657 
(2) the ability of the Department to translate 
such situational awareness into the intelligence, 
planning, deterrence, and capabilities and strategies 
of the Department. 
SEC. 1249. TREATMENT OF THE KURDISTAN DEMOCRATIC 
PARTY 
AND 
THE 
PATRIOTIC 
UNION 
OF 
KURDISTAN UNDER THE IMMIGRATION AND 
NATIONALITY ACT. 
(a) DISCRETION TO EXCLUDE KURDISTAN DEMO-
CRATIC PARTY AND PATRIOTIC UNION OF KURDISTAN 
FROM TREATMENT AS TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS.—The 
Secretary of State, after consultation with the Secretary 
of Homeland Security and the Attorney General, or the 
Secretary of Homeland Security, after consultation with 
the Secretary of State and the Attorney General, may ex-
clude the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Patriotic 
Union of Kurdistan from the definition of terrorist organi-
zation in section 212(a)(3)(B)(vi) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B)(vi)) for the lim-
ited purpose of issuing a temporary visa to a member of 
the Kurdistan Democratic Party or the Patriotic Union 
of Kurdistan. 
(b) PROHIBITION ON JUDICIAL REVIEW.—Notwith-
standing any other provision of law (whether statutory or 
nonstatutory), section 242 of the Immigration and Nation-
658 
ality Act (8 U.S.C. 1252), sections 1361 and 1651 of title 
28, United States Code, section 2241 of such title, and 
any other habeas corpus provision of law, no court shall 
have jurisdiction to review any determination made pursu-
ant to subsection (a). 
SEC. 1250. PROHIBITION ON INTEGRATION OF CERTAIN 
MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEMS. 
(a) PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA.—None of the 
funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or other-
wise made available for fiscal year 2015 for the Depart-
ment of Defense or for United States contributions to the 
North Atlantic Treaty Organization may be obligated or 
expended to integrate missile defense systems of the Peo-
ple’s Republic of China into missile defense systems of the 
United States. 
(b) RUSSIAN FEDERATION.— 
(1) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of 
Congress that missile defense systems of the Rus-
sian Federation should not be integrated into the 
missile defense systems of the United States or the 
North Atlantic Treaty Organization if such integra-
tion undermines the security of the United States or 
NATO. 
(2) PROHIBITION.—None of the funds author-
ized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise
659 
made available for fiscal year 2015 for the Depart-
ment of Defense or for United States contributions 
to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization may be 
obligated or expended to integrate missile defense 
systems of the Russian Federation into missile de-
fense systems of the United States if such integra-
tion undermines the security of the United States or 
NATO. 
(3) WAIVER.—The Secretary of Defense may 
waive the prohibition in paragraph (2) if the Sec-
retary, in consultation with the Secretary of State, 
determines that the Russian Federation— 
(A) has withdrawn military forces and as-
sets from Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula, other 
than at those operating in accordance with its 
1997 agreement on the Status and Conditions 
of the Black Sea Fleet Stationing on the Terri-
tory of Ukraine; and 
(B) has ceased aggressive actions, particu-
larly along Ukraine’s eastern border, that have 
led to a destabilization of the Ukrainian govern-
ment and the safety of its residents.
660 
SEC. 1251. REPORT, DETERMINATION, AND STRATEGY RE-
GARDING THE TERRORISTS RESPONSIBLE 
FOR THE ATTACK AGAINST UNITED STATES 
PERSONNEL 
IN 
BENGHAZI, 
LIBYA, 
AND 
OTHER REGIONAL THREATS. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) On September 11, 2012, United States fa-
cilities in Benghazi, Libya were attacked by an orga-
nized group of armed terrorists, killing United 
States Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen 
Doherty, and Tyrone Woods. 
(2) On September 14, 2012, President Obama 
stated that: ‘‘We will bring to justice those who took 
them from us * * * making it clear that justice will 
come to those who harm Americans.’’. 
(3) On May 1, 2014, White House spokesman 
Jay Carney stated that: ‘‘I can assure you that the 
President’s direction is that those who killed four 
Americans will be pursued by the United States 
until they are brought to justice. And if anyone 
doubts that, they should ask * * * friends and fam-
ily members of Osama bin Laden.’’. 
(4) In testimony before Congress in October 
2013, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 
General Martin Dempsey, asserted that the Presi-
661 
dent lacks the authority to use military force to find 
and kill the Benghazi attackers. 
(5) Since the Benghazi attacks, the President 
has not requested authority from Congress to use 
military force against the Benghazi attackers. 
(6) No terrorist responsible for the Benghazi 
attacks has been brought to justice. 
(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of the 
Congress that— 
(1) the persons and organizations who carried 
out the attacks on United States personnel in 
Benghazi, Libya on September 11 and 12, 2012, 
pose a continuing threat to the national security of 
the United States; 
(2) the failure to hold any individual respon-
sible for these terrorist attacks is a travesty of jus-
tice, and undermines the national security of the 
United States; and 
(3) the uncertainty surrounding the authority 
of the President to use force against the terrorists 
responsible for the attack against United States per-
sonnel in Benghazi, Libya, undermines the President 
as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the 
United States. 
(c) REPORT AND DETERMINATION.—
662 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after 
the date of the enactment of this Act, the President 
shall submit to Congress— 
(A) a report that contains— 
(i) the identity and location of those 
persons and organizations that planned, 
authorized, or committed the attacks 
against the United States facilities in 
Benghazi, Libya that occurred on Sep-
tember 11 and 12, 2012; and 
(ii) a detailed and specific description 
of all actions that have been taken to kill 
or capture any of the persons described in 
clause (i); and 
(B) a determination regarding whether the 
President currently possesses the authority to 
use the Armed Forces of the United States 
against all persons and organizations described 
in subparagraph (A)(i). 
(2) FORM.—The report and determination de-
scribed in this subsection shall be submitted in un-
classified form to the maximum extent possible, and 
may contain a classified annex. 
(d) STRATEGY TO COMBAT REGIONAL TERRORIST 
THREATS.—
663 
(1) TIMING AND CONTENT.—Not later than 90 
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
President shall submit to the appropriate congres-
sional committees a comprehensive strategy to 
counter the growing threat posed by radical Islamist 
terrorist groups in North Africa, West Africa, and 
the Sahel, which shall include, among other things— 
(A) a strategy to bring to justice those per-
sons who planned, authorized, or committed the 
terrorist attacks against the United States fa-
cilities in Benghazi, Libya that occurred on 
September 11 and 12, 2012; 
(B) a description of the radical Islamist 
terrorist groups active in North Africa, West 
Africa, and the Sahel, including an assessment 
of their origins, strategic aims, tactical meth-
ods, funding sources, leadership, and relation-
ships with other terrorist groups or state ac-
tors; 
(C) a description of the key military, diplo-
matic, intelligence, and public diplomacy re-
sources available to address these growing re-
gional terrorist threats; and 
(D) a strategy to maximize the coordina-
tion between, and the effectiveness of, United
664 
States military, diplomatic, intelligence, and 
public diplomacy resources to counter these 
growing regional terrorist threats. 
(2) FORM.—The strategy described in this sub-
section shall be submitted in unclassified form to the 
maximum extent possible, and may contain a classi-
fied annex. 
(3) DEFINITION
OF
APPROPRIATE
CONGRES-
SIONAL COMMITTEES.—In this subsection, the term 
‘‘appropriate congressional committees’’ means— 
(A) the Committee on Armed Services, the 
Committee on Foreign Relations, and the Select 
Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; and 
(B) the Committee on Armed Services, the 
Committee on Foreign Affairs, and the Perma-
nent Select Committee on Intelligence of the 
House of Representatives. 
SEC. 1252. WAR POWERS OF CONGRESS. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) In 1793, George Washington said, ‘‘The 
constitution vests the power of declaring war in Con-
gress; therefore no offensive expedition of impor-
tance can be undertaken until after they shall have 
deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a 
measure.’’.
665 
(2) In a letter to Thomas Jefferson in 1798, 
James Madison wrote: ‘‘The constitution supposes, 
what the History of all Governments demonstrates, 
that the Executive is the branch of power most in-
terested in war, and most prone to it. It has accord-
ingly with studied care vested the question of war to 
the Legislature.’’. 
(3) In 1973, Congress passed the War Powers 
Resolution which states in section 2: ‘‘The constitu-
tional powers of the President as Commander-in- 
Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into 
hostilities, or into situations where imminent involve-
ment in hostilities is clearly indicated by the cir-
cumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a 
declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authoriza-
tion, or (3) national emergency created by attack 
upon the United States, its territories or posses-
sions, or its armed forces.’’. 
(4) With respect to United States military 
intervention in Syria, President Obama said, ‘‘But 
having made my decision as Commander-in-Chief 
based on what I am convinced is our national secu-
rity interests, I’m also mindful that I’m the Presi-
dent of the world’s oldest constitutional democracy. 
I’ve long believed that our power is rooted not just
666 
in our military might, but in our example as a gov-
ernment of the people, by the people, and for the 
people. And that’s why I’ve made a second decision: 
I will seek authorization for the use of force from 
the American people’s representatives in Congress.’’. 
(b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this Act 
shall be construed to authorize any use of military force. 
SEC. 1253. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS TO IM-
PLEMENT THE ARMS TRADE TREATY. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—None of the funds authorized to 
be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available 
for fiscal year 2015 for the Department of Defense may 
be obligated or expended to implement the Arms Trade 
Treaty, or to make any change to existing programs, 
projects, or activities as approved by Congress in further-
ance of, pursuant to, or otherwise to implement the Arms 
Trade Treaty, unless the Arms Trade Treaty has received 
the advice and consent of the Senate and has been the 
subject of implementing legislation, as required, by the 
Congress. 
(b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this sec-
tion shall be construed to preclude the Department of De-
fense from assisting foreign countries in bringing their 
laws and regulations up to United States standards.
667 
SEC. 1254. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION. 
Nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorizing 
the use of force against Syria or Iran. 
SEC. 1255. COMBATING CRIME THROUGH INTELLIGENCE 
CAPABILITIES. 
The Secretary of Defense is authorized to deploy as-
sets, personnel, and resources to the Joint Interagency 
Task Force South, in coordination with SOUTHCOM, to 
combat the following by supplying sufficient intelligence 
capabilities: 
(1) Transnational criminal organizations. 
(2) Drug trafficking. 
(3) Bulk shipments of narcotics or currency. 
(4) Narco-terrorism. 
(5) Human trafficking. 
(6) The Iranian presence in the Western Hemi-
sphere. 
SEC. 1256. STATEMENT OF POLICY. 
It shall be the policy of the United States to under-
take a whole-of-government approach to bolster regional 
cooperation with countries throughout the Western Hemi-
sphere, with the exception of Cuba, to counter narcotics 
trafficking and illicit activities in the Western Hemi-
sphere.
668 
SEC. 1257. DECLARATION OF POLICY REGARDING ISRAEL’S 
LAWFUL EXERCISE OF SELF-DEFENSE. 
Congress declares that it is the policy of the United 
States to fully support Israel’s lawful exercise of self-de-
fense, including actions to halt regional aggression. 
SEC. 1258. STATEMENT OF POLICY AND REPORT ON THE IN-
HERENT RIGHT OF ISRAEL TO SELF-DE-
FENSE. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress makes the following find-
ings: 
(1) The United States-Israel Enhanced Security 
Cooperation Act of 2012 (22 U.S.C. 8601 et seq.) 
established the policy of the United States to sup-
port the inherent right of Israel to self-defense. 
(2) The United States-Israel Enhanced Security 
Cooperation Act of 2012 (22 U.S.C. 8601 et seq.) 
expressed the sense of Congress that the Govern-
ment of the United States should transfer to the 
Government of Israel defense articles and defense 
services such as air refueling tankers, missile de-
fense capabilities, and specialized munitions. 
(3) The inherent right of Israel to self-defense 
necessarily includes the possession and maintenance 
by Israel of an independent capability to remove ex-
istential threats to its security and defend its vital 
national interests.
669 
(b) POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES.—It is the pol-
icy of the United States to take all necessary steps to en-
sure that Israel possesses and maintains an independent 
capability to remove existential threats to its security and 
defend its vital national interests. 
(c) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con-
gress that air refueling tankers and advanced bunker- 
buster munitions should immediately be transferred to 
Israel to ensure our democratic ally has an independent 
capability to remove any existential threat posed by the 
Iranian nuclear program and defend its vital national in-
terests. 
(d) REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, and every 180 days there-
after for a period not to exceed four years, the President 
shall submit to the House and Senate Armed Services 
committees, the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the 
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and the House and 
Senate Appropriations committees a report that— 
(1) identifies all aerial refueling platforms, 
bunker-buster munitions, and other capabilities and 
platforms that would contribute significantly to the 
maintenance by Israel of a robust independent capa-
bility to remove existential security threats, includ-
670 
ing nuclear and ballistic missile facilities in Iran, 
and defend its vital national interests; 
(2) assesses the availability for sale or transfer 
of items necessary to acquire the capabilities and 
platforms described in paragraph (1) as well as the 
legal authorities available for making such transfers; 
and 
(3) describes the steps the President is taking 
to immediately transfer the items described in para-
graph (1) pursuant to the policy described in sub-
section (b). 
Subtitle F—Reports and Sense of 
Congress Provisions 
SEC. 1261. REPORT ON ‘‘NEW NORMAL’’ AND GENERAL MIS-
SION REQUIREMENTS OF UNITED STATES AF-
RICA COMMAND. 
(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con-
gress that— 
(1) the United States Africa Command should 
have sufficient assigned military forces; intelligence, 
surveillance, and reconnaissance assets; crisis re-
sponse forces; and enablers to support the crisis re-
sponse forces to meet the ‘‘New Normal’’ and gen-
eral mission requirements in the area of responsi-
bility of the United States Africa Command;
671 
(2) with the current force posture and structure 
of the United States Africa Command, the United 
States is accepting a high level of risk in defending 
United States posts that are ‘‘high risk, high threat’’ 
posts; 
(3) the United States should posture forces for-
ward and achieve the associated basing and access 
agreements to support such forces across the Con-
tinent of Africa in order to meet the ‘‘New Normal’’ 
and general mission requirements in the area of re-
sponsibility of the United States Africa Command; 
(4) the Department of Defense should consider 
reassigning to the United States Africa Command 
enabler assets currently assigned to, and shared 
with, the United States European Command; and 
(5) the United States Africa Command requires 
more intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance 
assets to meet the ‘‘New Normal’’ and general mis-
sion requirements in its area of responsibility. 
(b) REPORT.—Not later than January 15, 2015, the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary 
of State and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 
shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees 
a report on the extent to which the ‘‘New Normal’’ re-
quirements have changed the force posture and structure
672 
required of the United States Africa Command to meet 
the ‘‘New Normal’’ and general mission requirements in 
its area of responsibility. 
(c) ELEMENTS.—The report required by subsection 
(b) shall include the following: 
(1) A detailed description of the ‘‘New Normal’’ 
and general mission requirements in the area of re-
sponsibility of the United States Africa Command. 
(2) A description of any changes required for 
the United States Africa Command to meet the 
‘‘New Normal’’ and general mission requirements in 
its area of responsibility, including the gaps or 
shortfalls in capability, size, posture, agreements, 
basing, and enabler support of all crisis response 
forces and associated assets to access and defend 
posts that are ‘‘high risk, high threat’’ posts. 
(3) An assessment of how the United States Af-
rica Command could employ permanently assigned 
military forces to support all mission requirements 
of the United States Africa Command. 
(4) An estimate of the annual intelligence, sur-
veillance, and reconnaissance requirements of the 
United States Africa Command and the shortfall, if 
any, in meeting such requirements in fiscal year 
2015.
673 
(d) APPROPRIATE
CONGRESSIONAL
COMMITTEES 
DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘appropriate con-
gressional committees’’ means— 
(1) the congressional defense committees; and 
(2) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the 
Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the 
House of Representatives. 
(e) FORM.—The report required by subsection (b) 
may include a classified annex. 
SEC. 1262. REPORT ON CONTRACTORS WITH THE DEPART-
MENT OF DEFENSE THAT HAVE CONDUCTED 
SIGNIFICANT TRANSACTIONS WITH IRANIAN 
PERSONS OR THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAN. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter 
for a period not to exceed 3 years, the Secretary of De-
fense shall submit to the appropriate congressional com-
mittees a report that contains the following: 
(1) A list of each contractor with the Depart-
ment of Defense (including any subcontractors at 
any tier of the contractor), and any person owned or 
controlled by the contractor or that owns or controls 
the contractor, that has conducted a significant 
transaction with an Iranian person (other than an
674 
Iranian person listed under paragraph (2)) or the 
Government of Iran. 
(2) A list of each contractor with the Depart-
ment of Defense (including any subcontractors at 
any tier of the contractor), and any person owned or 
controlled by the contractor or that owns or controls 
the contractor, that has conducted a significant 
transaction with an Iranian person whose property 
has been blocked pursuant to Executive Order No. 
13224 (66 Fed. Reg. 49079) or Executive Order No. 
13382 (70 Fed. Reg. 38567) during the 5-year pe-
riod preceding the date of the submission of the re-
port. 
(3) The value of each significant transaction de-
scribed in paragraphs (1) and (2). 
(b) APPROPRIATE
CONGRESSIONAL
COMMITTEES 
DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘appropriate con-
gressional committees’’ means— 
(1) the Committee on Armed Services and the 
Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate; and 
(2) the Committee on Armed Services and the 
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Rep-
resentatives.
675 
SEC. 1263. REPORTS ON NUCLEAR PROGRAM OF IRAN. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall sub-
mit to Congress a report on the interim agreement relat-
ing to the nuclear program of Iran. Such report shall in-
clude— 
(1) verification of whether Iran is com-
plying with such agreement; and 
(2) an assessment of the overall state of 
the nuclear program of Iran. 
(b) ADDITIONAL REPORTS.—If the interim agree-
ment described in subsection (a) is renewed or if a com-
prehensive and final agreement is entered into regarding 
the nuclear program of Iran, by not later than 90 days 
after such renewal or final agreement being entered into, 
the President shall submit to Congress a report on such 
renewed or final agreement. Such report shall include the 
matters described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection 
(a). 
SEC. 1264. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON UNITED STATES PRES-
ENCE AND COOPERATION IN THE ARABIAN 
GULF REGION TO DETER IRAN. 
