expects to improve living and working conditions for those stationed overseas through more efficient utilization of its funds. Consolidation agreements have been concluded with both the Federal Republic of Germany and the Republic of Korea. The commander of U.S. forces in Europe has 13 Information on the privatization of military housing is found on the World Wide Web at [http://www.defenselink.mil/acq/installation/hrso/]. 14 Unaccompanied housing is also referred to as bachelor officer or enlisted quarters, barracks, etc. It lodges unmarried or geographically separated military personnel who live on military installations. 15 These include electric, water, waste water, and natural gas, as well as steam, hot and chilled water, and telecommunications systems at active duty, reserve, and National Guard installations. Privatization is not contemplated for locations where it is economically infeasible or where privatization may create a risk to security. 16 See 10 USC 2688. 17 More information on the privatization of utilities at U.S. military installations is available on the Internet at [http://www.acq.osd.mil/ie/utilities/privatization.htm]. CRS-6 requested funds for three construction projects to increase the capacity of the U.S. installation at Grafenwoehr, Germany. "Graf" is expected to accept personnel from 13 separate smaller facilities that will be closed as part of the command's "Efficient Basing East" plan. A similar program, called the "Land Partnership Plan," has been negotiated between the commander of U.S. forces in Korea and the government of the Republic of Korea.18 This 10-year plan will close approximately half of the U.S. facilities currently located in South Korea and consolidate U.S. military personnel onto the remaining installations, which will be upgraded to accept them. Environmental Remediation on Closed Military Bases. Through legislation passed during its first session, the 107th Congress authorized a new round of military base realignments and closures (BRAC). Criteria to select bases for inclusion in the new BRAC will be created and members will be appointed to a BRAC review commission during FY2003, with realignment and closure action scheduled to begin during FY2005.19 A significant portion of the federal property at closed installations during the 1995 BRAC round has been cleaned under the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) and title has been transferred, but the process is not yet complete. For example, the 1995 BRAC round tasked the Department of the Army with closing and conveying title to approximately 248,800 acres of Army property. As of February, 2002, the Army had disposed of 115,000 acres, or 46% of its total. Department of the Army has cited environmental remediation requirements as the principal reason that more property had not been conveyed.20 DOD maintains as its goal the transfer of all 1995 BRAC property before beginning the 2005 round and has requested $545 million in FY2003 BRAC funds.21 The President requested $545.1 million in BRAC funding for FY2003, which the House passed. The Senate Appropriations Committee has recommended that an additional $100.0 million be appropriated in a BRAC Environmental Cleanup Acceleration Initiative in order to speed the transfer of ownership of former military property to local authorities. Of this additional funding, $20 million is to be allocated to the Army, $55 million to the Navy, and $25 million to the Air Force for their use at the most pressing unfunded environmental cleanup sites. 18 See Franklin Fisher, "With Accord Signed, Planners Get To Work On Details Of S. Korea Land Return," Pacific Stars and Stripes, April 16, 2002. 19 See CRS Report RL30051, Military Base Closures: Time for Another Round?, by David E. Lockwood, and CRS Report RL30440, Military Base Closures: Where Do We Stand?, by David E. Lockwood, for more information on the FY2005 BRAC round. 20 See the testimony of Gen. Robert van Antwerp, Assistant Chief of Staff of the Army for Fort Installation Management before the House Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction of February 17, 2002. 21 For more information on defense-related environmental programs, see CRS Report RL31198, Defense Cleanup and Environmental Programs: Authorization and Appropriations for FY2002, by David M. Bearden. DOD maintains a web site with extensive additional information on its environmental cleanup efforts at [http://www.dtic.mil/envirodod/COffice/CleanupO.htm]. CRS-7 Efficient Facilities Initiative. On August 3, 2001, the General Counsel of Department of Defense submitted legislative language to Congress for a program termed the "Efficient Facilities Initiative," or EFI. The EFI included DOD's plan for a round of base realignments and closures during FY2003 and the permanent authorization and expansion to all services of the Brooks Air Force Base Development Demonstration Project.22 This language would have granted the service secretaries the authority to convey title to some or all of the federal property on a military installation to a non-federal entity (such as a local economic development authority) with the intention of leasing back only those facilities needed to support the base's military mission. Congress incorporated the authority for both base realignment and closure and the EFI in the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2002 (S.1438, P.L. 107- 107). Title XXX of the Act established the procedure for carrying out a FY2005 (vice FY2003) BRAC round. Section 2813, instead of granting the requested permanent authority for conveyance and lease-back, permitted the three service secretaries to nominate two military installations in each military department for a 4-year pilot project aimed at determining its potential for increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of operations. To date, no facilities have been nominated for the pilot project. Bill Status Table 1 shows the key legislative steps necessary for the enactment of the FY2003 military construction appropriations. It will be updated as the appropriation process moves forward. Table 1. Status of Military Construction Appropriations, FY2003 Conference Report Committee Markup House House Senate Senate Conf. Public Approval Report Passage Report Passage Report Law House Senate House Senate H.Rept. S.Rept. H.Rept. P.L. 06/24/02 06/27/02 06/27/02 07/18/02 10/10/02 10/11/02 107-533 107-202 107-731 107-249 Dashes indicate no action yet taken. Appropriations Action House Appropriations Action. The House Subcommittee on Military Appropriations held a series of hearings on the budget request dealing with the construction and family housing requirements of the individual services, both active and reserve components, and the European and Pacific commands between February 22 A fuller description of the Brooks Demonstration Project is given in CRS Report RL31010, Appropriations for FY2002: Military Construction, by Daniel H. Else. CRS-8 6 and April 17, 2002. The Subcommittee marked its bill June 12, and the full Committee followed on June 24. The bill (H.R. 5011, H.Rept 107-533) was introduced on June 25, and the Rules Committee introduced a rule (H.Res. 462) on June 26. H.R. 5011 was considered, amended, and passed on a vote of 426-1 (Roll No. 277) on June 27, 2002. The bill was received in the Senate on June 28.The House rejected the Senate amendment on September 10, 2002, and appointed conferees. Senate Appropriations Action. The Senate Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction held hearings during March. Committee markup on its version of the bill was completed on June 27, 2002. The bill (S. 2709, S.Rept. 107-202) was reported on July 3 and placed on the Legislative Calendar under General Orders (Order No. 479). The bill was read twice in the Senate and placed on the Legislative Calendar under General Orders on July 8, 2002 (Calendar No. 486). On July 17, the Senate substituted the language of S. 2709 for that of H.R. 5011. The Senate passed the amended H.R. 5011 (96-3, Roll No. 181) in lieu of S. 2709 and appointed conferees on July 18, 2002. Conference Action. Conferees met on October 8. The House accepted the conference report (H.Rept. 107-731) on October 10 on a 419-0 vote (Roll No. 458). The Senate adopted the conference report by unanimous consent on October 11, 2002. The completed bill was sent to the President on October 18. Its companion authorization bill, H.R. 4546, had not been passed as of that date. The President signed the bill on October 23 as P.L. 107-249. Changes in Project Funding during the Legislative Process The Military Construction Appropriation Act and the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2003 each contain more than 700 line items, individual construction projects for which new budget authority has been granted by Congress. Of these, more than 300 were adjusted (increased or decreased) during the period between budget submission in February until enactment in October and December, respectively. In the Appendix, Tables 10 and 11 list the line items that were adjusted during the legislative process, indicating the amount of new budget authority requested by the President, appropriated in the House, the Senate, and the final conference versions of the Military Construction Appropriations Act, and authorized by the National Defense Authorization Act. It is possible to follow the changes in proposed legislation by consulting these tables, ascertaining where each product was introduced, adjusted, or eliminated as the Congress exercised its oversight and funding responsibilities. A couple of examples may serve to illustrate how these tables can be used. 1. Table 10 shows a presidential budget request of $38 million to fund Phase IV in the construction of an ammunition demilitarization facility at Pueblo Depot, Colorado, an installation intended to disassemble and destroy munitions stockpiles. Congress assigned responsibility for this program to the Department of Defense, and DOD has, in turn, passed executive responsibility for the program to the Department of the Army. The presidential submission placed this construction funding in the Army budget, but Congress neither appropriated nor authorized the funding (zeroing CRS-9 out the request). Instead, Table 10 indicates funding for Pueblo Depot under the Defense-Wide (DOD) budget, with the House granting the full $38 million, the Senate passing a slightly reduced $36.1 million, and both appropriators and authorizers agreeing on the requested amount of $38 million. The effect was to remove the project from the Army's budget and place it under the Department of Defense. 