	Major Developments

		Defense Logistics Agency Issues Formal Notice for American-made Shoes

On January 31, 2014, DOD issued a solicitation designed to conduct market research to assess the availability of American-made shoes fully compliant with the Berry Amendment. According to one press report, DLA has announced that four companies have reported being capable of producing 100% domestic, U.S.-made, athletic footwear for military personnel. 113-66 , the NDAA for FY2014 ( H.R. 3304 ) was signed into law on December 26, 2013. Some of the Berry Amendment-related provisions proposed in H.R. 1960 and S. 1197 were not incorporated into the enacted bill. A discussion was provided in the joint explanation statement which accompanied the bill. 3304 . 1960, the House-proposed National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014

H.R. 1960 was introduced in the House on May 14, passed the House in a recorded vote (315-108) on June 14, and was referred to the Senate on July 8, 2013. The bill contained several provisions which would, if enacted into law, impact domestic source restrictions. The report would include a list of the components in the DOD supply chain for which one supplier controls over 50% of the global market, a list of supply chain parts where there is inadequate information to determine whether there is a single source for components, as well as the Secretary of Defense's recommendations on which single source suppliers create vulnerabilities and recommendations on how to reduce them; Section 839would have required DOD to meet domestic sourcing requirements for footwear issued to enlisted members, provided that DOD can certify that there are at least two domestic manufacturers of footwear that can meet the requirements of the Berry Amendment; Section 1601 would have required the DOD Inspector General to conduct periodic audits of contracting practices and policies related to the Berry Amendment. S. 1197, the Senate-proposed National Defense Authorization Act for FY2014

S. 1197 was introduced on June 20, 2013, and referred to the Armed Services Committee. S.Rept. 113-44 , which accompanied S. 1197 , directed both DOD and the Army to study the status of domestic sourcing for athletic footwear for enlisted members, as discussed here. As such, the committee directs DOD to submit a publicly releasable report to the congressional defense committees that includes, but not be limited to, any audits or auditing policy, investigations and enforcement, incentives, procurement officer training, and regulatory interpretation guidelines relating to the Department's contracting for textiles and clothing contained in Federal Supply Codes 83 and 84, and athletic footwear listed in Federal Supply Class 8430 and 8435. 1. From what sources does DOD procure American flags? 2533a shall apply. Background

The Berry Amendment contains a number of domestic source restrictions that prohibit DOD from acquiring food, clothing, fabrics (including ballistic fibers), specialty metals, stainless steel, and hand or measuring tools that are not grown or produced in the United States. Some policy makers believe that the Berry Amendment's restrictions (like the specialty metal clause) contradict free trade policies, and that the presence and degree of such competition is the most effective tool for promoting efficiencies and improving quality. Others believe that U.S.-based companies need the protections afforded by the Berry Amendment. Several issues were raised during the debate. Charles R. Henry, testified that the Berry Amendment was critical to the maintenance of a "warm" U.S. industrial base during periods of adversity and war. Congress may choose to examine the domestic source restrictions under the Berry Amendment and other procurement provisions and to determine whether they help or hurt the defense industrial base, including relationships with foreign trading partners. Option 7: Audit and Investigate Berry Amendment Contracts

Congress could investigate all military procurement contracts for compliance with the Berry Amendment. This provision would amend Title 10 U.S.C. P.L. 110th Congress

			Legislation Proposed

H.R.
This report examines the original intent and purpose of the Berry Amendment and legislative proposals to amend the application of domestic source restrictions, as well as potential options for Congress. In order to protect the U.S. industrial base during periods of adversity and war, Congress passed domestic source restrictions as part of the 1941 Fifth Supplemental Department of Defense (DOD) Appropriations Act. These provisions later became known as the Berry Amendment. The Berry Amendment (Title 10 United States Code [U.S.C.] §2533a, Requirement to Buy Certain Articles from American Sources; Exceptions) contains a number of domestic source restrictions that prohibit DOD from acquiring food, clothing (including military uniforms), fabrics (including ballistic fibers), stainless steel, and hand or measuring tools that are not grown or produced in the United States. The Berry Amendment applies to DOD purchases only.
On January 31, 2014, DOD issued a solicitation designed to conduct market research to assess the marketplace for the availability of American-made shoes fully compliant with the Berry Amendment. According to one February 2014 press report, four firms have told the Defense Logistics Agency that they could produce U.S.-made athletic footwear for military personnel.
H.R. 1960, the House-proposed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for FY2014, was introduced in the House on May 14, passed the House in a recorded vote (315-108) on June 14, and was referred to the Senate on July 8, 2013. The bill contained several provisions which would, if enacted into law, impact domestic source restrictions under the Berry Amendment, including the procurement of American flags, footwear for enlisted service members, contracts for textiles and clothing, and periodic audits by the Inspector General on contracts for goods and services.
S. 1197, the Senate-proposed NDAA for FY2014, was introduced on June 20, 2013, and referred to the Armed Services Committee. Senate Report (S. Rept.) 113-44, which accompanied S. 1197, directed both DOD and the Army to study the status of domestic sourcing for athletic footwear for enlisted members, and to determine if there were sufficient quantities and with the appropriate qualities to meet the needs and requirement of DOD. The committee also directed DOD to submit a report to Congress including any audits or auditing policy, investigations and enforcement, and other requirements relating to DOD's contracting for textiles, clothing, and athletic footwear.
P.L. 113-66, the NDAA for FY2014 (H.R. 3304) was signed into law on December 26, 2013. The Berry Amendment-related provisions proposed in H.R. 1960 and S. 1197 were not entirely incorporated into the enacted bill. A discussion was provided in the legislative text and joint explanation statement which accompanied H.R. 3304.
Some policy makers believe that policies like the Berry Amendment contradict free trade policies, and that the presence and degree of such competition is the most effective tool for promoting efficiencies and improving quality. On the other hand, some other policy makers believe that key domestic sectors (like manufacturing) need the protections afforded by the Berry Amendment. The debate over the Berry Amendment raises several questions, among them (1) If the United States does not produce a solely domestic item, or if U.S. manufacturers are at maximum production capability, should DOD restrict procurement from foreign sources; and (2) to what extent do U.S. national security interests and industrial base concerns justify waiver of the Berry Amendment?