[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 86 (Thursday, June 19, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H3945-H4069]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 169 and rule

[[Page H3946]]

XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 1119.

                              {time}  1424


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 1119) to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 1998 and 1999 
for military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe 
military personnel strengths for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and for 
other purposes, with Mr. Young of Florida in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence] and 
the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] each will control 1 hour.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence).
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, once again the Committee on National 
Security has reported a bipartisan bill that attempts to address many 
of the problems facing our Nation's military. H.R. 1119 also reflects 
the committee's deep concern over the difficulty in managing the risks 
posed by continued forced downsizing and budget reductions.
  The fundamental dilemma facing the Department of Defense remains the 
same: how to maintain a viable all-volunteer force in an environment 
where the number, scope, and duration of military missions, especially 
peacekeeping and humanitarian missions, continue to grow while military 
forces and defense budgets continue to decline. A long-standing gap 
between the U.S. military strategy and resources persists. In fact, it 
is widening.
  In looking at the challenges to our national security interests over 
the past year, the committee has continued to focus on China, an 
emerging power, and Russia, a once and perhaps future power. While 
neither nation is currently an enemy of the United States, they do 
represent the nations most likely and able to amass military power 
sufficient to challenge our vital interests.
  I support efforts to bolster the democratic process in Russia. 
However, Russia's future will be shaped less by our policy than by its 
own internal decisionmaking over whether to remain independent and 
driven by its own history and character or to form working partnerships 
with the United States and the West.
  But history has demonstrated that the transition to democracy is 
often tumultuous and violent. Russia is a vast yet collapsed empire, 
governed by a weak central authority, and armed with an arsenal of 
nuclear weaponry. It provides cause for both concern and caution.
  China is an emerging power and poses a different problem. I agree 
with the Department of Defense's recent report concluding that China's 
goal is to become one of the world's great powers. Whether or not an 
emerging China becomes an enemy of our country remains to be seen, but 
China's strategic goals would appear to be at odds with our Nation's 
role and influence in East Asia.
  Yet, I believe that the surest way to optimize the chances of an 
American strategic partnership with either Russia or China is for us to 
continue to be the world's most powerful force for peace and stability 
in the world. It would be dangerous and shortsighted to base the United 
States' security strategy on the assumption that either Russia or China 
will acquiesce to American global leadership indefinitely.
  In the post-cold war environment of shrinking military forces and 
constrained defense budgets, the imperative to maintain strategic 
priorities grows while the margin for error gets smaller. The Committee 
on National Security's efforts to begin revitalizing our military 
forces will take longer and will involve acceptance of higher risk in 
light of constrained resources.
  But in truth, the making of strategy has always been a process of 
managing risk. The projected real decline in future defense budgets, 
assumed by the Quadrennial Defense Review and ratified in the defense 
budget agreement, adds to this risk. The QDR has not eased my 
skepticism regarding the administration's commitment to a defense 
program that properly prioritizes and balances the critical elements of 
readiness, quality of life, and modernization.
  Secretary Cohen has admitted that the defense posture outlined in the 
QDR will allow United States' forces to execute the national military 
strategy, but at increased risk. And I pause for emphasis. But at 
increased risk. The Secretary also quantified the budgetary risk, the 
amount of defense spending required to close the strategy-resources 
gap, at approximately $15 billion per year.
  While I believe that the annual shortfall is greater than $15 billion 
a year, what is most striking to me is the relatively small size of the 
shortfall in comparison to the tremendous strategic risk associated 
with a failure to address it; $15 billion represents one-tenth of 1 
percent of the Federal budget, yet the military's strategic and 
political risk of not addressing it are monumental. The risk of 
inaction or failure far outweigh the cost of addressing such budgetary 
shortfalls.
  The Nation's military strategy demands that we maintain forces 
sufficient to fight and win two major regional conflicts nearly 
simultaneously, for instance, a Persian Gulf-like conflict and a 
conflict on the Korean peninsula.

                              {time}  1430

  Yet while the Nation maintains an expansive military strategy, we 
continue to cut back on our force structure and reduce our defense 
budgets to the point where I personally doubt that we could today 
execute another operation like Desert Storm as quickly, effectively, or 
with the relatively small loss of life as we did just 6 short years 
ago.
  We have cut from an 18-Army division since then down to 10, from 57 
reserve component brigades down to 42, from 546 naval battle force 
ships down to 346, from 16 aircraft carriers down to 12, and from 36 
Air Force fighter wings down to 20.
  In 1990, the Nation built 20 more ships, while this year we will 
build only 4. In 1990 we bought 511 tactical aircraft, but we will buy 
only 53 this year. And 7 years ago we approved construction of 448 
tanks, while today we are authorizing zero, none.
  We will not always be able to count on the backing of allied 
coalitions as we did in the gulf when it comes to protecting our vital 
national interests, nor should we assume that our next adversary will 
allow us time to build up our forces in a benign environment for 6 
months before the outbreak of hostilities.
  As our forces and resources decline, the Nation's risk still grows. 
We would all prefer to be raising and maintaining military forces 
capable of an unquestioned response to challenges anywhere in the 
world, rather than struggling to manage budgetary, military, and 
strategic risk with no margin for error. In this context, H.R. 1119 
reflects the attempt of the Committee on National Security to address 
serious shortfalls in the effort to mitigate risk in a resource-
constrained environment.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1119 provides $268.2 billion in budget authority 
for Department of Defense and Energy programs for fiscal year 1998. 
This figure is consistent with the fiscal year 1998 budget resolution 
and represents an increase of $2.6 billion over the President's 
request. The bill provides $3.3 billion more than the current fiscal 
year 1997 spending which, when adjusted for inflation, represents a 
real decline of 1.3 percent. This is not an increase in spending.
  I will leave discussion of the many important initiatives in the bill 
to my colleagues on the Committee on National Security, who have worked 
hard since February to get us to this point in the process.
  In particular, I would like to recognize the hard work of the 
subcommittee and panel chairmen and ranking members. Putting this bill 
together requires a lot of coordination and teamwork, which I have 
consistently been able to rely on.
  I would like to also personally thank the gentleman from California 
[Mr.

[[Page H3947]]

Dellums], the committee's ranking Democrat, for his contributions. He 
is a strong advocate not only for his personal position, but for the 
role of the minority in a process that continues to produce a 
bipartisan bill.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill, I might add, was reported out of the 
committee by a bipartisan vote, 51 to 3.
  Finally, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the staff. We have a 
small staff relative to the size of the committee and the magnitude of 
our oversight responsibilities. The work gets done only through great 
expertise, dedication, and effort.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge strong bipartisan support for this bipartisan 
bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman and Members of the House, as the ranking Democrat of the 
House Committee on National Security, I rise to offer the following 
observations on the bill, H.R. 1119, and the process that brought this 
bill to the floor for consideration today.
  First, Mr. Chairman, let me congratulate the distinguished gentleman 
from South Carolina [Mr. Spence], the chairman, who returned the 
committee to its bipartisan moorings. Not only did he and I work 
cooperatively on a number of issues within the committee, but the staff 
that serves the minority party were included in much more deliberative 
deliberations that led to the crafting of the committee consideration 
and recommendation and the report.
  I have appreciated the gentleman's openness to my discussions, both 
substantive and procedural, Mr. Chairman, as well as the receptivity of 
the majority staff to inputs that our side made on important issues 
contained in this bill and in this report.
  Despite, Mr. Chairman, the successful resolution this morning on the 
question of the rule, and for that I would like to thank the gentleman 
from New York [Mr. Solomon] and the leadership for working with this 
gentleman and this side of the aisle, I remain concerned that we are 
moving forward much too rapidly on the consideration of the bill, H.R. 
1119.
  There are numerous issues, Mr. Chairman, in this bill, ones deserving 
much more study before we proceed to consideration, and ones deserving 
of more time for debate than the rule has provided. Given the time, 
this gentleman will work as diligently as possible to ensure that as 
much explanation and illumination of these issues as is possible will 
indeed occur.
  On procedure, Mr. Chairman, let me also note for the Record, and it 
is not unusual, that I did not and cannot support the committee report. 
As the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence] noted, a broad 
bipartisan vote reports this bill from the Committee on National 
Security. Therefore, I do not claim at this moment to speak for all the 
Members on our side of the aisle regarding their support of this bill.
  Despite this caveat, we will have the opportunity to hear from my 
colleagues on this side of the aisle, the ranking members of the 
subcommittees, on their views as to what transpired within their 
subcommittee jurisdiction that led to the bill being reported from the 
full committee.
  Mr. Chairman, some Members may have read my dissenting views in the 
committee report. For those who have not, let me offer my thoughts in 
an effort to frame the debate from the perspective of those who think 
we have failed, Mr. Chairman, to completely align our military 
structure and its operations with the new requirements and 
opportunities that are emerging into the next century.
  I have said on more than one occasion, Mr. Chairman, that we are now 
in a new era, an era so special that we have no real name for it. We 
call it the post-cold war era, an era fraught with the need for changes 
and transition and uncertainty, fraught with great challenges but yet 
with great opportunities.
  One of my frustrations with the rule was its failure to include my 
amendment proposing that the Congress express its sense that the 
national security strategy of the United States contains elements far 
beyond and equally important to the funding of the departments charged 
with executing the military portion of this strategy.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe that this post-cold-war era has ushered in an 
opportunity for us to redefine a new national security agenda. Let me 
propose the following question: If we took whatever resources necessary 
to develop the most powerful military force that the human mind could 
conceive, and our society simultaneously was deteriorating culturally, 
socially, politically and economically, question: What are we 
defending?
  Therefore, Mr. Chairman, one of the extraordinarily vital national 
security interests must be a healthy, vibrant economy and a well-
educated, well-informed, well-trained citizenry capable of engaging the 
economic and social institutions of our society. That has implications 
for what we spend to educate our children, retrain our dislocated 
people, house our people, protect and preserve the environment, provide 
for health care.
  If our Nation is not a vital national security interest, what are we 
out there building this extraordinary military apparatus for? This is a 
moment in the context of change and challenge that we can redefine. 
That is one element.
  A second element, Mr. Chairman, is an engaged foreign policy. Martin 
Luther King probably said it best when he said that peace is more than 
simply the absence of war; it is the absence of conditions that create 
war, that give rise to war.
  And what gives rise to war? It is hunger, malnutrition, violation of 
human rights, denial of democratic principles, lack of sustainable 
economics, regional instability, brought on by man's inhumanity to man.
  So, our foreign policy must engage the world. We are a major 
superpower. We are the last superpower standing, and our foreign policy 
should engage the world, commit it to democratic principles, human 
rights, economic development, stability in regions around the world. We 
should stand for something. And our foreign policy and our foreign 
assistance act should engage, and that account should be adequately 
funded.
  Third, we should have a properly sized, properly trained, properly 
equipped military to meet the realities of a changing world as we move 
into the next millennium. All I have argued for is that there be 
balance in these accounts. Let the debate go forward. What should be 
the investment in our society as a vital national security interest? 
What goes into creating a healthy, well-educated, well-trained 
citizenry? What goes into creating a vibrant economy? How much money 
should we invest and engage in foreign policy that ends up precluding 
war, which at the end of the day, Mr. Chairman, is much more cost-
effective in terms of human life and economic resources than waging 
war. Preventing war.
  And fourth, we ought to have an honest debate over what is a properly 
sized, properly trained, properly equipped military. I did not come 
here to guarantee that my point of view should necessarily prevail, but 
this is the people's house. This is a place where we should debate and 
deliberate openly, so we should have a discussion over these matters. 
These are significant issues here.
  The American people are saying the world has changed. They know 
viscerally that the cold war is over. They know instinctively that 
there is no more Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact. They know intuitively 
that in this changing world we do not need to spend as much money on 
our military. But we need to be honest and open with them, not engage 
in 30-second scare tactics, but use the brilliance and the genius of 
our minds to talk about these issues substantively.
  I do not have to win, but let us just make it all fair. But rushing 
this bill to the floor that spends $260-plus billion, that is an 
incredible amount of money at an extraordinary time when we can say to 
our children and our children's children that there is need to go in a 
different direction.
  Some may agree or disagree with me, but I think we stand on the 
threshold much less of waging major war in the world than we are of 
engaging in peacekeeping, peacemaking, peace enforcement, humanitarian 
assistance, low-intensity conflicts.
  But I have no locks on truth. Other people may have different points 
of

[[Page H3948]]

view, but let us engage each other in a debate that is dignified and 
respectful and thoughtful. But we rush to judgment.