It is the sense of Congress that— 
(1) the United States should maintain a robust 
forward presence and posture in order to support 
United States allies and partners in the Arabian
676 
Gulf region, including Gulf Cooperation Council 
(GCC) countries and Israel, and to deter Iran; 
(2) the United States should seek ways to sup-
port the security posture of GCC countries in the 
Arabian Gulf region to deter Iran; 
(3) key strategic United States bases in the 
Arabian Gulf region that are used to deter Iran and 
would be used for any military operations in the 
Arabian Gulf region are entirely financed by funds 
for overseas contingency operations which is an 
unsustainable approach; 
(4) such key strategic United States bases in 
the Arabian Gulf region should be funded through 
the base budget of the Department of Defense; 
(5) the United States does not have status of 
forces agreements and defense agreements with key 
GCC allies, which would support the defense of the 
Arabian Gulf region and would deter Iran, and the 
United States should seek to complete these agree-
ments immediately; 
(6) the interim agreement with Iran relating to 
Iran’s nuclear program does not address key aspects 
of Iran’s nuclear program, including the possible 
military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear program;
677 
(7) a comprehensive agreement with Iran relat-
ing to Iran’s efforts to develop a nuclear weapons 
capability should address past and present issues of 
concern of the United States, the International 
Atomic Energy Agency, and the United Nations Se-
curity Council; 
(8) the United States should continue to put 
significant pressure on Iran’s network of organiza-
tions that conduct malign activities in the Arabian 
Gulf region, and around the globe, even while the 
United States engages in negotiations with Iran re-
lating to Iran’s nuclear program; 
(9) the United States Government should not 
enter into a contract with any person or entity that 
is determined to have violated United States sanc-
tions laws with respect to contracting with the Gov-
ernment of Iran and should encourage United States 
allies, partners, and other countries to maintain the 
same contracting standard; and 
(10) a comprehensive agreement with Iran re-
lating to Iran’s efforts to develop or acquire a nu-
clear weapons capability should be agreed to by the 
United States only if— 
(A) Iran ceases the enrichment of ura-
nium;
678 
(B) Iran has ceased the pursuit, acquisi-
tion, and development of, and has verifiably dis-
mantled its nuclear, biological, and chemical 
weapons and ballistic missiles and ballistic mis-
sile launch technology; and 
(C) the Government of Iran has ceased 
providing support for acts of international ter-
rorism. 
SEC. 1265. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON MODERNIZATION OF 
DEFENSE CAPABILITIES OF POLAND. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) The efforts of Poland to modernize its de-
fense capabilities and restructure its armed forces 
have the potential not only to enhance the national 
security of Poland but also to strengthen the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). 
(2) The main priority of Poland with respect to 
such efforts is to procure anti-aircraft and missile 
defense systems. 
(3) At a time when most NATO allies are cut-
ting defense spending, Poland has maintained a 
steady defense budget and is making significant in-
vestment in procurement of new defense systems. 
(4) The United States should recognize the ef-
forts of Poland to modernize its defense capabilities
679 
and restructure its armed forces and promote such 
efforts as a positive example for other NATO allies 
to follow. 
(5) The United States has enjoyed a close cul-
tural, economic, political, and military relationship 
with Poland for many years and the efforts of Po-
land to modernize its defense capabilities and re-
structure its armed forces provide opportunities for 
the two countries to work together even more close-
ly. 
(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con-
gress that— 
(1) the President should seek to work with Po-
land to ensure that, as part of the efforts of Poland 
to modernize its defense capabilities and restructure 
its armed forces— 
(A) Poland, to the maximum extent prac-
ticable, procures defense systems that are inter-
operable with NATO defense systems and will 
help fill critical NATO shortfalls; and 
(B) Poland, to the maximum extent prac-
ticable and to the extent not inconsistent with 
the provisions of subparagraph (A), procures 
United States defense systems that—
680 
(i) will strengthen the bilateral, stra-
tegic partnership between the two coun-
tries; 
(ii) will provide Poland with proven 
defense systems capabilities; and 
(iii) promote deeper and closer bilat-
eral cooperation between the two countries; 
and 
(2) the United States stands ready to assist Po-
land to achieve its goals to modernize its defense ca-
pabilities and restructure its armed forces. 
SEC. 1266. REPORT ON ACCOUNTABILITY FOR CRIMES 
AGAINST HUMANITY IN NIGERIA. 
(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—Congress— 
(1) strongly condemns the ongoing violence and 
the systematic gross human rights violations against 
the people of Nigeria carried out by the jihadist or-
ganization Boko Haram; 
(2) expresses its support for the people of Nige-
ria who wish to live in a peaceful, economically pros-
perous, and democratic Nigeria; and 
(3) calls on the President to support Nigerian 
and International Community efforts to ensure ac-
countability for crimes against humanity committed 
by Boko Haram against the people of Nigeria, par-
681 
ticularly young girls kidnapped from educational in-
stitutions by Boko Haram. 
(b) REPORT.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after 
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on 
crimes against humanity committed by Boko Haram 
in Nigeria. 
(2) ELEMENTS.—The report required under 
paragraph (1) shall include the following elements: 
(A) A description of initiatives undertaken 
by the Department of Defense to assist the 
Government of Nigeria to develop its own ca-
pacity to deploy specialized police and army 
units rapidly to bring Boko Haram leader 
Abubakar Shekau to justice and to prevent and 
combat sectarian violence in cities and areas in 
Nigeria where there has been a history of sec-
tarian violence. 
(B) A description of violations of inter-
nationally recognized human rights and crimes 
against humanity perpetrated by Boko Haram 
in Nigeria, including a description of the con-
ventional and unconventional weapons used for
682 
such crimes and, where possible, the origins of 
the weapons. 
(C) A description of efforts by the Depart-
ment of Defense to ensure accountability for 
violations of internationally recognized human 
rights and crimes against humanity perpetrated 
against the people of Nigeria by Boko Haram 
and al-Qaeda affiliates and other jihadists in 
Nigeria, including— 
(i) a description of initiatives that the 
United States has undertaken to train Ni-
gerian investigators on how to document, 
investigate, and develop findings of crimes 
against humanity; and 
(ii) an assessment of the impact of 
those initiatives. 
SEC. 1267. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE NAVAL 
CAPABILITIES OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERA-
TION. 
It is the sense of Congress that— 
(1) Mistral class amphibious assault warships, 
each of which has the capacity to carry 16 heli-
copters, up to 700 soldiers, four landing craft, 60 
armored vehicles, and 13 tanks, would significantly 
increase the naval capabilities of the Russian navy;
683 
(2) Mistral class warships would allow the Rus-
sian navy to expand its naval presence in the region, 
thereby augmenting its capabilities against Ukraine, 
Georgia, and Baltic member states of the North At-
lantic Treaty Organization; 
(3) France should not proceed with its sale of 
two Mistral class warships to the Russian Federa-
tion; and 
(4) the President, the Secretary of State, and 
the Secretary of Defense should use diplomatic 
means to urge their counterparts in the Government 
of France not to proceed with its sale of two Mistral 
class warships to the Russian Federation. 
SEC. 1268. REPORT ON COLLECTIVE AND NATIONAL SECU-
RITY IMPLICATIONS OF CENTRAL ASIAN AND 
SOUTH CAUCASUS ENERGY DEVELOPMENT. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) Assured access to stable energy supplies is 
an enduring concern of both the United States and 
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). 
(2) Adopted in Lisbon in November 2010, the 
new NATO Strategic Concept declares that ‘‘[s]ome 
NATO countries will become more dependent on for-
eign energy suppliers and in some cases, on foreign
684 
energy supply and distribution networks for their en-
ergy needs’’. 
(3) The report required by section 1233 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2012 (Public Law 112–81) reaffirmed the Strategic 
Concept’s assessment of growing energy dependence 
of some members of the NATO alliance and also 
noted there is value in the assured access, protec-
tion, and delivery of energy. 
(4) Development of energy resources and tran-
sit routes in the areas surrounding the Caspian Sea 
can diversify sources of supply for members of the 
NATO alliance, particularly those in Eastern Eu-
rope. 
(b) REPORT.— 
(1) REPORT.—Not later than 270 days after 
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
of Defense shall, in consultation with the Secretary 
of State and the Secretary of Energy, submit to the 
appropriate congressional committees a detailed re-
port on the implications of new energy resource de-
velopment and distribution networks, both planned 
and under construction, in the areas surrounding the 
Caspian Sea for energy security strategies of the 
United States and NATO.
685 
(2) ELEMENTS.—The report required by para-
graph (1) shall include the following: 
(A) An assessment of the dependence of 
NATO members on a single oil or natural gas 
supplier or distribution network. 
(B) An assessment of the potential of en-
ergy resources of the areas surrounding the 
Caspian Sea to mitigate such dependence on a 
single supplier or distribution network. 
(C) Recommendations, if any, for ways in 
which the United States can help support in-
creased energy security for NATO members. 
(3) SUBMISSION
OF
CLASSIFIED
INFORMA-
TION.—The report under this subsection shall be 
submitted in unclassified form, but may contain a 
classified annex. 
(c) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES DE-
FINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘appropriate congres-
sional committees’’ means— 
(1) the Committee on Armed Services and the 
Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Rep-
resentatives; and 
(2) the Committee on Armed Services and the 
Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate.
686 
SEC. 1269. FINDINGS AND SENSE OF CONGRESS. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) Protecting cultural property abroad is a 
vital part of United States cultural diplomacy, show-
ing the respect of the United States for other cul-
tures and the common heritage of humanity. 
(2) Cultural property abroad has been lost, 
damaged, or destroyed due to political instability, 
armed conflict, natural disasters, and other threats. 
(3) In Egypt, political instability has led to the 
ransacking of its museums, resulting in the destruc-
tion of countless ancient artifacts that will forever 
leave gaps in humanity’s knowledge of the ancient 
Egyptian civilization. 
(4) In Syria, the ongoing civil war has resulted 
in the shelling of medieval cities, damage to World 
Heritage Sites, and the looting of museums and ar-
chaeological sites. Archaeological and historic sites 
and artifacts in Syria date back more than six mil-
lennia, and include some of the earliest examples of 
writing. 
(5) In Mali, the Al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorist 
group Ansar Dine destroyed tombs and shrines in 
the ancient city of Timbuktu, once a major center 
for Islamic learning and scholarship in the 15th and
687 
16th centuries, and threatened collections of ancient 
manuscripts. 
(6) In Afghanistan, the Taliban decreed that 
the Bamiyan Buddhas, ancient statues carved into a 
cliff side in central Afghanistan, were to be de-
stroyed. In 2001 the Taliban carried out their threat 
and destroyed the statues, leading to worldwide con-
demnation. 
(7) In Iraq, after the fall of Saddam Hussein, 
thieves looted the Iraq Museum in Bagdad, resulting 
in the loss of approximately 15,000 items. These in-
cluded ancient amulets, sculptures, ivories, and cyl-
inder seals. Many of these items remain unrecovered. 
(8) The destruction of these and other cultural 
properties represents an irreparable loss to human-
ity’s common cultural heritage, and therefore to all 
Americans. 
(9) The Armed Forces have played important 
roles in preserving and protecting cultural property. 
On June 23, 1943, President Franklin D. Roosevelt 
established the American Commission for the Pro-
tection and Salvage of Artistic and Historic Monu-
ments in War Areas to provide expert advice to the 
military on the protection of cultural property. The 
Commission formed Monuments, Fine Arts, and Ar-
688 
chives (MFAA) teams which became part of the Civil 
Affairs Division of Military Government Section of 
the Allied armies. The individuals serving in the 
MFAA were known as the ‘‘Monuments Men’’ and 
have been credited with securing, cataloguing, and 
returning hundreds of thousands works of art stolen 
by the Nazis during World War II. 
(10) The United States Committee of the Blue 
Shield was founded in 2006 to support the imple-
mentation of the 1954 Hague Convention for the 
Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of 
Armed Conflict, and to coordinate with the Armed 
Forces, other branches of the United States Govern-
ment, and other cultural heritage nongovernmental 
organizations in preserving cultural property abroad 
threatened by political instability, armed conflict, or 
natural or other disasters. 
(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con-
gress that— 
(1) the Armed Forces play an important role in 
preserving and protecting cultural property in coun-
tries at risk of destruction due to political insta-
bility, armed conflict, or natural or other disasters; 
and
689 
(2) the United States must protect cultural 
property abroad pursuant to its obligations under 
the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of 
Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict 
and customary international law in all conflicts to 
which the United States is a party. 
(c) REPORT ON ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF 
DEFENSE IN REGARDS TO PROTECTING CULTURAL PROP-
ERTY ABROAD.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit 
to the congressional defense committees and the Com-
mittee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Com-
mittee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives 
a report on efforts of the Department of Defense to pro-
tect cultural property abroad, including activities under-
taken pursuant to the 1954 Hague Convention for the 
Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed 
Conflict, other cultural protection statutes, and inter-
national agreements, including— 
(1) directives, policies, and regulations the De-
partment has instituted to protect cultural property 
abroad at risk of destruction due to political insta-
bility, armed conflict, or natural or other disasters; 
(2) actions the Armed Forces have taken to 
protect cultural property abroad, including efforts 
made to avoid damage, to the extent possible, to cul-
690 
tural property through construction activities, train-
ing to ensure deploying military personnel are able 
to identify, avoid, and protect cultural property 
abroad, and other efforts made to inform military 
personnel about the protection of cultural property 
as part of the law of war; and 
(3) the status and number of specialist per-
sonnel in the Armed Forces assigned to secure re-
spect for cultural property abroad and to cooperate 
with civilian authorities responsible for safeguarding 
cultural property abroad, as required by existing 
treaty obligations under Article 7 of the 1954 Hague 
Convention. 
SEC. 1270. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON NIGERIA AND BOKO 
HARAM. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress makes the following find-
ings: 
(1) In recent years, Boko Haram has furthered 
violence and instability in Nigeria and bordering 
countries. 
(2) The terrorist group known as ‘‘Boko 
Haram,’’ which translates to ‘‘Western education is 
forbidden,’’ perpetrates violent attacks in Nigeria 
and has grown in strength and sophistication since 
its founding in 2002.
691 
(3) Boko Haram kidnapped over 200 female 
students on April 14, 2014, killed over 50 male stu-
dents on February 25, 2014, and continues to vio-
lently attack innocent civilians throughout Nigeria. 
(4) Boko Haram has previously attacked West-
ern interests, bombing the United Nations building 
in Abuja on August 26, 2011, and was affiliated 
with taking Western hostages in Bauchi on Feb-
ruary 16, 2013, and later killing seven hostages. 
(5) As stated by United States Ambassador to 
Nigeria Terrence P. McCulley in 2012, the threat of 
Boko Haram is growing: ‘‘We‘ve seen an increase in 
sophistication, we’ve seen increased lethality. We 
saw at least a part of the group has decided it’s in 
their interest to attack the international commu-
nity.’’. 
(6) In June 2012, the Department of State 
added three leaders of Boko Haram, Abubakar 
Shekau, Abubakar Adam Kambar, and Khalid al- 
Barnawi, to the Specially Designated Global Ter-
rorist list. 
(7) In November 2013, the Department of 
State designated Boko Haram and its splinter 
group, Ansaru, as Foreign Terrorist Organizations.
692 
(8) Boko Haram shares the ideological designs 
of al Qaeda, and has made public pledges of support 
to Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda, and al-Shabaab. 
(9) Boko Haram poses a broader threat to in-
terests in Nigeria, the Sahel, Europe, and the 
United States. 
(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—In light of the findings 
specified in subsection (a), it is the sense of Congress that 
the Secretary of Defense should— 
(1) take appropriate action with allies and part-
ners of the United States to fight Boko Haram’s vi-
olence and ideology; 
(2) partner with Nigeria’s regional neighbors to 
counter Boko Haram’s cross-border activity and re-
spond to emerging threats; and 
(3) develop a long-term, interagency strategy to 
combat Boko Haram and Ansaru, reassess United 
States assistance to Nigeria, and brief Congress on 
this strategy. 
SEC. 1271. RECOGNITION OF VICTIMS OF SOVIET COM-
MUNIST AND NAZI REGIMES. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress makes the following find-
ings: 
(1) On August 13, 1941, President Franklin D. 
Roosevelt and Prime Minister Winston Churchill
693 
issued a joint declaration ‘‘of certain common prin-
ciples in the national policies of their respective 
countries on which they based their hopes for a bet-
ter future for the world’’ and ‘‘the right of all peo-
ples to choose the form of government under which 
they will live and self government restored to those 
who have been forcibly deprived of them’’ and that 
the people of countries may live in freedom. 
(2) The United States Government has actively 
advocated for and continues to support the prin-
ciples of the United Nations Universal Declaration 
of Human Rights and the United Nations General 
Assembly resolution 260 (III) of December 9, 1948. 
(3) Captive Nations Week, signed into law by 
President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1959, raised 
public awareness of the oppression of nations under 
the control of Communist and other nondemocratic 
governments. 
(4) The European Parliament resolution on Eu-
ropean conscience and totalitarianism of April 2, 
2009, and the ‘‘Black Ribbon Day’’ resolution 
adopted by the Parliament of Canada on November 
30, 2009, establish a day of remembrance for vic-
tims of Communist and Nazi regimes to remember 
and commemorate their victims.
694 
(5) On the 70th anniversary of the formal 
adoption by the Nazi leadership of the ‘‘Final Solu-
tion of the Jewish Problem’’, members of the Euro-
pean Parliament and the national parliaments of the 
European Union rejected attempts to obfuscate the 
Holocaust by persons who sought to diminish the 
uniqueness of the Holocaust by deeming the Holo-
caust to be equal, similar, or equivalent to Com-
munism. 
(6) Extreme forms of totalitarian rule have led 
to premeditated and vast crimes committed against 
millions of human beings and their basic and in-
alienable rights on a scale unseen before in history. 
(7) The Nazi regime committed mass genocide 
during the Holocaust, killing millions of Jews, polit-
ical opponents, and minority populations. 
(8) August 23 would be an appropriate date to 
designate as ‘‘Black Ribbon Day’’ to remember and 
never forget the terror millions of citizens in Central 
and Eastern Europe experienced for more than 40 
years by ruthless military, economic, and political re-
pression of the people through arbitrary executions, 
mass arrests, deportations, the suppression of free 
speech, confiscation of private property, and the de-
struction of cultural and moral identity and civil so-
695 
ciety, all of which deprived the vast majority of the 
peoples of Central and Eastern Europe of their basic 
human rights and dignity, separating them from the 
democratic world by means of the Iron Curtain and 
the Berlin Wall. 
(9) The memories of Europe’s tragic past can-
not be forgotten in order to honor the victims, con-
demn the perpetrators, and lay the foundation for 
reconciliation based on truth and remembrance. 
(b) RECOGNITION.—Congress supports the designa-
tion of ‘‘Black Ribbon Day’’ to recognize the victims of 
Soviet Communist and Nazi regimes. 
SEC. 1272. REPORT RELATING TO RESCUE EFFORTS IN NI-
GERIAN KIDNAPPING. 
Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment 
of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with 
the Secretary of State, shall transmit to Congress a report 
on the findings of United States military personnel assist-
ing in the search and rescue efforts of the more than 200 
girls and young women who were abducted from the Gov-
ernment Secondary School in Chibok, Nigeria by Boko 
Haram. Such report shall include— 
(1) the location, health, and safety of the ab-
ducted girls, to the extent such information is ascer-
tainable;
696 
(2) recommendations on what the Nigerian gov-
ernment can do to protect the girls and similarly sit-
uated girls moving forward; 
(3) an assessment of the threat of Boko Haram 
to Nigeria and other countries in the region; 
(4) information regarding efforts by the De-
partment of Defense and Department of State to 
build the capacity of the Nigerian security forces to 
combat the threat of Boko Haram; 
(5) information regarding efforts underway to 
address poverty and governance in Nigeria to im-
prove the stability of that nation; and 
(6) an assessment of the efforts of the govern-
ment of Nigeria to address security challenges and 
the willingness of that government to cooperate with 
the efforts of the United States, including efforts to 
address human rights abuses by the security forces 
of the government of Nigeria. 
