H. R. 3230—202
SEC. 912. MISSION OF THE WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS AGENCY.
(a) TELECOMMUNICATIONS SUPPORT.—The Secretary of Defense
shall ensure that the activities of the White House Communications
Agency in providing support services on a nonreimbursable basis
for the President from funds appropriated for the Department of
Defense for any fiscal year are limited to the provision of tele-
communications support to the President and Vice President and
to related elements (as defined in regulations of that agency and
specified by the President with respect to particular individuals
within those related elements).
(b) OTHER SUPPORT.—Support services other than telecommuni-
cations support services described in subsection (a) may be provided
by the Department of Defense for the President through the White
House Communications Agency on a reimbursable basis.
(c) WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS AGENCY.—For purposes of
this section, the term ‘‘White House Communications Agency’’
means the element of the Department of Defense within the Defense
Communications Agency that is known on the date of the enactment
of this Act as the White House Communications Agency and
includes any successor agency.
(d) REPORT ON ISSUES RAISED BY DOD INSPECTOR GENERAL
REVIEW OF WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS AGENCY.—Not later
than October 1, 1996, or 30 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act, whichever is later, the Secretary of Defense shall submit
to Congress a report setting forth the actions taken by the Secretary
to address the issues raised by the report of the Department of
Defense Inspector General reviewing the mission of the White
House Communications Agency.
(e) QUARTERLY REPORTS DURING FISCAL YEAR 1997.—Not later
than 30 days after the end of each quarter of fiscal year 1997,
the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report describ-
ing the support services other than telecommunications support
services described in subsection (a) that were provided during the
preceding quarter by the Department of Defense for the President
through the White House Communications Agency.
(f) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section takes effect on October 1,
1997, and applies to funds appropriated for the Department of
Defense for any fiscal year after fiscal year 1997.
Subtitle B—Force Structure Review
SEC. 921. SHORT TITLE.
This subtitle may be cited as the ‘‘Military Force Structure
Review Act of 1996’’.
SEC. 922. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the
United States has conducted two substantial assessments of
the force structure of the Armed Forces necessary to meet
United States defense requirements.
(2) The assessment by the Bush Administration (known
as the ‘‘Base Force’’ assessment) and the assessment by the
Clinton Administration (known as the ‘‘Bottom-Up Review’’)
were intended to reassess the force structure of the Armed
H. R. 3230—203
Forces in light of the changing realities of the post-Cold War
world.
(3) Both assessments served an important purpose in focus-
ing attention on the need to reevaluate the military posture
of the United States, but the pace of global change necessitates
a new, comprehensive assessment of the defense strategy of
the United States and the force structure of the Armed Forces
required to meet the threats to the United States in the twenty-
first century.
(4) The Bottom-Up Review has been criticized on several
points, including—
(A) the assumptions underlying the strategy of plan-
ning to fight and win two nearly simultaneous major
regional conflicts;
(B) the force levels recommended to carry out that
strategy; and
(C) the funding proposed for such recommended force
levels.
(5) In response to the recommendations of the Commission
on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces, the Secretary
of Defense endorsed the concept of conducting a quadrennial
review of the defense program at the beginning of each newly
elected Presidential administration, and the Department
intends to complete the first such review in 1997.
(6) The review is to involve a comprehensive examination
of defense strategy, the force structure of the active, guard,
and reserve components, force modernization plans, infrastruc-
ture, and other elements of the defense program and policies
in order to determine and express the defense strategy of the
United States and to establish a revised defense program
through the year 2005.
(7) In order to ensure that the force structure of the Armed
Forces is adequate to meet the challenges to the national secu-
rity interests of the United States in the twenty-first century,
to assist the Secretary of Defense in conducting the review
referred to in paragraph (5), and to assess the appropriate
force structure of the Armed Forces through the year 2010
and beyond (if practicable), it is important to provide for the
conduct of an independent, nonpartisan review of the force
structure that is more comprehensive than prior assessments
of the force structure, extends beyond the quadrennial defense
review, and explores innovative and forward-thinking ways of
meeting such challenges.
SEC. 923. QUADRENNIAL DEFENSE REVIEW.
(a) REQUIREMENT IN 1997.—The Secretary of Defense, in con-
sultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall
complete in 1997 a review of the defense program of the United
States intended to satisfy the requirements for a Quadrennial
Defense Review as identified in the recommendations of the
Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces. The review
shall include a comprehensive examination of the defense strategy,
force structure, force modernization plans, infrastructure, budget
plan, and other elements of the defense program and policies with
a view toward determining and expressing the defense strategy
of the United States and establishing a revised defense program
through the year 2005.
H. R. 3230—204
(b) INVOLVEMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENSE PANEL.—(1) The Sec-
retary shall apprise the National Defense Panel established under
section 924, on an ongoing basis, of the work undertaken in the
conduct of the review.