                              {time}  1445

  ``Let me buy your weapons system. You buy mine.''
  Billions of dollars buying yesterday's technology, mortgaging into 
the future. We had a great discussion about mortgaging the children's 
future.
  We will have an opportunity in the course of this debate, for 
example, to look at the B-2 bomber, a program that was not contemplated 
in this 5-year budget agreement that we marched to the microphones and 
told America we balanced the budget. In the 5-year budget agreement, we 
established the parameters of the budget for 5 years. Now people want 
to walk into that budget what the Congressional Budget Office has 
defined as a $27 billion program, of which nearly $14 billion will be 
spent in the 5 years.
  One does not have to be a Ph.D. in economics to understand that if we 
signed onto a 5-year budget deal that did not contemplate a $27 billion 
weapons system and we are going to put that $27 billion dollar weapons 
system within the context of that 5-year budget agreement, something 
has got to go out. One does not have to be brilliant, no great genius. 
One can be a fool or a knave and come to that determination. We need to 
grapple over what is proper and what is appropriate.
  I have been here now in my 27th year. It is fascinating, Mr. 
Chairman. This is the first time that my colleagues are going to be 
forced to have to choose which weapons system, which direction, what 
policy shall guide us at this moment. But in the past, you scratch my 
back, I scratch yours, I buy your plane, you buy my ship, you buy my 
this, you buy my that. Now the world is different, Mr. Chairman. I have 
been waiting almost 27 years for this moment to come when everybody has 
got to get honest, everybody has got to walk up to the table, and we 
have got to start looking at each other eyeball to eyeball to talk 
about where we are going. I am saying this is an opportunity for a new 
national security agenda and that ought to frame the nature of this 
debate. The only thing that is framing the debate now is the 5-year 
budget agreement. But we are charged with the opportunity of developing 
a new national security agenda.
  Mr. Chairman, I applaud the committee in its retreat from an ABM 
Treaty busting approach to missile defenses. The last several years 
many of our colleagues were hell-bent to develop a national missile 
defense system that challenged the ABM system, the ABM Treaty. I have 
always argued that any time one moved to abrogate a treaty, when we are 
holding the public trust, when we have fiduciary responsibility for our 
children and our children's children, we ought to walk in a very 
fragile manner when we start to talk about moving beyond treaties. In 
this bill, I am pleased that we have sort of retreated from that.
  I believe that it is implicit embraced, this bill, of the 
administration's beefed up 3-plus-3 missile program, seeks to 
accelerate a program for which the requirements, and, Mr. Chairman, as 
my colleagues well knows, and its capabilities have yet to be 
demonstrated. We have spent billions. Requirements have not been 
demonstrated. Capabilities have not been demonstrated. We stand on the 
verge of spending too much too fast in a quest for defenses against 
threats that remain remote and manageable by other strategies in the 
near future. If that is true, slow down the train and let us start to 
talk about these matters before we spend so much money.
  How often do we go home in our town meetings and talk about wasting 
money, moving too fast, not throwing money after a problem? This bill 
is a classic example of this. We need to stop and America needs to 
pause from whatever it is doing and look at this and see what it is we 
are doing and become informed and engaged in a discussion that affects 
their lives and the lives of their children and their children's 
children. This is not just this gentleman. It is far beyond that.
  Mr. Chairman, the committee report also raids environmental cleanup 
accounts in the Department of Energy designed for use to clean up the 
most critically contaminated sites in the United States. Do my 
colleagues know why? To finance the acquisition of this additional 
hardware. What a shortsighted approach. There is broad alarm at what 
this portends, as the additional views of the gentleman from South 
Carolina [Mr. Spratt] illuminate eloquently in the committee report.
  We cut $2.6 billion from the Department of Energy request, a big 
chunk of that the environmental cleanup. For what reason? To buy more 
hardware, to buy more planes, to have more money for more 
modernization, rather than grappling with what are the realities. Do my 
colleagues think the American people do not want these sites cleaned up 
that were contaminated with goodness knows what? But we took money from 
there. ``Well, that's enough. We're going to build more weapons 
systems.''
  America needs to know that. We need to discuss this out in the open. 
And if the people want that, this is democracy, I stand with democracy, 
but at least let us have an open discussion on it. The reductions in 
the cooperative threat reduction funding, the whole pot of which is now 
threatened by the Solomon amendment made in order by the rule, pursue a 
strategy of being penny wise and pound foolish.
  Mr. Chairman, as my colleagues know, the cooperative threat reduction 
funding program, euphemistically known as Nunn-Lugar funds, to date 
what has transpired as a result of spending these few dollars on 
cooperative threat reduction? The safe removal to secure facilities of 
more than 3,300 strategic nuclear warheads from missiles. Three 
thousand three hundred nuclear warheads in the context of the former 
Soviet Union have now been moved to safe facilities. We were spending 
$300 billion per year prepared to wage war with the Soviet Union. Yet 
for a handful of dollars with the Nunn-Lugar program we have removed 
3,300 nuclear warheads.
  I daresay most of our children do not know this. Many of the American 
people do not know this. In darkness and in areas where there is lack 
of knowledge, then we can do these things, we can make reductions, 
because people do not know. But maybe if they knew, they would say, 
``Wait a minute. If there is one program you ought to fund fully, it is 
this program.'' If it is that cheap to remove nuclear weapons that 
threaten the lives of our children, then why would we want to cut that? 
For what reason? Build some more weapons.
  Mr. Chairman, finally, I want to urge all of my freshman colleagues 
and my sophomore colleagues who make up a huge percentage of this 
institution, a big number, the freshman and sophomore Members, come, 
pay attention to this debate, engage. Because they are the future, the 
new Members of Congress here. Many of us old heads, Mr. Chairman, we 
have been knocking heads with each other for over a quarter of a 
century. Many of us know these issues backwards and forwards. We can 
say ditto to your last year's speech and vice versa. But the new 
Members must engage this process so that there is some healthy new 
energy into this debate.
  I am prepared to be a man of change. The cold war is over. Let us 
move on and get ourselves out of the narrow confines of ideology and 
viewing the world through the narrow prism of ideology. Take off old 
paradigms, think fresh, think anew, think real, think young, think 
change. New people, engage. You have not had the repeated opportunities 
enjoyed by many of us to discuss and debate these issues.

  These should be viewed as challenging matters because we are getting 
ready to commit half of the discretionary resources of the U.S. 
Government to programs that will be stabilizing or destabilizing, 
wasteful or required, redundant or critical. These are the decisions we 
have to make. Engage this process. Knowing the issues and voting in the 
best interests of all of the elements of our national security strategy 
will hopefully be the hallmark of the debate and votes yet to come.
  A final comment. Out of all of these things I have said, Mr. 
Chairman, first I appreciate the work of my distinguished colleague, 
the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence]. We have now returned to 
a sense of bipartisanship. We sort of lost our way there for a while. I 
appreciate that. We have worked together. There are politics that 
divide us, but as long as there is

[[Page H3949]]

an atmosphere that our national security agenda ought to be bipartisan, 
let us fight out the issues.
  The second point that I simply make is that I think there is a rush 
to judgment to bring this bill to the floor to the tune of $260 some 
odd billion. If we cannot slow down when we are getting ready to spend 
$263 billion, what will make us slow down? $270 billion? $300 billion? 
$1.5 trillion? What makes you stop and think? We have had more debate 
on bills that contain a microscopic amount of money, but the issue was 
so controversial we talked for days. But when it comes to an issue that 
has such dramatic and profound impact, we move with great alacrity and 
great speed. Why? Because the faster we run it through, the less it 
gets looked at. And the less it gets looked at, the easier it can get 
worked on.
  I get paid to be right here. I have been frustrated all year, Mr. 
Chairman. This is my one time when we can stop. I will take my vitamins 
and drink my tea and we can have at it and stay here for several days 
and debate this matter. Hopefully, the American people will turn off 
the drama programs, what have you, and the talk shows and focus in on 
the real talk show, the real drama, the real educational channel, the 
real place where we make life-and-death decisions, right here. 
Sometimes it is even the comedy station because we can get funny around 
here, too.
  But this is a serious set of issues. Maybe if we took enough time and 
the American people started to focus, we could do it in such a manner 
that we could be educative.
  Mr. Chairman, with those remarks, it is my hope that we can open this 
discussion with vitality and energy.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Hunter], chairman of the Subcommittee on Military 
Procurement.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from South 
Carolina [Mr. Spence], the great chairman of our full committee, for 
his wonderful leadership. I want to compliment the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Dellums], the ranking member, for his tireless energy 
on the other side and his great attendance at our marathon hearings 
that went in some cases into 7, 8 o'clock at night. He had good 
endurance. And to my great friend the gentleman from Missouri from [Mr. 
Skelton], I thank the gentleman for working as a partner on this very 
important committee and to all of my colleagues who are a part of this 
committee, I think it is the most bipartisan committee in the House, 
and I think we did good work.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to engage with some of the propositions that the 
previous speaker put out. Let us review the bidding. Where are we on 
the big scale? This century we have undertaken a series of cycles that 
America, this great democracy, tends to go through.
  After World War I, we referred to that war as the war to end all 
wars. We hear that phrase recurring now after the cold war is over. We 
call it the post cold war period. The implication is there is not going 
to be any more wars. But my colleague, the gentleman from California 
[Mr. Dellums], mentioned something that I think hits the heart of the 
matter. He said, ``These are uncertain times.'' If we follow history, 
we should meet uncertain times with preparedness.
  It has been mentioned that every capital ship that was used in World 
War II had the keel laid before World War II, before the attack on 
Pearl Harbor. That means that we have to be prepared for war, and the 
best way to deter war is to be prepared for it, and the best way to win 
one when we have it is to be prepared for it. I do not think we are any 
smarter today in terms of intelligence than we were in the 1920's when 
we did not see World War II coming, than we were right after World War 
II, we had an army of 9.8 million people, and a few years later on the 
Korean peninsula we were pushed down the peninsula by a third-rate 
military. That is because we did not know what was going to happen.
  I have reviewed the words of Louis Johnson, then Secretary of 
Defense, and they sound a lot like President Clinton's leadership in 
the military now. They talked about a small core, changing fat into 
muscle, getting people out of their desk jobs and into the field. Only 
Omar Bradley really told it like it was in 1950, 4 months before the 
Korean war started when he said that we could not win a major war with 
what we have right now.
  Here is what we have done, Mr. Chairman. We have cut the Army since 
Desert Storm from 18 Army divisions to 10. We have cut our Air Force 
from 24 fighter air wings to 13. We have cut our air power almost in 
half. And we have cut the Navy from 546 Navy ships to 346 ships.
  Even President Clinton says we have to modernize and increase the 
modernization budget to $60 billion. That is not the gentleman from 
South Carolina [Mr. Spence], the chairman, that is not me, that is not 
other members of the committee. That is the President of the United 
States.