TITLE XIII—COOPERATIVE 
THREAT REDUCTION 
SEC. 1301. SPECIFICATION OF COOPERATIVE THREAT RE-
DUCTION PROGRAMS AND FUNDS. 
(a) SPECIFICATION OF COOPERATIVE THREAT RE-
DUCTION PROGRAMS.—For purposes of section 301 and 
other provisions of this Act, Cooperative Threat Reduction
697 
programs are the programs specified in section 1501 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1997 (50 U.S.C. 2362 note). 
(b) FISCAL YEAR 2015 COOPERATIVE THREAT RE-
DUCTION FUNDS DEFINED.—As used in this title, the 
term ‘‘fiscal year 2015 Cooperative Threat Reduction 
funds’’ means the funds appropriated pursuant to the au-
thorization of appropriations in section 301 and made 
available by the funding table in section 4301 for Coopera-
tive Threat Reduction programs. 
(c) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—Funds appropriated 
pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
301 and made available by the funding table in section 
4301 for Cooperative Threat Reduction programs shall be 
available for obligation for fiscal years 2015, 2016, and 
2017. 
SEC. 1302. FUNDING ALLOCATIONS. 
(a) FUNDING
FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES.—Of the 
$365,108,000 authorized to be appropriated to the De-
partment of Defense for fiscal year 2015 in section 301 
and made available by the funding table in section 4301 
for Cooperative Threat Reduction programs, the following 
amounts may be obligated for the purposes specified: 
(1) For strategic offensive arms elimination, 
$1,000,000.
698 
(2) 
For 
chemical 
weapons 
destruction, 
$15,720,000. 
(3) For global nuclear security, $17,703,000. 
(4) For cooperative biological engagement, 
$254,342,000. 
(5) For proliferation prevention, $46,124,000. 
(6) 
For 
threat 
reduction 
engagement, 
$2,375,000. 
(7) For activities designated as Other Assess-
ments/Administrative Costs, $27,844,000. 
(b) REPORT ON OBLIGATION OR EXPENDITURE OF 
FUNDS FOR OTHER PURPOSES.—No fiscal year 2015 Co-
operative Threat Reduction funds may be obligated or ex-
pended for a purpose other than a purpose listed in para-
graphs (1) through (7) of subsection (a) until 15 days 
after the date that the Secretary of Defense submits to 
Congress a report on the purpose for which the funds will 
be obligated or expended and the amount of funds to be 
obligated or expended. Nothing in the preceding sentence 
shall be construed as authorizing the obligation or expend-
iture of fiscal year 2015 Cooperative Threat Reduction 
funds for a purpose for which the obligation or expendi-
ture of such funds is specifically prohibited under this title 
or any other provision of law.
699 
(c) LIMITED
AUTHORITY
TO
VARY
INDIVIDUAL 
AMOUNTS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), in 
any case in which the Secretary of Defense deter-
mines that it is necessary to do so in the national 
interest, the Secretary may obligate amounts appro-
priated for fiscal year 2015 for a purpose listed in 
paragraphs (1) through (7) of subsection (a) in ex-
cess of the specific amount authorized for that pur-
pose. 
(2) NOTICE-AND-WAIT REQUIRED.—An obliga-
tion of funds for a purpose stated in paragraphs (1) 
through (7) of subsection (a) in excess of the specific 
amount authorized for such purpose may be made 
using the authority provided in paragraph (1) only 
after— 
(A) the Secretary submits to Congress no-
tification of the intent to do so together with a 
complete discussion of the justification for 
doing so; and 
(B) 15 days have elapsed following the 
date of the notification.
700 
SEC. 1303. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 
COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION ACTIVI-
TIES WITH RUSSIAN FEDERATION. 
(a) LIMITATION.—None of the funds authorized to 
be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available 
for fiscal year 2015 for Cooperative Threat Reduction may 
be obligated or expended for cooperative threat reduction 
activities with the Russian Federation until the date that 
is 30 days after the date on which the Secretary of De-
fense certifies, in coordination with the Secretary of State, 
to the appropriate congressional committees that— 
(1) the armed forces of the Russian Federation 
are no longer illegally occupying Ukrainian territory; 
(2) the Russian Federation is no longer acting 
inconsistently with the INF Treaty; and 
(3) the Russian Federation is in compliance 
with the CFE Treaty and has lifted its suspension 
of Russian observance of its treaty obligations. 
(b) WAIVER.—The Secretary of Defense may waive 
the limitation in subsection (a) if— 
(1) the Secretary of Defense, in coordination 
with the Secretary of State, submits to the appro-
priate congressional committees— 
(A) a notification that such a waiver is in 
the national security interest of the United
701 
States and a description of the national security 
interest covered by the waiver; and 
(B) a report explaining why the Secretary 
of Defense cannot make the certification under 
subsection (a); and 
(2) a period of 30 days has elapsed following 
the date on which the Secretary of Defense submits 
the information in the report under paragraph 
(1)(B). 
(c) EXCEPTION FOR CERTAIN MILITARY BASES.— 
The certification requirement specified in paragraph (1) 
of subsection (a) shall not apply to military bases of the 
Russian Federation in Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula oper-
ating in accordance with its 1997 agreement on the Status 
and Conditions of the Black Sea Fleet Stationing on the 
Territory of Ukraine. 
(d) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
(1) APPROPRIATE
CONGRESSIONAL
COMMIT-
TEES.—The term ‘‘appropriate congressional com-
mittees’’ means— 
(A) the Committee on Armed Services and 
the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House 
of Representatives; and
702 
(B) the Committee on Armed Services and 
the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Sen-
ate. 
(2) CFE TREATY.—The term ‘‘CFE Treaty’’ 
means the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in 
Europe, signed at Paris November 19, 1990, and 
entered into force July 17, 1992. 
(3) INF TREATY.—The term ‘‘INF Treaty’’ 
means the Treaty Between the United States of 
America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 
on the Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and 
Shorter-Range Missiles, commonly referred to as the 
Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, 
signed at Washington December 8, 1987 and en-
tered into force June 1, 1988. 
(e) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section takes effect on 
the date of the enactment of this Act and applies with 
respect to funds described in subsection (a) that are unob-
ligated as of such date of enactment. 
TITLE XIV—OTHER 
AUTHORIZATIONS 
Subtitle A—Military Programs 
SEC. 1401. WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS. 
Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for 
fiscal year 2015 for the use of the Armed Forces and other
703 
activities and agencies of the Department of Defense for 
providing capital for working capital and revolving funds, 
as specified in the funding table in section 4501. 
SEC. 1402. CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUC-
TION, DEFENSE. 
(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Funds 
are hereby authorized to be appropriated for the Depart-
ment of Defense for fiscal year 2015 for expenses, not oth-
erwise provided for, for Chemical Agents and Munitions 
Destruction, Defense, as specified in the funding table in 
section 4501. 
(b) USE.—Amounts authorized to be appropriated 
under subsection (a) are authorized for— 
(1) the destruction of lethal chemical Agents 
and munitions in accordance with section 1412 of 
the Department of Defense Authorization Act, 1986 
(50 U.S.C. 1521); and 
(2) the destruction of chemical warfare materiel 
of the United States that is not covered by section 
1412 of such Act. 
SEC. 1403. DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG AC-
TIVITIES, DEFENSE-WIDE. 
Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for 
the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2015 for ex-
penses, not otherwise provided for, for Drug Interdiction
704 
and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-wide, as specified in 
the funding table in section 4501. 
SEC. 1404. DEFENSE INSPECTOR GENERAL. 
Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for 
the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2015 for ex-
penses, not otherwise provided for, for the Office of the 
Inspector General of the Department of Defense, as speci-
fied in the funding table in section 4501. 
SEC. 1405. DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM. 
Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for 
fiscal year 2015 for the Defense Health Program, as spec-
ified in the funding table in section 4501, for use of the 
Armed Forces and other activities and agencies of the De-
partment of Defense in providing for the health of eligible 
beneficiaries. 
Subtitle B—National Defense 
Stockpile 
SEC. 1411. REVISIONS TO PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED DIS-
POSALS 
FROM 
THE 
NATIONAL 
DEFENSE 
STOCKPILE. 
(a) FISCAL YEAR 1999 DISPOSAL AUTHORITY.—Sec-
tion 3303(a)(7) of the Strom Thurmond National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105– 
261; 50 U.S.C. 98d note), as most recently amended by 
section 1412(a) of the Duncan Hunter National Defense
705 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110– 
417; 122 Stat. 4649), is further amended by striking 
‘‘1,386,000,000 by the end of fiscal year 2016’’ and in-
serting ‘‘$1,436,000,000 by the end of fiscal year 2019’’. 
(b) FISCAL YEAR 2000 DISPOSAL AUTHORITY.—Sec-
tion 3402(b)(5) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106–65; 50 U.S.C. 98d 
note), as most recently amended by section 1412 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 
(Public Law 112–81;125 Stat. 1654), is further amended 
by striking ‘‘$830,000,000 by the end of fiscal year 2016’’ 
and inserting ‘‘$850,000,000 by the end of 2019’’. 
Subtitle C—Other Matters 
SEC. 1421. AUTHORITY FOR TRANSFER OF FUNDS TO JOINT 
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE-DEPARTMENT OF 
VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL FACILITY DEM-
ONSTRATION FUND FOR CAPTAIN JAMES A. 
LOVELL HEALTH CARE CENTER, ILLINOIS. 
(a) AUTHORITY FOR TRANSFER OF FUNDS.—Of the 
funds authorized to be appropriated by section 1406 and 
available for the Defense Health Program for operation 
and maintenance, $146,857,000 may be transferred by the 
Secretary of Defense to the Joint Department of Defense– 
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Dem-
onstration Fund established by subsection (a)(1) of sec-
706 
tion 1704 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111–84; 123 Stat. 2571). 
For purposes of subsection (a)(2) of such section 1704, 
any funds so transferred shall be treated as amounts au-
thorized and appropriated specifically for the purpose of 
such a transfer. 
(b) USE OF TRANSFERRED FUNDS.—For the pur-
poses of subsection (b) of such section 1704, facility oper-
ations for which funds transferred under subsection (a) 
may be used are operations of the Captain James A. 
Lovell Federal Health Care Center, consisting of the 
North Chicago Veterans Affairs Medical Center, the Navy 
Ambulatory Care Center, and supporting facilities des-
ignated as a combined Federal medical facility under an 
operational agreement covered by section 706 of the Dun-
can Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2009 (Public Law 110–417; 122 Stat. 4500). 
SEC. 1422. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR 
ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME. 
There is hereby authorized to be appropriated for fis-
cal year 2015 from the Armed Forces Retirement Home 
Trust Fund the sum of $63,400,000 for the operation of 
the Armed Forces Retirement Home.
707 
TITLE XV—AUTHORIZATION OF 
ADDITIONAL 
APPROPRIA-
TIONS FOR OVERSEAS CON-
TINGENCY OPERATIONS 
Subtitle A—Authorization of 
Appropriations 
SEC. 1501. PURPOSE. 
The purpose of this subtitle is to authorize appropria-
tions for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2015 
to provide additional funds for overseas contingency oper-
ations being carried out by the Armed Forces. 
SEC. 1502. PROCUREMENT. 
Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for 
fiscal year 2015 for procurement accounts for the Army, 
the Navy and the Marine Corps, the Air Force, and De-
fense-wide activities in the amount of $6,180,000,000. 
SEC. 1503. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE. 
Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for 
fiscal year 2015 for the use of the Armed Forces and other 
activities and agencies of the Department of Defense for 
expenses, not otherwise provided for, for operation and 
maintenance in the amount of $64,040,000,000. In addi-
tion to the authorization of appropriations in the pre-
ceding sentence, funds are hereby authorized to be appro-
priated for fiscal year 2015 for the Department of the Air
708 
Force for the purpose of maintaining, operating, and up-
grading the A–10 aircraft fleet in the amount of 
$635,000,000. 
SEC. 1504. MILITARY PERSONNEL. 
Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for 
fiscal year 2015 for the use of the Armed Forces and other 
activities and agencies of the Department of Defense for 
expenses, not otherwise provided for, for military per-
sonnel in the amount of $7,140,000,000. 
SEC. 1505. OTHER APPROPRIATIONS. 
(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Funds 
are hereby authorized to be appropriated for the Depart-
ment of Defense for fiscal year 2015 for expenses, not oth-
erwise provided for, for the Other Authorizations in the 
amount of $1,450,000,000. 
(b) DEFINITION.—In this section, the term ‘‘Other 
Authorizations’’ means the Defense Health Program, 
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense- 
wide, and National Guard and Reserve Equipment. 
Subtitle B—Financial Matters 
SEC. 1511. TREATMENT AS ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS. 
The amounts authorized to be appropriated by this 
title are in addition to amounts otherwise authorized to 
be appropriated by this Act.
709 
SEC. 1512. SPECIAL TRANSFER AUTHORITY. 
(a) AUTHORITY TO TRANSFER AUTHORIZATIONS.— 
(1) AUTHORITY.—Upon determination by the 
Secretary of Defense that such action is necessary in 
the national interest, the Secretary may transfer 
amounts of authorizations made available to the De-
partment of Defense in this title for fiscal year 2015 
between any such authorizations for that fiscal year 
(or any subdivisions thereof). Amounts of authoriza-
tions so transferred shall be merged with and be 
available for the same purposes as the authorization 
to which transferred. 
(2) LIMITATIONS.—The total amount of author-
izations that the Secretary may transfer under the 
authority of this subsection may not exceed 
$3,000,000,000. 
(b) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—Transfers under this 
section shall be subject to the same terms and conditions 
as transfers under section 1001. 
(c) ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY.—The transfer author-
ity provided by this section is in addition to the transfer 
authority provided under section 1001.
710 
Subtitle C—Limitations, Reports, 
and Other Matters 
SEC. 1521. CONTINUATION OF EXISTING LIMITATIONS ON 
THE USE OF FUNDS IN THE AFGHANISTAN SE-
CURITY FORCES FUND. 
Funds available to the Department of Defense for the 
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund for fiscal year 2015 
shall be subject to the conditions contained in subsections 
(b) through (g) of section 1513 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110– 
181; 122 Stat. 428), as amended by section 1531(b) of 
the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2011 (Public Law 111–383; 124 Stat. 4424). 
SEC. 1522. USE OF AND TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM JOINT 
IMPROVISED 
EXPLOSIVE 
DEVICE 
DEFEAT 
FUND. 
Subsections (b) and (c) of section 1514 of the John 
Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2007 (Public Law 109–364; 120 Stat. 2439), as in 
effect before the amendments made by section 1503 of the 
Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110–417; 122 Stat. 4649), 
shall apply to the funds made available to the Department 
of Defense for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device De-
feat Fund for fiscal year 2015.
711 
SEC. 1523. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR THE AF-
GHANISTAN INFRASTRUCTURE FUND. 
None of the funds authorized to be appropriated or 
otherwise made available by this Act may be used for the 
Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund until all funds appro-
priated for the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund before 
the date of the enactment of this Act are obligated or ex-
pended. 
SEC. 1524. CODIFICATION OF OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT 
AND BUDGET CRITERIA. 
The Secretary of Defense shall implement the fol-
lowing criteria in requests for overseas contingency oper-
ations: 
(1) GEOGRAPHIC AREA COVERED.—For theater 
of operations for non-classified war overseas contin-
gency operations funding, the geographic areas in 
which combat or direct combat support operations 
occur are: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, 
Tajikistan, Kyrhyzstan, the Horn of Africa, Persian 
Gulf and Gulf nations, Arabian Sea, the Indian 
Ocean, the Philippines, and other countries on a 
case-by-case basis. 
(2) PERMITTED INCLUSIONS IN THE OVERSEAS 
CONTINGENCY OPERATION BUDGET.— 
(A) MAJOR EQUIPMENT.—
712 
(i) Replacement of loses that have oc-
curred but only for items not already pro-
grammed for replacement in the Future 
Years Defense Plan (FYDP), but not in-
cluding accelerations, which must be made 
in the base budget. 
(ii) Replacement or repair to original 
capability (to upgraded capability if that is 
currently available) of equipment returning 
from theater. The replacement may be a 
similar end item if the original item is no 
longer in production. Incremental cost of 
non-war related upgrades, if made, should 
be included in the base. 
(iii) Purchase of specialized, theater- 
specific equipment. 
(iv) Funding for major equipment 
must be obligated within 12 months. 
(B) 
GROUND
EQUIPMENT
REPLACE-
MENT.— 
(i) For combat losses and returning 
equipment that is not economical to repair, 
the replacement of equipment may be given 
to coalition partners, if consistent with ap-
proved policy.
713 
(ii) In-theater stocks above customary 
equipping levels on a case-by-case basis. 
(C) EQUIPMENT MODIFICATIONS.— 
(i) Operationally-required modifica-
tions to equipment used in theater or in di-
rect support of combat operations and that 
is not already programmed in FYDP. 
(ii) Funding for equipment modifica-
tions must be able be obligated in 12 
months. 
(D) MUNITIONS.— 
(i) Replenishment of munitions ex-
pended in combat operations in theater. 
(ii) Training ammunition for theater- 
unique training events. 
(iii) While forecasted expenditures are 
not permitted, a case-by-case assessment 
for munitions where existing stocks are in-
sufficient to sustain theater combat oper-
ations. 
(E) AIRCRAFT REPLACEMENT.— 
(i) Combat losses by accident that 
occur in the theater of operations. 
(ii) Combat losses by enemy action 
that occur in the theater of operations.
714 
(F) MILITARY CONSTRUCTION.— 
(i) Facilities and infrastructure in the 
theater of operations in direct support of 
combat operations. The level of construc-
tion should be the minimum to meet oper-
ational requirements. 
(ii) At non-enduring locations, facili-
ties and infrastructure for temporary use. 
(iii) At enduring locations, facilities 
and infrastructure for temporary use. 
(iv) At enduring locations, construc-
tion requirements must be tied to surge 
operations or major changes in operational 
requirements and will be considered on a 
case-by-case basis. 
(G) Research and development projects for 
combat operations in these specific theaters 
that can be delivered in 12 months. 
(H) OPERATIONS.— 
(i) Direct war costs: 
(I) 
Transport 
of 
personnel, 
equipment, and supplies to, from and 
within the theater of operations. 
(II) Deployment-specific training 
and preparation for unites and per-
715 
sonnel (military and civilian) to as-
sume their directed missions as de-
fined in the orders for deployment 
into the theater of operations. 
(ii) Within the theater, the incre-
mental costs above the funding pro-
grammed in the base budget to: 
(I) Support commanders in the 
conduct of their directed missions (to 
include Emergency Response Pro-
grams). 
(II) Build and maintain tem-
porary facilities. 
(III) Provide food, fuel, supplies, 
contracted services and other support. 
