Calendar No. 150

106TH CONGRESS REPORT 1st Session SENATE 106–74 "!

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATION BILL, 2000

JUNE 10, 1999.—Ordered to be printed

Mr. BURNS, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany S. 1205] The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1205) making appropriations for military construction, family housing, and base realignment and closure for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2000, and for other purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass. Total of bill as reported to Senate ...... $8,273,820,000 Amount of 2000 budget estimate ...... 5,438,443,000 Amount of 1999 appropriations ...... 8,449,742,000 The bill as reported to the Senate: Over the budget estimate, 2000 ...... 2,835,377,000 Under appropriations for fiscal year 1999 ...... 175,922,000

57–202 cc CONTENTS

Background: Page Purpose of the bill ...... 3 Comparative statement ...... 3 Compliance with section 308 of the Budget Control Act ...... 8 Committee recommendation ...... 8 Items of special interest ...... 9 Military construction, Army ...... 15 Military construction, Navy ...... 16 Military construction, Air Force ...... 17 Military construction, Defense-wide ...... 18 Military construction, Reserve components ...... 21 NATO Security Investment Program ...... 25 Family housing overview ...... 26 Family housing, Army ...... 26 Family housing, Navy and Marine Corps ...... 27 Family housing, Air Force ...... 29 Family housing, Defense-wide ...... 31 Family housing revitalization transfer fund ...... 31 Family housing improvement fund ...... 31 Base realignment and closure account, part IV ...... 32 General provisions ...... 33 Compliance with paragraph 7, rule XVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate ... 34 Compliance with paragraph 7(c), rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate ...... 35 Compliance with paragraph 12, rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate ...... 35 Project listing by location ...... 36

(2) BACKGROUND

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

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT The Committee recommends appropriations totaling $8,273,820,000 for fiscal year 2000 military construction, family housing, and base closure. The following table displays the Com- mittee recommendation in comparison with the current fiscal year, and the President’s fiscal year 2000 request.

(3) 4 62,285 41,357 604,231 659,536 379,867 224,364 239,785 278,317 169,332 411,419 565,097 502,812 217,226 577,685 337,900 210,689 248,117 ) com- ∂ ¥ ∂ ¥ ¥ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ¥ ∂ ∂ ¥ ∂ ¥ ¥ ) or decrease ( pared with— 5,860 ...... 2,500 ...... 5,000 ...... 83,696 75,431 29,200 ...... 68,744 77,931 ∂ 170,901 276,430 141,701 219,576 201,696 282,290 219,576 721,403 118,000 ...... ¥ ¥ ∂ ∂ ∂ ¥ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ¥ 1999 adjusted Budget estimate Increase ( ommendation Committee rec- 5,000 ...... ¥ [In thousands of dollars] COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY Item 1999 adjusted Budget estimate Total ...... 983,726Total ...... 1,315,539 608,453Total ...... 1,067,422 822,598Total ...... 642,009Total, Active components ...... 884,883 551,114 559,346 2,785,302 530,905 783,710 Total ...... 3,228,388 770,690 3,506,705 151,303 57,402 226,734 Emergency appropriations (Public Law 105–277) ...... 29,200 ...... Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2001 ...... 379,867 ...... Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2001 ...... 659,536 ...... Emergency appropriations (Public Law 105–277) ...... 118,000Emergency appropriations (Public Law 105–277) ...... 5,860 ...... Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2001 ...... 502,812 ...... Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2001 ...... 337,900 ...... Emergency appropriations (Public Law 105–277) ...... 2,500 ...... Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2001 ...... 41,357 ...... 1997, Public Law 104-196) ...... Military construction, Air Force ...... 612,809 179,479 783,710 Military construction, Army ...... 865,726 656,003 1,067,422 Military construction, Navy ...... 602,593 319,786 884,883 Military construction, Defense-wide ...... 551,114Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied Housing Improvement Fund: Rescission (fiscal year 193,005 770,690 Military construction, Air National Guard ...... 169,801 21,319 238,545 Military construction, Army National Guard ...... 148,803 16,045 226,734 5 2,906 8,544 16,522 91,000 27,297 26,542 10,020 23,709 15,165 28,191 43,991 51,981 82,697 54,506 91,000 19,600 165,245 666,151 387,834 ∂ ∂ ∂ ¥ ∂ ∂ ¥ ∂ ¥ ∂ ¥ ¥ ∂ ¥ ¥ ∂ 2,719,295) 2,053,144) ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ¥ 146 146 1,493 1,000 ...... 2,0502,639 ...... 3,698 3,698 5,000) ...... 1,493 ¥ ¥ 83,100 15,900 ...... 52,844 55,000 54,000 15,879 98,390 133,320 384,723 646,460) ...... 475,000 ...... ∂ ∂ ¥ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ¥ ¥ ∂ ¥ ¥ ¥ ¥ 1,026,183) ( ∂ ∂ ¥ ¥ ∂ 1,000 ...... 2,639 ...... 5,000) ...... ( ¥ ¥ ¥ Rescissions ...... ( Emergency appropriations ...... (646,460) ...... ( Appropriations ...... Advance appropriations ...... (3,118,957) ...... (1,425,845) (2,053,144) ...... (4,145,140) ( ( Total ...... Total ...... 185,701Total ...... 102,119 73,300Total ...... 31,621 77,626 238,545 Total, Reserve components ...... 34,371Total, Military construction ...... 105,817 14,953 505,115 3,760,417 27,320 31,475 250,601 3,478,989Total, NATO ...... 35,864 638,435 4,145,140 154,000Subtotal, construction 191,000 ...... 159,290 100,000 57,994 60,900 Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2001 ...... 10,020 ...... Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2001 ...... 15,165 ...... Revised economic assumptions ...... Planning and design ...... General reduction ...... Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2001 ...... 6,350 43,991 ...... 4,300 4,300 Emergency appropriations (Public Law 105–277) ...... Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2001 ...... 15,900Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2001 ...... 51,981 ...... 54,506 ...... New construction ...... Construction improvements ...... 107,100 48,479 4,400 5,303 24,000 32,600 Military construction, Naval Reserve ...... Military construction, Air Force Reserve ...... 31,621 34,371 4,933 12,155 31,475 35,864 NATO Security Investment Program ...... 155,000Family housing, Army: 191,000 100,000 Military construction, Army Reserve ...... 102,119 23,120 105,817 Military construction transfer fund (emergency appropriations) (Public Law 106–31) ...... 475,000 ...... 6 378 2,906 ∂ 62,582 18,021 18,021 62,582 95,672 100,407 137,193 215,222 133,342 171,167 ∂ ) com- ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ¥ ∂ ¥ ¥ 295 ...... ) or decrease ( pared with— 5,200 ...... 3,764 7,323 ...... 6,129 2,097 ...... ¥ 93,207 15,22310,599 ...... 10,383 ...... 57,085 22,058 12,512 55,069 41,68822,233 ...... 74,524 62,741 25,844 10,584 ...... ∂ ¥ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ¥ ¥ ¥ ∂ ∂ ¥ ∂ ∂ ∂ ¥ ∂ ¥ ∂ ∂ 1999 adjusted Budget estimate Increase ( ommendation Committee rec- 7,323 ...... 10,584 ...... ¥ ¥ [In thousands of dollars] COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY—Continued Item 1999 adjusted Budget estimate Total, Family housing, Army ...... 1,252,187Subtotal, construction 1,156,074 ...... 1,158,980 Total, Family housing, Navy ...... 294,590 1,215,482 235,772Subtotal, construction 1,130,842 ...... 298,354 1,193,424 Total, Family housing, Air Force ...... 279,965 1,082,402 317,013 1,138,905 335,034 1,156,926 Operation and maintenance ...... 910,293 895,070 895,070 Emergency appropriations (Public Law 105–277) ...... 10,599 ...... New construction ...... 175,099 50,418Construction improvements ...... 187,611 345 50 50 Operation and maintenance ...... 780,204 821,892 821,892 Operation and maintenance ...... Emergency appropriations (Public Law 105–277) ...... 1,087,697New construction ...... 5,200 ...... 1,098,080 ...... 58,504 1,098,080 15,182 115,589 Emergency appropriations (Public Law 105–277) ...... 22,233 ...... Construction improvements ...... 227,791 31,708Construction improvements ...... Planning and design ...... 165,050 104,108 11,342 34,280 17,093 129,952 17,471 General reduction and revised economic assumptions ...... Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2001 ...... 215,222 ...... Planning and design ...... 15,618 17,715 17,715 General reduction and revised economic assumptions ...... Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2001 ...... 171,167 ...... Family housing, Air Force: Family housing, Defense-wide: Family housing, Navy and Marine Corps: 7 378) ∂ 25,000 53,756) 53,756 54,753 577,306 257,200) 278,051 577,306 225,453 256,311) 430,380) ∂ ¥ ¥ ∂ 2,835,377) 3,060,830) ¥ ∂ ¥ ¥ ¥ ∂ ¥ ∂ ¥ 6,000 ...... 4,541 ...... 4,246 ...... 6,176) ( 5,000) ...... 13,503) ( 53,071)20,546) ( 41,389) ...... 23,000) ...... ( 38,032) ...... 23,000 25,000 11,505 278,051 427,164491,427 ...... 918,591 860,414 180,922)684,492) ( ...... ¥ ∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ ¥ ¥ ∂ ∂ ∂ ¥ ∂ ∂ ∂ ¥ ¥ ¥ ¥ ¥ ¥ ¥ 278,051 ¥ 5,000) ...... ( 20,546) ...... ( ¥ ¥ General Provisions Appropriations ...... Rescissions ...... Advance appropriations ...... (8,454,742) ...... ( (5,438,443) (3,060,830) ...... (8,273,820) ( ( Emergency appropriations ...... (684,492) ...... ( New budget (obligational) authority ...... 9,134,234 8,499,273 8,273,820 Construction improvements ...... Operation and maintenance ...... Family Housing Improvement Fund (380,723) ...... (2,815,093) (71,341) (2,000) (2,856,482) (327,652) (78,756) (2,856,482) ( ( (25,000) ( Planning and design ...... General reduction ...... (33,310) ( (39,108) (39,486) ( Emergency appropriations ...... Advance appropriations ...... (38,032) ...... (430,380) ...... ( ( Total, Family housing, Defense-wide ...... Total, Family housing 37,244 ...... 3,589,315 41,490 3,546,067 41,490 3,600,820 Total, Base realignment and closure accounts ...... 1,624,502Grand total: 1,283,217 705,911 ...... Operation and maintenance ...... 36,899New construction ...... 41,440 (340,703) 41,440 (70,000)Part III ...... Part IV ...... (327,200)Advance appropriations, fiscal year 2001 ...... 427,164 1,197,338 ( ...... 577,306 ...... 705,911 ...... 705,911 Contingency reduction (sec. 125) ...... Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund ...... 2,000 78,756 25,000 Base realignment and closure accounts: Family housing, Navy and Marine Corps (fiscal year 1999 Sec. 125) ...... 6,000 ...... Family housing revitalization ...... 25,000 8

COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 308 OF THE BUDGET CONTROL ACT Section 308(a) of the Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344) requires that the Committee include in its report a comparison of its recommendations with levels contained in the first concurrent resolution. Appropriate data are reflected below: BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93–344, AS AMENDED [In millions of dollars]

Budget authority Outlays Committee Amount Committee Amount allocation of bill allocation of bill

Comparison of amounts in the bill with Com- mittee allocations to its subcommittees of amounts for fiscal year 2000: Subcommittee on Military Construction: General purpose discretionary ...... 8,274 8,274 8,789 1 8,789 Violent crime reduction fund ...... Mandatory ...... Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation: 2000 ...... 2 2,473 2001 ...... 3,046 2002 ...... 1,608 2003 ...... 614 2004 and future year ...... 492 Financial assistance to State and local govern- ments for 2000 ...... NA ...... NA ...... 1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. NA: Not applicable.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Committee recommends new fiscal year 2000 appropriations of $8,273,820,000. This is $2,835,377,000 over the budget request, and $175,922,000 under the appropriations for fiscal year 1999. The basis for this recommendation is contained in the following ‘‘Items of special interest,’’ and under the discussions pertaining to each individual appropriation. Complete project detail is provided in the tables at the end of the report. ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST COMPLIANCE WITH 302(b) ALLOCATION The Appropriations Committee conformed fully to the budget resolution for defense spending in its 302(b) allocation. This allocation divided the budget authority and outlays among the subcommittees with jurisdiction over discretionary spending. In this recommended bill, the Appropriations Committee has remained within the tight constraints of its 302(b) allocation for military construction.

HEARINGS The Subcommittee on Military Construction held hearings on the fiscal year 2000 budget request during March 1999. The subcommittee heard testimony from representatives of the military services and defense agencies concerning fiscal year 2000 budget priorities and base realignment and closure issues.

SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The budget request for fiscal year 2000 reflects a reduction of $3,011,299,000 from the amount enacted in fiscal year 1999. The Committee notes, with great concern, the continuous under investment by the Department of Defense in military facilities and infrastructure. This proposed level of funding does not provide sufficient resources to continue the Department’s efforts to modernize, ren- ovate, and improve aging defense facilities. The effects of sustained and structural inattention by the Depart- ment and the military departments to basic infrastructure are ap- parent on nearly every military installation. This will continue to have long-term implications as facilities continue to age dispropor- tionately without a sustained level of investment in maintenance and repair. The requested funding level reflects a lack of commitment by the administration to reduce the serious backlog of readiness, revitalization and quality of life projects. The Committee urges the De- partment to develop a comprehensive funding strategy and plan to address these serious infrastructure problems. The Committee recommends an additional $2,835,377,000 above the fiscal year 2000 budget request to fully fund the budget request, as well as correct some of these deficiencies and shortfalls. The total recommended appropriation for fiscal year 2000 is $8,273,820,000, a reduction of $175,922,000 from fiscal year 1999 funding.

ADVANCE APPROPRIATIONS The Committee is concerned that the President’s fiscal year 2000 budget request for military construction recommended an incremental funding approach for military construction and family hous- (9) 10 ing projects. The proposed use of ‘‘advance appropriations’’ flies in the face of the Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 and the Administration’s long standing policy of fully funding military construction. In reviewing the events that led to the decision to request advance appropriations, the Committee is disturbed that such a major financing policy change was instituted at such a late date in the budget preparation process. It allowed almost no discussion within the Administration about the considerable risks that were being taken. The Committee also notes that no precedent exists for the broad-based, incremental funding of military construction as proposed by the Administration. Although there has been tacit support within the Department for the Administration’s action, open discussions with the civilian and military civil engineering community indicate significant dangers to this approach for both cost and schedule to complete the construction projects. To proceed in this manner demonstrates poor financial stewardship and places the fiscal year 2000 construction program in extreme jeopardy. In addition to ‘‘advance appropriations’’, the Administration requested the separation of funds for supervision, overhead and inspection (SIOH) charges totaling $154,281,000 from specific military construction projects and to annualize those charges over a five-year period. The Committee strongly opposes both changes to the management of the Department’s military construction and family housing programs. To ensure the integrity of the budget and appropriation process and that such fiscal practices are not repeated, the Committee directs the Department to fully fund all military construction projects in future budget requests. Further, the Committee directs the De- partment to adhere to the phase-funding guidelines it had previously established in conjunction with the Office of Management and Budget, prior to this budget submission. Continued disregard of this direction will force the Committee to review all military construction financing policies and enact appropriate controls and re- strictions.

