56–237

106TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 106–125

MAKING EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR MILITARY

OPERATIONS, REFUGEE RELIEF, AND HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE RELATING TO THE CONFLICT IN KOSOVO, AND FOR MILITARY OPERATIONS

IN SOUTHWEST ASIA FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30,

1999, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

MAY 4, 1999.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the

Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. YOUNG of Florida, from the Committee on Appropriations,

submitted the following

REPORT

together with

DISSENTING VIEWS

[To accompany H.R. 1664]

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in

explanation of the accompanying bill making emergency supplemental appropriations for military operations, refugee assistance,

and humanitarian assistance relating to the conflict in Kosovo, and

for military operations in Southwest Asia for the fiscal year ending

September 30, 1999, and for other purposes.

BILL HIGHLIGHTS

The bill accompanying this report provides $12,947,495,000 to respond to the unfunded needs relating to the conflict in Kosovo and

Operation Desert Fox as well as other urgent high priority military

readiness matters. It provides $70,500,000 for emergency diplomatic operations and security; $566,000,000 for international economic, refugee, and disaster assistance; $9,401,569,000 for military

personnel and equipment requirements; $1,838,426,000 for pay and

retirement increases; and $1,071,000,000 for emergency military

construction requirements.
2

CHAPTER 1

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

ADMINISTRATION OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR PROGRAMS

The Committee recommends $17,071,000, to remain available

until expended, as an emergency appropriation. This amount provides for the costs of diplomatic efforts related to the Kosovo crisis,

including the costs of shutting down embassy operations in Belgrade and enhancing security at posts in the region, as requested.

SECURITY AND MAINTENANCE OF UNITED STATES MISSIONS

The Committee recommends a total of $50,500,000, to remain

available until expended, as an emergency appropriation. Of this

amount, $5,000,000 is for the costs of security upgrades for post

and housing facilities in the region, as requested. An additional $45,500,000 is provided above the request, and release of any portion of this funding is contingent upon a Presidential emergency designation. Of this amount, $36,000,000 is for

costs of site acquisition, design and construction of an additional

secure embassy facility in Tirana, Albania. Embassy Tirana is a

hub of U.S. Government operations in the region, and will serve an

increasingly important role in supporting the military and diplomatic objectives of the U.S. Government and any subsequent peace

process. The remaining $9,500,000 in this account is provided to

make advance payment for the costs of repairing damage to post

facilities resulting from civil unrest related to the Kosovo conflict.

The Committee expects that host governments will be held accountable for such damages, and urges the Department to vigorously

pursue full reimbursement. The Committee directs the Department

to use these reimbursements and any remaining balance to fund a

Marine Security Guard quarters in Tirana.

EMERGENCIES IN THE DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR SERVICE

The Committee recommends $2,929,000, to remain available

until expended, as an emergency appropriation. This amount provides for the costs of evacuating post personnel and dependents as

a result of events related to the Kosovo conflict, as requested. Language is included, as requested, transferring $500,000 to the Peace

Corps and $450,000 to the U.S. Information Agency for the costs

of evacuating personnel and dependents of those agencies.

CHAPTER 2

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE—MILITARY

The President requested $5,458,069,000 in emergency supplemental appropriations for the Department of Defense (DoD) to finance the unbudgeted personnel, operations, and equipment replacement and drawdown costs associated with fiscal year 1999 operations in Southwest Asia (Operations Desert Thunder, Desert

Fox, and Enhanced Northern and Southern Watch) and those operations concerning Kosovo (including Operations Allied Force and
3

Allied Harbour, respectively NATO’s ongoing military and humanitarian operations in the Balkans). Of this amount, $453,339,000 is

for operations and the cost of munitions expended in Southwest

Asia and $5,004,730,000 is for Kosovo operations and munitions replacement. The Committee notes that the Administration’s estimates for Kosovo are premised on continued fiscal year 1999 operations at the current, planned level with the currently approved

forces.

The Committee recommends approving the full amount of the

President’s request (although it has realigned some funding to the

proper appropriations accounts). The Committee also recommends

an additional $461,800,000 for munitions, based on potential Operation Allied Force requirements identified by the military services,

and $400,000,000 only for a new operational enhancements rapid

response account, intended to support specific requests from U.S.

regional commanders, for the rapid fielding and support of equipment needed for Operation Allied Force or to provide substitute capabilities in other theaters to replace assets diverted to this operation.

Further, the Committee recommends an additional

$3,081,700,000 to address existing and urgent shortfalls in key

readiness categories (spare parts, depot maintenance of equipment,

recruiting of military personnel, training and operational tempo

support, and base operations). These represent unfunded requirements identified by the military services prior to the onset of Operation Allied Force, needs which will certainly be exacerbated by the

operations against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The Committee believes these demands must be addressed now, as they are

directly related to the immediate capability of U.S. forces to meet

their global commitments. The Committee notes there are many

other unfunded requirements confronting the Department of Defense, not only affecting immediate and near-term preparedness

but also long-term readiness (particularly in the weapons modernization accounts). The Committee expresses its determination to

address these additional shortfalls as it develops its fiscal year

2000 appropriations bills.

Finally, the Committee recommends $1,838,426,000 for the military personnel accounts, only for increases in military basic pay,

targeted pay increases against certain grades, and for reform of the

military retirement system. The obligation of these funds would be

subject to the enactment of subsequent authorizing legislation and

the designation of the funds as an emergency appropriation by the

President.

The following table summarizes the appropriations provided in

this chapter of the bill.

[In thousands of dollars]

Supplemental

request

Committee

recommendation

Military Personnel:

Army ................................................................................................................................ 2,920 2,920

Navy ................................................................................................................................. 7,660 7,660

Marine Corps ................................................................................................................... 1,586 1,586

Air Force .......................................................................................................................... 4,303 4,303
4

[In thousands of dollars]

Supplemental

request

Committee

recommendation

Total ............................................................................................................................ 16,469 16,469

Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund:

Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund (Emergency) ...................................... 4,591,600 3,907,300

Readiness/Munitions (Contingent) .................................................................................. 850,000 1,311,800

Total ............................................................................................................................ 5,441,600 5,219,100

Procurement:

Weapons Procurement, Navy ........................................................................................... — 431,100

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force ....................................................................................... — 40,000

Missile Procurement, Air Force ....................................................................................... — 178,200

Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force ........................................................................... — 35,000

Total ............................................................................................................................ 684,300

Operational Rapid Response Transfer Fund ............................................................................ — 400,000

Sec. 207. (Spare Parts) ........................................................................................................... — 1,339,200

Sec. 208. (Depot Maintenance) ............................................................................................... — 927,300

Sec. 209. (Recruiting) .............................................................................................................. — 156,400

Sec. 210. (Readiness Training/OPTEMPO) ............................................................................... — 307,300

Sec. 211. (Base Operations) .................................................................................................... — 351,500

Sec. 212. (Pay and Retirement) .............................................................................................. — 1,838,426

Grand total ................................................................................................................. 5,458,069 11,239,995

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Committee recognizes that the specific budget estimates underlying the supplemental request for Kosovo operations may require adjustments due to the evolving nature of the air campaign,

changes in deployment schedules and operational tempo, and other

requirements associated with current operations and currently

planned forces which were not identified at the time the supplemental request was developed. Accordingly, the Committee understands the need for some flexibility at this time and believes the

funding and authorities provided in the Committee bill give the

DoD the ability to make such adjustments as required. The Committee expects the Department to use these funds and authorities

judiciously, with particular care given to ensure that other important, ongoing DoD activities, especially those relating to personnel,

readiness, and important quality of life programs such as the Defense Health Program, are not adversely affected by the conduct of

Operation Allied Force.

The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a

monthly report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations which provides a detailed description of Department of Defense obligations in support of operations in and around Kosovo

and in Southwest Asia. This report shall indicate the cost of each

operation for each affected appropriation account (including those

accounts to which funds are transferred from the Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund). For the acquisition accounts, the

report should be provided at the R–1/P–1 level of detail. The first

such report should be provided no later than May 31, 1999. In addition, language has been included under the Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund which allows the transfer of funds
5

to military construction. The Undersecretary of Defense (Comptroller) is directed to notify the Committee on Appropriations of any

such transfers and the individual projects to be provided.