                              {time}  1500

  And he had that on his blueprint; this year we were going to spend 
$60 billion giving good equipment to our troops. But we did not go into 
it.
  As we walked down and got closer to and closer this fiscal year we 
went from $60 billion to about $55 billion. Then it was $48 billion, 
then $46, and when the rubber meets the road it is $42 billion, meaning 
that our men and women in the military do not have the right equipment, 
they do not have the best equipment they could possibly have because we 
have short changed them.
  And, Mr. Chairman, let me tell my colleagues in 1985 we spent $404 
billion in today's dollars, in 1997 dollars, on defense. Today we are 
spending about $258 billion. That means we have cut on an annual basis 
$140 billion out of the defense budget. That is where most of the cuts 
have come for the Clinton administration.
  But we did the best we could do with very little resources to try to 
bolster the military. We asked military leaders, we asked President 
Clinton's leaders to come in and tell us what their unfunded priorities 
were. They used to tell us that in private sessions in back rooms, but 
our great chairman, our great chairman, said we are not going to do 
that any more, we are not going to let editors call this pork and say 
it is stuff that the military did not want because it is not on the 
record. So he made them go on the record. He said ``You come tell us 
what you need in written form that's not funded,'' and they did that to 
the tune, this year, in excess of $10 billion that the President did 
not put in the budget for them and that the budget deal did not 
include.
  So in fixed wing aircraft and helicopters and track vehicles and 
ammunition, in small arms, we have tried to provide more, about $2.9 
billion more in the procurement budget, $3.9 billion more in the 
procurement budget than the President had. I think we did a pretty good 
job with limited resources, and our motto should be, be strong, be 
prepared, these are uncertain times.
  This is a good bill, and I hope everybody will support it.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 6 minutes to the distinguish 
gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Skelton].
  Mr. SKELTON. I thank my friend and colleague from California for 
yielding me this time. First let me compliment him on two fronts. The 
first is the framing of the debate so well regarding the three aspects 
of national security: domestic, foreign policy and the properly sized 
military, and, second, I would be remiss if I did not complement the 
gentleman on his eloquence because this Chamber through the years has 
seldom heard such persuasive and eloquent words as we hear from our 
friend from California, and I salute him for that.
  Let us look at these elements very briefly in the time that we have. 
I think it is absolutely right; what are we defending?
  Then, on the domestic front, we have the grandest civilization ever 
known in the history of mankind. That is what we are defending, and we 
have interests all over this world, whether they be moral interests, or 
whether they be trade interests or other economic interests. So we must 
maintain a strong domestic pattern in our life.
  Second, the foreign policy. As my friend from California says, we 
must be engaging in the world, and we engaging in the world. I think we 
are doing a fair job of that, whether it be by diplomacy, or whether it 
be by military,

[[Page H3950]]

whether it be by economics, whether it be by trade. We are the sole 
surviving superpower, and our foreign policy has brought us to that 
point.
  I might say that regarding diplomacy the need for the third element 
is very apparent. To back up diplomacy from time to time it is 
necessary to have an adequate and strong military. Otherwise the words 
spoken are empty.
  Third, and this is the primary reason we are here today, on having a 
proper sized military. Now of course everyone looks at it, I suppose, 
through our own individual eyes and through the eyes of the people we 
represent. Maybe the installations are the factories that we have in 
our own part of the country. But it is a broader issue than that. We 
must have a properly sized military that is capable of protecting this 
country and capable of protecting our interests throughout the world.
  Our interests throughout the world, of course, include precluding 
war, keeping the peace, because we know so full and well that small 
conflicts develop into major conflicts. I think the QDR, the 
quadrennial defense review, has the strategy right, and it looks at 
shaping and responding and preparing. Actually it is a broader strategy 
than that put forth by our late friend, Les Aspin, which was limited to 
two major regional contingencies. This one, I think, is more on 
balance.
  So I suggest in using the words of my California colleague, let the 
debate go forward.
  Had this debate taken place in this Chamber, had this debate taken 
place in the French Parliament, had this debate taken place in the 
Parliament of the United Kingdom in the 1920's, the second world war 
might well have been averted because we know from history that all 
three of those countries, particularly the United Kingdom and France, 
allowed their military to slip drastically. It was the late George C. 
Marshal as a major in the Army, gave a speech here in Washington to a 
small education group one day, 1923 when he decried the doing and 
undoing of those things for national defense, and he put the finger 
right on the Congress of the United States. And, my colleagues, under 
the constitution the buck stops with us in Harry Truman's words. We 
under article I section 8 are charged with raising and maintaining the 
military and charged with establishing the rules by which they shall 
live. That is our job.
  So I welcome this debate, and I compliment my friend for engaging in 
it. Looking into the future is like a kaleidoscope, we do not know what 
the next pattern is going to be, but we know the pieces of which it is 
made. I think our major challenge in the military is keeping good 
people. We have operational tempo that is high on keeping families 
happy and keeping a stability. A stability means a stable budget. We 
are blessed with the weapons systems that others do not have when they 
be satellite GPS's, global positioning systems, smart weapons or 
stealth technology which is so very important as reflected by the B-2 
bomber and by the F-117 which did so well in the gulf war.
  We must look to the future in the light of what our friend has said, 
to protect the grandest civilization we have, to develop and keep that 
engaging foreign policy that is successful and to have a properly sized 
military that George Marshal did not have, that France did not have, 
that Great Britain did not have. So in the days ahead we will have a 
more peaceful and a better opportunity for those young people who grow 
and follow in our footsteps.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Bateman].
  Mr. BATEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the Committee on 
National Security for yielding this time to me and appreciate the 
tremendous job that he has been doing.
  I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1119, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for fiscal year 1998. After an extensive series of 
hearings here in Washington and in field, the Committee on National 
Security has reached the conclusion that positive action must be taken 
to arrest what we believe to be a decline in the readiness of our 
military forces. These concerns were also highlighted in a readiness 
report issued by Chairman Spence a few weeks ago, and then in the 
interests of time I will not go into specific details of the many 
readiness issues that we have brought to light by the committee's 
investigation and the chairman's report, but I would urge everyone to 
pay close attention to these concerns.
  H.R. 1119 begins the process by which we address these readiness 
problems. To address many of the issues that I believe have a direct 
impact on readiness, H.R. 1119 includes several provisions that get to 
the heart of the problem which is how our military leaders report on 
readiness conditions of our forces and how our military leaders spend 
the funds Congress provides for readiness. To get at the problem of 
reporting on the readiness condition of the forces there is a provision 
that will expand the number of readiness indicators that must be 
reported on to give us a more accurate readiness picture.
  To address our current concerns on how readiness funds are used there 
is a provision that will require the Department of Defense to report to 
Congress before large amounts of money is moved from critical readiness 
accounts to other accounts. I believe these and other provisions found 
in H.R. 1119 will provide the necessary information so that the 
situation continues to decline, we should be in a position to take 
action before the system breaks down.
  Over the past 2 years this committee identified several areas for 
priority attention and provided additional funding. These areas 
included real property maintenance, maintenance, depot maintenance, 
base operation support and reserve readiness. For the second year in a 
row the President's fiscal year 1998 budget request cuts funding in all 
these areas to a level below what was provided last year. H.R. 1119 
provides additional resources in these and other areas where the 
Department of Defense has failed to provide sufficient adequate 
funding.
  Unlike the previous 2 years, the committee has not received any 
additional funding. Therefore to accomplish increases in the 
traditional readiness sensitive areas we will have to make some 
reductions in the budget request, particularly the accounts that 
reflect program growth in excess administrative support. I am convinced 
these reductions will not directly affect the readiness capabilities of 
our combat forces but will directly affect and improve the day to day 
readiness and quality of life for our service men and women.
  I would like to thank the ranking member of the Subcommittee on 
Military Readiness, my colleague the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. 
Sisisky], for his outstanding cooperation, his knowledge, ability, and 
leadership through the years. The Subcommittee on Military Readiness 
has had to deal with several difficult issues that have transcended 
political lines which would have been more difficult if it were not for 
his expertise and assistance.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1119 is a responsible, meaningful bill that 
appropriately allocates limited resources for the continued readiness 
of our military forces. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the 
bill.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to my distinguished 
colleague the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Sisisky].
  Mr. SISISKY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my ranking member, and adviser and 
other things. Although we do not agree ail the time, I do agree with 
his opinions; at least not agree with them, but I do respect all of his 
opinions, and I want to thank the chairman of the committee for the 
many courtesies that he has shown me and other Members of the minority. 
Of course, the chairman of the subcommittee, not many people realize 
it, but the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Bateman] has control over some 
$90 billion. That is a lot of money for a subcommittee, and I do 
respect what he is do doing.
  The ranking member, Mr. Dellums, talked about the new national 
security agenda, and it just dawned on me, and right after him the 
gentleman from California talked about preparedness and talked about 
Secretary Lewis Johnson living in the Korean thing. Let me tell my 
colleagues an interesting story about myself:
  I joined the Navy when I was 17, 1 day before I was 18, and I had 
lived through the depression, had not traveled very much, and I wanted 
to see the world, and that is why I joined the Navy. I went to a 
separation center in Bainbridge, MD. This was in the summer of 1946, 
and getting ready to get out of

[[Page H3951]]

boot camp and scheduled to go on a destroyer escort someplace in 
California and very excited. Guess what?
  The war ended. V-J Day happened. I did not see the world. They put me 
back in the separation center at Bainbridge, discharged members who had 
come back from the Pacific, 4 and 5 years in the Pacific.
  And what was my job and another group of us? Our job was to sign up 
these people for the inactive naval reserve, and we, as my colleagues 
know, I was a young guy. They just fed me information.
  I said, ``We've fought the war to end all wars.'' We were the only 
one at that time with the atom bomb, we had almost 10 million people in 
uniform, all the equipment, the world is a disaster, do not worry about 
it, never be called up, inactive naval reserve.

                              {time}  1515

  I did not sign up, I did not sell myself. But I can assure my 
colleagues, in 4\1/2\ years, a lot of people that I signed up went back 
to a country that I did not even know existed, to be very honest, and 
that was Korea; and for a while we really got beat there.
  The point I am making is, even though the agenda, and the gentleman 
is absolutely right, the agenda may be different, the agenda is still 
the same in the world, and that is be prepared and have insurance.
  Now, having said that, in light of the many challenges facing this 
Congress, it really is exciting for those of us who have been focusing 
on military readiness and quality of life concerns, we had the 
opportunity to hear firsthand the views of the personnel who will be 
carrying out our military strategy. We received input from general flag 
officers, enlisted personnel and in some cases, from family members. 
Their responses were as diverse as the population they represented.
  I have no doubt that they all had sincere interest in readiness and 
quality of life matters and expressed what they thought would be in the 
best interests of this Nation and the forces. The Congress and those 
military personnel and family members who shared their concerns with us 
can be assured that H.R. 1119 reflects their input to the degree that 
we could afford.
  There is no doubt that our military forces are ready today to face 
the challenges that may confront them in the many parts of the world 
where the U.S. national interests might be threatened. But I remain 
concerned about tomorrow. What will they look like in 18 months or 2 
years?
  I also remained concerned about the readiness, believe it or not, of 
our civilian workers, those dedicated employees who have superbly 
served this Nation during times of crisis over the years while enduring 
personnel drawdowns and, even worse, continuous rumors about 
reductions. Simply stated, the department and we here in Congress have 
not given them the attention they deserve.
  Notwithstanding their dedication, I am uncertain at this time about 
our ability to mobilize a crisis based on how we are managing them 
today. My feedback indicates that our civilian employees frequently 
feel abandoned because of the absence of security and, yes, 
predictability in their status.
  Mr. Chairman, we all recognize the difficulty in addressing the 
readiness and associate quality of life issues and making tough choices 
in this severely budget-constrained environment. And we will talk about 
the other parts of the budget constraint with the other amendments, but 
we address a number of difficult issues; but in our subcommittee we 
could not solve them all. I wish we could have done more.
  What we did, Mr. Chairman, was to begin to lay the foundation to 
sustain the military readiness we all agree is necessary for today and 
tomorrow.
  I again express my support for H.R. 1119 and urge my colleagues to do 
the same.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Weldon], the chairman of our Subcommittee on Military 
Research and Development.
  (Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of 
the legislation and applaud both the Chairman and the ranking member 
for their leadership and the cooperation of our subcommittee chairs and 
the ranking members.
  There are those in this country who think that we have mistakenly 
increased defense spending dramatically. The facts are, if we compare 
to what we are spending today to John Kennedy's tenure, and I raise 
that point in time because we had relative peace, it was after Korea 
and before Vietnam; we were spending 9 percent of our country's gross 
national product in the military. We were spending 52 cents of every 
Federal tax dollar on defense.
  In this year's budget, we are spending less than 3 percent of the GNP 
on the military. We are spending 16 cents of the Federal taxpayer 
dollar on the military.
  Now, in spite of that dramatic decrease, we have to consider the fact 
that in John Kennedy's era we had a draft. All of our young people were 
drafted out of high school, they were paid less than the minimum wage, 
they served for 2 years, they were not married, they did not have 
higher education; and therefore, we did not have the quality of life 
costs that we have today.
  Our troops today are all volunteer. They get better pay. Many of them 
are married. They have advanced degrees, they have children, we have 
housing, education, quality of life costs that we never had before. So 
in spite of reducing defense spending to this lower level, a much 
larger percentage of this smaller amount of money is going for quality 
of life issues. It is not going for sophisticated systems. And in fact, 
I have publicly said that we should cancel some major weapons systems. 
But the facts are that the bulk of our money is going to pay for the 
troops to take care of the family members who serve this country.
  We are hurting right now, because on top of the increased quality of 
life costs, the fastest growing portion of our defense budget is in, 
guess what? Environmental mitigation. Almost $12 billion this year to 
clean up the environment. And on top of that, we have an OPTEMPO 
deployment rate that we have not seen for the last 50 years.
  We have an internationalist foreign policy with an isolationist 
defense budget. We are committing our troops to more locations at 
higher costs and not planning for those expenditures, so are taking the 
money to pay for those operations out of the accounts to modernize our 
forces and to take care of our quality of life issues. And in fact, to 
add insult on top of injury, we are even paying the cost of our allies 
who come into these operations.
  Mr. Chairman, we had a very difficult process. In my subcommittee we 
focused on three major 21st century threats that we see emerging, and 
we plussed up funding in each area above what the administration 
requested. First of all, dealing with weapons of mass destruction, 
missile proliferation is our No. 1 concern. In a bipartisan vote, we 
plussed it up significantly. We never wanted to see an incident occur 
like we saw over in Saudi Arabia where in 1991 we lost a number of our 
young kids to a low-class Scud missile.
  Second, we increased significantly funds for antiterrorism. So yes, 
we can locate those attempts to bring in weapons, not necessarily from 
missiles, but sneaking them through our ports. Our committee increased 
funding for the third consecutive year in antiterrorism, both in 
technology and, more importantly this year, in training first 
responders all across the Nation.
  Third, we put a new focus on information warfare. When a foreign 
adversary can electronically transfer illegally $100 million from one 
of our banks, when they can potentially shut down the information 
systems of this Nation, we as a Committee on National Security are 
coming to the forefront and saying yes, we want our military prepared 
for that eventuality as well.
  We put $90 million of additional funding in this year's bill over 
what the President asked for so that we can help address the issues of 
encryption and protection of information systems that could bring down 
the economy of our country.
  Mr. Chairman, we have done it all. We have done the best that we 
could with an impossible budget number. Unfortunately, it is not 
enough. I would have liked to have seen us had more money to meet these 
threats in a more robust manner. We talk about the cost-effectiveness 
of acquisition reform; and

[[Page H3952]]

while the administration talks about that, we drive up the costs of our 
program dramatically. But I ask our colleagues to vote in the 
affirmative on this very important bill.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to my distinguished 
colleague from South Carolina [Mr. Spratt].
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and to my colleague from South Carolina and my good friend, the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums], I commend the gentleman on the 
work product he brought to the floor.
  I want to address in the time allotted to me a common misperception 
now out in the public and a misstatement that is likely to be made a 
number of times before this debate is over, and that is that the reason 
this budget is stretched so tight that it is so difficult to come up 
with extra funds to do things we would like to do is that the Clinton 
administration has not asked for more money for national defense. In 
fact, the facts tell a different story.
  Last year's budget resolution in the last Congress was the last 
blueprint we received from the Republicans on what they would spend on 
national defense. That resolution spelled out, budget function by 
budget function, what every different function would be funded at. And 
for the function we call 050, which is national defense 
comprehensively, the Pentagon and the Department of Energy both, the 
requests over 5 years, the amount of money allotted to national defense 
over 5 years in that budget resolution was $1 trillion 371 billion. 
That was the Republican budget resolution which passed the House last 
year, 1 trillion 371 billion for the period 1998 through 2002.
  When the President sent his budget up this year for that same period 
of time, 1998 through 2002, the President requested and proposed 
spending $1 trillion 383 billion on national defense comprehensively 
over that same 5-year period of time. This is $12 billion more than the 
amount of money that was provided in the last budget resolution passed 
by the House, which was a Republican-sponsored plan.
  This year, this was $12 billion ahead of where we left off. We then 
entered into negotiations which the administration fully supported, and 
as a result of those budget negotiations, we added $4.4 billion to 
function 050, national defense comprehensively.
  So through this bipartisan budget resolution, which the Democrats and 
Republicans both have supported and the President has blessed and 
supported himself, we have added $17 billion more to defense spending 
than the Republican budget provided when we adjourned in the last 
Congress. That is a significant increment in spending.
  The committee, and this is a matter of concern to me also, the 
committee has gone beyond that budget agreement and has taken $2.6 
billion which were specifically provided for function 053, the 
Department of Energy, specifically earmarked to certain programs there 
that are necessary for cleaning up the environmental mess that was left 
over from 40 to 50 years of building nuclear weapons, taken that $2.6 
billion and put it in the Department of Defense instead of the 
Department of Energy.
  Now, I would be one of the last to say that the money is misspent. It 
is being spent on some good programs, on O&M, operations and 
maintenance, and on procuring some things that I think add to our 
national defense. But in fact, the requirement for these funds, this 
$2.6 billion in DOE, will not go away simply because we do not fund it 
this year. It is still there. It will come back next year. We have 
simply pushed it into the future.
  In the meantime, by adding $2.6 billion to the procurement budget and 
to an R&D budget, we have started up programs which will not be fully 
completed and will not be fully sustained by that $2.6 billion. So we 
have generated more demands for funds to complete what we started this 
year in the outyears, and that is going to create fiscal problems in 
the outyears, as $2.6 billion that we moved out of DOE into DOD.
  Frank Raines, the very distinguished and able Director of the Office 
of Management and Budget, warned the House in a letter on June 5 that 
this funding, taken from DOE and shifted to DOD, violates the 
bipartisan budget agreement. And it is bound to come up again in the 
conference that we will go to when this bill comes to the floor and in 
reconciliation, because we have not settled the problem of what to do 
in the future for the problems that are not addressed with this $2.6 
billion.
  So I say to my colleagues who have participated in bringing this to 
the floor, I think on the whole it is a job well done. I commend the 
Chairman and I commend the ranking member for working together, but not 
every problem has been resolved and some of the rabbits we have pulled 
out of the hat to satisfy all of our demands this year will not be 
there next year when we try to do the same thing.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado [Mr. Hefley], the chairman of our Subcommittee on Military 
Installations and Facilities.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this 
legislation, the National Defense Authorization Act. In the brief time 
that I have available, I want to discuss the key parts of this bill as 
they relate to the military construction and military family housing 
programs of the Department of Defense.
  The Subcommittee on Military Installations and Facilities, which I 
have the honor of chairing, continues to be concerned about the serious 
shortfalls in basic infrastructure, military housing, and other 
facilities that affect the readiness of the armed forces and the 
quality of life of military personnel and their families.

                              {time}  1530

  The budget requested by the administration for fiscal year 1998 
continued a pattern of significant deterioration in the funding program 
by the Department of Defense for military construction, in spite of the 
very clear and obvious shortfalls. The budget request submitted in 
February was 16 percent below current spending levels and, in constant 
dollars, the administration requested 25 percent less in funding for 
military construction for the coming fiscal year than it sought just 2 
years ago.
  More significant, despite all of the rhetoric we hear from the 
administration about the importance of improving the quality of life 
for military personnel and military families, the budget request again 
this year cut construction funding that directly affects the living 
conditions of the very soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines that the 
President professes to support.
  Military family housing construction, for example, would have been 
cut by one-third, $326 million, from current levels in spite of the 
fact that 64 percent of the housing is classified as unsuitable. 
Barracks construction would have been cut by over $130 million, or 17 
percent.
  We owe the young Americans and the young families who volunteer to 
serve the Nation and defend our freedoms more than that. Just a few 
months ago the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs testified before the 
Committee on National Security that with regard to housing for the 
troops and military families, no one can be satisfied with where we are 
today, no one, he said. He asked us to keep the pressure on, and in 
this legislation that is exactly what we are trying to do.
  This bill puts an additional $750 million toward military 
construction. That amount would restore less than half of the 
administration's cut to the MILCON top line, but with those funds we 
have brought back nearly all of the President's cuts to quality of life 
construction.
  This bill would authorize funding for 50 new barracks and 
dormitories, the construction or improvement of 8,400 family housing 
units, six new child development centers, and other quality of life 
improvements. It improves public safety and working conditions. This 
bill also provides additional funding for important operational 
readiness and training facilities for the active and the reserve 
components.
  The House has always responded to the clear and compelling need of 
the military services. This bill reflects a bipartisan consensus on 
military construction. I urge the House to keep the faith with the men 
and women in uniform, and continue our efforts to improve their living 
and working conditions. I ask for the Members' support of this bill.

