Proposed FY2016 defense authorization and appropriations legislation under consideration in Congress as of June 2015 ( H.R. 2685 , H.R. 1735 , S. 1376 ) would not dramatically change the scope, scale, purposes, resources, or terms of the Syria Train and Equip program as it was originally authorized by Congress and as it is currently being implemented by the Administration. Nevertheless, Congress is considering FY2016 proposals that would extend and/or amend existing authorities, modify reporting requirements, and appropriate new funds in ways that illustrate several key policy issues related to the program and to broader debates about U.S. foreign policy and strategy toward the conflict in Syria. For example: Proposed reporting and certification requirements in the House and Senate versions of the FY2016 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA, H.R. 1735 , S. 1376 ) would require the Administration to report to Congress on the potential provision of U.S. support and protection to program participants upon their return to Syria from training locations outside of the country. Some supporters of the program and advocates of a more robust anti-Asad strategy for the United States argue that the United States should be prepared and willing to protect U.S. trainees from potential attacks from pro-Asad forces and extremist groups through defensive fire, air cover, intelligence and/or resupply. Critics of deeper U.S. involvement in the Syria conflict argue that such protection may entail confrontation and armed conflict between U.S. forces and the Syrian government or other actors, with unpredictable consequences. Proposed restrictions in the House-enrolled FY2016 NDAA ( H.R. 1735 ) on the provision of U.S. assistance to those found to have misused U.S. assistance reflect some Members' concerns for ensuring that U.S. assistance supports only those purposes that Congress set out for the program in FY2015 legislation. Specifically, some Members of Congress seek to ensure that U.S. assistance is used by U.S.- trained Syrians to combat the Islamic State and not to overthrow the government of Bashar al Asad or for other purposes. Administration officials insist that trainees and beneficiaries are receiving assistance to enable them first and foremost to protect civilians, opposition-held areas, and themselves from the forces of the Islamic State. Administration officials have said that forces misusing or redirecting U.S. assistance for their own purposes would not receive further U.S. support. Nevertheless, some ambiguity exists in the relationship between the stated purposes of authorized U.S. assistance and Syrian trainees' intentions toward Asad, raising questions among some Members of Congress about how U.S. assistance might ultimately be used by recipients. Proposed new reporting requirements in the House-enrolled FY2016 NDAA would require the Administration to report on the feasibility and potential costs of operations to establish so-called safe zones or no-fly zones in areas of Syria. This proposed change, while not involving the train and equip program directly, may reflect preferences expressed by some Syrian opposition activists and their U.S. supporters—including some Members of Congress—for a broader scope and scale of U.S. assistance under the train and equip program and/or for parallel U.S. military intervention to protect Syrian civilians. However, other Syrian groups and U.S. observers may reject deeper U.S. involvement. The potential effects of various FY2016 proposals are analyzed in more detail below in sections corresponding to current policy questions. Table 1 below reproduces the language enacted in the FY2015 NDAA ( P.L. 113-291 ) and the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 ( P.L. 113-235 ) alongside FY2016 defense legislative proposals under congressional consideration as of June 2015 ( H.R. 2685 , H.R. 1735 , S. 1376 ). Table A-1 in the Appendix reproduces enacted FY2015 NDAA and appropriations language alongside the President's evolving 2014 requests for authority and funds for the program. Congress and the President have debated proposals for the provision of U.S. assistance to the Syrian opposition since the outbreak of the Syrian uprising in 2011. Members of Congress have articulated varying views on the potential purposes, scope, risks, and rewards of such assistance. The executive branch, with the support of Congress, has provided overt non-lethal assistance to unarmed and armed groups in Syria, in addition to providing humanitarian assistance in Syria and in neighboring countries. U.S. assistance and weaponry also reportedly was provided to select Syrian opposition groups under covert action authorities. Through mid-2014, President Obama and some Members of Congress opposed the overt provision of U.S. military training or equipment to opposition forces reportedly in part because of concerns about its effectiveness and possible unintended consequences. Some Members have opposed the new train and equip program since that time for these reasons. The President's stance was altered by the failure in early 2014 of United Nations-backed negotiations aimed at ending the Syrian civil war