MILITARY PERSONNEL

The supplemental budget request includes $16,469,000 for special pays and allowances for military personnel deployed to Southwest Asia in support of Operations Desert Thunder, Desert Fox,

and Enhanced Northern and Southern Watch. In addition, the request includes $439,400,000 for personnel costs related to operations in and around Kosovo. The Committee recommends the

budget request. Funding relating to Kosovo is provided in the Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund as requested by the

President.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

The supplemental budget request includes $259,900,000 for operations in and around Southwest Asia and $3,210,000,000 in support of NATO operations in Kosovo. All Operation and Maintenance funding for these operations is included in the Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund. The Committee recommends

the budget request.

OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS TRANSFER FUND

The President requested $5,441,600,000 for this account, along

with authority to transfer funds as needed to a variety of appropriations accounts to meet estimated requirements. Included in

this total is $684,300,000 of procurement funding requested to replace certain high value munitions expended during Operation

Desert Fox and Operation Allied Force, to include air- and sealaunched cruise missiles, Joint Direct Attack Munitions, and decoys

(there is also $13,600,000 in Operation and Maintenance funding

requested to support these purchases). The request also includes a

total of $850,000,000 of contingent emergency appropriations to

meet expected munitions and readiness-related Kosovo expenses,

funds which would only be available after the subsequent submission of a budget request by the President, with only those funds requested being made available.

The Committee recommends a total of $5,219,100,000 for the

Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund. This reflects the

following adjustments to the supplemental budget request:

—a deletion of $684,300,000 for procurement of specific munitions as described above, which the Committee recommends

funding in the traditional appropriations accounts as described

elsewhere in this report; and

—an addition of $461,800,000 of contingent emergency appropriations, based on potential Operation Allied Force munition requirements identified by the military services, premised

on continued fiscal year 1999 operations at the current,

planned level with the currently approved forces.
6

CONTINGENCY OPERATION MUNITIONS REQUIREMENTS

As discussed above, the supplemental budget request for the

Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund includes

$850,000,000 in contingent emergency appropriations, including an

estimate of $700,000,000 to replace munitions expended in Operation Allied Force and in Southwest Asia in order to maintain adequate inventories for future operations. The Committee recognizes

that the request for contingent emergency appropriations reflects

the reality that additional funding will be required to replace munitions, but that the exact weapons types, quantities, and cost remain unknown at this time as operations continue. Use of the contingent designation thus ensures that funds will only be made

available following a specific determination of munitions needs, and

only after submission of a subsequent budget request by the President. The Committee believes that given this degree of control, it

is prudent to provide a larger amount for potential munitions replacement, and therefore recommends $1,161,800,000, an increase

of $461,800,000. The Committee makes this recommendation based

on requirements specifically identified by the military services

which may be required to support continued fiscal year 1999 operations at the current planned level with the currently approved

forces, as follows:

Weapons Procurement, Navy:

SLAM–ER ....................................................................................... $40,000,000

HARM Modifications ...................................................................... 81,000,000

JSOW (baseline variant) ................................................................ 11,000,000

Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps:

Laser Guided Bombs ...................................................................... 306,800,000

Expendables .................................................................................... 16,300,000

Fuzes ................................................................................................ 10,000,000

Missile Procurement, Army:

Army Tactical Missile System ....................................................... 135,000,000

Missile Procurement, Air Force:

AGM–130 Acceleration ................................................................... 500,000

Maverick Modifications .................................................................. 28,100,000

HARM Modifications ...................................................................... 147,300,000

Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force:

GBU–15 Modifications ................................................................... 26,500,000

Laser Guided Bombs ...................................................................... 165,700,000

Combined Effect Munitions ........................................................... 23,100,000

Fuzes ................................................................................................ 10,000,000

Training Munitions ........................................................................ 146,800,000

General Purpose Bombs ................................................................. 13,000,000

Flares and Chaff ............................................................................. 700,000

The Committee restates its intent that, at this time, the DoD has

the flexibility to reallocate these funds as needed to meet emergent

warfighting needs. However, should it be determined that funds

are required to support programs other than those listed above, the

Undersecretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall notify the House and

Senate Committees on Appropriations in writing of any expected

change, and the reason why, prior to any obligation of funds. In addition, the provision of these funds does not obviate the requirement for the Department to notify the Congress in advance of proposed new start programs.
7

CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS

The Committee’s recommendations regarding classified programs

are summarized in a classified annex accompanying this report.

PROCUREMENT

As discussed earlier in this report, the Committee bill recommends shifting $684,300,000 in procurement funding allocated

in the supplemental request for Tomahawk Land-Attack Missile

upgrades, Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missiles (CALCM),

Joint Direct Attack Munitions, and towed decoys from the Overseas

Contingency Operations Transfer Fund, as proposed in the request,

to specific appropriations accounts, as described below.

WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY

The supplemental budget request includes $431,100,000 for

Tomahawk upgrades. The Committee recommendation provides

this amount. (The Committee also approves an additional

$13,600,000 in operation and maintenance funding associated with

Tomahawk recertification, but has provided this funding in the

Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund, as proposed in

the supplemental budget request.)

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

The supplemental budget request includes $40,000,000 for ALE–

50 towed decoys. The Committee recommendation provides this

amount.

MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

The supplemental budget request includes $178,200,000 associated with replacement of Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missiles (CALCM). The Committee recommendation provides this

amount.

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE

The supplemental budget request includes $35,000,000 for additional Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs). The Committee recommendation provides this amount.

CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT OF WEAPONS SYSTEM PERFORMANCE

To conduct its oversight and funding responsibilities, the Committee must receive accurate and timely information on weapons

system performance in military operations. The military services,

the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the Joint Staff are all

reminded of their obligation to be responsive to Congress’ responsibilities and prerogatives in this regard, and their responsibility to

comply on a prompt basis to Committee inquiries regarding weapons system performance (including failures, battle damage assessment, and targeting errors).
8

OPERATIONAL RAPID RESPONSE TRANSFER FUND

The Committee recommends including a new appropriations account (Operational Rapid Response Transfer Fund) to enable the

accelerated fielding of needed capabilities to U.S. forces engaged in,

or in support of, Operation Allied Force; as well as to provide a potential means to rapidly deploy substitute or replacement capabilities to other regional commands (such as U.S. Central Command

or U.S. Pacific Command) who have had assets diverted from their

theaters to support Operation Allied Force.

During Operations Desert Shield/Desert Storm, the Department

of Defense accelerated the planned fielding of several weapons systems to meet warfighting requirements identified by the regional

commander-in-chief (CINC). Among these was the rapid fielding of

the PAC–2 anti-tactical ballistic missile variant of the PATRIOT

surface-to-air missile system (originally developed to engage aircraft, not ballistic missiles), which was still in advanced development at the time. Without this capability, U.S. and allied nations

during the Gulf War would have had no defense against the Iraqi

SCUD tactical ballistic missile. The Committee notes that other

systems, including then-advanced precision-guided ‘‘bunker busting’’ munitions, were conceived, developed, and deployed ‘‘from

scratch’’ during the timeframe of Operations Desert Shield/Desert

Storm.

At present, there are several broad, high-leverage operational

categories which U.S. assets are in short supply or deficient, but

which could be used to great effect if assets were made available

in sufficient numbers for Operation Allied Force. These include (but

are not limited to) tactical airborne electronic warfare and surveillance; tactical imagery and signals intelligence reconnaissance

(particularly systems which can loiter over engagement areas such

as unmanned aerial vehicles) and related communications

datalinks which can rapidly disseminate information; and tactical

communications systems in general.

A related, but competing challenge is that, in order to meet the

demands of Operation Allied Force, many U.S. military assets have

been deployed to U.S. European Command. However, in many instances this has diverted forces and capabilities from other regional

commands which have their own daunting set of operational requirements (for example, U.S. Central Command and Iraq, or U.S.