2. A second example is the Air Force alteration of the Graduate Education Facility at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. No funds were requested by the President, but both chambers added $13 million in appropriations and authorization for the project. Table 11 can be similarly used for examining the military family housing portion of military construction appropriations. The first Army project listed is a single housing unit in Stuttgart, Germany. The budget submission requested $990 thousand for the work. The House passed an appropriation for the full amount, while the Senate reduced the project to $500 thousand. Neither the appropriations conference nor the authorization included any funding (zeroing out the request). Key Policy Issues Several issues regarding military construction have gained visibility during the legislative deliberations of the current session of Congress. Among these are: overall and specific account funding levels requested by the Administration; congressional additions to the military construction budget request; military housing (including the encouragement of private sector financing of housing construction and maintenance); and funding requested through the Defense Emergency Response Fund. Overall and Specific Account Funding Levels. The FY2003 budget submitted by the President on February 4, 2002, requested $8.987 billion in new budget authority, an amount $1.62 billion below the 2002 enactment. Subsequent additional requests included in the Defense Emergency Response Fund (DERF) raised the total request to $9.578 billion in time for House consideration of its bill. An additional $122.5 million in Army DERF requests was later received by Congress and will be considered by the Senate. This raises the total Presidential budget request for FY2003 to $9.66 billion. The Senate is also expected to consider a $200 million Army and Air Force Transformation Initiative intended to appropriate a funding pool to accelerate the creation of infrastructure to support the Army's Interim Brigade Combat Team and Air Force C-17 aircraft mobility programs. This and the upward adjustment of BRAC environmental cleanup funding was not reckoned with by the House. The Senate Appropriations Committee has recommended a total of $10.62 billion in new military construction budget authority for FY2003. Within the overall military construction appropriation, there was a substantial change in how budget authority was allocated between the FY2002 enactment, the FY2003 request, and the bills as passed by the House and the Senate as reflected in Table 2. CRS-10 Increases in budget authority are evident in the construction and renovation of military family housing both within the United States and at overseas installations, offset somewhat by a reduction in the unspecified location accounts devoted to maintenance, management, provision of utilities, etc. There is also an increase in funding requested for general military construction overseas, reflecting a DOD effort to increase the quality of life in the workplace for military personnel stationed there. Table 2. Budget Authority by Location ($000) FY2002 FY2003 House Senate Enacted a Enacted Request a Passed a Passed a Military Construction, 4,700,849 3,189,151 3,555,398 3,742,568 4,048,115 Domestic Military Construction, 692,480 988,390 955,568 970,700 916,368 Overseas Military Construction, 556,377 611,204 569,261 904,147 562,554 Location Unspecified a Total Military 5,949,706 4,788,745 5,080,227 5,617,415 5,527,037 Construction Family Housing, 321,202 603,639 622,569 603,639 616,339 Domestic Family Housing, 28,112 71,122 69,890 69,400 68,900 Overseas Family Housing, 3,682,713 3,578,433 3,578,433 3,578,433 3,516,075 Location Unspecified a Total Family 4,032,027 4,253,194 4,270,892 4,251,472 4,201,314 Housing Total, Domestic 5,022,051 3,792,790 4,177,967 4,346,207 4,664,454 Total, Overseas 720,592 1,059,512 1,025,458 1,040,100 985,268 Total, Location 4,239,090 4,189,637 4,147,694 4,482,580 4,078,629 Unspecified b Defense-Wide Special 807,295 715,338 715,338 815,338 729,338 Accounts c Grand Total 10,789,028 9,757,277 10,066,457 10,684,225 10,457,689 Sources: Calculated by project from DOD Comptroller, Construction Programs (C-1), Department of Defense Budget, Fiscal Year 2003, February 2002, H.Rept. 107-323, S.Rept. 107-202, and H.Rept. 107-731. a. These figures include the additional requests of the FY2003 DERF as considered by the House and Senate, respectively. b. Examples of location unspecified projects are energy conservation funding, some major and minor construction projects, and classified projects for military construction; and maintenance, furnishings and utilities accounts for family housing, among others. c. Special accounts include BRAC, the NATO Security Investment Fund, the Homeowners Assistance Fund (zeroed out this year), and the DOD Family Housing Improvement Fund. CRS-11 The most noticeable reduction in budget authority is seen in domestic military construction. Table 3 compares military construction budget authority between FY2002 and FY2003 for military construction projects located within the United States, divided between the active duty and reserve (National Guard and federal reserves) components. Table 3. Domestic Military Construction, Active Duty and Reserves ($000) FY2002 FY2003 Change Enacted Request a Military Construction, Active Duty 3,878,692 2,372,175 -1,506,517 Military Construction, National Guard and 822,157 231,154 -591,003 Reserve Total, Active and Reserve 4,700,849 2,603,329 -2,097,520 Source: DOD Comptroller, Construction Programs (C-1), Department of Defense Budget, Fiscal Year 2003, February 2002. a. These figures do not include the additional funds requested for the FY2003 DERF. These figures represent decreases of 38.8% in active duty and 71.9% in reserve construction funding between FY2002 and FY2003. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and DOD Comptroller Dov Zakheim stated in a press briefing on February 4, 2002, that they expected a 20 to 25% reduction in military bases during the FY2005 BRAC round and anticipated this with a reduced construction request.23 This decrease in construction was to be offset by an increase in sustainment funds.24 Table 4 compares the DOD sustainment funds requested for FY2003 with those actually expended in FY2001 and appropriated for FY2002.25 23 See Political Transcripts, "Secretary Rumsfeld and Comptroller Zakheim Hold a Briefing on the FY2003 Defense Budget." Federal Document Clearing House, February 4, 2002, or at [http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2002/t02042002_t0204sd.html]. The additional force protection and anti-terrorism funding requested for the DERF raised the total military construction request for active duty components to $4.262 billion and for the reserves to $319 million. 24 Sustainment includes the maintenance, restoration, and modernization of existing structures and is part of the operations and maintenance budget activity of the defense budget. It therefore falls within the jurisdiction of the Appropriations Committees' Subcommittees on Defense, not Military Construction. 25 Operations & Maintenance funds are tracked as "total obligational authority" (TOA). TOA is an accounting term unique to DOD and equals appropriated budget authority adjusted to include credits (transfers) from other accounts and funds left unused from prior years. See CRS Report RL30002, A Defense Budget Primer, by Mary T. Tyszkiewicz and Stephen Daggett, for a more comprehensive explanation of defense budget terms. CRS-12 Table 4. Sustainment Funding Trend, FY2001-FY2003 (Current $000) FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 Actual Estimate Request* Total Sustainment 5,543,955 5,810,492 6,487,642 Change from previous year 266,537 677,150 Source: DOD Comptroller, Operation and Maintenance Programs (O-1): Department of Defense Budget for Fiscal Year 2003, February 2002. Note: Total Obligational Authority (TOA). Sustainment includes all DOD facilities sustainment, restoration, and modernization (FSRM) accounts. * These figures do not include additional funds requested for the FY2003 DERF. The table shows that sustainment funding rose $267 million between FY2001 and FY2002. If the same rate of increase (4.8%) occurred between FY2002 and FY2003, DOD would have been expected to request $6.089 billion. Instead, DOD requested $6.488 billion, or approximately $398 million beyond the normal expectation. This increase may be considered to constitute the substantive additional funds devoted to maintaining existing property. In addition, some Members have deemed DOD funding requests for the Army National Guard, the Air National Guard, and the federal reserves particularly inadequate.26 Until the late 1980s, the amount of military construction funding appropriated by Congress for the Guard and Reserve rose steadily, closely matching the amounts requested by DOD. For FY1989, though, the Administration began to decrease its requests for Guard and Reserve construction. Congress responded by appropriating funds in excess of the request (see Figure 1). Senator Christopher Bond commented during floor debate on FY1996 military construction appropriations that "National Guard forces traditionally have been underfunded" in construction requests submitted by the Pentagon.27 Since FY1989, Congress has consistently appropriated more than the Administration request, and the gap between request and enactment has grown considerably. The House, after including the DERF request, passed an appropriation for Guard and Reserve construction $210 million above that asked for by the Administration. The Senate Appropriations Committee recommended adding $290 million to the Administration's Guard and Reserve construction request. 