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROJECTS The Department has requested $244,910,000 for environmental compliance project construction during fiscal year 2000. The Com- mittee recommends funding of $244,910,000 for these 25 projects, as follows: [In thousands of dollars] State/Service/Installation/Project Recommended Alaska: Army: Fort Wainwright: Emissions Reduction Facility ...... 15,500 Defense-Wide: DFSC Elmendorf AFB: Hydrant Fuel System ...... 23,500 Defense-Wide: DESC Eielson AFB: Hydrant Fuel System ...... 26,000 Colorado: Air Force: Schriever AFB: Sanitary Sewer Line ...... 5,500 Florida: Air Force Reserve: Homestead ARB: Fire Fighter Training Facil- ity ...... 2,000 Georgia: Air National Guard: Savannah IAP: Regional Fire Training Fa- cility ...... 1,700 Hawaii: Navy: Pearl Harbor NSY: Abrasive Blast & Paint Facility ...... 10,610 Air Force: Hickam AFB: Fire Training Facility ...... 3,300 11

State/Service/Installation/Project Recommended Kansas: Army: Fort Leavenworth: Water Treatment Plant ...... 8,100 Maryland: Navy: Indian Head Naval Surface Warfare Ctr: Sewage Treat- ment Plant ...... 10,070 North Carolina: Air Force: Pope AFB: Dangerous Cargo Pad ...... 7,700 Pennsylvania: Naval Reserve: Willow Grove NAS: Hazardous/Matrl Strg Facility ...... 1,930 South Carolina: Navy: Beaufort Marine Corps Air Station: Corrosion Control Facil- ity ...... 8,700 Air Force: Charleston AFB: C–17 Corrosion Control Facility ...... 18,200 Tennessee: Air Force: Arnold Engineering Dev Center: Upgrade Jet Eng Air Induct Sys Ph III ...... 7,800 Washington: Army: Fort Lewis: Tank Trail Erosion Mitigation—Yakima Ph V ...... 12,000 Defense-Wide: DESC Fairchild AFB: Add to Hydrant Fuel System .... 12,400 Guam: Air Force: Andersen AFB: Landfill Closure ...... 8,900 Defense-Wide: Def Fuel Support Point Guam: Replace Hydrant Fuel System ...... 24,300 Puerto Rico: Air National Guard: Puerto Rico IAP: C–130 Fuel Cell Cor- rosion Control ...... 5,600 Spain: Defense-Wide: DFSC Moron Air Base: Replace Hydrant Fuel Sys- tem ...... 15,200 United Kingdom: Air Force: Feltwell: Wastewater Treatment Facility ...... 3,000 Air Force: RAF Mildenhall: Hazmat Storage Facility ...... 1,000 Air Force: RAF Mildenhall: Consolidate Corrision Control ...... 10,200 Air Force: RAF Molesworth: Wastewater Treatement Facility ...... 1,700 Total ...... 244,910 The Committee again directs the Department to devote the max- imum amount of resources to actual cleanups and to limit resources expended on administration, support, studies, and inves- tigations, to the greatest extent possible.

REPROGRAMMING CRITERIA The reprogramming criteria that apply to military construction projects (25 percent of the funded amount or $2,000,000, whichever is less) continue to apply to new housing construction projects and to improvements more than $2,000,000. To provide the individual services the flexibility to proceed with construction contracts without disruption or delay, the costs associated with environmental hazard remediation such as asbestos removal, radon abatement, lead-based paint removal or abatement, and any other legislated environmental hazard remediation may be excluded, provided that such remediation requirements could not be reasonably anticipated at the time of budget submission. This exclusion applies to projects authorized in the budget year, and also projects authorized in prior years for which construction contracts have not been completed.

BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE The Committee has included $705,911,000 for the ‘‘Base realignment and closure’’ account. The Committee has fully funded the budget request for base closure and realignment. This includes funding of the requirements for environmental cleanup at closing and realigning bases. The Committee again asks the General Accounting Office [GAO] to continue its annual review of the base closure accounts. The Committee requests GAO’s review of and recommendations on the 12 validity of DOD’s proposed budget requests for base closure activities. The Committee expects the Department of Defense and the military services to fully cooperate with the GAO in all aspects of its review. The Committee believes the annual GAO review will continue to give the Congress a better foundation for approving future requests. This report should be provided to the congressional defense committees not later than May 15, 2000.

BARRACKS CONSTRUCTION The Committee recommends $753,898,000 for 47 barracks construction projects in fiscal year 2000, an increase of $586,695,000 over the budget request. The projects are as follows: BARRACKS CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS [In thousands of dollars]

Rec- State/location/project Request Change ommended

ARMY Alaska: Fort Richardson: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 2,200 12,400 14,600 Georgia: Fort Stewart: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 7,000 ...... 7,000 Fort Benning: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 7,100 39,900 47,000 Hawaii: Schofield Barracks: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 14,200 ...... 14,200 Kansas: Fort Riley: Whole Barracks Renovation ...... 27,000 27,000 Fort Leavenworth: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 3,900 22,100 26,000 Kentucky: Fort Campbell: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 4,800 27,200 32,000 Maryland: Fort Meade: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 2,700 15,300 18,000 New Jersey: Fort Monmouth: Barracks Improvement ...... 11,800 11,800 North Carolina: Fort Bragg: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 16,508 ...... 16,508 Fort Bragg: Upgrade Barracks ...... 14,400 14,400 Pennsylvania: Carlisle Barracks: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 750 4,250 5,000 Texas: Fort Hood: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 4,350 24,650 29,000 Virginia: Fort Eustis: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 5,800 33,200 39,000 Germany: Ansbach: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 3,150 17,850 21,000 Bamberg: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 1,230 6,970 8,200 Bamberg: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 860 4,840 5,700 Mannheim: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 675 3,825 4,500 Bamberg: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 1,400 7,900 9,300 Korea: Camp Casey: Whole Barracks Complex ...... 4,650 26,350 31,000

Army Total ...... 81,273 299,935 381,208

NAVY/MARINE CORPS California: NMC San Diego: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters ...... 5,470 16,120 21,590 NavHospital 29 Palms: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters ...... 1,930 5,710 7,640 MCAGCC 29 Palms: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters ...... 4,840 14,290 19,130 Camp Pendleton: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters ...... 2,390 7,350 9,740 Georgia: NAS Atlanta: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters ...... 5,430 5,430 Hawaii: NS Pearl Harbor: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters ...... 4,720 13,880 18,600 Illinois: NTC Great Lakes: Recruit In-Process Barracks ...... 3,370 9,940 13,310 NTC Great Lakes: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters ...... 7,700 23,710 31,410 Maine: NAS Brunswick: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters ...... 4,270 12,620 16,890 Mississippi: NCBC Gulfport: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters ...... 3,260 9,600 12,860 CTC Gulfport: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters ...... 1,600 4,710 6,310 13

BARRACKS CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Rec- State/location/project Request Change ommended

Virginia: FCTC Dam Neck: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters ...... 2,610 7,700 10,310 MCCDC Quantico: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters ...... 5,270 15,550 20,820 NSY Norfolk: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters ...... 4,460 13,170 17,630 Bahrain: Bachelor Enlisted Quarters-Transient ...... 6,230 18,320 24,550 Bachelor Enlisted Quarters-Security Force ...... 5,840 17,930 23,770

Navy/MC Total ...... 63,960 196,030 259,990

AIR FORCE Alabama: Maxwell AFB: Officer Transient Student Dormitory ...... 10,600 10,600 Alaska: Elmendorf AFB: Dormitory ...... 3,727 12,073 15,800 Florida: Eglin AFB: Dormitory ...... 1,635 5,365 7,000 Eglin Aux. 9: Dormitory ...... 2,161 6,939 9,100 Mississippi: Keesler AFB: Student Dormitory ...... 4,679 15,221 19,900 Montana: Malmstrom AFB: Dormitory ...... 11,600 11,600 Nebraska: Offutt AFB: Dormitory ...... 1,941 6,359 8,300 Oklahoma: Tinker AFB: Dormitory ...... 1,602 5,198 6,800 Texas: Lackland AFB: Dormitory ...... 1,257 4,043 5,300 Virginia: Langley AFB: Dormitory ...... 1,486 4,814 6,300 Korea: Osan AB: Dormitory ...... 3,482 8,518 12,000

Total Air Force ...... 21,970 90,730 112,700

GRAND TOTAL ...... 167,203 586,695 753,898 Contingency funding.—The Committee believes that the amount requested for construction contingencies, 5 percent for new construction and 10 percent for alterations or additions, is excessive. The Committee supports the requirement established for unfore- seen needs, such as environmental and regulatory requirements, unanticipated subsurface conditions and changes in the bid cli- mate. However, the Committee has learned that this contingency funding is being used to fund upgrades on projects which have already been awarded and satisfy the basic requirement. The Com- mittee has included a provision (Section 125) which reduces the funding available for contingency within the Department. Alkali silica reactivity.—The Corps of Engineers has selected Fort Campbell, Kentucky as the initial defense installation to mitigate/prevent the deleterious effects of alkali silica reactivity (ASR) associated with concrete aprons, taxiways, tarmacs. However, the Committee recommends that the Corps, in conjunction with the De- partment of Defense, undertake a broader investigation of ASR problems at all domestic defense installations. Further, the Com- mittee understands the Corps has already developed a list of high priority sites where ASR problems exist. The investigation should continue this prioritization of sites and include the development of specifications to prevent and mitigate ASR in new and existing concrete structures as well as associated cost estimates per installation. The Committee directs the Department to report to congressional defense committees on its strategy to deal with ASR no later than March 15, 2000. 14 Real Property Maintenance Reporting Requirement.—The Com- mittee recommends a continuation of the following general rules for repairing a facility under Operations and Maintenance account funding: Components of the facility may be repaired by replacement, and such replacement can be up to current standards or code. Interior arrangements and restorations may be included as repair, but additions, new facilities, and functional conversions must be performed as military construction projects. Such projects may be done concurrent with repair projects, as long as the final conjunctively funded project is a complete and us- able facility. The appropriate Service Secretary shall submit a 21-day notification prior to carrying out any repair project with an estimated cost in excess of $10,000,000. MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, ARMY Appropriations, 1999 ...... $983,726,000 Budget estimate, 2000 ...... 656,003,000 Committee recommendation ...... 1,067,422,000 The Committee recommends $1,067,422,000 for the Army for fiscal year 2000. This is an increase of $411,419,000 from the budget request for fiscal year 2000. (See State tables at the end of the report for complete program recommendations.) The Committee fully expects contracts for the following projects to be awarded, as early in fiscal year 2000 as practical: Range improvements, Fort Knox, KY.—Of the $15,000,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Army Con- struction’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,200,000 be made available to make range improvements at the Pells Range, Fort Knox, KY. Ready building, Fort Richardson, AK.—Of the $15,000,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Military Con- struction, Army’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,500,000 be made available to construct a ready building at Fort Richardson, AK. Fire-rescue station, Ft. Rucker, AL.—Of the $15,000,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Military Construc- tion, Army’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,000,000 be made available to replace an existing fire station located at Cairns Army Air Field, Ft. Rucker, AL. Armament Software Engineering Center, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ.—Of the $65,114,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Military Construction, Army’’ account, the Committee directs that up to $1,900,000 be made available for the design of this facility to be located at Picatinny Arsenal, NJ. Joint mobility complex, Fort Wainwright, AK.—Of the $65,114,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Military Construction, Army’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $2,000,000 be made available for the design of a joint mobility complex to be located at either Fort Wainwright or Eielson AFB, AK. Military History Institute and Army Heritage Museum, Carlisle, PA.—The Committee is aware of discussions between the Secretary of the Army, officials representing the City of Carlisle, Pennsyl- vania, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, regarding the es- tablishment of a Military History Institute and Army Heritage Mu- seum in Carlisle. The Committee understands that the Secretary of the Army committed to making the proposed institute a first class facility. The community and the Commonwealth offered to provide 54 acres of land and $5,000,000 to establish the facility. The Committee applauds the commitment made by the Army and the people of Pennsylvania, and urges the Secretary of the Army (15) 16 to continue to work closely with the Carlisle project coordinators to advance the completion of the Military History Institute and Army Heritage Museum. Of the $65,114,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Military Construction, Army’’ account, the Committee directs that up to $500,000 be made available for the design of this facility. Information assurance.—The Department of Defense currently operates over two million separate computers and 25,000 distinct computer systems to conduct its mission. These computer systems are integral parts of a wide variety of defense programs. Many of these programs are critical to the direct fulfillment of military and supporting intelligence missions. Attacks on these systems are capable of significantly disrupting military operations and activities at all levels. The Department of Defense is interested in developing an effective control over the access to its information systems through computers because its bat- tle and communications systems are becoming increasingly dependent on information networks. The Committee understands that the Army is currently assessing technologies to make man-machine interface more user friendly, and is focusing on exploration and development of technologies in the biometrics arena to meet its information assurance requirements. The Committee directs the Army to conduct a feasibility study of its requirements for a facility to house the combined activities of biometrics sensor and template repository, biometrics security tech- nology, and other Army information assurance development and testing activities to accomplish a more focused and effective information assurance effort. This report should be provided to the congressional defense committee not later than February 15, 2000.

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, NAVY Appropriations, 1999 ...... $608,453,000 Budget estimate, 2000 ...... 319,786,000 Committee recommendation ...... 884,883,000 The Committee recommends $884,883,000 for Navy and Marine Corps military construction for fiscal year 2000. This amount is an increase of $565,097,000 from the fiscal year 2000 budget request. (See State tables at the end of the report for complete program recommendations.) The Committee fully expects contracts for the following projects to be awarded, as early in fiscal year 2000 as practical: Learning resource center, NAVSTA Pascagoula, MS.—Of the $8,862,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Military Construction, Navy’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $920,000 be made available to construct a learning resource center at the NAVSTA, Pascagoula, MS. Apron modifications, NAS Whiting Field, FL.—Of the $8,862,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Military Construction, Navy’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $600,000 be made available to construct a power check pad/ apron modifications at the NAS Whiting Field, FL. Prepositioned equipment maintenance facilities, Blount Island, Jacksonville, FL.—The Committee understands that the Secretary of Defense recently approved a waiver of the current moratorium 17 on land acquisition for the purchase of the afloat prepositioning maintenance facilities at Blount Island, Jacksonville, FL. These facilities are critical to the prepositioning support of the Marine Corps. The Committee encourages the Secretary of the Navy to proceed with the necessary actions required to initiate this land acquisition at the earliest possible date. Naval Submarine Base, Bangor, WA.—The Committee is concerned over the unwillingness of the Navy and the Department of Defense to address the need for an elementary special education center to serve the Naval Submarine Base, Bangor, Washington. In the Senate report accompanying the fiscal year 1999 Military Con- struction Appropriations Bill, the Department was directed to make $1,000,000 available from the ‘‘DOD dependent school’’ account for the design of such a facility to serve the Bangor installation, and to award a contract for the planning and design as early as practical in fiscal year 1999. Despite this language, the Depart- ment has not proceeded with this contract. The funds remain available, and the Committee directs the Navy and the Department of Defense to proceed immediately with design, planning, and site preparation activities associated with this facility. The Committee further urges the Department to address the requirement for this construction project in the fiscal year 2001 budget.

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE Appropriations, 1999 ...... $642,009,000 Budget estimate, 2000 ...... 179,479,000 Committee recommendation ...... 783,710,000 The Committee recommends $783,710,000 for the Air Force in fiscal year 2000. This is an increase of $604,213,000 to the fiscal year 2000 budget request. (See State tables at the end of the report for complete program recommendations.) The Committee fully expects contracts for the following projects to be awarded, as early in fiscal year 2000 as practical: Child development center addition, Hill AFB, UT.—Of the $14,126,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Military Construction, Air Force’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,500,000 be made available to expand the child care center at Hill AFB, Utah. Youth center upgrade, Holloman AFB, NM.—Of the $14,126,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Military Construction, Air Force’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,100,000 be made available to expand and upgrade the youth center at Holloman AFB, NM. Wing headquarters, Goodfellow AFB, TX.—Of the $32,764,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Military Construc- tion, Air Force’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,000,000 be made available for the design of a wing headquarters at Goodfellow AFB, TX. Fire/crash rescue station, Offutt AFB, NE.—Of the $32,764,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Military Construc- tion, Air Force’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $760,000 be made available for the design of a fire/crash rescue station at Offutt AFB, NE. 18 Vehicle maintenance corrosion control facility, Minot AFB, ND.— Of the $32,764,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Military Construction, Air Force’’, the Committee directs that not less than $280,000 be made available for the design of a vehicle maintenance corrosion control facility at Minot AFB, ND. McClellan Nuclear Radiation Center, CA.—During fiscal year 2000, the Committee fully expects the Department of the Air Force to reprogram $17,593,000, from within the Base Realignment and Closure Account contained in this bill, to accomplish the transfer of the McClellan Nuclear Radiation Center, CA., to the University of California. Weapons’ storage area, Malmstrom AFB, MT.—The Committee understands that the weapons’ storage area on the base is more than thirty years old, does not meet today’s high standards for weapons’ storage, and requires an intensive manpower effort in loading and unloading munitions. The costs to maintain this facility are in the range of $7,000,000 to $8,000,000 each year. The Committee strongly believes this facility must be replaced expedi- tiously and resited to a location that takes into consideration current safety standards. Accordingly, of the $32,764,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Military Construction, Air Force’’ account, the Com- mittee directs that not less than $2,000,000 be made available for the design of a new weapons’ storage area at Malmstrom AFB during fiscal year 2000. The Committee further directs the Secretary of the Air Force to report to the Committee on the status of these design efforts quarterly throughout the year, beginning with De- cember 15, 1999.