(IV) Cover the operational costs 
of 
coalition 
partners 
supporting 
United States military missions, as 
mutually agreed. 
(iii) Indirect war costs incurred out-
side the theater of operations will be evalu-
ated on a case-by-case basis. 
(I) HEALTH.— 
(i) Short-term care directly related to 
combat.
716 
(ii) Infrastructure that is only to be 
used during the current conflict. 
(J) PERSONNEL.— 
(i) Incremental special pays and al-
lowances for Service members and civilians 
deployed to a combat zone. 
(ii) Incremental pay, special pays and 
allowances for Reserve Component per-
sonnel mobilized to support war missions. 
(K) SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND.— 
(i) Operations that meet the criteria 
in this guidance. 
(ii) Equipment that meets the criteria 
in this guidance. 
(L) Prepositioned supplies and equipment 
for resetting in-theater stocks of supplies and 
equipment to pre-war levels. 
(M) Security force funding to train, equip, 
and sustain Iraqi and Afghan military and po-
lice forces. 
(N) FUEL.— 
(i) War fuel costs and funding to en-
sure that logistical support to combat oper-
ations is not degraded due to cash losses
717 
in the Department of Defense’s baseline 
fuel program. 
(ii) Enough of any base fuel shortfall 
attributable to fuel price increases to main-
tain sufficient on-hand cash for the De-
fense Working Capital Funds to cover 
seven days disbursements. 
(3) Excluded items from Overseas Contingency 
Funding that must be funded from the base budget: 
(A) Training vehicles, aircraft, ammuni-
tion, and simulators, but not training base 
stocks of specialized, theater-specific equipment 
that is required to support combat operations in 
the theater of operations, and support to de-
ployment-specific training described above. 
(B) Acceleration of equipment service life 
extension programs already in the Future Years 
Defense Plan. 
(C) 
Base 
Realignment 
and 
Closure 
projects. 
(D) Family support initiatives: 
(i) Construction of childcare facilities. 
(ii) Funding for private-public par-
tisanships to expand military families’ ac-
cess to childcare.
718 
(iii) Support for service members’ 
spouses professional development. 
(E) Programs to maintain industrial base 
capacity including ‘‘war-stoppers’’. 
(F) Personnel: 
(i) Recruiting and retention bonuses 
to maintain end-strength. 
(ii) Basic Pay and the Basic allow-
ances for Housing and Subsistence for per-
manently authorized end strength. 
(iii) Individual augmentees on a case- 
by-case basis. 
(G) Support for the personnel, operations, 
or the construction or maintenance of facilities, 
at United States Offices of Security Coopera-
tion in theater. 
(H) Costs for reconfiguring prepositioned 
supplies and equipment or for maintaining 
them. 
(4) SPECIAL SITUATIONS.—Items proposed for 
increases in reprogrammings or as payback for prior 
reprogrammings must meet the criteria above.
719 
TITLE 
XVI—STRATEGIC 
PRO-
GRAMS, CYBER, AND INTEL-
LIGENCE MATTERS 
Subtitle A—Space Activities 
SEC. 1601. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SPACE SECURITY 
AND DEFENSE PROGRAM. 
(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the Sense of Con-
gress that— 
(1) critical United States national security 
space systems are facing a serious growing foreign 
threat; 
(2) the People’s Republic of China and the Rus-
sian Federation are both developing capabilities to 
disrupt the use of space by the United States in a 
conflict, as recently outlined by the Director of Na-
tional Intelligence in testimony before Congress; and 
(3) a fully-developed multi-faceted space secu-
rity and defense program is needed to deter and de-
feat any adversaries’ acts of space aggression. 
(b) REPORT ON ABILITY OF THE UNITED STATES TO 
DETER AND DEFEAT ADVERSARY SPACE AGGRESSION.— 
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment 
of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the 
congressional defense committees a report containing an 
assessment of the ability of the Department of Defense
720 
to deter and defeat any act of space aggression by an ad-
versary. 
(c) STUDY ON ALTERNATIVE DEFENSE AND DETER-
RENCE
STRATEGIES
IN
RESPONSE
TO
FOREIGN 
COUNTERSPACE CAPABILITIES.— 
(1) STUDY REQUIRED.—The Secretary of De-
fense, acting through the Office of Net Assessment, 
shall conduct a study of potential alternative defense 
and deterrent strategies in response to the existing 
and projected counterspace capabilities of China and 
Russia. Such study shall include an assessment of 
the congruence of such strategies with the current 
United States defense strategy and defense pro-
grams of record, and the associated implications of 
pursuing such strategies. 
(2) REPORT.—Not later than one year after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
Defense shall submit to the congressional defense 
committees the results of the study required under 
paragraph (1). 
SEC. 1602. EVOLVED EXPENDABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE NOTI-
FICATION. 
(a) NOTIFICATION.—The Secretary of the Air Force 
shall provide to the appropriate congressional committees 
notice of each change to the evolved expendable launch
721 
vehicle acquisition plan and schedule from the plan and 
schedule included in the budget submitted by the Presi-
dent under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, 
for fiscal year 2015. Such notification shall include— 
(1) an identification of the change; 
(2) a national security rationale for the change; 
(3) the impact of the change on the evolved ex-
pendable launch vehicle block buy contract; 
(4) the impact of the change on the opportuni-
ties for competition for certified evolved expendable 
launch vehicle launch providers; and 
(5) the costs or savings of the change. 
(b) APPLICABILITY.—The requirement under sub-
section (a) shall apply to fiscal years 2015, 2016, and 
2017. 
(c) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.— 
In this section, the term ‘‘appropriate congressional com-
mittees’’ means— 
(1) the congressional defense committees; and 
(2) with respect to a change to the evolved ex-
pendable launch vehicle acquisition schedule for an 
intelligence-related launch, the Permanent Select 
Committee on Intelligence of the House of Rep-
resentatives and the Select Committee on Intel-
ligence of the Senate.
722 
SEC. 1603. SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS RESPONSIBIL-
ITIES OF EXECUTIVE AGENT FOR SPACE. 
The Secretary of Defense shall, not later than 180 
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, revise 
Department of Defense directives and guidance to require 
the Department of Defense Executive Agent for Space to 
ensure that in developing space strategies, architectures, 
and programs for satellite communications, the Executive 
Agent shall— 
(1) conduct strategic planning to ensure the 
Department of Defense is effectively and efficiently 
meeting the satellite communications requirements 
of the military departments and commanders of the 
combatant commands; 
(2) coordinate with the secretaries of the mili-
tary departments and the heads of Defense Agencies 
to eliminate duplication of effort and to ensure that 
resources are used to achieve the maximum effort in 
related satellite communication science and tech-
nology; research, development, test and evaluation; 
production; and operations and sustainment; 
(3) coordinate with the Under Secretary of De-
fense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and 
the Chief Information Officer of the Department to 
ensure that effective and efficient acquisition ap-
proaches are being used to acquire military and com-
723 
mercial satellite communications for the Depart-
ment, including space, ground, and user terminal in-
tegration; and 
(4) coordinate with the chairman of the Joint 
Requirements Oversight Council to develop a process 
to identify the current and projected satellite com-
munications requirements of the Department. 
SEC. 1604. LIQUID ROCKET ENGINE DEVELOPMENT PRO-
GRAM. 
(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con-
gress that the Secretary of Defense should develop a next- 
generation liquid rocket engine that— 
(1) is made in the United States; 
(2) meets the requirements of the national secu-
rity space community; 
(3) is developed by not later than 2019; 
(4) is developed using full and open competi-
tion; and 
(5) is available for purchase by all space launch 
providers of the United States. 
(b) DEVELOPMENT.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense 
shall develop a next-generation liquid rocket engine 
that enables the effective, efficient, and expedient 
transition from the use of non-allied space launch
724 
engines to a domestic alternative for national secu-
rity space launches. 
(2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Of 
the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act 
for fiscal year 2015 for research, development, test, 
and evaluation, Air Force, as specified in the fund-
ing table in section 4201, $220,000,000 shall be 
available for the Secretary of Defense to develop a 
next-generation liquid rocket engine. 
(c) COORDINATION.— The Secretary shall coordinate 
with the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration, to the extent practicable, to ensure 
that the rocket engine developed under subsection (b) 
meets objectives that are common to both the national se-
curity space community and the space program of the 
United States. 
(d) REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in coordina-
tion with the Administrator, shall submit to the appro-
priate congressional committees a report that includes— 
(1) a plan to carry out the development of the 
rocket engine under subsection (b), including an 
analysis of the benefits of using public-private part-
nerships;
725 
(2) the requirements of the program to develop 
such rocket engine; and 
(3) the estimated cost of such rocket engine. 
(e) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES DE-
FINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘appropriate congres-
sional committees’’ means the following: 
(1) The congressional defense committees. 
(2) The Committee on Science, Space, and 
Technology of the House of Representatives and the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transpor-
tation of the Senate. 
(3) The Permanent Select Committee on Intel-
ligence of the House of Representatives and the Se-
lect Committee on Intelligence of the Senate. 
SEC. 1605. PILOT PROGRAM FOR ACQUISITION OF COM-
MERCIAL SATELLITE COMMUNICATION SERV-
ICES. 
(a) PILOT PROGRAM.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense 
may develop and carry out a pilot program to deter-
mine the feasibility and advisability of expanding the 
use of working capital funds by the Secretary to ef-
fectively and efficiently acquire commercial satellite 
capabilities to meet the requirements of the military
726 
departments, Defense Agencies, and combatant com-
manders. 
(2) FUNDING.—Of the funds authorized to be 
appropriated for any of fiscal years 2015 through 
2020 for the Department of Defense for the acquisi-
tion of commercial satellite communications, not 
more than $50,000,000 may be obligated or ex-
pended for such pilot program during such a fiscal 
year. 
(3) CERTAIN
AUTHORITIES.—In carrying out 
the pilot program under paragraph (1), the Sec-
retary may not use the authorities provided in sec-
tions 2208(k) and 2210(b) of title 10, United States 
Code. 
(b) GOALS.—In developing and carrying out the pilot 
program under subsection (a)(1), the Secretary shall en-
sure that the pilot program— 
(1) provides a cost effective and strategic meth-
od to acquire commercial satellite services; 
(2) incentivizes private-sector participation and 
investment in technologies to meet future require-
ments of the Department of Defense with respect to 
commercial satellite services; 
(3) takes into account the potential for a surge 
or other change in the demand of the Department
727 
for commercial satellite communications access in re-
sponse to global or regional events; and 
(4) ensures the ability of the Secretary to con-
trol and account for the cost of programs and work 
performed under the pilot program. 
(c) DURATION.—If the Secretary commences the 
pilot program under subsection (a)(1), the pilot program 
shall terminate on October 1, 2020. 
(d) REPORTS.— 
(1) INITIAL REPORT.—Not later than 150 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Sec-
retary shall submit to the congressional defense com-
mittees a report that includes a plan and schedule 
to carry out the pilot program under subsection 
(a)(1). 
(2) FINAL REPORT.—Not later than December 
1, 2020, the Secretary shall submit to the congres-
sional defense committees a report on the pilot pro-
gram under subsection (a)(1). The report shall in-
clude— 
(A) an assessment of expanding the use of 
working capital funds to effectively and effi-
ciently acquire commercial satellite capabilities 
to meet the requirements of the military depart-
728 
ments, Defense Agencies, and combatant com-
manders; and 
(B) a description of— 
(i) any contract entered into under 
the pilot program, the funding used under 
such contract, and the efficiencies realized 
under such contract; 
(ii) the advantages and challenges of 
using working capital funds as described in 
subparagraph (A); 
(iii) any additional authorities the 
Secretary determines necessary to acquire 
commercial satellite capabilities as de-
scribed in subsection (a)(1); and 
(iv) any recommendations of the Sec-
retary with respect to improving or extend-
ing the pilot program. 
SEC. 1606. SPACE PROTECTION STRATEGY. 
Section 911(d) of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (10 U.S.C. 2271 note) is amend-
ed by adding at the end the following new paragraph: 
‘‘(4) Fiscal years 2026 through 2030.’’.
729 
Subtitle B—Defense Intelligence 
and Intelligence-Related Activities 
SEC. 1611. ASSESSMENT AND LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY 
OF FUNDS FOR INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES 
AND PROGRAMS OF UNITED STATES SPECIAL 
OPERATIONS COMMAND AND SPECIAL OPER-
ATIONS FORCES. 
(a) ASSESSMENT.— 
(1) REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary of Defense, 
acting through the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Intelligence, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict, and 
the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, 
shall submit to the appropriate committees of Con-
gress an assessment of the intelligence activities and 
programs of United States Special Operations Com-
mand and special operations forces. 
(2) INCLUSIONS.—The assessment under para-
graph (1) shall include each of the following ele-
ments: 
(A) An overall strategy defining such intel-
ligence activities and programs, including defi-
nitions of intelligence activities and programs 
unique to special operations.
730 
(B) A validated strategy and roadmap of 
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance 
programs and requirements for special oper-
ations across the future years defense program. 
(C) A comprehensive description of current 
and anticipated future Joint Staff validated re-
quirements for the intelligence activities and 
programs of each geographic combatant com-
mander within the respective geographic area of 
such covered combatant commander to be ful-
filled by special operations forces, including 
those that can only be addressed by special op-
erations forces, programs, or capabilities. 
(D) Validated present and planned United 
States Special Operations Command force 
structure requirements to meet current and an-
ticipated special operations intelligence activi-
ties and programs of geographic combatant 
commanders. 
(E) A comprehensive review and assess-
ment of statutory authorities, and Department 
and interagency policies, including limitations, 
for special operations forces intelligence activi-
ties and programs.
731 
(F) An independent, comprehensive cost 
estimate of special operations intelligence activi-
ties and programs by the Director of Cost As-
sessment and Program Evaluation of the De-
partment of Defense, including an estimate of 
the costs of the period of the current future 
years defense program, including a description 
of all rules and assumptions used to develop the 
cost estimates. 
(G) A copy of any memoranda of under-
standing or memoranda of agreement between 
the Department of Defense and other depart-
ments or agencies of the United States Govern-
ment, or between components of the Depart-
ment of Defense that are required to implement 
objectives of special operations intelligence ac-
tivities and programs. 
(H) Any other matters the Secretary con-
siders appropriate. 
(3) FORM.—The assessment required under 
paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified 
form, but may include a classified annex. 
(b) LIMITATIONS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), 
not more than 50 percent of the funds authorized to
732 
be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made avail-
able for fiscal year 2015 for procurement, Defense- 
wide, or research, development, test, and evaluation, 
Defense-wide, for the major force program 11 of the 
United States Special Operations Command may be 
obligated until the assessment required under sub-
section (a) is submitted. 
(2) EXCEPTION.—Paragraph (1) shall not 
apply with respect to funds authorized to be appro-
priated for Overseas Contingency Operations under 
title XV. 
(c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
(1) 
APPROPRIATE
COMMITTEES
OF
CON-
GRESS.—The term ‘‘appropriate committees of con-
gress’’ means the congressional defense committees, 
the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of 
the House of Representatives, and the Select Com-
mittee on Intelligence of the Senate. 
(2) FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE PROGRAM.—The 
term ‘‘future years defense program’’ means the fu-
ture years defense program under section 221 of 
title 10, United States Code. 
(3) GEOGRAPHIC
COMBATANT
COMMANDER.— 
The term ‘‘geographic combatant commander’’ 
means a commander of a combatant command (as
733 
defined in section 161(c) of title 10, United States 
Code) with a geographic area of responsibility. 
SEC. 1612. ANNUAL BRIEFING ON THE INTELLIGENCE, SUR-
VEILLANCE, 
AND 
RECONNAISSANCE 
RE-
QUIREMENTS 
OF 
THE 
COMBATANT 
COM-
MANDS. 
At the same time that the President’s budget is sub-
mitted pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United 
States Code, for each of fiscal years 2016 through 2020— 
(1) the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 
shall provide to the congressional defense commit-
tees, the Permanent Select Committee on Intel-
ligence of the House of Representatives, and the Se-
lect Committee on Intelligence of the Senate a brief-
ing on— 
(A) the intelligence, surveillance, and re-
connaissance requirements, by specific intel-
ligence capability type, of each of the combatant 
commands; 
(B) for the year preceding the year in 
which the briefing is provided, the satisfaction 
rate of each of the combatant commands with 
the intelligence, surveillance, and reconnais-
sance requirements, by specific intelligence ca-
pability type, of such combatant command; and
734 
(C) a risk analysis identifying the critical 
gaps and shortfalls in such requirements in re-
lation to such satisfaction rate; and 
(2) the Under Secretary of Defense for Intel-
ligence shall provide to the congressional defense 
committees, the Permanent Select Committee on In-
telligence of the House of Representatives, and the 
Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate a 
briefing on short-term, mid-term, and long-term 
strategies to address the critical intelligence, surveil-
lance and reconnaissance requirements of the com-
batant commands. 
SEC. 1613. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF REPORT ON IMAGERY 
INTELLIGENCE AND GEOSPATIAL INFORMA-
TION SUPPORT PROVIDED TO REGIONAL OR-
GANIZATIONS AND SECURITY ALLIANCES. 
Section 921(c)(1) of the National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112–239; 126 
Stat. 1878) is amended by striking ‘‘2014 and 2015’’ and 
inserting ‘‘2014 through 2016’’. 
SEC. 1614. TACTICAL EXPLOITATION OF NATIONAL CAPA-
BILITIES EXECUTIVE AGENT. 
Subchapter I of chapter 21 of title 10, United States 
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
section:
735 
‘‘§ 430. TENCAP executive agent 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—There is in the Department of 
Defense a Tactical Exploitation of National Capabilities 
Executive Agent who shall be appointed by the Under Sec-
retary of Defense for Intelligence. The Executive Agent 
shall report directly to the Under Secretary of Defense 
for Intelligence. The Executive Agent shall be responsible 
for working with the combatant commands, military serv-
ices, and the intelligence community to develop methods 
to increase warfighter effectiveness through the exploi-
tation of national capabilities and to promote cross-do-
main integration of such capabilities into military oper-
ations, training, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnais-
sance activities. 
‘‘(b) ANNUAL BRIEFING.—At the same time as the 
budget materials are submitted to Congress in connection 
with the submission of the budget for each of fiscal years 
2016 through 2020, pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, 
the Executive Agent, in coordination with the commanders 
of the combatant commands, the Secretaries of the mili-
tary departments, and the heads of the Department of De-
fense intelligence agencies and offices, shall provide to the 
Committee on Armed Services and the Select Committee 
on Intelligence of the Senate and the Committee on Armed 
Services and the Permanent Select Committee on Intel-
ligence of the House of Representatives a briefing on the
736 
investments, activities, challenges, and opportunities of 
the Executive Agent in carrying out the responsibilities 
under paragraph (1). The briefings shall be coordinated 
with each of the armed services, the Defense Intelligence 
Agency, the National Security Agency, the National 
Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, and the National Recon-
naissance office.’’. 
SEC. 1615. AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE ORGANIZATION. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) The Air Force National Air and Space In-
telligence Center provides essential national exper-
tise on foreign aerospace system capabilities, includ-
ing cyber, space systems, missiles, and aircraft. 