(2) Not later than March 14, 1997, the Chairman of the National
Defense Panel shall submit to the Secretary the Panel’s assessment
of work undertaken in the conduct of the review as of that date
and shall include in the assessment the recommendations of the
Panel for improvements to the review, including recommendations
for additional matters to be covered in the review.
(c) ASSESSMENTS OF REVIEW.—Upon completion of the review,
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Chairman of
the National Defense Panel, on behalf of the Panel, shall each
prepare and submit to the Secretary such Chairman’s assessment
of the review in time for the inclusion of the assessment in its
entirety in the report under subsection (d).
(d) REPORT.—Not later than May 15, 1997, the Secretary shall
submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and
the Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives
a comprehensive report on the review. The report shall include
the following:
(1) The results of the review, including a comprehensive
discussion of the defense strategy of the United States and
the force structure best suited to implement that strategy.
(2) The threats examined for purposes of the review and
the scenarios developed in the examination of such threats.
(3) The assumptions used in the review, including assump-
tions relating to the cooperation of allies and mission-sharing,
levels of acceptable risk, warning times, and intensity and
duration of conflict.
(4) The effect on the force structure of preparations for
and participation in peace operations and military operations
other than war.
(5) The effect on the force structure of the utilization by
the Armed Forces of technologies anticipated to be available
by the year 2005, including precision guided munitions, stealth,
night vision, digitization, and communications, and the changes
in doctrine and operational concepts that would result from
the utilization of such technologies.
(6) The manpower and sustainment policies required under
the defense strategy to support engagement in conflicts lasting
more than 120 days.
(7) The anticipated roles and missions of the reserve compo-
nents in the defense strategy and the strength, capabilities,
and equipment necessary to assure that the reserve components
can capably discharge those roles and missions.
(8) The appropriate ratio of combat forces to support forces
(commonly referred to as the ‘‘tooth-to-tail’’ ratio) under the
defense strategy, including, in particular, the appropriate num-
ber and size of headquarter units and Defense Agencies for
that purpose.
(9) The air-lift and sea-lift capabilities required to support
the defense strategy.
(10) The forward presence, pre-positioning, and other
anticipatory deployments necessary under the defense strategy
for conflict deterrence and adequate military response to antici-
pated conflicts.
H. R. 3230—205
(11) The extent to which resources must be shifted among
two or more theaters under the defense strategy in the event
of conflict in such theaters.
(12) The advisability of revisions to the Unified Command
Plan as a result of the defense strategy.
(13) Any other matter the Secretary considers appropriate.
SEC. 924. NATIONAL DEFENSE PANEL.
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Not later than December 1, 1996, the
Secretary of Defense shall establish a nonpartisan, independent
panel to be known as the National Defense Panel (in this section
referred to as the ‘‘Panel’’). The Panel shall have the duties set
forth in this section.
(b) MEMBERSHIP.—The Panel shall be composed of a chairman
and eight other individuals appointed by the Secretary, in consulta-
tion with the chairman and ranking member of the Committee
on Armed Services of the Senate and the chairman and ranking
member of the Committee on National Security of the House of
Representatives, from among individuals in the private sector who
are recognized experts in matters relating to the national security
of the United States.
(c) DUTIES.—The Panel shall—
(1) conduct and submit to the Secretary the assessment
of the review under section 923 that is required by subsection
(b)(2) of that section;
(2) conduct and submit to the Secretary the comprehensive
assessment of the review that is required by subsection (c)
of that section upon completion of the review; and
(3) conduct the assessment of alternative force structures
for the Armed Forces required under subsection (d).
(d) ALTERNATIVE FORCE STRUCTURE ASSESSMENT.—(1) The
Panel shall submit to the Secretary an independent assessment
of a variety of possible force structures of the Armed Forces through
the year 2010 and beyond, including the force structure identified
in the report on the review under section 923(d). The purpose
of the assessment is to develop proposals for an ‘‘above the line’’
force structure of the Armed Forces and to provide the Secretary
and Congress recommendations regarding the optimal force struc-
ture to meet anticipated threats to the national security of the
United States through the time covered by the assessment.
(2) In conducting the assessment, the Panel shall examine
a variety of potential threats (including near-term threats and
long-term threats) to the national security interests of the United
States, including the following:
(A) Conventional threats across a spectrum of conflicts.
(B) The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and
the means of delivering such weapons, and the illicit transfer
of technology relating to such weapons.
(C) The vulnerability of United States technology to non-
traditional threats, including information warfare.
(D) Domestic and international terrorism.
(E) The emergence of a major potential adversary having
military capabilities similar to those of the United States.
(F) Any other significant threat, or combination of threats,
identified by the Panel.