26 Senator Dianne Feinstein, in questioning the Deputy Director of the Army National Guard at a military construction hearing, remarked, "Many people believe that [deliberate underfunding is] the game that is played in this institution with this particular budget, that they really look at the Congress to kind of plus it up after it's been requested." See the Senate Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction hearing of March 5, 2002. The Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps Reserves are permanently under the control of the Department of Defense. The Army and Air National Guards are state-controlled organizations until such time as they are called into federal service. 27 Congressional Record, July 21, 1995, S10454. CRS-13 Figure 1. Guard and Reserve Funding Military Housing. Military housing for both families and unaccompanied has been a highly visible military construction issue for several years. In the mid 1990s, then-Secretary of Defense William Cohen announced a goal of the elimination of substandard military housing by 2010. He proposed to do this using an increase in traditional DOD-funded construction and renovation, plus less orthodox methods such as partnering with private enterprise to build and maintain housing and increasing the military Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) to cover the cost of off- base housing.28 At the present time, approximately one-third of military families live in government-owned housing. At the outset of the effort, DOD estimated that more than half of existing military family housing did not meet its own minimum housing standards with respect to living space, amenities, etc. In addition, BAH compensation covered only 85% of the cost (accommodation and utilities) of living off-base. DOD and Congress then initiated several programs to encourage private investment and to increase funding of traditional housing construction for both families and unaccompanied members, and to increase the percentage of off-base housing costs covered by military allowances. DOD now estimates that substandard housing will disappear for all military members and their families by 2007 and that out-of-pocket expenses associated with living on the local economy will be eliminated by 2005.29 28 For a description of the privatization of military family housing, see CRS Report RL31039, Military Housing Privatization Initiative: Background and Issues, by Daniel H. Else. The Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) is money added to a military member's base pay when he or she is authorized to live outside of government-furnished quarters, or "off- base." The domicile is usually established in a privately-owned apartment or house rented or purchased on the local economy. 29 The calculated BAH shortfall is being reduced incrementally in annual budget requests in order to eliminate service members' out-of-pocket housing and utility costs by 2005. CRS-14 Because improvement and expansion of adequate housing on military installations may encourage the movement of significant numbers of military families onto bases, some members have expressed concern that local school districts serving large military communities may find their facility and personnel plans unexpectedly disrupted. Language included in the House report for the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act (H.Rept. 107-436 accompanying H.R. 4546) directs DOD to report by March 1, 2003, on the situations at three Army and Air Force installations (Ft. Bragg, North Carolina, Ft. Hood, Texas, and Lackland Air Force Base, Texas) where large housing privatization projects are underway.30 Defense Emergency Response Fund. The Administration defense budget request for operations and maintenance (considered part of the defense appropriation, not the military construction appropriation) contained a single new entry for $20.1 billion entitled the Defense Emergency Response Fund (DERF).31 This is intended for use by DOD to respond to or protect against acts of terrorism. The request contained detailed justification for $10.1 billion, or about half of the total request, of which DOD identified approximately $594 million as appropriate for consideration as military construction to enhance physical security at military installations.32 The DERF is a transfer fund, which is used to shift appropriations between accounts without adherence to normal congressional reprogramming or notification requirements. The House Appropriations Committee considered $594 million of the DERF to be part of the Administration's military construction appropriation request and added it to the suitable appropriations accounts. The Administration forwarded an additional DERF request too late for House consideration but in time for Senate and conference action. DERF funding, as requested by the President and recommended by the conference committee, is shown in Table 5. Additional Omnibus Appropriations. Additional defense and military construction appropriations language was included in Division M (Other Matters), Title I (Defense Related Technical Corrections) of the Senate amendment to H.J.Res. 2 of the 108th Congress (the Omnibus Appropriations Act) (January 15, CR S988- 30 See Title XXXVIII­General Provisions, Items of Special Interest, p. 383. 31 Like facility sustainment, renovation, and modernization accounts, the DERF is part of the defense appropriation. The $20.1 billion requested for the DERF is not included in the budgetary analyses in this report. The DERF itself was created as a "transfer fund," which means its function is to act as an accounting vehicle for redistributing sums from one account to another. Therefore, it normally does not receive its own appropriation. See CRS Report RL31187, Terrorism Funding: Congressional Debate on Emergency Supplemental Allocations, by Amy Belasco and Larry Q. Nowels, and CRS Report RL31305, Authorization and Appropriations for FY2003: Defense, by Stephen Daggett and Amy Belasco. 32 The remaining $10.0 billion of the request was not accompanied by detailed justification. This was funding designated by the Budget Resolution for FY2003 (H.Con.Res. 353) as a "war reserve fund" to support ongoing military operations in and around Afghanistan. A second defense authorization bill (H.R. 4547, see below under Legislation, Defense Authorization) has been created to accommodate an anticipated detailed budget request for this $10.0 billion war reserve. CRS-15 S909). Several provisions of the bill amend P.L. 107-249 (the Military Construction Act for FY2003). Section 103 of the bill amends Section 124 of the original legislation, which had stated that "None of the funds appropriated or made available by this Act may be obligated for Partnership for Peace Programs in the New Independent States of the former Soviet Union," to read "Not more than $2,000,000 of the funds appropriated or made available by this Act may be obligated for Partnership for Peace Programs." Section 104 reduces the overall appropriation for Air Force military construction by $18,600,000 and transfers it to Air Force Reserve military construction, a 28% increase in the latter account (see Table 7). Section 105 permits the $15,000,000 appropriated for land acquisition at Nellis Air Force Base to be transferred to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to fulfill obligations under the Military Lands Withdrawal Act of 1999.33 The USFWS is then permitted to grant these funds to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to replace public lands withdrawn from public use under the 1999 Act. The bill also amended P.L. 107-248, the National Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2003. Included under those provisions were changes in various reprogramming thresholds, a raise in the limit placed on expense/investment value for items purchased with Operation and Maintenance funds from $100,000 to $250,000, various transfers of defense appropriations between accounts, and an additional appropriation of $3.89 billion.34 Additional discussion of H.J.Res. 2 can be found in CRS Report RL30343, Continuing Appropriations Acts: Brief Overview of Recent Practices, by Sandy Streeter.35 33 The Act formed part of the National Defense Authorization Act of 1999 (P.L. 106-). Section 3011 (b) of the Act withdrew a portion of the Nellis Air Force Range from all forms of appropriations under public land laws, reserving approximately 2.9 million acres of land in Clark, Lincoln, and Nye Counties, Nevada, for use as a weapons and training range. This appropriation is to be used for the replacement of National Wildlife Refuge System lands included in that withdrawal. 