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, DEFENSE-WIDE Appropriations, 1999 ...... $551,114,000 Budget estimate, 2000 ...... 193,005,000 Committee recommendation ...... 770,690,000 The Committee recommends $770,690,000 for projects considered within the ‘‘Defense-wide’’ account. The amount recommended is an increase of $577,685,000 from the fiscal year 2000 budget request. (See State tables at the end of the report for complete program recommendations.)

CHEMICAL DEMILITARIZATION The budget request identified a requirement of $256,200,000 for the construction of chemical weapon demilitarization facilities in fiscal year 1999. The Committee recommends a total of $261,300,000 for this program. The following chemical demilitarization projects are provided for fiscal year 2000: [In thousands of dollars]

Rec- State/location/project Request Change ommended

Alabama: Anniston AD: Ammunition Demilitarization Facility. Ph VII ...... 7,000 ...... 7,000 Arkansas: Pine Bluff Arsenal: Ammunition Demilitarization Facility. Ph IV ...... 61,800 ...... 61,800 19

[In thousands of dollars]

Rec- State/location/project Request Change ommended

Indiana: Newport AD: Ammunition Demilitarization Facility, Ph II ...... 61,200 ...... 61,200 Kentucky: Blue Grass AD: Ammuniton Demilitarization Facility, Ph I ...... 11,800 ...... 11,800 Kentucky: Blue Grass AD: Ammunition Demilitarization Support ...... 11,000 ...... 11,000 Kentucky: Blue Grass AD: Ammunition Surveillance Facility ...... 900 5,100 6,000 Maryland: Aberdeen Proving Ground: Ammunition Demilitarization Facil- ity, Ph I ...... 66,600 ...... 66,600 Oregon: Umatilla DA: Ammuniton Demilitarization Facility, Ph V ...... 35,900 ...... 35,900

Total ...... 256,200 5,100 261,300

The Committee does not support the Department’s transfer of the Chemical Demilitarization Program funds from the Office of the Secretary of Defense to the Army Military Construction Program. The Committee believes that the focus on this program must remain at the Office of the Secretary of the Defense rather than at the service level and directs the Department to submit the fiscal year 2001 budget accordingly.

MEDICAL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM The budget request included $161,750,000 for 23 projects and for unspecified minor construction to provide hospital and medical facilities, including treatment, training, and medical research and development facilities. The Committee recommends funding for these projects and two additional projects for a total of $174,950,000. The fiscal year 2000 program of $174,950,000 represents a decrease of $35,650,000 from the amount appropriated for medical construction projects in fiscal year 1999. The following hospital and medical projects are provided for fiscal year 2000: [In thousands of dollars] Location/Project Recommended Training Facilities: Florida: Pensacola Naval Air Station: Aircrew Water Survival Train- ing Facility ...... 4,300 Maryland: Patuxent River NAS: Aircrew Water Survival Training Facility ...... 4,150 North Carolina: Cherry Point: Aircrew Water Survival Training Fa- cility ...... 3,500 Texas: Fort Sam Houston: Veterinary Instructional Facility ...... 5,800 Virginia: Norfolk NAS: Aircrew Water Survival Training Facility ...... 4,050 Washington: Whidbey Island NAS: Aircrew Water Survival Training Facility ...... 4,700 Hospital and Medical Facilities: Alabama: Dannelly Field: Medical Training and Dining Facility ...... 6,000 Alaska: Ft. Wainwright: Hospital Replacement (Phase I) ...... 18,000 Arizona: Davis Monthan AFB: Ambulatory Health Care Center Addi- tion ...... 10,000 California: Los Angeles AFB: Medical/Dental Clinic Replacement ...... 13,600 California: Travis AFB: War Readiness Materials Warehouse & En- gineering Support Facility ...... 7,500 Florida: Jacksonville NAS: Branch Medical/Dental Clinic Addition .... 3,780 Florida: Patrick AFB: Medical Logistics Facility Replacement ...... 1,750 Georgia: Moody AFB: War Readiness Materials Warehouse/Bio- environmental Engineering Facility ...... 1,250 Indiana: Ft. Wayne: Medical Training and Dining Facility ...... 7,200 Kansas: Fort Riley: Consolidated Troop Medical Clinic ...... 6,000 20

Location/Project Recommended Maryland: Andrews AFB: Medical Logistics Facility Addition ...... 3,000 Ohio: Wright-Patterson AFB: Occupational Health Clinic, Bio- environmental Engineering Lab Replacement ...... 3,900 Virginia: Cheatham Annex: Fleet Hospital Support Office Container Holding Yard ...... 1,650 Washington: Ft. Lewis: North Ft. Lewis Dental Clinic Replacement 5,500 Germany: Ramstein Air Base: Dental Clinic Addition ...... 7,100 Korea: Yongsan: Hospital Addition ...... 38,570 Korea: Yongsan: Medical Supply/Equipment Storage Warehouse Re- placement ...... 2,550 Puerto Rico: Naval Security Group Activity: Medical/Dental Clinic Replacement ...... 4,000 United Kingdom: Royal Air Force Lakenheath: Dental Clinic Addi- tion ...... 7,100

Total ...... 174,950 Contingency construction.—The Committee has provided $938,000 for the Secretary of Defense ‘‘Contingency construction’’ account in accordance with the budget request. This account provides funds which may be used by the Secretary of Defense for un- foreseen facility requirements. The Committee believes that the funding provided to the account is adequate to meet the needs of the Department. Forward operating locations.—The fiscal year 2000 budget submission requested $42,800,000 for the acquisition and construction of three forward deployment sites for drug interdiction and counter-drug activities. The proposal was to construct three bases in Costa Rica, Ecuador, and Curacao, Netherlands Antilles using funds from the ‘‘Drug Interdiction and Counter-drug Activities, De- fense’’ appropriation. The Committee recognizes the importance of the Department’s counter-narcotics mission, and supports the high priority that it places on this mission. However, the Committee is concerned that the proposal to construct these new bases was developed outside the military construction process and budgetary guidelines without adequate consensus among the services and Congress as to the overall requirements for the counter-narcotics mission in the region. The Committee believes it is premature to appropriate funds for these bases until the Congress has been provided a long-range master plan for each location, combined with justification, detailed data, and costs for each of the projects that the Department anticipates building at these sites. The Department must also determine which military service has the responsibility for building and maintaining these bases. The Committee also directs the Department to submit future requests for specific military construction projects in support of drug interdiction and counter-drug activities of the Department of De- fense on a line-item basis, as part of the budget request for military construction. Accordingly, the Committee did not recommend construction funding for these forward operating locations, but rather provided $5,000,000 of planning and design funds that will facilitate the detailed planning and design work for these facilities over the next fiscal year. The Committee directs that none of the fund appropriated in the 1999 Emergency Supplemental Appropria- tions Act (Public law 106–31) be used to fund these bases. How- ever, the Committee urges the Department to develop its long- 21 range master plan as quickly as possible. In the interim, the Com- mittee urges the Department to continue aggressive counter-drug operations using existing facilities in the region.

SCHOOL FACILITIES STUDY The Committee is concerned about the adequacy of special education services available to the dependent children of uniformed personnel, particularly on those installations identified as compassionate assignment posts. The Committee is also concerned about the impact of special education needs on civilian school districts, such as the Central Kitsap School District, Washington, that support military installations identified as compassionate assignment posts. Consolidation and base realignment have greatly increased the number of personnel assigned to certain installations, such as the Bangor Submarine Base, Washington, overburdening the ca- pacity of local school districts and jeopardizing the quality of educational services, particularly special education services, to both the affected civilian and military populations. Accordingly, the Committee has included a provision (section 126) which directs the Secretary to provide the Committee with a report, by April 30, 2000, detailing the following: (1) a survey of schools on military installations in the United States that are oper- ated by either the Department of Defense or local school districts; (2) a survey of school districts in the continental United States that have experienced an increase in enrollment of 20 percent or more in the past five years resulting from base realignments or consoli- dations; and (3) an assessment of the impact of increased special education requirements on school districts in areas designated by the military departments as compassionate assignments posts. The Committee further directs the Secretary to assess the adequacy of special education services and facilities for dependent children of uniformed personnel within the United States, particularly at compassionate assignment posts, and to recommend corrective meas- ures where necessary to adequately support military personnel, including such improvements as the renovation of existing schools or the construction of new schools, a cost estimate of needed improvements, and a recommended source of funding within the Depart- ment of Defense. Given the importance of providing quality education to dependent children of military personnel and maintaining the educational standards of the school districts that support military installations, the Committee expresses great disappointment that this study was not initiated in compliance with the reporting requirements that accompanied the fiscal year 1999 Military Construction Appropria- tions Bill, and directs the Secretary to initiate the study outlined above without further delay.

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, RESERVE COMPONENTS Appropriations, 1999 ...... $505,115,000 Budget estimate, 2000 ...... 77,572,000 Committee recommendation ...... 638,435,000 The Committee recommends $638,435,000 for military construction projects for the Guard and Reserve components. This amount 22 is $560,863,000 above the fiscal year 2000 budget request. This increase reflects the Committee’s continued strong support for the Guard and Reserve. The Committee’s recommended action on each Reserve component project is reflected in the State list at the end of this report. The Committee recommends approval of military construction, Reserve component as outlined in the following table: RESERVE COMPONENT

Committee Component Request recommendation

Army National Guard ...... $16,045,000 $226,734,000 Air National Guard ...... 21,319,000 238,545,000 Army Reserve ...... 23,120,000 105,817,000 Naval Reserve ...... 4,933,000 31,475,000 Air Force Reserve ...... 12,155,000 35,864,000

Total ...... 77,572,000 638,435,000

Rapid Assessment and Initial Detection (RAID) Teams.—The Committee notes the continued implementation of the Defense Re- form Initiative Directive Number 25, which address the integration of National Guard and reserve components in responding to weapons of mass destruction. The Committee supports the continued es- tablishment of National Guard RAID teams as a critical component of this program. However, as the National Guard assumes this new mission, many of these teams do not have adequate facilities from which to train, to coordinate with other federal and state agencies, and to store decontamination and reconnaissance equipment. Any outstanding requirements in this area must be fully integrated into the overall resourcing strategy for responding to weapons of mass destruction. Accordingly, the Committee directs the Secretary of the Army, in coordination with the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, to review the overall RAID teams’ infrastructure requirements. This study should provide a master plan on RAID teams facility requirements, identify existing shortfalls, provide prioritization of any needed facilities, and identify proposed sources of funding and the associated budgetary time line. This assessment should be provided to the congressional defense committees not later than February 15, 2000. The Committee has added $35,446,000 for specific Reserve component planning and design initiatives and minor construction projects listed below. The Department is expected to program the construction funds for these projects. Planning and design.—The Committee recommendation provides an additional $15,081,000 over the budget request for planning and design activities for the Reserve components. The Committee fully expects contracts for the following projects to be awarded, as early in fiscal year 1999 as practical: Armed Forces Reserve Center/organizational maintenance shop, Glen Jean, WV.—Of the $29,667,000 provided for planning and de- 23 sign within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,200,000 be made available for the design of an armed forces reserve center and organizational maintenance shop at Glen Jean, WV. Army aviation support facility, Bangor, ME.—Of the $29,667,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,340,000 be made available for the design of an Army aviation support facility located at Bangor, ME. Regional training institute dormitory, Gowen Field, ID.—Of the $20,771,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,220,000 be made available to construct a regional training institute dormitory at Gowen Field, ID. Armed Forces Reserve Center, Smyrna, TN.—Of the $29,667,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,500,000 be made available for the design of an armed forces reserve center at Smyrna, TN. Readiness center, Williamstown, WV.—Of the $29,667,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $500,000 be made available for the design of a readiness center in Wood Coun- ty, WV. Armed Forces Reserve Center, Sand Springs, OK.—The Com- mittee directs the Army National Guard to include the Armed Forces Reserve Center, Sand Springs, Oklahoma in its fiscal year 2001 budget request. The Committee further requests that the Na- tional Guard Bureau periodically update the Committee on the status of this project. Regional training center, Fort Harrison, MT.—Of the $20,771,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Army Na- tional Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,500,000 be made available to construct a regional training institute at Fort Harrison, MT. Organizational maintenance shop, Fair Haven, VT.—Of the $20,771,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,400,000 be made available to construct an organizational maintenance shop at Fair Haven, VT. Readiness center, Bryan, TX.—Of the $20,771,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,500,000 be made available to construct a readiness center in Bryan, TX. Combat arms educational facility, Fort Bragg, NC.—The Com- mittee notes the urgent requirement for the construction of an Army National Guard combat arms educational facility located at Fort Bragg, NC. This facility was identified by the Army Chief of Staff to serve as part of the Total Army School System and will provide standard individual training and education to active component, Army National Guard and Army Reserve soldiers. The Committee directs the Army National Guard to include funding for this project in its fiscal year 2001 budget submission. 24 MOUT assault course, Fort Harrison, MT.—Of the $20,771,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Army Na- tional Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,500,000 be made available to construct a MOUT assault course at Fort Harrison, MT. Shoreline protection, Camp Grafton, ND.—Of the $20,771,000 provide for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Army Na- tional Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,500,000 be made available for shoreline protection at Camp Grafton, ND. Utility expansion, Camp Dawson, WV.—Of the $20,771,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $650,000 be made available to expand utilities at Camp Dawson, WV. Readiness center, Westfield, MA.—Of the $20,771,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,233,000 be made available to construct a temporary readiness support facility in Westfield, MA. Readiness center, Yakima, WA.—Of the $29,667,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $600,000 be made available for the design of an armory in Yakima, WA. Further, the Com- mittee directs that the National Guard Bureau include this project in the fiscal year 2001 budget request. Scout armories, AK.—Of the $20,771,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,500,000 be made available for the construction of Scout armories in Nightmute, Tuntutliak, and Petersburg, AK. Training site maintenance facility, Fort Harrison, MT.—Of the $20,771,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,500,000 be made available to construct a training site maintenance facility at Fort Harrison, MT. Armory, Sedalia, MO.—Of the $29,667,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Com- mittee directs that not less than $300,000 be made available for the design of an armory to be located in Sedalia, MO. Mobilization and Training Equipment Site/Combined Support Maintenance Shop, Fort Drum, NY.—Of the $29,667,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,600,000 be made available for the design of these facilities at Fort Drum NY. Repair taxiway/apron, Reno-Stead Airport, NV.—Of the $20,771,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,490,000 be made available to reconstruct the apron and taxiway located at the Reno-Stead Airport, NV. Readiness center, Bozeman, MT.—Of the $29,667,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $500,000 be made available for the design of a readiness center at Bozeman, MT. 25 Public safety training center, Spokane, WA.—Of the $29,667,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Army National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $2,215,000 be made available for the design of a public safety training center to be located in Spokane, WA. Water storage tank, NAS Memphis, TN.—Of the $4,036,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Military Con- struction, Naval Reserve’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,050,000 be made available to construct an elevated water storage tank at the NAS, Memphis, TN. Army Reserve Center, Lincoln, NE.—Of the $2,716,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Army Reserve’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,300,000 be made available for the construction of a Reserve Center in Lincoln, NE. Aircraft apron additions, General Mitchell IAP, WI.—Of the $5,467,000 provided for unspecified minor construction within the ‘‘Air Force Reserve’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $972,000 be made available to construct an aircraft apron addition at the General Mitchell IAP Air Reserve Station, WI, in support of the 440th Airlift Wing. Further, of the $7,000,000 provided for unspecified minor construction with the ‘‘Air National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,410,000 be made available to construct an aircraft apron addition in support of the 128th Air Refueling Wing located at the General Mitchell IAP, WI. Arm/dearm area, Great Falls, MT.—Of the $17,871,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Air National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $150,000 be made available for the design of an arm/dearm area for Gore Hill, Great Falls, MT. Aircraft corrosion control facility, Kulis ANGB, AK.—Of the $17,871,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Air Na- tional Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $955,000 be made available for the design of a corrosion control facility at Kulis ANGB, AK. Consolidated aircraft maintenance hangar, McGuire AFB, NJ.— Of the $17,871,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Air National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $1,500,000 be made available for the design of a consolidated aircraft maintenance hangar for the Air National Guard at McGuire AFB, NJ. Weapons release shop, Hector Field, ND.—Of the $17,781,000 provided for planning and design within the ‘‘Air National Guard’’ account, the Committee directs that not less than $300,000 be made available for the design on a weapons release shop at Hector Field, Fargo, ND.

NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM Appropriations, 1999 ...... $154,000,000 Budget estimate, 2000 ...... 191,000,000 Committee recommendation ...... 100,000,000 The Committee has provided $100,000,000 for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO] Security Investment Program for fis- 26 cal year 2000. This amount is $91,000,000 below the President’s fiscal year 2000 budget request. However, the Committee expects the Department to use funds that were appropriated in the 1999 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public Law 106–31) to provide adequate funding for this account in accordance with the amount authorized for fiscal year 2000. NATO Security Investment Program funds.—The Committee continues to be concerned that the Department would like to use NATO Security Investment Program [NSIP] funds to help pay for initiatives under the Partnership for Peace Program [PFP] for countries outside of NATO. The NSIP was established to fund critical infrastructure requirements within the NATO alliance. Every year, there are many more requirements than available funds. There continues to be significant funding challenges in the areas of logistics, communications, and construction that must be addressed by these limited funds. Accordingly, the Committee has again included a provision which prohibits the use of NSIP funds for any aspect of the Partnership for Peace Program or support to non-NATO countries.

FAMILY HOUSING OVERVIEW The Committee has provided $3,600,820,000 for family housing construction, operations and maintenance, the Department’s family housing improvements fund, and the new Family Housing Revital- ization Transfer Fund. This amount is $484,735,000 above the fiscal year 2000 budget request and $11,505,000 above the amount appropriated in fiscal year 1999.

FAMILY HOUSING, ARMY Appropriations, 1999 ...... $1,252,187,000 Budget estimate, 2000 ...... 1,112,083,000 Committee recommendation ...... 1,158,980,000 The Committee recommends a total of $1,158,980,000 for family housing, Army, in fiscal year 2000. This is $46,897,000 over the fiscal year 2000 budget request. Family housing, Dugway Proving Ground, UT.—The Committee notes the importance of the chemical and biological test and eval- uation mission at Dugway Proving Ground. This mission makes a significant impact on the chem-bio readiness for the soldier on the ground. The Army’s inconsistent support of family housing at Dugway, negatively impacts the mission due to the difficulty in re- cruiting and maintaining a workforce at such an isolated location. The Committee directs the Army to provide adequate family housing support at Dugway Proving Ground. Further, the Committee directs the Army to report to the Congressional Defense Committee within 180 days of enactment of this act, on the implementation of this directive. This report should also include the strategy the Army will take to provide adequate family housing resources in the out years.

CONSTRUCTION The Committee recommends $24,000,000 for new construction as shown below: 27

Location/project Requested Recommended

Korea: Camp Humphreys (60 units) ...... $4,400,000 $24,000,000

Total ...... 4,400,000 24,000,000

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

No. of Location/project units Recommended

Germany: Weisbaden ...... 198 $8,100,000 Baumholder ...... 162 17,500,000 Hanau ...... 64 7,000,000

Total ...... 32,600,000

FAMILY HOUSING, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS Appropriations, 1999 ...... $1,215,482,000 Budget estimate, 2000 ...... 959,675,000 Committee recommendation ...... 1,193,424,000 The Committee recommends $1,193,424,000 for family housing, Navy and Marine Corps, in fiscal year 2000. This amount is $233,749,000 over the fiscal year 2000 budget request.

NAVAL FLAG OFFICER QUARTERS The Committee understands that the Navy has spent a total of $5,500,000 from the ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Navy’’ appropriation to maintain, repair and preserve three flag officer quarters from fiscal years 1992 through 1999. In addition, ‘‘Family Housing, Navy’’ appropriation funding was used to supplement these major renovation initiatives. The use of the ‘‘Operation and Maintenance, Navy’’ appropriation for family housing renovation is totally inappropriate, irrespective of the rank of the individual who occupies these quarters. ‘‘Family Housing, Navy’’ funding is the correct appropriation for all family housing expenses, to include maintenance and repair. The Navy’s designation of senior flag officers’ quarters as representational, appears to be an attempt to circumvent the Congressional controls regarding limits on expenditures on flag and general officers’ quarters. Further, the Navy has systematically failed to notify the Con- gress that these renovations and other family housing improvements were planned and ongoing, as well as that some of these projects exceeded cost variation guidelines. Accordingly, the Com- mittee has included a new provision (section 124) which requires congressional notification of any expenditure of $25,000 or more for repair and maintenance of flag and general officers’ quarters. The Committee directs that the General Accounting Office review the Department of Defense spending on general and flag officers’ quarters and report to the congressional defense committees on their findings not later than March 15, 2000. 28 In its fiscal year 2000 budget submission, the Navy has requested funding for 41 units of senior officer housing. The Com- mittee disapproves funding for the following projects and instead directs that these funds be applied to the revitalization of junior enlisted Navy housing at these bases:

No. of Location/project units Recommended

California: CNB-San Diego-Point Loma ...... 8 ¥$3,185,000 Hawaii: CNB Pearl Harbor-Makalapa ...... 25 ¥4,582,000 Japan: NAF Atsugi ...... 7 ¥1,117,000 CNFJ Yokosuka ...... 1 ¥1,428,000

Total ...... 41 ¥10,312,000

CONSTRUCTION The Committee recommends $115,589,000 for new construction as shown below:

Location/project Requested Recommended

Arizona: Yuma MCAS (100 units) ...... $17,000,000 Hawaii: Kaneohe Bay MCAS (100 units) ...... $5,320,000 26,615,000 Marine Corps Base (84 units) ...... 22,639,000 Pearl Harbor Naval Complex (133 units) ...... 6,031,000 30,168,000 Pearl Harbor Naval Complex (96 units) ...... 3,831,000 19,167,000

Total ...... 15,182,000 115,589,000

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

Location/project No. of units Recommended

California: NB San Diego ...... 8 $3,185,000 NAWC China Lake ...... 104 4,139,000 Hawaii: NB Pearl Harbor ...... 28 3,730,000 NB Pearl Harbor ...... 19 4,156,000 NB Pearl Harbor ...... 112 18,055,000 NB Pearl Harbor ...... 25 4,582,000 North Carolina: Camp Lejeune MCB ...... 91 9,100,000 Cherry Point MCAS ...... 2,700,000 Iceland: NAS Keflavik ...... 101 15,977,000 Japan: NAF Atsugi ...... 7 1,117,000 NAF Atsugi ...... 96 10,520,000 NAF Atsugi ...... 36 2,955,000 NOF Saesbo ...... 88 692,000 NOF Saesbo ...... 272 447,000 PWC Yokosuka ...... 104 11,374,000 PWC Yokosuka ...... 46 4,588,000 29

Location/project No. of units Recommended

PWC Yokosuka ...... 7 1,428,000 Puerto Rico: NS Roosevelt Roads ...... 294 29,440,000 Guam: PWC Guam ...... 72 13,314,000 Arizona: MCAS Yuma ...... 113 14,364,000 California: MCB Camp Pendleton ...... 100 4,441,000 District of Columbia: Marine Barracks ...... 1 181,000 Marine Barracks ...... 1 158,000 Hawaii: MCB Kaneohe Bay ...... 1 191,000 North Carolina: MCAS Cherry Point ...... 103 2,024,000 Japan: MCAS Iwakuni ...... 44 310,000 MCAS Iwakuni ...... 44 1,882,000

Total ...... 165,050,000

FAMILY HOUSING, AIR FORCE Appropriations, 1999 ...... $1,082,402,000 Budget estimate, 2000 ...... 923,683,000 Committee recommendation ...... 1,156,926,000 The Committee recommends $1,156,926,000 for family housing, Air Force, in fiscal year 2000, which is $233,243,000 over the budget request.

CONSTRUCTION The Committee recommends $187,611,000 for new construction, instead of $50,418,000 as requested, as shown below:

Location/project Requested Recommended

Arizona: Davis-Monthan AFB (64 units) ...... $2,707,000 $10,000,000 California: Beale AFB (60 units) ...... 2,301,000 8,500,000 Edwards AFB (98 units) ...... 4,404,000 16,270,000 Edwards AFB (90 units) ...... 4,472,000 16,520,000 Vandenburg AFB (91 units) ...... 4,548,000 16,800,000 District of Columbia: Bolling AFB (72 units) ...... 2,537,000 9,375,000 Florida: Eglin AFB (130 units) ...... 3,812,000 14,080,000 MacDill AFB (54 units) ...... 2,446,000 9,034,000 Kansas: McConnell AFB ...... 1,363,000 Mississippi: Columbus AFB (100 units) ...... 3,327,000 12,290,000 Montana: Malmstrom AFB (34 units) ...... 2,050,000 7,570,000 Nebraska: Offutt AFB (72 units) ...... 3,343,000 12,352,000 North Carolina: Seymour Johnson AFB (78 units) ...... 3,300,000 12,187,000 North Dakota: Grand Forks AFB (42 units) ...... 2,720,000 10,050,000 Minot AFB (72 units) ...... 2,912,000 10,756,000 Texas: Lackland AFB (48 units) ...... 2,030,000 7,500,000 Portugal: Lajes AFB (Azores) (75 units) ...... 3,509,000 12,964,000

Total ...... 50,418,000 187,611,000 30

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

No. of Location/project units Recommended

Alaska: Elmendorf AFB ...... 76 $10,536,000 Arkansas: Little Rock AFB ...... 83 4,196,000 Colorado: USAF Academy ...... 650,000 District of Columbia: Bolling AFB ...... 6 455,000 Florida: Eglin Aux Field 9 ...... 650,000 Hawaii: Hickam AFB ...... 87 16,900,000 Hickam AFB ...... 62 12,450,000 Maryland: Andrews AFB ...... 54 5,791,000 Andrews AFB ...... 80 8,635,000 Montana: Malmstrom AFB ...... 46 5,810,000 Nebraska: Offutt AFB ...... 352 1,541,000 New Jersey: McGuire AFB ...... 34 4,100,000 South Carolina: Charleston AFB ...... 50 5,500,000 Virginia: Langley AFB ...... 23 4,000,000 Germany: Ramstein AB ...... 62 8,500,000 Ramstein AB ...... 65 8,910,000 Ramstein AB ...... 102 5,100,000 Ramstein AB ...... 96 11,650,000 Spangdahlem AB ...... 20 3,144,000 Spangdahlem AB ...... 20 3,134,000 United Kingdom: RAF Lakenheath ...... 42 4,600,000 RAF Midenhall ...... 24 3,700, 000

Total ...... 1,334 129,952,000

Housing Shortfall at Mountain Home Air Force Base, ID.—The Committee is concerned about a severe shortage of quality housing for airmen and families assigned to the 366th Wing, Mountain Home Air Force Base, ID. This shortage is exacerbated by the Air Force’s decision not to proceed with housing privatization. The family housing deficit will only worsen with the increase in manpower from the new B–1B squadron. Local rentals are limited and utilities are expensive, causing financial hardship for junior enlisted personnel forced to reside off base. The closest rental market is Boise, more than 50 miles from the installation. It is unclear how the future housing needs of the 366th Wing will be met. At the current rate of replacement for housing at the base, new on-base housing will have to be destroyed before the oldest units will be replaced. The situation is unacceptable. The Air Force has made quality-of-life a top priority. In order to ensure that the Air Force fulfills this obligation, the committee directs the Air Force to review the housing plan for Mountain Home Air Force Base and provide a report to the Congress that specifies how the family housing requirements will be met over the future year defense plan. This report should be provided to the congressional defense committees no later than December 15, 1999. 31

FAMILY HOUSING, DEFENSE-WIDE Appropriations, 1999 ...... $37,244,000 Budget estimate, 2000 ...... 41,490,000 Committee recommendation ...... 41,490,000 The Committee recommends $41,490,000 for family housing, defense-wide, in fiscal year 2000. This amount is equal to the budget request. Specific details are included in the tables at the end of the report.

FAMILY HOUSING REVITALIZATION TRANSFER FUND Appropriation to date ...... Budget estimate, 2000 ...... Committee recommendation ...... $25,000,000 The Committee recognizes that the readiness and retention of the all volunteer force are largely related to the quality of life which military personnel and their families enjoy. A major component of this equation is the condition and availability of military family housing. Many installations lack sufficient funding to make small but significant improvements to family housing. For example, several bases have family quarters with serious safety concerns because of funding shortfalls. Others installations have family quarters with kitchens and bathrooms that require renovation. Some family housing areas desperately need playground equipment and landscaping. Other quarters need to be rewired to accommodate today’s electrical requirements and reduce the risk of fire from out- of-code and outdated wiring. In view of these continuing requirements and backlog of projects, the Committee has provided $25,000,000 in a new account in fiscal year 2000, the Family Housing Revitalization Transfer Fund. This account is to fund military family housing improvement projects within the United States, such as those highlighted above. The funding should not be distributed on a pro-rata share among the military services, but should be allocated based on the conditions and outstanding requirements of family housing units. Further, these funds shall not be transferred to the Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund or used in conjunction with any housing privatization initiative ongoing or anticipated. The Committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense (Comp- troller) to provide a report to the congressional defense committees on all additional projects to be funded prior to the release of these funds and not later than October 31, 1999. This report should include location, estimated cost and projected commencement and completion dates.

FAMILY HOUSING IMPROVEMENT FUND Appropriations, 1999 ...... $2,000,000 Budget estimate, 2000 ...... 78,756,000 Committee recommendation ...... 25,000,000 The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the family housing privatization fund in fiscal year 2000 rather than $75,000,000 as requested in the budget. This reduction in funding is based on an adjusted estimate of the number and timing of those housing privatization projects that are likely to commence over the next year. 32 The Committee is concerned that the Military Housing Privatiza- tion Initiative is being regarded by the military departments as a substitute for military family housing construction. For example, in the fiscal year 2000 budget submission, the Army requested no family housing construction nor improvement projects for any military installation within the United States. The Army’s total family housing program consists of four projects in Korea and Germany for a total amount of $9,703,000. Further, the Army dropped all family housing improvement and construction projects from the De- partment’s long-range plan. It appears that the Department is scrambling to use the family housing privatization authorities as a means to solve all of their housing problems and deficits. With such limited success to date, the Department must allow sufficient time to fully capture lessons learned in all aspects of the process before proceeding to a nation- wide program. The Committee insists that there must be several successful privatization efforts from each service before this program proceeds on a broader scale. There are simply many locations where housing privatization is not economically feasible nor in the long-term interest of the Department of Defense. The Committee directs that the services execute those family housing construction projects for which funds have been appropriated rather than holding the funding as a potential down pay- ment for future housing privatization efforts. Further, the Com- mittee urges the Secretary of Defense to ensure that future budget requests for the military family housing programs of the military departments adequately address current and anticipated requirements.

BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACCOUNT, PART IV Appropriations, 1999 ...... $1,197,338,000 Budget estimate, 2000 ...... 705,911,000 Committee recommendation ...... 705,911,000 The Committee recommends $705,911,000 for the base realignment and closure account, part IV. This is a decrease of $918,591,000 from the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1999 but equal to the budget request. The Committee notes the assurances of the Department of De- fense that the requested amount of $705,911,000 is adequate to address requirements in fiscal year 2000. Consistent with those assurances, the Committee expects no delay in the timely environmental remediation of realigning or closing installations and no de- ferral in the reuse of affected military installations.– GENERAL PROVISIONS The following lists general provisions proposed by the Com- mittee. The Committee recommends inclusion of several proposals which have been incorporated in previous appropriations acts, provisions requested by the Defense Department, and new provisions. The Committee recommendations are as follows: SEC. 101. Restricts payments under a cost-plus-a-fixed-fee contract for work, except in cases of contracts for environmental restoration at base closure sites. SEC. 102. Permits use of funds for hire of passenger motor vehi- cles. SEC. 103. Permits use of funds for defense access roads. SEC. 104. Prohibits construction of new bases inside the continental United States for which specific appropriations have not been made. SEC. 105. Limits the use of funds for purchase of land or land easements. SEC. 106. Prohibits the use of funds to acquire land, prepare a site, or install utilities for any family housing except housing for which funds have been made available. SEC. 107. Limits the use of minor construction funds to transfer or relocate activities among installations. SEC. 108. Prohibits the procurement of steel unless American producers, fabricators, and manufacturers have been allowed to compete. SEC. 109. Prohibits payments of real property taxes in foreign nations. SEC. 110. Prohibits construction of new bases overseas without prior notification. SEC. 111. Establishes a threshold for American preference of $500,000 relating to architect and engineering services. SEC. 112. Establishes preference for American contractors for military construction in the United States territories and posses- sions in the Pacific, and on Kwajalein Atoll, or in the Arabian Gulf. SEC. 113. Requires notification of military exercises involving construction in excess of $100,000. SEC. 114. Limits obligations during the last 2 months of the year. SEC. 115. Permits funds appropriated in prior years to be available for construction authorized during the current session of Con- gress. SEC. 116. Permits the use of expired or lapsed funds to pay the cost of supervision for any project being completed with lapsed funds. SEC. 117. Permits obligation of funds from more than 1 fiscal year to execute a construction project, provided that the total obligation for such project is consistent with the total amount appropriated for the project. (33) 34

SEC. 118. Allows expired funds to be transferred to the ‘‘Foreign currency fluctuations, construction, defense’’ account. SEC. 119. Directs the Department to report annually on actions taken to encourage other nations to assume a greater share of the common defense budget. SEC. 120. Allows transfer of proceeds from ‘‘Base realignment and closure accounts, part I’’ to the continuing base realignment and closure accounts. SEC. 121. Restricts the use of funds for the Partnership for Peace Program. SEC. 122. Requires the Secretary of Defense to notify the congressional defense committees of all family housing privatization solici- tations and agreements which contain any clause providing consideration for base realignment and closure, force reductions and ex- tended deployments. SEC. 123. Provides transfer authority to the Homeowners Assist- ance Program. SEC. 124. Requires congressional notification of any expenditure of $25,000 or more for repair and maintenance of flag/general officers’ quarters. SEC. 125. Provides a 5-percent reduction of the construction contingency account. SEC. 126. Requires the Secretary of Defense to report on the adequacy of special education facilities for Department of Defense family members. SEC. 127. Amends the 1999 Emergency Supplemental Appropria- tions Act to allow the Department of Defense to transfer military construction funding to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Se- curity Investment Program. SEC. 128. Restricts the conveyance of land at the former Fort Sheridan, IL. SEC. 129. Restricts construction of chemical demilitarization facilities at the Bluegrass Army Depot, KY., until reporting requirements have been met by the Secretary of Defense. COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment to the House bill ‘‘which proposes an item of appropriation which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously passed by the Senate during that session.’’ Due to the early Committee action on the fiscal year 2000 Mili- tary Construction appropriations bill, an original Senate bill was reported by the Appropriations Committee to the Senate. The Committee has acted in good faith in its attempt to comply fully with requirements stipulated under paragraph 7, rule XVI. The Committee anticipates that Congress will authorize the amounts appropriated in this act. 35 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(C), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, the Committee ordered reported en bloc, S. 1205, an original fiscal year 2000 Military Con- struction Appropriations bill, and S. 1206, an original fiscal year 2000 Legislative Branch Appropriations bill, and an original fiscal year 2000 Commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary Appropria- tions bill, all subject to amendment and subject to the section 302 budget allocations, by a recorded vote of 28–0, a quorum being present. Yeas Nays Chairman Stevens Mr. Cochran Mr. Specter Mr. Domenici Mr. Bond Mr. Gorton Mr. McConnell Mr. Burns Mr. Shelby Mr. Gregg Mr. Bennett Mr. Campbell Mr. Craig Mrs. Hutchison Mr. Kyl Mr. Byrd Mr. Inouye Mr. Hollings Mr. Leahy Mr. Lautenberg Mr. Harkin Ms. Mikulski Mr. Reid Mr. Kohl Mrs. Murray Mr. Dorgan Mrs. Feinstein Mr. Durbin COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute or part of any statute include ‘‘(a) the text of the statute or part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by the committee.’’ 36

1999 EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, PUBLIC LAW 106–31 TITLE II—EMERGENCY NATIONAL SECURITY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS CHAPTER 1 * * * * * * * CHAPTER 6 MILITARY CONSTRUCTION TRANSFER FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS) For emergency expenses incurred by United States military forces in support of overseas operations; $475,000,000, to remain available for transfer until September 30, 2003: Provided, That the Secretary of Defense may transfer these funds only to military construction accounts and to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program as provided in section 2806 of title 10, United States Code: Provided further, That the transfer authority provided in this paragraph is in addition to any other transfer authority contained in this or any other Act: Provided further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, such funds may be ob- ligated or expended to carry out military construction projects not otherwise authorized by law: Provided further, That the entire amount made available under this heading is designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1995, as amended: Provided further, That this amount shall be available only to the extent that the President transmits to the Congress an official budget request that includes designation of the entire amount of the request as an emergency requirement as de- fined in the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1995, as amended.

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

ALABAMA ARMY: ANNISTON ARMY DEPOT: AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION FACILITY (PHASE VII) ...... 7,000 ...... ¥7,000 AIR FORCE: MAXWELL AFB: OTS CADET DORMITORY ...... 10,600 ∂10,600 DEFENSE-WIDE: ANNISTON ARMY DEPOT: AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION FACIL- ITY (PHASE VII) ...... 7,000 ∂7,000 ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: REDSTONE ARSENAL: UNIT TRAINING EQUIPMENT SITE ...... 8,916 ∂8,916 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: DANNELLY FIELD: MEDICAL TRAINING AND DINING FACIL- ITY ...... 6,000 ∂6,000

TOTAL, ALABAMA ...... 7,000 32,516 ∂25,516 37

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

ALASKA ARMY: FORT RICHARDSON: WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 2,200 14,600 ∂12,400 FORT WAINWRIGHT: EMISSION REDUCTION FACILITY ...... 2,300 15,500 ∂13,200 MOUT COLLECTIVE TRAINING FACILITY ...... 17,000 ∂17,000 AMMUNITION SURVEILLANCE FACILITY ...... 2,300 ∂2,300 AIR FORCE: EIELSON AFB: REPAIR KC–135 PARKING RAMP ...... 941 4,000 ∂3,059 REPAIR RUNWAY ...... 3,334 14,000 ∂10,666 WEAPONS RELEASE SYSTEM FACILITY ...... 1,451 6,100 ∂4,649 ELMENDORF AFB: ALTER ROADWAY DAVIS HWY ...... 9,500 ∂9,500 CONSTRUCT C–130 PARKING RAMP ...... 3,995 17,000 ∂13,005 DORMITORY ...... 3,727 15,800 ∂12,073 DEFENSE-WIDE: EIELSON AFB: HYDRANT FUEL SYSTEM ...... 9,000 26,000 ∂17,000 ELMENDORF AFB HYDRANT FUEL SYSTEM ...... 4,700 23,500 ∂18,800 FORT WAINWRIGHT: HOSPITAL REPLACEMENT (PHASE I) ...... 18,000 18,000 ...... ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: FORT RICHARDSON: CSMS/MATES ...... 2,940 13,850 ∂10,910 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: KULIS ANGB: COMPOSITE SUPPORT COMPLEX ...... 2,170 10,000 ∂7,830

TOTAL, ALASKA ...... 54,758 207,150 ∂152,392

ARIZONA NAVY: CAMP NAVAJO NAVY DETACHMENT: MAGAZINES MODERNIZATION ...... 1,910 7,560 ∂5,650 YUMA MARINE CORPS AIR STATION: CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER ADDITION ...... 640 2,620 ∂1,980 LAND ACQUISITION ...... 3,650 14,400 ∂10,750 AIR FORCE: DAVIS-MONTHAN AFB: AIRCRAFT PROCESSING RAMP ...... 1,847 7,800 ∂5,953 DEFENSE-WIDE: DAVIS MONTHAN AFB: ADD/ALTER AMBULATORY HEALTH CARE CENTER ...... 2,400 10,000 ∂7,600

TOTAL, ARIZONA ...... 10,447 42,380 ∂31,933

ARKANSAS ARMY: PINE BLUFF ARSENAL: AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION FACILITY (PHASE IV) ...... 61,800 ...... ¥61,800 CHEMICAL DEFENSE QUALIFICATION FACILITY ...... 18,000 ∂18,000 DEFENSE-WIDE: PINE BLUFF ARSENAL: AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION FACILITY (PHASE IV) ...... 61,800 ∂61,800 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: LITTLE ROCK AFB: VEHICLE/BASE ENGINE MAINTENANCE COMPLEX ...... 1,881 8,699 ∂6,818 AIR FORCE RESERVE: LITTLE ROCK AFB: ALTER AERIAL PORT TRAINING FACIL- ITY ...... 209 800 ∂591

TOTAL, ARKANSAS ...... 63,890 89,299 ∂25,409

CALIFORNIA ARMY: FORT IRWIN: ROTATIONAL UNIT FACILITY MAINTENANCE AREA ...... 3,300 13,400 ∂10,100 NAVY: BARSTOW MARINE CORPS LOGISTICS BASE: TEST TRACK/TEST POND FA- CILITY ...... 1,150 4,670 ∂3,520 CAMP PENDLETON MARINE CORPS BASE: ARMORY ...... 660 2,620 ∂1,960 BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS ...... 2,390 9,740 ∂7,350 38

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

INTEGRATED COMMUNICATIONS HUB ...... 960 3,810 ∂2,850 STAFF NON-COMMISSIONED OFFICER’S ACADEMY ...... 1,640 6,480 ∂4,840 TACTICAL VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FACILITY ...... 2,210 9,010 ∂6,800 LEMOORE NAVAL AIR STATION: AIRCRAFT ORDNANCE LOADING FACILITIES ...... 3,010 11,900 ∂8,890 AVIATION ARMAMENT FACILITY ...... 1,460 5,800 ∂4,340 ENGINE MAINTENANCE SHOP ADDITION ...... 600 2,360 ∂1,760 STRIKE FIGHTER WEAPONS TRAINING FACILITY ...... 1,000 3,960 ∂2,960 NORTH ISLAND NAVAL AIR STATION: BERTHING WHARF (PHASE I) ...... 40,760 54,420 ∂13,660 SAN DIEGO NAVAL MEDICAL CENTER: BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS MODERNIZATION ...... 5,470 21,590 ∂16,120 SAN DIEGO MARINE CORPS RECRUIT DEPOT: PHYSICAL FITNESS CENTER ADDITION ...... 810 3,200 ∂2,390 TWENTYNINE PALMS MARINE CORPS BASE: BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS ...... 4,840 19,130 ∂14,290 CAST TRAINER ADDITION ...... 420 1,670 ∂1,250 TACTICAL VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FACILITY ...... 3,420 13,960 ∂10,540 TWENTYNINE PALMS NAVAL HOSPITAL: BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS ..... 1,930 7,640 ∂5,710 AIR FORCE: BEALE AFB: FLIGHTLINE FIRE STATION ...... 2,086 8,900 ∂6,814 TRAVIS AFB: ADD TO PHYSICAL FITNESS CENTER ...... 1,754 7,500 ∂5,746 DEFENSE-WIDE: CORONADO NAVAL AMPHIBIOUS BASE: NAVAL SPECIAL WARFARE C2 ADDI- TION ...... 2,272 6,000 ∂3,728 LOS ANGELES AIR FORCE BASE: MEDICAL/DENTAL CLINIC REPLACEMENT .. 2,400 13,600 ∂11,200 PRESIDIO, MONTEREY DOD CENTER RENOVATION ...... 6,712 28,000 ∂21,288 TRAVIS AIR FORCE BASE: WAR READINESS MATERIALS WAREHOUSE/ENGI- NEERING SUPP ...... 2,000 7,500 ∂5,500 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: FRESNO ANGS OPS TRNG AND DINING FACILITY ...... 9,100 ∂9,100 MOFFETT FIELD: REPLACE AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR ...... 3,033 14,000 ∂10,967 NAVY RESERVE: CAMP PENDLETON MARINE CORPS RESERVE CENTER: RESERVE TRAINING COMPLEX ...... 1,649 9,940 ∂8,291

TOTAL, CALIFORNIA ...... 97,936 299,900 ∂201,964

COLORADO ARMY: PETERSON AFB: US ARMY SPACE COMMAND HEADQUARTERS ...... 3,700 25,000 ∂21,300 PUEBLO DEPOT ACTIVITY: AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION FACILITY (PHASE I) ...... 11,800 ...... ¥11,800 AIR FORCE: PETERSON AFB: USSPACECOM/NORAD HEADQUARTERS ...... 7,887 33,000 ∂25,113 SCHRIEVER AFB: PHYSICAL FITNESS CENTER ...... 929 3,900 ∂2,971 SANITARY SEWER LINE ...... 1,296 5,500 ∂4,204 US AIR FORCE ACADEMY: UPGRADE ACADEMIC FACILITY ...... 4,056 17,500 ∂13,444 DEFENSE-WIDE: PUEBLO ARMY DEPOT: AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION FACILITY (PHASE I) ...... 11,800 ∂11,800

TOTAL, COLORADO ...... 29,668 96,700 ∂67,032

CONNECTICUT ARMY RESERVE: WEST HARTFORD: ADAL RESERVE CENTER ...... 17,525 ∂17,525 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: ORANGE ANGS: AIR CONTROL SQD COMPLEX ...... 11,000 ∂11,000

TOTAL, CONNECTICUT ...... 28,525 ∂28,525

DELAWARE AIR FORCE: DOVER AFB: VISITORS QUARTERS ...... 12,000 ∂12,000 39

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: SMYRNA: READINESS CENTER ...... 4,381 ∂4,381

TOTAL, DELAWARE ...... 16,381 ∂16,381

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ARMY: FORT MCNAIR: CHAPEL ...... 380 1,250 ∂870 WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER: PHYSICAL FITNESS TRAINING CEN- TER ...... 1,020 6,800 ∂5,780

TOTAL, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ...... 1,400 8,050 ∂6,650

FLORIDA NAVY: WHITING FIELD NAVAL AIR STATION: JPATS T–6A TRAINER FACILITY ...... 1,200 4,750 ∂3,550 AIR FORCE: EGLIN AFB: DORMITORY ...... 1,635 7,000 ∂5,365 SQUADRON OPERATIONS FACILITY ...... 1,566 6,600 ∂5,034 EGLIN AFB AUXILIARY FIELD 9: DORMITORY ...... 2,161 9,100 ∂6,939 REPAIR RUNWAY/TAXIWAY ...... 2,269 9,700 ∂7,431 MACDILL AFB: ADD/ALTER PHYSICAL FITNESS CENTER ...... 1,302 5,500 ∂4,198 PATRICK AFB: AIR FREIGHT/PASSENGER TERMINAL FACILITY ...... 1,967 8,300 ∂6,333 BASE SUPPLY/TRAFFIC MAINTENANCE COMPLEX ...... 2,238 9,500 ∂7,262 DEFENSE-WIDE: JACKSONVILLE NAVAL AIR STATION: ADD/ALTER BRANCH MEDICAL/DENTAL CLINIC ...... 780 3,780 ∂3,000 PATRICK AFB: MEDICAL LOGISTICS FACILITY REPLACEMENT ...... 200 1,750 ∂1,550 PENSACOLA NAVAL AIR STATION: AIRCREW WATER SURVIVAL TRAINING FA- CILITY ...... 1,300 4,300 ∂3,000 ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: PENSACOLA: READINESS CENTER ...... 4,628 ∂4,628 ARMY RESERVE: ORLANDO: LAND ACQUISITION, JOINT RESERVE COMPLEX ...... 690 690 ...... AIR FORCE RESERVE: HOMESTEAD ARB: FIRE FIGHTER TRAINING FACILITY ...... 524 2,000 ∂1,476

