In subsection (a), the last sentence is substituted for 5 U.S.C. 171a(a) (proviso).

In subsection (b), the words “this title and section 401 of title 50” are substituted for 5 U.S.C. 171a(b) (13th through 30th words of last sentence), since those words merely described the coverage of this title and section 401 of title 50.

In subsection (c), the words “during the period covered by the report” are inserted for clarity. The following substitutions are made: “under section 125 of this title” for “pursuant to the provisions of this Act” since 125 of this title relates to the duty of the Secretary of Defense to take action to save public funds and to eliminate duplication in the Department of Defense; and the last 22 words of clause (3) for 5 U.S.C. 171a–1 (last 13 words).

In subsection (d), section 5 of 1953 Reorganization Plan No. 6 is omitted as covered by 5 U.S.C. 171a(f).

The words “prepare and” are omitted as surplus.

Subsection (k) is based on Pub. L. 100–202, § 101(b) [title VIII, § 8042], 101 Stat. 1329–69.

Section 8042 of the FY88 Defense Appropriations Act (Public Law 100–202) established a requirement for the Secretary of Defense to submit an annual report on the cost of stationing United States forces overseas. Under that section, the annual report is to be sent to the Committees on Appropriations of the two Houses. In codifying that section as section 113(k) of title 10, the committee added the two Armed Services Committees as committees to be sent the annual report. This minor change from the source law does not change the nature of the report to be submitted.

The committee notes that the source section does not specify the period of time to be covered by the report. In the absence of statutory language specifying the period to be covered by the report, it would seem reasonable to conclude that the report should cover the previous fiscal year. The committee notes, however, that the report of the Senate Appropriations Committee on its FY88 defense appropriations bill (S. Rpt. 100–235) states that this new annual report “should cover the budget years and the 2 previous fiscal years” (page 54). The committee believes that such a requirement may be unnecessarily burdensome and in any case, if such a requirement is intended, should be stated in the statute. In the absence of clear intent, the provision is proposed to be codified without specifying the period of time to be covered by the annual report.

In codifying this provision, the committee also changed the term “United States troops” in the source law to “United States forces” for consistency in usage in title 10 and as being preferable usage. No change in meaning is intended. The committee also changed “overseas” to “outside the United States” and defined “United States” for this purpose to include the territories and possessions of the United States. The committee was concerned that the term “overseas” read literally could include Hawaii or Guam, an interpretation clearly not intended in enacting section 8042. The committee notes that the Senate report referred to above states “For the purposes of this report [meaning the new DOD annual report], U.S. forces stationed overseas are considered to be those outside of the United States and its territories.”. The committee extrapolates from this statement that provisions in the report requirement relating to expenditures “overseas” and costs incurred “overseas” are also to be construed as relating to matters outside the United States and its territories and has prepared the codified provision accordingly.

The National Security Act of 1947, referred to in subsecs. (b) and (e)(2), is act July 26, 1947, ch. 343, 61 Stat. 495, which was formerly classified principally to chapter 15 (§ 401 et seq.) of Title 50, War and National Defense, prior to editorial reclassification in chapter 44 (§ 3001 et seq.) of Title 50. Sections 2 and 108 of the Act are now classified to sections 3002 and 3043, respectively, of Title 50. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

2013—Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 112–239 struck out “on” after “Board on”.

2011—Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 111–383 substituted “on any reserve component matter” for “the reserve programs of the Department of Defense and on any other matters”.

Subsec. (j)(1)(A) to (C). Pub. L. 112–81, § 1064(1)(A), added subpar. (B), redesignated former subpar. (B) as (A), and struck out former subpars. (A) and (C) which read as follows:

“(A) Costs incurred in the United States and costs incurred outside the United States in connection with the stationing of United States forces outside the United States.

“(C) The effect of such expenditures outside the United States on the balance of payments of the United States.”

Subsec. (j)(2), (3). Pub. L. 112–81, § 1064(1)(B), (C), redesignated par. (3) as (2) and struck out former par. (2) which read as follows: “Each report under this subsection shall be prepared in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce.”

Subsec. (l). Pub. L. 112–81, § 933(a), amended subsec. (l) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (l) related to contents of the Secretary’s annual report to Congress under subsec. (c).

2008—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 110–181, § 903(a), substituted “seven” for “10”.

Subsec. (g)(2). Pub. L. 110–181, § 1815(e), substituted “contingency plans, including plans for providing support to civil authorities in an incident of national significance or a catastrophic incident, for homeland defense, and for military support to civil authorities” for “contingency plans”.

1999—Subsec. (j)(1). Pub. L. 106–65 substituted “and the Committee on Armed Services” for “and the Committee on National Security” in introductory provisions.

1998—Subsec. (l). Pub. L. 105–261, § 915(a), added subsec. (l).

Subsec. (m). Pub. L. 105–261, § 1212(b), added subsec. (m).

1997—Subsec. (g)(2). Pub. L. 105–85 struck out “annually” after “Staff, shall provide” and inserted “be provided every two years or more frequently as needed and shall” after “Such guidance shall”.

1996—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 104–201, § 1255(c)(2)–(5), inserted “(1)” after “(c)”, redesignated former pars. (1), (2), and (4) as subpars. (A), (B), and (C), respectively, inserted “and” at end of subpar. (B), and added par. (2).

Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 104–201, § 1255(c)(1), struck out par. (3) which read as follows: “a report from the Reserve Forces Policy Board on the reserve programs of the Department of Defense, including a review of the effectiveness of chapters 51, 337, 361, 363, 549, 573, 837, 861 and 863 of this title, as far as they apply to reserve officers; and”.

Pub. L. 104–106, § 1501(a)(8)(B), made technical correction to directory language of Pub. L. 103–337, § 1671(c)(2). See 1994 Amendment note below.

Subsec. (i)(2)(B). Pub. L. 104–106, § 1503(a)(1), substituted “the period covered by the future-years defense program submitted to Congress during that year pursuant to section 221” for “the five years covered by the five-year defense program submitted to Congress during that year pursuant to section 114(g)”.

Subsec. (j)(1). Pub. L. 104–106, § 1502(a)(3), substituted “Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on National Security and the Committee on Appropriations of the” for “Committees on Armed Services and Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and”.

1994—Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 103–337, § 1671(c)(2), as amended by Pub. L. 104–106, § 1501(a)(8)(B), which directed the substitution of “1219 and 1401 through 1411 of this title” for “51, 337, 361, 363, 549, 573, 837, 861 and 863 of this title, as far as they apply to reserve officers”, effective Oct. 1, 1996, could not be executed because of the intervening amendment by Pub. L. 104–201, § 1255(c)(1). See 1996 Amendment note above.

Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 103–337, § 1070(a)(1), substituted “section 108” for “section 104”.

1991—Subsec. (i)(2)(C) to (E). Pub. L. 102–190 added subpar. (C) and redesignated former subpars. (C) and (D) as (D) and (E), respectively.

1990—Subsecs. (i) to (l). Pub. L. 101–510 redesignated subsecs. (j) to (l) as (i) to (k), respectively, and struck out former subsec. (i) which read as follows: “The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a written report, not later than February 15 of each fiscal year, recommending the amount of funds to be appropriated to the Department of Defense for the next fiscal year for functions relating to the formulation and carrying out of Department of Defense policies on the control of technology transfer and activities related to the control of technology transfer. The Secretary shall include in that report the proposed allocation of the funds requested for such purpose and the number of personnel proposed to be assigned to carry out such activities during such fiscal year.”

1989—Subsec. (j)(2)(B). Pub. L. 101–189 substituted “five-year defense program” for “Five-Year Defense Program”.

1988—Subsec. (j). Pub. L. 100–456, § 731, designated existing provisions as par. (1), struck out provision requiring that each report be transmitted in both a classified and an unclassified form, and added pars. (2) and (3).

Subsec. (k). Pub. L. 100–370 added subsec. (k).

Subsec. (l). Pub. L. 100–456, § 1101, added subsec. (l).

1987—Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 100–26 inserted “(50 U.S.C. 404a)” after “National Security Act of 1947”.

Subsec. (j). Pub. L. 100–180 added subsec. (j).

1986—Pub. L. 99–433, § 110(d)(2), struck out “: appointment; powers and duties; delegation by” at end of section catchline.

Subsecs. (a) to (e). Pub. L. 99–443, § 101(a)(2), redesignated subsecs. (a) to (e) of section 133 of this title as subsecs. (a) to (e) of this section.

Pub. L. 99–433, § 301(b)(2), substituted “sections 125 and 191” for “section 125” in subsec. (c)(2).

Pub. L. 99–433, § 603(b), amended subsec. (e) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (e) read as follows: “After consulting with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives before February 1 of each year a written report on—

“(1) the foreign policy and military force structure for the next fiscal year;

“(2) the relationship of that policy and structure to each other; and

“(3) the justification for the policy and structure.”

Subsecs. (f) to (h). Pub. L. 99–433, § 102, added subsecs. (f) to (h).

Subsec. (i). Pub. L. 99–433, §§ 101(a)(2), 110(b)(2), successively redesignated subsec. (h) of section 138 of this title as subsec. (h) of section 114 of this title and then as subsec. (i) of this section.

1982—Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 97–295 added subsec. (e).

Subsec. (i) [formerly § 138(h)]. Pub. L. 97–252, § 1105, added subsec. (h). See 1986 Amendment note above.

1980—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 96–513 substituted “section 2 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401)” for “section 401 of title 50”.

Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title XV, § 1501(f)(3), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 501, provided that: “The amendments made by this section [see Tables for classification] shall take effect as if included in the Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act [Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XVI] as enacted on October 5, 1994.”

Amendment by section 1671(c)(2) of Pub. L. 103–337 effective Oct. 1, 1996, see section 1691(b)(1) of Pub. L. 103–337, set out as an Effective Date note under section 10001 of this title.

Amendment by Pub. L. 96–513 effective Dec. 12, 1980, see section 701(b)(3) of Pub. L. 96–513, set out as a note under section 101 of this title.

Functions of President under various sections delegated to Secretary of Defense, see Ex. Ord. No. 10621, July 1, 1955, 20 F.R. 4759, as amended by Ex. Ord. No. 11294, Aug. 4, 1966, 31 F.R. 10601; see Ex. Ord. No. 10661, Feb. 27, 1956, 21 F.R. 1315; see Ex. Ord. No. 11390, Jan. 22, 1968, 33 F.R. 841; all set out as notes under section 301 of Title 3, The President.

For assignment of certain emergency preparedness functions to Secretary of Defense, see Parts 1, 2, and 5 of Ex. Ord. No. 12656, Nov. 18, 1988, 53 F.R. 47491, set out as a note under section 5195 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.

For order of succession during any period when the Secretary has died, resigned, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office of Secretary, see Ex. Ord. No. 13533, Mar. 1, 2010, 75 F.R. 10163, listed in a table under section 3345 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title V, § 525, Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 757, provided that: “(a) Provision in Electronic Format.—In accordance with subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, shall make the covered records of each member of the Armed Forces available to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs in an electronic format. “(b) Deadline for Provision of Records.—With respect to a member of the Armed Forces who is discharged or released from the Armed Forces on or after January 1, 2014, the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the covered records of the member are made available to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs not later than 90 days after the date of the member’s discharge or release. “(c) Sharing of Protected Health Information.—For purposes of the regulations promulgated under section 264(c) of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–191; 42 U.S.C. 1320d–2 note), making medical records available to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs under subsection (a) shall be treated as a permitted disclosure. “(d) Records Currently Available to Secretary of Veterans Affairs.—The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall ensure that the covered records of members of the Armed Forces that are available to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs as of the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 26, 2013] are made electronically accessible and available as soon as practicable after that date to the Veterans Benefits Administration. “(e) Covered Records Defined.—In this section, the term ‘covered records’ means, with respect to a member of the Armed Forces—“(1) service treatment records; “(2) accompanying personal records; “(3) relevant unit records; and “(4) medical records created by reason of treatment or services received pursuant to chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code.”

Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title X, § 1096, Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 880, provided that: “(a) Strategy Required.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop and implement a strategy for developing and sustaining through fiscal year 2020 information operations capabilities for future contingencies. The Secretary shall submit such strategy to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] by not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 26, 2013]. “(b) Contents of Strategy.—The strategy required by subsection (a) shall include each of the following:“(1) A plan for the sustainment of existing capabilities that have been developed during the ten-year period prior to the date of the enactment of this Act, including such capabilities developed using funds authorized to be appropriated for overseas contingency operations determined to be of enduring value for continued sustainment. “(2) A discussion of how the capabilities referred to in paragraph (1) are integrated into policy, doctrine, and operations. “(3) An assessment of the force structure that is required to sustain operational planning and potential contingency operations, including the integration across the active and reserve components. “(4) Estimates of the steady-state resources needed to support the force structure referred to in paragraph (3), as well as estimates for resources that might be needed based on selected operational plans, contingency plans, and named operations. “(5) An assessment of the impact of how new and emerging technologies can be incorporated into policy, doctrine, and operations. “(6) A description of ongoing research into new capabilities that may be needed to fill any identified gaps and programs that might be required to develop such capabilities. “(7) Potential policy implications or legal challenges that may prevent the integration of new and emerging technologies into the projected force structure. “(8) Potential policy implications or challenges to the better leveraging of capabilities from interagency partners.”

Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title XVII, § 1709(a), (b), Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 962, provided that: “(a) Regulations on Prohibition of Retaliation.—“(1) Regulations required.—The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations, or require the Secretaries of the military departments to prescribe regulations, that prohibit retaliation against an alleged victim or other member of the Armed Forces who reports a criminal offense. The regulations shall prescribe that a violation of the regulations is an offense punishable under section 892 of title 10, United States Code (article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice). “(2) Deadline.—The regulations required by this subsection shall be prescribed not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 26, 2013]. “(b) Retaliation and Personnel Action Described.—“(1) Retaliation.—For purposes of the regulations required by subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall define retaliation to include, at a minimum—“(A) taking or threatening to take an adverse personnel action, or withholding or threatening to withhold a favorable personnel action, with respect to a member of the Armed Forces because the member reported a criminal offense; and “(B) ostracism and such of [sic] acts of maltreatment, as designated by the Secretary of Defense, committed by peers of a member of the Armed Forces or by other persons because the member reported a criminal offense. “(2) Personnel actions.—For purposes of paragraph (1)(A), the Secretary of Defense shall define the personnel actions to be covered by the regulations.”

Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title XVII, § 1732, Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 975, provided that: “(a) Review.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 26, 2013], the Secretary of Defense shall conduct a review of the practices of the military criminal investigative organizations (Army Criminal Investigation Command, Naval Criminal Investigative Service, and Air Force Office of Special Investigation) in response to an allegation that a member of the Armed Forces has committed an offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, including the extent to which the military criminal investigative organizations make a recommendation regarding whether an allegation appears founded or unfounded. “(b) Policy.—After conducting the review required by subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall develop a uniform policy for the Armed Forces, to the extent practicable, regarding the use of case determinations to record the results of the investigation of an alleged violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. In developing the policy, the Secretary shall consider the feasibility of adopting case determination methods, such as the uniform crime report, used by nonmilitary law enforcement agencies.”

Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title IX, § 903, Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 1866, provided that: “Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 2, 2013], the Secretary of Defense shall— “(1) designate a senior official of the Department of Defense as the official with principal responsibility for coordination and management oversight of data conversion for all enterprise resource planning systems of the Department; and “(2) set forth the responsibilities of that senior official with respect to such data conversion.”

Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title X, § 1061(a), (b), Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 1939, provided that: “(a) Guidance Required.—Not later than January 1, 2013, the Secretary of Defense shall review and update Department of Defense guidance related to electronic warfare to ensure that oversight roles and responsibilities within the Department related to electronic warfare policy and programs are clearly defined. Such guidance shall clarify, as appropriate, the roles and responsibilities related to the integration of electronic warfare matters and cyberspace operations. “(b) Plan Required.—Not later than October 1, 2013, the Commander of the United States Strategic Command shall update and issue guidance regarding the responsibilities of the Command with regard to joint electronic warfare capabilities. Such guidance shall—“(1) define the role and objectives of the Joint Electromagnetic Spectrum Control Center or any other center established in the Command to provide governance and oversight of electronic warfare matters; and “(2) include an implementation plan outlining tasks, metrics, and timelines to establish such a center.”

Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title XII, § 1275, Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 2027, provided that: “(a) Participation Authorized.—The Secretary of Defense may, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, authorize the participation of members of the Armed Forces as members of the staff of Headquarters Eurocorps for the purpose of supporting the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) activities of the NATO Rapid Deployable Corps Eurocorps. “(b) Memorandum of Understanding.—“(1) Requirement.—The participation of members of the Armed Forces as members of the staff of Headquarters Eurocorps shall be in accordance with the terms of one or more memoranda of understanding entered into by the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, and Headquarters Eurocorps. “(2) Cost-sharing arrangements.—If Department of Defense facilities, equipment, or funds are used to support Headquarters Eurocorps, the memoranda of understanding under paragraph (1) shall provide details of any cost-sharing arrangement or other funding arrangement. “(c) Limitation on Number of Members Participating as Staff.—Not more than two members of the Armed Forces may participate as members of the staff of Headquarters Eurocorps, until the Secretary of Defense submits to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report setting forth the following:“(1) A certification by the Secretary of Defense that the participation of more than two members of the Armed Forces in Headquarters Eurocorps is in the national interests of the United States. “(2) A description of the benefits of the participation of the additional members proposed by the Secretary. “(3) A description of the plans for the participation of the additional members proposed by the Secretary, including the grades and posts to be filled. “(4) A description of the costs associated with the participation of the additional members proposed by the Secretary. “(d) Notice on Participation of Number of Members Above Certain Ceiling.—Not more than 10 members of the Armed Forces may participate as members of the staff of Headquarters Eurocorps unless the Secretary of Defense submits to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a notice that the number of members so participating will exceed 10 members. “(e) Availability of Appropriated Funds.—“(1) Availability.—Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for operation and maintenance are available as follows:“(A) To pay the United States’ share of the operating expenses of Headquarters Eurocorps. “(B) To pay the costs of the participation of members of the Armed Forces participating as members of the staff of Headquarters Eurocorps, including the costs of expenses of such participants. “(2) Limitation.—No funds may be used under this section to fund the pay or salaries of members of the Armed Forces who participate as members of the staff of the Headquarters, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Rapid Deployable Corps under this section. “(f) Headquarters Eurocorps Defined.—In this section, the term ‘Headquarters Eurocorps’ refers to the multinational military headquarters, established on October 1, 1993, which is one of the High Readiness Forces (Land) associated with the Allied Rapid Reaction Corps of NATO.”

Pub. L. 112–87, title V, § 503, Jan. 3, 2012, 125 Stat. 1896, provided that: “(a) Strategy.—“(1) Establishment.—The Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense shall establish a coordinated strategy utilizing all available personnel and assets for intelligence collection and analysis to identify and counter network activity and operations in Pakistan and Afghanistan relating to the development and use of improvised explosive devices. “(2) Contents.—The strategy established under paragraph (1) shall identify—“(A) the networks that design improvised explosive devices, provide training on improvised explosive device assembly and employment, and smuggle improvised explosive device components into Afghanistan; “(B) the persons and organizations not directly affiliated with insurgents in Afghanistan who knowingly enable the movement of commercial products and material used in improvised explosive device construction from factories and vendors in Pakistan into Afghanistan; “(C) the financiers, financial networks, institutions, and funding streams that provide resources to the insurgency in Afghanistan; and “(D) the links to military, intelligence services, and government officials who are complicit in allowing the insurgent networks in Afghanistan to operate. “(b) Report and Implementation.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 3, 2012], the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense shall—“(1) submit to the congressional intelligence committees [Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives] and the Committees on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the Senate a report containing the strategy established under subsection (a); and “(2) implement such strategy.”

Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title IX, § 903, Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1532, provided that: “Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 31, 2011], the Secretary of Defense shall— “(1) designate a senior official of the Department of Defense as the official with principal responsibility for the airship programs of the Department; and “(2) set forth the responsibilities of that senior official with respect to such programs.”

Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title XII, § 1215, Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1631, as amended by Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title XII, § 1211(a)–(c), Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 1982; Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title XII, § 1214(a)–(c), Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 906, provided that: “(a) Authority.—The Secretary of Defense may support United States Government transition activities in Iraq by providing funds for the following:“(1) Operations and activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq. “(2) Operations and activities of security assistance teams in Iraq. “(b) Types of Support.—The operations and activities for which the Secretary may provide funds under the authority in subsection (a) may include life support, transportation and personal security, and construction and renovation of facilities. “(c) Limitation on Amount.—The total amount of funds provided under the authority in subsection (a) in fiscal year 2014 may not exceed $209,000,000. “(d) Source of Funds.—Funds for purposes of subsection (a) for fiscal year 2014 shall be derived from amounts available for that fiscal year for operation and maintenance for the Air Force. “(e) Coverage of Costs of OSCI in Connection With Sales of Defense Articles or Defense Services to Iraq.—The President shall ensure that any letter of offer for the sale to Iraq of any defense articles or defense services issued after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 31, 2011] includes, consistent with the provisions of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.), charges sufficient to recover the costs of operations and activities of security assistance teams in Iraq in connection with such sale. “(f) Additional Authority for Activities of OSCI.—“(1) In general.—During fiscal year 2014, the Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, may authorize the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq to conduct non-operational training activities in support of Iraqi Ministry of Defense and Counter Terrorism Service personnel in an institutional environment to address capability gaps, integrate processes relating to intelligence, air sovereignty, combined arms, logistics and maintenance, and to manage and integrate defense-related institutions. “(2) Required elements of training.—The training conducted under paragraph (1) shall include elements that promote the following:“(A) Observance of and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. “(B) Military professionalism. “(C) Respect for legitimate civilian authority within Iraq. “(g) Report.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation with the Secretary of State, submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives], the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives a report on the activities of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq. The report shall include the following:“(1) A description, in unclassified form (but with a classified annex if appropriate), of any capability gaps in the security forces of Iraq, including capability gaps relating to intelligence matters, protection of Iraq airspace, and logistics and maintenance. “(2) A description of the manner in which the programs of the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq, in conjunction with other United States programs such as the Foreign Military Financing program, the Foreign Military Sales program, and joint training exercises, will address the capability gaps described in paragraph (1) if the Government of Iraq requests assistance in addressing such capability gaps.”

Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title I, § 124, Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4159, provided that: “(a) Comprehensive Database.—“(1) In general.—The Secretary of Defense, acting through the Director of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization, shall develop and maintain a comprehensive database containing appropriate information for coordinating, tracking, and archiving each counter-improvised explosive device initiative within the Department of Defense. The database shall, at a minimum, ensure the visibility of each counter-improvised explosive device initiative. “(2) Use of information.—Using information contained in the database developed under paragraph (1), the Secretary, acting through the Director of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization, shall—“(A) identify and eliminate redundant counter-improvised explosive device initiatives; “(B) facilitate the transition of counter-improvised explosive device initiatives from funding under the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund to funding provided by the military departments; and “(C) notify the appropriate personnel and organizations prior to a counter-improvised explosive device initiative being funded through the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund. “(3) Coordination.—In carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary shall ensure that the Secretary of each military department coordinates and collaborates on development of the database to ensure its interoperability, completeness, consistency, and effectiveness. “(b) Metrics.—The Secretary of Defense, acting through the Director of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization, shall—“(1) develop appropriate means to measure the effectiveness of counter-improvised explosive device initiatives; and “(2) prioritize the funding of such initiatives according to such means. “(c) Counter-improvised Explosive Device Initiative Defined.—In this section, the term ‘counter-improvised explosive device initiative’ means any project, program, or research activity funded by any component of the Department of Defense that is intended to assist or support efforts to counter, combat, or defeat the use of improvised explosive devices.”

Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title V, § 574, Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4223, provided that: “(a) Commemorative Program Authorized.—The Secretary of Defense may establish and conduct a program to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Korean War (in this section referred to as the ‘commemorative program’). In conducting the commemorative program, the Secretary of Defense shall coordinate and support other programs and activities of the Federal Government, State and local governments, and other persons and organizations in commemoration of the Korean War. “(b) Schedule.—If the Secretary of Defense establishes the commemorative program, the Secretary shall determine the schedule of major events and priority of efforts for the commemorative program to achieve the commemorative objectives specified in subsection (c). The Secretary of Defense may establish a committee to assist the Secretary in determining the schedule and conducting the commemorative program. “(c) Commemorative Activities and Objectives.—The commemorative program may include activities and ceremonies to achieve the following objectives:“(1) To thank and honor veterans of the Korean War, including members of the Armed Forces who were held as prisoners of war or listed as missing in action, for their service and sacrifice on behalf of the United States. “(2) To thank and honor the families of veterans of the Korean War for their sacrifices and contributions, especially families who lost a loved one in the Korean War. “(3) To highlight the service of the Armed Forces during the Korean War and the contributions of Federal agencies and governmental and non-governmental organizations that served with, or in support of, the Armed Forces. “(4) To pay tribute to the sacrifices and contributions made on the home front by the people of the United States during the Korean War. “(5) To provide the people of the United States with a clear understanding and appreciation of the lessons and history of the Korean War. “(6) To highlight the advances in technology, science, and medicine related to military research conducted during the Korean War. “(7) To recognize the contributions and sacrifices made by the allies of the United States during the Korean War. “(d) Use of The United States of America Korean War Commemoration and Symbols.—Subsection (c) of section 1083 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105–85; 111 Stat. 1918)[10 U.S.C. 113 note], as amended by section 1067 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105–261; 112 Stat. 2134) and section 1052 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106–65; 113 Stat. 764), shall apply to the commemorative program. “(e) Commemorative Fund.—“(1) Establishment of new account.—If the Secretary of Defense establishes the commemorative program, the Secretary [of] the Treasury shall establish in the Treasury of the United States an account to be known as the ‘Department of Defense Korean War Commemoration Fund’ (in this section referred to as the ‘Fund’). “(2) Administration and use of fund.—The Fund shall be available to, and administered by, the Secretary of Defense. The Secretary of Defense shall use the assets of the Fund only for the purpose of conducting the commemorative program and shall prescribe such regulations regarding the use of the Fund as the Secretary of Defense considers to be necessary. “(3) Deposits.—There shall be deposited into the Fund the following:“(A) Amounts appropriated to the Fund. “(B) Proceeds derived from the use by the Secretary of Defense of the exclusive rights described in subsection (c) of section 1083 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105–85; 111 Stat. 1918). “(C) Donations made in support of the commemorative program by private and corporate donors. “(4) Availability.—Subject to paragraph (5), amounts in the Fund shall remain available until expended. “(5) Treatment of unobligated funds; transfer.—If unobligated amounts remain in the Fund as of September 30, 2013, the Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer the remaining amounts to the Department of Defense Vietnam War Commemorative Fund established pursuant to section 598(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110–181; 10 U.S.C. 113 note). The transferred amounts shall be merged with, and available for the same purposes as, other amounts in the Department of Defense Vietnam War Commemorative Fund. “(f) Acceptance of Voluntary Services.—“(1) Authority to accept services.—Notwithstanding section 1342 of title 31, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense may accept from any person voluntary services to be provided in furtherance of the commemorative program. The Secretary of Defense shall prohibit the solicitation of any voluntary services if the nature or circumstances of such solicitation would compromise the integrity or the appearance of integrity of any program of the Department of Defense or of any individual involved in the program. “(2) Compensation for work-related injury.—A person providing voluntary services under this subsection shall be considered to be a Federal employee for purposes of chapter 81 of title 5, United States Code, relating to compensation for work-related injuries. The person shall also be considered a special governmental employee for purposes of standards of conduct and sections 202, 203, 205, 207, 208, and 209 of title 18, United States Code. A person who is not otherwise employed by the Federal Government shall not be considered to be a Federal employee for any other purpose by reason of the provision of voluntary services under this subsection. “(3) Reimbursement of incidental expenses.—The Secretary of Defense may provide for reimbursement of incidental expenses incurred by a person providing voluntary services under this subsection. The Secretary of Defense shall determine which expenses are eligible for reimbursement under this paragraph. “(g) Report Required.—If the Secretary of Defense conducts the commemorative program, the Inspector General of the Department of Defense shall submit to Congress, not later than 60 days after the end of the commemorative program, a report containing an accounting of—“(1) all of the funds deposited into and expended from the Fund; “(2) any other funds expended under this section; and “(3) any unobligated funds remaining in the Fund as of September 30, 2013, that are transferred to the Department of Defense Vietnam War Commemorative Fund pursuant to subsection (e)(5). “(h) Limitation on Expenditures.—Using amounts appropriated to the Department of Defense, the Secretary of Defense may not expend more than $5,000,000 to carry out the commemorative program.”

Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title IX, § 943, Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4341, provided that: “(a) Report Required.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 7, 2011], the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on the organizational structure and policy guidance of the Department of Defense with respect to information operations. “(b) Review.—In preparing the report required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall review the following:“(1) The extent to which the current definition of ‘information operations’ in Department of Defense Directive 3600.1 is appropriate. “(2) The location of the office within the Department of the lead official responsible for information operations of the Department, including assessments of the most effective location and the need to designate a principal staff assistant to the Secretary of Defense for information operations. “(3) Departmental responsibility for the development, coordination, and oversight of Department policy on information operations and for the integration of such operations. “(4) Departmental responsibility for the planning, execution, and oversight of Department information operations. “(5) Departmental responsibility for coordination within the Department, and between the Department and other departments and agencies of the Federal Government, regarding Department information operations, and for the resolution of conflicts in the discharge of such operations, including an assessment of current coordination bodies and decisionmaking processes. “(6) The roles and responsibilities of the military departments, combat support agencies, the United States Special Operations Command, and the other combatant commands in the development and implementation of information operations. “(7) The roles and responsibilities of the defense intelligence agencies for support of information operations. “(8) The role in information operations of the following Department officials:“(A) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs. “(B) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict. “(C) The senior official responsible for information processing and networking capabilities. “(9) The role of related capabilities in the discharge of information operations, including public affairs capabilities, civil-military operations capabilities, defense support of public diplomacy, and intelligence. “(10) The management structure of computer network operations in the Department for the discharge of information operations, and the policy in support of that component. “(11) The appropriate use, management, and oversight of contractors in the development and implementation of information operations, including an assessment of current guidance and policy directives pertaining to the uses of contractors for these purposes. “(c) Form.—The report required by subsection (a) shall be submitted in unclassified form, with a classified annex, if necessary. “(d) Department of Defense Directive.—Upon the submittal of the report required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall prescribe a revised directive for the Department of Defense on information operations. The directive shall take into account the results of the review conducted for purposes of the report. “(e) Information Operations Defined.—In this section, the term ‘information operations’ means the information operations specified in Department of Defense Directive 3600.1, as follows:“(1) Electronic warfare. “(2) Computer network operations. “(3) Psychological operations. “(4) Military deception. “(5) Operations security.”

Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, § 1054, Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4358, provided that: “(a) Report.—Not later than March 1 of each even-numbered year, beginning March 1, 2012, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Administrator for Nuclear Security, shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a report on the nuclear triad. “(b) Matters Included.—The report under subsection (a) shall include the following:“(1) A detailed discussion of the modernization and sustainment plans for each component of the nuclear triad over the 10-year period beginning on the date of the report. “(2) The funding required for each platform of the nuclear triad with respect to operation and maintenance, modernization, and replacement. “(3) Any industrial capacities that the Secretary considers vital to ensure the viability of the nuclear triad. “(c) Nuclear Triad Defined.—In this section, the term ‘nuclear triad’ means the nuclear deterrent capabilities of the United States composed of ballistic missile submarines, land-based missiles, and strategic bombers.”

Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, § 1077, Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4379, provided that: “Any law applicable to Operation Iraqi Freedom shall apply in the same manner and to the same extent to the successor contingency operation known as Operation New Dawn, except as specifically provided in this Act [see Tables for classification], any amendment made by this Act, or any other law enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 7, 2011].”

Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title VIII, § 807, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2404, provided that: “(a) Policy.—It shall be the policy of the Department of Defense that facilities, infrastructure, and equipment that are intended for use by military or civilian personnel of the Department in current or future military operations should be inspected for safety and habitability prior to such use, and that such facilities should be brought into compliance with generally accepted standards for the safety and health of personnel to the maximum extent practicable and consistent with the requirements of military operations and the best interests of the Department of Defense, to minimize the safety and health risk posed to such personnel. “(b) Requirements.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 28, 2009], the Secretary of Defense shall—“(1) ensure that each contract or task or delivery order entered into for the construction, installation, repair, maintenance, or operation of facilities for use by military or civilian personnel of the Department complies with the policy established in subsection (a); “(2) ensure that contracts entered into prior to the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act comply with such policy to the maximum extent practicable; “(3) define the term ‘generally accepted standards’ with respect to fire protection, structural integrity, electrical systems, plumbing, water treatment, waste disposal, and telecommunications networks for the purposes of this section; and “(4) provide such exceptions and limitations as may be needed to ensure that this section can be implemented in a manner that is consistent with the requirements of military operations and the best interests of the Department of Defense.”

Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title IX, § 932, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2433, provided that: “(a) In General.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a Defense Integrated Military Human Resources System development and transition Council to provide advice to the Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments on the modernization of the integrated pay and personnel system for each military department and the collection of data generated by each such system into the enterprise information warehouse. “(b) Council.—The Council shall include the following members:“(1) The Deputy Chief Management Officer of the Department of Defense. “(2) The Director of the Business Transformation Agency. “(3) The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, or a designated representative. “(4) The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, or a designated representative. “(5) One representative from each of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps who is a lieutenant general or vice admiral, or a civilian equivalent. “(6) One representative of the National Guard Bureau who is a lieutenant general or vice admiral, or a civilian equivalent. “(7) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration, or a designated representative. “(8) The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, or a designated representative. “(9) Such other individuals as may be designated by the Deputy Secretary of Defense, acting in the Deputy Secretary’s capacity as the Chief Management Officer. “(c) Meetings.—The Council shall meet not less than twice a year, or more often as specified by the Deputy Secretary of Defense. “(d) Duties.—The Council shall have the following responsibilities:“(1) Resolution of significant policy, programmatic, or budgetary issues impeding modernization or deployment of integrated personnel and pay systems for each military department, including issues relating to—“(A) common interfaces, architectures, and systems engineering; “(B) ensuring that developmental systems are consistent with current and future enterprise accounting and pay and personnel standards and practices; and “(C) ensuring that developmental systems are consistent with current and future Department of Defense business enterprise architecture. “(2) Coordination of implementation of the integrated personnel and pay system within defense organizations to ensure interoperability between all appropriate elements of the system. “(3) Establishment of metrics to assess the following:“(A) Business process re-engineering needed for successful deployment of the integrated pay and personnel system. “(B) Interoperability between legacy, operational, and developmental pay and personnel systems. “(C) Interface and systems architecture control and standardization. “(D) Retirement of legacy systems. “(E) Use of the enterprise information warehouse. “(F) Any other relevant matters. “(4) Such other responsibilities as the Secretary determines are appropriate. “(e) Termination.—This section shall not be in effect after September 30, 2013. “(f) Report.—Not later than March 1, 2010, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a report on actions taken pursuant to this section.”

Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title I, § 144, Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4382, provided that: “(a) Policy and Acquisition Strategy Required.—The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall establish a policy and an acquisition strategy for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance payloads and ground stations for manned and unmanned aerial vehicle systems. The policy and acquisition strategy shall be applicable throughout the Department of Defense and shall achieve integrated research, development, test, and evaluation, and procurement commonality. “(b) Objectives.—The policy and acquisition strategy required by subsection (a) shall have the following objectives:“(1) Procurement of common payloads by vehicle class, including—“(A) signals intelligence; “(B) electro optical; “(C) synthetic aperture radar; “(D) ground moving target indicator; “(E) conventional explosive detection; “(F) foliage penetrating radar; “(G) laser designator; “(H) chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, [or] explosive detection; and “(I) national airspace operations avionics or sensors, or both. “(2) Commonality of ground system architecture by vehicle class. “(3) Common management of vehicle and payloads procurement. “(4) Ground station interoperability standardization. “(5) Maximum use of commercial standard hardware and interfaces. “(6) Open architecture software. “(7) Acquisition of technical data rights in accordance with section 2320 of title 10, United States Code. “(8) Acquisition of vehicles, payloads, and ground stations through competitive procurement. “(9) Common standards for exchange of data and metadata. “(c) Affected Systems.—For the purposes of this section, the Secretary shall establish manned and unmanned aerial vehicle classes for all intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance programs of record based on factors such as vehicle weight, payload capacity, and mission. “(d) Report.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 14, 2008], the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives], the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives, and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate a report containing—“(1) the policy required by subsection (a); and “(2) the acquisition strategy required by subsection (a).”

Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title XII, § 1216, Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4633, as amended by Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title XII, § 1229, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2528, provided that: “(a) Report Required.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 14, 2008], or December 1, 2008, whichever occurs later, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the command and control structure for military forces operating in Afghanistan. “(b) Matters to Be Included.—The report required under subsection (a) shall include the following:“(1) A detailed description of efforts by the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with senior leaders of NATO ISAF forces, including the commander of NATO ISAF forces, to modify the chain of command structure for military forces operating in Afghanistan to better coordinate and de-conflict military operations and achieve unity of command whenever possible in Afghanistan, and the results of such efforts, including—“(A) any United States or NATO ISAF plan for improving the command and control structure for military forces operating in Afghanistan; and “(B) any efforts to establish a headquarters in Afghanistan that is led by a commander—“(i) with command authority over NATO ISAF forces and separate United States forces operating under Operation Enduring Freedom and charged with closely coordinating the efforts of such forces; and “(ii) responsible for coordinating other United States and international security efforts in Afghanistan. “(2) A description of how rules of engagement are determined and managed for United States forces operating under NATO ISAF or Operation Enduring Freedom, and a description of any key differences between rules of engagement for NATO ISAF forces and separate United States forces operating under Operation Enduring Freedom. “(3) An assessment of how any modifications to the command and control structure for military forces operating in Afghanistan would impact coordination of military and civilian efforts in Afghanistan. “(c) Update of Report.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees an update of the report required under subsection (a) as warranted by any modifications to the command and control structure for military forces operating in Afghanistan as described in the report. “(d) Form.—The report required under subsection (a) and any update of the report required under subsection (c) shall be submitted in an unclassified form, but may include a classified annex, if necessary. Any update of the report required under subsection (c) may be included in the report required under section 1230 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110–181; 122 Stat. 385). “(e) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.—In this section, the term ‘appropriate congressional committees’ means—“(1) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives; and “(2) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate.”

Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title V, § 598, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 141, provided that: “(a) Commemorative Program Authorized.—The Secretary of Defense may conduct a program to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Vietnam War. In conducting the commemorative program, the Secretary shall coordinate, support, and facilitate other programs and activities of the Federal Government, State and local governments, and other persons and organizations in commemoration of the Vietnam War. “(b) Schedule.—The Secretary of Defense shall determine the schedule of major events and priority of efforts for the commemorative program in order to ensure achievement of the objectives specified in subsection (c). “(c) Commemorative Activities and Objectives.—The commemorative program may include activities and ceremonies to achieve the following objectives:“(1) To thank and honor veterans of the Vietnam War, including personnel who were held as prisoners of war or listed as missing in action, for their service and sacrifice on behalf of the United States and to thank and honor the families of these veterans. “(2) To highlight the service of the Armed Forces during the Vietnam War and the contributions of Federal agencies and governmental and non-governmental organizations that served with, or in support of, the Armed Forces. “(3) To pay tribute to the contributions made on the home front by the people of the United States during the Vietnam War. “(4) To highlight the advances in technology, science, and medicine related to military research conducted during the Vietnam War. “(5) To recognize the contributions and sacrifices made by the allies of the United States during the Vietnam War. “(d) Names and Symbols.—The Secretary of Defense shall have the sole and exclusive right to use the name ‘The United States of America Vietnam War Commemoration’, and such seal, emblems, and badges incorporating such name as the Secretary may lawfully adopt. Nothing in this section may be construed to supersede rights that are established or vested before the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 28, 2008]. “(e) Commemorative Fund.—“(1) Establishment and administration.—If the Secretary establishes the commemorative program under subsection (a), the Secretary the Treasury shall establish in the Treasury of the United States an account to be known as the ‘Department of Defense Vietnam War Commemoration Fund’ (in this section referred to as the ‘Fund’). The Fund shall be administered by the Secretary of Defense. “(2) Use of fund.—The Secretary shall use the assets of the Fund only for the purpose of conducting the commemorative program and shall prescribe such regulations regarding the use of the Fund as the Secretary considers to be necessary. “(3) Deposits.—There shall be deposited into the Fund—“(A) amounts appropriated to the Fund; “(B) proceeds derived from the Secretary’s use of the exclusive rights described in subsection (d); “(C) donations made in support of the commemorative program by private and corporate donors; and “(D) funds transferred to the Fund by the Secretary from funds appropriated for fiscal year 2008 and subsequent years for the Department of Defense. “(4) Availability.—Subject to subsection (g)(2), amounts deposited under paragraph (3) shall constitute the assets of the Fund and remain available until expended. “(5) Budget request.—The Secretary of Defense may establish a separate budget line for the commemorative program. In the budget justification materials submitted by the Secretary in support of the budget of the President for any fiscal year for which the Secretary establishes the separate budget line, the Secretary shall—“(A) identify and explain any amounts expended for the commemorative program in the fiscal year preceding the budget request; “(B) identify and explain the amounts being requested to support the commemorative program for the fiscal year of the budget request; and “(C) present a summary of the fiscal status of the Fund. “(f) Acceptance of Voluntary Services.—“(1) Authority to accept services.—Notwithstanding section 1342 of title 31, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense may accept from any person voluntary services to be provided in furtherance of the commemorative program. The Secretary of Defense shall prohibit the solicitation of any voluntary services if the nature or circumstances of such solicitation would compromise the integrity or the appearance of integrity of any program of the Department of Defense or of any individual involved in the program. “(2) Reimbursement of incidental expenses.—The Secretary may provide for reimbursement of incidental expenses incurred by a person providing voluntary services under this subsection. The Secretary shall determine which expenses are eligible for reimbursement under this paragraph. “(g) Final Report.—“(1) Report required.—Not later than 60 days after the end of the commemorative program, if established by the Secretary of Defense under subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report containing an accounting of—“(A) all of the funds deposited into and expended from the Fund; “(B) any other funds expended under this section; and “(C) any unobligated funds remaining in the Fund. “(2) Treatment of unobligated funds.—Unobligated amounts remaining in the Fund as of the end of the commemorative period specified in subsection (b) shall be held in the Fund until transferred by law. “(h) Limitation on Expenditures.—Total expenditures from the Fund, using amounts appropriated to the Department of Defense, may not exceed $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2008 or for any subsequent fiscal year to carry out the commemorative program. “(i) Funding.—Of the amount authorized to be appropriated pursuant to section 301(5) [122 Stat. 53] for Defense-wide activities, $1,000,000 shall be available for deposit in the Fund for fiscal year 2008 if the Fund is established under subsection (e).”

Proc. No. 8829, May 25, 2012, 77 F.R. 32875, provided:

As we observe the 50th anniversary of the Vietnam War, we reflect with solemn reverence upon the valor of a generation that served with honor. We pay tribute to the more than 3 million servicemen and women who left their families to serve bravely, a world away from everything they knew and everyone they loved. From Ia Drang to Khe Sanh, from Hue to Saigon and countless villages in between, they pushed through jungles and rice paddies, heat and monsoon, fighting heroically to protect the ideals we hold dear as Americans. Through more than a decade of combat, over air, land, and sea, these proud Americans upheld the highest traditions of our Armed Forces.

As a grateful Nation, we honor more than 58,000 patriots—their names etched in black granite—who sacrificed all they had and all they would ever know. We draw inspiration from the heroes who suffered unspeakably as prisoners of war, yet who returned home with their heads held high. We pledge to keep faith with those who were wounded and still carry the scars of war, seen and unseen. With more than 1,600 of our service members still among the missing, we pledge as a Nation to do everything in our power to bring these patriots home. In the reflection of The Wall, we see the military family members and veterans who carry a pain that may never fade. May they find peace in knowing their loved ones endure, not only in medals and memories, but in the hearts of all Americans, who are forever grateful for their service, valor, and sacrifice.

In recognition of a chapter in our Nation’s history that must never be forgotten, let us renew our sacred commitment to those who answered our country’s call in Vietnam and those who awaited their safe return. Beginning on Memorial Day 2012, the Federal Government will partner with local governments, private organizations, and communities across America to participate in the Commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of the Vietnam War—a 13-year program to honor and give thanks to a generation of proud Americans who saw our country through one of the most challenging missions we have ever faced. While no words will ever be fully worthy of their service, nor any honor truly befitting their sacrifice, let us remember that it is never too late to pay tribute to the men and women who answered the call of duty with courage and valor. Let us renew our commitment to the fullest possible accounting for those who have not returned. Throughout this Commemoration, let us strive to live up to their example by showing our Vietnam veterans, their families, and all who have served the fullest respect and support of a grateful Nation.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim May 28, 2012, through November 11, 2025, as the Commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of the Vietnam War. I call upon Federal, State, and local officials to honor our Vietnam veterans, our fallen, our wounded, those unaccounted for, our former prisoners of war, their families, and all who served with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-fifth day of May, in the year of our Lord two thousand twelve, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-sixth.

Pub. L. 112–239, div. B, title XXVIII, § 2812, Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 2150, provided that: “(a) Procedural Requirements for Identification Verification.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 2, 2013], the Secretary of Defense shall publish procedural requirements regarding access to military installations in the United States by individuals, including individuals performing work under a contract awarded by the Department of Defense. The procedural requirements may vary between military installations, or parts of installations, depending on the nature of the installation, the nature of the access granted, and the level of security required. “(b) Issues Addressed.—The procedures required by subsection (a) shall address, at a minimum, the following:“(1) The forms of identification to be required to permit entry. “(2) The measures to be used to verify the authenticity of such identification and identify individuals who seek unauthorized access to a military installation through the use of fraudulent identification or other means. “(3) The measures to be used to notify Department of Defense security personnel of any attempt to gain unauthorized access to a military installation.”

Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title X, § 1069, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 326, as amended by Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title X, § 1059, Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4611; Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title X, § 1073(c)(11), Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2475, provided that: “(a) Development of Standards.—“(1) Access standards for visitors.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop access standards applicable to all military installations in the United States. The standards shall require screening standards appropriate to the type of installation involved, the security level, category of individuals authorized to visit the installation, and level of access to be granted, including—“(A) protocols to determine the fitness of the individual to enter an installation; and “(B) standards and methods for verifying the identity of the individual. “(2) Additional criteria.—The standards required under paragraph (1) may—“(A) provide for expedited access to a military installation for Department of Defense personnel and employees and family members of personnel who reside on the installation; “(B) provide for closer scrutiny of categories of individuals determined by the Secretary of Defense to pose a higher potential security risk; and “(C) in the case of an installation that the Secretary determines contains particularly sensitive facilities, provide additional screening requirements, as well as physical and other security measures for the installation. “(b) Use of Technology.—The Secretary of Defense is encouraged to procure and field existing identification screening technology and to develop additional technology only to the extent necessary to assist commanders of military installations in implementing the standards developed under this section at points of entry for such installations. “(c) Deadlines.—“(1) Development and implementation.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop the standards required under this section by not later than February 1, 2009, and implement such standards by not later than October 1, 2010. “(2) Submission to congress.—Not later than August 1, 2009, the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives the standards developed pursuant to paragraph (1).”

[Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title X, § 1073(c), Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2474, provided that the amendment made by section 1073(c)(11) to section 1059 of Pub. L. 110–417, included in the credit set out above, is effective as of Oct. 14, 2008, and as if included in Pub. L. 110–417 as enacted.]

Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title X, § 1074, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 330, as amended by Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title X, § 1084(b)(2)(A), Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 872, provided that: “(a) Protection for Department Leadership.—The Secretary of Defense, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary and in accordance with guidelines approved by the Secretary and the Attorney General, may authorize qualified members of the Armed Forces and qualified civilian employees of the Department of Defense to provide physical protection and personal security within the United States to the following persons who, by nature of their positions, require continuous security and protection:“(1) Secretary of Defense. “(2) Deputy Secretary of Defense. “(3) Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “(4) Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “(5) Secretaries of the military departments. “(6) Chiefs of the Services. “(7) Commanders of combatant commands. “(b) Protection for Additional Personnel.—“(1) Authority to provide.—The Secretary of Defense, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary and in accordance with guidelines approved by the Secretary and the Attorney General, may authorize qualified members of the Armed Forces and qualified civilian employees of the Department of Defense to provide physical protection and personal security within the United States to individuals other than individuals described in paragraphs (1) through (7) of subsection (a) if the Secretary determines that such protection and security are necessary because—“(A) there is an imminent and credible threat to the safety of the individual for whom protection is to be provided; or “(B) compelling operational considerations make such protection essential to the conduct of official Department of Defense business. “(2) Personnel.—Individuals authorized to receive physical protection and personal security under this subsection include the following:“(A) Any official, military member, or employee of the Department of Defense. “(B) A former or retired official who faces serious and credible threats arising from duties performed while employed by the Department for a period of up to two years beginning on the date on which the official separates from the Department. “(C) A head of a foreign state, an official representative of a foreign government, or any other distinguished foreign visitor to the United States who is primarily conducting official business with the Department of Defense. “(D) Any member of the immediate family of a person authorized to receive physical protection and personal security under this section. “(E) An individual who has been designated by the President, and who has received the advice and consent of the Senate, to serve as Secretary of Defense, but who has not yet been appointed as Secretary of Defense. “(3) Limitation on delegation.—The authority of the Secretary of Defense to authorize the provision of physical protection and personal security under this subsection may be delegated only to the Deputy Secretary of Defense. “(4) Requirement for written determination.—A determination of the Secretary of Defense to provide physical protection and personal security under this subsection shall be in writing, shall be based on a threat assessment by an appropriate law enforcement, security, or intelligence organization, and shall include the name and title of the officer, employee, or other individual affected, the reason for such determination, the duration of the authorized protection and security for such officer, employee, or individual, and the nature of the arrangements for the protection and security. “(5) Duration of protection.—“(A) Initial period of protection.—After making a written determination under paragraph (4), the Secretary of Defense may provide protection and security to an individual under this subsection for an initial period of not more than 90 calendar days. “(B) Subsequent period.—If, at the end of the period that protection and security is provided to an individual under subsection (A), the Secretary determines that a condition described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) continues to exist with respect to the individual, the Secretary may extend the period that such protection and security is provided for additional 60-day periods. The Secretary shall review such a determination at the end of each 60-day period to determine whether to continue to provide such protection and security. “(C) Requirement for compliance with regulations.—Protection and personal security provided under subparagraph (B) shall be provided in accordance with the regulations and guidelines referred to in paragraph (1). “(6) Submission to congress.—“(A) In general.—Except as provided in subparagraph (D), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees each determination made under paragraph (4) to provide protection and security to an individual and of each determination under paragraph (5)(B) to extend such protection and security, together with the justification for such determination, not later than 15 days after the date on which the determination is made. “(B) Form of report.—A report submitted under subparagraph (A) may be made in classified form. “(C) Regulations and guidelines.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees the regulations and guidelines prescribed pursuant to paragraph (1) not less than 20 days before the date on which such regulations take effect. “(D) Exceptions.—Subparagraph (A) does not apply to determinations made with respect to the following individuals:“(i) An individual described in paragraph (2)(C) who is otherwise sponsored by the Secretary of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, or the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “(ii) An individual described in paragraph (2)(E). “(c) Definitions.—In this section:“(1) Congressional defense committees.—The term ‘congressional defense committees’ means the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives. “(2) Qualified members of the armed forces and qualified civilian employees of the department of defense.—The terms ‘qualified members of the Armed Forces’ and ‘qualified civilian employees of the Department of Defense’ refer collectively to members or employees who are assigned to investigative, law enforcement, or security duties of any of the following:“(A) The Army Criminal Investigation Command. “(B) The Naval Criminal Investigative Service. “(C) The Air Force Office of Special Investigations. “(D) The Defense Criminal Investigative Service. “(E) The Pentagon Force Protection Agency. “(d) Construction.—“(1) No additional law enforcement or arrest authority.—Other than the authority to provide protection and security under this section, nothing in this section may be construed to bestow any additional law enforcement or arrest authority upon the qualified members of the Armed Forces and qualified civilian employees of the Department of Defense. “(2) Posse comitatus.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to abridge section 1385 of title 18, United States Code. “(3) Authorities of other departments.—Nothing in this section may be construed to preclude or limit, in any way, the express or implied powers of the Secretary of Defense or other Department of Defense officials, or the duties and authorities of the Secretary of State, the Director of the United States Secret Service, the Director of the United States Marshals Service, or any other Federal law enforcement agency.”

Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title XII, § 1208, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 367, provided that: “(a) Authority To Provide Data.—The Secretary of Defense, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, may authorize the Secretary of a military department or a commander of a combatant command to exchange or furnish automatic identification system data broadcast by merchant or private ships and collected by the United States to a foreign country or international organization pursuant to an agreement for the exchange or production of such data. Such data may be transferred pursuant to this section without cost to the recipient country or international organization. “(b) Definitions.—In this section:“(1) Automatic identification system.—The term ‘automatic identification system’ means a system that is used to satisfy the requirements of the Automatic Identification System under the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, signed at London on November 1, 1974 (TIAS 9700) [see 33 U.S.C. 1602 and notes thereunder]. “(2) Geographic combatant commander.—The term ‘commander of a combatant command’ means a commander of a combatant command (as such term is defined in section 161(c) of title 10, United States Code) with a geographic area of responsibility.”

Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title XII, § 1225, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 375, which required the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Director of National Intelligence, to submit to the Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives reports describing and assessing any support provided to anti-coalition forces in Iraq by Iran or its agents, the strategy and ambitions in Iraq of Iran, and any strategy or efforts by the United States to counter the activities of agents of Iran in Iraq, was repealed by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title XII, § 1233(f)(2), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4397.

Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title XVIII, § 1814, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 498, provided that: “(a) Requirement for Plan.—“(1) In general.—Not later than June 1, 2008, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the commander of the United States Northern Command, and the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, shall prepare and submit to Congress a plan for coordinating the use of the National Guard and members of the Armed Forces on active duty when responding to natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters as identified in the national planning scenarios described in subsection (e). “(2) Update.—Not later than June 1, 2010, the Secretary, in consultation with the persons consulted under paragraph (1), shall submit to Congress an update of the plan required under paragraph (1). “(b) Information To Be Provided to Secretary.—To assist the Secretary of Defense in preparing the plan, the National Guard Bureau, pursuant to its purpose as channel of communications as set forth in section 10501(b) of title 10, United States Code, shall provide to the Secretary information gathered from Governors, adjutants general of States, and other State civil authorities responsible for homeland preparation and response to natural and man-made disasters. “(c) Two Versions.—The plan shall set forth two versions of response, one using only members of the National Guard, and one using both members of the National Guard and members of the regular components of the Armed Forces. “(d) Matters Covered.—The plan shall cover, at a minimum, the following:“(1) Protocols for the Department of Defense, the National Guard Bureau, and the Governors of the several States to carry out operations in coordination with each other and to ensure that Governors and local communities are properly informed and remain in control in their respective States and communities. “(2) An identification of operational procedures, command structures, and lines of communication to ensure a coordinated, efficient response to contingencies. “(3) An identification of the training and equipment needed for both National Guard personnel and members of the Armed Forces on active duty to provide military assistance to civil authorities and for other domestic operations to respond to hazards identified in the national planning scenarios. “(e) National Planning Scenarios.—The plan shall provide for response to the following hazards:“(1) Nuclear detonation, biological attack, biological disease outbreak/pandemic flu, the plague, chemical attack-blister agent, chemical attack-toxic industrial chemicals, chemical attack-nerve agent, chemical attack-chlorine tank explosion, major hurricane, major earthquake, radiological attack-radiological dispersal device, explosives attack-bombing using improvised explosive device, biological attack-food contamination, biological attack-foreign animal disease and cyber attack. “(2) Any other hazards identified in a national planning scenario developed by the Homeland Security Council.”

Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title XVIII, § 1815(a)–(d), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 499, provided that: “(a) Determination of Requirements.—The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall determine the military-unique capabilities needed to be provided by the Department of Defense to support civil authorities in an incident of national significance or a catastrophic incident. “(b) Plan for Funding Capabilities.—“(1) Plan.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop and implement a plan, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, for providing the funds and resources necessary to develop and maintain the following:“(A) The military-unique capabilities determined under subsection (a). “(B) Any additional capabilities determined by the Secretary to be necessary to support the use of the active components and the reserve components of the Armed Forces for homeland defense missions, domestic emergency responses, and providing military support to civil authorities. “(2) Term of plan.—The plan required under paragraph (1) shall cover at least five years. “(c) Budget.—The Secretary of Defense shall include in the materials accompanying the budget submitted for each fiscal year a request for funds necessary to carry out the plan required under subsection (b) during the fiscal year covered by the budget. The defense budget materials shall delineate and explain the budget treatment of the plan for each component of each military department, each combatant command, and each affected Defense Agency. “(d) Definitions.—In this section:“(1) The term ‘military-unique capabilities’ means those capabilities that, in the view of the Secretary of Defense—“(A) cannot be provided by other Federal, State, or local civilian agencies; and “(B) are essential to provide support to civil authorities in an incident of national significance or a catastrophic incident. “(2) The term ‘defense budget materials’, with respect to a fiscal year, means the materials submitted to Congress by the Secretary of Defense in support of the budget for that fiscal year.”

Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title V, § 564, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2222, provided that: “(a) Center Required.—In support of the comprehensive policy on the provision of assistance to severely wounded or injured servicemembers required by section 563 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (Public Law 109–163; 119 Stat. 3269; 10 U.S.C. 113 note), the Secretary of Defense shall establish within the Department of Defense a center to augment and support the programs and activities of the military departments for the provision of such assistance, including the programs of the military departments referred to in subsection (c). “(b) Designation.—The center established under subsection (a) shall be known as the ‘Military Severely Injured Center’ (in this section referred to as the ‘Center’). “(c) Programs of the Military Departments.—The programs of the military departments referred to in this subsection are the following:“(1) The Army Wounded Warrior Support Program. “(2) The Navy Safe Harbor Program. “(3) The Palace HART Program of the Air Force. “(4) The Marine for Life Injured Support Program of the Marine Corps. “(d) Activities of Center.—“(1) In general.—The Center shall carry out such programs and activities to augment and support the programs and activities of the military departments for the provision of assistance to severely wounded or injured servicemembers and their families as the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretaries of the military departments and the heads of other appropriate departments and agencies of the Federal Government (including the Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs), determines appropriate. “(2) Database.—The activities of the Center under this subsection shall include the establishment and maintenance of a central database. The database shall be transparent and shall be accessible for use by all of the programs of the military departments referred to in subsection (c). “(e) Resources.—The Secretary of Defense shall allocate to the Center such personnel and other resources as the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretaries of the military departments, considers appropriate in order to permit the Center to carry out effectively the programs and activities assigned to the Center under subsection (d).”

Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title XIV, § 1402, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2433, which required the Secretary of Defense to submit quarterly reports on incidents involving the detonation or discovery of an improvised explosive device that involved United States or allied forces in Iraq and Afghanistan and on certain efforts of the Department of Defense to counter the threat of improvised explosive devices, was repealed by Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title X, § 1062(d)(5), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1585.

Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title XIV, § 1406, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2436, provided that: “The Secretary of Defense shall maintain a database of emergency response capabilities that includes the following: “(1) The types of emergency response capabilities that each State’s National Guard, as reported by the States, may be able to provide in response to a domestic natural or manmade disaster, both to their home States and under State-to-State mutual assistance agreements. “(2) The types of emergency response capabilities that the Department of Defense may be able to provide in support of the National Response Plan’s Emergency Support Functions, and identification of the units that provide these capabilities.”

Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title III, § 354, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3204, provided that: “(a) Report Containing Assessment and Response Plan.—Not later than April 15, 2006, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report containing—“(1) an assessment of the impact on military readiness caused by undocumented immigrants whose entry into the United States involves trespassing upon operational ranges of the Department of Defense; and “(2) a plan for the implementation of measures to prevent such trespass. “(b) Preparation and Elements of Assessment.—The assessment required by subsection (a)(1) shall be prepared by the Secretary of Defense. The assessment shall include the following:“(1) A listing of the operational ranges adversely affected by the trespass of undocumented immigrants upon operational ranges. “(2) A description of the types of range activities affected by such trespass. “(3) A determination of the amount of time lost for range activities, and the increased costs incurred, as a result of such trespass. “(4) An evaluation of the nature and extent of such trespass and means of travel. “(5) An evaluation of the factors that contribute to the use by undocumented immigrants of operational ranges as a means to enter the United States. “(6) A description of measures currently in place to prevent such trespass, including the use of barriers to vehicles and persons, military patrols, border patrols, and sensors. “(c) Preparation and Elements of Plan.—The plan required by subsection (a)(2) shall be prepared jointly by the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security. The plan shall include the following:“(1) The types of measures to be implemented to improve prevention of trespass of undocumented immigrants upon operational ranges, including the specific physical methods, such as barriers and increased patrols or monitoring, to be implemented and any legal or other policy changes recommended by the Secretaries. “(2) The costs of, and timeline for, implementation of the plan. “(d) Implementation Reports.—Not later than September 15, 2006, March 15, 2007, September 15, 2007, and March 15, 2008, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report detailing the progress made by the Department of Defense, during the period covered by the report, in implementing measures recommended in the plan required by subsection (a)(2) to prevent undocumented immigrants from trespassing upon operational ranges. Each report shall include the number and types of mitigation measures implemented and the success of such measures in preventing such trespass. “(e) Definitions.—In this section, the terms ‘operational range’ and ‘range activities’ have the meaning given those terms in section 101(e) of title 10, United States Code.”

Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title V, § 554, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3264, provided that: “(a) Requirement for Reports.—“(1) In general.—The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe in regulations a requirement that each covered member of the Armed Forces shall submit to an authority in the military department concerned designated pursuant to such regulations a timely report of any conviction of such member by any law enforcement authority of the United States for a violation of a criminal law of the United States, whether or not the member is on active duty at the time of the conduct that provides the basis for the conviction. The regulations shall apply uniformly throughout the military departments. “(2) Covered members.—In this section, the term ‘covered member of the Armed Forces’ means a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps who is on the active-duty list or the reserve active-status list and who is—“(A) an officer; or “(B) an enlisted member in a pay grade above pay grade E–6. “(b) Law Enforcement Authority of the United States.—For purposes of this section, a law enforcement authority of the United States includes—“(1) a military or other Federal law enforcement authority; “(2) a State or local law enforcement authority; and “(3) such other law enforcement authorities within the United States as the Secretary shall specify in the regulations prescribed pursuant to subsection (a). “(c) Criminal Law of the United States.—“(1) In general.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), for purposes of this section, a criminal law of the United States includes—“(A) any military or other Federal criminal law; “(B) any State, county, municipal, or local criminal law or ordinance; and “(C) such other criminal laws and ordinances of jurisdictions within the United States as the Secretary shall specify in the regulations prescribed pursuant to subsection (a). “(2) Exception.—For purposes of this section, a criminal law of the United States shall not include a law or ordinance specifying a minor traffic offense (as determined by the Secretary for purposes of such regulations). “(d) Timeliness of Reports.—The regulations prescribed pursuant to subsection (a) shall establish requirements for the timeliness of reports under this section. “(e) Forwarding of Information.—The regulations prescribed pursuant to subsection (a) shall provide that, in the event a military department receives information that a covered member of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of another military department has become subject to a conviction for which a report is required by this section, the Secretary of the military department receiving such information shall, in accordance with such procedures as the Secretary of Defense shall establish in such regulations, forward such information to the authority in the military department having jurisdiction over such member designated pursuant to such regulations. “(f) Convictions.—In this section, the term ‘conviction’ includes any plea of guilty or nolo contendere. “(g) Deadline for Regulations.—The regulations required by subsection (a), including the requirement in subsection (e), shall go into effect not later than the end of the 180-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 6, 2006]. “(h) Applicability of Requirement.—The requirement under the regulations required by subsection (a) that a covered member of the Armed Forces submit notice of a conviction shall apply only to a conviction that becomes final after the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 6, 2006].”

Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title V, § 563, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3269, provided that: “(a) Comprehensive Policy.—“(1) Policy required.—Not later than June 1, 2006, the Secretary of Defense shall prescribe a comprehensive policy for the Department of Defense on the provision of assistance to members of the Armed Forces who incur severe wounds or injuries in the line of duty (in this section referred to as ‘severely wounded or injured servicemembers’). “(2) Consultation.—The Secretary shall develop the policy required by paragraph (1) in consultation with the Secretaries of the military departments, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and the Secretary of Labor. “(3) Incorporation of past experience and practice.—The policy required by paragraph (1) shall be based on—“(A) the experience and best practices of the military departments, including the Army Wounded Warrior Program, the Marine Corps Marine for Life Injured Support Program, the Air Force Palace HART program, and the Navy Wounded Marines and Sailors Initiative; “(B) the recommendations of nongovernment organizations with demonstrated expertise in responding to the needs of severely wounded or injured servicemembers; and “(C) such other matters as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate. “(4) Procedures and standards.—The policy shall include guidelines to be followed by the military departments in the provision of assistance to severely wounded or injured servicemembers. The procedures and standards shall be uniform across the military departments except to the extent necessary to reflect the traditional practices or customs of a particular military department. The procedures and standards shall establish a minimum level of support and shall specify the duration of programs. “(b) Elements of Policy.—The comprehensive policy developed under subsection (a) shall address the following matters:“(1) Coordination with the Severely Injured Joint Support Operations Center of the Department of Defense. “(2) Promotion of a seamless transition to civilian life for severely wounded or injured servicemembers who are or are likely to be separated on account of their wound or injury. “(3) Identification and resolution of special problems or issues related to the transition to civilian life of severely wounded or injured servicemembers who are members of the reserve components. “(4) The qualifications, assignment, training, duties, supervision, and accountability for the performance of responsibilities for the personnel providing assistance to severely wounded or injured servicemembers. “(5) Centralized, short-term and long-term case-management procedures for assistance to severely wounded or injured servicemembers by each military department, including rapid access for severely wounded or injured servicemembers to case managers and counselors. “(6) The provision, through a computer accessible Internet website and other means and at no cost to severely wounded or injured servicemembers, of personalized, integrated information on the benefits and financial assistance available to such members from the Federal Government. “(7) The provision of information to severely wounded or injured servicemembers on mechanisms for registering complaints about, or requests for, additional assistance. “(8) Participation of family members. “(9) Liaison with the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Labor in order to ensure prompt and accurate resolution of issues relating to benefits administered by those agencies for severely wounded or injured servicemembers. “(10) Data collection regarding the incidence and quality of assistance provided to severely wounded or injured servicemembers, including surveys of such servicemembers and military and civilian personnel whose assigned duties include assistance to severely wounded or injured servicemembers. “(c) Adoption by Military Departments.—Not later than September 1, 2006, the Secretary of each military department shall prescribe regulations, or modify current regulations, on the policies and procedures of such military department on the provision of assistance to severely wounded or injured servicemembers in order to conform such policies and procedures to the policy prescribed under subsection (a).”

Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title X, § 1055, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3438, provided that: “(a) Prohibition of Destruction of Certain Records.—The Secretary of Defense may not destroy any official record in the custody or control of the Department of Defense that contains information relating to radioactive fallout from nuclear weapons testing. “(b) Preservation and Publication of Information.—The Secretary of Defense shall identify, preserve, and make available any unclassified information contained in official records referred to in subsection (a).”

Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title X, § 1071, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3446, provided that: “(a) Plan for Safe Delivery of Military Mail.—“(1) Plan required.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop and implement a plan to ensure that the mail within the military mail system is safe for delivery. The plan shall provide for the screening of all mail within the military mail system in order to detect the presence of biological, chemical, or radiological weapons, agents, or pathogens or explosive devices before mail within the military mail system is delivered to its intended recipients. “(2) Funding.—The budget justification materials submitted to Congress with the budget of the President for fiscal year 2007 and each fiscal year thereafter shall include a description of the amounts required in such fiscal year to carry out the plan. “(b) Report on Safety of Mail for Delivery.—“(1) Report required.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 6, 2006], the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the safety of mail within the military mail system for delivery. “(2) Elements.—The report shall include the following:“(A) An assessment of any existing deficiencies in the military mail system in ensuring that mail within the military mail system is safe for delivery. “(B) The plan required by subsection (a). “(C) An estimate of the time and resources required to implement the plan. “(D) A description of the delegation within the Department of Defense of responsibility for ensuring that mail within the military mail system is safe for delivery, including responsibility for the development, implementation, and oversight of improvements to the military mail system to ensure that mail within the military mail system is safe for delivery. “(3) Form.—The report shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex. “(c) Mail Within the Military Mail System Defined.—“(1) In general.—In this section, the term ‘mail within the military mail system’ means—“(A) any mail that is posted through the Military Post Offices (including Army Post Offices (APOs) and Fleet Post Offices (FPOs)), Department of Defense mail centers, military Air Mail Terminals, and military Fleet Mail Centers; and “(B) any mail or package posted in the United States that is addressed to an unspecified member of the Armed Forces. “(2) Inclusions and exception.—The term includes any official mail posted by the Department of Defense. The term does not include any mail posted as otherwise described in paragraph (1) that has been screened for safety for delivery by the United States Postal Service before such posting.”

Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title XII, § 1221, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3462, as amended by Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title XV, § 1518, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2443; Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title XII, § 1233, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2531, provided that: “(a) Report Required for Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation Noble Eagle.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives], in accordance with this section, a report on procurement and equipment maintenance costs for each of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation Noble Eagle and on facility infrastructure costs associated with each of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. The report shall include the following:“(1) Procurement.—A specification of costs of procurement funding requested since fiscal year 2003, together with end-item quantities requested and the purpose of the request (such as replacement for battle losses, improved capability, increase in force size, restructuring of forces), shown by service. “(2) Equipment maintenance.—A cost comparison of the requirements for equipment maintenance expenditures during peacetime and for such requirements during wartime, as shown by the requirements in each of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation Noble Eagle. The cost comparison shall include—“(A) a description of the effect of war operations on the backlog of maintenance requirements over the period of fiscal years 2003 to the time of the report; and “(B) an examination of the extent to which war operations have precluded maintenance from being performed because equipment was unavailable. “(3) Operation iraqi freedom and operation enduring freedom infrastructure.—A specification of the number of United States military personnel that can be supported by the facility infrastructure in Iraq and Afghanistan and in the neighboring countries from where Operation Iraq Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom are supported. “(b) Submission Requirements.—The report under subsection (a) shall be submitted not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 6, 2006]. The Secretary of Defense shall submit an updated report on procurement, equipment maintenance, and military construction costs, as specified in subsection (a), concurrently with any request made to Congress after the date of the enactment of this Act for war-related funding. “(c) Submission to Congress and Gao of Certain Reports on Costs.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] and the Comptroller General, not later than 45 days after the end of each reporting month, the Department of Defense Supplemental and Cost of War Execution reports.”

Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title XII, § 1224, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3463, provided that: “(a) Requirement for Annual Report.—“(1) Department of defense costs.—Not later than April 30 of each year, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional committees specified in paragraph (2) a report on Department of Defense costs during the preceding fiscal year to carry out United Nations resolutions. “(2) Specified committees.—The committees specified in this paragraph are—“(A) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Foreign Relations, and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and “(B) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on International Relations [now Committee on Foreign Affairs], and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives. “(b) Matters to Be Included.—Each report under subsection (a) shall set forth the following:“(1) All direct and indirect costs (including incremental costs) incurred by the Department of Defense during the preceding fiscal year in implementing or supporting any resolution adopted by the United Nations Security Council, including any such resolution calling for—“(A) international sanctions; “(B) international peacekeeping operations; “(C) international peace enforcement operations; “(D) monitoring missions; “(E) observer missions; or “(F) humanitarian missions. “(2) An aggregate of all such Department of Defense costs by operation or mission and the total cost to United Nations members of each operation or mission. “(3) All direct and indirect costs (including incremental costs) incurred by the Department of Defense during the preceding fiscal year in training, equipping, and otherwise assisting, preparing, providing resources for, and transporting foreign defense or security forces for implementing or supporting any resolution adopted by the United Nations Security Council, including any such resolution specified in paragraph (1). “(4) All efforts made to seek credit against past United Nations expenditures. “(5) All efforts made to seek compensation from the United Nations for costs incurred by the Department of Defense in implementing and supporting United Nations activities. “(c) Coordination.—The report under subsection (a) each year shall be prepared in coordination with the Secretary of State. “(d) Form of Report.—Each report required by this section shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.”

Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title XII, § 1233, Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3469, provided that: “(a) Criteria.—As part of the Integrated Global Presence and Basing Strategy (IGPBS) developed by the Department of Defense that is referred to as the ‘Global Posture Review’, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall develop criteria for assessing, with respect to each type of facility specified in subsection (c) that is to be located in a foreign country, the following factors:“(1) The effect of any new basing arrangements on the strategic mobility requirements of the Department of Defense. “(2) The ability of units deployed to overseas locations in areas in which United States Armed Forces have not traditionally been deployed to meet mobility response times required by operational planners. “(3) The cost of deploying units to areas referred to in paragraph (2) on a rotational basis (rather than on a permanent basing basis). “(4) The strategic benefit of rotational deployments through countries with which the United States is developing a close or new security relationship. “(5) Whether the relative speed and complexity of conducting negotiations with a particular country is a discriminator in the decision to deploy forces within the country. “(6) The appropriate and available funding mechanisms for the establishment, operation, and sustainment of specific Main Operating Bases, Forward Operating Bases, or Cooperative Security Locations. “(7) The effect on military quality of life of the unaccompanied deployment of units to new facilities in overseas locations. “(8) Other criteria as Secretary of Defense determines appropriate. “(b) Analysis of Alternatives to Basing or Operating Locations.—The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall develop a mechanism for analyzing alternatives to any particular overseas basing or operating location. Such a mechanism shall incorporate the factors specified in each of paragraphs (1) through (5) of subsection (a). “(c) Minimal Infrastructure Requirements for Overseas Installations.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop a description of minimal infrastructure requirements for each of the following types of facilities:“(1) Facilities categorized as Main Operating Bases. “(2) Facilities categorized as Forward Operating Bases. “(3) Facilities categorized as Cooperative Security Locations. “(d) Notification Required.—Not later than 30 days after an agreement is entered into between the United States and a foreign country to support the deployment of elements of the United States Armed Forces in that country, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a written notification of such agreement. The notification under this subsection shall include the terms of the agreement, any costs to the United States resulting from the agreement, and a timeline to carry out the terms of the agreement. “(e) Annual Budget Element.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress, as an element of the annual budget request of the Secretary, information regarding the funding sources for the establishment, operation, and sustainment of individual Main Operating Bases, Forward Operating Bases, or Cooperative Security Locations. “(f) Report.—Not later than March 30, 2006, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on the matters specified in subsections (a) through (c).”

Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title V, § 573, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1921, provided that: “(a) Elimination of Backlog, Etc.—The Secretary of Defense shall take such steps as may be necessary to ensure that—“(1) the United States Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory has the personnel and resources to effectively process forensic evidence used by the Department of Defense within 60 days of receipt by the laboratory of such evidence; “(2) consistent policies are established among the Armed Forces to reduce the time period between the collection of forensic evidence and the receipt and processing of such evidence by United States Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory; and “(3) there is an adequate supply of forensic evidence collection kits—“(A) for all United States military installations, including the military service academies; and “(B) for units of the Armed Forces deployed in theaters of operation. “(b) Training.—The Secretary shall take such measures as the Secretary considers appropriate to ensure that personnel are appropriately trained—“(1) in the use of forensic evidence collection kits; and “(2) in the prescribed procedures to ensure protection of the chain of custody of such kits once used.”

Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title VII, § 724, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1990, provided that: “(a) Policy Required.—The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe the policy of the Department of Defense for providing, in the case of the serious illness or injury of a member of the Armed Forces in a combat zone, timely notification to the next of kin of the member regarding the illness or injury, including information on the condition of the member and the location at which the member is receiving treatment. In prescribing the policy, the Secretary shall ensure respect for the expressed desires of individual members of the Armed Forces regarding the notification of next of kin and shall include standards of timeliness for both the initial notification of next of kin under the policy and subsequent updates regarding the condition and location of the member. “(b) Submission of Policy.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 28, 2004], the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a copy of the policy.”

Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title IX, § 932, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2031, provided that: “(a) Criteria for Critical Information.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall establish criteria for determining categories of critical information that should be made known expeditiously to senior civilian and military officials in the Department of Defense. Those categories should be limited to matters of extraordinary significance and strategic impact to which rapid access by those officials is essential to the successful accomplishment of the national security strategy or a major military mission. The Secretary may from time to time modify the list to suit the current strategic situation. “(2) The Secretary shall provide the criteria established under paragraph (1) to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretaries of the military departments, the commanders of the unified and specified commands, the commanders of deployed forces, and such other elements of the Department of Defense as the Secretary considers necessary. “(b) Matters To Be Included.—The criteria established under subsection (a) shall include, at a minimum, requirement for identification of the following:“(1) Any incident that may result in a contingency operation, based on the incident’s nature, gravity, or potential for significant adverse consequences to United States citizens, military personnel, interests, or assets, including an incident that could result in significant adverse publicity having a major strategic impact. “(2) Any event, development, or situation that could be reasonably assumed to escalate into an incident described in paragraph (1). “(3) Any deficiency or error in policy, standards, or training that could be reasonably assumed to have the effects described in paragraph (1). “(c) Requirements for Transmission of Critical Information.—The criteria under subsection (a) shall include such requirements for transmission of such critical information to such senior civilian and military officials of the Department of Defense as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate. “(d) Time for Issuance of Criteria.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish the criteria required by subsection (a) not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 28, 2004].”

Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title X, § 1032, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2045, authorized the Secretary of Defense to conduct a program during fiscal year 2005 to commemorate the 60th anniversary of World War II.

Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title X, § 1085, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2065, as amended by Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title III, § 360(c), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 78; Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, § 1075(i)(2), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4378, provided that: “The Secretary of Defense may not reduce or eliminate search and rescue capabilities at any military installation in the United States unless the Secretary, after reviewing the search and rescue capabilities report prepared by the Secretary of the Air Force under section 360(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110–181; 122 Stat. 77), first certifies to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives that equivalent search and rescue capabilities will be provided, without interruption and consistent with the policies and objectives set forth in the United States National Search and Rescue Plan entered into force on January 1, 1999, by— “(1) the Department of Interior, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Transportation, the Federal Communications Commission, or the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; or “(2) the Department of Defense, either directly or through a Department of Defense contract with an emergency medical service provider or other private entity to provide such capabilities.”

Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title XIV, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2094, provided that:

Pub. L. 108–177, title III, § 358, Dec. 13, 2003, 117 Stat. 2621, directed the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, not later than one year after Dec. 13, 2003, to submit preliminary and final reports to committees of Congress on information obtained by the Department of Defense and the intelligence community on the conventional weapons and ammunition obtained by Iraq in violation of applicable resolutions of the United Nations Security Council adopted since the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1990.

Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title XII, § 1204, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1649, directed the Secretary of Defense, not later than one year after Nov. 24, 2003, to submit to committees of Congress a report on the acquisition by Iraq of weapons of mass destruction and associated delivery systems and the acquisition by Iraq of advanced conventional weapons.

Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title II, § 216, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1418, directed the Secretary of Defense to provide for the performance of two independent studies of alternative future fleet platform architectures for the Navy and to forward the results of each study to congressional defense committees not later than Jan. 15, 2005.

Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title III, § 320, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1435, provided that: “(a) Study Required.—The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a study on the impact, if any, of the following types of encroachment issues affecting military installations and operational ranges:“(1) Civilian community encroachment on those military installations and ranges whose operational training activities, research, development, test, and evaluation activities, or other operational, test and evaluation, maintenance, storage, disposal, or other support functions require, or in the future reasonably may require, safety or operational buffer areas. The requirement for such a buffer area may be due to a variety of factors, including air operations, ordnance operations and storage, or other activities that generate or might generate noise, electro-magnetic interference, ordnance arcs, or environmental impacts that require or may require safety or operational buffer areas. “(2) Compliance by the Department of Defense with State Implementation Plans for Air Quality under section 110 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7410). “(3) Compliance by the Department of Defense with the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.). “(b) Matters To Be Included With Respect to Civilian Community Encroachments.—With respect to paragraph (1) of subsection (a), the study shall include the following:“(1) A list of all military installations described in subsection (a)(1) at which civilian community encroachment is occurring. “(2) A description and analysis of the types and degree of such civilian community encroachment at each military installation included on the list. “(3) An analysis, including views and estimates of the Secretary of Defense, of the current and potential future impact of such civilian community encroachment on operational training activities, research, development, test, and evaluation activities, and other significant operational, test and evaluation, maintenance, storage, disposal, or other support functions performed by military installations included on the list. The analysis shall include the following:“(A) A review of training and test ranges at military installations, including laboratories and technical centers of the military departments, included on the list. “(B) A description and explanation of the trends of such encroachment, as well as consideration of potential future readiness problems resulting from unabated encroachment. “(4) An estimate of the costs associated with current and anticipated partnerships between the Department of Defense and non-Federal entities to create buffer zones to preclude further development around military installations included on the list, and the costs associated with the conveyance of surplus property around such military installations for purposes of creating buffer zones. “(5) Options and recommendations for possible legislative or budgetary changes necessary to mitigate current and anticipated future civilian community encroachment problems. “(c) Matters To Be Included With Respect to Compliance With Specified Laws.—With respect to paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (a), the study shall include the following:“(1) A list of all military installations and other locations at which the Armed Forces are encountering problems related to compliance with the laws specified in such paragraphs. “(2) A description and analysis of the types and degree of compliance problems encountered. “(3) An analysis, including views and estimates of the Secretary of Defense, of the current and potential future impact of such compliance problems on the following functions performed at military installations:“(A) Operational training activities. “(B) Research, development, test, and evaluation activities. “(C) Other significant operational, test and evaluation, maintenance, storage, disposal, or other support functions. “(4) A description and explanation of the trends of such compliance problems, as well as consideration of potential future readiness problems resulting from such compliance problems. “(d) Plan to Respond to Encroachment Issues.—On the basis of the study conducted under subsection (a), including the specific matters required to be addressed by subsections (b) and (c), the Secretary of Defense shall prepare a plan to respond to the encroachment issues described in subsection (a) affecting military installations and operational ranges. “(e) Reporting Requirements.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives the following reports regarding the study conducted under subsection (a), including the specific matters required to be addressed by subsections (b) and (c):“(1) Not later than January 31, 2004, an interim report describing the progress made in conducting the study and containing the information collected under the study as of that date. “(2) Not later than January 31, 2006, a report containing the results of the study and the encroachment response plan required by subsection (d). “(3) Not later than January 31, 2007, and each January 31 thereafter through January 31, 2010, a report describing the progress made in implementing the encroachment response plan.”

Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title III, § 337, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1445, provided that: “(a) Pilot Program.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a pilot program under which the Secretary concerned shall create, or continue the implementation of, high-performing organizations through the conduct of a Business Process Reengineering initiative at selected military installations and facilities under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned. “(b) Effect of Participation in Pilot Program.—(1) During the period of an organization’s participation in the pilot program, including the periods referred to in paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (f), the Secretary concerned may not require the organization to undergo any Office of Management and Budget Circular A–76 competition or other public-private competition involving any function of the organization covered by the Business Process Reengineering initiative. The organization may elect to undergo such a competition as part of the initiative. “(2) Civilian employee or military personnel positions of the participating organization that are part of the Business Process Reengineering initiative shall be counted toward any numerical goals, target, or quota that the Secretary concerned is required or requested to meet during the term of the pilot program regarding the number of positions to be covered by public-private competitions. “(c) Eligible Organizations.—Subject to subsection (d), the Secretary concerned may select two types of organizations to participate in the pilot program:“(1) Organizations that underwent a Business Process Reengineering initiative within the preceding five years, achieved major performance enhancements under the initiative, and will be able to sustain previous or achieve new performance goals through the continuation of its existing or completed Business Process Reengineering plan. “(2) Organizations that have not undergone or have not successfully completed a Business Process Reengineering initiative, but which propose to achieve, and reasonably could reach, enhanced performance goals through implementation of a Business Process Reengineering initiative. “(d) Additional Eligibility Requirements.—(1) To be eligible for selection to participate in the pilot program under subsection (c)(1), an organization described in such subsection shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Secretary concerned, the completion of a total organizational assessment that resulted in enhanced performance measures at least comparable to those performance measures that might be achieved through competitive sourcing. “(2) To be eligible for selection to participate in the pilot program under subsection (c)(2), an organization described in such subsection shall identify, to the satisfaction of the Secretary concerned—“(A) functions, processes, and measures to be studied under the Business Process Reengineering initiative; “(B) adequate resources to carry out the Business Process Reengineering initiative; and “(C) labor-management agreements in place to ensure effective implementation of the Business Process Reengineering initiative. “(e) Limitation on Number of Participants.—Total participants in the pilot program is limited to eight military installations and facilities, with some participants to be drawn from organizations described in subsection (c)(1) and some participants to be drawn from organizations described in subsection (c)(2). “(f) Implementation and Duration.—(1) The implementation and management of a Business Process Reengineering initiative under the pilot program shall be the responsibility of the commander of the military installation or facility at which the Business Process Reengineering initiative is carried out. “(2) An organization selected to participate in the pilot program shall be given a reasonable initial period, to be determined by the Secretary concerned, in which the organization must implement the Business Process Reengineering initiative. At the end of this period, the Secretary concerned shall determine whether the organization has achieved initial progress toward designation as a high-performing organization. In the absence of such progress, the Secretary concerned shall terminate the organization’s participation in the pilot program. “(3) If an organization successfully completes implementation of the Business Process Reengineering initiative under paragraph (2), the Secretary concerned shall designate the organization as a high-performing organization and grant the organization an additional five-year period in which to achieve projected or planned efficiencies and savings under the pilot program. “(g) Reviews and Reports.—The Secretary concerned shall conduct annual performance reviews of the participating organizations or functions under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned. Reviews and reports shall evaluate organizational performance measures or functional performance measures and determine whether organizations are performing satisfactorily for purposes of continuing participation in the pilot program. “(h) Performance Measures.—Performance measures utilized in the pilot program should include the following, which shall be measured against organizational baselines determined before participation in the pilot program:“(1) Costs, savings, and overall financial performance of the organization. “(2) Organic knowledge, skills or expertise. “(3) Efficiency and effectiveness of key functions or processes. “(4) Efficiency and effectiveness of the overall organization. “(5) General customer satisfaction. “(i) Definitions.—In this section[:]“(1) The term ‘Business Process Reengineering’ refers to an organization’s complete and thorough analysis and reengineering of mission and support functions and processes to achieve improvements in performance, including a fundamental reshaping of the way work is done to better support an organization’s mission and reduce costs. “(2) The term ‘high-performing organization’ means an organization whose performance exceeds that of comparable providers, whether public or private. “(3) The term ‘Secretary concerned’ means the Secretary of a military department and the Secretary of Defense, with respect to matters concerning the Defense Agencies.”

Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title V, § 517(b), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1461, directed the Secretary of Defense to submit to committees of Congress, not later than one year after Nov. 24, 2003, a description of the effects on reserve component recruitment and retention that have resulted from calls and orders to active duty and the tempo of such service, an assessment of the process for calling and ordering reserve members to active duty, preparing such members for active duty, processing such members into the force, and deploying such members, and a description of changes in the Armed Forces envisioned by the Secretary of Defense.

Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title V, § 546, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1479, provided that: “(a) Requirement for Policy.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Nov. 24, 2003], the Secretary of Defense shall prescribe the policy of the Department of Defense on public release of the name or other personally identifying information of any member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps who while on active duty or performing inactive-duty training is killed or injured, whose duty status becomes unknown, or who is otherwise considered to be a casualty. “(b) Guidance on Timing of Release.—The policy under subsection (a) shall include guidance for ensuring that any public release of information on a member under the policy occurs only after the lapse of an appropriate period following notification of the next-of-kin regarding the casualty status of such member.”

Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title II, § 243, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 51, provided that: “(a) Research, Development, and Testing Plan.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a research, development, and testing plan for prompt global strike program objectives for fiscal years 2008 through 2013. “(b) Plan for Obligation and Expenditure of Funds.—“(1) In general.—The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a plan for obligation and expenditure of funds available for prompt global strike for fiscal year 2008. The plan shall include correlations between each technology application being developed in fiscal year 2008 and the prompt global strike alternative or alternatives toward which the technology application applies. “(2) Limitation.—The Under Secretary shall not implement the plan required by paragraph (1) until at least 10 days after the plan is submitted as required by that paragraph.”

Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title X, § 1032, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1605, as amended by Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title X, § 1043, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 311, provided that: “(a) Integrated Plan for Prompt Global Strike Capability.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish an integrated plan for developing, deploying, and sustaining a prompt global strike capability in the Armed Forces. The Secretary shall update the plan annually. “(b) Annual Reports.—(1) Not later than April 1 of each of 2004, 2005, and 2006, and each of 2007, 2008, and 2009, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of Senate and House of Representatives] a report on the plan established under subsection (a). “(2) Each report under paragraph (1) shall include the following:“(A) A description and assessment of the targets against which long-range strike assets might be directed and the conditions under which those assets might be used. “(B) The role of, and plans for ensuring, sustainment and modernization of current long-range strike assets, including bombers, intercontinental ballistic missiles, and submarine-launched ballistic missiles. “(C) A description of the capabilities desired for advanced long-range strike assets and plans to achieve those capabilities. “(D) A description of the capabilities desired for advanced conventional munitions and the plans to achieve those capabilities. “(E) An assessment of advanced nuclear concepts that could contribute to the prompt global strike mission. “(F) An assessment of the command, control, and communications capabilities necessary to support prompt global strike capabilities. “(G) An assessment of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities necessary to support prompt global strike capabilities. “(H) A description of how prompt global strike capabilities are to be integrated with theater strike capabilities. “(I) An estimated schedule for achieving the desired prompt global strike capabilities. “(J) The estimated cost of achieving the desired prompt global strike capabilities. “(K) A description of ongoing and future studies necessary for updating the plan appropriately.”

Pub. L. 109–13, div. A, title I, § 1024(c), May 11, 2005, 119 Stat. 253, provided that: “(1) Each semiannual report to Congress required under a provision of law referred to in paragraph (2) shall include, in addition to the matters specified in the applicable provision of law, the following:“(A) A statement of the cumulative total of all amounts obligated, and of all amounts expended, as of the date of such report for Operation Enduring Freedom. “(B) A statement of the cumulative total of all amounts obligated, and of all amounts expended, as of the date of such report for Operation Iraqi Freedom. “(C) An estimate of the reasonably foreseeable costs for ongoing military operations to be incurred during the 12-month period beginning on the date of such report. “(2) The provisions of law referred to in this paragraph are as follows:“(A) Section 1120 of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004 (Public Law 108–106; 117 Stat. 1219; 10 U.S.C. 113 note). “(B) Section 9010 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108–287; 118 Stat. 1008; 10 U.S.C. 113 note).”

Pub. L. 108–287, title IX, § 9010, Aug. 5, 2004, 118 Stat. 1008, as amended by Pub. L. 108–324, div. B, § 306, Oct. 13, 2004, 118 Stat. 1243, provided that: “(a) Not later than April 30 and October 31 of each year, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on the military operations of the Armed Forces and the reconstruction activities of the Department of Defense in Iraq and Afghanistan. “(b) Each report shall include the following information:“(1) For each of Iraq and Afghanistan for the half-fiscal year ending during the month preceding the due date of the report, the amount expended for military operations of the Armed Forces and the amount expended for reconstruction activities, together with the cumulative total amounts expended for such operations and activities. “(2) An assessment of the progress made toward preventing attacks on United States personnel. “(3) An assessment of the effects of the operations and activities in Iraq and Afghanistan on the readiness of the Armed Forces. “(4) An assessment of the effects of the operations and activities in Iraq and Afghanistan on the recruitment and retention of personnel for the Armed Forces. “(5) For the half-fiscal year ending during the month preceding the due date of the report, the costs incurred for repair of Department of Defense equipment used in the operations and activities in Iraq and Afghanistan. “(6) The foreign countries, international organizations, and nongovernmental organizations that are contributing support for the ongoing military operations and reconstruction activities, together with a discussion of the amount and types of support contributed by each during the half-fiscal year ending during the month preceding the due date of the report. “(7) The extent to which, and the schedule on which, the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve of the Armed Forces is being involuntarily ordered to active duty under section 12302 of title 10, United States Code. “(8) For each unit of the National Guard of the United States and the other reserve components of the Armed Forces on active duty pursuant to an order to active duty under section 12302 of title 10, United States Code, the following information:“(A) The unit. “(B) The projected date of return of the unit to its home station. “(C) The extent (by percentage) to which the forces deployed within the United States and outside the United States in support of a contingency operation are composed of reserve component forces.”

Pub. L. 108–106, title I, § 1120, Nov. 6, 2003, 117 Stat. 1219, provided that: “(a) Not later than April 30 and October 31 of each year, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on the military operations of the Armed Forces and the reconstruction activities of the Department of Defense in Iraq and Afghanistan. “(b) Each report shall include the following information:“(1) For each of Iraq and Afghanistan for the half-fiscal year ending during the month preceding the due date of the report, the amount expended for military operations of the Armed Forces and the amount expended for reconstruction activities, together with the cumulative total amounts expended for such operations and activities. “(2) An assessment of the progress made toward preventing attacks on United States personnel. “(3) An assessment of the effects of the operations and activities in Iraq and Afghanistan on the readiness of the Armed Forces. “(4) An assessment of the effects of the operations and activities in Iraq and Afghanistan on the recruitment and retention of personnel for the Armed Forces. “(5) For the half-fiscal year ending during the month preceding the due date of the report, the costs incurred for repair of Department of Defense equipment used in the operations and activities in Iraq and Afghanistan. “(6) The foreign countries, international organizations, and nongovernmental organizations that are contributing support for the ongoing military operations and reconstruction activities, together with a discussion of the amount and types of support contributed by each during the half-fiscal year ending during the month preceding the due date of the report. “(7) The extent to which, and the schedule on which, the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve of the Armed Forces is being involuntarily ordered to active duty under section 12304 of title 10, United States Code. “(8) For each unit of the National Guard of the United States and the other reserve components of the Armed Forces on active duty pursuant to an order to active duty under section 12304 of title 10, United States Code, the following information:“(A) The unit. “(B) The projected date of return of the unit to its home station. “(C) The extent (by percentage) to which the forces deployed within the United States and outside the United States in support of a contingency operation are composed of reserve component forces.”

Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title II, § 233, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2490, provided that: “(a) Requirement for System.—The Secretary of Defense shall implement a single financial management and accounting system for all test and evaluation facilities of the Department of Defense. The Secretary shall implement such system as soon as practicable, and shall establish the objective that such system be implemented not later than September 30, 2006. “(b) System Features.—The system required by subsection (a) shall be designed to achieve, at a minimum, the following functional objectives:“(1) Enable managers within the Department of Defense to compare the costs of carrying out test and evaluation activities in the various facilities of the military departments. “(2) Enable the Secretary of Defense—“(A) to make prudent investment decisions; and “(B) to reduce the extent to which unnecessary costs of owning and operating test and evaluation facilities of the Department of Defense are incurred. “(3) Enable the Department of Defense to track the total cost of test and evaluation activities. “(4) Comply with the financial management architecture established by the Secretary.”

Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title III, § 366, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2522, as amended by Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title III, § 348, Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2159; Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title X, § 1063(c)(2), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 322; Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, § 1075(g)(2), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4376; Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title III, § 311, Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 1691, provided that: “(a) Plan Required.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall develop a comprehensive plan for using existing authorities available to the Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments to address training constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine areas, and airspace that are available in the United States and overseas for training of the Armed Forces. “(2) As part of the preparation of the plan, the Secretary of Defense shall conduct the following:“(A) An assessment of current and future training range requirements of the Armed Forces. “(B) An evaluation of the adequacy of current Department of Defense resources (including virtual and constructive training assets as well as military lands, marine areas, and airspace available in the United States and overseas) to meet those current and future training range requirements. “(3) The plan shall include the following:“(A) Proposals to enhance training range capabilities and address any shortfalls in current Department of Defense resources identified pursuant to the assessment and evaluation conducted under paragraph (2). “(B) Goals and milestones for tracking planned actions and measuring progress. “(C) Projected funding requirements for implementing planned actions. “(D) Designation of an office in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and in each of the military departments that will have lead responsibility for overseeing implementation of the plan. “(4) At the same time as the President submits to Congress the budget for fiscal year 2004, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report describing the progress made in implementing this subsection, including—“(A) the plan developed under paragraph (1); “(B) the results of the assessment and evaluation conducted under paragraph (2); and “(C) any recommendations that the Secretary may have for legislative or regulatory changes to address training constraints identified pursuant to this section. “(5) At the same time as the President submits to Congress the budget for each fiscal year through fiscal year 2018, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report describing the progress made in implementing the plan and any additional actions taken, or to be taken, to address training constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine areas, and airspace. “(b) Readiness Reporting Improvement.—Not later than June 30, 2003, the Secretary of Defense, using existing measures within the authority of the Secretary, shall submit to Congress a report on the plans of the Department of Defense to improve the Global Status of Resources and Training System to reflect the readiness impact that training constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine areas, and airspace have on specific units of the Armed Forces. “(c) Training Range Inventory.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall develop and maintain a training range inventory for each of the Armed Forces—“(A) to identify all available operational training ranges; “(B) to identify all training capacities and capabilities available at each training range; and “(C) to identify training constraints caused by limitations on the use of military lands, marine areas, and airspace at each training range. “(2) The Secretary of Defense shall submit an initial inventory to Congress at the same time as the President submits the budget for fiscal year 2004 and shall submit an updated inventory to Congress at the same time as the President submits the budget for each fiscal year through fiscal year 2018. “(d) GAO Evaluation.—The Secretary of Defense shall transmit copies of each report required by subsections (a) and (b) to the Comptroller General. Within 90 days of receiving a report, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress an evaluation of the report. “(e) Armed Forces Defined.—In this section, the term ‘Armed Forces’ means the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps.”

Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title X, § 1004, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2629, which required Secretary of Defense to develop a financial management enterprise architecture for all budgetary, accounting, finance, enterprise resource planning, and mixed information systems of the Department of Defense by May 1, 2003, was repealed by Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title III, § 332(f), Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1856.

Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title X, § 1008, Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1204, as amended by Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title X, § 1052, Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1582; Pub. L. 113–188, title IV, § 401(b), Nov. 26, 2014, 128 Stat. 2019, provided that: “[(a), (b) Repealed. Pub. L. 113–188, title IV, § 401(b)(1), Nov. 26, 2014, 128 Stat. 2019.] “(c) Information to Auditors.—Not later than the date that is 180 days prior to the date set by the Office of Management and Budget for the submission of financial statements of each year [sic], the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and the Assistant Secretary of each military department with responsibility for financial management and comptroller functions shall each provide to the auditors of the financial statement of that official’s department for the fiscal year ending during the preceding month that official’s preliminary management representation, in writing, regarding the expected reliability of the financial statement. The representation shall be consistent with guidance issued by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and shall include the basis for the reliability assessment stated in the representation. “(d) Limitation on Inspector General Audits.—(1) On each financial statement that an official asserts is unreliable under subsection (c), the Inspector General of the Department of Defense shall only perform the audit procedures required by generally accepted government auditing standards consistent with any representation made by management. “(2) With the annual budget justifications for the Department of Defense submitted to Congress each year, the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall submit, with respect to the fiscal year in which submitted, the preceding fiscal year, and the following fiscal year, information which the Inspector General shall report to the Under Secretary, as follows:“(A) An estimate of the resources that the Inspector General is saving or expects to save as a result of actions taken and to be taken under paragraph (1) with respect to the auditing of financial statements. “(B) A discussion of how the resources saved as estimated under subparagraph (A) have been redirected or are to be redirected from the auditing of financial statements to the oversight and improvement of systems underlying financial management within the Department of Defense and to the oversight and improvement of financial management policies, procedures, and internal controls within the Department of Defense. “(e) Effective Date.—The requirements of this section shall apply with respect to financial statements for fiscal years after fiscal year 2001 and to the auditing of those financial statements. “(f) Termination of Applicability.—If the Secretary of Defense certifies to the Inspector General of the Department of Defense that the financial statement for the Department of Defense, or a financial statement for a component of the Department of Defense, for a fiscal year is reliable, this section shall not apply with respect to that financial statement or to any successive financial statement for the Department of Defense, or for that component, as the case may be, for any later fiscal year.”

Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title X, § 1043, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2646, provided that: “(a) Reports Required.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional committees specified in subsection (d) an annual report on the conduct of military operations conducted as part of Operation Enduring Freedom. The first report, which shall include a definition of the military operations carried out as part of Operation Enduring Freedom, shall be submitted not later than June 15, 2003. Subsequent reports shall be submitted not later than June 15 each year, and the final report shall be submitted not later than 180 days after the date (as determined by the Secretary of Defense) of the cessation of hostilities undertaken as part of Operation Enduring Freedom. “(2) Each report under this section shall be prepared in consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the commander of the United States Central Command, the Director of Central Intelligence, and such other officials as the Secretary considers appropriate. “(3) Each such report shall be submitted in both a classified form and an unclassified form, as necessary. “(b) Special Matters To Be Included.—Each report under this section shall include the following:“(1) A discussion of the command, control, coordination, and support relationship between United States special operations forces and Central Intelligence Agency elements participating in Operation Enduring Freedom and any lessons learned from the joint conduct of operations by those forces and elements. “(2) Recommendations to improve operational readiness and effectiveness of these forces and elements. “(c) Other Matters To Be Included.—Each report under this section shall include a discussion, with a particular emphasis on accomplishments and shortcomings, of the following matters with respect to Operation Enduring Freedom:“(1) The political and military objectives of the United States. “(2) The military strategy of the United States to achieve those political and military objectives. “(3) The concept of operations, including any new operational concepts, for the operation. “(4) The benefits and disadvantages of operating with local opposition forces. “(5) The benefits and disadvantages of operating in a coalition with the military forces of allied and friendly nations. “(6) The cooperation of nations in the region for overflight, basing, command and control, and logistic and other support. “(7) The conduct of relief operations both during and after the period of hostilities. “(8) The conduct of close air support (CAS), particularly with respect to the timeliness, efficiency, and effectiveness of such support. “(9) The use of unmanned aerial vehicles for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and combat support to operational forces. “(10) The use and performance of United States and coalition military equipment, weapon systems, and munitions. “(11) The effectiveness of reserve component forces, including their use and performance in the theater of operations. “(12) The importance and effectiveness of the International Security Assistance Force. “(13) The importance and effectiveness of United States civil affairs forces. “(14) The anticipated duration of the United States military presence in Afghanistan. “(15) The most critical lessons learned that could lead to long-term doctrinal, organizational, and technological changes. “(d) Congressional Committees.—The committees referred to in subsection (a)(1) are the following:“(1) The Committee on Armed Services and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate. “(2) The Committee on Armed Services and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives.”

[Reference to the Director of Central Intelligence or the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Director’s capacity as the head of the intelligence community deemed to be a reference to the Director of National Intelligence. Reference to the Director of Central Intelligence or the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Director’s capacity as the head of the Central Intelligence Agency deemed to be a reference to the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. See section 1081(a), (b) of Pub. L. 108–458, set out as a note under section 3001 of Title 50, War and National Defense.]

Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title XIV, § 1402, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2675, provided that: “(a) Comprehensive Plan.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop a comprehensive plan for improving the preparedness of military installations for preventing and responding to terrorist attacks, including attacks involving the use or threat of use of weapons of mass destruction. “(b) Preparedness Strategy.—The plan under subsection (a) shall include a preparedness strategy that includes each of the following:“(1) Identification of long-term goals and objectives for improving the preparedness of military installations for preventing and responding to terrorist attacks. “(2) Identification of budget and other resource requirements necessary to achieve those goals and objectives. “(3) Identification of factors beyond the control of the Secretary that could impede the achievement of those goals and objectives. “(4) A discussion of the extent to which local, regional, or national military response capabilities are to be developed, integrated, and used. “(5) A discussion of how the Secretary will coordinate the capabilities referred to in paragraph (4) with local, regional, or national civilian and other military capabilities. “(c) Performance Plan.—The plan under subsection (a) shall include a performance plan that includes each of the following:“(1) A reasonable schedule, with milestones, for achieving the goals and objectives of the strategy under subsection (b). “(2) Performance criteria for measuring progress in achieving those goals and objectives. “(3) A description of the process, together with a discussion of the resources, necessary to achieve those goals and objectives. “(4) A description of the process for evaluating results in achieving those goals and objectives. “(d) Submittal to Congress.—The Secretary shall submit the comprehensive plan developed under subsection (a) to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 2, 2002]. “(e) Comptroller General Review and Report.—Not later than 60 days after the date on which the Secretary submits the comprehensive plan under subsection (a), the Comptroller General shall review the plan and submit to the committees referred to in subsection (d) the Comptroller General’s assessment of the plan. “(f) Annual Report.—(1) In each of 2004, 2005, and 2006, the Secretary of Defense shall include a report on the comprehensive plan developed under subsection (a) with the materials that the Secretary submits to Congress in support of the budget submitted by the President that year pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code. “(2) Each such report shall include—“(A) a discussion of any revision that the Secretary has made in the comprehensive plan developed under subsection (a) since the last report under this subsection or, in the case of the first such report, since the plan was submitted under subsection (d); and “(B) an assessment of the progress made in achieving the goals and objectives of the strategy set forth in the plan. “(3) If the Secretary includes in the report for 2004 or 2005 under this subsection a declaration that the goals and objectives of the preparedness strategy set forth in the comprehensive plan have been achieved, no further report is required under this subsection.”

Pub. L. 106–398, § 1 [[div. A], title V, § 552], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–125, provided that: “(a) Policy Requirement.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a policy creating a uniform process within the Department of Defense that—“(1) affords any individual who, in connection with the investigation of a reported crime, is designated (by name or by any other identifying information) as a suspect in the case in any official investigative report, or in a central index for potential retrieval and analysis by law enforcement organizations, an opportunity to obtain a review of that designation; and “(2) requires the expungement of the name and other identifying information of any such individual from such report or index in any case in which it is determined the entry of such identifying information on that individual was made contrary to Department of Defense requirements. “(b) Effective Date.—The policy required by subsection (a) shall be established not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 30, 2000].”

Pub. L. 106–398, § 1 [[div. A], title V, § 576], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–138, directed the Secretary of Defense to conduct a three-year test program to determine the most effective peacetime structure and operational employment of reserve component intelligence assets and to establish a means to coordinate and transition the peacetime intelligence support network into use for meeting wartime needs, and to submit to Congress interim and final reports on such program not later than Dec. 1, 2004.

Pub. L. 106–398, § 1 [[div. A], title XI, § 1105], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–311, directed the Secretary of Defense to conduct a study to assess the manner in which personnel services were provided for civilian personnel in the Department of Defense and to submit a report on such study to committees of Congress not later than Jan. 1, 2002.

Pub. L. 106–398, § 1 [[div. A], title XI, § 1111], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–312, directed the Secretary of Defense to carry out a three-year pilot program to improve processes for the resolution of equal employment opportunity complaints by civilian employees of the Department of Defense, and directed the Comptroller General to submit to Congress a report on such program not later than 90 days following the end of the first and last full or partial fiscal years during which such program had been implemented.

Pub. L. 106–398, § 1 [[div. A], title XI, § 1112], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–313, as amended by Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title III, § 363, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2520, directed the Secretary of Defense to carry out a defense employees work safety demonstration program under which work safety models used by employers in the private sector would be adopted and any improvement to work safety records would be assessed, directed that such program would terminate on Sept. 30, 2003, and required the Secretary to submit interim and final reports on such program to committees of Congress not later than Dec. 1, 2003.

Pub. L. 106–398, § 1 [[div. A], title XII, § 1223], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–328, directed the Comptroller General to conduct a study assessing the benefits and costs to the United States and United States national security interests of the engagement of United States forces in Europe and of United States military strategies used to shape the international security environment in Europe and to submit to committees of Congress a report on the results of such study not later than Dec. 1, 2001.

Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title III, § 366, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 578, provided that: “(a) Establishment of Standards.—The Secretary of each military department shall establish, for deployable units of each of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of the Secretary, standards regarding—“(1) the level of spare parts that the units must have on hand; and “(2) similar logistics and sustainment needs of the units. “(b) Basis for Standards.—The standards to be established for a unit under subsection (a) shall be based upon the following:“(1) The unit’s wartime mission, as reflected in the war-fighting plans of the relevant combatant commanders. “(2) An assessment of the likely requirement for sustained operations under each such war-fighting plan. “(3) An assessment of the likely requirement for that unit to conduct sustained operations in an austere environment, while drawing exclusively on its own internal logistics capabilities. “(c) Sufficiency Capabilities.—The standards to be established by the Secretary of a military department under subsection (a) shall reflect those spare parts and similar logistics capabilities that the Secretary considers sufficient for the units of each of the Armed Forces under the Secretary’s jurisdiction to successfully execute their missions under the conditions described in subsection (b). “(d) Relation to Readiness Reporting System.—The standards established under subsection (a) shall be taken into account in designing the comprehensive readiness reporting system for the Department of Defense required by section 117 of title 10, United States Code, and shall be an element in determining a unit’s readiness status. “(e) Relation to Annual Funding Needs.—The Secretary of Defense shall consider the standards established under subsection (a) in establishing the annual funding requirements for the Department of Defense. “(f) Reporting Requirement.—The Secretary of Defense shall include in the annual report required by section 113(c) of title 10, United States Code, an analysis of the then current spare parts, logistics, and sustainment standards of the Armed Forces, as described in subsection (a), including any shortfalls and the cost of addressing these shortfalls.”

Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title III, § 373(a)–(g), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 580, 581, provided that: “(a) Department of Navy as Lead Agency.—The Department of the Navy shall serve as the lead agency for the development and implementation of a Smart Card program for the Department of Defense. “(b) Cooperation of Other Military Departments.—The Department of the Army and the Department of the Air Force shall each establish a project office and cooperate with the Department of the Navy to develop implementation plans for exploiting the capability of Smart Card technology as a means for enhancing readiness and improving business processes throughout the military departments. “(c) Senior Coordinating Group.—(1) Not later than November 30, 1999, the Secretary of Defense shall establish a senior coordinating group to develop and implement—“(A) Department-wide interoperability standards for use of Smart Card technology; and “(B) a plan to exploit Smart Card technology as a means for enhancing readiness and improving business processes. “(2) The senior coordinating group shall be chaired by a representative of the Secretary of the Navy and shall include senior representatives from each of the Armed Forces and such other persons as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate. “(3) Not later than March 31, 2000, the Secretary of Defense 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 a detailed discussion of the progress made by the senior coordinating group in carrying out its duties. “(d) Role of Department of Defense Chief Information Office.—The senior coordinating group established under subsection (c) shall report to and receive guidance from the Department of Defense Chief Information Office. “(e) Increased Use Targeted to Certain Naval Regions.—Not later than November 30, 1999, the Secretary of the Navy shall establish a business plan to implement the use of Smart Cards in one major Naval region of the continental United States that is in the area of operations of the United States Atlantic Command and one major Naval region of the continental United States that is in the area of operations of the United States Pacific Command. The regions selected shall include a major fleet concentration area. The implementation of the use of Smart Cards in each region shall cover the Navy and Marine Corps bases and all non-deployed units in the region. The Secretary of the Navy shall submit the business plan to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives]. “(f) Funding for Increased Use of Smart Cards.—Of the funds authorized to be appropriated for the Navy by section 102(a)(4) [113 Stat. 530] or 301(2) [113 Stat. 557], the Secretary of the Navy—“(1) shall allocate such amounts as may be necessary, but not to exceed $30,000,000, to ensure that significant progress is made toward complete implementation of the use of Smart Card technology in the Department of the Navy; and “(2) may allocate additional amounts for the conversion of paper-based records to electronic media for records systems that have been modified to use Smart Card technology. “(g) Definitions.—In this section:“(1) The term ‘Smart Card’ means a credit card-size device, normally for carrying and use by personnel, that contains one or more integrated circuits and may also employ one or more of the following technologies:“(A) Magnetic stripe. “(B) Bar codes, linear or two-dimensional. “(C) Non-contact and radio frequency transmitters. “(D) Biometric information. “(E) Encryption and authentication. “(F) Photo identification. “(2) The term ‘Smart Card technology’ means a Smart Card together with all of the associated information technology hardware and software that comprise the system for support and operation.”

Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title V, § 526, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 600, required Secretary of Defense to review process used by the Army to develop estimates of annual authorizations and appropriations required for civilian personnel of Department of the Army generally and for National Guard and Army Reserve technicians in particular and to report on results of review to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives not later than Mar. 31, 2000.

Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title V, § 581, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 633, directed the Secretary of Defense to develop and implement a survey on attitudes toward military service to be completed by all members of the Armed Forces who had been voluntarily discharged or separated or transferred from a regular to a reserve component between Jan. 1, 2000, and June 30, 2000, and to submit a report to Congress on the results of such survey not later than Oct. 1, 2000.

Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, § 1025, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 748, which required the Secretary of Defense to submit an annual report regarding the deployments and assignments of the United States Armed Forces in Colombia, was repealed by Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title X, § 1062(j)(2), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1585.

Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, § 1039, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 756, as amended by Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title X, § 1031(h)(3), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1605, provided findings of Congress relating to the Defense Capabilities Initiative.

Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, § 1053, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 764, as amended by Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title X, § 1048(g)(7), Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1228, established a commission to review and make recommendations regarding the celebration of victory in the Cold War, directed the President to transmit to Congress a report on the content of a Presidential proclamation and a plan for appropriate ceremonies and activities, and authorized funds.

Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title XII, § 1202, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 781, as amended by Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title XII, § 1221, Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1252; Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title XII, § 1263, Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 407; Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title XII, § 1246(a)–(c), Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2544, 2545; Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title X, § 1066(e)(1), title XII, § 1238(a), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1589, 1642; Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title XII, § 1271, Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 2022; Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title XII, § 1242, Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 920, provided that: “(a) Annual Report.—Not later than March 1 each year, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the specified congressional committees a report, in both classified and unclassified form, on military and security developments involving the People’s Republic of China. The report shall address the current and probable future course of military-technological development of the People’s Liberation Army and the tenets and probable development of Chinese security strategy and military strategy, and of military organizations and operational concepts, through the next 20 years. The report shall also address United States-China engagement and cooperation on security matters during the period covered by the report, including through United States-China military-to-military contacts, and the United States strategy for such engagement and cooperation in the future. “(b) Matters To Be Included.—Each report under this section shall include analyses and forecasts of the following:“(1) The goals and factors shaping Chinese security strategy and military strategy. “(2) Trends in Chinese security and military behavior that would be designed to achieve, or that are inconsistent with, the goals described in paragraph (1). “(3) The security situation in the Taiwan Strait. “(4) Chinese strategy regarding Taiwan. “(5) The size, location, and capabilities of Chinese strategic, land, sea, and air forces, including detailed analysis of those forces facing Taiwan. “(6) Developments in Chinese military doctrine and training. “(7) Efforts, including technology transfers and espionage, by the People’s Republic of China to develop, acquire, or gain access to information, communication, space and other advanced technologies that would enhance military capabilities or otherwise undermine the Department of Defense’s capability to conduct information assurance. Such analyses shall include an assessment of the damage inflicted on the Department of Defense by reason thereof. “(8) An assessment of any challenges during the preceding year to the deterrent forces of the Republic of China on Taiwan, consistent with the commitments made by the United States in the Taiwan Relations Act (Public Law 96–8) [22 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.]. “(9) Developments in China’s asymmetric capabilities, including its strategy and efforts to develop and deploy cyberwarfare and electronic warfare capabilities, details on the number of malicious cyber incidents originating from China against Department of Defense infrastructure, and associated activities originating or suspected of originating from China. “(10) The strategy and capabilities of Chinese space and counterspace programs, including trends, global and regional activities, the involvement of military and civilian organizations, including state-owned enterprises, academic institutions, and commercial entities, and efforts to develop, acquire, or gain access to advanced technologies that would enhance Chinese military capabilities. “(11) Developments in China’s nuclear program, including the size and state of China’s stockpile, its nuclear strategy and associated doctrines, its civil and military production capacities, and projections of its future arsenals. “(12) A description of China’s anti-access and area denial capabilities. “(13) A description of China’s command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance modernization program and its applications for China’s precision guided weapons. “(14) A description of the roles and activities of the People’s Liberation Army Navy and those of China’s paramilitary and maritime law enforcement vessels, including their response to United States naval activities. “(15) In consultation with the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of State, developments regarding United States-China engagement and cooperation on security matters. “(16) The current state of United States military-to-military contacts with the People’s Liberation Army, which shall include the following:“(A) A comprehensive and coordinated strategy for such military-to-military contacts and updates to the strategy. “(B) A summary of all such military-to-military contacts during the period covered by the report, including a summary of topics discussed and questions asked by the Chinese participants in those contacts. “(C) A description of such military-to-military contacts scheduled for the 12-month period following the period covered by the report and the plan for future contacts. “(D) The Secretary’s assessment of the benefits the Chinese expect to gain from such military-to-military contacts. “(E) The Secretary’s assessment of the benefits the Department of Defense expects to gain from such military-to-military contacts, and any concerns regarding such contacts. “(F) The Secretary’s assessment of how such military-to-military contacts fit into the larger security relationship between the United States and the People’s Republic of China. “(G) The Secretary’s certification whether or not any military-to-military exchange or contact was conducted during the period covered by the report in violation of section 1201(a) [10 U.S.C. 168 note]. “(17) Other military and security developments involving the People’s Republic of China that the Secretary of Defense considers relevant to United States national security. “(18) A description of Chinese military-to-military relationships with other countries, including the size and activity of military attache offices around the world and military education programs conducted in China for other countries or in other countries for the Chinese. “(19) A description of any significant sale or transfer of military hardware, expertise, and technology to or from the People’s Republic of China, including a forecast of possible future sales and transfers, a description of the implications of those sales and transfers for the security of the United States and its partners and allies in Asia, and a description of any significant assistance to and from any selling state with military-related research and development programs in China. “(20) The status of the 5th generation fighter program of the People’s Republic of China, including an assessment of each individual aircraft type, estimated initial and full operational capability dates, and the ability of such aircraft to provide air superiority. “(c) Specified Congressional Committees.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘specified congressional committees’ means the following:“(1) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate. “(2) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on International Relations [now Committee on Foreign Affairs] of the House of Representatives. “(d) Report on Significant Sales and Transfers to China.—(1) The report to be submitted under this section not later than March 1, 2002, shall include in a separate section a report describing any significant sale or transfer of military hardware, expertise, and technology to the People’s Republic of China. The report shall set forth the history of such sales and transfers since 1995, forecast possible future sales and transfers, and address the implications of those sales and transfers for the security of the United States and its friends and allies in Asia. “(2) The report shall include analysis and forecasts of the following matters related to military cooperation between selling states and the People’s Republic of China:“(A) The extent in each selling state of government knowledge, cooperation, or condoning of sales or transfers of military hardware, expertise, or technology to the People’s Republic of China. “(B) An itemization of significant sales and transfers of military hardware, expertise, or technology from each selling state to the People’s Republic of China that have taken place since 1995, with a particular focus on command, control, communications, and intelligence systems. “(C) Significant assistance by any selling state to key research and development programs of China, including programs for development of weapons of mass destruction and delivery vehicles for such weapons, programs for development of advanced conventional weapons, and programs for development of unconventional weapons. “(D) The extent to which arms sales by any selling state to the People’s Republic of China are a source of funds for military research and development or procurement programs in the selling state. “(3) The report under paragraph (1) shall include, with respect to each area of analysis and forecasts specified in paragraph (2)—“(A) an assessment of the military effects of such sales or transfers to entities in the People’s Republic of China; “(B) an assessment of the ability of the People’s Liberation Army to assimilate such sales or transfers, mass produce new equipment, or develop doctrine for use; and “(C) the potential threat of developments related to such effects on the security interests of the United States and its friends and allies in Asia.”

[Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title XII, § 1238(b), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1642, provided that: “The amendments made by this section [amending section 1202 of Pub. L. 106–65, set out above] shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 31, 2011], and shall apply with respect to reports required to be submitted under subsection (a) of section 1202 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 [Pub. L. 106–65], as so amended, on or after that date.” ]

[Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title XII, § 1246(e), Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2545, provided that:

[“(1) In general.—The amendments made by this section [amending section 1202 of Pub. L. 106–65, set out above, and provisions set out as a note under section 168 of this title] shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 28, 2009], and shall apply with respect to reports required to be submitted under subsection (a) of section 1202 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 [Pub. L. 106–65, set out above], as so amended, on or after that date.

[“(2) Strategy and updates for military-to-military contacts with people’s liberation army.—The requirement to include the strategy described in paragraph (11)(A) of section 1202(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, as so amended, in the report required to be submitted under section 1202(a) of such Act, as so amended, shall apply with respect to the first report required to be submitted under section 1202(a) of such Act on or after the date of the enactment of this Act. The requirement to include updates to such strategy shall apply with respect to each subsequent report required to be submitted under section 1202(a) of such Act on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.”]

Pub. L. 106–65, div. C, title XXXI, § 3163(d), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 945, provided that: “(1) The Secretary of Defense shall develop and implement a plan to ensure the continued reliability of the capability of the Department of Defense to carry out its nuclear deterrent mission. “(2) The plan shall do the following:“(A) Articulate the current policy of the United States on the role of nuclear weapons and nuclear deterrence in the conduct of defense and foreign relations matters. “(B) Establish stockpile viability and capability requirements with respect to that mission, including the number and variety of warheads required. “(C) Establish requirements relating to the contractor industrial base, support infrastructure, and surveillance, testing, assessment, and certification of nuclear weapons necessary to support that mission. “(3) The plan shall take into account the following:“(A) Requirements for the critical skills, readiness, training, exercise, and testing of personnel necessary to meet that mission. “(B) The relevant programs and plans of the military departments and the Defense Agencies with respect to readiness, sustainment (including research and development), and modernization of the strategic deterrent forces.”

Pub. L. 105–262, title VIII, § 8119, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2331, as amended by Pub. L. 110–234, title IV, § 4002(b)(1)(B), (D), (E), (2)(K), May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1096, 1097; Pub. L. 110–246, § 4(a), title IV, § 4002(b)(1)(B), (D), (E), (2)(K), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 1857, 1858, directed the Secretary of Defense to submit to committees of Congress, at the same time that materials relating to Department of Defense funding for fiscal year 2001 were to be submitted, a report on supplemental nutrition assistance program benefits assistance for members of the Armed Forces.

Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title IX, § 924, Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 726, provided that: “(a) Executive Agent.—The Secretary of Defense may designate the Secretary of the Navy as the Department of Defense executive agent for carrying out the pilot program described in subsection (c). “(b) Implementing Office.—If the Secretary of Defense makes the designation referred to in subsection (a), the Secretary of the Navy, in carrying out that pilot program, shall act through the head of the Systems Executive Office for Manpower and Personnel of the Department of the Navy, who shall act in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense. “(c) Pilot Program.—The pilot program referred to in subsection (a) is the defense reform initiative enterprise pilot program for military manpower and personnel information established pursuant to section 8147 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1999 (Public Law 105–262; 112 Stat. 2341; 10 U.S.C. 113 note).”

Pub. L. 105–262, title VIII, § 8147, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2341, provided that: “The Secretary of Defense shall establish, through a revised Defense Integrated Military Human Resources System (DIMHRS), a defense reform initiative enterprise pilot program for military manpower and personnel information: Provided, That this pilot program should include all functions and systems currently included in DIMHRS and shall be expanded to include all appropriate systems within the enterprise of personnel, manpower, training, and compensation: Provided further, That in establishing a revised DIMHRS enterprise program for manpower and personnel information superiority the functions of this program shall include, but not be limited to: (1) an analysis and determination of the number and kinds of information systems necessary to support manpower and personnel within the Department of Defense; and (2) the establishment of programs to develop and implement information systems in support of manpower and personnel to include an enterprise level strategic approach, performance and results based management, business process improvement and other non-material solutions, the use of commercial or government off-the-shelf technology, the use of modular contracting as defined by Public Law 104–106 [see 41 U.S.C. 2308], and the integration and consolidation of existing manpower and personnel information systems: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense shall re-instate fulfillment standards designated as ADS–97–03–GD, dated January, 1997: Provided further, That the requirements of this section should be implemented not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 17, 1998].”

Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title III, § 344, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 1977, as amended by Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title III, § 373(h), title X, § 1067(3), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 581, 774, directed the Secretary of the Navy to allocate up to $25,000,000 of fiscal year 1999 funds for the purpose of making progress toward the issuance and use of Smart Cards throughout the Navy and the Marine Corps and to equip with Smart Card technology at least one carrier battle group, one carrier air wing, and one amphibious readiness group in each of the United States Atlantic and Pacific Commands not later than June 30, 1999, and directed the Secretary of Defense, not later than Mar. 31, 1999, to submit to congressional defense committees a plan for the use of Smart Card technology by each military department.

Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title III, § 377, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 1993, as amended by Pub. L. 106–398, § 1 [[div. A], title III, § 387], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–88, provided that: “(a) Pilot Program Authorized.—The Secretary of each military department may carry out a pilot program to demonstrate the use of landing fees as a source of funding for the operation and maintenance of airfields of that department. “(b) Landing Fee Defined.—In this section, the term ‘landing fee’ means any fee that is established under or in accordance with regulations of the military department concerned (whether prescribed in a fee schedule or imposed under a joint-use agreement) to recover costs incurred for use by civil aircraft of an airfield of the military department in the United States or in a territory or possession of the United States. “(c) Use of Proceeds.—Amounts received in payment of landing fees for use of a military airfield in a fiscal year of the pilot program shall be credited to the appropriation that is available for that fiscal year for the operation and maintenance of the military airfield, shall be merged with amounts in the appropriation to which credited, and shall be available for that military airfield for the same period and purposes as the appropriation is available. “(d) Report.—Not later than March 31, 2003, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on the pilot programs carried out under this section by the Secretaries of the military departments. The report shall specify the amounts of fees received and retained by each military department under its pilot program as of December 31, 2002.”

“(e) Duration of Pilot Program.—The pilot program under this section may not be carried out after September 30, 2010.”

Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title IX, § 915(b), Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2102, directed the Secretary of Defense, not later than 90 days after Oct. 17, 1998, to submit to committees of Congress a report setting forth the definitions of the terms “support” and “mission” to use for purposes of the report requirement under subsec. (l) of this section.

Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title III, § 392, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1717, as amended by Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title III, § 374, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 1992, provided that: “The Secretary of Defense shall maintain a specific coordinated program for the investigation of evidence of fraud, waste, and abuse within the Department of Defense, particularly fraud, waste, and abuse regarding finance and accounting matters and any fraud, waste, and abuse occurring in connection with overpayments made to vendors by the Department of Defense, including overpayments identified under section 354 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104–106; 10 U.S.C. 2461 note).”

Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title V, subtitle F, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1750, as amended by Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title V, § 524, Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2014; Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, § 1066(c)(2), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 773, established a Commission on Military Training and Gender-Related Issues to review requirements and restrictions regarding cross-gender relationships of members of the Armed Forces, to review the basic training programs of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps, and to make recommendations on improvements to those programs, requirements, and restrictions, and further provided for composition, powers, and duties of Commission, administrative matters, funding, an interim report to Congress not later than Oct. 15, 1998, and a final report to Congress not later than Mar. 15, 1999, and for termination of Commission 60 days after submission of final report.

Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title IX, § 907, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1856, provided that: “(a) Military Department Criminal Investigative Organizations.—(1) The heads of the military department criminal investigative organizations shall take such action as may be practicable to conserve the limited resources available to the military department criminal investigative organizations by sharing personnel, expertise, infrastructure, training, equipment, software, and other resources. “(2) The heads of the military department criminal investigative organizations shall meet on a regular basis to determine the manner in which and the extent to which the military department criminal investigative organizations will be able to share resources. “(b) Defense Auditing Organizations.—(1) The heads of the defense auditing organizations shall take such action as may be practicable to conserve the limited resources available to the defense auditing organizations by sharing personnel, expertise, infrastructure, training, equipment, software, and other resources. “(2) The heads of the defense auditing organizations shall meet on a regular basis to determine the manner in which and the extent to which the defense auditing organizations will be able to share resources. “(c) Implementation Plan.—Not later than December 31, 1997, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a plan designed to maximize the resources available to the military department criminal investigative organizations and the defense auditing organizations, as required by this section. “(d) Definitions.—For purposes of this section:“(1) The term ‘military department criminal investigative organizations’ means—“(A) the Army Criminal Investigation Command; “(B) the Naval Criminal Investigative Service; and “(C) the Air Force Office of Special Investigations. “(2) The term ‘defense auditing organizations’ means—“(A) the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Defense; “(B) the Defense Contract Audit Agency; “(C) the Army Audit Agency; “(D) the Naval Audit Service; and “(E) the Air Force Audit Agency.”

Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title X, § 1052, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1889, provided that: “(a) Protection of Personnel.—The Secretary of Defense shall take appropriate actions to ensure that units of the Armed Forces engaged in a peace operation are provided adequate troop protection equipment for that operation. “(b) Specific Actions.—In taking actions under subsection (a), the Secretary shall—“(1) identify the additional troop protection equipment, if any, required to equip a division (or the equivalent of a division) with adequate troop protection equipment for peace operations; and “(2) establish procedures to facilitate the exchange or transfer of troop protection equipment among units of the Armed Forces. “(c) Designation of Responsible Official.—The Secretary of Defense shall designate an official within the Department of Defense to be responsible for—“(1) ensuring the appropriate allocation of troop protection equipment among the units of the Armed Forces engaged in peace operations; and “(2) monitoring the availability, status or condition, and location of such equipment. “(d) Troop Protection Equipment Defined.—In this section, the term ‘troop protection equipment’ means the equipment required by units of the Armed Forces to defend against any hostile threat that is likely during a peace operation, including an attack by a hostile crowd, small arms fire, mines, and a terrorist bombing attack. “(e) Report on Antiterrorism Activities of the Department of Defense and Protection of Personnel.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Nov. 18, 1997], the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report, in classified and unclassified form, on antiterrorism activities of the Department of Defense and the actions taken by the Secretary under subsections (a), (b), and (c). The report shall include the following:“(1) A description of the programs designed to carry out antiterrorism activities of the Department of Defense, any deficiencies in those programs, and any actions taken by the Secretary to improve implementation of such programs. “(2) An assessment of the current policies and practices of the Department of Defense with respect to the protection of members of the Armed Forces overseas against terrorist attack, including any modifications to such policies or practices that are proposed or implemented as a result of the assessment. “(3) An assessment of the procedures of the Department of Defense for determining accountability, if any, in the command structure of the Armed Forces in instances in which a terrorist attack results in the loss of life at an overseas military installation or facility. “(4) A detailed description of the roles of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretaries of the military departments, and the combatant commanders in providing guidance and support with respect to the protection of members of the Armed Forces deployed overseas against terrorist attack (both before and after the November 1995 bombing in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) and how these roles have changed since the June 25, 1996, terrorist bombing at Khobar Towers in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. “(5) A description of the actions taken by the Secretary of Defense under subsections (a), (b), and (c) to provide adequate troop protection equipment for units of the Armed Forces engaged in a peace operation.”

Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title X, § 1072, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1898, required the Secretary of Defense to provide for a study to be conducted by the National Academy of Public Administration of the policies, procedures, and practices of the military criminal investigative organizations for the conduct of investigations of complaints of sex crimes and other criminal sexual misconduct arising in the Armed Forces, required the Academy to submit a report to the Secretary not later than one year after Nov. 18, 1997, and directed the Secretary to submit the report and comments on the report to Congress not later than 30 days afterwards.

Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title X, § 1083, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1918, as amended by Pub. L. 105–129, § 1(b)(1), Dec. 1, 1997, 111 Stat. 2551; Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title X, § 1067(a), (c), Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2134; Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, § 1052(a), (b)(1), (c), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 764; Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title X, § 1048(g)(6), (i)(1), Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1228, 1229; Pub. L. 107–314, div. A, title X, § 1069, Dec. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 2660, authorized the Secretary of Defense to conduct a program to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Korean War during fiscal years 2000 through 2004, provided that up to $10,000,000 of funds appropriated for the Army for such fiscal years be made available for the program, and directed the Secretary to submit to Congress a report containing an accounting not later than 60 days after completion of all activities and ceremonies.

Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title XIII, § 1309, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1956, provided that: “(a) Findings.—Congress makes the following findings:“(1) The United States has stated its support for a ban on antipersonnel landmines that is global in scope and verifiable. “(2) On May 16, 1996, the President announced that the United States, as a matter of policy, would eliminate its stockpile of non-self-destructing antipersonnel landmines, except those used for training purposes and in Korea, and that the United States would reserve the right to use self-destructing antipersonnel landmines in the event of conflict. “(3) On May 16, 1996, the President also announced that the United States would lead an effort to negotiate an international treaty permanently banning the use of all antipersonnel landmines. “(4) The United States is currently participating at the United Nations Conference on Disarmament in negotiations aimed at achieving a global ban on the use of antipersonnel landmines. “(5) On August 18, 1997, the administration agreed to participate in international negotiations sponsored by Canada (the so-called ‘Ottawa process’) designed to achieve a treaty that would outlaw the production, use, and sale of antipersonnel landmines. “(6) On September 17, 1997, the President announced that the United States would not sign the antipersonnel landmine treaty concluded in Oslo, Norway, by participants in the Ottawa process because the treaty would not provide a geographic exception to allow the United States to stockpile and use antipersonnel landmines in Korea or an exemption that would preserve the ability of the United States to use mixed antitank mine systems which could be used to deter an armored assault against United States forces. “(7) The President also announced a change in United States policy whereby the United States—“(A) would no longer deploy antipersonnel landmines, including self-destructing antipersonnel landmines, by 2003, except in Korea; “(B) would seek to field alternatives by that date, or by 2006 in the case of Korea; “(C) would undertake a new initiative in the United Nations Conference on Disarmament to establish a global ban on the transfer of antipersonnel landmines; and “(D) would increase its current humanitarian demining activities around the world. “(8) The President’s decision would allow the continued use by United States forces of self-destructing antipersonnel landmines that are used as part of a mixed antitank mine system. “(9) Under existing law (as provided in section 580 of Public Law 104–107; 110 Stat. 751), on February 12, 1999, the United States will implement a one-year moratorium on the use of antipersonnel landmines by United States forces except along internationally recognized national borders or in demilitarized zones within a perimeter marked area that is monitored by military personnel and protected by adequate means to ensure the exclusion of civilians. “(b) Sense of Congress.—It is the sense of Congress that—“(1) the United States should not implement a moratorium on the use of antipersonnel landmines by United States Armed Forces in a manner that would endanger United States personnel or undermine the military effectiveness of United States Armed Forces in executing their missions; and “(2) the United States should pursue the development of alternatives to self-destructing antipersonnel landmines. “(c) Annual Report.—Not later than December 31 each year, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of Senate and House of Representatives] a report concerning antipersonnel landmines. Each such report shall include the Secretary’s description of the following:“(1) The military utility of the continued deployment and use by the United States of antipersonnel landmines. “(2) The effect of a moratorium on the production, stockpiling, and use of antipersonnel landmines on the ability of United States forces to deter and defend against attack on land by hostile forces, including on the Korean peninsula. “(3) Progress in developing and fielding systems that are effective substitutes for antipersonnel landmines, including an identification and description of the types of systems that are being developed and fielded, the costs associated with those systems, and the estimated timetable for developing and fielding those systems. “(4) The effect of a moratorium on the use of antipersonnel landmines on the military effectiveness of current antitank mine systems. “(5) The number and type of pure antipersonnel landmines that remain in the United States inventory and that are subject to elimination under the President’s September 17, 1997, declaration on United States antipersonnel landmine policy. “(6) The number and type of mixed antitank mine systems that are in the United States inventory, the locations where they are deployed, and their effect on the deterrence and warfighting ability of United States Armed Forces. “(7) The effect of the elimination of pure antipersonnel landmines on the warfighting effectiveness of the United States Armed Forces. “(8) The costs already incurred and anticipated of eliminating antipersonnel landmines from the United States inventory in accordance with the policy enunciated by the President on September 17, 1997. “(9) The benefits that would result to United States military and civilian personnel from an international treaty banning the production, use, transfer, and stockpiling of antipersonnel landmines.”

Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title V, § 571(a), (b), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2532, provided that: “(a) Human Relations Training.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the Secretary of each military department conducts ongoing programs for human relations training for all members of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of the Secretary. Matters to be covered by such training include race relations, equal opportunity, opposition to gender discrimination, and sensitivity to ‘hate group’ activity. Such training shall be provided during basic training (or other initial military training) and on a regular basis thereafter. “(2) The Secretary of Defense shall also ensure that unit commanders are aware of their responsibilities in ensuring that impermissible activity based upon discriminatory motives does not occur in units under their command. “(b) Information To Be Provided to Prospective Recruits.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that each individual preparing to enter an officer accession program or to execute an original enlistment agreement is provided information concerning the meaning of the oath of office or oath of enlistment for service in the Armed Forces in terms of the equal protection and civil liberties guarantees of the Constitution, and each such individual shall be informed that if supporting those guarantees is not possible personally for that individual, then that individual should decline to enter the Armed Forces.”

Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title X, § 1041, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2640, required the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress a report on Operation Provide Comfort and Operation Enhanced Southern Watch not later than Mar. 1 of each year and provided for the termination of the requirement with respect to each operation upon the termination of United States involvement in that operation.

Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title X, § 1042, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2642, as amended by Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, § 1067(5), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 774, directed Secretary of Defense to submit to Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on emerging operational concepts not later than March 1 of each year through 2000, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title II, § 241(b), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 550.

Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title X, § 1065, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2653, as amended by Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title X, § 1031(f)(2), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1604; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title IX, § 903(c)(2), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3399, provided that: “(a) Marshall Center Participation By Foreign Nations.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Defense may authorize participation by a European or Eurasian nation in Marshall Center programs if the Secretary determines, after consultation with the Secretary of State, that such participation is in the national interest of the United States. “(b) Exemptions for Members of Marshall Center Board of Visitors From Certain Requirements.—(1) In the case of any person invited to serve without compensation on the Marshall Center Board of Visitors, the Secretary of Defense may waive any requirement for financial disclosure that would otherwise apply to that person solely by reason of service on such Board. “(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a member of the Marshall Center Board of Visitors may not be required to register as an agent of a foreign government solely by reason of service as a member of the Board. “(3) Notwithstanding section 219 of title 18, United States Code, a non-United States citizen may serve on the Marshall Center Board of Visitors even though registered as a foreign agent.”

Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XIII, § 1306, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2892, as amended by Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title XII, § 1223, Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1652; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title IX, § 903(c)(1), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3399, provided that: “(a) Waiver of Charges.—The Secretary of Defense may waive reimbursement of the costs of conferences, seminars, courses of instruction, or similar educational activities of the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies for military officers and civilian officials from states located in Europe or the territory of the former Soviet Union if the Secretary determines that attendance by such personnel without reimbursement is in the national security interest of the United States. “(b) Source of Funds.—Costs for which reimbursement is waived pursuant to subsection (a) shall be paid from appropriations available for the Center.”

Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title X, § 1070, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2656, provided that: “(a) Crime Prevention Plan.—The Secretary of Defense shall prepare and implement an incentive-based plan to encourage members of the Armed Forces, dependents of members, civilian employees of the Department of Defense, and employees of defense contractors performing work at military installations to report to an appropriate military law enforcement agency any crime or criminal activity that the person reasonably believes occurred on a military installation or involves a member of the Armed Forces. “(b) Incentives to Report Criminal Activity.—The Secretary of Defense shall include in the plan developed under subsection (a) incentives for members and other persons described in such subsection to provide information to appropriate military law enforcement agencies regarding any crime or criminal activity occurring on a military installation or involving a member of the Armed Forces. “(c) Report Regarding Implementation.—Not later than February 1, 1997, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report describing the plan being developed under subsection (a).”

Pub. L. 104–193, title III, § 363(a), Aug. 22, 1996, 110 Stat. 2247, as amended by Pub. L. 107–296, title XVII, § 1704(e)(1)(A), Nov. 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 2315, provided that: “(1) Maintenance of address information.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a centralized personnel locator service that includes the address of each member of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of the Secretary. Upon request of the Secretary of Homeland Security, addresses for members of the Coast Guard shall be included in the centralized personnel locator service. “(2) Type of address.—“(A) Residential address.—Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the address for a member of the Armed Forces shown in the locator service shall be the residential address of that member. “(B) Duty address.—The address for a member of the Armed Forces shown in the locator service shall be the duty address of that member in the case of a member—“(i) who is permanently assigned overseas, to a vessel, or to a routinely deployable unit; or “(ii) with respect to whom the Secretary concerned makes a determination that the member’s residential address should not be disclosed due to national security or safety concerns. “(3) Updating of locator information.—Within 30 days after a member listed in the locator service establishes a new residential address (or a new duty address, in the case of a member covered by paragraph (2)(B)), the Secretary concerned shall update the locator service to indicate the new address of the member. “(4) Availability of information.—The Secretary of Defense shall make information regarding the address of a member of the Armed Forces listed in the locator service available, on request, to the Federal Parent Locator Service established under section 453 of the Social Security Act [42 U.S.C. 653].”

Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title II, § 262, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 236, directed the Secretary of Defense, not later than 90 days after Feb. 10, 1996, to request the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a two-year review of current and planned service and defense-wide programs for command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence, and required the Secretary to provide that the Council submit interim reports and a final report on the review to the Department of Defense and committees of Congress.

Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title III, § 366, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 275, directed the Secretary of Defense to develop a strategy for the development or modernization of automated information systems for the Department of Defense and to submit to Congress a report on the development of such strategy not later than Apr. 15, 1996.

Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title V, § 551, Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 318, directed the Secretary of Defense to establish an advisory committee to consider issues relating to the appropriate forum for judicial review of Department of Defense administrative personnel actions, required the committee to submit a report to the Secretary of Defense not later than Dec. 15, 1996, required the Secretary to transmit the committee’s report to Congress not later than Jan. 1, 1997, and provided for the termination of the committee 30 days after the date of the submission of its report to Congress.

Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title III, § 381, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2738, provided that: “(a) Determination Required.—(1) Not later than March 15 in each of 1995, 1996, and 1997, the Secretary of Defense shall—“(A) determine whether each automated information system described in paragraph (2) meets the requirements set forth in subsection (b); and “(B) take appropriate action to end the modernization or development by the Department of Defense of any such system that the Secretary determines does not meet such requirements. “(2) An automated information system referred to in paragraph (1) is an automated information system—“(A) that is undergoing modernization or development by the Department of Defense; “(B) that exceeds $50,000,000 in value; and “(C) that is not a migration system, as determined by the Enterprise Integration Executive Board of the Department of Defense. “(b) Requirements.—The use of an automated information system by the Department of Defense shall—“(1) contribute to the achievement of Department of Defense strategies for the use of automated information systems; “(2) as determined by the Secretary, provide an acceptable benefit from the investment in the system or make a substantial contribution to the performance of the defense mission for which the system is used; “(3) comply with Department of Defense directives applicable to life cycle management of automated information systems; and “(4) be based on guidance developed under subsection (c). “(c) Guidance for Use.—The Secretary of Defense shall develop guidance for the use of automated information systems by the Department of Defense. In developing the guidance, the Secretary shall consider the following:“(1) Directives of the Office of Management and Budget applicable to returns of investment for such systems. “(2) A sound, functional economic analysis. “(3) Established objectives for the Department of Defense information infrastructure. “(4) Migratory assessment criteria, including criteria under guidance provided by the Defense Information Systems Agency. “(d) Waiver.—(1) The Secretary of Defense may waive the requirements of subsection (a) for an automated information system if the Secretary determines that the purpose for which the system is being modernized or developed is of compelling military importance. “(2) If the Secretary exercises the waiver authority provided in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall include the following in the next report required by subsection (f):“(A) The reasons for the failure of the automated information system to meet all of the requirements of subsection (b). “(B) A determination of whether the system is expected to meet such requirements in the future, and if so, the date by which the system is expected to meet the requirements. “(e) Performance Measures and Management Controls.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall establish performance measures and management controls for the supervision and management of the activities described in paragraph (2). The performance measures and management controls shall be adequate to ensure, to the maximum extent practicable, that the Department of Defense receives the maximum benefit possible from the development, modernization, operation, and maintenance of automated information systems. “(2) The activities referred to in paragraph (1) are the following:“(A) Accelerated implementation of migration systems. “(B) Establishment of data standards. “(C) Process improvement. “(f) Reports.—Not later than March 15 in each of 1995, 1996, and 1997, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on the establishment and implementation of the performance measures and management controls referred to in subsection (e)(1). Each such report shall also specify—“(1) the automated information systems that, as determined under subsection (a), meet the requirements of subsection (b); “(2) the automated information systems that, as determined under subsection (a), do not meet the requirements of subsection (b) and the action taken by the Secretary to end the use of such systems; and “(3) the automated information systems that, as determined by the Enterprise Integration Executive Board, are migration systems. “(g) Review by Comptroller General.—Not later than April 30, 1995, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to Congress a report that contains an evaluation of the following:“(1) The progress made by the Department of Defense in achieving the goals of the corporate information management program of the Department. “(2) The progress made by the Secretary of Defense in establishing the performance measures and management controls referred to in subsection (e)(1). “(3) The progress made by the Department of Defense in using automated information systems that meet the requirements of subsection (b). “(4) The report required by subsection (f) to be submitted in 1995. “(h) Definitions.—In this section:“(1) The term ‘automated information system’ means an automated information system of the Department of Defense described in the exhibits designated as ‘IT-43’ in the budget submitted to Congress by the President for fiscal year 1995 pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code. “(2) The term ‘migration system’ has the meaning given such term in the document entitled ‘Department of Defense Strategy for Acceleration of Migration Systems and Data Standards’ attached to the memorandum of the Department of Defense dated October 13, 1993 (relating to accelerated implementation of migration systems, data standards, and process improvement).”

Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title VIII, § 830, Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2614, as amended by Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title I, § 101(f) [title VIII, § 808(c)], Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–314, 3009–394, provided that Secretary of Defense was to include in report submitted in 1997 under section 381(f) of Pub. L. 103–337 [set out above] a discussion of progress made in implementing div. E of Pub. L. 104–106 [§§ 5001–5703, see Tables for classification] and strategy for development or modernization of automated information systems for Department of Defense, and plans of Department of Defense for establishing an integrated framework for management of information resources within the Department, and provided further specifications of the elements to be included in the discussion.

Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title V, § 533, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2760, provided that: “(a) Required Assessment.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress an annual report on trends in recruiting, retention, and personnel readiness. “(b) Data To Be Collected.—Each annual report under subsection (a) shall include the following information with respect to the preceding fiscal year for the active components of each of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of the Secretary (as well as such additional information as the Secretary considers appropriate):“(1) The numbers of members of the Armed Forces temporarily and permanently nondeployable and rates of temporary and permanent nondeployability, displayed by cause of nondeployability, rank, and gender. “(2) The numbers and rates of complaints and allegations within the Armed Forces that involve gender and other unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment, and the rates of substantiation for those complaints and allegations. “(3) The numbers and rates of disciplinary proceedings, displayed (A) by offense or infraction committed, (B) by gender, rank, and race, and (C) by the categories specified in paragraph (2). “(4) The retention rates, by gender, rank, and race, with an analysis of factors influencing those rates. “(5) The propensity of persons to enlist, displayed by gender and race, with an analysis of the factors influencing those propensities. “(c) Submission to Congress.—The Secretary shall submit the report under this section for any fiscal year as part of the annual Department of Defense posture statement provided to Congress in connection with the Department of Defense budget request for that fiscal year. “(d) Initial Submission.—The first report under this section shall be submitted in connection with the Department of Defense budget request for fiscal year 1996 and shall include data, to the degree such data already exists, for fiscal years after fiscal year 1991.”

Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title V, § 534, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2761, provided that: “(a) Establishment.—(1) The Secretary of Defense, acting through the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, shall revise policies and regulations of the Department of Defense with respect to the programs of the Department of Defense specified in paragraph (2) in order to establish within each of the military departments a victims’ advocates program. “(2) Programs referred to in paragraph (1) are the following:“(A) Victim and witness assistance programs. “(B) Family advocacy programs. “(C) Equal opportunity programs. “(3) In the case of the Department of the Navy, separate victims’ advocates programs shall be established for the Navy and the Marine Corps. “(b) Purpose.—A victims’ advocates program established pursuant to subsection (a) shall provide assistance described in subsection (d) to members of the Armed Forces and their dependents who are victims of any of the following:“(1) Crime. “(2) Intrafamilial sexual, physical, or emotional abuse. “(3) Discrimination or harassment based on race, gender, ethnic background, national origin, or religion. “(c) Interdisciplinary Councils.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall establish a Department of Defense council to coordinate and oversee the implementation of programs under subsection (a). The membership of the council shall be selected from members of the Armed Forces and officers and employees of the Department of Defense having expertise or experience in a variety of disciplines and professions in order to ensure representation of the full range of services and expertise that will be needed in implementing those programs. “(2) The Secretary of each military department shall establish similar interdisciplinary councils within that military department as appropriate to ensure the fullest coordination and effectiveness of the victims’ advocates program of that military department. To the extent practicable, such a council shall be established at each significant military installation. “(d) Assistance.—(1) Under a victims’ advocates program established under subsection (a), individuals working in the program shall principally serve the interests of a victim by initiating action to provide (A) information on available benefits and services, (B) assistance in obtaining those benefits and services, and (C) other appropriate assistance. “(2) Services under such a program in the case of an individual who is a victim of family violence (including intrafamilial sexual, physical, and emotional abuse) shall be provided principally through the family advocacy programs of the military departments. “(e) Staffing.—The Secretary of Defense shall provide for the assignment of personnel (military or civilian) on a full-time basis to victims’ advocates programs established pursuant to subsection (a). The Secretary shall ensure that sufficient numbers of such full-time personnel are assigned to those programs to enable those programs to be carried out effectively. “(f) Implementation Deadline.—Subsection (a) shall be carried out not later than six months after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 5, 1994]. “(g) Implementation Report.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which Department of Defense policies and regulations are revised pursuant to subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report on the implementation (and plans for implementation) of this section.”

Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title X, § 1031, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2838, provided that: “(a) Single Point of Contact.—The Secretary of Defense shall designate an official of the Department of Defense to serve as a single point of contact within the department—“(1) for the immediate family members (or their designees) of any unaccounted-for Korean conflict POW/MIA; and “(2) for the immediate family members (or their designees) of any unaccounted-for Cold War POW/MIA. “(b) Functions.—The official designated under subsection (a) shall serve as a liaison between the family members of unaccounted-for Korean conflict POW/MIAs and unaccounted-for Cold War POW/MIAs and the Department of Defense and other Federal departments and agencies that may hold information that may relate to such POW/MIAs. The functions of that official shall include assisting family members—“(1) with the procedures the family members may follow in their search for information about the unaccounted-for Korean conflict POW/MIA or unaccounted-for Cold War POW/MIA, as the case may be; “(2) in learning where they may locate information about the unaccounted-for POW/MIA; and “(3) in learning how and where to identify classified records that contain pertinent information and that will be declassified. “(c) Assistance in Obtaining Declassification.—The official designated under subsection (a) shall seek to obtain the rapid declassification of any relevant classified records that are identified. “(d) Repository.—The official designated under subsection (a) shall provide all documents relating to unaccounted-for Korean conflict POW/MIAs and unaccounted-for Cold War POW/MIAs that are located as a result of the official’s efforts to the National Archives and Records Administration, which shall locate them in a centralized repository. “(e) Definitions.—For purposes of this section:“(1) The term ‘unaccounted-for Korean conflict POW/MIA’ means a member of the Armed Forces or civilian employee of the United States who, as a result of service during the Korean conflict, was at any time classified as a prisoner of war or missing-in-action and whose person or remains have not been returned to United States control and who remains unaccounted for. “(2) The term ‘unaccounted-for Cold War POW/MIA’ means a member of the Armed Forces or civilian employee of the United States who, as a result of service during the period from September 2, 1945, to August 21, 1991, was at any time classified as a prisoner of war or missing-in-action and whose person or remains have not been returned to United States control and who remains unaccounted for. “(3) The term ‘Korean conflict’ has the meaning given such term in section 101(9) of title 38, United States Code.”

