(A) The cost-effectiveness of using contrac-
tors rather than Department of Defense employ-
ees to perform security-guard functions. 
(B) The performance of contractors em-
ployed as security guards compared with the 
performance of military personnel who have 
served as security guards. 
(C) Specific results of on-site visits made by 
officials designated by the Secretary of Defense to 
military installations using contractors to per-
form security-guard functions. 
(c) CONTRACT LIMITATION.—No contract may be en-
tered into under section 332 of the Bob Stump National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public 
Law 107–314) after September 30, 2007, until the report 
required under subsection (b) is submitted. 
Subtitle D—Reports 
SEC. 331. REPORT ON NUCLEAR ATTACK SUBMARINE 
DEPOT MAINTENANCE. 
(a) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than February 1, 
2007, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the Com-
mittee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee 
on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report 
describing the criteria used when a nuclear attack sub-
marine is sent to a facility other than a facility located 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
within 200 miles of the homeport of the submarine for 
maintenance described in subsection (d) when there is a 
public or private facility located within 200 miles of the 
homeport at which the maintenance required could be con-
ducted. 
(b) CONTENTS
OF REPORT.—The report required 
under subsection (a) shall include the following: 
(1) An assessment of the cost of housing for the 
crew of the submarine. 
(2) The costs associated with traveling to the 
homeport of the submarine for official duty. 
(3) The treatment of crew time while the sub-
marine is undergoing nondeployed maintenance work 
away from the homeport. 
(4) An assessment of the effect that maintenance 
conducted away from the homeport of a submarine 
has on the families of the members stationed on that 
submarine. 
(5) An analysis of the retention of officers and 
enlisted members stationed on the submarine. 
(6) An analysis of the use of fixed maintenance 
crews or semi-permanent engineering crews for main-
tenance availabilities that exceed 13 months. 
(c) RESTRICTION
ON
MAINTENANCE
AWAY
FROM 
HOMEPORT.— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
(1) RESTRICTION.—During fiscal year 2007, the 
Secretary of the Navy may not conduct maintenance 
described in subsection (d) on a nuclear attack sub-
marine at a facility other than a facility located 
within 200 miles of the homeport of that submarine 
if there is a public or private facility located within 
200 miles of the homeport at which the maintenance 
required could be conducted without adversely affect-
ing operational deployment schedules. 
(2) NOTIFICATION
REQUIRED.—Not later than 
five days before maintenance restricted under para-
graph (1) is conducted due to operation deployment 
schedules, the Secretary of the Navy shall provide to 
the congressional defense committees written notice of 
the maintenance that is to be conducted and the jus-
tification for conducting that maintenance. 
(d) COVERED MAINTENANCE.—Maintenance described 
in this subsection is any of the following: 
(1) Maintenance referred to as selected restricted 
availability maintenance. 
(2) Maintenance referred to as preinactivation 
restricted availability maintenance. 
(3) Maintenance referred to as extended selected 
restricted availability maintenance. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
(4) Maintenance referred to as interim dry dock 
availabilities. 
SEC. 332. REPORT ON NAVY FLEET RESPONSE PLAN. 
(a) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than December 1, 
2006, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the Com-
mittee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee 
on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report 
on the program of the Navy referred to as the Fleet Response 
Plan. The report shall include the following: 
(1) A directive that provides guidance for the 
conduct of the Plan and standardizes terms and defi-
nitions. 
(2) Performance measures for evaluation of the 
Plan. 
(3) Costs and resources needed to achieve objec-
tives of the Plan. 
(4) Operational tests, exercises, war games, ex-
periments, and deployments used to test performance. 
(5) A collection and synthesis of lessons learned 
from the implementation of the Plan as of the date 
on which the report is submitted. 
(6) Evaluation of each of the following with re-
spect to each ship participating in the Plan: 
(A) Combat Readiness. 
(B) Ship material condition. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
(C) Number of maintenance deficiencies. 
(D) Amount of maintenance accomplished 
while underway. 
(E) Amount of maintenance accomplished 
at pier dockings. 
(F) Number of voyage repairs during each 
deployment. 
(G) Combat skills training requirements ac-
complished during a deployment and at the 
home station. 
(H) Professional development training re-
quirements accomplished during a deployment 
and at home station. 
(I) Crew retention statistics. 
(7) Any proposed changes to the Surface Force 
Training Manual. 