Pacific Command and North Korea). In testimony before the Committee on April 21, 1999, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

characterized Operation Allied Force as ‘‘a third MTW (major theater of war) where aviation assets are concerned’’. Clearly, carrying

out Operation Allied Force with the current ‘‘two MTW’’ force structure poses many risks at many levels for U.S. planners and potentially for U.S. forces in the field.

The Committee recognizes that the current campaign against the

Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is of uncertain duration. Nevertheless, it believes a dedicated, ‘‘quick response’’ appropriation, expressly intended to accelerate the fielding of systems, subsystems,

support equipment or capabilities needed to meet the many operational challenges confronting U.S. European Command and other
9

regional CINCs, could prove to be a valuable resource in fielding

badly needed capabilities in the immediate future. Therefore, the Committee recommends $400,000,000, designated

as a contingent emergency appropriation, only for the Operational

Rapid Response Transfer Fund. These funds will only be available

if designated as an emergency by the President, and may be used

only to rapidly develop, deploy or field equipment or systems in response to specific requests made by U.S. regional commands and

only if the obligation of funds is specifically approved by the Secretary of Defense or his designee. The Committee does not intend

that any of these funds be used for systems or efforts which cannot

be fielded expeditiously, nor to procure items which can and should

be more appropriately budgeted in annual appropriations requests.

The Committee’s sole intent is to ensure that the Department of

Defense and our warfighting CINCs, during this time of strained

resources, be able to respond in innovative and rapid fashion to the

operational challenges posed by Operation Allied Force.

URGENT READINESS REQUIREMENTS

Spare Parts Shortfalls.—The Committee recommends a general provision (Section 207) which appropriates $1,339,200,000, designated as contingent emergency appropriations, only for the provision of spare and repair parts and associated logistical support necessary to improve the operational status of Department of Defense

weapons systems. For years the Committee has expressed its concern about the steady decline in mission capable rates of weapons

systems, particularly Navy and Air Force aircraft. This has been

driven largely in recent years by a combination of aging equipment,

sustained high rates of operational tempo, and a shortage of spare

parts. Despite having added hundreds of millions of dollars for

spare parts in recent defense appropriations bills over the amounts

requested in Administration budget submissions, the Committee is

dismayed to observe that the services still suffer from large unfunded shortfalls in this area. These problems will clearly worsen

as a result of Operation Allied Force as a result of the large number of aircraft deployed, at high rates of usage. Accordingly, the

Committee provides this funding in order to preclude any additional degradation in readiness.

Depot Maintenance.—The Committee recommends a general pro- vision (Section 208) which provides $927,300,000, designated as

contingent emergency appropriations, only for depot level maintenance and repair requirements of the Department of Defense. Similar to the problems discussed above in connection with spare parts,

despite the Committee’s having provided robust funding over proposed Administration budgets in recent years for depot maintenance, the services continue to identify substantial existing shortfalls in this area which will only be exacerbated by Operation Allied Force unless they are addressed in this bill.

Recruiting and Advertising.—The Committee recommends a gen- eral provision (Section 209) which provides $156,400,000, designated as contingent emergency appropriations, only for Department of Defense recruiting programs based on shortfalls identified

in the fiscal year 1999 program. With the exception of the Marine

Corps, each of the services is currently experiencing recruiting dif-
10

ficulties which, combined with growing retention problems, have

led to undermanning of units including deployed forces, as well as

proposals to begin reducing quality standards for recruits. The appropriations provided in this section will fully fund an increased recruiting program, meeting shortfalls as defined by the military

services in data provided the Committee.

Readiness Training and Operations Tempo.—The Committee recommends a general provision (Section 210) which provides

$307,300,000, designated as contingent emergency appropriations,

only for readiness related training and operations tempo requirements of the Department of Defense. The Committee notes with

concern that the level of current deployment activity coupled with

the need to fund long-overdue infrastructure costs has resulted in

shortfalls in the military services’ training programs. The funding

provided in this section is essential in order to alleviate pressure

on the military services’ readiness-related training programs and

ensure that U.S. forces are trained to meet required readiness levels.

Base Operations Support.—The Committee recommends a gen- eral provision (Section 211) which provides $351,500,000, designated as contingent emergency appropriations, only for base operations support requirements of the Department of Defense. The

Committee notes that DoD has consistently underfunded base operations costs associated with facilities operations and maintenance,

range operations and maintenance, utilities services, and a host of

other critical infrastructure costs. This has created pressure on the

training and other readiness related accounts, and has in recent

years repeatedly resulted in the diversion of funds provided by the

Congress from readiness accounts to these non-discretionary infrastructure costs. The appropriations in this section are needed to

meet base operations shortfalls identified in service data provided

to the Committee, which will not only support the Department’s

base infrastructure but also relieve pressure on the readiness accounts and ensure that readiness related activities are conducted

at levels funded by the Congress.

MILITARY PAY AND RETIREMENT

The Committee recommends a general provision (Section 212) which provides $1,838,426,000 for the military personnel accounts,

designated as contingent emergency appropriations, only for increases in military basic pay, targeted pay increases against certain grades, and for reform of the military retirement system. In

his fiscal year 2000 budget submission, the President has proposed

a military benefits package which includes a proposed increase in

basic pay, targeted pay increases against certain grades (so-called

‘‘pay table reform’’), and the repeal of the 1986 Military Retirement

Reform Act (commonly referred to as ‘‘REDUX’’). The Committee

notes that the Senate has already passed an authorization bill

dealing with these issues (S. 4), and that the House Armed Services Committee will soon address them in its consideration of the

National Defense Authorization Act.

The Committee is confident that the Congress will enact a comprehensive military pay and retirement package, and therefore, has

included $1,838,426,000 in contingent emergency appropriations for
11

a fiscal year 2000 increase in the military personnel accounts resulting from increased levels of military base pay, pay table reform,

and repeal of the REDUX retirement system. The Committee believes that doing so will send a positive signal to our service men

and women, not only those engaged in Operation Allied Force but

in difficult missions around the world, that Congress is committed

to providing an increase in military compensation and reforming

the military pay and retirement system, and as a sign of that commitment, is providing funding to support these objectives in this

bill. However, since at this time the President and the Senate have

proposed substantively different approaches to these issues, and

the House Armed Services Committee has yet to make its recommendations to the House, release of these funds is conditioned

upon the enactment of authorizing legislation as well as the funds

being designated as emergency appropriations by the President.

NUTRITION AND FOOD NEEDS

The Committee recognizes that with the significant deployment

of U.S. forces in the Balkan region, along with the increasing refugee camp population, nutrition and food needs are paramount

international concerns. The Committee urges the Department of

Defense to work with the Department of Agriculture to use all appropriate acquisition authorities to purchase food in ways that

meet the humanitarian and military needs attendant to the Balkan

engagement, and to do so in ways that also benefit U.S. farmers

who are experiencing record low level prices for their products.

GENERAL PROVISIONS—THIS CHAPTER

The Committee bill includes section 201, as requested in the supplemental request, which provides for an increase in the fiscal year

1999 transfer authority available to the Department of Defense.

The Committee bill includes section 202, as requested in the supplemental request, which provides that $10,000,000 of the funds in

the Committee bill may be available to the common funded budgets

of NATO.

The Committee bill includes section 203, as requested in the supplemental request, which provides authorization for funds in the

Committee bill, or funds made available by the transfer of funds

in the Committee bill, for intelligence activities.

The Committee bill includes section 204, as requested in the supplemental request, which extends until June 30, 1999 special authorities for contracts awarded or modified for the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) program.

The Committee bill includes section 205, which requests the

President to seek an equitable reimbursement from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), member nations of NATO, and

other appropriate organizations and nations for the costs incurred

by the United States government in connection with Operation Allied Force. The Committee recognizes the valuable and important

contributions made by our NATO allies, as well as other nations,

in the conduct of Operation Allied Force and in humanitarian activities relating to Kosovo. However, in recognition of the disproportionate share of the military operations being currently car-
12

ried out by U.S. forces, the Committee believes the President

should seek an equitable burdensharing agreement with NATO

members and other nations. For example, with respect to NATO

members, in all likelihood the financial costs to the U.S. at present

exceed the American contribution to NATO’s common-funded budgets.