Pub. L. 113–76, div. C, title VIII, § 8067, Jan. 17, 2014, 128 Stat. 121, provided that: “Section 8106 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1997 (titles I through VIII of the matter under subsection 101(b) of Public Law 104–208; 110 Stat. 3009–111; 10 U.S.C. 113 note) shall continue in effect to apply to disbursements that are made by the Department of Defense in fiscal year 2014.”

Similar provisions were contained in the following prior appropriation acts:

Pub. L. 113–6, div. C, title VIII, § 8067, Mar. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 313.

Pub. L. 112–74, div. A, title VIII, § 8068, Dec. 23, 2011, 125 Stat. 822.

Pub. L. 112–10, div. A, title VIII, § 8070, Apr. 15, 2011, 125 Stat. 73.

Pub. L. 111–118, div. A, title VIII, § 8073, Dec. 19, 2009, 123 Stat. 3445.

Pub. L. 110–329, div. C, title VIII, § 8073, Sept. 30, 2008, 122 Stat. 3637.

Pub. L. 110–116, div. A, title VIII, § 8076, Nov. 13, 2007, 121 Stat. 1332.

Pub. L. 109–289, div. A, title VIII, § 8074, Sept. 29, 2006, 120 Stat. 1291.

Pub. L. 109–148, div. A, title VIII, § 8083, Dec. 30, 2005, 119 Stat. 2717.

Pub. L. 108–287, title VIII, § 8091, Aug. 5, 2004, 118 Stat. 992.

Pub. L. 108–87, title VIII, § 8092, Sept. 30, 2003, 117 Stat. 1094.

Pub. L. 107–248, title VIII, § 8098, Oct. 23, 2002, 116 Stat. 1559.

Pub. L. 107–117, div. A, title VIII, § 8118, Jan. 10, 2002, 115 Stat. 2273.

Pub. L. 106–259, title VIII, § 8137, Aug. 9, 2000, 114 Stat. 704.

Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title I, § 101(b) [title VIII, § 8106], Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–71, 3009–111, as amended by Pub. L. 105–56, title VIII, § 8113, Oct. 8, 1997, 111 Stat. 1245; Pub. L. 105–277, div. C, title I, § 143, Oct. 21, 1998, 112 Stat. 2681–609; Pub. L. 106–79, title VIII, § 8135, Oct. 25, 1999, 113 Stat. 1268, provided that: “(a) The Secretary of Defense shall require each disbursement by the Department of Defense in an amount in excess of $500,000 be matched to a particular obligation before the disbursement is made. “(b) The Secretary shall ensure that a disbursement in excess of the threshold amount applicable under section (a) is not divided into multiple disbursements of less than that amount for the purpose of avoiding the applicability of such section to that disbursement.”

[Section 8113 of Pub. L. 105–56 provided that the amendment made by that section [amending section 101(b) [title VIII, § 8106] of Pub. L. 104–208] set out above, is effective June 30, 1998.]

Similar provisions were contained in the following prior appropriation acts:

Pub. L. 104–61, title VIII, § 8102, Dec. 1, 1995, 109 Stat. 672.

Pub. L. 103–335, title VIII, § 8137, Sept. 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 2654.

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title V, § 542, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1659, as amended by Pub. L. 106–398, § 1 [[div. A], title V, § 573(b)], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–136; Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title V, § 591, Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1125, which generally required the Secretary of Defense to transmit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives notice of a proposed change in military personnel policies in order to make available to female members of the Armed Forces assignment to any type of combat unit, class of combat vessel, or type of combat platform that was not open to such assignments, and also required the Secretary to submit to Congress a report providing notice of certain proposed changes to the ground combat exclusion policy, was repealed and restated as section 652 of this title by Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title V, § 541(a)(1), (c), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3251, 3253.

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title V, § 543, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1660, as amended by Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title V, § 523, Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 756, provided that: “(a) Gender Neutrality Requirement.—In the case of any military career designator that is open to both male and female members of the Armed Forces, the Secretary of Defense—“(1) shall ensure that qualification of members of the Armed Forces for, and continuance of members of the Armed Forces in, that occupational career field is evaluated on the basis of an occupational standard, without differential standards or evaluation on the basis of gender; “(2) may not use any gender quota, goal, or ceiling except as specifically authorized by law; and “(3) may not change an occupational performance standard for the purpose of increasing or decreasing the number of women in that occupational career field. “(b) Requirements Relating To Use of Specific Physical Requirements.—(1) For any military career designator for which the Secretary of Defense determines that specific physical requirements for muscular strength and endurance and cardiovascular capacity are essential to the performance of duties, the Secretary shall prescribe specific physical requirements as part of the gender-neutral occupational standard for members in that career designator and shall ensure (in the case of a career designator that is open to both male and female members of the Armed Forces) that those requirements are applied on a gender-neutral basis. “(2) Whenever the Secretary establishes or revises a physical requirement for a military career designator, a member serving in that military career designator when the new requirement becomes effective, who is otherwise considered to be a satisfactory performer, shall be provided a reasonable period, as determined under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, to meet the standard established by the new requirement. During that period, the new physical requirement may not be used to disqualify the member from continued service in that military career designator. “(c) Notice to Congress of Changes.—Whenever the Secretary of Defense proposes to implement changes to the gender-neutral occupational standard for a military career designator that are expected to result in an increase, or in a decrease, of at least 10 percent in the number of female members of the Armed Forces who enter, or are assigned to, that military career designator, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report providing notice of the change and the justification and rationale for the change. Such changes may then be implemented only after the end of the 60-day period beginning on the date on which such report is submitted. “(d) Definitions.—In this section:“(1) Gender-neutral occupational standard.—The term ‘gender-neutral occupational standard’, with respect to a military career designator, means that all members of the Armed Forces serving in or assigned to the military career designator must meet the same performance outcome-based standards for the successful accomplishment of the necessary and required specific tasks associated with the qualifications and duties performed while serving in or assigned to the military career designator. “(2) Military career designator.—The term ‘military career designator’ refers to—“(A) in the case of enlisted members and warrant officers of the Armed Forces, military occupational specialties, specialty codes, enlisted designators, enlisted classification codes, additional skill identifiers, and special qualification identifiers; and “(B) in the case of commissioned officers (other than commissioned warrant officers), officer areas of concentration, occupational specialties, specialty codes, additional skill identifiers, and special qualification identifiers.”

Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title X, § 1041, Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2842, directed the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress, not later than 90 days after the close of each of fiscal years 1995 through 2000, a report concerning the denial, revocation, or suspension of security clearances for Department of Defense military and civilian personnel, and for Department of Defense contractor employees, for that fiscal year.

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title XI, § 1183, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1774, provided that: “(a) Review of Security Clearance Procedures.—(1) The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a review of the procedural safeguards available to Department of Defense civilian employees who are facing denial or revocation of security clearances. “(2) Such review shall specifically consider—“(A) whether the procedural rights provided to Department of Defense civilian employees should be enhanced to include the procedural rights available to Department of Defense contractor employees; “(B) whether the procedural rights provided to Department of Defense civilian employees should be enhanced to include the procedural rights available to similarly situated employees in those Government agencies that provide greater rights than the Department of Defense; and “(C) whether there should be a difference between the rights provided to both Department of Defense civilian and contractor employees with respect to security clearances and the rights provided with respect to sensitive compartmented information and special access programs. “(b) Report.—The Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the review required by subsection (a) not later than March 1, 1994. “(c) Regulations.—The Secretary shall revise the regulations governing security clearance procedures for Department of Defense civilian employees not later than May 15, 1994.”

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title V, § 575, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1675, directed the Secretary of Defense to develop and carry out a test program for improving foreign language proficiency in the Department of Defense through improved management and other measures and to submit a report to committees of Congress not later than Apr. 1, 1994, containing a plan for the program, an explanation of the plan, and a discussion of proficiency pay adjustments, and provided for the program to begin on Oct. 1, 1994, or 180 days after the date of submission of the report and to terminate two years later.

Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title XI, § 1185, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1774, required the Secretary of Defense to review, not later than June 30, 1994, the procedures of the military departments for investigating deaths of members of the Armed Forces that may have resulted from self-inflicted causes, to submit to Congress, not later than July 15, 1994, a report on the review, and to prescribe, not later than Oct. 1, 1994, regulations governing the investigation of deaths of members of the Armed Forces that may have resulted from self-inflicted causes, required the Inspector General of the Department of Defense to review certain death investigations, and required the Secretary of Transportation to implement with respect to the Coast Guard the requirements that were imposed on the Secretary of Defense and the Inspector General of the Department of Defense.

Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title III, § 378, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2387, as amended by Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title III, § 382(a), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2740, authorized the Secretary of Defense, during fiscal years 1993 through 1996, to conduct a program to commemorate the 50th anniversary of World War II and to coordinate, support, and facilitate commemoration programs and activities of Federal, State, and local governments.

Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title III, § 383, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2392, provided that: “(a) Review Required.—The Secretary of Defense shall provide for a review of the practices and procedures of the military departments regarding the use of civilian airfields in flight training activities of the Armed Forces. “(b) Purpose.—The purpose of the review is to determine whether the practices and procedures referred to in subsection (a) should be modified to better protect the public safety while meeting training requirements of the Armed Forces. “(c) Special Requirement.—In the conduct of the review, particular consideration shall be given to the practices and procedures regarding the use of civilian airfields in heavily populated areas.”

Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title VI, § 653(d), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2429, directed the Secretary of Defense to transmit a report to Congress not later than Dec. 15, 1993, on actions that had been taken and were planned to be taken in the Department of Defense to reduce or eliminate disincentives for a dependent of a member of the Armed Forces abused by the member to report the abuse.

Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title X, § 1072, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2508, provided that: “(a) Availability of Fatality Reports and Records.—“(1) Requirement.—The Secretary of each military department shall ensure that fatality reports and records pertaining to any member of the Armed Forces who dies in the line of duty shall be made available to family members of the service member in accordance with this subsection. “(2) Information to be provided after notification of death.—Within a reasonable period of time after family members of a service member are notified of the member’s death, but not more than 30 days after the date of notification, the Secretary concerned shall ensure that the family members—“(A) in any case in which the cause or circumstances surrounding the death are under investigation, are informed of that fact, of the names of the agencies within the Department of Defense conducting the investigations, and of the existence of any reports by such agencies that have been or will be issued as a result of the investigations; and “(B) are furnished, if the family members so desire, a copy of any completed investigative report and any other completed fatality reports that are available at the time family members are provided the information described in subparagraph (A) to the extent such reports may be furnished consistent with sections 552 and 552a of title 5, United States Code. “(3) Assistance in obtaining reports.—(A) In any case in which an investigative report or other fatality reports are not available at the time family members of a service member are provided the information described in paragraph (2)(A) about the member’s death, the Secretary concerned shall ensure that a copy of such investigative report and any other fatality reports are furnished to the family members, if they so desire, when the reports are completed and become available, to the extent such reports may be furnished consistent with sections 552 and 552a of title 5, United States Code. “(B) In any case in which an investigative report or other fatality reports cannot be released at the time family members of a service member are provided the information described in paragraph (2)(A) about the member’s death because of section 552 or 552a of title 5, United States Code, the Secretary concerned shall ensure that the family members—“(i) are informed about the requirements and procedures necessary to request a copy of such reports; and “(ii) are assisted, if the family members so desire, in submitting a request in accordance with such requirements and procedures. “(C) The requirement of subparagraph (B) to inform and assist family members in obtaining copies of fatality reports shall continue until a copy of each report is obtained, or access to any such report is denied by competent authority within the Department of Defense. “(4) Waiver.—The requirements of paragraph (2) or (3) may be waived on a case-by-case basis, but only if the Secretary of the military department concerned determines that compliance with such requirements is not in the interests of national security. “(b) Review of Combat Fatality Notification Procedures.—“(1) Review.—The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a review of the fatality notification procedures used by the military departments. Such review shall examine the following matters:“(A) Whether uniformity in combat fatality notification procedures among the military departments is desirable, particularly with respect to—“(i) the use of one or two casualty notification and assistance officers; “(ii) the use of standardized fatality report forms and witness statements; “(iii) the use of a single center for all military departments through which combat fatality information may be processed; and “(iv) the use of uniform procedures and the provision of a dispute resolution process for instances in which members of one of the Armed Forces inflict casualties on members of another of the Armed Forces. “(B) Whether existing combat fatality report forms should be modified to include a block or blocks with which to identify the cause of death as ‘friendly fire’, ‘U.S. ordnance’, or ‘unknown’. “(C) Whether the existing ‘Emergency Data’ form prepared by members of the Armed Forces should be revised to allow members to specify provision for notification of additional family members in cases such as the case of a divorced service member who leaves children with both a current and a former spouse. “(D) Whether the military departments should, in all cases, provide family members of a service member who died as a result of injuries sustained in combat with full and complete details of the death of the service member, regardless of whether such details may be graphic, embarrassing to the family members, or reflect negatively on the military department concerned. “(E) Whether, and when, the military departments should inform family members of a service member who died as a result of injuries sustained in combat about the possibility that the death may have been the result of friendly fire. “(F) The criteria and standards which the military departments should use in deciding when disclosure is appropriate to family members of a member of the military forces of an allied nation who died as a result of injuries sustained in combat when the death may have been the result of fire from United States armed forces and an investigation into the cause or circumstances of the death has been conducted. “(2) Report.—The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report on the review conducted under paragraph (1). Such report shall be submitted not later than March 31, 1993, and shall include recommendations on the matters examined in the review and on any other matters the Secretary determines to be appropriate based upon the review or on any other reviews undertaken by the Department of Defense. “(c) Definitions.—In this section:“(1) The term ‘fatality reports’ includes investigative reports and any other reports pertaining to the cause or circumstances of death of a member of the Armed Forces in the line of duty (such as autopsy reports, battlefield reports, and medical reports). “(2) The term ‘family members’ means parents, spouses, adult children, and such other relatives as the Secretary concerned considers appropriate. “(d) Applicability.—(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), this section applies with respect to deaths of members of the Armed Forces occurring after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 23, 1992]. “(2) With respect to deaths of members of the Armed Forces occurring before the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary concerned shall provide fatality reports to family members upon request as promptly as practicable.”

Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title X, § 1082, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2516, as amended by Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title X, § 1031(d)(2), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1604, provided that: “(a) Support for Contractors.—In the event that a United States defense contractor or industrial association requests the Department of Defense or a military department to provide support in the form of military equipment for any airshow or trade exhibition to be held outside the United States, such equipment may not be supplied unless the contractor or association agrees to reimburse the Treasury of the United States for—“(1) all incremental costs of military personnel accompanying the equipment, including food, lodging, and local transportation; “(2) all incremental transportation costs incurred in moving such equipment from its normally assigned location to the airshow or trade exhibition and return; and “(3) any other miscellaneous incremental costs not included under paragraphs (1) and (2) that are incurred by the Federal Government but would not have been incurred had military support not been provided to the contractor or industrial association. “(b) Department of Defense Exhibitions.—(1) A military department may not participate directly in any airshow or trade exhibition held outside the United States unless the Secretary of Defense determines that it is in the national security interests of the United States for the military departments to do so. “(2) The Secretary of Defense may not delegate the authority to make the determination referred to in [former] paragraph (1)(A) below the level of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. “(c) Definition.—In this section, the term ‘incremental transportation cost’ includes the cost of transporting equipment to an airshow or trade exhibition only to the extent that the provision of transportation by the Department of Defense described in subsection (a)(2) does not fulfill legitimate training requirements that would otherwise have to be met.”

Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title XIII, § 1302, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2545, which provided that on and after Sept. 30, 1996, no appropriated funds may be used to support an end strength level of members of the Armed Forces of the United States assigned to permanent duty ashore in nations outside the United States at any level in excess of 60 percent of the end strength level of such members on Sept. 30, 1992, with exceptions in the event of declarations of war or emergency, was repealed and restated as section 123b of this title by Pub. L. 103–337, § 1312(a), (c).

Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title X, § 1063, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2469, as amended by Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, § 1075(d)(14), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4373, provided that: “(a) Report Requirement.—Concurrent with the delivery of the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review required by section 118 of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a report on the plan for basing of forces outside the United States. “(b) Matters Covered.—The report required under subsection (a) shall contain a description of—“(1) how the plan supports the United States national security strategy; “(2) how the plan supports the security commitments undertaken by the United States pursuant to any international security treaty, including the North Atlantic Treaty, the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan, and the Security Treaty Between Australia, New Zealand, and the United States of America; “(3) how the plan addresses the current security environment in each geographic combatant command’s area of responsibility, including United States participation in theater security cooperation activities and bilateral partnership, exchanges, and training exercises; “(4) the impact that a permanent change in the basing of a unit currently stationed outside the United States would have on the matters described in paragraphs (1) through (3); “(5) the impact the plan will have on the status of overseas base closure and realignment actions undertaken as part of a global defense posture realignment strategy and the status of development and execution of comprehensive master plans for overseas military main operating bases, forward operating sites, and cooperative security locations of the global defense posture of the United States; “(6) any recommendations for additional closures or realignments of military installations outside of the United States; and “(7) any comments resulting from an interagency review of the plan that includes the Department of State and other relevant Federal departments and agencies. “(c) Notification Requirement.—The Secretary of Defense shall notify Congress at least 30 days before the permanent relocation of a unit stationed outside the United States as of the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 28, 2009]. “(d) Definitions.—In this section:“(1) Unit.—The term ‘unit’ has the meaning determined by the Secretary of Defense for purposes of this section. “(2) Geographic combatant command.—The term ‘geographic combatant command’ means a combatant command with a geographic area of responsibility that does not include North America.”

Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title XIII, § 1304, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2546, as amended by Pub. L. 103–160, div. B, title XXIX, § 2924(a), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1931; Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title XV, § 1502(c)(2)(A), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 506, provided that: “(a) Annual Report.—The Secretary of Defense shall, not later than March 31 of each year through 1997, submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives [now Committee on Armed Services of House of Representatives], either separately or as part of another relevant report, a report that specifies—“(1) the stationing and basing plan by installation for United States military forces outside the United States; “(2) the status of closures of United States military installations located outside the United States; “(3) both—“(A) the status of negotiations, if any, between the United States and the host government as to (i) United States claims for compensation for the fair market value of the improvements made by the United States at each installation referred to in paragraph (2), and (ii) any claims of the host government for damages or restoration of the installation; and “(B) the representative of the United States in any such negotiations; “(4) the potential savings to the United States resulting from such closures; “(5) the cost to the United States of any improvements made at each installation referred to in paragraph (2) and the fair market value of such improvements, expressed in constant dollars based on the date of completion of the improvements; “(6) in each case in which negotiations between the United States and a host government have resulted in an agreement for the payment to the United States by the host government of the value of improvements to an installation made by the United States, the amount of such payment, the form of such payment, and the expected date of such payment; and “(7) efforts and progress toward achieving host nation offsets under section 1301(e) [106 Stat. 2545] and reduced end strength levels under section 1302 [set out above]. “(b) Report on Budget Implications of Overseas Basing Agreements.—Whenever the Secretary of Defense enters into a basing agreement between the United States and a foreign country with respect to United States military forces outside the United States, the Secretary of Defense shall, in advance of the signing of the agreement, submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the Federal budget implications of the agreement.”

Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title V, part D, subpart 2, Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1365, provided for the creation of a Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces to assess the laws and policies restricting the assignment of female service members and the implications, if any, for the combat readiness of the Armed Forces of permitting female members to qualify for assignment to positions in some or all categories of combat positions, with a report to be submitted to the President no later than Nov. 15, 1992, and to the Congress no later than Dec. 15, 1992, containing recommendations as to what roles female members should have in combat and what laws and policies restricting such assignments should be repealed or modified, and further provided for powers and procedures of the Commission, personnel matters, payment of Commission expenses and other miscellaneous administrative provisions, termination of the Commission 90 days after submission of its final report, and test assignments of female service members to combat positions.

Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title VIII, § 832, Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1446, provided that: “(a) European Procurement Practices.—The Secretary of Defense shall—“(1) compute the total value of American-made military goods and services procured each year by European governments or companies; “(2) review defense procurement practices of European governments to determine what factors are considered in the selection of contractors and to determine whether American firms are discriminated against in the selection of contractors for purchases by such governments of military goods and services; and “(3) establish a procedure for discussion with European governments about defense contract awards made by them that American firms believe were awarded unfairly. “(b) Defense Trade and Cooperation Working Group.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a defense trade and cooperation working group. The purpose of the group is to evaluate the impact of, and formulate United States positions on, European initiatives that affect United States defense trade, cooperation, and technology security. In carrying out the responsibilities of the working group, members of the group shall consult, as appropriate, with personnel in the Departments of State and Commerce and in the Office of the United States Trade Representative. “(c) GAO Review.—The Comptroller General shall conduct a review to determine how the members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization are implementing their bilateral reciprocal defense procurement memoranda of understanding with the United States. The Comptroller General shall complete the review, and submit to Congress a report on the results of the review, not later than February 1, 1992.”

Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title IX, § 924, Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1454, provided that: “(a) Procedures for Use.—The Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the Director of Central Intelligence, shall prescribe procedures for regularly and periodically exercising national intelligence collection systems and exploitation organizations that would be used to provide intelligence support, including support of the combatant commands, during a war or threat to national security. “(b) Use in Joint Training Exercises.—In accordance with procedures prescribed under subsection (a), the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall provide for the use of the national intelligence collection systems and exploitation organizations in joint training exercises to the extent necessary to ensure that those systems and organizations are capable of providing intelligence support, including support of the combatant commands, during a war or threat to national security. “(c) Report.—Not later than May 1, 1992, the Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central Intelligence shall submit to the congressional defense committees, the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives a joint report—“(1) describing the procedures prescribed under subsection (a); and “(2) stating the assessment of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the performance in joint training exercises of the national intelligence collection systems and the Chairman’s recommendations for any changes that the Chairman considers appropriate to improve that performance.”

[Reference to the Director of Central Intelligence or the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Director’s capacity as the head of the intelligence community deemed to be a reference to the Director of National Intelligence. Reference to the Director of Central Intelligence or the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Director’s capacity as the head of the Central Intelligence Agency deemed to be a reference to the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. See section 1081(a), (b) of Pub. L. 108–458, set out as a note under section 3001 of Title 50, War and National Defense.]

Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title X, § 1083, Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1482, provided that: “(a) Request for Establishment.—The President is authorized and requested to establish in the Department of Defense a family support center to provide information and assistance to members of the families of persons who at any time while members of the Armed Forces were classified as prisoners of war or missing in action in Southeast Asia and who have not been accounted for. Such a support center should be located in a facility in the National Capital region. “(b) Duties.—The center should be organized and provided with such personnel as necessary to permit the center to assist family members referred to in subsection (a) in contacting the departments and agencies of the Federal Government having jurisdiction over matters relating to such persons.”

Pub. L. 102–25, title IV, Apr. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 99, directed Director of Office of Management and Budget to submit to Congress a number of reports on incremental costs associated with Operation Desert Storm and amounts of contributions made to United States by foreign countries to offset those costs, with a final report due not later than Nov. 15, 1992, and directed Secretary of State and Secretary of the Treasury to jointly submit to Congress a number of reports on contributions made by foreign countries as part of international response to Persian Gulf crisis, with a final report due not later than Nov. 15, 1992.

Pub. L. 102–25, title VI, § 601, Apr. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 105, as amended by Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title X, § 1063(d)(1), Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1476; Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title X, § 1053(8), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2502, authorized the Secretary of Defense to provide child care assistance for families of members of the Armed Forces and the National Guard who had served on active duty during the Persian Gulf conflict in Operation Desert Storm.

Pub. L. 102–25, title VI, § 602, Apr. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 106, as amended by Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title X, § 1063(d)(2), Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1476, authorized the Secretary of Defense to provide assistance to families of members of the Armed Forces and National Guard who had served on active duty during the Persian Gulf conflict in Operation Desert Storm in order to ensure that they would receive educational assistance and support services necessary to meet needs.

Pub. L. 102–25, title VI, § 608, Apr. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 112, provided that: “(a) General Rule.—Effective as of the end of the six-month period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act [Apr. 6, 1991], the Secretary of Defense shall withhold payments to any nonpaying pledging nation that would otherwise be paid as reimbursements for expenses of indirect-hire civilian personnel of the Department of Defense in that nation. “(b) Nonpaying Pledging Nation Defined.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘nonpaying pledging nation’ means a foreign nation that has pledged to the United States that it will make contributions to assist the United States in defraying the incremental costs of Operation Desert Shield and which has not paid to the United States the full amount so pledged. “(c) Release of Withheld Amounts.—When a nation affected by subsection (a) has paid to the United States the full amount pledged, the Secretary of Defense shall release the amounts withheld from payment pursuant to subsection (a). “(d) Waiver Authority.—The Secretary of Defense may waive the requirement in subsection (a) upon certification to Congress that the waiver is required in the national security interests of the United States.”