[[Page H3953]]

  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Mississippi [Mr. Taylor].
  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the 
gentleman from Missouri for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to encourage my fellow Members to support this 
measure. As many other people have pointed out, it does not do 
everything that we would like to do. But in a budget environment where, 
unfortunately, the only committee in Congress that has had its budget 
reduced in real dollars is the Department of Defense, I do believe that 
we have done as much good as we could with what we have.
  There are certain disappointments that I would like to articulate, 
things that I hope that we can address during this session. I will 
start by talking about health care for military retirees. Since most of 
those people have spent at least 20 years serving their country in the 
military, I think they, better than most, understand the chain of 
command, who is responsible for what.
  Unfortunately, this was not a decision that could be made alone by 
the Committee on Armed Services. Unfortunately, the funding for the 
program that they have told me they had the most interest in, which is 
Medicare subvention, flows through the Committee on Ways and Means, 
because the funding for that will have to come out of the Medicare 
budget. I am sorry that as of today that committee has chosen not to 
act upon this. What I mean by ``acting upon this'' is to create a 
program that would allow military retirees over 65 years of age to 
continue going to the base hospitals, and then have the base hospital 
bill Medicare for that service.
  We will get a chance this year. I want to assure the retirees that 
when the Medicare portion of reconciliation reaches the House floor, 
this will be an effort that I will be a part of to see to it that 
Medicare subvention becomes the law of the land. I would hope the 
leadership would allow a straight up-or-down vote on this, it is that 
important. Because quite honestly, they were the only people in America 
who were promised health care, and they are the only people in America 
in that age group who are not getting it. That is simply not fair.
  One of the other disappointments of this session, but something I 
hope we can address in future years, is the inequity of the way pay 
raises are granted. For about the past 25 years pay raises have been 
granted on a percentage basis, which, if you are a general or a colonel 
or an admiral is not so bad, because after all, 2.8 percent of a 
general or an admiral or colonel's pay is pretty good pay. If you 
happen to be an E-1, an E-2, an E-3, an E-4, and in particular one with 
a family, then 2.8 percent of your pay, even as a raise, amounts to 
only about $20 or $30 a month. That is not much money, and as a matter 
of fact, it would barely buy one box of Pampers for one of your 
children each month.
  Mr. Chairman, I would hope in the future that we will, as a 
committee, seriously study an alternative to give those people at the 
lower ranks who occupy better than one-half of the U.S. Marine Corps a 
flat rate on the lower scale, to allow them to make a little bit more 
money and make a life in the military, a career in the military, a more 
attractive option.
  Something I am very proud of, we were able to balance the budget this 
year in the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, and it was a bipartisan 
effort and could not even have been done without the help of many of my 
Republican colleagues, was the passage and retention of a very good 
program, in fact, the opportunity to expand a program, called Youth 
Challenge.
  It is a program where at-risk youth, high school dropouts, people 
between the ages of 16 and 18 who have dropped out of school, and in 
many if not most instances have gotten into some trouble with the law, 
but have not yet been convicted of anything, where they are given the 
opportunity to get drug-free. They go through a boot camp type 
environment for 22 weeks. It is run, I believe, in 15 States, and it 
has a 96-percent success ratio.
  That means that 96 percent of the over 8,000 young people who 
participated in this program have gotten their GED and have gone on to 
go to work, further their education, or have joined the military. Some 
of them are doing all three by joining the National Guard, continuing 
their education, and getting a part-time job to help with their 
expenses.
  Mr. Chairman, I cannot think of another program in the United States 
of America that has a 96-percent success ratio. We have funded this 
program at $50 million this year. We have called for an increased 
participation on the part of the States, with the understanding that 
this allows the Federal dollars to go further, and it is my hope that 
every single State in the Union will participate in this great program.
  I want to compliment our subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from 
Indiana [Mr. Buyer], for taking some steps to lessen the financial blow 
to people who are on active duty who are sent away from their families 
for training. There have been a number of measures included in this 
bill that will lessen the financial blow that they have when they are 
separated from their families, because the last thing we want people to 
do is actually lose money while they are away from their families.
  Mr. Chairman, I would close by saying I would encourage every Member 
to support this bill. I think it is the best we can do with the 
resources available.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Utah [Mr. Hansen], a very valuable member of our committee who would 
probably be a subcommittee chairman, were he not chairman of the 
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.
  (Mr. HANSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from South Carolina 
for his courtesy in yielding time to me.
  Mr. Chairman, years ago I walked into this place, and every 2 years I 
put my arm in the air and I take an oath to obey the law of the land. I 
did that as a city councilman, I did that as a State legislator, and I 
notice even the President of the United States has to do that.
  In the 1980's we passed a particular law and we called it the base 
closing law. In that particular law we said there would be certain 
rounds, and how that works is first the people in uniform say what they 
need to defend this Nation. Then they turn it over to the Secretary. He 
can add or take away. Then he turns that over to a base closing 
commission. They have from March to July to look at it. Then they turn 
their work over to the President of the United States. The President of 
the United States has 15 days.
  What does the law say the President of the United States can do? He 
can say yes, I accept, or no, I do not accept. If he does not accept, 
it goes back to the BRAC Commission.
  In this particular instance, in the last round of base closings in 
1995, our President, it does not matter if it was Republican or 
Democrat, our President elected to add something that is not in the 
law. He added a provision that said, however, in two very popular 
States with a lot of votes, I will privatize in place. That is not in 
the law. In 45 days Congress then has the same right as the President, 
accept or reject. I am talking about what happened in the last go-
around.
  I have asked for a legal opinion from the Pentagon, tell us if the 
President can do that. The chairman signed a letter with me. So far, 
Secretary Perry neglected to do that. Secretary Cohen has neglected to 
do that. It is amazing, though, that last year Secretary Cohen talked 
in great, dramatic terms about how important it was that they do it 
right and they follow the law. Now he is in the funny building across 
the river, and we will hope that he will obey the law.
  What do we have in the chairman's markup this time? We have 
provisions and language that will make the President of the United 
States obey the law. What is so wrong with obeying the law? I think we 
all have to do it.
  That language, let me tell the Members briefly what that does. The 
language, contrary to what has been floating around this floor and in 
these halls of Congress, does not affect any current private contracts. 
It does not require work to be moved into the public sector. The 
language does not require any service to increase the percentage of 
depot workload. The language does not define which weapon systems and

[[Page H3954]]

equipment are core. The language does not preclude further downsizing.
  What does it ask them to do? It asks that they bring the bases that 
are now operating at this low capacity, that are costing these big 
dollars up to the percent and capacity they should have. We asked the 
GAO, we said, let us know what this is costing the American taxpayers, 
all you folks in America, by this disobeying of the law.
  The GAO came back with a figure of $468 million. Then we went to the 
Air Force and asked, what does it cost because a certain group of folks 
are disobeying the law? They came up with a figure of $689 million 
because they are not following the law.
  Do we have to downsize? You bet we do, but when we close bases and we 
cannot because of political expediency, let us keep this one in 
California open, let us keep this one in Texas open, we have to come 
down and say, look, everybody has to square their shoulders and do this 
right.
  The Navy had six depots, they closed three, and they lived with it. 
The Air Force should do the same thing, and so should the Army. But for 
political reasons, I think it is abhorrent to the American people that 
we do this.
  Let me say, the people who will be arguing for a certain amendment 
around here are in effect saying, it is okay to obey the law if the 
benefits inure to me, but if they do not inure to me, you cannot. I 
think it is just a wee bit on the greedy side and extremely parochial 
when we all say we obey the law.
  Let me say it one time, in the base that I represent, and 
incidentally I had four and three are closed now, but the last one, I 
stood in front of our committee and said, if we come out very last on 
the COBRA formula, I will stand up and say, close that base. I mean 
that from the bottom of my heart. Yet, when they came out number one, 
how come the people who are last now will not say the same thing? That 
really bothers me.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California [Ms. Harman].
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me.
  Mr. Chairman, I note that the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] 
is temporarily off the floor, but would like to take a second to 
commend his opening remarks and him. He always shows incredible 
professionalism, passion, and poetry which I believe are unmatched in 
this body.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1119, the National Defense 
Authorization Act of 1997. I support better defense forces prepared to 
fight the next war, not the last one. Unlike some colleagues, I think 
we can provide that for less money. We can do this if we make tough 
choices to fund weapons that make sense, and to cut weapons, forces, 
and infrastructure that do not make sense.
  I am proud to have been part of the bipartisan effort to draft this 
bill, and want to publicly commend the leadership of the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Dellums] and the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. 
Spence], the staff, and my committee colleagues.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill does much to restore the balance between the 
readiness of America's forces, the quality of life of America's service 
men and women, and the need to modernize America's forces to deal with 
future threats. It supports our commitments to our allies, especially 
through joint programs such as the tactical high energy laser program 
they have with Israel, programs which are mutually beneficial, reduce 
the time required to develop systems, and conserve resources.
  It encourages innovative approaches in R&D by rewarding partnerships 
between military and commercial enterprises which leverage cutting edge 
technologies and save scarce dollars.

                              {time}  1545

  Such cost-sharing partnerships are now routine in the private sector 
but the Pentagon, used to the cold war way of doing business, has been 
slow to utilize them.
  As a member of the task force investigating sexual misconduct, I am 
pleased to note that the bill mandates serious study of improvements in 
the selection, training and on-the job assessment of all drill 
sergeants.
  True, the bill does not go far enough in some areas such as 
instituting best business practices throughout the department to reduce 
infrastructure, ensuring the rights of service women to equal health 
care overseas or providing long lead funding for nine more B-2s.
  If we are to have a revolution in military affairs that brings to the 
Pentagon the best technology, we must first have a revolution in 
business affairs to reduce the bloated overhead and help pay for 
recapitalization.
  We owe it to our service women and the women who are dependents of 
service members to ensure that they have access to the same health care 
services that are available to CONUS civilian and military 
counterparts.
  And, Mr. Chairman, we cannot achieve the objectives of the QDR to 
shape, respond and prepare without three wings or 30 B-2s, the only 
system that can fly great distances, penetrate hostile air space and 
deliver massive amounts of munitions on key targets with acceptable, 
even minimal risk. Amendments are going to be offered to correct these 
deficiencies. I will be offering one and will be supporting the others.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill is the bridge between cold war military 
forces, cold war ways of doing business and the military of the future. 
This bill helps build a military that is less expensive, more effective 
and ready for the next war. I urge its support.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana [Mr. Buyer], the chairman of the Subcommittee on Military 
Personnel.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, let me congratulate the gentleman from South 
Carolina [Mr. Spence] and the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] 
again for their fine work on this bill.
  I rise in strong support of H.R. 1119, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for fiscal year 1998. My support stems in no small 
part to the fact that the bill addresses major personnel issues like 
manpower, pay, compensation, and health care that confront the military 
today.
  Moreover, H.R. 1119's military personnel titles represent a 
bipartisan consensus and commitment to ensuring that the needs of the 
military members are addressed directly and effectively.
  As the committee began looking at the needs of the people and quality 
of life in the fiscal year 1998 defense bill, several major challenges 
dominated our focus. Among those challenges were, insufficient military 
manpower for the required range of missions and a Quadrennial Defense 
Review that prescribed a cut of another 155,000 uniformed personnel; an 
enduring picture of distressing financial need being experienced by 
military men and women; also increasing difficulties by DOD in 
recruiting sufficient manpower of the requisite quality; the 
termination of military leave for more than 120,000 Federal employees 
who also have volunteered to serve as members of the Reserve 
components; and, for a second year in a row, a budget request that 
significantly underfunded defense health care programs.
  To address these and other issues in this bill, we are working on the 
growing gap between military and civilian pay by mandating that 
military pay raises be based on a full employment cost index [ECI], and 
not the ECI minus a half percent.
  We also are requiring the Secretary of Defense to implement a system 
of pay and allowance that would prevent the loss of income for military 
personnel when they are deployed and authorize $50 million to 
facilitate the initiative.
  We also are increasing the housing allowance in high cost areas to 
ensure that military personnel experience the same amount of out-of-
pocket costs regardless of location.
  We also want to continue reducing the out-of-pocket housing costs 
toward the goal of having military personnel absorb no more than 15 
percent of the cost of adequate housing.
  We are retaining the statutory floors on end strength for each of the 
services and are also temporarily taking away the 15-year retirement 
for one year. We are increasing the funding for military recruiting and 
direct a series of reforms to improve recruiter performance and reduce 
recruit attrition.
  We retain military leave for Federal civilians in the Selected 
Reserve and restore the $85 million cut by the President's budget from 
the Reserve component budgets. We restore $274