(8) The amount of funding required to effectively 
implement the operations and maintenance require-
ments of the Plan and the effect of providing funding 
in an amount less than that amount. 
(9) Any recommendations of the Secretary of the 
Navy with respect to expanding the Plan to include 
Expeditionary Strike Groups. 
(b) COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT.—Not later than 
March 15, 2007, the Comptroller General shall submit to 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
the congressional defense committees a report containing a 
review of the Navy report required under subsection (a). 
The report shall include the following: 
(1) An examination of the management ap-
proaches of the Navy in implementing the Fleet Re-
sponse Plan. 
(2) An assessment of the adequacy of Navy direc-
tives and guidance with respect to maintenance and 
training requirements and procedures. 
(3) An analysis and assessment of the adequacy 
of the Navy’s test, exercises, and evaluation criteria. 
(4) An evaluation of Navy data on aircraft car-
riers, destroyers, and cruisers that participated in the 
Fleet Response Plan with respect to readiness, re-
sponse time, and availability for routine or unfore-
seen deployments. 
(5) An assessment of the Navy’s progress in iden-
tifying the amount of funding required to effectively 
implement the operations and maintenance require-
ments of the Fleet Response Plan and the effect of 
providing funding in an amount less than that 
amount. 
(6) Any recommendations of the Comptroller 
General with respect to expanding the Fleet Response 
Plan to include Expeditionary Strike Groups. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
22:09 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
(c) POSTPONEMENT OF EXPANSION.—The Secretary of 
the Navy may not expand the implementation of the Fleet 
Response Plan beyond the Carrier Strike Groups until Oc-
tober 1, 2007. 
SEC. 333. REPORT ON NAVY SURFACE SHIP ROTATIONAL 
CREW PROGRAMS. 
(a) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than April 1, 
2007, the Secretary of the Navy shall submit to the Com-
mittee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee 
on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report 
on the ship rotational crew experiment referred to in sub-
section (c)(1). The report shall include the following: 
(1) A comparison between the three destroyers 
participating in that experiment and destroyers not 
participating in the experiment that takes into con-
sideration each of the following: 
(A) Cost-effectiveness, including a compari-
son of travel and per diem expenses, mainte-
nance costs, and other costs. 
(B) Maintenance procedures, impacts, and 
deficiencies, including the number and character-
ization of maintenance deficiencies, the extent of 
voyage repairs, post-deployment assessments of 
the material condition of the ships, and the ex-
tent to which work levels were maintained. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
(C) Mission training requirements. 
(D) Professional development requirements 
and opportunities. 
(E) Liberty port of call opportunities. 
(F) Movement and transportation of crew. 
(G) Inventory and property accountability. 
(H) Policies and procedures for assigning 
billets for rotating crews. 
(I) Crew retention statistics. 
(J) Readiness and mission capability data. 
(2) Results from surveys administered or focus 
groups held to obtain representative views from com-
manding officers, officers, and enlisted members on 
the effects of rotational crew experiments on quality 
of life, training, professional development, mainte-
nance, mission effectiveness, and other issues. 
(3) The extent to which standard policies and 
procedures were developed and used for participating 
ships. 
(4) Lessons learned from the destroyer experi-
ment. 
(5) An assessment from the combatant com-
manders on the crew mission performance when de-
ployed. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
(6) An assessment from the commander of the 
Fleet Forces Command on the material condition, 
maintenance, and crew training of each participating 
ship. 
(7) Any recommendations of the Secretary of the 
Navy with respect to the extension of the ship rota-
tional crew experiment or the implementation of the 
experiment for other surface vessels. 
(b) POSTPONEMENT OF IMPLEMENTATION.—The Sec-
retary of the Navy may not begin implementation of any 
new surface ship rotational crew experiment or program 
during the period beginning on the date of the enactment 
of this Act and ending on October 1, 2009. 
(c) TREATMENT OF EXISTING EXPERIMENTS.— 
(1) DESTROYER EXPERIMENT.—Not later than 
January 1, 2007, the Secretary of the Navy shall ter-
minate the existing ship rotational crew experiment 
involving the U.S.S. Gonzalez (DDG–66), the U.S.S. 
Stout (DDG–55), and the U.S.S. Laboon (DDG–58) 
that is known as the ‘‘sea swap’’. 
