†
713
HR 1815 EAS
ment under the 2005 round of defense base closure and re-
alignment.
(c) REPORT.—The Secretary shall submit to Congress,
as part of each annual report under section 2706 of title
10, United States Code, a report describing any progress
made in carrying out this section.
(d) EFFECT OF SECTION.—Nothing in this section af-
fects any obligation of the Secretary with respect to any
other Federal or State requirement relating to—
(1) the environment; or
(2) the transfer of property.
SEC. 2894. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON LIMITATION ON TRANS-
FER 
OF 
UNITS 
FROM 
CLOSED 
AND 
RE-
ALIGNED MILITARY INSTALLATIONS PEND-
ING READINESS OF RECEIVING LOCATIONS.
(a) FINDINGS.—
(1) The Commission on Review of Overseas Mili-
tary Facility Structure of the United States, also
known as the Overseas Basing Commission, trans-
mitted a report to the President and Congress on Au-
gust 15, 2005, that discussed considerations for the re-
turn to the United States of up to 70,000 service per-
sonnel and 100,000 family members and civilian em-
ployees from overseas garrisons.
†
714
HR 1815 EAS
(2) The 2005 Base Closure and Realignment
Commission released a report on September 8, 2005,
to the President that assessed the closure and realign-
ment decisions of the Department of Defense, which
would affect 26,830 military personnel positions.
(3) Both of these reports expressed concerns that
massive movements of units, service personnel, and
families may disrupt unit operational effectiveness
and the quality of life for family members if not car-
ried out with adequate planning and resources.
(4) The 2005 Base Closure and Realignment
Commission, in its decision to close Fort Monmouth,
included a provision requiring the Secretary of De-
fense to provide a report that ‘‘movement of organiza-
tions, functions, or activities from Fort Monmouth to
Aberdeen Proving Ground will be accomplished with-
out disruption of their support to the Global War on
Terrorism or other critical contingency operations,
and that safeguards exist to ensure that necessary re-
dundant capabilities are put in place to mitigate po-
tential degradation of such support, and to ensure
maximum retention of critical workforce’’.
(5) The Overseas Basing Commission found that
‘‘base closings at home along with the return of yet
additional masses of service members and dependents
†
715
HR 1815 EAS
from overseas will have major impact on local com-
munities and the quality of life that can be expected.
Movements abroad from established bases into new lo-
cations, or into locations already in use that will be
put under pressure by increases in populations, will
impact on living conditions.’’
(6) The Overseas Basing Commission notes that
the four most critical elements of quality of life as
they relate to restructuring of the global defense pos-
ture are housing, military child education, healthcare,
and service member and family services.
(7) The Overseas Basing Commission rec-
ommended that ‘‘planners must take a ‘last day-first
day’ approach to the movement of units and families
from one location to another’’, meaning that they
must maintain the support infrastructure for per-
sonnel until the last day they are in place and must
have the support infrastructure in place on the first
day troops arrive in the new location.
(8) The Overseas Basing Commission further rec-
ommended that it is ‘‘imperative that the ‘last day-
first day’ approach should be taken whether the move-
ment is abroad from one locale to another, from over-
seas to the United States, or from one base in CONUS
†
716
HR 1815 EAS
[the continental United States] to yet another as a re-
sult of base realignment and closures’’.
(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress
that the Secretary of Defense should not transfer any unit
from a military installation closed or realigned due to the
relocation of forces under the Integrated Global Presence
and Basing Strategy or the 2005 round of defense base clo-
sure and realignment until adequate facilities and infra-
structure necessary to support the unit’s mission and qual-
ity of life requirements for military families are ready for
use at the receiving location.
DIVISION 
C—DEPARTMENT 
OF
ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY
AUTHORIZATIONS 
AND
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE 
XXXI—DEPARTMENT 
OF
ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY
PROGRAMS
Subtitle A—National Security
Programs Authorizations
SEC. 3101. NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRA-
TION.
(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Funds are
hereby authorized to be appropriated to the Department of
Energy for fiscal year 2006 for the activities of the National
†
717
HR 1815 EAS
Nuclear Security Administration in carrying out programs
necessary for national security in the amount of
$9,357,427,000, to be allocated as follows:
(1) For weapons activities, $6,590,319,000.
(2) For defense nuclear nonproliferation activi-
ties, $1,637,239,000, of which amount $338,565,000
shall be available for project 99–D–143, the Mixed
Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility, Savannah River
Site, Aiken, South Carolina, and $24,000,000 shall be
available for project 99–D–141, the Pit Disassembly
and Conversion Facility, Savannah River Site,
Aiken, South Carolina.
(3) For naval reactors, $786,000,000.
(4) For the Office of the Administrator for Nu-
clear Security, $343,869,000.
(b) AUTHORIZATION
OF NEW PLANT PROJECTS.—
From funds referred to in subsection (a) that are available
for carrying out plant projects, the Secretary of Energy
may carry out new plant projects for weapons activities
as follows:
(1) For readiness in technical base and facilities,
the following new plant projects:
Project 06–D–140, Readiness in Technical
Base and Facilities Program (RTBF), project