(2) The Air Force National Air and Space In-
telligence Center is organizationally aligned to the 
Headquarters Air Staff, through the Air Force Intel-
ligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Agency. 
(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con-
gress that— 
(1) the Air Force National Air and Space Intel-
ligence Center provides indispensable intelligence 
support to a variety of customers, including the Air 
Force, the Department of Defense, the intelligence 
community, and national policymakers; and
737 
(2) to maintain operational effectiveness, the 
Air Force organizational reporting structure of the 
Air Force National Air and Space Intelligence Cen-
ter should remain organizationally aligned to the 
Headquarters Air Staff with reporting through the 
Vice Chief of Staff. 
(c) PLAN.—Not later than 90 days after the date of 
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force 
shall submit to the congressional defense committees, the 
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House 
of Representatives, and the Select Committee on Intel-
ligence of the Senate a strategic plan for the intelligence 
organization of the Air Force, including maintaining the 
National Air and Space Intelligence Center alignment to 
the Headquarters Air Staff. 
SEC. 1616. PROHIBITION ON NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE 
PROGRAM CONSOLIDATION. 
(a) PROHIBITION.—No amounts authorized to be ap-
propriated or otherwise made available to the Department 
of Defense may be used during the period beginning on 
the date of the enactment of this Act and ending on De-
cember 31, 2015, to execute— 
(1) the separation of the National Intelligence 
Program budget from the Department of Defense 
budget;
738 
(2) the consolidation of the National Intel-
ligence Program budget within the Department of 
Defense budget; or 
(3) the establishment of a new appropriations 
account or appropriations account structure for the 
National Intelligence Program budget. 
(b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
(1) NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM.—The 
term ‘‘National Intelligence Program’’ has the mean-
ing given the term in section 3 of the National Secu-
rity Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003). 
(2) NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM BUDG-
ET.—The term ‘‘National Intelligence Program 
budget’’ means the portions of the Department of 
Defense budget designated as part of the National 
Intelligence Program. 
SEC. 1617. REPORT ON GOVERNANCE AND CORRUPTION IN 
THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION. 
(a) REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, the Director of National In-
telligence shall submit to the Committee on Foreign Af-
fairs and the Committee on Armed Services of the House 
of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Rela-
tions and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate
739 
a report on the status of governance and democratization 
in the Russian Federation. 
(b) CONTENTS.—The report required under sub-
section (a) shall include— 
(1) a description of the extent of political and 
economic corruption among the senior leadership of 
the Russian Federation; and 
(2) an analysis of the assets of the senior lead-
ership of the Russian Federation, with a particular 
focus on the illegal attainment and movement of 
those assets, including the use of family or friends 
to hide assets. 
(c) FORM.—The report required under subsection (a) 
shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include 
a classified annex. 
(d) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—The Director of Na-
tional Intelligence shall make publicly available on the 
Internet the unclassified portion of the report required 
under subsection (a). 
Subtitle C—Cyberspace-Related 
Matters 
SEC. 1621. EXECUTIVE AGENT FOR CYBER TEST AND TRAIN-
ING RANGES. 
(a) EXECUTIVE AGENT.—Not later than 120 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary
740 
of Defense shall designate a senior official of the Depart-
ment of Defense to act as the executive agent for cyber 
and information technology test and training ranges. 
(b) ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES, 
AND
AUTHORI-
TIES.— 
(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—Not later than one year 
after the enactment of this Act, and in accordance 
with Directive 5101.1, the Secretary of Defense shall 
prescribe the roles, responsibilities, and authorities 
of the executive agent designated under subsection 
(a). 
(2) SPECIFICATION.—The roles and responsibil-
ities of the executive agent designated under sub-
section (a) shall include each of the following: 
(A) Developing and maintaining a com-
prehensive list of cyber and information tech-
nology ranges, test facilities, test beds, and 
other means of testing, training, and developing 
software, personnel, and tools for accommo-
dating the mission of the Department. 
(B) Serving as a single entity to organize 
and manage designated cyber and information 
technology test ranges, including—
741 
(i) establishing the priorities for cyber 
and information technology ranges to meet 
Department objectives; 
(ii) enforcing standards to meet re-
quirements specified by the United States 
Cyber Command, the training community, 
and the research, development, testing, and 
evaluation community; 
(iii) identifying and offering guidance 
on 
the 
opportunities 
for 
integration 
amongst the designated cyber and informa-
tion technology ranges regarding test, 
training, and development functions; 
(iv) finding opportunities for cost re-
duction, integration, and coordination im-
provements for the appropriate cyber and 
information technology ranges; 
(v) adding or consolidating cyber and 
information technology ranges in the fu-
ture to better meet the evolving needs of 
the cyber strategy and resource require-
ments of the Department; and 
(vi) coordinating with interagency and 
industry partners on cyber and information 
technology range issues.
742 
(C) Defining a cyber range architecture 
that— 
(i) may add or consolidate cyber and 
information technology ranges in the fu-
ture to better meet the evolving needs of 
the cyber strategy and resource require-
ments of the Department; 
(ii) coordinates with interagency and 
industry partners on cyber and information 
technology range issues; 
(iii) allows for integrated closed loop 
testing in a secure environment of cyber 
and electronic warfare capabilities; 
(iv) supports science and technology 
development, experimentation, testing and 
training; and 
(v) provides for interconnection with 
other existing cyber ranges and other ki-
netic range facilities in a distributed man-
ner. 
(D) Certifying all cyber range investments 
of the Department of Defense. 
(E) Performing such other roles and re-
sponsibilities as the Secretary of Defense con-
siders appropriate.
743 
(c) SUPPORT WITHIN DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.— 
In accordance with Directive 5101.1, the Secretary of De-
fense shall ensure that the military departments, Defense 
Agencies, and other components of the Department of De-
fense provide the executive agent designated under sub-
section (a) with the appropriate support and resources 
needed to perform the roles, responsibilities, and authori-
ties of the executive agent. 
(d) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
(1) The term ‘‘designated cyber and informa-
tion technology range’’ includes the National Cyber 
Range, the Joint Information Operations Range, the 
Defense Information Assurance Range, and the C4 
Assessments Division of J6 of the Joint Staff. 
(2) The term ‘‘Directive 5101.1’’ means De-
partment of Directive 5101.1, or any successor di-
rective relating to the responsibilities of an executive 
agent of the Department of Defense. 
(3) The term ‘‘executive agent’’ has the mean-
ing given the term ‘‘DoD Executive Agent’’ in Direc-
tive 5101.1. 
SEC. 1622. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING ROLE OF NA-
TIONAL GUARD IN DEFENSE OF UNITED 
STATES AGAINST CYBER ATTACKS. 
It is the sense of Congress that—
744 
(1) members of the National Guard may pos-
sess knowledge of critical infrastructure in the 
States in which the members serve that may be of 
value for purposes of defending such infrastructure 
against cyber threats; 
(2) traditional members of the National Guard 
and National Guard technicians may have experience 
in both the private and public sector that could ben-
efit the readiness of the Department of Defense’s 
cyber force and the development of cyber capabili-
ties; 
(3) the long-standing relationship the National 
Guard has with local and civil authorities may be 
beneficial for purposes of providing for a coordinated 
response to a cyber attack and defending against 
cyber threats; 
(4) the States are already working to establish 
cyber partnerships with the National Guard; and 
(5) the National Guard has a role in the de-
fense of the United States against cyber threats and 
consideration should be given to how the National 
Guard might be integrated into a comprehensive na-
tional approach for cyber defense.
745 
SEC. 1623. DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE CER-
TIFICATION WITH RESPECT TO THE MISSION 
ANALYSIS FOR CYBER OPERATIONS OF DE-
PARTMENT OF DEFENSE. 
Section 933 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113–66; 127 Stat. 
830) is amended— 
(1) in subsection (c)— 
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘before 
the submittal of’’ and all that follows and in-
serting ‘‘or 2015 before the Secretary submits 
the report required by subsection (d) and the 
Director of National Intelligence submits a cer-
tification described in subsection (g).’’; and 
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking the pe-
riod at the end and inserting ‘‘and the Director 
of National Intelligence submits a certification 
described in subsection (g).’’; and 
(2) by adding at the end the following new sub-
section: 
‘‘(g) DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE CER-
TIFICATION.—The Director of National Intelligence shall 
submit to the congressional defense committees a certifi-
cation that the recommendations of the report required 
under subsection (d) are consistent with the cyber oper-
ations capability needs of the United States.’’.
746 
Subtitle D—Nuclear Forces 
SEC. 1631. PREPARATION OF ANNUAL BUDGET REQUEST 
REGARDING NUCLEAR WEAPONS. 
Section 179(f) of title 10, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following new para-
graphs: 
‘‘(3)(A) With respect to the preparation of a budget 
for a fiscal year to be submitted by the President to Con-
gress under section 1105(a) of title 31, the Secretary of 
Defense may not agree to a proposed transfer of estimated 
nuclear budget request authority unless the Secretary of 
Defense submits to the congressional defense committees 
a certification described in subparagraph (B). 
‘‘(B) A certification described in this subparagraph 
is a certification that includes the following: 
‘‘(i) Certification that, during the fiscal year 
prior to the fiscal year covered by the budget for 
which the certification is submitted, the Secretary of 
Energy obligated or expended any amounts covered 
by a proposed transfer of estimated nuclear budget 
request authority made for such prior fiscal year in 
a manner consistent with a memorandum of agree-
ment that was developed by the Nuclear Weapons 
Council and entered into by the Secretary of Defense 
and the Secretary of Energy.
747 
‘‘(ii) A detailed assessment by the Nuclear 
Weapons Council regarding how the Administrator 
for Nuclear Security implemented any agreements 
and decisions of the Council made during such prior 
fiscal year. 
‘‘(iii) An assessment from each of the Vice 
Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff and the Com-
mander of the United States Strategic Command re-
garding any effects to the military during such prior 
fiscal year that were caused by the delay or failure 
of the Administrator to implement any agreements 
or decisions described in clause (ii). 
‘‘(4) The Secretary of Defense shall include with the 
defense budget materials for a fiscal year the memo-
randum of agreement described in paragraph (3)(B)(i) 
that covers such fiscal year. 
‘‘(5)(A) Not later than 30 days after the President 
submits to Congress the budget for a fiscal year under 
section 1105(a) of title 31, the Commander of the United 
States Strategic Command shall submit to the Chairman 
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff an assessment of— 
‘‘(i) whether such budget allows the Federal 
Government to meet the nuclear stockpile and stock-
pile stewardship program requirements during the
748 
fiscal year covered by the budget and the four subse-
quent fiscal years; and 
‘‘(ii) if the Commander determines that such 
budget does not allow the Federal Government to 
meet such requirements, a description of the steps 
being taken to meet such requirements. 
‘‘(B) Not later than 30 days after the date on which 
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff receives the as-
sessment of the Commander of the United States Stra-
tegic Command under subparagraph (A), the Chairman 
shall submit to the congressional defense committees— 
‘‘(i) such assessment as it was submitted to the 
Chairman; and 
‘‘(ii) any comments of the Chairman. 
‘‘(6) In this subsection: 
‘‘(A) The term ‘budget’ has the meaning given 
that term in section 231(f) of this title. 
‘‘(B) The term ‘defense budget materials’ has 
the meaning given that term in section 231(f) of this 
title. 
‘‘(C) The term ‘proposed transfer of estimated 
nuclear budget request authority’ means, in pre-
paring a budget, a request for the Secretary of De-
fense to transfer an estimated amount of the pro-
posed budget authority of the Secretary to the Sec-
749 
retary of Energy for purposes relating to nuclear 
weapons.’’. 
SEC. 1632. INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF THE PERSONNEL RE-
LIABILITY PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT 
OF DEFENSE AND THE HUMAN RELIABILITY 
PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY. 
(a) REVIEW.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after 
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
of Defense and the Secretary of Energy shall jointly 
seek to enter into a contract with a federally funded 
research and development center to conduct an inde-
pendent review of the personnel reliability program 
of the Department of Defense and the human reli-
ability program of the Department of Energy. 
(2) MATTERS
INCLUDED.—The review under 
paragraph (1) shall include the following: 
(A) An examination of the costs and bene-
fits of each program described in paragraph 
(1). 
(B) Examples of successes and failures for 
each such program. 
(C) The reporting and administrative re-
quirements of each such program.
750 
(D) The authorities and responsibilities of 
the commanders and managers of each such 
program. 
(E) Guidance for when certain positions 
must be included in each such program. 
(F) Recommendations with respect to mak-
ing each such program more effective, more ef-
ficient, and, to the extent appropriate, more 
consistent between the Departments. 
(G) Any other matters the Secretaries 
jointly determine appropriate. 
(b) REPORT.—Not later than October 1, 2015, the 
Secretaries shall jointly submit to the congressional de-
fense committees such review. 
SEC. 1633. ASSESSMENT OF NUCLEAR WEAPON SECONDARY 
REQUIREMENT. 
(a) ASSESSMENT.—The Secretary of Defense, in co-
ordination with the Secretary of Energy and the Com-
mander of the United States Strategic Command, shall 
assess the annual secondary production requirement need-
ed to sustain a safe, secure, reliable, and effective nuclear 
deterrent. 
(b) REPORT.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Sec-
751 
retary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary 
of Energy and the Commander of the United States 
Strategic Command, shall submit to the congres-
sional defense committees a report regarding the as-
sessment conducted under subsection (a). 
(2) MATTERS
INCLUDED.—The report under 
paragraph (1) shall include the following: 
(A) An explanation of the rationale and as-
sumptions that led to the current 50 to 80 
secondaries per year production requirement, 
including the factors considered in determining 
such requirement. 
(B) An analysis of whether there are any 
changes to such 50 to 80 secondaries per year 
production requirement, including the reasons 
for any such changes. 
(C) A description of how the secondary 
production requirement is affected by or related 
to— 
(i) the demands of stockpile mod-
ernization, including the schedule for life 
extension programs; 
(ii) the requirement for a responsive 
infrastructure, including the ability to
752 
hedge against technical failure and geo-
political risk; and 
(iii) the number of secondaries held in 
reserve or the inactive stockpile, and the 
likelihood such secondaries may be reused. 
(E) The proposed time frame for achieving 
such 50 to 80 secondaries per year production 
requirement. 
(3) FORM.—The report under paragraph (1) 
shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may in-
clude a classified annex. 
SEC. 1634. RETENTION OF MISSILE SILOS. 
(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the Sense of Con-
gress that recent authorization and appropriations Acts 
passed by Congress and signed by the President have pro-
mulgated a national policy that it is in the national secu-
rity interests of the United States to retain the maximum 
number of land-based strategic missile silos and their as-
sociated infrastructure to ensure that billions of dollars 
in prior taxpayer investments for such silos and infra-
structure are not lost through precipitous actions which 
may be budget-driven, cyclical, and not in the long-term 
strategic interests of the United States. 
(b) REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary of Defense shall 
preserve each intercontinental ballistic missile silo that
753 
contains a deployed missile as of the date of the enactment 
of this Act in, at minimum, a warm status that enables 
such silo to— 
(1) remain a fully functioning element of the 
interconnected and redundant command and control 
system of the missile field; and 
(2) be made fully operational with a deployed 
missile. 
SEC. 1635. CERTIFICATION ON NUCLEAR FORCE STRUC-
TURE. 
Not later than 90 days after the date of the enact-
ment of this Act, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff, in coordination with the Commander of the United 
States Strategic Command, shall certify to the congres-
sional defense committees that the plan for implementa-
tion of the New START Treaty (as defined in section 
494(a)(2)(D) of title 10, United States Code) announced 
on April 8, 2014, will enable the United States to meet 
its obligations under such treaty in a manner that ensures 
the nuclear forces of the United States— 
(1) are capable, survivable, and balanced; and 
(2) maintain strategic stability, deterrence and 
extended deterrence, and allied assurance.
754 
SEC. 1636. FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF POLICY ON THE 
NUCLEAR TRIAD. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) The April 2010 Nuclear Posture Review 
stated— 
(A) ‘‘After considering a wide range of 
possible options for the U.S. strategic nuclear 
posture, including some that involved elimi-
nating a leg of the Triad, the NPR concluded 
that for planned reductions under New START, 
the United States should retain a smaller Triad 
of SLBMs [submarine launched ballistic mis-
siles], ICBMs [intercontinental ballistic mis-
siles], and heavy bombers. Retaining all three 
Triad legs will best maintain strategic stability 
at reasonable cost, while hedging against poten-
tial technical problems or vulnerabilities.’’; 
(B) ‘‘ICBMs provide significant advan-
tages to the U.S. nuclear force posture, includ-
ing extremely secure command and control, 
high readiness rates, and relatively low oper-
ating costs.’’; 
(C) ‘‘a survivable U.S. response force re-
quires continuous at-sea deployments of SSBNs 
[ballistic missile submarines] in both the Atlan-
755 
tic and Pacific oceans, as well as the ability to 
surge additional submarines in crisis.’’; and 
(D) nuclear-capable bombers— 
(i) ‘‘[provide] a rapid and effective 
hedge against technical challenges with an-
other leg of the Triad, as well as geo-
political uncertainties’’; and 
(ii) ‘‘are important to extended deter-
rence of potential attacks on U.S. allies 
and partners.’’. 
(2) In a letter to the Senate on February 2, 
2011, regarding the New START Treaty, President 
Obama stated that ‘‘I intend to modernize or replace 
the triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems: a 
heavy bomber and air- launched cruise missile, an 
ICBM, and a nuclear-powered ballistic missile sub-
marine (SSBN) and SLBM.’’. 
(3) In the Resolution Of Advice And Consent 
To Ratification of the New START Treaty, the Sen-
ate stated that ‘‘it is the sense of the Senate that 
United States deterrence and flexibility is assured by 
a robust triad of strategic delivery vehicles. To this 
end, the United States is committed to accom-
plishing the modernization and replacement of its 
strategic nuclear delivery vehicles, and to ensuring
756 
the continued flexibility of United States conven-
tional and nuclear delivery systems.’’. 
(4) On June 19, 2013, the Secretary of De-
fense, Chuck Hagel, stated, ‘‘First, the U.S. will 
maintain a ready and credible deterrent. Second, we 
will retain a triad of bombers, ICBMs, and ballistic 
missile submarines. Third, we will make sure that 
our nuclear weapons remain safe, secure, ready and 
effective.’’. 
(5) Section 1062 of the National Defense Au-
thorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 
113–66; 10 U.S.C. 495 note) states that— 
(A) ‘‘It is the policy of the United States 
to modernize or replace the triad of strategic 
nuclear delivery systems’’; and 
(B) ‘‘Congress supports the modernization 
or replacement of the triad of strategic nuclear 
delivery systems consisting of a heavy bomber 
and air-launched cruise missile, an interconti-
nental ballistic missile, and a ballistic missile 
submarine and submarine launched ballistic 
missile’’. 