Pub. L. 102–396, title IX, § 9070, Oct. 6, 1992, 106 Stat. 1918, provided that: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, where cost effective, all Department of Defense software shall be written in the programming language Ada, in the absence of special exemption by an official designated by the Secretary of Defense.”

Similar provisions were contained in the following prior appropriation acts:

Pub. L. 102–172, title VIII, § 8073, Nov. 26, 1991, 105 Stat. 1188.

Pub. L. 101–511, title VIII, § 8092, Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1896.

Pub. L. 101–511, title VIII, § 8105, Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1902, as amended by Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title X, § 1063(b), Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1476, provided that: “(a) Permanent Ceiling on United States Armed Forces in Japan.—After September 30, 1990, funds appropriated pursuant to an appropriation contained in this Act or any subsequent Act may not be used to support an end strength level of all personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States stationed in Japan at any level in excess of 50,000. “(b) Annual Reduction in Ceiling Unless Support Furnished.—Unless the President certifies to Congress before the end of each fiscal year that Japan has agreed to offset for that fiscal year the direct costs incurred by the United States related to the presence of all United States military personnel in Japan, excluding the military personnel title costs, the end strength level for that fiscal year of all personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States stationed in Japan may not exceed the number that is 5,000 less than such end strength level for the preceding fiscal year. “(c) Sense of Congress.—It is the sense of Congress that all those countries that share the benefits of international security and stability should share in the responsibility for that stability and security commensurate with their national capabilities. The Congress also recognizes that Japan has made a substantial pledge of financial support to the effort to support the United Nations Security Council resolutions on Iraq. The Congress also recognizes that Japan has a greater economic capability to contribute to international security and stability than any other member of the international community and wishes to encourage Japan to contribute commensurate with that capability. “(d) Exceptions.—(1) This section shall not apply in the event of a declaration of war or an armed attack on Japan. “(2) The President may waive the limitation in this section for any fiscal year if he declares that it is in the national interest to do so and immediately informs Congress of the waiver and the reasons for the waiver. “(e) Effective Date.—This section shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act [Nov. 5, 1990].”

Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIV, § 1455, Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1695, provided that: “(a) Purpose.—It is the purpose of this section to require Japan to offset the direct costs (other than pay and allowances for United States military and civilian personnel) incurred by the United States related to the presence of United States military personnel in Japan. “(b) Permanent Ceiling on United States Armed Forces in Japan.—Funds appropriated pursuant to an authorization contained in this Act or any subsequent Act may not be used to support an end strength level of all personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States stationed in Japan at any level in excess of 50,000. “(c) Sense of Congress on Allied Burden Sharing.—(1) Congress recognizes that Japan has made a substantial pledge of financial support to the effort to support the United Nations Security Council resolutions on Iraq. “(2) It is the sense of Congress that—“(A) all countries that share the benefits of international security and stability should, commensurate with their national capabilities, share in the responsibility for maintaining that security and stability; and “(B) given the economic capability of Japan to contribute to international security and stability, Japan should make contributions commensurate with that capability. “(d) Negotiations.—At the earliest possible date after the date of the enactment of this Act [Nov. 5, 1990], the President shall enter into negotiations with Japan for the purpose of achieving an agreement before September 30, 1991, under which Japan offsets all direct costs (other than pay and allowances for United States military and civilian personnel) incurred by the United States related to the presence of all United States military personnel stationed in Japan. “(e) Exceptions.—(1) This section shall not apply in the event of a declaration of war or an armed attack on Japan. “(2) This section may be waived by the President if the President—“(A) declares an emergency or determines that such a waiver is required by the national security interests of the United States; and “(B) immediately informs the Congress of the waiver and the reasons for the waiver.”

Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title IX, § 901, Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1619, directed the Secretary of Defense to submit, with the Secretary’s annual report to Congress during each of fiscal years 1992, 1993, and 1994, a report covering a period of at least ten years addressing threats facing the United States and strategic military plans to aid in the achievement of national objectives.

Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title II, § 211(e), Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1394, which required Secretary of Defense to submit annual report to congressional defense committees on Balanced Technology Initiative, was repealed by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title X, § 1061(l), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 443.

Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title VI, § 661, Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1463, which related to establishment by Secretary of Defense of programs to provide relocation assistance to members of Armed Forces and their families, was repealed and restated in section 1056 of this title by Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIV, § 1481(c)(1), (3), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1705.

Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title XV, Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1589, which provided that such title could be cited as the “Military Child Care Act of 1989”, and which related to funding for military child care for fiscal year 1990, child care employees, parent fees, child abuse prevention and safety at facilities, parent partnerships with child development centers, report on 5-year demand for child care, subsidies for family home day care, early childhood education demonstration program, and deadline for regulations, was repealed and restated in subchapter II (§ 1791 et seq.) of chapter 88 of this title by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title V, § 568(a)(1), (e)(2), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 331, 336.

Pub. L. 100–456, div. A, title XI, § 1102, Sept. 29, 1988, 102 Stat. 2042, which designated the Department of Defense as the single lead agency of the Federal Government for detection and monitoring of aerial and maritime transit of illegal drugs into the United States, was repealed and restated as section 124 of this title by Pub. L. 101–189, § 1202(a)(1), (b).

Pub. L. 100–456, div. A, title XIII, § 1309, Sept. 29, 1988, 102 Stat. 2063, directed Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress annual reports assessing security at United States military facilities in Republic of Philippines, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 102–484, div. A, title X, § 1074, Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2511.

Pub. L. 100–463, title VIII, § 8125, Oct. 1, 1988, 102 Stat. 2270–41, as amended by Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title XVI, § 1623, Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1606; Pub. L. 103–236, title I, § 162(j), Apr. 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 408; Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title XV, § 1502(f)(1), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 509; Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title X, § 1067(14), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 775, provided that: “(a)(1) Not later than March 1, 1989, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on the assignment of military missions among the member countries of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and on the prospects for the more effective assignment of such missions among such countries. “(2) The report shall include a discussion of the following:“(A) The current assignment of military missions among the member countries of NATO. “(B) Military missions for which there is duplication of capability or for which there is inadequate capability within the current assignment of military missions within NATO. “(C) Alternatives to the current assignment of military missions that would maximize the military contributions of the member countries of NATO. “(D) Any efforts that are underway within NATO or between individual member countries of NATO at the time the report is submitted that are intended to result in a more effective assignment of military missions within NATO. “(b) The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State shall (1) conduct a review of the long-term strategic interests of the United States overseas and the future requirements for the assignment of members of the Armed Forces of the United States to permanent duty ashore outside the United States, and (2) determine specific actions that, if taken, would result in a more balanced sharing of defense and foreign assistance spending burdens by the United States and its allies. Not later than August 1, 1989, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State shall transmit to Congress a report containing the findings resulting from the review and their determinations. “[(c) Repealed. Pub. L. 103–236, title I, § 162(j), Apr. 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 408.] “(d) The President shall specify (separately by appropriation account) in the Department of Defense items included in each budget submitted to Congress under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, (1) the amounts necessary for payment of all personnel, operations, maintenance, facilities, and support costs for Department of Defense overseas military units, and (2) the costs for all dependents who accompany Department of Defense personnel outside the Unied [sic] States. “(e) Not later than May 1, 1989, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services and on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report that sets forth the total costs required to support the dependents who accompany Department of Defense personnel assigned to permanent duty overseas. “(f) As of September 30 of each fiscal year, the number of members of the Armed Forces on active duty assigned to permanent duty ashore in Japan and the Republic of Korea may not exceed 94,450 (the number of members of the Armed Forces on active duty assigned to permanent duty ashore in Japan and the Republic of Korea on September 30, 1987). The limitation in the preceding sentence may be increased if and when (1) a major reduction of United States forces in the Republic of the Philippines is required because of a loss of basing rights in that nation, and (2) the President determines and certifies to Congress that, as a consequence of such loss, an increase in United States forces stationed in Japan and the Republic of Korea is necessary. “(g)(1) After fiscal year 1990, budget submissions to Congress under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, shall identify funds requested for Department of Defense personnel and units in permanent duty stations ashore outside the United States that exceed the amount of such costs incurred in fiscal year 1989 and shall set forth a detailed description of (A) the types of expenditures increased, by appropriation account, activity and program; and (B) specific efforts to obtain allied host nations’ financing for these cost increases. “(2) The Secretary of Defense shall notify in advance the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives, through existing notification procedures, when costs of maintaining Department of Defense personnel and units in permanent duty stations ashore outside the United States will exceed the amounts as defined in the Department of Defense budget as enacted for that fiscal year. Such notification shall describe: (A) the type of expenditures that increased; and (B) the source of funds (including prior year unobligated balances) by appropriation account, activity and program, proposed to finance these costs. “(3) In computing the costs incurred for maintaining Department of Defense personnel and forces in permanent duty stations ashore outside the United States compared with the amount of such costs incurred in fiscal year 1989, the Secretary shall—“(A) exclude increased costs resulting from increases in the rates of pay provided for members of the Armed Forces and civilian employees of the United States Government and exclude any cost increases in supplies and services resulting from inflation; and “(B) include (i) the costs of operation and maintenance and of facilities for the support of Department of Defense overseas personnel, and (ii) increased costs resulting from any decline in the foreign exchange rate of the United States dollar. “(h) The provisions of subsections (f) and (g) shall not apply in time of war or during a national emergency declared by the President or Congress. “(i) In this section—“(1) the term ‘personnel’ means members of the Armed Forces of the United States and civilian employees of the Department of Defense; “(2) the term ‘Department of Defense overseas personnel’ means those Department of Defense personnel who are assigned to permanent duty ashore outside the United States; and “(3) the term ‘United States’ includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the territories and possessions of the United States.”

Pub. L. 100–202, § 101(b) [title VIII, § 8042], Dec. 22, 1987, 101 Stat. 1329–43, 1329–69, which required Secretary of Defense to submit annual report on full costs of stationing United States troops overseas, etc., was repealed and restated in subsec. (k) [now (j)] of this section by Pub. L. 100–370, § 1(o).

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title VI, § 637, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1106, provided that: “Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 4, 1987], the Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations to establish the policy that— “(1) the decision by a spouse of a member of the Armed Forces to be employed or to voluntarily participate in activities relating to the Armed Forces should not be influenced by the preferences or requirements of the Armed Forces; and “(2) neither such decision nor the marital status of a member of the Armed Forces should have an effect on the assignment or promotion opportunities of the member.”

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title VI, § 638, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1106, as amended by Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title VI, § 662, Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1465; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIV, § 1484(l)(1), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1719, provided that the Secretary of Defense, with respect to members of the Armed Forces, and the Secretary of Transportation, with respect to members of the Coast Guard, were to carry out a test program providing for reimbursement for qualifying adoption expenses incurred by members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps for adoption proceedings initiated after Sept. 30, 1987, and before Oct. 1, 1990, and for qualifying adoption expenses incurred by members of the Coast Guard for adoption proceedings initiated after Sept. 30, 1989, and before Oct. 1, 1990.

Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title XI, § 1121, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1147, as amended by Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title X, § 1073(d)(5), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1906, which provided for a counterintelligence polygraph program to be carried out by the Secretary of Defense, was repealed and restated in section 1564a of this title by Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title X, § 1041(a)(1),(b), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1607, 1608.

Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title VI, § 612, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3878, provided that: “The Secretary of each military department shall establish procedures to ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable within operational and other military requirements, permanent change of station moves for members of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who have dependents in elementary or secondary school occur at times that avoid disruption of the school schedules of such dependents.”

Pub. L. 99–500, § 101(c) [title X, § 955], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–82, 1783–173, and Pub. L. 99–591, § 101(c) [title X, § 955], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–82, 3341–173; Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title IX, formerly title IV, § 955, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3953, renumbered title IX, Pub. L. 100–26, § 3(5), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 273, which provided that in preparing the defense budget for any fiscal year, the Secretary of Defense was to specifically identify each common procurement weapon system included in the budget, take all feasible steps to minimize variations in procurement unit costs for any such system as shown in the budget requests of the different armed forces requesting procurement funds for the system, and identify and justify in the budget all such variations in procurement unit costs for common procurement weapon systems, and that the Secretary of Defense carry out this section through the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), was repealed and restated in section 2217 of this title by Pub. L. 100–370, § 1(d)(3).

Pub. L. 99–433, title IV, § 405, Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 1032, required the Secretary of Defense to include in the Secretary’s annual report to Congress under subsec. (c) of this section for each year from 1987 through 1991 a detailed report on the implementation of title IV of Pub. L. 99–433.

Pub. L. 99–433, title IV, § 406(g), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 1034, required that the first report submitted by the Secretary of Defense under subsec. (c) of this section after Oct. 1, 1986, would contain as much of the information required by section 667 of this title as had been available to the Secretary at the time of its preparation.

Pub. L. 99–399, title XI, Aug. 27, 1986, 100 Stat. 894, directed the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress not later than June 30, 1987, on actions taken to review the security of each base and installation of the Department of Defense outside the United States, to improve the security of such bases and installations, and to institute a training program for members of the Armed Forces stationed outside the United States and their families concerning security and antiterrorism.

Pub. L. 99–145, title VI, § 685(a), (b), (d), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 666, provided that: “(a) Required Surcharge.—The Secretary of Defense shall require that each time a sale is recorded at a military animal disease prevention and control center the person to whom the sale is made shall be charged a surcharge of $2. “(b) Deposit of Receipts in Treasury.—Amounts received from surcharges under this section shall be deposited in the Treasury in accordance with section 3302 of title 31.”

“(d) Effective Date.—This section shall take effect on October 1, 1985.”

Pub. L. 98–94, title X, § 1033, Sept. 24, 1983, 97 Stat. 672, as amended by Pub. L. 98–525, title VI, § 656, Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2553, effective Oct. 1, 1985, required payment by a member of the Armed Forces of a $10 fee for veterinary services, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 99–145, title VI, § 685(c), (d), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 666, effective Oct. 1, 1985.

Pub. L. 99–145, title VIII, Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 678, as amended by Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title VI, § 653, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3890; Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title VI, § 635, Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1106; Pub. L. 100–456, div. A, title V, § 524, Sept. 29, 1988, 102 Stat. 1975, which provided that such title could be cited as the “Military Family Act of 1985”, and which related to Office of Family Policy, transfer of Military Family Resource Center, surveys of military families, family members serving on advisory committees, employment opportunities for military spouses, youth sponsorship program, dependent student travel within United States, relocation and housing, food programs, reporting of child abuse, miscellaneous reporting requirements, and effective date, was repealed and restated in subchapter I (§ 1781 et seq.) of chapter 88 of this title by Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title V, § 568(a)(1), (e)(1), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 329, 336.

Pub. L. 99–145, title XII, § 1212, Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 726, as amended by Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title V, § 518, Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1443, provided that: “(a) No solicitation, contract, or agreement for the provision of off-duty postsecondary education services for members of the Armed Forces of the United States, civilian employees of the Department of Defense, or the dependents of such members or employees may discriminate against or preclude any accredited academic institution authorized to award one or more associate degrees from offering courses within its lawful scope of authority solely on the basis of such institution’s lack of authority to award a baccalaureate degree. “(b) No solicitation, contract, or agreement for the provision of off-duty postsecondary education services for members of the Armed Forces of the United States, civilian employees of the Department of Defense, or the dependents of such members or employees, other than those for services at the graduate or postgraduate level, may limit the offering of such services or any group, category, or level of courses to a single academic institution. However, nothing in this section shall prohibit such actions taken in accordance with regulations of the Secretary of Defense which are uniform for all armed services as may be necessary to avoid unnecessary duplication of offerings, consistent with the purpose of this provision of ensuring the availability of alternative offerors of such services to the maximum extent feasible. “(c)(1) The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a study to determine the current and future needs of members of the Armed Forces, civilian employees of the Department of Defense, and the dependents of such members and employees for postsecondary education services at overseas locations. The Secretary shall determine on the basis of the results of that study whether the policies and procedures of the Department in effect on the date of the enactment of the Department of Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 [probably means date of enactment of Pub. L. 101–189, Nov. 29, 1989] with respect to the procurement of such services are—“(A) consistent with the provisions of subsections (a) and (b); “(B) adequate to ensure the recipients of such services the benefit of a choice in the offering of such services; and “(C) adequate to ensure that persons stationed at geographically isolated military installations or at installations with small complements of military personnel are adequately served. The Secretary shall complete the study in such time as necessary to enable the Secretary to submit the report required by paragraph (2)(A) by the deadline specified in that paragraph. “(2)(A) The Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the results of the study referred to in paragraph (1), together with a copy of any revisions in policies and procedures made as a result of such study. The report shall be submitted not later than March 1, 1990. “(B) The Secretary shall include in the report an explanation of how determinations are made with regard to—“(i) affording members, employees, and dependents a choice in the offering of courses of postsecondary education; and “(ii) whether the services provided under a contract for such services should be limited to an installation, theater, or other geographic area. “(3)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), no contract for the provision of services referred to in subsection (a) may be awarded, and no contract or agreement entered into before the date of the enactment of this paragraph [Nov. 29, 1989] may be renewed or extended on or after such date, until the end of the 60-day period beginning on the date on which the report referred to in paragraph (2)(A) is received by the committees named in that paragraph. “(B) A contract or an agreement in effect on October 1, 1989, for the provision of postsecondary education services in the European Theater for members of the Armed Forces, civilian employees of the Department of Defense, and the dependents of such members and employees may be renewed or extended without regard to the limitation in subparagraph (A). “(C) In the case of a contract for services with respect to which a solicitation is pending on the date of the enactment of this paragraph [Nov. 29, 1989], the contract may be awarded—“(i) on the basis of the solicitation as issued before the date of the enactment of this paragraph; “(ii) on the basis of the solicitation issued before the date of the enactment of this paragraph modified so as to conform to any changes in policies and procedures the Secretary determines should be made as a result of the study required under paragraph (1); or “(iii) on the basis of a new solicitation. “(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to require more than one academic institution to be authorized to offer courses aboard a particular naval vessel.”

Pub. L. 99–145, title XIV, § 1407, Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 745, required reports on unobligated balances, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title XIII, § 1307(b), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3981. See section 2215 of this title.

Pub. L. 99–145, title XIV, § 1456, Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 762, which directed Secretary of Defense to monitor capability of domestic textile and apparel industrial base to support defense mobilization requirements and to make annual reports to Congress on status of such industrial base, was repealed and restated in section 2510 of this title by Pub. L. 101–510, § 826(a)(1), (b).

Pub. L. 99–85, Aug. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 286, as amended by Pub. L. 103–199, title IV, § 404(a), Dec. 17, 1993, 107 Stat. 2325, provided: “That the Secretary of Defense may provide to Russia, as provided in the Exchange of Notes Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Concerning the Direct Communications Link Upgrade, concluded on July 17, 1984, such equipment and services as may be necessary to upgrade or maintain the Russian part of the Direct Communications Link agreed to in the Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and the Soviet Union signed June 20, 1963. The Secretary shall provide such equipment and services to Russia at the cost thereof to the United States.

[Pub. L. 103–199, title IV, § 404(b), Dec. 17, 1993, 107 Stat. 2325, provided that: “The amendment made by subsection (a)(2) [amending section 2(b) of Pub. L. 99–85, set out above] does not affect the applicability of section 2(b) of that joint resolution to funds received from the Soviet Union.” ]

Pub. L. 97–252, title XI, § 1110, Sept. 8, 1982, 96 Stat. 747, provided that none of funds appropriated pursuant to an authorization of appropriations could be used for purpose of consolidating any functions being performed on Sept. 8, 1982, by Military Traffic Management Command of Army, Military Sealift Command of Navy, or Military Airlift Command of Air Force with any function being performed on such date by either or both of the other commands, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 99–433, title II, § 213(a), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 1018.

Pub. L. 97–86, title IX, § 918, Dec. 1, 1981, 95 Stat. 1132, directed Secretary of Defense, not later than Jan. 15, 1982 and 1983, to submit to Congress reports containing recommendations to improve efficiency and management of, and to eliminate waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in, operation of Department of Defense, and to include each recommendation by Comptroller General since Jan. 1, 1979, for elimination of waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement in Department of Defense with a statement as to which have been adopted and, to extent practicable actual and projected cost savings from each, and which have not been adopted and, to extent practicable, projected cost savings from each and an explanation of why each such recommendation was not adopted.

Pub. L. 94–431, title VI, § 610, Sept. 30, 1976, 90 Stat. 1365, authorized Secretary of Defense to conduct studies with regard to possible use of military installations being closed and to make recommendations with regard to such installations, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 97–86, title IX, § 912(b), Dec. 1, 1981, 95 Stat. 1123. See section 2391 of this title.

Pub. L. 94–106, title VIII, § 812, Oct. 7, 1975, 89 Stat. 540, which directed Secretary of Defense, after consultation with Secretary of State, to prepare and submit not later than January 31 of each year to Committees on Armed Services of Senate and House of Representatives a written annual report on foreign policy and military force structure of United States for next fiscal year, how such policy and force structure relate to each other, and justification for each, was repealed and restated as subsec. (e) of section 133 [now § 113] of this title by Pub. L. 97–295, §§ 1(1), 6(b).

Pub. L. 94–106, title VIII, § 813, Oct. 7, 1975, 89 Stat. 540, as amended by Pub. L. 95–79, title VIII, § 814, July 30, 1977, 91 Stat. 337; Pub. L. 97–252, title XI, § 1104, Sept. 8, 1982, 96 Stat. 739, which directed Secretary of Defense to report to Congress on any letter proposing to transfer $50,000,000 or more of defense articles, detailing impact of such a sale on readiness, adequacy of price for replacement, and armed forces needs and supply for each article, was repealed and restated as section 133b (renumbered § 118 and repealed) of this title by Pub. L. 97–295, §§ 1(2)(A), 6(b).

Pub. L. 86–149, title IV, § 412, Aug. 10, 1959, 73 Stat. 322, as amended by Pub. L. 87–436, § 2, Apr. 27, 1962, 76 Stat. 55; Pub. L. 88–174, title VI, § 610, Nov. 7, 1963, 77 Stat. 329; Pub. L. 89–37, title III, § 304, June 11, 1965, 79 Stat. 128; Pub. L. 90–168, § 6, Dec. 1, 1967, 81 Stat. 526; Pub. L. 91–121, title IV, § 405, Nov. 19, 1969, 83 Stat. 207; Pub. L. 91–441, title V, §§ 505, 509, Oct. 7, 1970, 84 Stat. 912, 913; Pub. L. 92–129, title VII, § 701, Sept. 28, 1971, 85 Stat. 362; Pub. L. 92–436, title III, § 302, title VI, § 604, Sept. 26, 1972, 86 Stat. 736, 739, was repealed by Pub. L. 93–155, title VIII, § 803(b)(1), Nov. 16, 1973, 87 Stat. 615. See sections 114 to 116 of this title.

Ex. Ord. No. 12765, June 11, 1991, 56 F.R. 27401, provided:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, and my authority as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. The Secretary of Defense is hereby designated and empowered, without the approval, ratification, or other action by the President, to exercise the authority vested in the President by section 749 of title 10 of the United States Code to assign the command without regard to rank in grade to any commissioned officer otherwise eligible to command when two or more commissioned officers of the same grade or corresponding grades are assigned to the same area, field command, or organization.

Sec. 2. The Secretary of Defense is hereby designated and empowered, without the approval, ratification, or other action by the President, to exercise the authority vested in the President by section 7299a(a) of title 10 of the United States Code to direct that combatant vessels and escort vessels be constructed in a Navy or private yard, as the case may be, if the requirement of the Act of March 27, 1934 (ch. 95, 48 Stat. 503) that the first and each succeeding alternate vessel of the same class be constructed in a Navy yard is inconsistent with the public interest.

Sec. 3. For vessels, and for any major component of the hull or superstructure of vessels to be constructed or repaired for any of the armed forces, the Secretary of Defense is hereby designated and empowered, without the approval, ratification, or other action by the President, to exercise the authority vested in the President by section 7309(b) of title 10 of the United States Code to authorize exceptions to the prohibition in section 7309(a) of title 10 of the United States Code. Such exceptions shall be based on a determination that it is in the national security interest of the United States to authorize an exception. The Secretary of Defense shall transmit notice of any such determination to the Congress, as required by section 7309(b).

Sec. 4. The Secretary of Defense may redelegate the authority delegated to him by this order, in accordance with applicable law.

Sec. 5. This order shall be effective immediately.

Memorandum of the President of the United States, May 14, 1991, 56 F.R. 23991, provided:

Memorandum for the Secretary of Defense

Consistent with section 8105(d)(2) of the Department of Defense Appropriation Act, 1991 (Public Law 101–511; 104 Stat. 1856) [set out above], I hereby waive the limitation in section 8105(b) which states that the end strength level for each fiscal year of all personnel of the Armed Forces of the United States stationed in Japan may not exceed the number that is 5,000 less than such end strength level for the preceding fiscal year, and declare that it is in the national interest to do so.

You are authorized and directed to inform the Congress of this waiver and of the reasons for the waiver contained in the attached justification, and to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

In January of this year the Department of Defense signed a new Host Nation Support Agreement with the Government of Japan in which that government agreed to pay all utility and Japanese labor costs incrementally over the next five years (worth $1.7 billion). Because United States forward deployed forces stationed in Japan have regional missions in addition to the defense of Japan, we did not seek to have the Government of Japan offset all of the direct costs incurred by the United States related to the presence of all United States military personnel in Japan (excluding military personnel title costs).