TOTAL, FLORIDA ...... 17,832 77,598 ∂59,766

GEORGIA ARMY: FORT BENNING: AMMUNITION HOLDING AREA ...... 420 1,400 ∂980 WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 7,100 47,000 ∂39,900 FORT STEWART: CONTINGENCY LOGISTICS FACILITY ...... 19,000 ∂19,000 MULTI-PURPOSE TRAINING RANGE ...... 1,100 7,200 ∂6,100 WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL W/DINING ...... 7,000 7,000 ...... NAVY: ALBANY MARINE CORPS LOGISTICS BASE: FIELD MAINTENANCE SHOP ...... 1,540 6,260 ∂4,720 NAVY RESERVE: NAS ATLANTA: BEQ–A ...... 5,430 ∂5,430 AIR FORCE: FORT BENNING: AIR SUPPORT OPERATIONS SQUADRON FACILITY ...... 911 3,900 ∂2,989 MOODY AFB: SQUADRON OPERATIONS FACILITY ...... 763 3,200 ∂2,437 ROBINS AFB KC–135 FLIGHT SIMULATOR FACILITY ...... 789 3,350 ∂2,561 DEFENSE-WIDE: FORT BENNING: REGIMENTAL COMMAND AND CONTROL FACILITY ...... 2,272 10,200 ∂7,928 MOODY AFB: WAR READINESS MATERIALS WAREHOUSE/BIOENVIRON- MENTAL ENGINEERING FACILITY ...... 200 1,250 ∂1,050 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: SAVANNAH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: COMPOSITE SUPPORT COMPLEX ...... 2,116 9,800 ∂7,684 REGIONAL FIRE TRAINING FACILITY ...... 368 1,700 ∂1,332 40

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

ARMY RESERVE: FORT GILLEM: USAR CENTER/ORGANIZATIONAL MAINTENANCE SHOP/DIRECT SUPPORT/WAREHOUSE ...... 3,610 22,121 ∂18,511 AIR FORCE RESERVE: DOBBINS AFB: ADD/ALTER FACILITY FOR C130–H AIRCREW TRAINING ...... 558 2,130 ∂1,572 ROBINS AFB: ADD/ALTER AIR FORCE RESERVE COMMAND HEADQUARTERS AND ALTERNATE TANKER AIRLIFT CONTROL CENTER ...... 3,666 14,000 ∂10,334

TOTAL, GEORGIA ...... 32,413 164,941 ∂132,528

HAWAII ARMY: SCHOFIELD BARRACKS: WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 14,200 14,200 ...... NAVY: CAMP H.M. SMITH: CINCPAC HEADQUARTERS (PHASE I) ...... 15,870 15,870 ...... KANEOHE BAY MARINE CORPS AIR STATION: CONTROL TOWER AND AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITY ...... 1,460 5,790 ∂4,330 PEARL HARBOR NAVAL SHIPYARD: ABRASIVE BLAST AND PAINT FACILITY ... 2,690 10,610 ∂7,920 PEARL HARBOR NAVAL STATION: BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS MOD- ERNIZATION ...... 4,720 18,600 ∂13,880 PEARL HARBOR NAVAL SUBMARINE BASE: BERTHING WHARF ...... 7,470 29,460 ∂21,990 AIR FORCE: HICKAM AFB: FIRE TRAINING FACILITY ...... 785 3,300 ∂2,515 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: BELLOWS AFS: REGIONAL TRAINING INSTITUTE (PHASE II) ...... 12,105 ∂12,105

TOTAL, HAWAII ...... 47,195 109,935 ∂62,740

IDAHO NAVY: BAYVIEW NAVAL SURFACE WEAPONS CENTER: UNDERWATER EQUIPMENT LABORATORY ...... 2,540 10,040 ∂7,500 AIR FORCE: MOUNTAIN HOME AFB: DEFENSE ACCESS ROAD ...... 564 2,400 ∂1,836 ENHANCED TRAINING RANGE (PHASE II) ...... 3,487 14,600 ∂11,113 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: GOWEN FIELD: A–10 EXPAND ARM/DISARM APRON ...... 350 1,600 ∂1,250 FUEL CELL AND CORROSION CONTROL HANGER ...... 2,300 ∂2,300

TOTAL, IDAHO ...... 6,941 30,940 ∂23,999

ILLINOIS NAVY: GREAT LAKES NAVAL TRAINING CENTER: ALL WEATHER RUNNING TRACK ...... 354 1,380 ∂1,026 BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS (‘‘A’’ SCHOOL) ...... 7,700 31,410 ∂23,710 DRILL HALL REPLACEMENT ...... 2,830 11,190 ∂8,360 RECRUIT IN-PROCESS BARRACK ...... 3,370 13,310 ∂9,940 ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: MARSEILLES: BATTALION TRAINING COMPLEX ...... 2,325 10,952 ∂8,627

TOTAL, ILLINOIS ...... 16,579 68,242 ∂51,663

INDIANA ARMY: NEWPORT ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT: AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION FACILITY (PHASE II) ...... 61,200 ...... ¥61,200 DEFENSE-WIDE: NEWPORT ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT: AMMUNITION DEMILI- TARIZATION FACILITY (PHASE II) ...... 61,200 ∂61,200 ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: FORT WAYNE: MEDICAL TRAINING FACILITY/DINING HALL ...... 7,200 ∂7,200 41

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

TOTAL, INDIANA ...... 61,200 68,400 ∂7,200

IOWA AIR NATIONAL GUARD: SIOUX CITY: VEHICLE MAINTENANCE COMPLEX ...... 3,600 ∂3,600

KANSAS ARMY: FORT LEAVENWORTH: US DISCIPLINARY BARRACKS (PHASE III) ...... 18,800 18,800 ...... WATER TREATMENT PLANT ...... 1,200 8,100 ∂6,900 WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 3,900 26,000 ∂22,100 FORT RILEY: WHOLE BARRACKS RENOVATION ...... 27,000 ∂27,000 AIR FORCE: MCCONNELL AFB; KC–135 SQUAD OPERATIONS/AIRCRAFT MAINTE- NANCE UNIT ...... 2,280 9,600 ∂7,320 DEFENSE-WIDE: FORT RILEY: CONSOLIDATED TROOP MEDICAL CLINIC ...... 1,060 6,000 ∂4,940

TOTAL, KANSAS ...... 27,240 95,500 ∂68,260

KENTUCKY ARMY: BLUEGRASS ARMY DEPOT: AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION FACILITY (PHASE I) ...... 11,800 ...... ¥11,800 AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION SUPPORT ...... 11,000 ...... ¥11,000 FORT CAMPBELL: MOUT TRAINING COMPLEX ...... 2,150 14,400 ∂12,250 PHYSICAL FITNESS TRAINING CENTER ...... 900 6,000 ∂5,100 SABRE HELIPORT IMPROVEMENTS ...... 2,475 19,500 ∂17,025 WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL (PHASE II) ...... 4,800 32,000 ∂27,200 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FACILITY ...... 17,000 ∂17,000 FORT KNOX: MULTI-PURPOSE DIGITAL TRAINING RANGE (PHASE II) ...... 2,400 2,400 ...... AIR FORCE: FORT CAMPBELL: AIR SUPPORT OPERATIONS SQUADRON FACILITY ... 1,472 6,300 ∂4,828 DEFENSE-WIDE: BLUE GRASS ARMY DEPOT: AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION FACILITY (PHASE I) ...... 11,800 ∂11,800 AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION SUPPORT ...... 11,000 ∂11,000 AMMUNITION SURVEILLANCE FACILITY ...... 900 6,000 ∂5,100

TOTAL, KENTUCKY ...... 37,897 126,400 ∂88,503

LOUISIANA ARMY RESERVE: FORT POLK: ORGANIZATIONAL MAINTENANCE SHOP ...... 4,309 ∂4,309 NAVY RESERVE: LAFAYETTE: MARINE CORPS RESERVE CENTER ...... 3,330 ∂3,330 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: NAS BELLE CHASSE: AMMUNITION STORAGE IGLOO ...... 1,350 ∂1,350

MAINE NAVY: BRUNSWICK NAVAL AIR STATION: BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS RE- PLACEMENT ...... 4,270 16,890 ∂12,620

MARYLAND ARMY: ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND: AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION FACILITY (PHASE II) ...... 66,600 ...... ¥66,600 FORT MEADE: MILITARY ENTRANCE PROCESSING STATION ...... 1,350 4,450 ∂3,100 WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 2,700 18,000 ∂15,300 NAVY: INDIAN HEAD NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER: SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT ...... 2,550 10,070 ∂7,520 AIR FORCE: ANDREWS AFB: SQUADRON OPERATIONS FACILITY ...... 9,900 ∂9,900 42

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

DEFENSE-WIDE: ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND: AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION FACILITY (PHASE II) ...... 66,600 ∂66,600 ANDREWS AFB: ADD/ALTER MEDICAL LOGISTICS FACILITY ...... 2,000 3,000 ∂1,000 FORT MEADE: PERIMETER FENCE (EAST) ...... 903 903 ...... RECONFIGURE OPS1 CHILLED WATER ...... 2,043 2,043 ...... PATUXENT RIVER NAVAL AIR STATION: AIRCREW WATER SURVIVAL TRAIN- ING FACILITY ...... 1,200 4,150 ∂2,950

TOTAL, MARYLAND ...... 79,346 119,116 ∂39,770

MASSACHUSETTS ARMY: WESTOVER AFB: MILITARY ENTRANCE PROCESSING STATION ...... 1,200 4,000 ∂2,800 AIR FORCE: HANSCOM AFB: ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT FACILITY RENOVATION ...... 16,000 ∂16,000

TOTAL, MASSACHUSETTS ...... 1,200 20,000 ∂18,800

MICHIGAN AIR NATIONAL GUARD: CAMP GRAYLING: AIR GROUND RANGE SUPPORT FACIL- ITY ...... 5,800 ∂5,800

MINNESOTA ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: CAMP RIPLEY: COMBINED SUPPORT MAINTENANCE SHOP ...... 10,368 ∂10,368

MISSISSIPPI NAVY: GULFPORT NAVAL CONSTRUCTION BATTALION CENTER: BACHELOR EN- LISTED QUARTERS MODERNIZATION ...... 3,260 12,860 ∂9,600 GULFPORT NAVAL CONSTRUCTION TRAINING CENTER: BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS RENOVATION ...... 1,600 6,310 ∂4,710 AIR FORCE: COLUMBUS AFB: ADD TO T–1A HANGAR ...... 2,600 ∂2,600 KEESLER AFB: C–130J SIMULATOR FACILITY ...... 8,900 ∂8,900 STUDENT DINING FACILITY ...... 1,686 7,100 ∂5,414 STUDENT DORMITORY ...... 4,679 19,900 ∂15,221 DEFENSE-WIDE: MISSISSIPPI ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT: SMALL CRAFT TRAINING COMPLEX ...... 9,600 9,600 ...... LAND/WATER RANGES ...... 3,300 ∂3,300 ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: CAMP SHELBY: MULTI-PURPOSE RANGE COMPLEX (PHASE III) ...... 14,900 ∂14,900 VICKSBURG: READINESS CENTER ...... 5,914 ∂5,914 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: JACKSON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT: C–17 SIMULATOR BUILDING ...... 3,600 ∂3,600

TOTAL, MISSISSIPPI ...... 20,825 94,984 ∂74,159

MISSOURI ARMY: FORT LEONARD WOOD: WOLVERINE/GRIZZLY SIMULATOR FACILITY ...... 1,600 10,600 ∂9,000 AIR FORCE: WHITEMAN AFB: B–2 LOW OBSERVABLE RESTORATION FACILITY ...... 5,428 23,000 ∂17,572 PHYSICAL FITNESS CENTER ...... 447 1,900 ∂1,453 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: ROSENCRANS MEM APT: UPGRADE AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON (PHASE II) ...... 9,000 ∂9,000

TOTAL, MISSOURI ...... 7,475 44,500 ∂37,025 43

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

MONTANA AIR FORCE: MALMSTROM AFB: DORMITORY ...... 11,600 ∂11,600 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: GREAT FALLS IAP: BASE SUPPLY WAREHOUSE ...... 1,400 ∂1,400

TOTAL, MONTANA ...... 13,000 ∂13,000

NEBRASKA AIR FORCE: OFFUTT AFB: DORMITORY ...... 1,941 8,300 ∂6,359

NEVADA ARMY: HAWTHORNE ARMY DEPOT: CONTAINER REPAIR FACILITY ...... 1,700 ∂1,700 AIR FORCE: NELLIS AFB: F–22 AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR ...... 1,859 7,800 ∂5,941 F–22 COMPOSITE AND FABRICATION SHOP ...... 1,756 7,500 ∂5,744 F–22 PARTS WAREHOUSE AND OPERATIONS ADDITION ...... 773 3,300 ∂2,527 LAND ACQUISITION ...... 11,600 ∂11,600

TOTAL, NEVADA ...... 4,388 31,900 ∂27,512

NEW HAMPSHIRE NAVY: PORTSMOUTH: WATERFRONT CRANE ...... 3,850 ∂3,850 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: PEASE TRADE PORT: UPGRADE KC–135 PARKING APRON ...... 9,600 ∂9,600

TOTAL, NEW HAMPSHIRE ...... 13,450 ∂13,450

NEW JERSEY ARMY: FORT MONMONTH: BARRACKS IMPROVEMENT ...... 11,800 ∂11,800 NAVY: LAKEHURST NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER: AIRCRAFT/PLATFORM INTER- FACE LABORATORY ...... 3,970 15,710 ∂11,740 AIR FORCE: MCGUIRE AFB: VISITING QUARTERS ...... 2,765 11,800 ∂9,035 ARMY RESERVE: FORT DIX: CENTRALIZED TACTICAL VEHICLE WASH FACILITY ..... 1,607 5,624 ∂4,017

TOTAL, NEW JERSEY ...... 8,342 44,934 ∂36,592

NEW MEXICO AIR FORCE: KIRTLAND AFB: COMPOSITE SUPPORT COMPLEX ...... 9,700 ∂9,700 CANNON AFB: CONTROL TOWER ...... 4,000 ∂4,000 REPAIR RUNWAY #2204 ...... 8,100 ∂8,100

TOTAL, NEW MEXICO ...... 21,800 ∂21,800

NEW YORK ARMY: UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY: CADET PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER (PHASE II) ...... 28,500 28,500 ...... AIR FORCE: ROME RESEARCH SITE: CONSOLIDATE INTELLIGENCE AND RECON- NAISSANCE LAB ...... 3,002 12,800 ∂9,798 ARMY RESERVE: FORT WADSWORTH: ADD/ALTER USAR CENTER/ORGANIZATIONAL MAINTENANCE SHOP/AREA MAINT SUPPORT ACTIVITY (PHASE II) ...... 2,066 5,786 ∂3,720 AIR FORCE RESERVE: NIAGARA FALLS: VISITING OFFICERS QUARTERS ...... 6,300 ∂6,300

TOTAL, NEW YORK ...... 33,568 53,386 ∂19,818 44

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

NORTH CAROLINA ARMY: FORT BRAGG: HEAVY DROP RIGGING FACILITY ...... 4,500 30,000 ∂25,500 MOUT TRAINING COMPLEX (PHASE II) ...... 5,600 7,000 ∂1,400 UPGRADE BARRACKS D-AREA ...... 14,400 ∂14,400 WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 16,508 16,508 ...... SUNNY POINT MILITARY OCEAN TERMINAL: AMMUNITION SURVEILLANCE FACILITY ...... 550 3,800 ∂3,250 NAVY: CAMP LEJEUNE: MARINE CORPS BASE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS FACILITY ...... 2,120 8,400 ∂6,280 PHYSICAL FITNESS CENTER ...... 1,070 4,230 ∂3,160 ROAD AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION ...... 2,140 8,750 ∂6,610 NEW RIVER MARINE CORPS AIR STATION: AIRCRAFT TAXIWAY ADDITION ...... 130 520 ∂390 FAMILY SERVICES CENTER ...... 330 1,340 ∂1,010 PROPERTY CONTROL FACILITY ...... 910 3,610 ∂2,700 AIR FORCE: FORT BRAGG: AIR SUPPORT OPERATIONS GROUP FACILITY ...... 1,076 4,600 ∂3,524 POPE AFB: DANGEROUS CARGO PAD ...... 1,802 7,700 ∂5,898 DEFENSE-WIDE: CAMP LEJUNE MCB: TARAWA TERRACE II ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ...... 2,387 10,570 ∂8,183 CHERRY POINT MARINE CORPS AIR STATION: AIRCREW WATER SURVIVAL TRAINING FACILITY ...... 1,000 3,500 ∂2,500 FORT BRAGG: BATTALION OPERATIONS COMPLEX ...... 2,272 18,600 ∂16,328 DEPLOYABLE EQUIPMENT FACILITY ...... 1,500 1,500 ...... ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: CHARLOTTE: ORGANIZATIONAL MAINTENANCE SHOP ...... 912 4,297 ∂3,385 READINESS CENTER ...... 1,504 7,087 ∂5,583