(6) On March 6, 2014, the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, tes-
tified to the Committee on Armed Services of the
757 
House of Representatives that the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff have determined that ‘‘our recommendation is 
to remain firmly committed to the triad, the three 
legs of the nuclear capability, and that any further 
reduction should be done only through negotiations, 
not unilaterally, and that we should commit to mod-
ernizing the stockpile while we have it.’’. 
(7) On April 2, 2014, the Commander of 
United States Strategic Command, Admiral Cecil 
Haney, testified to the Committee on Armed Serv-
ices of the House of Representatives that ‘‘First and 
foremost, I think it is important that we as a coun-
try realize just how important and foundational our 
strategic deterrent is today for us and well into the 
future. As you have mentioned, there is a need for 
modernization in a variety of areas. When you look 
at the credible strategic deterrent we have today, 
that includes everything from the indications and 
warning, to the command and control and commu-
nication structure that goes all the way from the 
President down to the units, and to what frequently 
we talk about as the triad involving the interconti-
nental ballistic missiles, the submarines, and the 
bombers—each providing its unique aspect of deter-
rence.’’.
758 
(8) In the June 2013 Report on Nuclear Em-
ployment Strategy of the United States required by 
section 491 of title 10, United States Code, the Sec-
retary of Defense, on behalf of the President, stated 
that ‘‘the United States will maintain a nuclear 
Triad, consisting of ICBMs, SLBMs, and nuclear- 
capable heavy bombers. Retaining all three Triad 
legs will best maintain strategic stability at reason-
able cost, while hedging against potential technical 
problems or vulnerabilities. These forces should be 
operated on a day-to-day basis in a manner that 
maintains strategic stability with Russia and China, 
deters potential regional adversaries, and assures 
U.S. Allies and partners.’’. 
(b) STATEMENT OF POLICY.—It is the policy of the 
United States— 
(1) to operate, sustain, and modernize or re-
place the triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems 
consisting of— 
(A) heavy bombers equipped with nuclear 
gravity bombs and air-launched nuclear cruise 
missiles; 
(B) land-based intercontinental ballistic 
missiles equipped with nuclear warheads that
759 
are capable of carrying multiple independently 
targetable reentry vehicles; and 
(C) ballistic missile submarines equipped 
with submarine launched ballistic missiles and 
multiple nuclear warheads. 
(2) to operate, sustain, and modernize or re-
place a capability to forward-deploy nuclear weapons 
and dual-capable fighter-bomber aircraft; 
(3) to deter potential adversaries and assure al-
lies and partners of the United States through 
strong and long-term commitment to the nuclear de-
terrent of the United States and the personnel, sys-
tems, and infrastructure that comprise such deter-
rent; and 
(4) to ensure the members of the Armed Forces 
that operate the nuclear deterrent of the United 
States have the training, resources, and national 
support required to execute the critical national se-
curity mission of the members. 
SEC. 1637. IMPROVEMENT TO BIENNIAL ASSESSMENT ON 
DELIVERY PLATFORMS FOR NUCLEAR WEAP-
ONS AND THE NUCLEAR COMMAND AND CON-
TROL SYSTEM. 
Section 492(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is 
amended by inserting ‘‘, and the ability to meet oper-
760 
ational availability requirements for,’’ after ‘‘military ef-
fectiveness of’’. 
SEC. 1638. REPORTS AND BRIEFINGS OF STRATEGIC ADVI-
SORY GROUP. 
Not later than 30 days after the date on which the 
President submits to Congress, under section 1105 of title 
31, United States Code, a budget for a fiscal year after 
fiscal year 2015, the Commander of the United States 
Strategic Command shall submit to the congressional de-
fense committees each report and briefing provided by the 
Strategic Advisory Group established pursuant to the Fed-
eral Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), including 
any subgroup thereof and any successor advisory group, 
to the Commander during the one-year period preceding 
the date of such submission. The Commander may include 
with each such submission any additional views the Com-
mander determines appropriate. 
SEC. 1639. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 
REMOVAL OR CONSOLIDATION OF DUAL-CA-
PABLE AIRCRAFT FROM EUROPE. 
(a) LIMITATION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—None of the funds author-
ized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise 
made available for fiscal year 2015 for the Depart-
ment of Defense may be used for the removal or
761 
consolidation of dual-capable aircraft from the area 
of responsibility of the United States European 
Command until the Secretary of Defense, in con-
sultation with the Secretary of State, certifies to the 
appropriate congressional committees that— 
(A) the armed forces of the Russian Fed-
eration are no longer illegally occupying 
Ukrainian territory; 
(B) the Russian Federation is no longer 
violating the INF Treaty; and 
(C) the Russian Federation is in compli-
ance with the CFE Treaty and has lifted its 
suspension of Russian observance of its treaty 
obligations. 
(2) EXCEPTION.—The limitation in paragraph 
(1) shall not apply in instances where a dual-capable 
aircraft is being replaced by an F–35 aircraft. 
(b) WAIVER.—The Secretary of Defense may waive 
the limitation in subsection (a)(1) if— 
(1) the Secretary of Defense, in coordination 
with the Secretary of State, submits to the appro-
priate congressional committees— 
(A) a notification that such a waiver is in 
the national security interest of the United
762 
States and a description of the national security 
interest covered by the waiver; 
(B) certification that such consolidation is 
consistent with the policy established in the 
NATO Deterrence and Defense Posture Review 
of 2012 concerning reciprocal non-strategic nu-
clear weapons reductions by the Russian Fed-
eration; and 
(C) a report, in unclassified form, explain-
ing why the Secretary of Defense cannot make 
the certification under subsection (a)(1); and 
(2) a period of 30 days has elapsed following 
the date on which the Secretary of Defense submits 
the information in the report under paragraph 
(1)(C). 
(c) REPORT.—The Secretary of Defense shall provide 
a report on the cost and burden sharing arrangements of 
forward-deployed nuclear weapons in place with the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization and its members and any 
recommendations for changes to these arrangements. 
(d) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
(1) The term ‘‘CFE Treaty’’ means the Treaty 
on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, signed at 
Paris November 19, 1990, and entered into force 
July 17, 1992.
763 
(2) The ‘‘dual-capable aircraft’’ means tactical 
fighter aircraft that can perform both conventional 
and nuclear missions. 
(3) The term ‘‘INF Treaty’’ means the Treaty 
Between the United States of America and the 
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Elimi-
nation of Their Intermediate-Range and Shorter- 
Range Missiles, commonly referred to as the Inter-
mediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, signed 
at Washington December 8, 1987 and entered into 
force June 1, 1988. 
SEC. 1640. ANNUAL CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE RE-
VIEW OF COST ESTIMATES FOR NUCLEAR 
WEAPONS. 
Section 1041(b) of the National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112–239; 126 
Stat. 1931) is amended— 
(1) in the subsection heading, by inserting ‘‘AN-
NUAL’’ before ‘‘CBO’’; and 
(2) by inserting ‘‘and annually thereafter,’’ 
after ‘‘this Act,’’.
764 
Subtitle E—Missile Defense 
Programs 
SEC. 1641. THEATER AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE OF ALLIES 
OF THE UNITED STATES. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) A Patriot battery of the United States pro-
viding a short-range air and missile defense capa-
bility has previously been rotationally deployed to 
Poland, pursuant to an agreement between the 
United States and the Government of Poland, dur-
ing a period occurring between 2010 to 2012. 
(2) The deployment of the Patriot battery did 
not include operational missiles and was not re-
placed with another short-range air and missile de-
fense system upon completion of the deployment ro-
tation in 2012. 
(b) POLICY.—It is the policy of the United States 
that available short-range air and missile defense systems 
and terminal missile defense systems of the United States 
with operational missiles be rotationally deployed to cen-
tral and eastern European allies, pursuant to agreements 
between the United States and such allies, to strengthen 
the air and missile defense capabilities of such allies, as 
appropriate. 
(c) AEGIS ASHORE SYSTEM.—
765 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than December 31, 
2016, and pursuant to an agreement between the 
United States and the Government of Poland, the 
Secretary of Defense shall ensure the operational 
availability of the Aegis Ashore system site in Po-
land. 
(2) RELOCATION
OF
ASSETS.—The Secretary 
may relocate the necessary assets of the Aegis weap-
on system between and within the DDG–51 Class 
Destroyer program and the Aegis Ashore program to 
meet mission requirements. 
(3) BRIEFINGS.—The Secretary shall provide to 
the appropriate congressional committees quarterly 
briefings to update the status of the progress in car-
rying out paragraph (1). 
(4) TRANSFER
AUTHORITY.—The Secretary 
may use the authority provided under section 1001 
to carry out this subsection. 
(d) MISSILE DEFENSE CAPABILITY OF POLAND.— 
(1) DEPLOYMENT.—Not later than December 
31, 2014, and pursuant to an agreement between 
the United States and the Government of Poland, 
the Secretary of Defense shall deploy to Poland a 
system providing a short-range air and missile de-
fense capability or terminal missile defense capa-
766 
bility, or both, and the personnel required to operate 
and maintain such system. 
(2) REMOVAL.—No action may be taken to ef-
fect or implement the removal of the system or the 
personnel described in paragraph (1) unless— 
(A) at least 30 days before the removal, 
the Secretary of Defense notifies the appro-
priate congressional committees that such re-
moval is in the national security interests of the 
United States; or 
(B) the removal is requested by the Gov-
ernment of Poland in the manner provided in 
the agreement between the United States and 
the Government of Poland regarding the system 
and personnel. 
(e) NOTIFICATION.—The Secretary of Defense shall 
notify the appropriate congressional committees by not 
later than 60 days after the date on which a NATO mem-
ber state makes a request that communicates to the Sec-
retary the interest of the member state in hosting missile 
defense capabilities described in subsection (b) and the 
plan of the Secretary for addressing such request. 
(f) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES DE-
FINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘appropriate congres-
sional committees’’ means the following:
767 
(1) The congressional defense committees. 
(2) The Committee on Foreign Relations of the 
Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the 
House of Representatives. 
SEC. 1642. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON PROCUREMENT AND 
DEPLOYMENT 
OF 
CAPABILITY 
ENHANCE-
MENT II EXOATMOSPHERIC KILL VEHICLE. 
It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of De-
fense should not procure an additional capability enhance-
ment II exoatmospheric kill vehicle for deployment until 
after the date on which a successful operationally realistic 
intercept flight test of the capability enhancement II 
ground-based interceptor has occurred, unless such pro-
curement is for test assets or to maintain a warm line 
for the industrial base. 
SEC. 1643. PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY FOR SPECIFIED 
FUZES. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Air Force 
may enter into contracts for the life-of-type procurement 
of covered parts of the intercontinental ballistic missile 
fuze. 
(b) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—Notwithstanding sec-
tion 1502(a) of title 31, United States Code, of the 
amounts authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 
2015 by section 101 and available for Missile Procure-
768 
ment, Air Force, as specified in the funding table in sec-
tion 4101, $4,500,000 shall be available for the procure-
ment of covered parts pursuant to contracts entered into 
under subsection (a). 
(c) COVERED PARTS DEFINED.—In this section, the 
term ‘‘covered parts’’ means commercial off-the-shelf 
items as defined in section 104 of title 41, United States 
Code. 
SEC. 
1644. 
PLAN 
TO 
COUNTER 
CERTAIN 
GROUND- 
LAUNCHED BALLISTIC MISSILES AND CRUISE 
MISSILES. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) On March 5, 2014, the Deputy Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Missile De-
fense Policy testified before the Committee on 
Armed Services of the Senate that ‘‘[w]e are con-
cerned about Russian activity that appears to be in-
consistent with the Intermediate Range Nuclear 
Forces Treaty. We’ve raised the issue with Russia. 
They provided an answer that was not satisfactory 
to us, and we will, we told them that the issue is not 
closed, and we will continue to raise this.’’ Congress 
shares this concern regarding Russian behavior that 
is ‘‘inconsistent with’’ or in violation or circumven-
tion of the INF Treaty.
769 
(2) The Commander of the United States Euro-
pean Command, and Supreme Allied Commander 
Europe, stated on April 2, 2014, that ‘‘a weapon ca-
pability that violates the INF, that is introduced 
into the greater European land mass is absolutely a 
tool that will have to be dealt with * * * I would 
not judge how the alliance will choose to react, but 
I would say they will have to consider what to do 
about it * * * It can’t go unanswered.’’. 
(3) The Director of the Missile Defense Agency 
stated on March 25, 2014, that Aegis Ashore missile 
defense sites, including those to be deployed in the 
Republic of Poland and the Republic of Romania, 
could be reconfigured to deal with the threat of in-
termediate-range ground launched cruise missiles 
with modest changes to ‘‘the software, [and] with a 
minor hardware addition.’’. 
(4) The ‘‘Report on Conventional Prompt Glob-
al Strike Options if Exempt from the Restrictions of 
the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty Be-
tween the United States of America and the Union 
of Soviet Socialist Republics’’ provided to the Com-
mittee on Armed Services of the House of Rep-
resentatives in September 2013 by the Chairman of 
the Joint Chiefs of Staff stated, ‘‘[i]n the absence of
770 
the INF Treaty, four types of weapons systems 
could assist in closing the existing JROC-validated 
capability gap: (1) Modifications to existing short 
range or tactical weapon systems to extend range; 
(2) Forward-based, ground-launched cruise missiles 
(GLCMs); (3) Forward-based, ground-launched in-
termediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs); and (4) 
Forward-based, ground-launched intermediate-range 
missiles with trajectory shaping vehicles (TSVs).’’. 
(5) The report further stated that, ‘‘[b]ecause 
of INF restrictions, examination of prohibited con-
cepts has not been performed by industry or the 
Services. Trade studies regarding capability, afford-
ability, and development timelines would have to be 
completed prior to providing an accurate estimate of 
cost, technology risk, and timeline advantages that 
could be achieved with respect to these concepts. Ex-
tensive knowledge could be leveraged from past and 
current land- and sea-based systems to assist in po-
tential development and deployment of these cur-
rently prohibited concepts.’’. 
(6) President Obama stated in Prague in April 
2009 that ‘‘Rules must be binding. Violations must 
be punished. Words must mean something.’’.
771 
(7) The Nuclear Posture Review of 2010 stat-
ed, ‘‘it is not enough to detect non-compliance; viola-
tors must know that they will face consequences 
when they are caught.’’. 
(8) The July 2010 Verifiability Assessment re-
leased by the Department of State on the New 
START Treaty, and as quoted in a hearing of the 
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate, stated: 
‘‘[t]he costs and risks of Russian cheating or break-
out, on the other hand, would likely be very signifi-
cant’’ and that the Russian Federation would be un-
likely to cheat because of the ‘‘financial and inter-
national political costs of such an action.’’. 
(b) PLAN FOR TESTING OF AEGIS ASHORE.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Director of the Missile 
Defense Agency shall develop a plan to test, by not 
later than December 31, 2015, the capability of the 
Aegis Ashore system, including pursuant to any ap-
propriate modifications to the hardware or software 
of such system, to counter intermediate-range 
ground launched cruise missiles. 
(2) SUBMISSION.—Not later than 120 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Di-
rector shall submit to the congressional defense com-
mittees the plan under paragraph (1), including, if
772 
determined appropriate by the Director, whether the 
Director determines that such plan should be imple-
mented. 
(c) 
PLAN
TO
DEVELOP
CERTAIN
GROUND- 
LAUNCHED
BALLISTIC
MISSILES
AND
CRUISE
MIS-
SILES.—If, as of the date of the enactment of this Act, 
the Russian Federation is not in complete and verifiable 
compliance with its obligations under the INF Treaty, the 
Secretary of Defense shall— 
(1) develop a plan for the research and develop-
ment of intermediate range ballistic and cruise mis-
siles, including through trade studies regarding ca-
pability, affordability, and development timelines, for 
which there are validated military requirements; and 
(2) by not later than 120 days after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, submit to the congres-
sional defense committees the plan developed under 
paragraph (1), including, if determined appropriate 
by the Secretary, whether the Secretary determines 
that such plan should be implemented. 
(d) INF TREATY DEFINED.—The term ‘‘INF Trea-
ty’’ means the Treaty Between the United States of Amer-
ica and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the 
Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and Shorter- 
Range Missiles, commonly referred to as the Intermediate-
773 
Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, signed at Wash-
ington December 8, 1987, and entered into force June 1, 
1988. 
SEC. 1645. STUDY ON TESTING PROGRAM OF GROUND- 
BASED MIDCOURSE MISSILE DEFENSE SYS-
TEM. 
(a) STUDY.—The Secretary of Defense shall enter 
into an arrangement with the Institute for Defense Anal-
yses under which the Institute shall carry out a study on 
the testing program of the ground based midcourse missile 
defense system. 
(b) ELEMENTS.—The study under subsection (a) 
shall include the following: 
(1) An assessment of whether the testing pro-
gram described in subsection (a) has established, as 
of the date of the study, that the ground-based mid-
course missile defense system will perform reliably 
and effectively under realistic operational conditions, 
including an explanation of the degree of confidence 
supporting such assessment. 
(2) An assessment of whether the currently 
planned testing program, if implemented, is suffi-
cient to establish that the ground-based midcourse 
missile defense system will perform both reliably and 
effectively against current and plausible near- and
774 
medium-term ballistic missile threats under realistic 
operational conditions, and if any gaps are identi-
fied, an evaluation of what improvements could be 
made to the testing program to achieve reasonable 
confidence that the system would be reliable and ef-
fective under realistic operational conditions. 
(3) Any necessary recommendations to improve 
the effectiveness and reliability of the ground-based 
midcourse missile defense system. 
(c) REPORT.—Not later than one year after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit 
to the congressional defense committees a report con-
taining the study. 
SEC. 1646. BUDGET INCREASE FOR AEGIS BALLISTIC MIS-
SILE DEFENSE. 
(a) INCREASE.—Notwithstanding the amounts set 
forth in the funding tables in division D, the amount au-
thorized to be appropriated in section 101 for procure-
ment, Defense-wide, as specified in the corresponding 
funding table in section 4101, for Aegis BMD (Line 030) 
is hereby increased by $99,000,000. 
(b) OFFSET.—Notwithstanding the amounts set forth 
in the funding tables in division D— 
(1) the amounts authorized to be appropriated 
in section 101 for aircraft procurement, Army, as
775 
specified in the corresponding funding table in sec-
tion 4101, for Aerial Common Sensor (Line 003) is 
hereby reduced by $75,300,000; and 
(2) the amounts authorized to be appropriated 
in section 1405 for the Defense Health Program, as 
specified in the corresponding funding table in sec-
tion 4501, for operation and maintenance pertaining 
to implementation of benefit reform proposals, is 
hereby reduced by $23,700,000. 
TITLE XVII—DEFENSE AUDIT AD-
VISORY PANEL ON DEPART-
MENT 
OF 
DEFENSE 
AUDITABILITY 
SEC. 1701. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) Congress remains steadfast in supporting 
the continuing efforts of the Department of Defense 
to produce auditable financial statements. Such ef-
forts are essential to ensure taxpayers dollars are ac-
counted for at the largest department of the Federal 
Government. 
(2) As the 2017 and 2019 statutory audit dead-
lines approach, Congress believes an advisory panel 
is necessary to better track the Department’s 
progress.