(2) PATROL
COASTAL
CLASS
SHIP
EXPERI-
MENT.—The Secretary of the Navy may continue the 
existing ship rotational crew program that is cur-
rently in use by overseas-based Patrol Coastal class 
ships. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
(d) COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT.—Not later than 
July 15, 2007, the Comptroller General shall submit to the 
Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Com-
mittee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives 
a report on the ship rotational crew experiment referred to 
in subsection (c)(1). The report shall include the following: 
(1) A review of the report submitted by the Sec-
retary of the Navy under subsection (a) and an as-
sessment of the extent to which the Secretary fully ad-
dressed costs, quality of life, training, maintenance, 
and mission effectiveness, and other relevant issues in 
that report. 
(2) An assessment of the extent to which the Sec-
retary established and applied a comprehensive 
framework for assessing the use of ship rotational 
crew 
experiments, 
including 
formal 
objectives, 
metrics, and methodology for assessing the cost-effec-
tiveness of such experiments. 
(3) An assessment of the extent to which the Sec-
retary established effective guidance for the use of ship 
rotational crew experiments. 
(4) Lessons learned from recent ship rotational 
crew experiments and an assessment of the extent to 
which the Navy systematically collects and shares les-
sons learned. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
(e) CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE REPORT.—Not 
later than July 15, 2007, the Director of the Congressional 
Budget Office shall submit a report to the Committee on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed 
Services of the House of Representatives on the long-term 
implications of the use of crew rotation on Navy ships on 
the degree of forward presence provided by Navy ships. The 
report shall include the following: 
(1) An analysis of different approaches to crew 
rotation and the degree of forward presence each ap-
proach would provide. 
(2) A comparison of the degree of forward pres-
ence provided by the fleet under the long-term ship-
building plan of the Navy with and without the wide-
spread use of crew rotation. 
(3) The long-term benefits and costs of using 
crew rotation on Navy ships. 
SEC. 334. REPORT ON ARMY LIVE-FIRE RANGES IN HAWAII. 
Not later than March 1, 2007, the Secretary of the 
Army shall submit to Congress a report on the adequacy 
of the live-fire ranges of the Army in the State of Hawaii 
with respect to current and future training requirements. 
The report shall include the following: 
(1) An evaluation of the capacity of the existing 
live-fire ranges to meet the training requirements of 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
the Army, including the training requirements of 
Stryker Brigade Combat Teams. 
(2) A description of any existing plan to modify 
or expand any range in Hawaii for the purpose of 
meeting anticipated live-fire training requirements. 
(3) A description of the current live-fire restric-
tions at the Makua Valley range and the effect of these 
restrictions on unit readiness. 
(4) Cost and schedule estimates for the construc-
tion of new ranges or the modification of existing 
ranges that are necessary to support future training 
requirements if existing restrictions on training at the 
Makua Valley range remain in place. 
SEC. 335. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON JOINT 
STANDARDS AND PROTOCOLS FOR ACCESS 
CONTROL SYSTEMS AT DEPARTMENT OF DE-
FENSE INSTALLATIONS. 
(a) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than one year 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller 
General shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services 
of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the 
House of Representatives a report containing the assessment 
of the Comptroller General of— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
(1) the extent to which consistency exists in 
standards, protocols, and procedures for access control 
across installations of the Department of Defense; and 
(2) whether the establishment of joint standards 
and protocols for access control at such installations 
would be likely to— 
(A) address any need of the Department 
identified by the Comptroller General; or 
(B) improve access control across the instal-
lations by providing greater consistency and im-
proved force protection. 
(b) ISSUES TO BE ASSESSED.—In conducting the as-
sessment required by subsection (a), the Comptroller Gen-
eral shall assess the extent to which each installation of the 
Department of Defense has or would benefit from having 
an access control system with the ability to— 
(1) electronically check any identification card 
issued by any Federal agency or any State or local 
government within the United States, including any 
identification card of a visitor to the installation who 
is a citizen or legal resident of the United States; 
(2) verify that an identification card used to ob-
tain access to the installation was legitimately issued 
and has not been reported lost or stolen; 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
(3) check on a real-time basis all relevant watch 
lists maintained by the Government, including ter-
rorist watch lists and lists of persons wanted by 
State, local, or Federal law enforcement authorities; 
(4) maintain a log of individuals seeking access 
to the installation and of individuals who are denied 
access to the installation; and 
(5) exchange information with any installation 
with a system that complies with the joint standards 
and protocols. 