34 See also CR S839. Reprogramming refers to the transfer of funds between appropriations accounts. Congress has set thresholds for DOD increases in accounts below which the Department does not have to request congressional authorization. This bill raises these limits at $20 million in military personnel (up from $10 million), $20 million in operation and maintenance (up from the $15 million set by the 105th Congress), $20 million in procurement (up from the $10 million or 20% of appropriation set by the 100th Congress), and $10 million in research, development, test, and evaluation (up from $4 million set by the 100th Congress). The bill makes no change in the current $2.5 million reprogramming threshold in military construction accounts. 35 In the omnibus measure, the Senate approved an across-the-board rescission of 1.6% (§601, Division N). This cut is augmented by §309 of Division G, which requires an increase in the cut to offset $5 billion in additional education spending. According to CBO, this amount generates an additional 1.252% reduction. Thus, the total across-the-board (continued...) CRS-16 Table 5. DERF Military Construction Allocation by Account ($000) Account Request Enacted Army 222,465 211,688 Navy 220,730 209,430 Air Force 190,597 188,597 Defense-Wide 31,300 33,300 Air National Guard 8,933 8,933 Naval Reserve 7,117 7,117 Air Force Reserve 6,076 3,576 Family Housing O&M, Air Force 29,631 29,631 TOTAL 716,849 692,272 Sources: S.Rept. 107-202, H.Rept. 107-731. Major Funding Trends Between FY1985 and FY1998, funding devoted to military construction declined steadily as DOD and Congress struggled with a changing strategic environment, a shrinking military force, and the uncertainties associated with several rounds of base realignments and closures. Appropriations began to rise with FY1998 as Congress sought to replace outdated facilities and improve the quality of life for military personnel at home and in the workplace. Administration requests for military construction funding (not including BRAC and family housing) continued to decline until FY2000, but have risen forFY2001 and 2002. The request for FY2003 dips, but DOD projects that its annual construction requests will approximately triple between FY2003 and FY2007 (see Figure 2). 35 (...continued) reduction is currently estimated at 2.852%, which has been calculated by CBO as $11 billion, 392 million. Figures in this report do not reflect the across-the-board cuts in the omnibus measure, as it is unclear how they would be calculated for the Military Construction Appropriations Act overall and for particular departments, agencies, and programs in that bill. CRS-17 Figure 2. Military Construction Funding Prior to FY1994, Congress considered Administration requests to exceed real construction requirements, typically appropriating less new budget authority than requested. This pattern reversed with the FY1995 budget. Every year since then, Congress has added to Administration requests, countering what Members have termed "inadequate" funding for military construction. The DOD request for construction funds for FY2003 fell relative to both its FY2002 request and the subsequent enactment, anticipating the FY2005 round of base realignments and closures, according to statements made by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and DOD Comptroller Dov Zakheim. DOD projects that future requests for military construction will rise steadily and rapidly. Table 6 shows overall military construction program funding since FY1999 (including BRAC and Family Housing). Table 7 breaks down the FY2003 request by appropriations account and compares it to FY2002 levels. Table 8 shows congressional action on current military construction appropriations by account. Table 9 compares Administration military construction requests and enactments for Guard and Reserve projects from FY1993-2003. CRS-18 Legislation Supplemental Legislation for FY2002 H.R. 4775 (Young). Making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes. This bill does not contain significant military construction funding. Introduced as an original bill on May 20, 2002, by the House Committee on Appropriations with H.Rept. 107-480 and placed on the Union Calendar (Calendar No. 289). Passed in the House on May 24, 2002, 280-138 (Roll No. 206), and laid before the Senate on June 3. The Senate struck all after the Enacting Clause and substituted the text of S. 2551 in its place. It was then placed on the Legislative Calendar under General Orders (Calendar No. 405). Debate and amendment of the bill began on June 4, 2002, and continued through June 6. On June 7, the Senate passed the bill with an amendment, substituting the text of its own version of the bill (S. 2551), by a vote of 71-22 (Record Vote No. 145), insisted on its amendment, and appointed conferees. The House disagreed with the amendment and appointed its own conferees on June 12 (CR H3459-H3461). A conference report was filed on July 19 (H.Rept. 107-593, CR H4935-H4985). The House took up the conference report as unfinished business on July 23 (CR H5201-H5229, H5289) and agreed with it on a roll call vote (397-32, Roll no. 328). The Senate considered the conference report on July 24 (S7263-S7282) and agreed with a 92-7 vote (Record Vote Number 188). The action was reported to the House and the bill was cleared for the President. The bill was enacted by the President on August 2, 2002 (P.L. 107- 206). Military Construction Appropriations H.R. 5011 (Hobson). Making appropriations for military construction, family housing, and base realignment and closure for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, and for other purposes. The House Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction held a series of hearings between February 6 and April 17, 2002. The Subcommittee markup was forwarded to the full Committee on June 12. The full Committee mark took place on June 24. The bill was reported on June 25 (H.Rept. 107-533, CR H3914, H3927). A rule was reported (H.Res. 462) on the bill on June 26 (CR H4039, H4064, H4067). H.R. 5011 was considered and passed on a 426-1 vote (Roll No. 277). The bill was read twice in the Senate and placed on the Legislative Calendar under General Orders on July 8, 2002 (Calendar No. 486). On July 17, the Senate substituted the language of S. 2709 for that of H.R. 5011 (CR S6931-S6934). The Senate passed the amended H.R. 5011 (96-3, Roll No. 181) and appointed conferees on July 18, 2002 (CR S6972-S6976). The House rejected the Senate amendment and appointed its conferees on September 10, 2002. Conferees met on October 8. The House accepted the conference report (H.Rept. 107-731) on October 10 on a 419-0 vote (Roll No. 458). The Senate adopted the conference report by unanimous consent on October 11. The completed bill was sent to the President on October 18, though without the companion authorization bill (H.R. 4546), which had not been passed as of that date. The President signed the bill on October 23 as P.L. 107-249. CRS-19 S. 2709 (Feinstein). The Senate Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction held hearings during March. The Senate received the House Military Construction Appropriations Bill (H.R. 5011) on June 28 (CR S6317). The Senate Appropriations Committee marked its version of the bill, recommending $10.62 billion in new budget authority, on June 27. The bill was reported on July 3 (S.Rept. 107-202, CR July 8, 2002, S6361) and placed on the Legislative Calendar under General Orders (Calendar No. 479). The Senate amended H.R. 5011 by substituting the language of S. 2709 on July 18, 2002, and passed the amended H.R. 5011 in lieu of S. 2709 (see paragraph above). Defense Authorization H.R. 4546 (Stump, by request).36 To authorize appropriations for FY2003 for military activities of the Department of Defense, and for military construction, to prescribe military personnel strengths for FY2003, and for other purposes. Introduced on April 23, 2002, and referred to the Committee on Armed Services, it was further referred to the Subcommittees on Military Personnel, Military Installations and Facilities, and Military Readiness (amendment added) on April 25 and returned to the full Committee on the same day. The Subcommittee on Military Installations and Facilities, which exercises jurisdiction over the military construction portion of the authorization bill, defeated (3-13-2) an amendment that would have repealed existing authority to conduct an FY2005 round of base realignments and closures (BRAC). The bill was referred to the Subcommittees on Military Procurement and Military Research and Development on April 30 and returned to the full Committee the same day. The full Committee considered the bill on May 1, 2002, and ordered it reported, rejecting an identical BRAC-stopping amendment (19-38). The bill was reported on May 3, 2002 (H.Rept. 107-436, CR H2104-2105), and placed on the Union Calendar (Calendar No. 258). A supplemental report (a dissenting opinion, H.Rept 107-436, Part II, CR H2108) was filed on May 6. Brought to the floor on May 9, 2002, subject to a rule (H.Res.415, H.Rept.107-450). H.R. 4546 was debated, amended, and passed by recorded vote (359-58, Roll no 158) on May 10. The bill was received in the Senate on May 14, 2002, and on May 16 was placed on the Legislative Calendar under General Orders (Calendar No. 379). The bill was amended in the Senate on June 27 by the substitution of the text of S. 2514 (see below) after the enabling clause CR S6225). The bill was passed by unanimous consent and the Senate appointed conferees. A message on the Senate action was sent to the House on July 8. On July 25, the Rules Committee reported to the House (H.Res. 500) the rule for consideration of the amended bill. The House amended the Senate amendment and appointed