[[Page H3955]]

million to the Defense Health Program, and I appreciate the cooperation 
of the Comptroller of Defense on that issue.
  We also direct the Secretary of Defense to report to Congress on the 
feasibility of extending a mail-order pharmacy program to all Medicare 
eligible beneficiaries who do not live near a military medical 
treatment facility.
  In addition, we restore the POW-MIA provisions to the Missing Persons 
Act. We also address a range of issues that have emerged during the 
subcommittee's and full committee's examination of sexual misconduct in 
the military by providing a review of the ability of the military 
criminal investigative services to investigate crimes of sexual 
misconduct and mandate a series of reforms to drill sergeant selection 
and training.
  H.R. 1119 would also require an independent panel to assess reforms 
to military basic training, including a determination of the merits of 
gender-integrated or gender-segregated basic training as a method to 
attain the training objectives established by each service.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1119 does many good things for the people who 
serve our Nation in uniform. For that reason, I urge my colleagues to 
support its adoption.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to my distinguished 
colleague, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Ortiz].
  Mr. ORTIZ. Mr. Chairman, as the ranking member of the Subcommittee on 
Military Construction, I rise in support of the military construction 
provision in the national defense authorization bill, and I would like 
to express thanks for the leadership of the gentleman from South 
Carolina [Mr. Spence] and the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] 
that they have provided throughout the course of these hearings that we 
have held.
  The bill has $267 million more for military family housing, a 
significant increase for the quality of life issues. Despite the fact 
that the military has seen significant downsizing, we are still very 
concerned about the men and women who serve us in the armed services. 
It also contains $117 million more for barracks and dormitories to 
house the men and women who protect our Nation including those 
stationed overseas.
  We all take seriously the obligation to address the quality of life 
concerns of our military personnel. How and where they live has a 
direct effect on their lives and missions. In fact, of the $750 million 
that we added to the administration's numbers, 63 percent is to be 
spent on quality of life facilities.
  Further funding of $88 million will be spent on facilities like child 
development centers, fitness centers and items of that nature.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Hefley], chairman of 
the subcommittee, who is one of the finest men in this Congress, and 
again the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence], and the gentleman 
from California [Mr. Dellums], thank them for their support. I urge 
support of the military construction authorization.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York [Mr. McHugh], the chairman of our Special Oversight Panel on 
Morale, Welfare and Recreation.
  Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Chairman, let me begin my adding my words of deep 
appreciation both to the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence], 
the chairman of the full committee, and the gentleman from California 
[Mr. Dellums], the ranking member, for their very diligent work on this 
particular piece of legislation.
  As we have heard already, a matter as complex as this brings about 
some disagreement. I think it is a tribute to these two gentlemen 
particularly but also the entire committee that we have been able to 
craft such, I think, a fair and balanced piece of legislation in this 
particular bill.
  I would like to spend my time, Mr. Chairman, on a portion of the bill 
on which I think and I hope we can all agree. That is the provision 
relating to morale, welfare, and recreation activities of the 
Department of Defense. Let me also add my words of appreciation to all 
of the members of the MWR panel, Democrat and Republican alike, 
particularly to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Meehan], the 
ranking member, for their constructive and always, always bipartisan 
participation in the panel's work on H.R. 1119.
  The Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare, and Recreation of the 
Committee on National Security considered several issues that year that 
have significant implications for the military resale system, for 
service MWR activities, and, most importantly, for service members and 
their families. The panel's goal this year, as it has been in the past, 
has been to ensure the health of the military resale system, the 
commissaries and exchanges, in such a way that we preserve the benefit 
and quality of life for our service men and women who make such great 
sacrifices in order to serve us and to serve our country.
  Perhaps just as important at a time when we are, as we all know, 
under increased pressure to do more with less, the panel has tried to 
make the MWR system more efficient and at the same time more cost-
effective. I believe the provisions in this particular bill represent a 
significant step in achieving these objectives. I certainly urge my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bill for that 
reason.
  Let me highlight, Mr. Chairman, very briefly some of the more 
significant MWR provisions in the bill. First, in partial response to 
some of the actions of the department over the last year, we have 
included a provision that would tighten up existing merchandise and 
pricing requirements at commissaries. Other provisions in the bill make 
more rigorous the requirements for brand-name commercial items sold at 
commissaries to be acquired noncompetitively and transfer 
administrative responsibility for MWR programs to the office of the 
Comptroller of the Department of Defense.
  We have also increased the financial management flexibility of the 
Defense Commissary Agency by expanding the categories of revenues that 
may be deposited in that organization's operational account. Finally, 
Mr. Chairman, we have included provision giving the department the 
authority to go forward with public-private ventures as long as those 
activities will benefit MWR activities and its patrons.
  By supporting this initiative, Mr. Chairman, all Members of this 
House can clearly demonstrate our commitment to the men and women in 
uniform. It is a good bill, good provisions. I strongly urge its 
acceptance.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone].
  (Mr. PALLONE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the committee for producing what is 
an excellent bipartisan effort.
  I share the committee's concern regarding the state of Nation's 
military infrastructure. The Committee's report on the fiscal year 1998 
Defense Authorization bill, expressed concern that military 
construction projects at bases across the Nation have been underfunded.
  Indeed, the committee was right to add an additional $750 million on 
top of the administration's request for military construction.
  The committee has done an excellent job in making do with the limited 
resources. At Fort Monmouth in Monmouth County, NJ, for instance, the 
committee recognized the serious need to rebuild the fort's firehouse. 
The existing firehouse, Mr. Chairman, was severely damaged by fire in 
1994. Currently, the firefighters who protect the fort's childcare 
center, family housing, and high-technology research centers. Live in 
and operate out of a housetrailer that does not provide minimum 
essential operational and living requirements.
  The committee also recognized the need to upgrade some housing 
facilities at Fort Monmouth that had not, other than roof and window 
replacements, had any major modernizations in 50 years. The importance 
of such improvements really cannot be underestimated. Modernizing and 
preserving infrastructure must be done not only to ensure our military 
personnel live in safe environments, but to ensure they receive, in 
exchange for their service, the finest possible quality of life 
benefits--and along those lines I am pleased to see the committee 
included a 2.8-percent pay raise for military personnel.
  Mr. Chairman, like the military construction and personnel sections, 
the other parts of the bill were well thought out and developed. 
Funding for the operations and maintenance section is at an appropriate 
level--a fact I know to be of importance to Fort Monmouth, where 
CECOM--the Communications and Electronics Command--the Army's leader in 
communications and electronics research, continues to do cutting edge 
work.

[[Page H3956]]

  Mr. Chairman, I intend to vote for this bill and urge my colleagues 
to do the same.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California [Mr. McKeon], a very valuable member of our committee.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1119, the 
National Defense Authorization Act. I thank the gentleman from South 
Carolina [Mr. Spence], the chairman, and the gentleman from California 
[Mr. Dellums], the ranking member, for their work in bringing this 
product to the floor.
  I would like to use my time to discuss an issue of vital importance 
that we will be considering as part of this bill. This issue involves 
future production of the B-2 Stealth bomber. A lot of people think I am 
supportive of the B-2 because it is built in my district and simply is 
my responsibility to provide jobs for my constituents. While we all 
know that jobs are important, this is not my motivation. At one time it 
was, but the more I have learned about the B-2 and its importance to 
our defense, the more supportive I have become of this plane.
  I think we need to look beyond the short term, beyond the issue of 
jobs in our districts, beyond the next election. We need to look down 
the road 30 or 40 years from now. What kind of world will our children 
and our grandchildren live in during the year 2020 or 2030? Who will 
our adversaries be? We can speculate on the answer to these questions, 
but we must also be prepared to defend our national security against 
whatever happens in the future.
  The B-2 bomber is cutting-edge technology that is one of the 
cornerstones of our future national defense strategy. Could our future 
leaders depend on 70- or 80-year-old B-52's to defend our interests 30 
years from now? I do not think so. Since World War I, every time we cut 
the defense budget, every time we cut back, we have had to rebuild 
again at a cost both financial and at great loss of human life. While 
the B-2 was conceived during the cold war, it is not a cold war weapon. 
Instead, it is a deterrent. And it is deterrence that helped us win the 
cold war and guard our Nation from the threat of outside aggression.
  We will have ample opportunity to debate the B-2 as this bill is 
considered. We must remember, however, that we have already cut 18 Army 
divisions down to 10 and 24 fighter wings down to 13 since Desert 
Storm, and we are reducing the presence of U.S. forces overseas. 
Authorizing the production of additional B-2's will allow the United 
States to compensate for these and other reductions and deter future 
aggression.
  I respectfully urge defeat of the Dellums amendment and passage of 
this Defense Authorization Act.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kansas [Mr. Ryun], world record holder in the mile event.
  (Mr. RYUN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. RYUN. Mr. Chairman, as a freshman member of the Committee on 
National Security, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1119, the fiscal 
year 1998 National Defense Authorization Act. Although hampered by a 
limited budget, this bill funds quality of life initiatives, 
modernization efforts and reforms to increase efficiency, and cut waste 
in the Defense Department.
  Unfortunately, the President's request for military construction, 
which includes family housing, was 16 percent below current spending 
levels. This bill, however, adds $750 million to his request. Fort 
Riley and Fort Leavenworth, which are in the Second District of Kansas, 
are historic posts that were built over 100 years ago to help open and 
expand the American frontier.