SEC. 336. REPORT ON PERSONNEL SECURITY INVESTIGA-
TIONS FOR INDUSTRY AND NATIONAL INDUS-
TRIAL SECURITY PROGRAM. 
(a) REPORTS REQUIRED.—Not later than 90 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act and every six 
months thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
the congressional defense committees, the Committee on 
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Sen-
ate, and the Committee on Government Reform of the House 
of Representatives, a report on the future requirements of 
the Department of Defense with respect to the Personnel Se-
curity Investigations for Industry and the National Indus-
trial Security Program of the Defense Security Service. 
(b) CONTENTS OF REPORTS.— 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
(1) INITIAL
REPORT.—The initial report re-
quired under subsection (a) shall include each of the 
following: 
(A) The number of personnel security clear-
ance investigations conducted during the period 
beginning on October 1, 1999, and ending on 
September 30, 2006. 
(B) The number of each type of security 
clearance granted during that period. 
(C) The unit cost to the Department of De-
fense of each security clearance granted during 
that period. 
(D) The amount of any fee or surcharge 
paid to the Office of Personnel Management as 
a result of conducting a personnel security clear-
ance investigation. 
(E) A description of the procedures used by 
the Secretary of Defense to estimate the number 
of personnel security clearance investigations to 
be conducted during a fiscal year. 
(F) A description of any effect of delays and 
backlogs in the personnel security clearance in-
vestigation process on the national security of 
the United States. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
(G) A description of any effect of delays 
and backlogs in the personnel security clearance 
investigation process on the defense industrial 
base assets of the United States. 
(H) A plan developed by the Secretary of 
Defense to reduce such delays and backlogs. 
(I) A plan developed by the Secretary of De-
fense to adequately fund the personnel security 
clearance investigation process. 
(J) A plan developed by the Secretary of 
Defense to establish a more stable and effective 
Personnel Security Investigations Program. 
(K) A plan developed by the Secretary of 
Defense to involve external sources, including de-
fense contractors, in the plans of the Secretary of 
Defense under subparagraphs (H), (I), and (J). 
(2) SUBSEQUENT
REPORTS.—Each report re-
quired to be submitted under subsection (a) after the 
submission of the initial report shall include each of 
the following: 
(A) The funding requirements of the per-
sonnel security clearance investigation program 
and ability of the Secretary of Defense to fund 
the program. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
(B) The size of the personnel security clear-
ance investigation process backlog. 
(C) The length of the average delay for an 
individual case pending in the personnel security 
clearance investigation process. 
(D) Any progress made by the Secretary of 
Defense during the six months preceding the date 
on which the report is submitted toward imple-
menting planned changes in the personnel secu-
rity clearance investigation process. 
(E) A determination certified by the Sec-
retary of Defense of whether the personnel secu-
rity clearance investigation process has improved 
during the six months preceding the date on 
which the report is submitted. 
(c) COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT.—As soon as 
practicable after the Secretary of Defense submits the initial 
report required under subsection (a), the Comptroller Gen-
eral shall submit a report to Congress that contains a re-
view of such initial report. 
(d) SENSE OF CONGRESS ON IMPROVING THE PER-
SONNEL SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM.— 
(1) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(A) Since fiscal year 2000, the General Ac-
countability Office has listed the Personnel Secu-
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
rity Investigations Program of the Department 
of Defense as a systemic weakness that affects 
more than one component of the Department and 
may jeopardize the operations of the Depart-
ment. 
(B) In 2005, the Government Accountability 
Office designated the Personnel Security Inves-
tigations Program as a high-risk area because 
delays by the Program in issuing security clear-
ances can affect national security. 
(C) In 2005, the Government Accountability 
Office found that the Department of Defense con-
tinues to face sizeable security clearance back-
logs. 
(D) The Government Accountability Office 
also reported in 2005 that security clearance 
delays increase national security risks, delay the 
start of classified work, hamper employers from 
hiring the best qualified workers, and increase 
the cost to the Government of national security- 
related contracts. 
(E) These security clearance backlogs and 
delays continue in 2006, and have brought the 
security clearance program to a reported stand-
still. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
18:59 May 06, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6203
E:\BILLS\H5122.RH
H5122
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS