To modify the authority of Department of Defense for installation support services and intergovernmental support agreements, and for other purposes.
- Sponsor
- Rep. Schmidt, Derek [R-KS-2]
- Committees
- Armed Services Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Oct 9, 2026
Bottom line
This bill aims to enhance the Department of Defense's ability to utilize and track intergovernmental support agreements, promoting efficiency and transparency in installation support services.
What it actually does
This bill amends Section 2679 of title 10, United States Code, to expand the funding sources available to the Department of Defense for intergovernmental support agreements (IGSAs). It mandates the creation of a uniform framework for collecting and evaluating IGSA data, establishes a publicly accessible database for this information, and requires the Secretary of Defense to conduct periodic analyses and submit reports to Congress on IGSA utilization and effectiveness. Additionally, it clarifies definitions related to eligible support services and funding sources.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill will streamline the use of IGSAs, allowing the DoD to leverage local government services more effectively, leading to cost savings, improved service delivery, and better community collaboration. The data framework and database will provide crucial insights for optimizing these agreements and demonstrating their value.
Opponents contend
Opponents might express concerns about the potential for reduced oversight if funding sources are too broadly defined, or the administrative burden and cost associated with developing and maintaining the new framework and database. Some might also worry about the impact on private sector contractors if more services are shifted to intergovernmental agreements.
The bill is short and relatively straightforward, allowing sufficient time for an informed reader to understand its provisions.
Section 1(1) of the bill, amending 10 U.S.C. 2679(c)
Expanded Funding Authority for Intergovernmental Support Agreements
This provision modifies existing law to allow any Department of Defense (DoD) funding source to be used by the Secretary concerned (Army, Navy, Air Force, or Defense) to pay for intergovernmental support services. Previously, funding was limited to specific appropriations for that year. This change provides greater flexibility in how the DoD can finance agreements with state and local governments for support services.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this flexibility is crucial for efficient resource allocation, enabling military installations to quickly enter into or expand IGSAs without being constrained by specific annual appropriations, thereby improving readiness and cost-effectiveness.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that broadening funding sources could reduce transparency or make it harder to track specific expenditures for IGSAs, potentially leading to less accountability if not properly managed.
Tradeoffs
The tension is between increasing financial flexibility for DoD components and maintaining clear accountability and oversight of how funds are used for intergovernmental agreements.
Section 1(3) of the bill, inserting new 10 U.S.C. 2679(f)
Establishment of IGSA Data Framework, Database, and Reporting Requirements
This section mandates the Secretary of Defense to develop a uniform framework for collecting and evaluating data on IGSAs within 180 days. It also requires the implementation of a policy for consistent framework use and the establishment of a publicly accessible, searchable database of IGSA data within one year. Furthermore, the Secretary must conduct quadrennial analyses of this data and submit reports to Congress, including findings, disaggregated data, recommendations for improvement, and best practices.
Section 1(4) of the bill, amending 10 U.S.C. 2679(g)
Clarified Definitions for Support Services and Funding Sources
This provision clarifies the types of services that can be covered under intergovernmental support agreements by explicitly including "the repair, construction, maintenance, and operation of a facility on an installation." It also formally defines "Department of Defense source" to mean any appropriations made available by Congress, excluding permanent appropriations, revolving funds, previously unavailable balances, or third-party financing, and clarifies "Secretary concerned" to include the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Defense.
This provision defines "Department of Defense source" for funding Intergovernmental Support Agreements (IGSAs) as "any appropriations made available by Congress to the Department of Defense," but explicitly excludes "permanent appropriations, revolving funds, previously unavailable balances, or third-party financing arrangements."
Section 1(4)(B), adding 10 U.S.C. 2679(g)(5)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to define terms precisely in a dedicated section. It's not necessarily evasive but requires careful reading to understand the full scope of the funding authority.
Case for: Supporters would argue this provides necessary fiscal discipline and clarity, preventing the use of less transparent or less accountable funding streams for IGSAs, ensuring that funds are directly appropriated by Congress for these purposes.
Case against: Critics might argue that these exclusions limit the flexibility that the bill otherwise aims to provide, potentially hindering the most efficient use of all available DoD funds, especially for long-term or self-sustaining projects that revolving funds might support.
Estimated impact: This clarifies the scope of available funds for IGSAs, potentially limiting the total pool compared to a truly "any source" interpretation, but ensuring greater congressional oversight of the specific appropriations used.