                              {time}  1600

  Unfortunately, many of the buildings at the post date from the era 
when General Custer left Fort Riley to ride off to the Little Big Horn 
battle. Corroding pipes, lead paint, aging plumbing and electrical 
systems are some of the problems plaguing these structures. It is 
simply not right to require our service men and women to live and work 
in these conditions. The Committee on National Security recognizes this 
situation and has made military construction a priority in the bill 
before us today.
  Finally, the committee addressed an issue that I believe in, a very 
important one, and that is the issue of active duty end strength. It 
maintains our current force levels, and I believe these levels are 
necessary to carry out our national security requirements and to be 
able to fight two nearly simultaneous major theater wars.
  I am strongly opposed to further cuts in the military personnel. Why 
am I so concerned about the number of soldiers in today's Army? Well, I 
hope these facts will have the impact on my colleagues that they have 
had on me.
  Today's Army is the smallest active force since 1939. It is at the 
highest operations tempo since the Vietnam war. From 1950 through 1989 
the United States has engaged in 10 deployments. Since 1990 we have 
deployed 27 times just in the Army.
  We have asked the Army to do more with less over these past 7 years 
and their performance has been exceptional, but as deployments continue 
to go up and the size and funding continues to go down, I am concerned 
that we will reach a breaking point and that our readiness and 
retention will suffer.
  I urge support. I believe this is a great measure for the country and 
I hope all my colleagues will vote for it.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas, [Ms. Granger], a new Member of this body, the former mayor of 
Fort Worth, who is doing a great job.
  Ms. GRANGER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 
1119, the defense authorization bill. My support comes primarily 
because H.R. 1119 reverses the dangerous decline in defense spending 
that past Congresses have imposed on America's soldiers, sailors, 
airmen, and marines in recent years.
  The United States still boasts the finest Armed Forces in the world, 
but in recent years we have made our military the bill payer for every 
other function of government. Over the past decade, domestic 
discretionary spending and entitlement spending have increased over 20 
percent in today's dollars. Our Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines have 
paid the price for this expansion.
  As measured in 1998 dollars, defense spending has declined every year 
since 1985, so that we are spending 37 percent less on defense than we 
did that year. As measured as a percentage of gross domestic product, 
defense spending has fallen to its lowest level since Pearl Harbor.
  This decrease in defense spending has also endangered vital 
procurement needs. We, as a nation, are spending only one third the 
amount on procurement as we did a decade ago. As our military has had 
to endure this forced procurement holiday, much-needed modernization 
has been constantly delayed.
  The Air Force, for example, has been forced to rely on an air 
superiority fighter, the F-15, which features technology developed in 
the 1960's and 1970's. The rest of the world has been able to catch up 
with American air superiority, and the price which will ultimately be 
paid if we do not recapture our overwhelming edge, is the lives of our 
men and women in uniform, lives which will be spared if we in Congress 
make the courageous decision to invest in state-of-the-art technology.
  I am a strong supporter of H.R. 1119 because it does begin to reverse 
the dangerous decline in military spending. H.R. 1119 recognizes that 
we need to continue to invest in state-of-the-art technology which will 
keep our superiority on the battlefield alive, state-of-the-art 
technology like the F-22 Raptor. Slated to replace the aging F-15, this 
fighter combines stealth, supercruise and advanced avionics into its 
design and will help preserve our overwhelming edge in the skies, an 
edge that has prevented the death by enemy aircraft of our ground 
troops.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina [Mr. Jones].
  Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, I would also like to thank the gentleman 
from South Carolina [Mr. Spence] and the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Dellums] for their leadership on H.R. 1119.
  Mr. Chairman, I have the privilege of representing four military 
bases in eastern North Carolina. As a member of the Committee on 
National Security, I feel doubly responsible to make sure that our 
service men and women are well equipped and trained to fight the right 
fight.

[[Page H3957]]

  But, Mr. Chairman, I have to question if after 3 years of United 
States troop involvement in Bosnia, if it is not time to bring our 
troops home. I do not believe that the fall of the Berlin Wall meant 
that the United States had to become the world's police force.
  We have spent, Mr. Chairman, $7.5 billion to put out the fires of 
Bosnia. Our job is done, yet each time an exit strategy is planned, 
someone in the administration cries foul.
  Mr. Chairman, enough is enough. The Constitution states that Congress 
alone shall raise and maintain the Nation's Armed Forces. Later today 
we will be debating the Hilleary amendment. By supporting the Hilleary 
amendment, Congress can finally take action to assure the safe and 
orderly withdrawal of United States troops from Bosnia.
  America has met its commitment to Bosnia. It is time to bring our 
troops home.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California, [Mr. Cunningham], our Top Gun fighter pilot.
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, it was very difficult to leave the 
Committee on National Security to go on the Committee on 
Appropriations. While I served there, even though we differed in great 
amounts, I think there was only one time we came to clash, when I 
thought I was being dealt with unfairly, but we have since resolved 
that with my friend, the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums], and 
the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence], a great chairman, and I 
think they have done just about everything they can do with a budget in 
a bipartisan way.
  But I would say, Mr. Chairman, this budget today, we are going to get 
American men and women killed. Men and women are going to die on the 
battlefield. They will not be trained and they are not equipped 
properly because of this budget.
  I am going to support this budget because I feel they have done 
everything they can with every ounce and every dollar that they can. 
Are they well equipped? No. Let me give my colleagues some examples.
  Before we trained to go to Vietnam and Desert Storm we had F-16's to 
train us against Mig 29's, Mig 31's, SU-27's, SU-35's. We do not have 
those anymore. We do not have the dollars to invest in our adversary 
programs. They are gone.
  We have post Vietnam A-4's and F-5's to compete with.
  Captain O'Grady, when we talk about training, Captain O'Grady that 
was shot down in Bosnia, Mr. Chairman, he was not even trained in ACM, 
that is air combat maneuvering, because the money was not available to 
do that. That is a crime. We send our men and women to war and we do 
not even have the dollars to qualify them and train them.
  When we say the cold war is over, look what the threat is. The SU-27 
is far superior to our F-14's and F-15's. True. We do not have parity. 
Our last airplanes we bought, the F-14 and 15, are 25 years old. The 
AA-12 missile that the SU-27 carries is far superior to our AMRAAM. 
That puts our kids behind the power curve and is going to mean their 
death. The F-22, which is stealthy, the F-18, and, yes, the B-2 which 
is stealthy, will keep our men and women alive, but yet there are 
amendments to cut that.
  We need to do more, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Pickett], my distinguished colleague.
  Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I rise in support of the bill.
  The bill that is reported by the Committee on National Security is 
one that does a good job in balancing recognized necessary 
modernization, end strength and quality of life issues for our people.
  As a member of the Subcommittee on Military Research and Development, 
I was very concerned about the technological effort that we are making 
to make sure that our forces have a technological edge in any battle 
that they might be called into. I think I can reassure everyone here 
that the investment accounts that we maintain to ensure those basic 
research and development activities have been fully funded.
  We must remember that in this budget we are not providing money for 
any contingencies. So if our forces are called to go and carry out any 
activities outside of their normal training routine, then this has to 
come out of their training funds, and an unlevel funding stream is one 
of the things that is very disruptive for our military. I hope we can 
avoid this in the future, because we find that our military is taking 
money out of the maintenance and training accounts to do contingency 
operations, and they are not getting these monies reimbursed in time to 
keep a level stream of funding for their regular activities.
  In the research and development area, Mr. Chairman, I believe that a 
great deal has been done in the missile defense program, particularly 
with the theater missile defense and also in bringing on line the 
required funding for our national missile defense.
  Recapitalizing our forces is an absolute necessity. We have to 
modernize our weapon systems and make sure that we are prepared for the 
events of the future. Capital items like ships and submarines are 
expensive, but they are long-lead items. It takes a long time to get 
them repaired, built, and operational. We have to make certain that 
these are available and that we have the very latest models so that our 
forces can be successful on the field of battle in the future.
  The tactical Air Force program is one that I believe we have done a 
great deal to straighten out in this bill, and I think that it will 
ensure air performance and air superiority for our forces.
  Mr. Chairman, the most important thing that we have to think about 
are our people, and the people are the key to a successful military. 
There has been an undue amount of turbulence among our people in the 
military. They are concerned about health care, they are concerned 
about housing, they are concerned about other benefits like the 
military resale system. And with the increasing operations tempo and 
personnel tempo, we know that they are being called upon to do more and 
more with less and less.
  So I think of all the things that we do here today, trying to make 
certain that we have adequate provision to make sure that our military 
people and their families are taken care of is one of the most 
important things that we will be doing.
  I believe that the health care issue is one that we have to make 
certain that we fulfill our commitments on. The housing issue for our 
families is one that we may need to ensure that they have housing that 
is adequate and decent in the communities where they are required to 
live. And we should maintain all the other programs that are set up to 
supplement the income of our military members and to make their lives 
as nearly normal as can be with those of our other government 
employees.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill is one that I think we can all live with in 
the future, one that will be a step in the right direction in providing 
a balanced program for our military, and I look forward to the other 
Members of our body here supporting this very reasonable bill that I 
think does a good job for our military people.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, it is difficult in times of peace, or what people 
perceive as a time of peace, to prepare for war. During the cold war 
and other times it was not difficult to point out to our people the 
perils we faced in a very hostile world, and so, therefore, it was not 
difficult to sustain a robust defense budget.
  In times of peace, people naturally ask, what is the threat? Why do 
we need a robust? We need it because, as someone said a long time ago, 
if we fail to prepare, we prepare to fail. I think it was Benjamin 
Franklin.
  History has shown that we continue to commit the same sins. After 
every war we always say, this is the end of conflict. The gentleman 
from Virginia [Mr. Sisisky] referred to it in his remarks earlier 
today. Around the end of World War II, we disbanded in a headlong way 
the greatest military that the world has ever known. We came back home, 
and tried to get on with our Nation's business.
  But we cannot control conflict. Who would have predicted Korea at the 
end of World War II? We were caught unprepared for Korea. We were, as 
the gentleman from California [Mr. Hunter] said, pushed all over the 
Korean peninsula.

[[Page H3958]]

  And, incidentally, we did not win in Korea. We had an armistice. We 
drew a line and tried to recoup and let it go at that.