TOTAL, NORTH CAROLINA ...... 46,311 156,412 ∂110,101

NORTH DAKOTA AIR FORCE: GRAND FORKS AFB: PARKING APRON EXTENSION ...... 9,500 ∂9,500

OHIO AIR FORCE: WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB: CONSOLIDATE AVIONICS RESEARCH LABORATORY ...... 3,230 13,600 ∂10,370 CONTROL TOWER ...... 934 4,000 ∂3,066 CONVERT TO PHYSICAL FITNESS CENTER ...... 4,600 ∂4,600 DEFENSE-WIDE: WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB: OCCUPATIONAL HEATH CLINIC/BIO- ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING REPLACEMENT ...... 2,800 3,900 ∂1,100 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: SPRINGFIELD F–16 SQD OPS FLT TNG COMPLEX ...... 1,770 ∂1,770 NAVY RESERVE: COLUMBUS AFB: RESERVE CENTER ADDITION ...... 3,541 ∂3,541

TOTAL, OHIO ...... 6,964 31,411 ∂24,447

OKLAHOMA ARMY: MCALESTER ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT: AMMUNITION ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE ...... 1,020 6,800 ∂5,780 FIRE STATION ...... 900 3,000 ∂2,100 RAILYARD INFRASTRUCTURE ...... 2,000 6,800 ∂4,800 FORT SILL: RAIL AND CONTAINERIZATION FACILITY ...... 2,000 13,200 ∂11,200 AIR FORCE: TINKER AFB: AIR DRIVEN ACCESS OVERHAUL AND TEST FACILITY ...... 4,001 17,000 ∂12,999 45

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

DORMITORY ...... 1,602 6,800 ∂5,198 REPAIR AND UPGRADE RUNWAY ...... 11,000 ∂11,000 VANCE AFB: UPGRADE CENTER RUNWAY ...... 12,600 ∂12,600 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: TULSA IAP: COMPOSITE SUPPORT COMPLEX ...... 10,800 ∂10,800

TOTAL, OKLAHOMA ...... 11,523 88,000 ∂76,477

OREGON ARMY: UMATILLA ARMY DEPOT: AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION FACILITY (PHASE V) ...... 35,900 ...... ¥35,900 DEFENSE-WIDE: UMATILLA ARMY DEPOT: AMMUNITION DEMILITARIZATION FACIL- ITY (PHASE V) ...... 35,900 ∂35,900 ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: SALEM ARMED FORCES RESERVE CENTER ...... 15,255 ∂15,255

TOTAL, OREGON ...... 35,900 51,155 ∂15,255

PENNSYLVANIA ARMY: CARLISLE BARRACKS: WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 750 5,000 ∂4,250 LETTERKENNY ARMY DEPOT: AMMUNITION CONTAINERIZATION COMPLEX .... 570 3,650 ∂3,080 NAVY: MECHANICSBURG NAVAL INVENTORY CONTROL POINT: WATER DISTRIBU- TION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ...... 760 2,990 ∂2,230 NORFOLK NSY DETACHMENT (PHILADELPHIA): CASTING PITS MODERNIZA- TION ...... 13,320 ∂13,320 DEFENSE-WIDE: DEF DIST DEPOT NEW CUMBERLAND-DDSP PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER ...... 867 5,000 ∂4,133 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: JOHNSTOWN ANGS: AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITY ...... 6,200 ∂6,200 NAVY RESERVE: WILLOW GROVE NAVAL AIR STATION: GROUND EQUIPMENT SHOP ...... 600 ∂600 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL STORAGE FACILITY ...... 320 1,930 ∂1,610

TOTAL, PENNSYLVANIA ...... 3,267 38,690 ∂35,423

RHODE ISLAND AIR NATIONAL GUARD: QUONSET: MAINTENANCE HANGER AND SHOPS ...... 16,500 ∂16,500

SOUTH CAROLINA ARMY: FORT JACKSON: EMERGENCY SERVICES CENTER ...... 1,100 7,400 ∂6,300 NAVY: BEAUFORT MARINE CORPS AIR STATION: ARMORY FACILITY ...... 450 1,790 ∂1,340 CORROSION CONTROL FACILITY ...... 2,200 8,700 ∂6,500 CHARLESTON NAVAL WEAPONS STATION: AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL ENGINEER- ING FACILITY ...... 1,930 7,640 ∂5,710 AIR FORCE: CHARLESTON AFB: C–17 CORROSION CONTROL FACILITY ...... 4,389 18,200 ∂13,811 DEFENSE-WIDE: LAUREL BAY ISLAND: INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL ADDITION ...... 642 2,874 ∂2,232 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: MCENTIRE ANGS: CONTROL TOWER ...... 8,000 ∂8,000

TOTAL, SOUTH CAROLINA ...... 10,711 54,604 ∂43,893

SOUTH DAKOTA AIR FORCE: ELLSWORTH AFB: EDUCATION/LIBRARY CENTER ...... 10,200 ∂10,200

TENNESSEE AIR FORCE: ARNOLD AFB: UPGRADE JET ENGINE AIR INDUCT SYSTEM (PHASE III) ...... 1,851 7,800 ∂5,949 46

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: HENDERSON: ORGANIZATIONAL MAINTENANCE SHOP ...... 1,976 ∂1,976

TOTAL, TENNESSEE ...... 1,851 9,776 ∂7,925

TEXAS ARMY: FORT BLISS: AIR DEPLOYMENT FACILITY COMPLEX ...... 2,550 17,000 ∂14,450 AIRCRAFT LOADING APRON ...... 3,300 22,000 ∂18,700 AMMUNITION HOT LOAD FACILITY ...... 1,700 11,400 ∂9,700 FORT HOOD: DEPLOYMENT READY REACTIVE FIELD AND TRAILS ...... 2,000 8,000 ∂6,000 FIXED WING AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON ...... 4,600 31,000 ∂26,400 FORCE XXI, SOLDIER DEVELOPMENT CENTER (PHASE II) ...... 14,000 14,000 ...... RAIL HEAD FACILITY (PHASE II) ...... 14,800 14,800 ...... WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 4,350 29,000 ∂24,650 AIR FORCE: DYESS AFB: CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER ...... 5,400 ∂5,400 LACKLAND AFB: DORMITORY ...... 1,257 5,300 ∂4,043 SECURITY FORCES CENTER ...... 1,893 8,100 ∂6,207 LAUGHLIN AFB: ADD/ALTER JPATS BEDDOWN VARIOUS FACILITIES ...... 766 3,250 ∂2,484 DEFENSE-WIDE: FORT SAM HOUSTON: VETERINARY INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITY ...... 600 5,800 ∂5,200 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: LACKLAND AFB: F–16 SQUADRON OPS FLIGHT TRNG COMPLEX ...... 9,700 ∂9,700 ARMY RESERVE: FORT HOOD: AREA MAINTENANCE SUPPORT ACTIVITY/EQUIP- MENT CONCENTRATION SITE ...... 2,684 9,431 ∂6,747

TOTAL, TEXAS ...... 54,500 194,181 ∂139,681

UTAH ARMY: SALT LAKE: RED BUTTE DAM ...... 8,000 ∂8,000 AIR FORCE: HILL AFB: CAD/PAD SPARES STORAGE FACILITY ...... 1,081 4,600 ∂3,519 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: SALT LAKE CITY IAP: UPGRADE AIRCRAFT MAINTE- NANCE ...... 9,700 ∂9,700 NAVY RESERVE: CAMP WILLIAMS: MARINE CORPS RESERVE TRAINING CENTER ADDITION ...... 150 890 ∂740

TOTAL, UTAH ...... 1,231 23,190 ∂21,959

VERMONT ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: NORTHFIELD: MULTIPURPOSE TRAINING FACILITY ...... 8,652 ∂8,652

VIRGINIA ARMY: FORT BELVOIR: FIRE STATION ...... 500 1,700 ∂1,200 MILITARY POLICE STATION ...... 640 2,150 ∂1,510 FORT EUSTIS: WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 5,800 39,000 ∂33,200 FORT MYER: PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER ...... 870 2,900 ∂2,030 NAVY: DAM NECK FLEET COMBAT TRAINING CENTER: BACHELOR ENLISTED QUAR- TERS ...... 2,610 10,310 ∂7,700 NORFOLK NAVAL STATION: BERTHING PIER (PHASE II) ...... 12,690 12,690 ...... PIER ELECTRICAL UPGRADES (PHASE II) ...... 4,720 18,660 ∂13,940 PIER REPLACEMENT ...... 8,600 40,000 ∂31,400 WATERFRONT ATHLETIC COMPLEX ...... 2,760 10,890 ∂8,130 47

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

NORFOLK NAVAL SHIPYARD: BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS REPLACE- MENT ...... 4,460 17,630 ∂13,170 OCEANA NAVAL AIR STATION: AIRCRAFT ACOUSTICAL ENCLOSURE ...... 2,910 11,490 ∂8,580 QUANTICO MARINE CORPS COMBAT DEVELOPMENT COMMAND: BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS ...... 5,270 20,820 ∂15,550 YORKTOWN NAVAL WEAPONS STATION: TRESTLE REPLACEMENT AND PIER UPGRADE ...... 6,330 25,040 ∂18,710 AIR FORCE: LANGLEY AFB: DORMITORY ...... 1,486 6,300 ∂4,814 DEFENSE-WIDE: CHEATHAM ANNEX: FLEET HOSPITAL SUPPORT OFC CONTAINER HOLDING YARD ...... 500 1,650 ∂1,150 DAM NECK: MISSION SUPPORT FACILITY ...... 2,273 4,700 ∂2,427 NORFOLK NAVAL AIR STATION: AIRCREW WATER SURVIVAL TRAINING FA- CILITY ...... 1,150 4,050 ∂2,900 ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: FORT PICKETT: MULTIPURPOSE RANGE ...... 13,500 ∂13,500

TOTAL, VIRGINIA ...... 63,569 243,480 ∂179,911

WASHINGTON ARMY: FORT LEWIS: AMMUNITION SUPPLY POINT ...... 1,560 5,200 ∂3,640 PHYSICAL FITNESS TRAINING CENTER ...... 1,850 6,200 ∂4,350 TANK TRAIL EROSION MITIGATION—YAKIMA (PHASE V) ...... 2,000 12,000 ∂10,000 NAVY: BANGOR STRATEGIC WEAPONS FACILITY: D5 MISSILE SUPPORT FACILITY ... 1,600 6,300 ∂4,700 PORT HADLOCK NAVAL ORDNANCE CENTER (PACIFIC): TOMAHAWK MAGA- ZINE ...... 870 3,440 ∂2,570 PUGET SOUND NAVAL SHIPYARD: DREDGING ...... 3,950 15,610 ∂11,660 AIR FORCE: FAIRCHILD AFB: FLIGHTLINE SUPPORT FACILITY ...... 9,100 ∂9,100 SURVIVAL TRAINING LOGISTICS COMPLEX ...... 1,071 4,500 ∂3,429 MCCHORD AFB: C–17 SQUADRON OPERATIONS/AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE UNIT ...... 1,858 7,900 ∂6,042 DEFENSE-WIDE: FAIRCHILD AFB: ADD TO HYDRANT FUEL SYSTEM ...... 1,500 12,400 ∂10,900 FORT LEWIS: NORTH DENTAL CLINIC REPLACEMENT ...... 4,950 5,500 ∂550 WHIDBEY ISLAND NAVAL AIR STATION: AIRCREW WATER SURVIVAL TRAIN- ING FACILITY ...... 1,300 4,700 ∂3,400 ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: YAKIMA: MANEUVER AREA TRAINING EQUIPMENT SITE (PHASE I) ...... 3,464 16,316 ∂12,852 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: FAIRCHILD AFB: COMPOSITE SUPPORT COMPLEX ...... 9,800 ∂9,800 AIR FORCE RESERVE: MCCHORD AFB: ADD/ALTER C–17 SQUADRON OPERATIONS AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE UNIT FACILITY ...... 864 3,300 ∂2,436

TOTAL, WASHINGTON ...... 26,837 122,266 ∂95,429

WEST VIRGINIA ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: ELEANOR: MAINTENANCE COMPLEX ...... 18,521 ∂18,521 READINESS CENTER ...... 9,583 ∂9,583

TOTAL, WEST VIRGINIA ...... 28,104 ∂28,104

WISCONSIN AIR NATIONAL GUARD: VOLK FIELD: REPLACE TROOP TRAINING QUARTERS ...... 1,923 8,900 ∂6,977

CONUS CLASSIFIED ARMY: CLASSIFIED LOCATIONS: CLASSIFIED PROJECT ...... 36,400 36,400 ...... 48

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

AIR FORCE: CLASSIFIED LOCATION: AIR CONTROL SQUADRON OPERATIONS COMPLEX ...... 1,200 5,100 ∂3,900 CLASSIFIED PROJECT ...... 1,093 1,093 ...... CLASSIFIED PROJECT ...... 9,700 9,700 ...... SPECIAL TACTICAL UNIT DETACHMENT FACILITY ...... 244 977 ∂733

TOTAL, CONUS CLASSIFIED ...... 48,637 53,270 ∂4,633

ASCENSION ISLAND AIR FORCE: ASCENSION ISLAND AUXILIARY AIR FIELD: GPS SATELLITE CONTROL STATION ...... 512 2,150 ∂1,638

BAHRAIN ISLAND NAVY: ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT UNIT (SOUTHWEST ASIA): BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS (SECURITY FORCE) ...... 6,230 24,550 ∂18,320 BACHELOR ENLISTED QUARTERS (TRANSIENT) ...... 5,840 23,770 ∂17,930 OPERATIONS CONTROL CENTER ...... 8,550 34,770 ∂26,220

TOTAL, BAHRAIN ISLAND ...... 20,620 83,090 ∂62,470

DIEGO GARCIA NAVY: DIEGO GARCIA NAVY SUPPORT FACILITY: AIRCRAFT INTERMEDIATE MAIN- TENANCE FACILITY ...... 2,070 8,150 ∂6,080

GERMANY ARMY: ANSBACH: WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 3,150 21,000 ∂17,850 BAMBERG: WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 860 5,700 ∂4,840 WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 1,400 9,300 ∂7,900 WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 1,230 8,200 ∂6,970 MANNHEIM: WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 675 4,500 ∂3,825 DEFENSE-WIDE: RAMSTEIN AIR BASE: ADD/ALTER DENTAL CLINIC ...... 2,550 7,100 ∂4,550

TOTAL, GERMANY ...... 9,865 55,800 ∂45,935

GREECE NAVY: SOUDA BAY CRETE NAVAL SUPPORT ACTIVITY: OPERATIONAL SUPPORT FACILITIES ...... 1,620 6,380 ∂4,760

GUAM AIR FORCE: ANDERSEN AFB: LANDFILL CLOSURE ...... 2,097 8,900 ∂6,803 DEFENSE-WIDE: ANDERSEN AFB: ANDERSEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ...... 10,026 44,170 ∂34,144 DEF FUEL SUPPORT POINT GUAM: REPLACE HYDRANT FUEL SYSTEM ...... 2,600 24,300 ∂21,700 ARMY RESERVE: BARRIGADA: USAR CENTER/ORGANIZATIONAL MAINTENANCE SHOP/AREA MAINTENANCE SUPPORT ACTIVITY ...... 1,116 17,546 ∂16,430

TOTAL, GUAM ...... 15,839 94,916 ∂79,077

ITALY NAVY: NAPLES NAVAL SUPPORT ACTIVITY: OPERATIONAL SUPPORT FACILITY ...... 7,370 26,750 ∂19,380 AIR FORCE: AVIANO AB: RADAR APPROACH CONTROL FACILITY ...... 966 3,700 ∂2,734

TOTAL, ITALY ...... 8,336 30,450 ∂22,114 49

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

KOREA ARMY: CAMP CASEY: WHOLE BARRACKS COMPLEX RENEWAL ...... 4,650 31,000 ∂26,350 CAMP HOWZE: WATER SYSTEM UPGRADE ...... 920 3,050 ∂2,130 CAMP STANLEY: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM UPGRADE ...... 1,100 3,650 ∂2,550 AIR FORCE: OSAN AB: ADD/ALTER PHYSICAL FITNESS CENTER ...... 2,229 7,600 ∂5,371 DORMITORY ...... 3,482 12,000 ∂8,518 DEFENSE-WIDE YONGSAN: ADD/ALTER HOSPITAL ...... 9,570 38,570 ∂29,000 MEDICAL SUPPLY/EQUIP STORAGE WAREHOUSE REPLACEMENT ...... 2,300 2,550 ∂250

TOTAL, KOREA ...... 24,251 98,420 ∂74,169

KWAJALEIN ARMY: KWAJALEIN ATOLL: POWER PLANT—ROI NAMUR ISLAND (PHASE II) ...... 35,400 35,400 ......