Therefore, pursuant to section 205, the President is to seek a

more equitable sharing of the financial costs of Operation Allied

Force among NATO members and other countries. For purposes of

this provision, the term ‘‘costs incurred by the United States government in connection with Operation Allied Force’’ shall also include the costs of refugee, humanitarian, and other assistance

funded through non-military accounts, including assistance to the

front line states. Further, this section requires the President to

submit to Congress, not later than September 30, 1999, a report on

all burdensharing measures taken by the President; the amount of

reimbursement received to date from each organization and nation,

including a description of any commitments made by any such organization or nation to provide reimbursement; and in the case of

an organization or nation that has refused to provide, or to commit

to provide, reimbursement, an explanation of the reasons therefor.

The Committee bill includes section 206, which directs that within thirty days of enactment into law of the Committee bill, the

President shall transmit to Congress a report, in both classified

and unclassified format, on current United States government operations involving Kosovo, including:

(1) A statement of the national security objectives involved

in U.S. participation in Operation Allied Force;

(2) An accounting of all current active duty personnel assigned to support Operation Allied Force and related humanitarian operations around Kosovo to include total number, service component and area of deployment (such accounting should

also include total numbers of personnel from other NATO

countries participating in the action);

(3) Additional planned deployment of active duty units in the

European Command area of operations to support Operation

Allied Force, between the date of enactment of this Act and the

end of fiscal year 1999;

(4) Additional planned Reserve component mobilization, including specific units to be called up between the date of enactment of this Act and the end of fiscal year 1999, to support Operation Allied Force;

(5) An accounting by the Joint Chiefs of Staff on the transfer

of personnel and materiel from other regional commands to the

United States European Command to support Operation Allied

Force and related humanitarian operations around Kosovo, and

an assessment by the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the impact any

such loss of assets has had on the warfighting capabilities and

deterrence value of these other commands;

(6) Levels of humanitarian aid provided to the displaced

Kosovar community from the United States, NATO member

nations, and other nations (figures should be provided by country and the type of assistance provided whether financial or inkind); and
13

(7) Any significant revisions to the total cost estimate for the

deployment of United States forces involved in Operation Allied Force through the end of fiscal year 1999.

The Committee bill includes section 207, which appropriates $1,339,200,000, designated as contingent emergency appropriations, only for urgent shortfalls in Department of Defense spare

and repair parts and associated logistical support, as described earlier in this report.

The Committee bill includes section 208, which appropriates $927,300,000, designated as contingent emergency appropriations,

only for urgent shortfalls in the depot level maintenance and repair

requirements of the Department of Defense, as described earlier in

this report.

The Committee bill includes section 209, which appropriates $156,400,000, designated as contingent emergency appropriations,

only for urgent shortfalls in Department of Defense recruiting programs, as described earlier in this report.

The Committee bill includes section 210, which appropriates $307,300,000, designated as contingent emergency appropriations,

only for urgent readiness related training and operations tempo requirements of the Department of Defense, as described earlier in

this report.

The Committee bill includes section 211, which appropriates

$351,500,000, designated as contingent emergency appropriations,

only for urgent base operations support requirements of the Department of Defense, as described earlier in this report.

The Committee bill includes section 212, which appropriates

$1,838,426,000, designated as contingent emergency appropriations, for the military personnel accounts, only for an increase in

military basic pay, targeted pay increases against certain grades,

and for reform of the military retirement system, as described earlier in this report.

CHAPTER 3

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION—THIS CHAPTER

On April 19, 1999, the President transmitted to Congress an

emergency supplemental funding request, which includes

$566,000,000 for refugee, disaster, and economic assistance to respond to the humanitarian and economic crisis in the Balkans.

The Committee recognizes that refugees fleeing Kosovo continue

to burden neighboring nations. As of April 22, more than 359,000

refugees have fled to Albania, 132,000 have arrived in Macedonia,

68,000 have entered Montenegro, and 32,000 have come into Bosnia. The State Department estimates the number of refugees could

grow to more than 900,000, and international aid groups estimate

that this total could rise much higher in the coming months if the

conflict in the Balkans continues. Given these projections, the Committee believes the President’s request for disaster and refugee assistance is inadequate. Therefore, the Committee has provided

higher funding levels than the Administration requested for supplemental disaster and refugee assistance. These increases should

provide the resources necessary to meet emergency needs for the

remainder of the current fiscal year.
14

These increases have been offset with a reduction in the request

for assistance through the account for Eastern Europe.

None of the funds appropriated herein are to be used to implement a long-term, regional program of development or reconstruction in Southeastern Europe. That is not the purpose of this Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act. As the President’s budget

request clearly states: ‘‘the supplementals provide FY 1999 funding

to plan the reconstruction efforts in a post-conflict Kosovo, but

would not fund the U.S. portion of a long-term reconstruction effort.’’

The refugee, SEED, and disaster assistance funds are appropriated for emergency support of refugees and displaced persons

and the local communities directly affected by the influx of refugees. The Economic Support Funds are appropriated for short-term,

emergency balance of payments support for the countries listed in

the bill language.

The Committee requests that the Administration keep it informed on a regular basis of refugee assistance and other funding

commitments made by our NATO allies.

BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE

FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE PRESIDENT

AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

INTERNATIONAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE

The Committee is recommending $96,000,000 for an additional

amount for International Disaster Assistance for fiscal year 1999.

The President requested $71,000,000. The Committee understands

that this funding will ensure that AID’s Office of Foreign Disaster

Assistance will have the necessary resources to meet its worldwide

commitments in fiscal year 1999, and to deal with the projections

of possible refugee flows in the Balkans. These funds are to remain

available until expended.

OTHER BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE

ECONOMIC SUPPORT FUND

The Committee is recommending $105,000,000 for an additional

amount for the Economic Support Fund as requested by the President. The Administration requested $100,000,000 of these funds to

provide direct assistance to Albania, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Romania,

Macedonia and Montenegro—the so-called front line states. The

Committee notes that these front line nations have borne the brunt

of the 700,000 refugees fleeing Kosovo and, even under the best of

circumstances, these countries will be expected to deal with these

refugees for many months. The conflict in the Balkans and the resultant refugee crisis have already created significant disruptions

to normal commerce in the region and have increased economic

hardship in these front line nations. This assistance is designed to

help these governments meet balance of payments shortfalls and to

partially offset costs of refugee assistance. The Committee strongly
15

supports additional resources to support the democratic government of Montenegro. The Committee expects that up to $5,000,000 of these funds will

be used to document war crimes and atrocities committed in

Kosovo. These funds are to remain available for obligation until

September 30, 2000. In addition, the Committee recommendation

includes bill language waiving other provisions of law except section 533 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related

Programs Appropriations Act, 1999, for the purpose of obligating

these funds. However, the requirement for a notification prior to

obligation has been reduced from 15 days to 5 days in order to provide the President with increased flexibility.

ASSISTANCE FOR EASTERN EUROPE AND THE BALTIC STATES

The Committee is recommending $75,000,000 for an additional

amount for the account ‘‘Assistance for Eastern Europe and the

Baltic States’’. The President requested $170,000,000 for this account. The Committee has provided up to $1,000,000 of these funds

for administrative costs of AID. Funds appropriated under this account would be subject to the regular notification requirements of

the Committees on Appropriations, and would remain available for

obligation until September 30, 2000.

The Committee has increased resources for other accounts in this

bill to meet emergency needs in the Balkans. Therefore, the Committee is not in a position to provide the President’s full request

for this account due to the imperative to meet funding requirements for higher priority refugee and humanitarian assistance. In

addition, the Committee is concerned that part of the request could

be used to provide for long-term reconstruction programs in the

Balkans. The Committee believes that the events in the region are

changing so rapidly that it would be premature to consider additional long-term development programs at this time. Further, the

Committee believes that European nations bear greater responsibility for the integration of these front line states into Europe’s

economy and for reconstruction programs in the region.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

MIGRATION AND REFUGEE ASSISTANCE

The Committee is recommending $195,000,000 for an additional

amount for the Migration and Refugee Assistance account. The

President requested $125,000,000. The Committee recommendation

allows for not more than $500,000 from these supplemental funds

for administrative expenses, and provides for the availability of

funds through September 30, 2000.