776 
(b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of the Advisory Panel 
are— 
(1) to work on behalf of Congress to actively 
monitor the audit readiness work of the Department 
of Defense and, after September 30, 2017, the De-
partment’s 2018 audit; and 
(2) to regularly providing interim findings and 
recommendations to the Committees on Armed Serv-
ices of the Senate and the House of Representatives, 
with the purpose of making the Department 
auditable and aiding in oversight of the Department 
by such Committees. 
SEC. 1702. ESTABLISHMENT OF ADVISORY PANEL ON DE-
PARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUDIT READINESS. 
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established the Advi-
sory Panel on Department of Defense Audit Readiness (in 
this title referred to as the ‘‘Advisory Panel’’). 
(b) MEMBERSHIP.— 
(1) COMPOSITION.—The Advisory Panel shall 
be composed of 10 members, of whom— 
(A) two shall be appointed jointly by the 
Chairman of the Committee on Armed Services 
of the Senate and the Chairman of the Com-
mittee on Armed Services of the House of Rep-
resentatives, in consultation with the Ranking
777 
Member of each such Committee, from among 
members of different political parties from each 
such Committee, to serve as Co-Chairmen of 
the Advisory Panel; 
(B) two shall be appointed by the Chair-
man of the Committee on Armed Services of 
the Senate; 
(C) two shall be appointed by the Ranking 
Member of the Committee on Armed Services of 
the Senate; 
(D) two shall be appointed by the Chair-
man of the Committee on Armed Services of 
the House of Representatives; and 
(E) two shall be appointed by the Ranking 
Member of the Committee on Armed Services of 
the House of Representatives. 
(2) APPOINTMENT DATE.—The appointments of 
the members of the Advisory Panel shall be made 
not later than 30 days after the date of the enact-
ment of this Act. 
(3) QUALIFICATIONS.—Appointments to the 
Advisory Panel shall be made from among individ-
uals who are certified public accountants and have 
work experience within the Department of Defense 
or private financial management sectors. An indi-
778 
vidual who is an officer or employee of the Federal 
Government may not be appointed to the Advisory 
Panel. 
(c) PERIOD OF APPOINTMENT; VACANCIES.—Mem-
bers shall be appointed for the life of the Advisory Panel. 
Any vacancy in the Advisory Panel shall not affect its pow-
ers, but shall be filled in the same manner as the original 
appointment. 
(d) INITIAL MEETING.—Not later than 60 days after 
the date on which all members of the Advisory Panel have 
been appointed, the Advisory Panel shall hold its first 
meeting. 
(e) MEETINGS.—The Advisory Panel shall meet regu-
larly at the call of the Co-Chairmen. 
(f) QUORUM.—Five members of the Advisory Panel 
shall constitute a quorum, but four members may hold 
hearings. 
SEC. 1703. DUTIES OF THE ADVISORY PANEL. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The duties of the Advisory Panel 
are as follows: 
(1) To provide the Secretary of Defense, 
through the Under Secretary of Defense (Comp-
troller), independent advice on the Department’s fi-
nancial management, including the financial report-
ing process, systems of internal controls, audit proc-
779 
ess, and processes for monitoring compliance with 
applicable laws and regulations. 
(2) To identify, review, and evaluate the work 
of the Department of Defense (including the work of 
each military department and Defense Agency) on 
auditability. 
(3) To identify problem areas and recommend 
solutions in order to aid the Department in meeting 
the following statutory deadlines: 
(A) By not later than September 30, 2017, 
validating the financial statements of the De-
partment of Defense as ready for audit, as re-
quired by section 1003(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Na-
tional Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2010 (Public Law 111–84; 10 U.S.C. 
2222 note). 
(B) By not later than March 31, 2019, au-
diting the financial statements of the Depart-
ment of Defense for fiscal year 2018, as re-
quired by section 1003(a)(2)(a)(iii) of such Act 
(Public Law 111–84; 10 U.S.C. 2222 note). 
(4) To provide briefings regularly to the Com-
mittees on Armed Services of the Senate and the 
House of Representatives on the Advisory Panel’s 
findings, analysis, and recommendations.
780 
(b) REPORTS.—Not later than March 31 and Sep-
tember 30 of each year during the life of the Advisory 
Panel, beginning with March 31, 2015, the Advisory Panel 
shall submit to the congressional defense committees find-
ings and conclusions of the Advisory Panel as a result of 
its work under subsection (a) during the period covered 
by the report, together with such recommendations as it 
considers appropriate. 
(c) AUTHORITY OF UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE 
(COMPTROLLER).—In accordance with Department policy 
and procedures, the Under Secretary of Defense (Comp-
troller) is authorized to act upon the advice emanating 
from the Advisory Panel. 
SEC. 1704. POWERS OF THE ADVISORY PANEL. 
(a) HEARINGS.—The Advisory Panel may hold such 
hearings, sit and act at such times and places, take such 
testimony, and receive such evidence as the Advisory Panel 
considers advisable to carry out this title. 
(b) INFORMATION
FROM
DEPARTMENT
OF
DE-
FENSE.—The Advisory Panel may secure directly from the 
Department of Defense such information as the Advisory 
Panel considers necessary to carry out this title. Upon re-
quest of the Co-Chairmen of the Advisory Panel, the Sec-
retary of Defense shall furnish such information to the 
Advisory Panel.
781 
(c) POSTAL SERVICES.—The Advisory Panel may use 
the United States mails in the same manner and under 
the same conditions as other departments and agencies of 
the Federal Government. 
SEC. 1705. ADVISORY PANEL PERSONNEL MATTERS. 
(a) COMPENSATION OF MEMBERS.—Members of the 
Advisory Panel shall serve without compensation for such 
service. 
(b) TRAVEL EXPENSES.—Each member of the Advi-
sory Panel shall be allowed travel expenses, including per 
diem in lieu of subsistence, in accordance with applicable 
provisions under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, 
United States Code. 
(c) STAFF.— 
(1) DIRECTOR.—The Advisory Panel may have 
a Director, who shall be appointed by the Co-Chair-
men. 
(2) STAFF.—The Co-Chairmen may appoint 
such additional staff as may be necessary to enable 
the Advisory Panel to perform its duties, except that 
the number of staff may not exceed the equivalent 
of five full-time employees. 
(3) COMPENSATION.—The Co-Chairmen of the 
Advisory Panel may fix the compensation of the Di-
rector and other personnel without regard to chapter
782 
51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of title 5, 
United States Code, relating to classification of posi-
tions and General Schedule pay rates, except that 
the rate of pay for the Director and other personnel 
may not exceed the rate payable for level IV of the 
Executive Schedule under section 5315 of such title. 
(d) DETAIL
OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES.—Any 
Federal Government employee may be detailed to the Ad-
visory Panel without reimbursement, and such detail shall 
be without interruption or loss of civil service status or 
privilege. 
(e) PROCUREMENT OF TEMPORARY AND INTERMIT-
TENT SERVICES.—The Co-Chairmen of the Advisory 
Panel may procure temporary and intermittent services 
under section 3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, at 
rates for individuals which do not exceed the daily equiva-
lent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for level 
V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such 
title. 
SEC. 1706. TERMINATION OF THE ADVISORY PANEL. 
The Advisory Panel shall terminate April 30, 2019.
783 
DIVISION 
B—MILITARY 
CON-
STRUCTION 
AUTHORIZA-
TIONS 
SEC. 2001. SHORT TITLE. 
This division may be cited as the ‘‘Military Construc-
tion Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015’’. 
SEC. 
2002. 
EXPIRATION 
OF 
AUTHORIZATIONS 
AND 
AMOUNTS REQUIRED TO BE SPECIFIED BY 
LAW. 
(a) EXPIRATION OF AUTHORIZATIONS AFTER THREE 
YEARS.—Except as provided in subsection (b), all author-
izations contained in titles XXI through XXVII for mili-
tary construction projects, land acquisition, family housing 
projects and facilities, and contributions to the North At-
lantic Treaty Organization Security Investment Program 
(and authorizations of appropriations therefor) shall ex-
pire on the later of— 
(1) October 1, 2017; or 
(2) the date of the enactment of an Act author-
izing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2018. 
(b) EXCEPTION.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to 
authorizations for military construction projects, land ac-
quisition, family housing projects and facilities, and con-
tributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Se-
784 
curity Investment Program (and authorizations of appro-
priations therefor), for which appropriated funds have 
been obligated before the later of— 
(1) October 1, 2017; or 
(2) the date of the enactment of an Act author-
izing funds for fiscal year 2018 for military con-
struction projects, land acquisition, family housing 
projects and facilities, or contributions to the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment 
Program. 
SEC. 2003. EFFECTIVE DATE. 
Titles XXI through XXVII shall take effect on the 
later of— 
(1) October 1, 2014; or 
(2) the date of the enactment of this Act. 
TITLE XXI—ARMY MILITARY 
CONSTRUCTION 
SEC. 2101. AUTHORIZED ARMY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND 
ACQUISITION PROJECTS. 
(a) INSIDE THE UNITED STATES.—Using amounts 
appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropria-
tions in section 2103 and available for military construc-
tion projects inside the United States as specified in the 
funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Army 
may acquire real property and carry out military construc-
785 
tion projects for the installations or locations inside the 
United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the fol-
lowing table: 
Army: Inside the United States 
State 
Installation or Location 
Amount 
California .......................
Concord ..................................................................
$15,200,000 
Fort Irwin ..............................................................
$45,000,000 
Colorado .........................
Fort Carson ...........................................................
$89,000,000 
Hawaii ............................
Fort Shafter ..........................................................
$83,000,000 
Kentucky ........................
Blue Grass Army Depot ........................................
$15,000,000 
Fort Campbell .......................................................
$23,000,000 
New York .......................
Fort Drum .............................................................
$27,000,000 
Pennsylvania ..................
Letterkenny Army Depot ......................................
$16,000,000 
South Carolina ...............
Fort Jackson .........................................................
$52,000,000 
Texas ..............................
Fort Hood ..............................................................
$46,000,000 
Virginia ..........................
Fort Lee ................................................................
$86,000,000 
Joint Base Langley-Eustis ....................................
$7,700,000 
(b) OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES.—Using amounts 
appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropria-
tions in section 2103 and available for military construc-
tion projects outside the United States as specified in the 
funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Army 
may acquire real property and carry out the military con-
struction project for the installations or locations outside 
the United States, and in the amount, set forth in the 
following table: 
Army: Outside the United States 
Country 
Installation or Location 
Amount 
Guantanamo Bay ............
Guantanamo Bay ....................................................
$92,800,000 
Japan ..............................
Kadena Air Base ....................................................
$10,600,000 
SEC. 2102. FAMILY HOUSING. 
(a) 
CONSTRUCTION
AND
ACQUISITION.—Using 
amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of ap-
propriations in section 2103 and available for military
786 
family housing functions as specified in the funding table 
in section 4601, the Secretary of the Army may construct 
or acquire family housing units (including land acquisition 
and supporting facilities) at the installations or locations, 
in the number of units, and in the amounts set forth in 
the following table: 
Army: Family Housing 
State/Country 
Installation 
Units 
Amount 
Illinois ......................
Rock Island ..............
Family Housing New 
Construction ........
$19,500,000 
Korea .......................
Camp Walker ...........
Family Housing New 
Construction ........
$57,800,000 
(b) PLANNING AND DESIGN.—Using amounts appro-
priated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in 
section 2103 and available for military family housing 
functions as specified in the funding table in section 4601, 
the Secretary of the Army may carry out architectural and 
engineering services and construction design activities 
with respect to the construction or improvement of family 
housing units in an amount not to exceed $1,309,000. 
SEC. 2103. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, ARMY. 
(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Funds 
are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years 
beginning after September 30, 2014, for military con-
struction, land acquisition, and military family housing 
functions of the Department of the Army as specified in 
the funding table in section 4601.
787 
(b) LIMITATION ON TOTAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION 
PROJECTS.—Notwithstanding the cost variations author-
ized by section 2853 of title 10, United States Code, and 
any other cost variation authorized by law, the total cost 
of all projects carried out under section 2101 of this Act 
may not exceed the total amount authorized to be appro-
priated under subsection (a), as specified in the funding 
table in section 4601. 
SEC. 2104. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT 
CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 2004 PROJECT. 
In the case of the authorization contained in the table 
in section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (division B of Public Law 
108–136; 117 Stat. 1697) for Picatinny Arsenal, New 
Jersey, for construction of an Explosives Research and 
Development Loading Facility at the installation, the Sec-
retary of the Army may use available unobligated balances 
of amounts appropriated for military construction for the 
Army to complete work on the project within the scope 
specified for the project in the justification data provided 
to Congress as part of the request for authorization of 
the project.
788 
SEC. 2105. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT 
CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 2013 PROJECTS. 
(a) FORT DRUM.—In the case of the authorization 
contained in the table in section 2101(a) of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (di-
vision B of Public Law 112–239; 126 Stat. 2119) for Fort 
Drum, New York, for construction of an Aircraft Mainte-
nance Hangar at the installation, the Secretary of the 
Army may provide a capital contribution to a public or 
private utility company in order for the utility company 
to extend the utility company’s gas line to the installation 
boundary. Such capital contribution is not a change in the 
scope of work of the project under section 2853 of title 
10, United States Code. 
(b) FORT LEONARD WOOD.—In the case of the au-
thorization contained in the table in section 2101(a) of 
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2013 (division B of Public Law 112–239; 126 Stat. 
2119) for Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, for construction 
of Battalion Complex Facilities at the installation, the 
Secretary of the Army may construct the Battalion Head-
quarters with classrooms for a unit other than a Global 
Defense Posture Realignment unit. 
(c) FORT MCNAIR.—In the case of the authorization 
contained in the table in section 2101(a) of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (di-
789 
vision B of Public Law 112–239; 126 Stat. 2119) for Fort 
McNair, District of Columbia, for construction of a Vehi-
cle Storage Building at the installation, the Secretary of 
the Army may construct up to 20,227 square feet of vehi-
cle storage. 
(d) FORT BELVOIR.—The table in section 2101(a) of 
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2013 (division B of Public Law 112–239; 126 Stat. 
2119) is amended in the item relating to Fort Belvoir, 
Virginia, by striking ‘‘$94,000,000’’ in the amount column 
and inserting ‘‘$183,000,000’’. 
SEC. 2106. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF CERTAIN 
FISCAL YEAR 2011 PROJECT. 
(a) EXTENSION.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of 
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2011 (division B of Public Law 111–383; 124 Stat. 
4436), the authorization set forth in the table in sub-
section (b), as provided in section 2101 of that Act (124 
Stat. 4437) and extended by section 2109 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (di-
vision B of Public Law 113–66; 127 Stat. 988), shall re-
main in effect until October 1, 2015, or the date of the 
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military con-
struction for fiscal year 2016, whichever is later:
790 
(b) TABLE.—The table referred to in subsection (a) 
is as follows: 
Army: Extension of 2011 Project Authorization 
State 
Installation or Lo-
cation 
Project 
Amount 
Georgia .....................
Fort Benning ..........
Land Acquisition ....
$12,200,000 
SEC. 2107. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN 
FISCAL YEAR 2012 PROJECTS. 
(a) EXTENSION.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of 
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2012 (division B of Public Law 112–81; 125 Stat. 
1660), the authorizations set forth in the table in sub-
section (b), as provided in section 2101 of that Act (125 
Stat. 1661), shall remain in effect until October 1, 2015, 
or the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds 
for military construction for fiscal year 2016, whichever 
is later: 
(b) TABLE.—The table referred to in subsection (a) 
as follows: 
Army: Extension of 2012 Project Authorizations 
State 
Installation or Lo-
cation 
Project 
Amount 
Georgia ....................
Fort Benning ...........
Land Acquisition .....
$5,100,000 
Fort Benning ...........
Land Acquisition .....
$25,000,000 
North Carolina ........
Fort Bragg ..............
Unmanned Aerial 
Vehicle Mainte-
nance Hanger.
$54,000,000 
Texas .......................
Fort Bliss ................
Applied Instruction 
Building.
$8,300,000 
Fort Bliss ................
Vehicle Maintenance 
Facility.
$19,000,000 
Fort Hood ................
Unmanned Aerial 
Vehicle Mainte-
nance Hanger.
$47,000,000 
Virginia ....................
Fort Belvoir .............
Road and Infrastruc-
ture Improvements.
$25,000,000
791 
TITLE XXII—NAVY MILITARY 
CONSTRUCTION 
SEC. 2201. AUTHORIZED NAVY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND 
ACQUISITION PROJECTS. 
(a) INSIDE THE UNITED STATES.—Using amounts 
appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropria-
tions in section 2204 and available for military construc-
tion projects inside the United States as specified in the 
funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Navy 
may acquire real property and carry out military construc-
tion projects for the installations or locations inside the 
United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the fol-
lowing table: 
Navy: Inside the United States 
State 
Installation or Location 
Amount 
Arizona ..........................
Yuma ........................................................................
$16,608,000 
California .......................
Bridgeport ................................................................
$16,180,000 
San Diego ................................................................
$47,110,000 
District of Columbia ......
Naval Support Activity ............................................
$31,735,000 
Florida ...........................
Jacksonville ..............................................................
$30,235,000 
Mayport ....................................................................
$20,520,000 
Guam .............................
Joint Region Marianas ............................................
$50,651,000 
Hawaii ...........................
Kaneohe Bay ............................................................
$53,382,000 
Pearl Harbor ............................................................
$9,698,000 
Maryland ........................
Annapolis .................................................................
$120,112,000 
Indian Head .............................................................
$15,346,000 
Patuxent River .........................................................
$9,860,000 
Nevada ...........................
Fallon .......................................................................
$31,262,000 
North Carolina ..............
Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station ..................
$41,588,000 
Pennsylvania ..................
Philadelphia .............................................................
$23,985,000 
South Carolina ...............
Charleston ................................................................
$35,716,000 
Virginia ..........................
Dahlgren ..................................................................
$27,313,000 
Norfolk .....................................................................
$39,274,000 
Portsmouth ..............................................................
$9,743,000 
Quantico ...................................................................
$12,613,000 
Yorktown ..................................................................
$26,988,000 
Washington ....................
Bremerton ................................................................
$16,401,000 
Port Angeles ............................................................
$20,638,000 
Whidbey Island ........................................................
$24,390,000
792 
(b) OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES.—Using amounts 
appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropria-
tions in section 2204 and available for military construc-
tion projects outside the United States as specified in the 
funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Navy 
may acquire real property and carry out military construc-
tion projects for the installation or location outside the 
United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the fol-
lowing table: 
Navy: Outside the United States 
Country 
Installation or Location 
Amount 
Bahrain ............................
South West Asia ......................................................
$27,826,000 
Djibouti ............................
Camp Lemonier .......................................................
$9,923,000 
Japan ...............................
Iwakuni ....................................................................
$6,415,000 
Kadena Air Base ......................................................
$19,411,000 
Marine Corps Air Station Futenma ........................
$4,639,000 
Okinawa ...................................................................
$35,685,000 
Spain ................................
Rota .........................................................................