and the mid-2014 offensive in Iraq by the extremist group known as the Islamic State (IS, also known as ISIL or ISIS). In the Administration's June 2014 amended request for war funding, President Obama requested authority and funding from Congress to begin an overt "train and equip" program for vetted Syrians for the following purposes: defending the Syrian people from attacks by the Syrian regime, facilitating the provision of essential services, and stabilizing territory controlled by the opposition; defending the United States, its friends and allies, and the Syrian people from the threats posed by terrorists in Syria; and, promoting the conditions for a negotiated settlement to end the conflict in Syria. The President amended the request in September 2014 to reflect additional goals for combatting the Islamic State. The FY2015 Continuing Resolution ( P.L. 113-164 , "the FY2015 CR") contained temporary authorization for the training and equipping of vetted Syrians that differed from the Administration's requests and expired on December 11, 2014. The FY2015 NDAA (Sections 1209, 1510, and 1534 of Division A of P.L. 113-291 ) and the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 ('Counterterrorism Partnership Fund' and Section 9016 of P.L. 113-235 ) provided further authority and funding guidance for the program. Like the FY2015 CR, these acts authorized the provision of U.S. assistance to vetted Syrians by the Department of Defense (DOD) in coordination with the State Department for the following purposes: 1) Defending the Syrian people from attacks by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), and securing territory controlled by the Syrian opposition. (2) Protecting the United States, its friends and allies, and the Syrian people from the threats posed by terrorists in Syria. (3) Promoting the conditions for a negotiated settlement to end the conflict in Syria. In setting these conditions, Congress rejected the Administration's request for explicit authority to train and equip Syrians to defend Syrian civilians from Syrian government forces. Authority for training for such defensive action may be implied by the phrases referring to "securing territory" and promoting conditions for a negotiated settlement to the wider conflict. Relative to the authority enacted in the FY2015 CR, the FY2015 full-year appropriations and NDAA: Expanded the types of assistance to be provided from training and equipment to include stipends and construction of training and other facilities. Added vetting requirements for program participants to include commitment to human rights, rule of law, and "a peaceful and democratic Syria." Required 15-day advance notifications of a detailed plan before funds can be obligated, and continued to require approval by the four congressional defense committees of individual reprogramming requests. Added criteria to notification and progress reporting requirements to provide further metrics for program evaluation. Authorized assistance to third countries for program-related purposes. Stated that while the Syrian program may draw on FY2015 CTPF funds that are available for two years, during execution, FY2015 funds are to be transferred to individual Operation and Maintenance (O&M) accounts that are available for one-year. Ended (provided for the "sunset" of) the authority on December 31, 2016, and limited related funds to FY2015 monies and reprogramming requests to OCO-designated Defense funds available from October 1, 2014, through September 30, 2016. Permitted the President to waive any other provisions of law that would otherwise restrict the provision of assistance authorized for the Syria program, provided that the President notifies Congress 30-days in advance. As of June 2015, several hundred U.S. military training personnel and a similar number of support personnel have deployed in support of the Syria Train and Equip Program. According to Administration officials, the program intends to field a force of approximately 3,000 vetted Syrians in 2015 and 5,400 others per year in 2016 and, if authorized, in 2017. Congressional defense committees approved initial funding for the program in late 2014, and approved related transfers and further funding in early 2015. According to U.S. officials, program implementers have engaged with different Syrian groups in order to identify potential recruits for the program and worked with partner governments for assistance in vetting participants (see "Vetting Definitions" in Table 1 below). Press reports citing unnamed U.S. officials suggested that fighting in Syria and uncertainties among Syrian opposition members and their regional backers about the program's purpose and about the general level of U.S. support for anti-Asad efforts delayed the program to some extent. Nevertheless, as of late March 2015, U.S. officials reportedly had identified more than 2,000 planned participants and vetted 400 of them. Training began for the first batch of 90 recruits in early May. U.S. officials have declined to publicly identify locations where training may take place, but Turkish officials have stated that training activities related to the program are underway in Turkey.