The Committee has been informed that funding for humanitarian

assistance for refugees would face a significant shortfall if refugee

levels continue to increase through the end of the fiscal year and

into fiscal year 2000. As a result, the Committee has increased

funding in this account and in the Disaster assistance account in

order to ensure that adequate funds are available for refugee assistance—particularly if it becomes necessary to support large refugee populations through the winter. In order to fund these high

priority activities, the Committee recommendation includes a re-
16

duction of $95,000,000 from the request for assistance for Eastern

Europe.

The massive outflow of refugees from Kosovo into surrounding

territories has placed tremendous burdens on the surrounding governments. While these refugees have been generally well treated by

host governments, the Committee is concerned about reports of the

mistreatment of some Kosovar refugees. The continued and increased international funding for the care of these refugees will alleviate the burdens on host governments. The Committee urges

that all governments respect the human rights of all refugees in

this difficult situation.

The Committee is deeply troubled by the use of a rape as a tool

of war. There are widespread and credible reports that Serbian

forces are targeting ethnic Albanian women for rape and using

rape as a means of emptying communities. Many of the ethnic Albanian refugees have been the victims of rape, brutalization and

other traumatic events. While the Committee understands that

there are many pressing and immediate needs for shelter and food,

it believes that psychological services for traumatized refugees,

particularly women who have been raped, should not be neglected.

The Committee urges the Administration to designate funds for

those psychological services. In addition, the Committee believes

the Administration needs to demonstrate leadership to ensure that

rape is prosecuted as a war crime.

UNITED STATES EMERGENCY REFUGEE AND MIGRATION ASSISTANCE

FUND

The Committee is recommending $95,000,000 for an additional

amount for the United States Emergency Refugee and Migration

Assistance Fund, as requested by the President. These funds would

be available until expended.

GENERAL PROVISION—THIS CHAPTER

The Committee is recommending bill language requested by the

President to provide that the value of commodities and services authorized by the President through March 31, 1999, drawn down

pursuant to section 552(c)(2) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961

to support international relief efforts relating to the Kosovo conflict

shall not be counted against the ceiling limitation of that section.

This provision also provides that such assistance shall be made

available notwithstanding any other provision of law.

CHAPTER 4

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT

PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $240,000,000, contingent on the

Presidential declaration of an emergency, for the continued support

of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program.
17

OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS TRANSFER FUND

Language has been included under the ‘‘Overseas Contingency

Operations Transfer Fund’’ which allows the transfer of funds to

military construction. The Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) is directed to notify the Subcommittee on Military Construction

of any such transfers and the individual projects to be provided.

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

The Committee recommends a total of $831,000,000, contingent

on the Presidential declaration of an emergency, for operations in

Europe and Southwest Asia, for the following items:

Location/Account/Installation Project title Cost

Bahrain Island:

Navy:

Southwest Asia Admin Support Unit ..... BEQ (Security Force) ............................................... 24,550,000

Southwest Asia Admin Support Unit ..... BEQ (Transient) ....................................................... 23,770,000

Southwest Asia Admin Support Unit ..... Operations Control Center ....................................... 34,770,000

Subtotal, Bahrain Island ................... .................................................................................. 83,090,000

Diego Garcia:

Navy:

Diego Garcia Naval Support Facility ..... Aircraft Intermediate Maintenance Facility ............ 8,150,000

Subtotal, Diego Garcia ...................... .................................................................................. 8,150,000

................................................................ .................................................................................. ..............................

Germany:

Army:

Ansbach, Barton Barracks ..................... Whole Barracks Complex Renewal .......................... 21,000,000

Bamberg Air Field .................................. Whole Barracks Complex Renewal .......................... 9,300,000

Bamberg Air Field .................................. Whole Barracks Complex Renewal .......................... 8,200,000

Bamberg, Warner Barracks ................... Whole Barracks Complex Renewal .......................... 5,700,000

Baumholder ............................................ Vehicle Maintenance Shop, Direct Support ............ 10,000,000

Baumholder ............................................ Vehicle Maintenance Shop, Organizational ............ 12,600,000

Baumholder ............................................ Vehicle Maintenance Shop, Organization ............... 9,600,000

Baumholder ............................................ Vehicle Maintenance Shop, Organizational Addition.10,400,000

Grafenwoehr ........................................... Multipurpose Range Complex 118 .......................... 25,000,000

Grafenwoehr ........................................... Multipurpose Range Complex 211 .......................... 23,000,000

Hohenfels ............................................... Centralized Vehicle Wash Facility ........................... 7,600,000

Hohenfels ............................................... Objective Instrumentation Building ........................ 8,600,000

Kaiserslautern ........................................ Vehicle Maintenance Shop, Organizational ............ 9,000,000

Mannhein ............................................... Organizational Vehicle Parking ............................... 7,600,000

Mannhein ............................................... Vehicle Maintenance Shop, Organizational ............ 9,300,000

Mannheim .............................................. Vehicle Maintenance Shop, Organizational ............ 11,400,000

Mannheim, Coleman Barracks ............... Whole Barracks Complex Renewal .......................... 4,500,000

Schweinfurt ............................................ Centralized Vehicle Wash Facility ........................... 1,600,000

Schweinfurt ............................................ Close Combat Tactical Trainer ............................... 11,200,000

Schweinfurt ............................................ Vehicle Maintenance Shop, Direct Support ............ 12,000,000

Schweinfurt ............................................ Vehicle Maintenance Shop, Organizational ............ 20,000,000

Stuttgart ................................................. Deployment Storage Buildings ................................ 4,100,000

Stuttgart ................................................. Indoor Firing Range ................................................ 3,000,000

Stuttgart ................................................. USEUCOM Communications Command Center ....... 10,800,000

Vilseck .................................................... Non-Toe Maintenance Facility ................................. 5,300,000

Air Force:

Ramstein Air Base ................................. Aircraft Parts Storage Facility ................................ 3,800,000

Ramstein Air Base ................................. CNS 3 Fire Stations ................................................ 12,000,000

Ramstein Air Base ................................. Combat Communications Squadron Complex ......... 12,000,000

Ramstein Air Base ................................. Contingency Response Group Complex ................... 5,000,000

Ramstein Air Base ................................. C–130 Squadron Operations/AMU, 37 AS .............. 8,800,000
18

Location/Account/Installation Project title Cost

Ramstein Air Base ................................. Reachback Operations Support Center ................... 17,400,000

Ramstein Air Base ................................. Squadron Operations/AMU, 75 AS .......................... 8,800,000

Ramstein Air Base ................................. Vehicle Maintenance Facility .................................. 6,500,000

Spangdahlem Air Base .......................... ACS Maintenance and Support Facilities ............... 14,900,000

Spangdahlem Air Base .......................... CE Pavement/Equipment Complex .......................... 9,800,000

Spangdahlem Air Base .......................... Mobility Processing Center ...................................... 5,300,000

Spangdahlem Air Base .......................... Refueler Maintenance Facility ................................. 2,600,000

Spangdahlem Air Base .......................... Squad Operations/AMU, 22/23 Flight Squadron ..... 18,000,000

Subtotal, Germany ............................. .................................................................................. 385,700,000

Greece:

Navy:

Souda Bay, Crete Naval Support Activity.Operational Support Facilities ................................ 6,380,000

Subtotal, Greece ................................ .................................................................................. 6,380,000

Italy:

Navy:

Naples Naval Support Activity ............... Operational Support Facilities ................................ 26,750,000

Sigonella Naval Air Station ................... Base Level Communication Facility ........................ 3,100,000

Sigonella Naval Air Station ................... Base Operations Support ........................................ 35,000,000

Air Force:

Aviano Air Base ..................................... Air Control Squadron Warehouse ............................ 3,900,000

Aviano Air Base ..................................... Base Operations ...................................................... 2.900,000

Aviano Air Base ..................................... CNS Contingency Dorm (600 PNs) .......................... 14,000,000

Aviano Air Base ..................................... Dormitory (120 PNs) ................................................ 8,150,000

Aviano Air Base ..................................... Indoor Firing Range ................................................ 2,900,000

Aviano Air Base ..................................... Radar Approach Control Facility ............................. 3,700,000

Aviano Air Base ..................................... Southside Ramp ...................................................... 7,000,000

Aviano Air Base ..................................... Upgrade Airfield Lighting ........................................ 4,000,000

Subtotal, Italy .................................... .................................................................................. 111,400,000

Portugal:

Air Force:

Lajes Field, Azores ................................. Apron Security Lighting ........................................... 1,800,000

Lajes Field, Azores ................................. Transient Dormitory ................................................. 9,000,000

Defense-Wide:

Lajes Field, Azores DESC ....................... Replace Hydrant Fuel System ................................. 13,000,000

Subtotal, Portugal ............................. .................................................................................. 23,800,000

Spain:

Defense-Wide:

Moron DESC ........................................... Replace Hydrant Fuel System ................................. 15,200,000

Subtotal, Spain .................................. .................................................................................. 15,200,000

Turkey:

Air Force:

Incirlik Air Base ..................................... Consolidated Communications Facility ................... 2,100,000

Incirlik Air Base ..................................... Force Protection: Perimeter Improvements ............. 3,000,000

Incirlik Air Base ..................................... Indoor Firing Range ................................................ 2,200,000

Subtotal, Turkey ................................. .................................................................................. 7,300,000

United Kingdom:

Air Force:

RAF Fairford ........................................... CNS Contingency Dorm (576 PNs) .......................... 13,000,000

RAF Feltwell ........................................... Add/Alter CATM Facility ........................................... 3,100,000

RAF Lakenheath ..................................... Add/Alter Main Fire Station/CNS Crash Station ..... 5,000,000

RAF Lakenheath ..................................... Communications Facility ......................................... 5,200,000

RAF Lakenheath ..................................... Consolidated Support Complex ............................... 12,400,000

RAF Lakenheath ..................................... Mobility Processing and Cargo Facility .................. 1,500,000
19

Location/Account/Installation Project title Cost

RAF Lakenheath ..................................... Squad Operations/AMU, 492 & 494 Flight Squadron.18,633,000

RAF Lakenheath ..................................... Supply Material Control .......................................... 4,900,000

RAF Mildenhall ....................................... Communications Facility ......................................... 4,000,000

RAF Mildenhall ....................................... CNS Avionics/Maintenance Complex, Phase II ....... 12,200,000

RAF Mildenhall ....................................... Corrosion Control and Maintenance Complex ......... 10,200,000

RAF Mildenhall ....................................... Control Tower/Base Ops Complex/Crash Rescue .... 9,500,000

RAF Mildenhall ....................................... Hazardous Material Storage Facility ....................... 1,000,000

RAF Mildenhall ....................................... Mobility Processing Center ...................................... 4,500,000

RAF Mildenhall ....................................... Operations Facility .................................................. 4,100,000

Defense-Wide:

RAF Mildenhall ....................................... Replace Hydrant Fuel System ................................. 5,300,000

Subtotal, United Kingdom ................. .................................................................................. 114,533,000

Worldwide Unspecified:

Army:

Unspecified Worldwide Locations .......... Planning & Design .................................................. 25,000,000

Unspecified Worldwide Locations .......... Unspecified Minor Construction .............................. 10,000,000

Navy:

Unspecified Worldwide Locations .......... Planning & Design .................................................. 3,800,000

Air Force:

Unspecified Worldwide Locations .......... Planning & Design .................................................. 29,647,000

Unspecified Worldwide Locations .......... Unspecified Minor Construction .............................. 5,000,000

Defense-Wide:

Unspecified Worldwide Locations .......... Planning & Design .................................................. 2,000,000

Subtotal, Worldwide Unspecified ...... .................................................................................. 75,447,000

Grand total .................................... .................................................................................. 831,000,000

COMPLIANCE WITH CLAUSE 3 OF RULE XIII (RAMSEYER RULE)

In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House

of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted

is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):

The accompanying bill would amend the Department of Defense

Appropriations Act, 1999, Public Law 105–262, as follows:

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

* * * * * * *

TITLE VIII

GENERAL PROVISIONS

* * * * * * *

(TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

SEC. 8005. Upon determination by the Secretary of Defense that

such action is necessary in the national interest, he may, with the

approval of the Office of Management and Budget, transfer not to

exceed ø$1,650,000,000¿ $2,450,000,000 of working capital funds of

the Department of Defense or funds made available in this Act to

the Department of Defense for military functions (except military

construction) between such appropriations or funds or any subdivision thereof, to be merged with and to be available for the same
20

purposes, and for the same time period, as the appropriation or

fund to which transferred: Provided, That such authority to transfer may not be used unless for higher priority items, based on unforeseen military requirements, than those for which originally appropriated and in no case where the item for which funds are requested has been denied by Congress: Provided further, That the

Secretary of Defense shall notify the Congress promptly of all

transfers made pursuant to this authority or any other authority

in this Act: Provided further, That no part of the funds in this Act

shall be available to prepare or present a request to the Committees on Appropriations for reprogramming of funds, unless for higher priority items, based on unforeseen military requirements, than

those for which originally appropriated and in no case where the

item for which reprogramming is requested has been denied by the

Congress.

CHANGES IN THE APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of

Representatives, the following statements are submitted describing

the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill which directly or

indirectly change the application of existing law.

Language is included in various locations throughout the bill

that declares appropriations as emergency requirements pursuant

to the Congressional Budget Act.

Language is included under the Department of State, Security

and Maintenance of U.S. Missions, which makes portions of the appropriations subject to enactment upon receipt of an official budget

request by the President to the Congress.

Language has been included under chapter 2, Department of Defense—Military, to include a number of provisions which makes

portions of the appropriations subject to enactment upon receipt of

an official budget request by the President of the Congress.

Language has been included (Section 201) under chapter 2, Department of Defense—Military, which increases the Secretary of

Defense’s transfer authority for funds provided in the Department

of Defense Appropriations Act, 1999.

Language has been included (Section 202) under chapter 2, Department of Defense—Military, which increases the funds available

for contribution to the common funded budgets of NATO.

Language has been included (Section 203) under chapter 2, Department of Defense—Military, concerning funds for intelligence-related programs.

Language has been included (Section 204) under chapter 2, Department of Defense—Military, which extends the pilot program

authority for the Joint Direct Attack Munition program.

Language has been included (Section 205) under chapter 2, Department of Defense—Military, which addresses burdensharing for

operations in Kosovo.

Language has been included (Section 206) under chapter 2, Department of Defense—Military, which establishes reporting requirements regarding operations in Kosovo and their costs.

Language has been included (Section 207) under chapter 2, Department of Defense—Military, which provides additional funding

for spare parts for military equipment.
21

Language has been included (Section 208) under chapter 2, Department of Defense—Military, which provides additional funding

for depot maintenance of military equipment.

Language has been included (Section 209) under chapter 2, Department of Defense—Military, which provides additional funding

for military personnel recruiting initiatives.

Language has been included (Section 210) under chapter 2, Department of Defense—Military, which provides additional funding

for military readiness training and operations tempo.

Language has been included (Section 211) under chapter 2, Department of Defense—Military, which provides additional funding

for military base operations.

Language has been included (Section 212) under chapter 2, Department of Defense—Military, which provides funding for adjustments to military pay and retirement programs.

Under ‘‘International Disaster Assistance’’, funds are appropriated to remain available until expended, and are only available

to the extent an official budget request for a specific dollar amount,

that includes designation of the entire amount of the request as an

emergency requirement, is transmitted by the President to the

Congress.

Under ‘‘Economic Support Fund’’, funds are appropriated to remain available until September 30, 2000, for assistance for Albania, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, and

Romania; are made available notwithstanding any other provision

of law except section 533 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1999; and are available pursuant to the regular notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations (except that the requirement for a 15 day

notification is reduced to 5 days).

Under ‘‘Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States’’,

funds are appropriated to remain available until September 30,

2000, and up to $1,000,000 of such funds may be used for administrative costs.

Under ‘‘Migration and Refugee Assistance’’, funds are appropriated to remain available until September 30, 2000, and not more

than $500,000 are for administrative costs; and are only available

to the extent an official budget request for a specific dollar amount,

that includes designation of the entire amount of the request as an

emergency requirement, is transmitted by the President to the

Congress.

Under ‘‘United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund’’, funds are appropriated subject to the terms and conditions that apply to the funds appropriated under the same head in

the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs

Appropriations Act, 1999.

A general provision is included that exempts the value of commodities and services authorized by the President through March

31, 1999, to be drawn down under the authority of section 552(c)(2)

of the Foreign Assistance Act to support international relief efforts

relating to the Kosovo conflict from the ceiling limitation of that

section, and provides that such assistance may be made available

notwithstanding any other provision of law.
22

Language has been included (Section 401) under chapter 4,

which provides funds for Military Construction, Army; Military

Construction, Navy; Military Construction, Air Force; and Military

Construction, Defense-Wide.

Launguage is included in title V that addresses the availability

of funds in the Act.

Language is included in title V that states the Sense of Congress

regarding pay parity between civilian and military employees.

APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

Pursuant to clause 3(f) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of

Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations in the

accompanying bill which are not authorized by law:

Department of State

Diplomatic and Consular Programs

Security and Maintenance of U.S. Missions

Emergencies in the Diplomatic and Consular Service

Department of Defense

Military Personnel, Army

Military Personnel, Navy

Military Personnel, Marine Corps

Military Personnel, Air Force

Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund

Weapons Procurement, Navy

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force

Missile Procurement, Air Force

Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force

Operational Rapid Response Transfer Fund

Appropriations made in Chapter 2, Sections 207 through 212

International Disaster Assistance

Economic Support Fund

Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Baltic States

Migration and Refugee Assistance

United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund

Department of Defense

Military Construction, Army

Military Construction, Navy

Military Construction, Air Force

Military Construction, Defense-wide

North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program

TRANSFERS

Pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule X of the Rules of the House of

Representatives, the following table is submitted describing the

transfers of unexpended balances in the accompanying bill:
23

TRANSFERS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL

Language is included in chapter 2 that increases the limitation

of funds included in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act,

1999, that can be transferred among accounts.

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY

Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives states that:

Each report of a committee on a bill or joint resolution of a

public character, shall include a statement citing the specific

powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution to enact

the law proposed by the bill or joint resolution.

The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to report

this legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I of the Constitution of the United States of America which states:

No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of Appropriations made by law***

Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to this

specific power granted by the Constitution.

COMPARISON WITH THE BUDGET RESOLUTION

Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as amended, requires that the report accompanying a bill providing new budget

authority contain a statement detailing how that authority compares with the reports submitted under section 302 of the Act for

the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget for

the fiscal year. All budget authority provided in the accompanying

bill is designated emergency funding requirements under the procedures set forth in section 251(b)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget and

Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended. The Committee will receive an increased allocation to accommodate this budget

authority and resulting outlays after reporting this bill.

FIVE-YEAR OUTLAY PROJECTIONS

In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional

Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–

344), as amended, the following table contains five-year projections

associated with the budget authority provided in the accompanying

bill:

Millions

Budget Authority ............................................................................................. $12,947

Outlays:

1999 ........................................................................................................... 2,954

2000 ........................................................................................................... 7,072

2001 ........................................................................................................... 1,779

2002 ........................................................................................................... 648

2003 and beyond ....................................................................................... 253

ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional

Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–
24

344), as amended, the financial assistance to State and local governments is as follows:

Millions

Budget Authority ............................................................................................. 0

Fiscal year 1999 outlays resulting therefrom ............................................... 0

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(a)(1)(b) of rule XIII of the

House of Representatives, the results of each rollcall vote on an

amendment or on the motion to report, together with the names of

those voting for and those voting against, are printed below:

ROLLCALL NUMBER: 1

Date: April 29, 1999.

Measure: Kosovo and Southwest Asia Emergency Supplemental

Appropriations Bill, FY 1999.

Motion by: Mr. Obey.

Description of motion: To reduce amounts in the bill for spare

parts, depot maintenance, recruiting, training, base operations, and

military construction; and to insert authorization for military pay

and retirement reform, funding for agricultural emergencies, funding for Hurricanes Mitch and Georges recovery, funding for several

non-emergency matters, several rescissions and offsets, technical

corrections to P.L. 105–277, and funding for emergency food assistance.

Results: Rejected, 20 Yeas to 35 Nays.

Members Voting Yea Members Voting Nay

Mr. Boyd Mr. Bonilla

Mr. Cramer Mr. Callahan

Ms. DeLauro Mr. Cunningham

Mr. Dixon Mr. DeLay

Mr. Edwards Mr. Dickey

Mr. Hinchey Mr. Dicks

Mr. Hoyer Mrs. Emerson

Mr. Jackson Mr. Forbes

Ms. Kaptur Mr. Frelinghuysen

Ms. Kilpatrick Ms. Granger

Mrs. Meek Mr. Hobson

Mr. Obey Mr. Istook

Mr. Olver Mr. Kingston

Mr. Pastor Mr. Knollenberg

Ms. Pelosi Mr. Kolbe

Mr. Price Mr. Latham

Ms. Roybal-Allard Mr. Lewis

Mr. Sabo Mr. Miller

Mr. Serrano Mr. Mollohan

Mr. Visclosky Mr. Moran

Mr. Murtha

Mr. Nethercutt

Mr. Packard

Mr. Peterson

Mr. Porter

Mr. Regula
25

Mr. Rogers

Mr. Skeen

Mr. Sununu

Mr. Tiahrt

Mr. Walsh

Mr. Wamp

Mr. Wicker

Mr. Wolf

Mr. Young
26
27
28
29
30
(31)

DISSENTING VIEWS

There are several sets of issues raised by the President’s request

for emergency spending to deal with the current crisis in Kosovo.

One set deals with current U.S. policies toward Kosovo and the

adequacy of the funds requested to implement those policies. The

other deals with the integrity of the congressional budget process

and the use of the ‘‘emergency spending’’ designation to exempt certain spending items from the ceilings established within that process. This Committee, at the firm direction of the House Leadership,

appears to have placed itself on both sides of both sets of issues.

While many members of the Committee voted against resolutions

supporting current military efforts in Yugoslavia, most of those

same members are insisting on an enormous increase in the President’s request for funding those efforts. At the same time, those

members appear to have reversed themselves on the use of the

emergency spending powers within the Budget Act.

Only a month ago they were arguing (at the insistence of their

leadership) that emergency spending authority should be used so

sparingly that the Congress could not address the current farm crisis or the hurricane disaster which struck Central America without

rewriting the budget for the current fiscal year. As a result, no action on either of those crises has yet been taken.

Now the Committee Majority is arguing that the emergency designation procedure should be used to add billions to the President’s

request for Kosovo—even though most of that spending is unrelated to Kosovo and falls entirely outside the Budget Act requirements for emergency spending.

The President’s request

It is difficult to understand the magnitude of the inconsistency

displayed by the Committee on either of these issues without first

reviewing the President’s request for Kosovo. That request—particularly with respect to military operations—is in a word, robust.

It contains the funds needed to meet all costs and replace all items

used thus far in the Kosovo conflict. It contains sufficient funds to

fill Yugoslavian airspace with allied aircraft to virtual capacity between now and the end of the current fiscal year on September

30th and to drop all of the munitions that those aircraft are capable of carrying for each of the remaining 148 days during that period. That includes funds for all of the 500 planes which have been

in use since the beginning of the air conflict, the 82 additional

planes that were requested last month, and the 300 new planes

now being sent into the region.

It contains sufficient funds to build and arm an Apache helicopter base near the Albanian border. There are funds to provide

for as many as 50 Apache helicopters along with the tanks, infantry forces and ATACMS missiles to protect the base and support
32

operations. It fully funds the callup of 33,000 reservists. On top of

every identified need, there is also an $850 million reserve fund to

pay for additional parts, munitions or other possible contingencies

if needed. In short, the air war against Yugoslavia will not be constrained by lack of funding under the President’s $6 billion request.

Additional funding will not intensify the air war. General Wesley

Clark, the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, may be prevented

from conducting the most aggressive possible air campaign because

of uncooperative weather, lack of political consensus among the allies or simply the lack of airspace over the targets, but he will not

lack financial resources.

In addition to these military items, the President has requested $591 million for Department of State refugee relief, economic support, and embassy security needs.

The Committee response

The role of the Appropriations Committee has traditionally been

to protect the public from the potentially excessive demands for

spending by the Executive Branch. In most years, the Committee

has not only cast a skeptical eye on administration spending proposals but has recommended spending levels well below the

amounts requested. That tradition stands in sharp contrast to the

contents of the legislation accompanying this report. For defense, the Committee has added $6.9 billion to the $5.5 billion that was requested for the Department of Defense for a total

of $12.4 billion—a 125% increase above requested levels. It has

provided $460 million for additional munitions, $400 million for unanticipated and unidentified procurements, $1 billion for a wide variety of military construction projects around the world, $1.3 billion

for additional spare parts, $900 million for additional maintenance

and about $800 million for several smaller items. It has also included $1.84 billion for the President’s proposed increase in military pay and retirement benefits scheduled to take place next year;

but it neglected to include the authorizing language which would

actually deliver those benefits to the troops.

The Majority members of the Committee insist that these funds

are necessary because of critical worldwide shortages in U.S. military munitions, spare parts and maintenance funds. If such shortages do exist it is appropriate to ask why. And it is also appropriate to ask who is responsible.

JDAM cutback

Recently, discussion of military shortages has focused on the potential shortage of Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM). There is

a possibility that the Pentagon may exhaust existing stocks of

these all weather, satellite guided precision bombs before new shipments arrive later this month. If we have poor weather in the Balkans in the coming weeks, that shortage could impede the air war.

The reason for the shortage however, is not a lack of defense

spending but a lack of spending on the right items within the defense budget. While the Congress succeeded in spending well above

the President’s request for defense last year, they actually cut his

request for JDAM procurement by 13%—from $53.2 million to

$46.2 million. Those funds were redirected to other large-scale pro-
33

curement items that the Pentagon had not requested but which

were produced in the states and districts of powerful Senators and

Representatives.

Over the last four fiscal years (FY1996 through 1999), Congress has added about $27 billion, or 2.5%, to military spending above

the levels requested by the President. While many of the advocates

talk about the desperate shortages in readiness when they argue

for these sums, the nature of the emergency seems to change radically when it comes time to spend the money. According to CBO

data only about $3.6 billion or 14% of these add-ons went for spare

parts, training, equipment maintenance and other areas of defense

readiness. Senator John McCain pointed out in Defense Daily last

year:

* * * pork barrel spending is at an all time high * * *

The lack of appreciation of the problems the men and

women in the military face—and now the belief that somehow the defense budget is the way to fund home-town pork

projects and pump up the National Guard at the expense

of the regular forces—I think is really very serious.

Military construction add-ons

Also contained in this package is more than $1 billion for additional military construction spending. Only a tiny fraction of these

funds have any arguable relevance to the current military activity

in Yugoslavia. The 77 projects which are funded are scattered in

locations ranging from Southwest Asia to Northern Europe. Few of

the projects can be completed within a 12- or even 24-month timeframe and it is highly questionable whether they represent the

most pressing military construction needs.

Nearly half, or 37, of these projects representing $335 million in

total spending are not even contained on the Pentagon 5-year plan

for upgrading physical infrastructure. These projects at U.S. bases

in Germany are being pushed ahead of construction needs that the

Pentagon’s own methodical internal review process says are more

important. This Committee does not have the expertise to make

such judgments. They require massive amounts of information and

planning. If the Committee believes that Pentagon prioritization of

infrastructure needs is badly out of whack, it should demand that

the Pentagon fix it. If it does not, it should largely abide by those

judgments in allocating scarce resources.

Responsible use of emergency spending authority

In 1990, the Congress adopted various reforms to the Budget Act.

In order to permit the inclusion of rigid caps on discretionary

spending, the Bush administration proposed that the flexibility

necessary to respond to unforeseen emergencies be preserved by

providing emergency spending authority. According to the President’s OMB Director at the time, Richard Darman, that authority

should be used only when the need for funds is ‘‘urgent’’, ‘‘unanticipated’’, and ‘‘essential.’’

The current majority caucus in the House has had a great deal

of difficulty over the years in coming to terms with this provision

of the Budget Act. In 1993, when vast areas of the Mississippi and

Missouri River Valleys were under water and billions in crops, live-
34

stock, businesses and homes had been lost, a majority of House Republicans opposed the use of the emergency spending authority to

provide relief to the flood victims. In the end they backed away

from the insistence of some of their members that the aid be provided with a 16% across the board cut rather than through the use

of the emergency clause.

In 1996 they delayed action for months on a second flood that

had struck communities in the Upper Midwest because of disagreements over this same provision allowing for emergency appropriations. They relented only after the public became outraged at congressional inaction.

But in the fall of 1998, House Republicans reversed field entirely. In response to an administration request for a little more than $7

billion in emergency funding to deal with the bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, cope with the year 2000 computer bug, sustain

U.S. military operations in Bosnia and relief for the victims of East

Coast hurricane damage, Congressional Republicans demanded

their own list of ‘‘emergency spending’’ items. By the time the process was over a billion dollars had been added for anti-missile defense, a billion and a half dollars for various intelligence programs

and $0.7 billion for anti-drug activities. The entire package came

to $21.3 billion and none of it was offset.

The field was reversed again this spring when the administration asked for $963 million to deal with problems created by Hurricanes

Mitch and Georges and the devastation that they brought to Central America and the Caribbean. The original intention of the committee to proceed without offsets to this spending was reversed by

a last minute leadership directive that they must be included. The

offsets that were identified were unacceptable to not only House

Democrats and the Administration but to Senate Republicans as

well. Although the legislation passed the House by a very narrow

margin, a conference committee to consider the differences between

House and Senate versions has not met in the six weeks since it

cleared both chambers.

Now the House Republican Leadership has reversed course

again. Rather than insisting on spending cuts to finance military

operations in Yugoslavia they are insisting on doubling the amount

of the surplus that will be used for that purpose. Furthermore, they

are insisting that items that in no way qualify under the budget

act definition of ‘‘emergency’’ be included. Of the $3 billion in additional Operations and Maintenance spending included in their

package, $1.8 billion of that will not even be spent in the current

year and is advance funding those activities for fiscal 2000. In the

military construction category, of the more than $1 billion contained in the measure probably no more than $20 million is for

projects that are related to Kosovo and could be built in a time

frame that would conceivably make them useful to the current effort.

While one might argue that nearly all of this $6.9 billion add on

is nonemergency, there is clearly $2.9 billion that falls completely

outside the definition. Whatever arguments one might make for appropriating a portion of next year’s regular operations and maintenance funds in this fiscal year, that action cannot be justified as

an ‘‘unanticipated’’ expense. The issue is even greater with respect
35

to military construction projects that will take years to complete.

Furthermore, if the committee really feels that there is an ‘‘urgent’’

need for more military construction they should at least pick

projects that are on the Pentagon five-year plan and for which architectural and site development plans are available.

The majority’s alternating refusal to use emergency authority to

address real emergencies when they occur and insistence on appropriating large sums under the emergency authority for items that

clearly fail to meet the established criteria for emergency spending

undercuts the credibility of the Congress on budget matters. It is

also eating up significant portions of the surplus for questionable

spending items. But most importantly, it is hamstringing our ability to act to protect the national interest in a consistent and timely

manner—a failing that could be even more expensive in the long

run.

DAVID OBEY.

Æ