$20,233,000 
(c) UNSPECIFIED WORLDWIDE.—Using amounts ap-
propriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations 
in section 2204 and available for military construction 
projects at unspecified worldwide locations as specified in 
the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the 
Navy may acquire real property and carry out military 
construction projects for unspecified locations, and in the 
amount, set forth in the following table: 
Navy: Unspecified Worldwide Locations 
Country 
Location 
Amount 
Unspecified Worldwide 
Locations .....................
Unspecified Worldwide Locations ............................
$38,985,000
793 
SEC. 2202. FAMILY HOUSING. 
Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the author-
ization of appropriations in section 2204 and available for 
military family housing functions as specified in the fund-
ing table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Navy may 
carry out architectural and engineering services and con-
struction design activities with respect to the construction 
or improvement of family housing units in an amount not 
to exceed $472,000. 
SEC. 2203. IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING 
UNITS. 
Subject to section 2825 of title 10, United States 
Code, and using amounts appropriated pursuant to the 
authorization of appropriations in section 2204 and avail-
able for military family housing functions as specified in 
the funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the 
Navy may improve existing military family housing units 
in an amount not to exceed $15,940,000. 
SEC. 2204. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, NAVY. 
(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Funds 
are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years 
beginning after September 30, 2014, for military con-
struction, land acquisition, and military family housing 
functions of the Department of the Navy, as specified in 
the funding table in section 4601.
794 
(b) LIMITATION ON TOTAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION 
PROJECTS.—Notwithstanding the cost variations author-
ized by section 2853 of title 10, United States Code, and 
any other cost variation authorized by law, the total cost 
of all projects carried out under section 2201 of this Act 
may not exceed the total amount authorized to be appro-
priated under subsection (a), as specified in the funding 
table in section 4601. 
SEC. 2205. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT 
CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 2012 PROJECTS. 
(a) YUMA.—In the case of the authorization con-
tained in the table in section 2201(a) of the Military Con-
struction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (division 
B of Public Law 112–81; 125 Stat. 1666), for Yuma, Ari-
zona, for construction of a Double Aircraft Maintenance 
Hangar, the Secretary of the Navy may construct up to 
approximately 70,000 square feet of additional apron to 
be utilized as a taxi-lane using amounts appropriated for 
this project pursuant to the authorization of appropria-
tions in section 2204 of such Act (125 Stat. 1667). 
(b) CAMP PENDELTON.—In the case of the author-
ization contained in the table in section 2201(a) of the 
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2012 (division B of Public Law 112–81; 125 Stat. 1666), 
for Camp Pendelton, California, for construction of an In-
795 
fantry Squad Defense Range, the Secretary of the Navy 
may construct up to 9,000 square feet of vehicular bridge 
using amounts appropriated for this project pursuant to 
the authorization of appropriations in section 2204 of such 
Act (125 Stat. 1667). 
(c) KINGS BAY.—In the case of the authorization 
contained in the table in section 2201(a) of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (di-
vision B of Public Law 112–81; 125 Stat. 1666), for 
Kings Bay, Georgia, for construction of a Crab Island Se-
curity Enclave, the Secretary of the Navy may expand the 
enclave fencing system to three layers of fencing and con-
struct two elevated fixed fighting positions with associated 
supporting facilities using amounts appropriated for this 
project pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in 
section 2204 of such Act (125 Stat. 1667). 
SEC. 2206. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT 
CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 2014 PROJECT. 
In the case of the authorization contained in the table 
in section 2201(a) of the Military Construction Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (division B of Public Law 
113–66; 127 Stat. 989), for Yorktown, Virginia, for con-
struction of Small Arms Ranges, the Secretary of the 
Navy may construct 240 square meters of armory, 48 
square meters of Safety Officer/Target Storage Building,
796 
and 667 square meters of Range Operations Building 
using appropriations available for the project pursuant to 
the authorization of appropriations in section 2204 of such 
Act (127 Stat. 990). 
SEC. 2207. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN 
FISCAL YEAR 2011 PROJECTS. 
(a) EXTENSION.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of 
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2011 (division B of Public Law 111–383; 124 Stat. 
4436), the authorizations set forth in the table in sub-
section (b), as provided in section 2201 of that Act (124 
Stat. 4441) and extended by section 2207 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (di-
vision B of Public Law 113–66; 127 Stat. 991), shall re-
main in effect until October 1, 2015, or the date of an 
Act authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal 
year 2016, whichever is later. 
(b) TABLE.—The table referred to in subsection (a) 
is as follows: 
Navy: Extension of 2011 Project Authorizations 
State/Country 
Installation or Lo-
cation 
Project 
Amount 
Bahrain ....................
South West Asia ......
Navy Central Com-
mand Ammunition 
Magazines.
$89,280,000 
Guam .......................
Naval Activities, 
Guam.
Defense Access 
Roads Improve-
ments.
$66,730,000
797 
SEC. 2208. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN 
FISCAL YEAR 2012 PROJECTS. 
(a) EXTENSION.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of 
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2012 (division B of Public Law 112–81; 125 Stat. 
1660), the authorizations set forth in the table in sub-
section (b), as provided in section 2201 of that Act (125 
Stat. 1666), shall remain in effect until October 1, 2015, 
or the date of an Act authorizing funds for military con-
struction for fiscal year 2016, whichever is later. 
(b) TABLE.—The table referred to in subsection (a) 
is as follows: 
Navy: Extension of 2012 Project Authorizations 
State/Country 
Installation or Lo-
cation 
Project 
Amount 
California .................
Camp Pendelton ......
North Area Waste 
Water Conveyance 
$78,271,000 
Camp Pendelton ......
Infantry Squad De-
fense Range .........
$29,187,000 
Twentynine Palms ...
Land Expansion ......
$8,665,000 
Florida .....................
Jacksonville ..............
P–8A Hangar Up-
grades ..................
$6,085,000 
Georgia ....................
Kings Bay ................
Crab Island Security 
Enclave ................
$52,913,000 
Kings Bay ................
WRA Land/Water 
Interface ..............
$33,150,000 
Maryland ..................
Patuxent River ........
Aircraft Prototype 
Facility Phase 2 ...
$45,844,000 
TITLE XXIII—AIR FORCE 
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION 
SEC. 2301. AUTHORIZED AIR FORCE CONSTRUCTION AND 
LAND ACQUISITION PROJECTS. 
(a) INSIDE THE UNITED STATES.—Using amounts 
appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropria-
798 
tions in section 2302 and available for military construc-
tion projects inside the United States as specified in the 
funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Air 
Force may acquire real property and carry out military 
construction projects for the installations or locations in-
side the United States, and in the amounts, set forth in 
the following table: 
Air Force: Inside the United States 
State 
Installation or Location 
Amount 
Alaska ...........................................
Clear Air Force Base ............................
$11,500,000 
Arizona .........................................
Luke Air Force Base ............................
$26,800,000 
Guam ............................................
Joint Region Marianas .........................
$13,400,000 
Kansas ..........................................
McConnell Air Force Base ....................
$34,400,000 
Massachusetts ...............................
Hanscom Air Force Base ......................
$13,500,000 
Nevada ..........................................
Nellis Air Force Base ...........................
$53,900,000 
New Jersey ...................................
Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst .....
$5,900,000 
Oklahoma ......................................
Tinker Air Force Base ..........................
$111,000,000 
Texas ............................................
Joint Base San Antonio ........................
$5,800,000 
(b) OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES.—Using amounts 
appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropria-
tions in section 2302 and available for military construc-
tion projects outside the United States as specified in the 
funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of the Air 
Force may acquire real property and carry out military 
construction projects for the installation outside the 
United States, and in the amount, set forth in the fol-
lowing table: 
Air Force: Outside the United States 
Country 
Installation 
Amount 
United Kingdom ...............
Croughton Royal Air Force Base .........
$92,223,000
799 
SEC. 2302. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, AIR 
FORCE. 
(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Funds 
are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years 
beginning after September 30, 2014, for military con-
struction and land acquisition functions of the Depart-
ment of the Air Force, as specified in the funding table 
in section 4601. 
(b) LIMITATION ON TOTAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION 
PROJECTS.—Notwithstanding the cost variations author-
ized by section 2853 of title 10, United States Code, and 
any other cost variation authorized by law, the total cost 
of all projects carried out under section 2301 of this Act 
may not exceed the total amount authorized to be appro-
priated under subsection (a), as specified in the funding 
table in section 4601. 
SEC. 2303. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT 
CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 2008 PROJECT. 
In the case of the authorization contained in the table 
in section 2301(a) of the Military Construction Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (division B of Public Law 
110–181; 122 Stat. 515), for Shaw Air Force Base, South 
Carolina, for base infrastructure at that location, the Sec-
retary of the Air Force may acquire fee or lesser real prop-
erty interests in approximately 11.5 acres of land contig-
uous to Shaw Air Force Base for the project using funds
800 
appropriated to the Department of the Air Force for con-
struction in years prior to fiscal year 2015. 
SEC. 2304. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT 
CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 2014 PROJECT. 
In the case of the authorization contained in the table 
in section 2301(a) of the Military Construction Authoriza-
tion Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (division B of Public Law 
113–66; 127 Stat. 992) relating to Saipan for the con-
struction of a maintenance facility, a hazardous cargo pad, 
or an airport storage facility in the Commonwealth of the 
Northern Mariana Islands, the Secretary of the Air Force 
may carry out such construction at any suitable location 
in the Northern Mariana Islands. 
SEC. 2305. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF CERTAIN 
FISCAL YEAR 2011 PROJECT. 
(a) EXTENSION.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of 
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2011 (division B of Public Law 111–383; 124 Stat. 
4436), the authorization set forth in the table in sub-
section (b), as provided in section 2301 of that Act (124 
Stat. 4444) and extended by section 2307 of the Military 
Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (di-
vision B of Public Law 113–66; 127 Stat. 994), shall re-
main in effect until October 1, 2015, or the date of the
801 
enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military con-
struction for fiscal year 2016, whichever is later. 
(b) TABLE.—The table referred to in subsection (a) 
is as follows: 
Air Force: Extension of 2011 Project Authorization 
Country 
Installation or Lo-
cation 
Project 
Amount 
Bahrain ....................
Shaikh Isa Air Base 
North Apron Expan-
sion.
$45,000,000. 
SEC. 2306. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN 
FISCAL YEAR 2012 PROJECTS. 
(a) EXTENSION.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of 
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2012 (division B of Public Law 112–81; 125 Stat. 
1660), the authorizations set forth in the table in sub-
section (b), as provided in section 2301 of that Act (125 
Stat. 1670), shall remain in effect until October 1, 2015, 
or the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds 
for military construction for fiscal year 2016, whichever 
is later. 
(b) TABLE.—The table referred to in subsection (a) 
is as follows: 
Air Force: Extension of 2012 Project Authorizations 
State/Country 
Installation or Lo-
cation 
Project 
Amount 
Alaska ......................
Eielson AFB ............
Dormitory (168 RM) 
$45,000,000 
Italy .........................
Sigonella Naval Air 
Station .................
UAS SATCOM 
Relay Pads and 
Facility .................
$15,000,000
802 
TITLE 
XXIV—DEFENSE 
AGEN-
CIES 
MILITARY 
CONSTRUC-
TION 
Subtitle A—Defense Agency 
Authorizations 
SEC. 2401. AUTHORIZED DEFENSE AGENCIES CONSTRUC-
TION AND LAND ACQUISITION PROJECTS. 
(a) INSIDE THE UNITED STATES.—Using amounts 
appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropria-
tions in section 2403 and available for military construc-
tion projects inside the United States as specified in the 
funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of Defense 
may acquire real property and carry out military construc-
tion projects for the installations or locations inside the 
United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the fol-
lowing table: 
Defense Agencies: Inside the United States 
State 
Installation or Location 
Amount 
Arizona .......................................
Fort Huachuca ........................................
$1,871,000 
California ....................................
Camp Pendelton ......................................
$11,841,000 
Coronado .................................................
$70, 340,000 
Lemoore ...................................................
$52,500,000 
Colorado .....................................
Peterson Air Force Base .........................
$15,200,000 
Georgia .......................................
Hunter Army Airfield ..............................
$7,692,000 
Robins Air Force Base ............................
$19,900,000 
Hawaii ........................................
Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam ...........
$52,900,000 
Kentucky ....................................
Fort Campbell .........................................
$18,000,000 
Maryland ....................................
Fort Meade ..............................................
$54,207,000 
Joint Base Andrews ................................
$18,300,000 
Michigan .....................................
Selfridge Air National Guard Base .........
$35,100,000 
Mississippi ..................................
Stennis .....................................................
$27,547,000 
Nevada .......................................
Fallon ......................................................
$20,241,000 
New Mexico ................................
Cannon Air Force Base ...........................
$23,333,000 
North Carolina ...........................
Camp Lejeune .........................................
$52,748,000 
Fort Bragg ..............................................
$93,136,000 
Seymour Johnson AFB ...........................
$8,500,000 
South Carolina ...........................
Beaufort ..................................................
$40,600,000 
South Dakota .............................
Ellsworth Air Force Base .......................
$8,000,000 
Texas ..........................................
Joint Base San Antonio ..........................
$38,300,000
803 
Defense Agencies: Inside the United States—Continued 
State 
Installation or Location 
Amount 
Virginia ......................................
Craney Island ..........................................
$36,500,000 
Defense Distribution Depot Richmond ...
$5,700,000 
Fort Belvoir .............................................
$7,239,000 
Joint Base Langley-Eustis ......................
$41,200,000 
Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek- 
Story ....................................................
$39,588,000 
Pentagon .................................................
$15,100,000 
CONUS Classified ......................
Classified Location ..................................
$53,073,000 
(b) OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES.—Using amounts 
appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropria-
tions in section 2403 and available for military construc-
tion projects outside the United States as specified in the 
funding table in section 4601, the Secretary of Defense 
may acquire real property and carry out military construc-
tion projects for the installations or locations outside the 
United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the fol-
lowing table: 
Defense Agencies: Outside the United States 
Country 
Installation or Location 
Amount 
Australia ........................
Geraldton ..............................................................
$9,600,000 
Belgium .........................
Brussels ................................................................
$79,544,000 
Guantanamo Bay ..........
Guantanamo Bay .................................................
$76,290,000 
Japan ............................
Misawa Air Base ..................................................
$37,775,000 
Okinawa ................................................................
$170,901,000 
Sasebo ...................................................................
$37,681,000 
SEC. 
2402. 
AUTHORIZED 
ENERGY 
CONSERVATION 
PROJECTS. 
(a) INSIDE THE UNITED STATES.—Using amounts 
appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropria-
tions in section 2403 and available for energy conservation 
projects inside the United States as specified in the fund-
ing table in section 4601, the Secretary of Defense may
804 
carry out energy conservation projects under chapter 173 
of title 10, United States Code, for the installations or 
locations inside the United States, and in the amounts, 
set forth in the following table: 
Energy Conservation Projects: Inside the United States 
State 
Installation or Location 
Amount 
California ............................
Edwards Air Force Base ..............
$4,500,000 
Fort Hunter Liggett .....................
$13,500,000 
Vandenberg Air Force Base ..........
$7,197,000 
Colorado ..............................
Fort Carson ...................................
$3,000,000 
Florida ................................
Eglin Air Force Base ....................
$3,850,000 
Georgia ...............................
Moody Air Force Base ..................
$3,600,000 
Hawaii ................................
Marine Corps Base Hawaii ...........
$8,460,000 
Illinois .................................
Great Lakes Naval Station ...........
$2,190,000 
Maine ..................................
Portsmouth Naval Shipyard .........
$2,740,000 
Maryland .............................
Fort Detrick ..................................
$2,100,000 
North Dakota .....................
Offutt Air Force Base ...................
$2,869,000 
Oklahoma ............................
Tinker Air Force Base ..................
$3,609,000 
Oregon ................................
Oregon City Armory .....................
$6,600,000 
Utah ....................................
Dugway Proving Ground ..............
$15,400,000 
Virginia ...............................
Naval Station Norfolk ...................
$11,360,000 
Pentagon .......................................
$2,120,000 
Various Locations ...............
Various Locations .........................
$23,679,000 
(b) OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES.—Using amounts 
appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropria-
tions in section 2403 and available for energy conservation 
projects outside the United States as specified in the fund-
ing table in section 4601, the Secretary of Defense may 
carry out energy conservation projects under chapter 173 
of title 10, United States Code, for the installations or 
locations outside the United States, and in the amounts, 
set forth in the following table: 
Energy Conservation Projects: Outside the United States 
Country 
Installation or Location 
Amount 
Diego Garcia .......................
Naval Support Facility .................
$14,620,000 
Japan ..................................
Fleet Activities Yokosuka .............
$8,030,000 
Germany .............................
Spangdahlem .................................
$4,800,000 
Various Locations ...............
Various Locations .........................
$5,776,000
805 
(c) LIMITATION ON SET-ASIDE OF FACILITIES RES-
TORATION AND MODERNIZATION PROGRAM FUNDS FOR 
ENERGY PROJECTS.—Amounts appropriated pursuant to 
the authorization of appropriation in section 301 for oper-
ation and maintenance and made available for facilities 
restoration and modernization may not be set-aside for the 
exclusive purpose of funding energy projects on military 
installations. Installation energy projects must compete in 
the normal process of determining installation require-
ments. 
SEC. 2403. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, DE-
FENSE AGENCIES. 
(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Funds 
are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years 
beginning after September 30, 2014, for military con-
struction, land acquisition, and military family housing 
functions of the Department of Defense (other than the 
military departments), as specified in the funding table 
in section 4601. 
(b) LIMITATION ON TOTAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION 
PROJECTS.—Notwithstanding the cost variations author-
ized by section 2853 of title 10, United States Code, and 
any other cost variation authorized by law, the total cost 
of all projects carried out under section 2401 of this Act 
may not exceed the total amount authorized to be appro-
806 
priated under subsection (a), as specified in the funding 
table in section 4601. 
SEC. 2404. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN 
FISCAL YEAR 2011 PROJECTS. 
(a) EXTENSION.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of 
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2011 (division B of Public Law 111–383; 124 Stat. 
4436), the authorizations set forth in the table in sub-
section (b), as provided in section 2401 of that Act (124 
Stat. 4446), shall remain in effect until October 1, 2015, 
or the date of an Act authorizing funds for military con-
struction for fiscal year 2016, whichever is later. 
(b) TABLE.—The table referred to in subsection (a) 
is as follows: 
Defense Agencies: Extension of 2011 Project Authorizations 
State 
Installation or Lo-
cation 
Project 
Amount 
District of Columbia 
Bolling Air Force 
Base .....................
Cooling Tower Ex-
pansion .................
$2,070,000 
DIAC Parking Ga-
rage ......................
$13,586,000 
Electrical Upgrades
$1,080,000 
SEC. 2405. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN 
FISCAL YEAR 2012 PROJECTS. 
(a) EXTENSION.—Notwithstanding section 2002 of 
the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2012 (division B of Public Law 112–81; 125 Stat. 
1660), the authorizations set forth in the table in sub-
section (b), as provided in section 2401 of that Act (125