conferees and voted to instruct them (419-2, Roll no. 349). The Senate disagreed by Unanimous Consent to the House amendment on July 26 and appointed conferees. The conferees began meeting on September 5, 2002. On October 10, the House voted 391-0 to instruct its conferees (Roll No. 463). The Military Construction Appropriations bill (H.R. 5011) was sent to the President on October 18 and enacted as P.L. 107-249. Conferees reported the authorization bill to the House on 36 S. 2225 corresponds to the Administration's budget request and was introduced by request. H.R. 4546 and S. 2514 are the defense authorization bills from the House and Senate Armed Services Committees respectively. CRS-20 November 12 (H.Rept. 107-772), where it was agreed to by voice vote. The President enacted the bill as P.L. 107-314 on December 2, 2002. H.R. 4547 (Stump, by request). To authorize appropriations for FY2003 for military activities of the Department of Defense and to prescribe military personnel strengths for FY2003. Companion bill to H.R. 4546, introduced on April 23, to authorize the $10.0 billion designated as incremental funding for ongoing operations in the war on terrorism (the "war reserve fund"), as specified in the Budget Resolution for FY2003 (H.Con.Res. 353). Also known as the Costs of War/Substitute Amendment, the original bill was amended on May 1 to authorize the war reserve fund. Of this, $3.7 billion would be used to replace equipment destroyed in the war in Afghanistan, upgrade equipment and defray other war-related costs, and offer war-related pay to military personnel. House Armed Services Committee held its markup on July 18, 2002, and reported the bill (H.Rept. 107-603) on July 23 (Union Calendar, Calendar No. 365). On a motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (2/3 required), the bill was passed (413-3, Roll no. 335) early on July 24. The bill was received in the Senate on July 24 and referred to the Committee on Armed Services. S. 2514 (Levin).37 An original bill to authorize appropriations for FY2003 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal year for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes. Introduced as an original measure by the Senate Committee on Armed Forces on May 15, 2002 (S.Rept. 107-151, CR S4387). Placed on the Legislative Calendar under General Orders (Calendar No. 370). Debate on the defense authorization bill began in the Senate on June 19 (CR beginning S5727). S. 2514 was passed on June 27 with amendments on a vote of 97-2 (Record Vote No. 165). It was then incorporated into H.R. 4546 and passed by unanimous consent (CR S6178-80, S6182). Omnibus Appropriation Bill H.J.Res. 2 (Young). The 107th Congress passed only two (defense and military construction) of the usual 13 appropriations bills for FY2003. At the convening of the 108th Congress on January 7, 2003, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee introduced a bill making further appropriations for FY2003. The bill was passed on January 8 (CR H121) and received in the Senate on January 9. It was placed on the Legislative Calendar under General Orders (Calendar No. 1) and laid before the Senate be unanimous consent on January 15 (CR S340-S839). Senator Stevens offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Numerous additional 37 S. 2515, S. 2516, and S. 2517 originated with the Senate Armed Services Committee and correspond to S. 2514 Division A (Department of Defense authorization), S. 2514 Division B (Military Construction authorization), and S. 2514 Division C (Department of Energy and other national security authorizations) respectively. When S. 2514 was considered by the Senate on June 27, Divisions A, B, and C were separated and substituted for the original language in S. 2515, S. 2516, and S. 2517, respectively. These three bills were then passed by unanimous consent. See CR S6225 for June 27, 2002. They were sent to the House on July 8, where they were held at the desk and eventually incorporated into H.R. 4546. CRS-21 amendments were offered between January 15 and January 23, when the Senate passed the amended bill by a Yea-Nay vote of 69-29 (Record Vote Number 28, CR S1379-S1419). The Senate insisted on its amendment and appointed conferees. On January 29, the House disagreed with the Senate amendment and agreed without objection to a conference (CR H224-9). Mr. Obey moved that the conferees be instructed, but the House defeated the motion 200-209 (Roll no. 17). The Speaker then appointed conferees. The conferees began meeting on February 10, 2003. Table 6. Military Construction Appropriations, FY1999-FY2003 (new budget authority in millions of dollars) FY1999 FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2003 Actual Actual Actual Estimate Request* Enacted* Military 5,405 4,793 5,423 6,745 5,249 5,565 Construction Family 3,592 3,597 3,683 4,050 4,246 4,206 Housing Total 8,997 8,390 9,106 10,795 9,495 9,771 Source: Actual FY1999-2001 data, Estimate FY2002 and Request FY2003 from Department of Defense (DOD), Financial Summary Tables, February 2002 and previous years' reports, H.Rept. 107- 731. Notes: "Actual" and "Estimated" budget authority differs from "Enacted" amounts by funds reprogrammed (transferred) by the Department of Defense between appropriations accounts. Military Construction in this table includes BRAC funding, but not NSIP. * Includes $612 million in DERF, as considered by the conference committee. CRS-22 Table 7. Military Construction Appropriations by Account: FY2002-FY2003 (new budget authority in thousands of dollars) FY2002 FY2003 FY2003 Account Enacted Request* Enacted* MilCon, Army 1,742,512 1,672,903 1,634,334 MilCon, Navy 1,113,736 1,105,391 1,303,788 MilCon, Air Force 1,224,112 834,687 1,066,966 MilCon, Defense-wide 796,804 771,835 871,669 MilCon, Army National Guard 400,994 101,595 241,377 MilCon, Air National Guard 250,530 62,406 203,813 MilCon, Army Reserve 165,136 58,779 100,554 MilCon, Navy Reserve 51,676 58,671 74,921 MilCon, Air Force Reserve 74,013 37,976 67,226 BRAC Acct., Total 632,713 545,138 561,138 NATO Security Investment Program 162,600 168,200 167,200 Foreign Curr. Fluct., Constr., Def. (60,000) ) ) Total: Military Construction 6,554,826 5,417,581 6,292,986 Family Housing Const., Army 309,217 283,346 275,436 Family Housing Operation & Debt, 1,077,292 1,119,007 1,106,007 Army Family Housing Const., Navy & Marine 328,040 375,700 373,816 Corps Family Housing Operation & Debt, 899,837 867,788 861,788 Navy & Marine Corps Family Housing Const., AF 544,496 676,694 676,042 Family Housing Operation & Debt, AF 835,194 874,050 863,050 Family Housing Const., Def-wide 247 5,480 5,480 Family Housing Operation & Debt, Def- 43,269 42,395 42,395 wide DOD Family Housing Improvement 1,977 2,000 2,000 Fund Total: Family Housing 4,039,569 4,246,460 4,206,014 GRAND TOTAL 10,594,395 9,664,041 10,499,000 Source: Data for FY2002 Enacted from FY2003 Budget Request, Conference Report from H.Rept. 107-731. Note: FY2002 Enacted includes P.L. 107-64 Sec. 130 (here listed as "Foreign Curr. Fluct.") and Sec. 132 rescissions. * Includes $692 million in DERF, as considered by the conference committee, does not include additional appropriations included in H.J.Res 2 of the 108th Congress. CRS-23 Table 8. Military Construction FY2003 Appropriations by Account; Congressional Action (in thousands of dollars) FY2003 House Senate Account Enacted* Request* Bill Bill* MilCon, Army 1,672,903 1,495,881 1,665,536 1,634,334 MilCon, Navy 1,105,391 1,244,425 1,215,303 1,303,788 MilCon, Air Force 834,687 954,021 1,165,336 1,066,966 MilCon, Defense-wide 771,835 898,090 924,266 871,669 MilCon, Army Nat'l. Guard 101,595 159,672 208,482 241,377 MilCon, Air National Guard 62,406 119,613 217,988 203,813 MilCon, Army Reserve 58,779 99,059 66,487 100,554 MilCon, Navy Reserve 58,671 75,821 51,554 74,921 MilCon, Air Force Reserve 37,976 75,276 58,209 67,226 BRAC Acct. 545,138 545,138 645,138 561,138 NATO Security Investment 168,200 168,200 168,200 167,200 Program Total: Military 5,417,581 5,835,196 6,386,499 6,292,986 Construction Family Housing Const., Army 283,346 278,426 277,936 275,436 Family Housing Ops & Debt, 1,119,007 1,119,007 1,119,007 1,106,007 Army Family Housing Const., 375,700 377,616 371,816 373,816 Navy and Marine Corps Family Housing Ops & Debt, 867,788 867,788 867,788 861,788 Navy and Marine Corps Family Housing Const., 676,694 681,042 667,912 676,042 Air Force Family Housing Ops & Debt, 874,050 874,050 874,050 863,050 Air Force Family Housing Const, 5,480 5,480 5,480 5,480 Defense-wide Family Housing Ops & Debt, 42,395 42,395 42,395 42,395 Defense-wide DOD Family Housing 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 Improvement Fund Total: Family Housing 4,246,460 4,247,804 4,228,384 4,206,014 GRAND TOTAL 9,664,041 10,083,000 10,614,883 10,499,000 Sources: H.Rept. 107-533, S.Rept. 107-202, H.Rept. 107-731. * Includes $712 million in DERF, as considered by the Senate, and $692 million as considered by the conference committee, does not include additional appropriations included in H.J.Res 2 of the 108th Congress. CRS-24 Table 9. Congressional Additions to Annual DOD Budget Requests for National Guard and Reserve Military Construction, FY1993-FY2003 (current year dollars in thousands) Total Army Air Air Change Fiscal National National Army Naval Force from Year Guard Guard Reserve Reserve Reserve Total Request 1993 Req. 46,700 173,270 31,500 37,772 52,880 342,122 ­ 1993 214,989 305,759 42,150 15,400 29,900 608,198 +266,076 Enacted 1994 Req. 50,865 142,353 82,233 20,591 55,727 351,769 ­ 1994 302,719 247,491 102,040 25,029 74,486 751,765 +399,996 Enacted 1995 Req. 9,929 122,770 7,910 2,355 28,190 171,154 ­ 1995 187,500 248,591 57,193 22,748 56,958 572,990 +401,836 Enacted 1996 Req. 18,480 85,647 42,963 7,920 27,002 182,012 ­ 1996 137,110 171,272 72,728 19,055 36,482 436,647 +254,635 Enacted 1997 Req. 7,600 75,394 48,459 10,983 51,655 194,091 ­ 1997 78,086 189,855 55,543 37,579 52,805 413,868 +219,777 Enacted 1998 Req. 45,098 60,225 39,112 13,921 14,530 172,886 ­ 1998 102,499 190,444 55,453 26,659 15,030 390,085 +217,199 Enacted 1999 Req. 47,675 34,761 71,287 15,271 10,535 179,529 ­ 1999 144,903 185,701 102,119 31,621 34,371 498,715 +319,186 Enacted 2000 Req. 57,402 73,300 77,626 14,953 27,320 250,601 ­ 2000 236,228 262,360 110,764 28,310 64,071 701,733 +451,132 Enacted 2001 Req. 59,130 50,179 81,713 16,103 14,851 221,976 ­ 2001 285,587 203,381 108,499 61,931 36,510 695,908 Enacted +473,932 2002 Req. 267,389 149,072 111,404 33,641 53,732 615,238 ­ 2002 400,994 250,530 165,136 51,676 74,013 942,349 +327,112 Enacted 2003 Req.* 101,595 62,406 58,779 58,671 37,976 319,427 ­ 2003 241,377 203,813 100,554 74,921 67,226 687,891 +210,014 Enacted* Source: Department of Defense, Financial Summary Tables, successive years. * Includes DERF requests of $594 million (House) and $717 million (Request and Senate), does not include additional appropriations included in H.J.Res 2 of the 108th Congress. CRS-25 For Additional Information CRS Products CRS Report RL31010. Appropriations for FY2002: Military Construction, by Daniel Else. CRS Report RL31305. Authorization and Appropriations for FY2003: Defense, by Stephen Daggett and Amy Belasco. CRS Report RL31349. Defense Budget for FY2003: Data Summary, by Stephen Daggett and Amy Belasco. CRS Report RL31187. Terrorism Funding: Congressional Debate on Emergency Supplemental Allocations, by Amy Belasco and Larry Q. Nowels, CRS Report RL31005. Appropriations and Authorization for FY2002: Defense, coordinated by Stephen Daggett and Amy Belasco. CRS Report RL30002. A Defense Budget Primer, by Mary T. Tyszkiewicz and Stephen Daggett. CRS Report RL30440. Military Base Closures: Where Do We Stand, by David E. Lockwood. CRS Report RL30051. Military Base Closures: Time for Another Round?, by David E. Lockwood. CRS Issue Brief IB96022. Defense Acquisition Reform: Status and Current Issues, by Valerie Bailey Grasso. Selected World Wide Web Sites Legislative Branch Sites House Committee on Appropriations [http://www.house.gov/appropriations/] Senate Committee on Appropriations [http://www.senate.gov/~appropriations/] CRS Appropriations Products Guide [http://www.crs.gov/products/appropriations/apppage.shtml] Congressional Budget Office [http://www.cbo.gov/] General Accounting Office [http://www.gao.gov/] CRS-26 U.S. Department of Defense Sites U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), FY2003 Budget Materials [http://www.dtic.mil/comptroller/fy2003budget/] U.S. Department of Defense, Installations Home Page [http://www.acq.osd.mil/installation/] White House Sites Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Budget Materials [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/] Office of Management & Budget [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/] CRS-27 Appendix These tables include only those projects and other line items that were either requested by the President or appropriated or authorized by Congress. Table 10 shows changes to military construction projects and line items, while Table 11 does the same for family housing. Many DERF items show presidential requests and no House-recommended appropriations. This was caused by the late submission by the President of much of the DERF request. Table 10. Changes in Project Funding, Military Construction Fiscal Year 2003 Appropriations and Authorization ($000) Location Name Project Loca Request House Senate Conf Auth Army Fort Richardson Perimeter Fencing (DERF) AK 5,011 0 5,011 5,011 5,011 Fort Greely Fencing (DERF) AK 2,700 0 2,700 2,700 2,700 Fencing Installation Boundary Fort Wainwright (DERF) AK 6,896 0 6,896 6,896 6,896 Fort Richardson Community Center AK 0 0 15,000 15,000 15,000 Vehicle Maintenance Shop Fort Wainwright Phase II AK 0 0 0 0 22,000 Fort Rucker UH-60 Parking Apron AL 0 3,050 3,050 3,050 3,050 Fort Rucker Cantonment Fencing (DERF) AL 9,258 0 9,258 9,258 9,258 Fort Rucker Physical Fitness Center AL 0 0 3,500 3,500 3,500 Redstone Arsenal Cafeteria Addition AL 0 1,950 0 1,950 1,950 Non-stockpile Ammunition Pine Bluff Arsenal Demolition Shop AR 18,937 0 0 0 0 Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Fort Huachuca Training Facilities AZ 0 10,400 0 10,400 10,400 Aircraft Armament Yuma Proving Ground Test/Maintenance Facilities AZ 0 4,500 0 4,500 4,500 Monterey Defense Language Institute Water Diversion CA 0 1,500 0 0 0 Fort Irwin Fencing (DERF) CA 2,522 0 2,522 2,522 2,522 Fort Carson Fencing (DERF) CO 4,348 0 4,348 4,348 4,348 Ammunition Demilitarization Pueblo Depot Facility Phase IV CO 38,000 0 0 0 0 Fort Carson Fire Station CO 0 4,250 0 4,250 4,250 Walter Reed Army Medical Physical Security, Main Center Section (DERF) DC 3,844 0 3,844 3,844 3,844 Fort Benning Chapel GA 0 6,500 0 6,500 6,500 Fort Benning Cantonment Fencing (DERF) GA 11,986 0 11,986 5,500 5,500 Access Road (Saddle Road) Pohakuloa Training Area Ph I HI 0 0 13,000 13,000 13,000 Newport Army Ammunition Ammunition Demilitarization Plant Facility-Ph V IN 61,494 0 0 0 0 Fort Leavenworth Cantonment Fencing (DERF) KS 4,829 0 4,829 4,829 4,829 Deployment Facility, Ramp Fort Riley Expansion KS 0 4,950 0 0 0 Fort Riley Cantonment Fencing (DERF) KS 7,095 0 7,095 7,095 7,095 CRS-28 Location Name Project Loca Request House Senate Conf Auth Combined Arms Collective Fort Riley Training Facility, Ph I KS 0 0 13,800 13,800 13,800 Ammunition Demilitarization Blue Grass Army Depot Facility Ph III KY 10,300 0 0 0 0 Ammunition Demilitarization Blue Grass Army Depot Support Ph III KY 8,300 0 0 0 0 Fort Knox Access Control (DERF) KY 2,529 0 2,529 2,529 2,529 Fort Knox Cantonment Fencing (DERF) KY 3,344 0 3,344 3,344 3,344 Fort Knox Child Development Center KY 0 0 6,800 0 0 Purchase Restrictive Fort Campbell Easements KY 0 7,300 0 7,300 7,300 Fort Polk Fencing (DERF) LA 6,620 0 6,620 6,620 6,620 Nantic Soldier Support Center Food Engineering Lab MA 0 4,100 0 4,100 4,100 Ammunition Demilitarization Aberdeen Proving Ground Fac Ph V MD 30,600 0 0 0 0 Fort Detrick Add/Alter Fire Station MD 0 2,800 0 2,800 2,800 Access Control Points 4 Fort Leonard Wood Locations (DERF) MO 9,493 0 9,493 9,493 9,493 Fort Bragg Fencing NC 4,732 0 4,732 4,732 4,732 Fort Bragg Soldier Support Center NC 0 9,400 0 9,400 9,400 High Energy Propellant Picatinny Arsenal Formulation Fac (Ph II) NJ 0 7,500 0 7,500 7,500 Launcher Complex White Sands Missile Range Revitalization (Ph II-A) NM 0 4,500 0 0 0 Fencing West Point Proper West Point (DERF) NY 4,991 0 4,991 4,991 4,991 Fort Drum Barracks Expansion NY 0 8,000 0 8,000 8,000 Fort Drum Taxiway Construction NY 0 8,800 0 8,800 8,800 Fort Sill Cantonment Fencing (DERF) OK 4,652 0 4,652 4,652 4,652 Logistics Maintenance Facility Fort Sill (Ph I) OK 0 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Fort Jackson Cantonment Fencing (DERF) SC 3,051 0 3,051 3,051 3,051 Fort Bliss Cantonment Fencing (DERF) TX 4,291 0 4,291 0 0 Brigade Command and Fort Hood Control Facilities TX 0 16,000 0 11,600 11,600 Fort Hood Fencing (DERF) TX 0 0 0 2,461 2,461 Fort Bliss Upgrade Water Systems TX 0 10,200 0 10,200 5,200 Fencing and Access Roads Fort Eustis (Serf) VA 4,133 0 4,133 4,133 4,133 Fort Lee Cantonment Fencing (DERF) VA 1,903 0 1,903 1,903 1,903 Fire and Emergency Services Fort Lee Center (Ph I) VA 0 5,200 0 5,200 5,200 Fort Lewis Fencing (DERF) WA 2,395 0 2,395 2,395 2,395 Yakima Training Center Shoot House WA 0 0 0 0 1,500 Yakima Training Center Urban Assault Course WA 0 0 0 0 1,500 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Planning and Design (DERF) ZU 9,381 0 9,381 9,381 9,381 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Recision ZU 0 0 0 -35,700 0 CRS-29 Location Name Project Loca Request House Senate Conf Auth Unspecified Worldwide Sbct Transformation, Various Locations Facilities ZU 0 0 100,000 25,000 0 Unspecified Worldwide Civilian Personnel Accural Locations Accounting Adjustment ZU 0 0 0 -26,083 -26,083 Unspecified Worldwide Recision (Foreign Currency Locations Fluctuation) ZU 0 0 0 -13,676 -13,676 Revised Economic Unspecified Worldwide Assumptions (Mid-session Locations Review, Construction) ZU 0 0 0 -8,000 -8,000 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Planning and Design ZU 119,824 119,824 122,114 124,714 121,892 Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Locations Construction ZU 20,500 20,500 20,500 26,975 21,550 Unspecified Worldwide Supervision, Inspection and Locations Overhead Reduction ZU 0 0 0 0 -16,740 Navy Combat Aircraft Loading Yuma Apron, Phase II AZ 3,000 3,000 0 3,000 3,000 Camp Pendleton Child Development Center CA 0 0 8,230 0 0 Barstow Marine Corps Combat Vehicle Welding Logistics Base Shop CA 0 4,450 0 4,450 4,450 China Lake Naval Air Propellants and Explosives Warfare Center Lab (Ph II) CA 0 10,100 0 10,100 10,100 Miramar Refueling Vehicle Shop CA 0 3,510 0 3,510 3,510 Monterey Naval Educational Facility Postgraduate School Replacement (Ph I) CA 0 7,000 0 7,000 7,000 Twentynine Palms Aircraft Surveillance Radar CA 0 15,100 0 13,700 13,700 Port Hueneme Seabee Training Facility CA 0 0 10,170 10,170 10,170 Whiting Field Naval Air Aircraft Maintenance Officer Station School FL 0 1,780 0 0 0 Jacksonville Naval Air Aviation Support Equip Maint Station Training Facility FL 0 6,572 0 6,572 6,572 Panama City Naval Surface Warfare Center Special Operations Facility FL 0 0 10,700 10,700 10,700 Larissa BEQ and Support Facility GR 14,800 14,800 0 6,800 6,800 Site Improvements (Utility Ford Island Systems) HI 0 0 19,400 19,400 19,400 Religious Ministry Facility Marine Corps Base/Oahu (Chapel) HI 0 0 9,500 9,500 9,500 Waterfront/Mechanical Shop Pearl Harbor (Bravo Pier) HI 0 18,500 0 18,500 18,500 Great Lakes Naval Training Center Recruit Barracks IL 41,740 41,740 36,740 36,740 36,740 Great Lakes Naval Training Center Recruit Barracks IL 43,360 43,360 38,360 38,360 38,360 Crane Naval Surface Electrochemistry Engineering Warfare Center Facility IN 0 11,610 0 11,610 11,610 Off Base Access Road Sigonella Improvements (DERF) IT 11,300 0 11,300 0 0 CRS-30 Location Name Project Loca Request House Senate Conf Auth U.S. Naval Academy Ethical Center Classroom MD 0 1,800 0 1,800 1,800 National Maritime Technical Carderock (NSWC) Information Center MD 0 0 12,900 12,900 12,900 Brunswick Naval Air Station Control Tower Upgrade ME 0 0 9,830 9,830 9,830 Gulfport Naval Construction Battalion Bachelor Enlisted Quarters Center (Ph I) MS 0 12,000 0 0 0 Control Tower and Beacon Meridian Naval Air Station Facility MS 0 2,850 2,850 2,850 2,850 Bachelor Enlisted Quarters Pascagoula Naval Station (100 Units) MS 0 0 10,500 10,500 10,500 Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station High Explosives Magazines NC 0 4,430 0 0 0 Camp Lejeune Land Acquisition NC 0 4,200 0 4,200 4,200 Lakehurst Naval Air Combined Structural/Aircraft Warfare Center Fire Rescue Station NJ 0 5,200 5,200 5,200 5,200 Fallon Naval Air Station High Explosives Magazines NV 0 4,010 0 0 0 Consolidated Newport Naval Station Police/Fire/Security Facility RI 0 0 9,030 9,030 9,030 Newport Naval Station Child Development Center RI 0 6,870 0 6,870 6,870 Torrejon AB NEX/MWR Facility SP 2,890 0 0 0 0 Fort Worth Naval Air Aircraft Engine Maintenance Station/Joint Reserve Base Shop TX 8,850 0 0 0 0 Corpus Christi Naval Air Station Public Safety Facility TX 0 7,150 0 7,150 7,150 Ingleside Mine Warfare Training Center TX 0 0 5,480 5,000 5,000 Dam Neck Special Operations Building VA 3,900 0 0 0 0 Ship Component Service Norfolk Naval Shipyard Facility VA 0 0 16,810 16,810 16,810 Quantico Marine Corps Base Candidate Instruction Facility VA 0 5,310 0 5,310 5,310 Puget Sound AT/FP Improvements WA 21,670 21,670 21,670 24,670 21,670 Small Arms Collective Bangor Training Facility (DERF) WA 29,800 29,800 16,410 16,410 16,410 Keyport Naval Undersea Undersea Water System Warfare Center Dependability Center WA 0 10,500 0 7,500 7,500 Puget Sound AT/FP Parking WA 0 0 0 0 3,000 Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Locations Construction ZU 23,262 23,262 26,187 26,187 26,187 Unspecified Worldwide Civilian Personnel Accural Locations Accounting Adjustment ZU 0 0 0 -10,470 -10,470 Various Worldwide Recision (Foreign Currency Locations Fluctuation) ZU 0 0 0 -1,340 -1,340 Revised Economic Various Worldwide Assumptions (Mid-session Locations Review, Construction) ZU 0 0 0 -5,000 -5,000 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Planning and Design ZU 68,573 68,573 73,990 69,423 77,940 CRS-31 Location Name Project Loca Request House Senate Conf Auth Various Worldwide Supervision, Inspection and Locations Overhead Reductions ZU 0 0 0 0 -15,017 Air Force Blair Lakes Range Eielson AFB Maintenance Complex AK 0 0 19,500 19,500 19,500 Physical Fitness Maxwell AFB Center-Gunter Annex AL 0 8,000 0 0 0 Davis-Monthan AFB HH-60 Maintenance Hangar AZ 6,440 6,440 0 6,440 6,440 HH-60 Apron/Taxiway D Davis-Monthan AFB Shoulders AZ 3,720 3,720 0 3,720 3,720 Davis-Monthan AFB Dormitory (120 Rm) AZ 9,110 9,110 0 9,110 9,110 Luke AFB Land Acquisition AZ 0 13,000 0 13,000 13,000 Travis AFB C-17 Flight Simulator CA 0 4,600 4,596 4,600 4,600 Travis AFB C-17 Parts Store CA 0 8,000 7,998 8,000 8,000 Electrical/Utilities and Travis AFB Supporting Infrastructure CA 0 11,269 11,297 11,269 11,269 Squadron Operation/Aircraft Travis AFB Maintenance Unit CA 0 9,600 0 9,600 9,600 AT/FP Site Improvements for Peterson AFB HQ Complex (DERF) CO 2,000 0 2,000 2,000 2,000 NORAD Battle Management Peterson AFB Center (DERF) CO 3,500 0 3,500 3,500 3,500 Visitors Center/Entry Control Schriever AFB Gates (DERF) CO 5,700 0 5,700 5,700 5,700 Perimeter Fence-Cadet Area U S Air Force Academy (Ph I) (DERF) CO 4,200 0 4,200 4,200 4,200 Perimeter Wall, North Gate to Bolling AFB Navy Line (DERF) DC 1,500 1,500 0 1,500 1,500 Security Forces Operations Bolling AFB Facility (DERF) DC 3,500 3,500 0 3,500 3,500 Tyndall AFB Physical Fitness Center FL 0 8,100 0 0 0 Defense Access Road, Avon Park Air Force Range Arbuckle Creek Bridge FL 0 2,000 0 2,000 2,000 Control Tower/Fire Crash MacDill AFB Rescue Station FL 0 13,000 0 13,000 13,000 Corrosion Paint/Depaint Robins AFB Facility GA 0 0 24,000 24,000 24,000 Consolidate Area A-1/Area Aviano AB A-2 for Force PRT (DERF) IT 5,000 0 5,000 5,000 5,000 Large Vehicle Security Aviano AB Inspection Station (DERF) IT 1,600 0 1,600 1,600 1,600 Corrosion Control Facilities McConnell AFB (Ph I) KY 0 7,500 0 7,500 7,500 Barksdale AFB Parking Apron LA 0 0 12,000 12,000 12,000 Fourth Cliff Recreation Erosion Control/Retaining Area Wall MA 0 0 9,476 0 0 Seymour Johnson Fire/Crash Rescue Station NC 0 0 10,600 0 0 Cruise Missile Storage Minot AFB Facility ND 0 0 18,000 0 0 CRS-32 Location Name Project Loca Request House Senate Conf Auth Minot AFB Munitions Storage Igloos ND 0 0 0 5,000 5,000 Offutt AFB Fire/Crash Rescue Station NE 0 0 0 11,000 11,000 Pease Air Base Fire Station NH 0 0 4,450 0 0 Mcguire AFB C-17 Add/Alter 3-bay Hangar NJ 0 0 0 0 5,200 Holloman AFB Survival Equipment Shop NM 0 4,650 4,650 4,650 4,650 Kirtland AFB Visiting Quarters NM 0 8,450 8,400 8,400 8,400 Nellis AFB Land Acquisition NV 0 0 19,500 19,500 19,500 Alter Graduate Education Wright-Patterson AFB Facility OH 0 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000 Wright-Patterson AFB Dormitory (144 Rm) OH 10,400 0 0 0 0 Consolidate Materials Wright-Patterson AFB Computations Research Fac OH 0 0 15,200 0 0 Wright-Patterson AFB Dormitory (144 Rm) OH 12,000 12,000 0 0 0 Fully Contained Small Arms Wright-Patterson AFB Range Complex (DERF) OH 12,000 0 9,700 12,000 12,000 Consolidated Integrated Tinker AFB Support Facility OK 0 7,500 0 0 0 Consolidate Base Engineer Altus AFB Complex (Ph I) OK 0 0 7,700 7,700 7,700 Vance AFB Road Repair (Elam Road) OK 0 0 4,800 4,800 4,800 Fighter Squadron Shaw AFB Maintenance Facilities SC 0 6,800 6,800 6,800 6,800 Ellsworth AFB Operations Facility SD 0 0 13,200 13,200 13,200 Airfield Operations Complex Sheppard AFB (Ph I) TX 0 8,000 0 0 0 MOUT Training Facility Camp Bullis (DERF) TX 6,000 0 0 6,000 6,000 Camp Bullis Visiting Quarters (DERF) TX 4,000 0 0 4,000 0 Goodfellow AFB Wing Support Complex TX 0 0 10,600 10,600 10,600 Lackland AFB Physical Fitness Center TX 0 5,800 0 5,800 5,800 Consolidated Wing Support Laughlin AFB Facility TX 0 8,000 0 8,000 8,000 Camp Bullis Visiting Quarters TX 0 0 0 0 4,000 Consolidated Software Hill Air Force Base Support Facility UT 0 0 16,500 0 0 Depot Maintenance Hangar Hill Air Force Base (Ph Ib) UT 0 14,500 0 14,500 14,500 Air Combat Command Operations Support Ctr Langley AFB (DERF) VA 24,000 24,000 24,000 23,000 23,000 Warren AFB Stormwater Drainage System WY 0 0 10,000 0 0 Classified Location Classified Milcon Project ZC 1,993 0 1,993 1,993 1,993 Classified Location C-17 Various Facilities ZC 30,569 0 30,569 0 0 Unspecified Worldwide Air Mobility Modernization, Locations Various Facilities ZU 0 0 0 25,000 0 Various Worldwide C-17 Transformation, Various Locations Facilities ZU 0 0 100,000 0 0 CRS-33 Location Name Project Loca Request House Senate Conf Auth Various Worldwide Recision (Foreign Currency Locations Fluctuation) ZU 0 0 0 -10,281 0 Various Worldwide Unspecified Minor Locations Construction ZU 11,500 11,500 12,620 12,620 11,500 Revised Economic Various Worldwide Assumptions (Mid-session Locations Review, Construction) ZU 0 0 0 -5,000 -5,000 Various Worldwide Locations Planning and Design ZU 41,496 41,496 65,758 51,486 62,023 Various Worldwide Locations Planning and Design (DERF) ZU 21,797 21,797 21,797 20,797 0 Various Worldwide Locations Planning and Design ZU 0 0 0 0 15,797 Various Worldwide Planning and Design (Predator Locations Beddown) ZU 0 0 0 0 5,000 Various Worldwide Locations Recision ZU 0 0 0 -3,000 -10,281 Various Worldwide Supervision, Inspection and Locations Overhead Reductions ZU 0 0 0 0 -15,306 Defense-wide Hospital Replacement (Phase Fort Wainwright IV) AK 53,000 53,000 53,000 53,000 0 Non-stockpile Ammunition Pine Bluff Arsenal Demolition Shop AR 0 18,937 17,990 18,937 18,937 Ammunition Demilitarization Pueblo Depot Facility Phase IV CO 0 38,000 36,100 38,000 38,000 Fac Refurbishment Homeland Peterson AFB Security Cinc (DERF) CO 25,000 0 23,000 25,000 25,000 District of Columbia Parking Garage DC 2,500 2,500 0 2,500 2,500 Bolling AFB DIA Analysis Center DC 121,958 121,958 121,958 111,958 111,958 Newport Army Ammunition Ammunition Demilitarization Plant Facility-Ph V IN 0 61,494 58,420 61,494 61,494 Ammunition Demilitarization Blue Grass Army Depot Facility Ph III KY 0 10,300 9,758 10,300 10,300 Ammunition Demilitarization Blue Grass Army Depot Support Ph III KY 0 8,300 7,885 8,300 8,300 Ammunition Demilitarization Aberdeen Proving Ground Fac Ph V MD 0 30,600 29,070 20,600 20,600 Stennis Space Center (Bay St Louis) Land/Water Ranges MS 0 0 5,000 5,000 5,000 Columbus Physical Fitness Facility OH 5,021 5,021 5,021 0 0 Def Fuel Support Point Lajes Field Azores Replace Hydrant Fuel System PO 19,000 0 19,000 0 0 Arlington Land Acquisition VA 18,000 0 0 0 0 Dam Neck Special Operations Building VA 0 3,900 0 3,900 3,900 Unspecified Worldwide Planning and Design (Tricare Locations Management Facility) ZU 14,200 14,200 17,200 18,500 14,200 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Planning and Design (DERF) ZU 0 0 2,000 2,000 0 CRS-34 Location Name