PORTUGAL AIR FORCE: LAJES FIELD (AZORES): APRON SECURITY LIGHTING ...... 479 1,800 ∂1,321

PUERTO RICO DEFENSE-WIDE: NSGA SABANA SECA: MEDICAL/DENTAL CLINIC REPLACEMENT ... 1,120 4,000 ∂2,880 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: PUERTO RICO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT C–130 ADD TO AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON ...... 490 2,250 ∂1,760 C–130 FUEL CELL AND CORROSION CONTROL FACILITY ...... 1,212 5,600 ∂4,388 C–130 UPGRADE AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE HANGAR ...... 825 3,800 ∂2,975 ARMY RESERVE: FORT BUCHANAN: USAR CENTER ...... 1,431 10,101 ∂8,670

TOTAL, PUERTO RICO ...... 5,078 25,751 ∂20,673

SPAIN DEFENSE-WIDE: MORON AIR BASE: REPLACE HYDRANT FUEL SYSTEM ...... 4,100 15,200 ∂11,100 ROTA NAVAL STATION: ROTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ...... 3,854 17,020 ∂13,166

TOTAL, SPAIN ...... 7,954 32,220 ∂24,266

UNITED KINGDOM AIR FORCE: ROYAL AIR FORCE FELTWELL: WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ...... 786 3,000 ∂2,214 ROYAL AIR FORCE LAKENHEATH: CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER ...... 1,519 5,800 ∂4,281 CONSOLIDATED SUPPORT COMPLEX ...... 3,221 12,400 ∂9,179 ROYAL AIR FORCE MILDENHALL: CONSOLIDATE CORROSION CONTROL/MAINTENANCE COMPLEX ...... 2,693 10,200 ∂7,507 OPERATIONS FACILITY ...... 1,076 4,100 ∂3,024 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL STORAGE FACILITY ...... 267 1,000 ∂733 KC–135 FLIGHT SIMULATOR FACILITY ...... 600 2,300 ∂1,700 ROYAL AIR FORCE MOLESWORTH: WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ...... 445 1,700 ∂1,255 DEFENSE-WIDE: ROYAL AIR FORCE FELTWELL: CONSTRUCT MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY ...... 1,023 4,570 ∂3,547 LAKENHEATH MIDDLE SCHOOL: CONSTRUCT GYMNASIUM BUILDING ...... 841 3,770 ∂2,929 MENWITH HILL STATION: MEDICAL CENTER EXPANSION ...... 500 500 ...... ROYAL AIR FORCE LAKENHEATH: ADD/ALTER DENTAL CLINIC ...... 1,000 7,100 ∂6,100

TOTAL, UNITED KINGDOM ...... 13,971 56,440 ∂42,469 50

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

NATO NATO SECURITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM ...... 191,000 100,000 ¥91,000

WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED ARMY: UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE LOCATIONS: HOST NATION SUPPORT ...... 21,300 21,300 ...... MINOR CONSTRUCTION ...... 9,500 15,000 ∂5,500 PLANNING AND DESIGN ...... 60,705 65,114 ∂4,409 GENERAL REDUCTION ...... SUPERVISION, INSPECTION AND OVERHEAD ...... 30,689 ...... ¥30,689 FINANCING ENTRY ...... ¥30,689 ...... ∂30,689 NAVY: UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE LOCATIONS: PLANNING AND DESIGN ...... 65,630 66,581 ∂951 UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION ...... 7,342 8,862 ∂1,520 GENERAL REDUCTION ...... SUPERVISION, INSPECTION AND OVERHEAD ...... 6,178 ...... ¥6,178 FINANCING ENTRY ...... ¥6,178 ...... ∂6,178 AIR FORCE: UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE LOCATIONS: UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION ...... 8,741 14,126 ∂5,385 PLANNING AND DESIGN ...... 28,004 32,764 ∂4,760 GENERAL REDUCTION ...... SUPERVISION, INSPECTION AND OVERHEAD ...... 3,376 ...... ¥3,376 FINANCING ENTRY ...... ¥3,376 ...... ∂3,376 DEFENSE-WIDE: UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE LOCATIONS: ENERGY CONSERVATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ...... 6,558 ...... ¥6,558 CONTINGENCY CONSTRUCTION ...... 938 938 ...... GENERAL REDUCTION ...... PLANNING AND DESIGN: TRI-CARE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITY ...... 9,500 9,500 ...... SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND ...... 5,700 6,040 ∂340 BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE ORGANIZATION ...... 124 15,124 ∂15,000 DEFENSE LEVEL ACTIVITIES ...... 18,000 3,000 ¥15,000 TRANSFER FROM RDT&E ...... FORWARD OPERATING LOCATIONS ...... 5,000 ∂5,000

SUBTOTAL, PLANNING AND DESIGN ...... 33,324 38,664 ∂5,340

UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEPENDENTS EDUCATION ...... 1,000 1,000 ...... TRI-CARE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITY ...... 3,587 3,587 ...... SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND ...... 2,300 2,300 ...... DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE ...... 1,500 1,500 ...... BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE ORGANIZATION ...... 1,248 1,248 ...... DEFENSE LEVEL ACTIVITIES ...... 2,900 2,900 ...... JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF ...... 6,083 6,083 ......

SUBTOTAL, UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION ...... 18,618 18,618 ......

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD: UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE LOCATIONS: PLANNING AND DESIGN ...... 4,129 29,667 ∂25,538 UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION ...... 771 20,771 ∂20,000 AIR NATIONAL GUARD: UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE LOCATIONS: PLANNING AND DESIGN ...... 4,951 17,871 ∂12,920 UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION ...... 2,000 7,000 ∂5,000 51

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

ARMY RESERVE: UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE LOCATIONS: PLANNING AND DESIGN ...... 8,500 9,968 ∂1,468 UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION ...... 1,416 2,716 ∂1,300 SUPERVISION, INSPECTION AND OVERHEAD ...... 712 ...... ¥712 FINANCING ENTRY ...... ¥712 ...... ∂712 NAVY RESERVE: UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE LOCATIONS: PLANNING AND DESIGN ...... 1,778 1,778 ...... UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION ...... 1,036 4,036 ∂3,000 SUPERVISION, INSPECTION AND OVERHEAD ...... 32 ...... ¥32 FINANCING ENTRY ...... ¥32 ...... ∂32 AIR FORCE RESERVE: UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE LOCATIONS: PLANNING AND DESIGN ...... 1,867 1,867 ...... UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION ...... 4,467 5,467 ∂1,000 SUPERVISION, INSPECTION AND OVERHEAD ...... 407 ...... ¥407 FINANCING ENTRY ...... ¥407 ...... ∂407

TOTAL, WORLDWIDE UNSPECIFIED ...... 291,575 383,108 ∂91,533

WORLDWIDE VARIOUS DEFENSE-WIDE: VARIOUS LOCATIONS: POLLUTION ABATEMENT FACILITIES ...... 1,300 8,900 ∂7,600

FAMILY HOUSING, ARMY KOREA: CAMP HUMPHREYS (60 UNITS) ...... 4,400 24,000 ∂19,600 FINANCING ENTRY ...... ¥286 ...... ∂286 CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS ...... 5,303 32,600 ∂27,297 FINANCING ENTRY ...... ¥345 ...... ∂345 PLANNING AND DESIGN ...... 4,300 4,300 ...... SUPERVISION, INSPECTION AND OVERHEAD ...... 631 ...... ¥631

SUBTOTAL, CONSTRUCTION ...... 14,003 60,900 ∂46,897

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE: MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT ...... 92,453 92,453 ...... SERVICES ACCOUNT ...... 47,715 47,715 ...... UTILITIES ACCOUNT ...... 220,952 220,952 ...... FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT ...... 44,970 44,970 ...... MISCELLANEOUS ACCOUNT ...... 482 482 ...... LEASING ...... 222,294 222,294 ...... MAINTENANCE OF REAL PROPERTY ...... 469,211 469,211 ...... INTEREST PAYMENTS ...... 3 3 ......

SUBTOTAL, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ...... 1,098,080 1,098,080 ......

TOTAL, FAMILY HOUSING, ARMY ...... 1,112,083 1,158,980 ∂46,897

FAMILY HOUSING, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS ARIZONA: MARINE CORPS AIR STATION (YUMA) (100 UNITS) ...... 17,000 ∂17,000 HAWAII: MARINE CORPS AIR STATION (KANEOHE BAY) (100 UNITS) ...... 5,320 26,615 ∂21,295 MARINE CORPS BASE HAWAII FAMILY HOUSING (84 UNITS) ...... 22,639 ∂22,639 NAVAL COMPLEX (PEARL HARBOR) (133 UNITS) ...... 6,031 30,168 ∂24,137 NAVAL COMPLEX (PEARL HARBOR) (96 UNITS) ...... 3,831 19,167 ∂15,336 FINANCING ENTRY ...... ¥908 ...... ∂908 CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS ...... 31,708 165,050 ∂133,342 FINANCING ENTRY ...... ¥1,897 ...... ∂1,897 PLANNING AND DESIGN ...... 17,715 17,715 ...... 52

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

SUPERVISION, INSPECTION AND OVERHEAD ...... 2,805 ...... ¥2,805

SUBTOTAL, CONSTRUCTION ...... 64,605 298,354 ∂233,749

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE: MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT ...... 82,925 82,925 ...... SERVICES ACCOUNT ...... 63,589 63,589 ...... UTILITIES ACCOUNT ...... 170,991 170,991 ...... FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT ...... 32,636 32,636 ...... MISCELLANEOUS ACCOUNT ...... 1,180 1,180 ...... LEASING ...... 145,953 145,953 ...... MAINTENANCE OF REAL PROPERTY ...... 397,723 397,723 ...... MORTGAGE INSURANCE PREMIUMS ...... 73 73 ......

SUBTOTAL, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ...... 895,070 895,070 ......

TOTAL, FAMILY HOUSING, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS ...... 959,675 1,193,424 ∂233,749

FAMILY HOUSING, AIR FORCE ARIZONA: DAVIS-MONTHAN AFB (64 UNITS) ...... 2,707 10,000 ∂7,293 CALIFORNIA: BEALE AFB (60 UNITS) ...... 2,301 8,500 ∂6,199 EDWARDS AFB (98 UNITS) ...... 4,404 16,270 ∂11,866 EDWARDS AFB (90 UNITS) ...... 4,472 16,520 ∂12,048 VANDENBERG AFB (91 UNITS) ...... 4,548 16,800 ∂12,252 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: BOLLING AFB (72 UNITS) ...... 2,537 9,375 ∂6,838 FLORIDA: EGLIN AFB (130 UNITS) ...... 3,812 14,080 ∂10,268 MACDILL AFB (54 UNITS) ...... 2,446 9,034 ∂6,588 KANSAS: MCCONNELL AFB ...... 1,363 ∂1,363 MISSISSIPPI: COLUMBUS AFB (100 UNITS) ...... 3,327 12,290 ∂8,963 MONTANA: MALMSTROM AFB (34 UNITS) ...... 2,050 7,570 ∂5,520 NEBRASKA: OFFUTT AFB (72 UNITS) ...... 3,343 12,352 ∂9,009 NORTH CAROLINA: SEYMOUR JOHNSON AFB (78 UNITS) ...... 3,300 12,187 ∂8,887 NORTH DAKOTA: GRAND FORKS AFB (42 UNITS) ...... 2,720 10,050 ∂7,330 MINOT AFB (72 UNITS) ...... 2,912 10,756 ∂7,844 TEXAS: LACKLAND AFB (48 UNITS) ...... 2,030 7,500 ∂5,470 PORTUGAL: LAJES AFB (AZORES) (75 UNITS) ...... 3,509 12,964 ∂9,455 FINANCING ENTRY ...... ¥1,033 ...... ∂1,033 CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS ...... 34,280 129,952 ∂95,672 FINANCING ENTRY ...... ¥128 ...... ∂128 PLANNING AND DESIGN ...... 17,093 17,471 ∂378 SUPERVISION, INSPECTION AND OVERHEAD ...... 1,161 ...... ¥1,161

SUBTOTAL, CONSTRUCTION ...... 101,791 335,034 ∂233,243

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE: MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT ...... 56,413 56,413 ...... SERVICES ACCOUNT ...... 31,450 31,450 ...... UTILITIES ACCOUNT ...... 160,117 160,117 ...... FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT ...... 36,997 36,997 ...... MISCELLANEOUS ACCOUNT ...... 2,640 2,640 ...... LEASING ...... 118,509 118,509 ...... MAINTENANCE OF REAL PROPERTY ...... 415,733 415,733 ...... MORTGAGE INSURANCE PREMIUMS ...... 33 33 ......

SUBTOTAL, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ...... 821,892 821,892 ......

TOTAL, FAMILY HOUSING, AIR FORCE ...... 923,683 1,156,926 ∂233,243 53

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT LISTING BY LOCATION—Continued [In thousands of dollars]

Committee Change from Installation and project Budget recommen- budget request dation estimate

FAMILY HOUSING, DEFENSE-WIDE CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS (NSA) ...... 50 50 ...... OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE: MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT (NSA) ...... 67 67 ...... SERVICES ACCOUNT (NSA) ...... 265 265 ...... UTILITIES ACCOUNT (NSA) ...... 515 515 ...... FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT (NSA) ...... 132 132 ...... MISCELLANEOUS ACCOUNT (NSA) ...... 50 50 ...... LEASING (NSA) ...... 13,374 13,374 ...... MAINTENANCE OF REAL PROPERTY (NSA) ...... 244 244 ...... FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT (DIA) ...... 3,401 3,401 ...... LEASING (DIA) ...... 22,265 22,265 ...... MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT (DLA) ...... 247 247 ...... SERVICES ACCOUNT (DLA) ...... 75 75 ...... UTILITIES ACCOUNT (DLA) ...... 414 414 ...... FURNISHINGS ACCOUNT (DLA) ...... 21 21 ...... MAINTENANCE OF REAL PROPERTY (DLA) ...... 370 370 ......

SUBTOTAL, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ...... 41,440 41,440 ......

TOTAL, FAMILY HOUSING, DEFENSE-WIDE ...... 41,490 41,490 ......

FAMILY HOUSING REVITALIZATION FAMILY HOUSING REVITALIZATION ...... 25,000 ∂25,000

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FAMILY HOUSING IMPROVEMENT FUND DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FAMILY HOUSING IMPROVEMENT FUND ...... 78,756 25,000 ¥53,756

BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACCOUNT, PART IV BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACCOUNT, PART IV ...... 705,911 705,911 ......

GENERAL PROVISIONS CONTINGENCY REDUCTION ...... ¥278,051 ¥278,051

GRAND TOTAL ...... 5,438,443 8,273,820 ∂2,835,377