Project Loca Request House Senate Conf Auth Unspecified Worldwide Energy Conservation Locations Improvement Program ZU 49,531 49,531 49,531 34,531 34,531 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Planning and Design (Soc) ZU 4,932 4,932 5,032 4,932 5,032 Unspecified Worldwide Recision (Foreign Currency Locations Fluctuation) ZU 0 0 0 -2,976 -2,976 Revised Economic Unspecified Worldwide Assumptions (Mid-session Locations, OSD Review, Construction) ZU 0 0 0 -3,000 -3,000 Unspecified Worldwide Planning and Design Locations (Undistributed) ZU 20,000 20,000 28,557 20,000 21,300 Revised Economic Supervision, Inspection, & Assumptions (Mid-session Overhead Reduction, OSD Review) ZU 0 0 0 0 -7,414 Army National Guard Gadsen Readiness Center, Add/Alt AL 1,781 2,261 1,781 2,261 2,261 Combined Support Camp Blanding Maintenance Shop (Ph I) FL 0 5,000 0 5,000 5,000 Barrigada Readiness Center GU 0 6,968 0 6,968 6,968 Boone Readiness Center IA 0 4,252 0 4,252 4,252 Gowan Field/Boise Readiness Center ID 0 0 1,500 1,500 1,500 Camp Atterbury Battle Simulation Center IN 0 8,327 0 8,327 8,327 Patuxent River Readiness Center MD 0 6,740 0 6,740 6,740 Shiawasse County Owosso Readiness Center MI 0 4,700 0 0 0 Joint/Multi-Unit Readiness Lansing Center MI 0 0 16,928 16,928 16,928 Fort Leonard Wood Aviation Support Facility MO 0 0 14,767 14,767 14,767 Kosciusko Readiness Center MS 0 0 2,300 2,300 2,300 Johnstown Runway Improvements PA 12,270 0 0 0 0 Connelsville Readiness Center (Ph II) PA 0 1,750 0 1,700 1,700 Barracks/Dining/Admin & Camp Rapid Parking (Ph I) SD 0 0 10,593 10,593 10,593 Maneuver & Equipment Fort Pickett Training Site VA 0 0 8,957 8,957 8,957 South Burlington Readiness Center (Ph I) VT 0 0 11,241 11,241 11,241 Spokane Readiness Center (Ph I) WA 0 8,800 11,598 8,800 8,800 United States Property and Madison Fiscal Office WI 5,245 5,245 5,245 5,245 0 United States Property and Madison Fiscal Office WI 0 0 0 0 5,245 Lewisburg Readiness Center WV 0 0 5,715 5,715 5,715 Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Locations Construction ZU 4,930 4,930 13,399 13,985 13,985 Revised Economic Unspecified Worldwide Assumptions (Mid-session Locations Review, Construction) ZU 0 0 0 -1,000 -1,000 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Planning and Design ZU 14,724 14,724 29,543 32,183 27,042 CRS-35 Location Name Project Loca Request House Senate Conf Auth Air National Guard Operations and Training Little Rock AFB Facility AR 0 5,100 5,100 5,100 5,100 Operations and Training Fort Smith Map Facility AR 0 0 6,000 6,000 6,000 Communications and Sepulveda Electronics Training Facility CA 0 0 7,000 7,000 7,000 Buckley Air Force Base Control Tower CO 0 0 5,900 5,900 5,900 New Castle County Airport Parking Apron DE 0 0 10,800 10,800 10,800 Homestead ARB Services Complex FL 0 2,500 0 2,500 2,500 Des Moines Airfield Facilities Upgrade IA 0 0 9,200 6,000 6,000 Air Support Squadron Gowan Field/Boise (Beddown) ID 0 0 6,700 6,700 6,700 Greater Peoria Regional Composite Support Training Airport Facility IL 0 8,800 0 0 0 Springfield (Capitol Airport) Composite Support Facility IL 0 0 10,000 10,000 10,000 New Orleans Joint Reserve Vehicle Maintenance Support Base Belle Chasse Equipment Shop LA 0 0 5,500 0 0 Selfridge ANGB Joint Dining Facility MI 0 0 8,500 8,500 8,500 W K Kellogg Airport Vehicle Maintenance Shop MI 0 3,800 0 3,800 3,800 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar Duluth International Airport & Shop (Ph II) MN 0 0 15,000 6,100 6,100 Base Relocation/Facilities St Louis/Lambert Field Upgrade MO 0 0 4,000 0 0 Munitions Load Crew Gore Hills/Great Falls Training Facility MT 0 0 0 3,500 3,500 Upgrade Base Force Hancock Field Protection and Infrastructure NY 0 0 0 8,600 8,600 Toledo Express Airport Replace Logistics Complex OH 0 6,900 0 0 0 Vehicle Maintenance Mansfield Lahm Airport Complex OH 0 3,500 0 3,500 3,500 Springfield-Beckley Municipal Airport Fire Station OH 0 6,100 0 6,100 6,100 Rickenbacker ANGB Fire Station OH 0 6,000 0 6,000 6,000 Squadron Operations & Pittsburgh Support Facility PA 0 0 7,700 7,700 7,700 McEntire Air National Replace Operations & Guard Base Training Facility SC 0 0 10,200 0 0 Fort Bliss Base Defense Training Center TX 0 0 8,700 8,000 8,000 Martinsburg Airbase Site Improvement and Utilities WV 0 0 12,200 12,200 12,200 Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Locations Construction ZU 4,400 4,400 5,400 5,900 5,900 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Planning and Design ZU 8,273 8,273 22,405 16,680 17,082 CRS-36 Location Name Project Loca Request House Senate Conf Auth Army Reserve Add/Alter Parking Fort Dix Apron/Taxiway NJ 0 10,000 0 10,000 10,000 Fort Dix Vehicle/Pallet Facility NJ 0 4,012 0 4,012 4,012 Reserve North Canton Center/OMS/AMSA/Storage OH 0 11,998 0 11,998 11,998 Upgrade Aircraft Johnstown Parking/Ramp PA 0 12,270 0 12,270 12,270 Fort McCoy Battle Simulation Center WI 0 0 3,863 0 0 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Planning and Design ZU 6,965 6,965 10,810 10,460 9,305 Naval Reserve New Orleans Joint Reserve Center (Ph III) LA 0 7,400 0 7,400 7,400 Fort Worth Naval Air Aircraft Engine Maintenance Station/Joint Reserve Base Shop TX 0 8,850 0 8,850 8,850 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Planning and Design ZU 2,509 2,509 2,509 2,509 3,389 Air Force Reserve March AFB Taxiway Repair CA 0 4,350 0 0 0 C-17 Alter Squadron March AFB Operations Facility CA 0 1,700 1,696 1,700 1,700 C-17 Alter Co-located Life March AFB Support Building CA 0 3,000 3,026 3,000 3,000 C-17 Alter General March AFB Maintenance Shops CA 0 2,000 2,004 2,000 2,000 March AFB Runway Repair CA 0 2,550 0 2,550 2,550 March AFB C-17 Multifunctional Hangar CA 0 0 0 0 15,100 Add/Alter C-17 Simulator March AFB Facility CA 0 0 0 0 1,900 Consolidated Space Group Schriever AFB Operations Facility CO 0 0 0 6,900 6,900 Addition/Alteration Aircraft Grissom Air Reserve Base Maintenance Hangar IN 0 0 6,000 0 0 Security Forces Operations Westover ARB Complex MA 0 3,850 0 3,850 3,850 Consolidated Lodging Facility Minneapolis-St Paul ARS (Ph IV) MN 0 6,300 0 6,300 6,300 Niagra Falls Air Reserve Visiting Airmen Quarters Station (Ph I) NY 0 0 9,000 0 0 Youngstown ARS Visitors Center (DERF) OH 2,500 2,500 2,500 0 0 Charleston AFB Medical Training Facility SC 0 2,150 0 2,150 2,150 Unspecified Worldwide Unspecified Minor Locations Construction ZU 5,160 5,160 5,960 5,960 5,960 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Planning and Design ZU 3,656 3,656 3,863 3,656 5,079 Sources: FY2003 Budget Request, H.Rept. 107-533, S.Rept. 107-202, H.Rept. 107-731, H.Rept. 107-772. a. Standard postal abbreviations for states are used. GR=Greece; IT=Italy; ZC=Unspecified Location, Classified Project; ZU=Unspecified Location, Unclassified Project. CRS-37 Table 11. Changes in Project Funding, Military Family Housing Fiscal Year 2003 Appropriations and Authorization ($000) Location Name Project Loca Request House Senate Conf Auth Army Stuttgart Stuttgart, Germany (1) GY 990 990 500 0 0 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Construction Improvements ZU 239,751 239,751 239,751 239,751 239,721 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Privatization Support Costs ZU 25,926 25,926 25,926 20,926 20,926 Unspecified Worldwide Rescission (Foreign Currency Locations Fluctuation) ZU 0 0 0 -4,920 -4,920 Revised Economic Unspecified Worldwide Assumptions (Mid-session Locations Review, Operations & Debt) ZU 0 0 0 -2,000 -2,000 Unspecified Worldwide Civilian Personnel Accrual Locations Accounting Adjustment ZU 0 0 0 -3,267 -3,267 Revised Economic Unspecified Worldwide Assumptions (Mid-session Locations Review, Operations & Debt) ZU 0 0 0 -8,000 -8,000 Navy & Marine Corps Larissa Greece - Larissa GR 1,232 0 0 0 0 Brunswick NAS 26 Units ME 0 5,800 0 5,000 5,000 Unspecified Worldwide Rescission (Foreign Currency Locations Fluctuation) ZU 0 0 0 -2,652 -2,652 Revised Economic Assumptions (Mid-session Unspecified Worldwide Review, Construction Locations Improvements) ZU 0 0 0 -3,000 -3,000 Revised Economic Unspecified Worldwide Assumptions (Mid-session Locations Review, Operating Expenses) ZU 0 0 0 -6,000 -6,000 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Privatization Support Costs ZU 7,071 7,071 7,071 11,398 7,071 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Maintenance of Real Property ZU 381,388 381,388 381,388 377,061 381,388 Air Force Whiteman AFB 75 Units MO 0 13,130 0 13,130 0 Replace Family Housing Ph 3 Whiteman AFB (22 Units) MO 3,977 3,977 3,977 3,977 17,107 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Privatization Support Costs ZU 20,482 20,482 20,482 15,482 15,482 Unspecified Worldwide Rescission (Foreign Currency Locations Fluctuations) ZU 0 0 0 -8,782 -8,782 Revised Economic Unspecified Worldwide Assumptions (Mid-session Locations Review, Operations & Debt) ZU 0 0 0 -5,000 -5,000 Revised Economic Unspecified Worldwide Assumptions (Mid-session Locations Review, Operations & Debt) ZU 0 0 0 -6,000 -6,000 CRS-38 Location Name Project Loca Request House Senate Conf Auth Defense-wide Def Distribution Depot New Cumberland Whole House Revitalization PA 5,430 5,430 5,430 0 5,430 Unspecified Worldwide Civilian Personnel Accural Locations Accounting Adjustment ZU 0 0 0 -37 -37 Unspecified Worldwide Locations Construction Improvements ZU 5,480 5,480 5,480 5,480 50 Sources: FY2003 Budget Request, H.Rept. 107-533, S.Rept. 107-202, H.Rept. 107-731, H.Rept. 107-772. a. Standard postal abbreviations for states are used. GY= Federal Republic of Germany; GR=Greece; ZU=Unspecified Location, Unclassified Project. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For other versions of this document, see http://wikileaks.org/wiki/CRS-RL31310