                              {time}  1615

  Then the same thing again, in Vietnam. It is not a matter of if we 
will have another war, it is just when it is going to be and where it 
is going to be. And our peril and the peril of all our citizens is 
great.
  I might say that I believe the primary duty of any central Federal 
Government is to do those things for people they cannot do for 
themselves or that local government cannot do. And national defense is 
the Federal Government's primary responsibility. If we are not strong 
and do not have a defense that can protect our freedoms and they can be 
plundered away.
  I am reminded of the gospel according to Mark, when Jesus admonished 
the crowd, that ``no one can enter a strong man's house and plunder his 
property without first tying up the strong man that indeed the house 
can be plundered.''
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my distinguished 
colleague from Florida, [Mrs. Thurman].
  Mrs. THURMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from California 
[Mr. Dellums] for yielding me the time.
  I really stand here today because, Mr. Chairman, I really want to 
highlight and commend the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] and 
the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence] for including in this 
committee bill a study of a proposal that I introduced to expand the 
national mail-order pharmacy program to all Medicare-eligible military 
retirees. This mail-order program would ensure the availability of an 
eligible pharmacy benefit for all eligible beneficiaries regardless of 
their geographic location.
  Unfortunately, the program today does not include the vast majority 
of our Nation's Medicare-eligible military retirees. That is why on 
June 3, I introduced legislation H.R. 1773 to expand the mail-order 
program to all our Nation's Medicare-eligible military retirees. This 
measure is supported by both the Air Force Sergeants Association and 
the Army Retirement Council.
  Mr. Chairman, one of the greatest hardships Medicare-eligible 
military retirees face is the inability to obtain prescription drugs at 
reasonable prices. While Congress has authorized a mail-order pharmacy 
program and allowed retirees near designated base closure areas to 
participate, hundreds of thousands of other brave retired servicemen 
and women will be locked out unless action is taken.
  In 1993, Congress unanimously affirmed in the National Defense 
Authorization Act that members and former members of the uniformed 
services should have access under the health care delivery system of 
the uniformed services regardless of age. I could not agree more. The 
DOD has an implied moral commitment to provide this care to all 
military beneficiaries.
  Mr. Chairman, let us not just make this a study; let us make it a 
reality. By supporting the expansion of the mail-order program, we can 
send a clear message that the passage of time does not erase either the 
service that our military retirees gave nor our Government's obligation 
to their well-being.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado [Mr. Hefley].
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, just to continue to emphasize what I spoke 
to earlier, and that is that we have got young Americans in over 40 
countries of the world housed, in many occasions, in quarters that are 
Third World conditions or in some cases worse than Third World 
conditions.
  Now, we can say that we understand that when we deploy people in 40 
nations of the world, when they are employed, it may not be the best 
living conditions. But when we have them in the United States, it is 
shameful, shameful for us not to provide decent living conditions for 
our young men and women in the services.
  My colleague, the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] was a 
marine. The Marine Corps is 40 years behind in modernizing their living 
facilities, their dormitories, their barracks, and their family 
housing. Forty years. They are the worst of any of the services.
  In fact, I had lunch the other day with the Commandant of the 
Marines; and I said, ``What is the matter with you guys? Don't you care 
about that aspect of this?'' And he said, ``Of course we do. But they 
struggle to get through the process over in the Pentagon.''
  What we try to do in this bill is take care of this shame. What we 
try to do in this bill is to provide, and about 60 percent of all the 
money that we are putting into the adds that we are putting into this 
bill in military construction go to take care of the shamefulness of 
the way we are making some of these people live. We cannot get there 
from here just with MILCON dollars. We use maintenance dollars. We use 
initiative force, privatization, and all kinds of things. But if we do 
not have the MILCON dollars too, we never get there from here.
  Mr. Chairman, the ranking member and the chairman have been awfully 
good to help us toward this goal because I think they see this as an 
important goal, too. But let us not forget this when we are dealing 
with this bill.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my distinguished 
colleague, the gentleman form Maryland [Mr. Hoyer].
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  I have been listening to this debate for about 1 hour and 45 minutes 
here on the floor, and I have some specifics that I can reference and I 
will revise and extend and include those.
  But I rise, Mr. Chairman, because we talk about specific items. I 
want to follow up on the comments of the gentleman from South Carolina 
[Mr. Spence].
  I am one of those who believes that both sides of the aisle are 
putting at risk defense. One side of the aisle argues that we need tax 
cuts. I would like to have tax cuts. The other side, my side, argues 
that we must pay attention to domestic priorities. My view is that our 
Nation will not be strong no matter how much defense we have if we do 
not pay attention to domestic priorities.
  This Nation is the wealthiest nation on the face of the Earth. Yet, I 
tell my friends on both sides of the aisle that we are reducing the 
portion of our GDP that we spend on both defense and domestic 
priorities since the 1950's. I say to my friends that they ought to 
listen to the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spratt]. It is not the 
Democrats who are trying to undermine defense and, in my opinion, not 
the Republicans. But other priorities are driving us to not pay 
attention to one of the primary responsibilities the Nation has, and 
that is ensuring the defense of its people.
  All of us know that the United States is unique in the world in that 
the rest of the world looks to us to maintain international security. 
Is that fair? Perhaps not. Is it reality? Quite obviously.
  We will have some debates on withdrawing from Bosnia. I was one of 
those, as so many of my colleagues know, for deploying troops to 
Bosnia. Why? Because genocide was occurring in Bosnia. And we stood 
silent in the 1930's and we did not in the 1980's and the 1990's, and 
for that America is a better place and there is more security in the 
world.
  I say to the chairman and I say to the ranking member that their 
priorities are right for America, both domestic and defense, we need to 
pursue those and stand up for those.
  I rise in support of this bill to authorize $268 billion for critical 
defense needs in fiscal 1998.
  The spending level in this bill mirrors the budget resolution. As a 
co-chair of the National Security Caucus, I believe this represents the 
minimum we should spend on our national defense.
  I believe Chairman Spence was correct in his statement to the press 
that ``This bill maintains the committee's long-standing sense of 
urgency over restoring a proper balance among readiness, quality of 
life, modernization, innovation, and reform.''
  I will speak later in opposition to the additional reform package 
that the committee leadership hopes to add that contains a misguided 
40-percent cut in our acquisition work force.
  But, at this time, I want to commend them for what is in the bill 
before us:
  A 2.8-percent military pay raise.
  The $1.3 billion for procurement of 12 FA-18 E/F's and $425 million 
for continued R and

[[Page H3959]]

D--however, I regret that the President's request for $2.1 billion for 
20 planes was not fully funded.
  The $2.6 billion for the first of four new attack submarines and $154 
million to complete the third Seawolf submarine.
  The $661 million for procurement of seven V-22 Ospreys.
  Advance procurement funds for LPD-18, the second in this new class of 
amphibious ships.
  As a member of the Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee, 
I also want to commend Chairman Hefley for his work on authorizing $9.1 
billion for military construction.
  I commend the committee for funding these DOD and Navy priorities and 
for addressing important Maryland needs.
  I hope that we will pass the bill without unwise amendments like the 
acquisition work force cut.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Weldon].
  (Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise again to pay tribute 
to both the chairman and the ranking member and the appropriate 
subcommittee leaders and also to follow up on the comments of my good 
friend, the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer].
  My colleague makes a good statement that defense has always been a 
bipartisan issue in this city, and it still is today. We have all 
acknowledged that the success of enduring what has been a very 
difficult pattern of cuts over the past 5 years has basically been 
provided by both Democrats and Republicans. It is not something that we 
on the Republican side take credit for. In fact, I think many of our 
disagreements are more between this institution and the White House 
than it is between Republicans and Democrats in this body.
  Now we are criticized the last several years for our add-ons. We are 
told that we were putting money that was not needed by the troops, by 
the chiefs. What we heard this year, Mr. Chairman, were requests by the 
chiefs for $20 billion of additional program needs that were not 
requested by the administration.
  Every one of us who serves as a chairman of a subcommittee or ranking 
member was visited by all the services saying these are absolute 
priorities. But Mr. Chairman, it was not limited to the service chiefs. 
We had the administration come back to us, the President, after 
criticizing us for increasing funding for national missile defense for 
3 straight years, and say to us this year, we made a mistake, we want 
you to provide $2.3 billion of additional money for national missile 
defense.
  We had to find $474 million this year above what the President asked 
for because the President said we need more money for missile defense. 
The President said we had needed to fund a high energy laser program 
for Israel's protection called THEL. Yet the President never gave us a 
dollar amount.
  We had to beg the Army on the day of the markup to give us a figure. 
We are finally able to arrive at a $38 million figure even though the 
administration had told us last year it was their No. 1 priority when, 
in fact, the facts did not bear out the rhetoric.
  Mr. Chairman, our bill is based on the threat. We are not saying we 
want to recreate the cold war, but we know what is happening in Russia. 
We see the demise of the conventional forces in Russia; and with that 
demise, we see a heightened reliance on strategic offensive weapons.
  Just a year ago, in January, the Russian long-range ICBM's were out 
on full alert. Boris Yeltsin himself announced publicly that he had 
activated the black box because of a Norwegian rocket launch to detect 
weather conditions.
  Now, Mr. Chairman, that is reality. There have been numerous records 
of threats from Russia of missile material. We have the evidence of 
accelerometers and gyroscopes going from Russia to Iraq which were used 
for long-range ICBM's. We were told by the intelligence community that 
no one would deploy a system that would threaten our troops because we 
would see it tested first.
  Yet just 1 month ago, as reported in every major international media, 
North Korea fully deployed the No Dong missile system after one test. 
That No Dong missile system, with the range of 1,300 kilometers, now 
poses a real risk that we cannot defend against to every one of our 
troops in Japan, South Korea, and Okinawa. That is what this bill is 
about.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5\1/2\ 
minutes.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, we come to the end of general debate on a 
very important and substantive matter, the defense authorization for 
fiscal year 1998. I listened carefully during the general debate, and I 
would like to make a couple of comments, first to my distinguished 
colleague from South Carolina, [Mr. Spence]. I listened very carefully 
to his most recent remarks.
  I would suggest that, Mr. Chairman, when one argues that our national 
defense is the most important or the only responsibility of the Federal 
Government, I would challenge that assertion. My reading of the 
Preamble to the Constitution is as follows:

       We, the people of the United States, in order to form a 
     more perfect Union, establish justice, ensure domestic 
     tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the 
     general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty for 
     ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this 
     Constitution for the United States of America.

                              {time}  1600

  My read of that is that the founding persons of this country 
establishing this Constitution did not say national defense was the No. 
1 or most important. It gave equal weight to all of these functions, 
which is precisely why I argue that in the context of this post cold 
war environment, we must now begin to shape the parameters of the 
debate to move us to a new national security agenda that brings equal 
weight to what the founding persons envisioned and established in the 
Constitution.
  That is why a vibrant and healthy economy is important. We do not 
fight battles simply with military capability. We fight battles also 
with our economy. The extent to which it is healthy and vibrant is an 
integral part of our national security strategy.
  An enlightened and informed, well-trained, well-educated citizenry 
capable of engaging the economic and civic institutions of our Nation 
is what makes us different, is what makes us a democracy. Informed and 
enlightened citizens who can engage makes this country a democracy. It 
is not just about national defense as part of the national security 
strategy. The people and the children and the children's children are 
an integral part of that.
  Mr. Chairman, when I talked about an engaged foreign policy, an 
enlightened society should be attempting to prevent war. Only a fool 
wants to march off to war if it is not necessary. The way we prevent 
war is to address the issues that create war. People become violent and 
angry when we violate their personhood, when we violate their capacity 
to function, impact their Government, when they are victims of human 
rights violations, when they are hungry and malnourished, when there is 
no economic development. That is what generates wars.
  So our foreign policy is also a part of our national security 
strategy.
  A number of times I heard the quote, ``If you don't understand the 
past, you're doomed to repeat the failures of the past.''
  Mr. Chairman, as we downsize this budget in the context of the post 
cold war, I would assert that we have learned from the past. Our 
military fighters who come before the committee are not asserting that 
we have a hollow force. We learned from the past. We are now gradually 
downsizing. None of the CINCs who came before us, none of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff, none of the Secretaries of Defense have suggested that 
we have a hollow force. I would suggest that no person credibly can 
assert that at this moment.
  Every one of our military people have come before us and said we have 
the greatest fighting force in history on the Planet Earth. When this 
country went to war in the context of the Persian Gulf, what did the 
President of the United States then say? We were going to fight the 
fourth largest army on the face of the Earth, and within hours we 
annihilated them with our incredible military and technological 
superiority and capability. The American

[[Page H3960]]

people watched us wage war on CNN with smart missiles and smart bombs 
that went down Broadway, turned left and dropped into 1052. People may 
not know it, but we have even greater technology at this moment than we 
had when we fought in the Persian Gulf.
  When we talk about history, that sounds good as a 30-second 
soundbite, but the reality is we are not in a hollow force, we are not 
repeating the past. Remembering the past in World War I, World War II, 
we failed in the League of Nations, we failed in the international 
arena, but at this point, the last times we have gone to war, how did 
we go to war? We went to war with coalitions, we went to war with 
alliances. We have learned from the past. It is counterintuitive to 
everything we know that we will go it alone in the world. The world has 
changed, Mr. Chairman, and that is the reality.
  I just wanted to assert that, to put it in the Record. Maybe over the 
next 4 days we can elaborate. I look forward to a vigorous and 
intelligent and informed debate.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from South Carolina is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, it never ceases to amaze me that our Maker 
endowed us as human beings with minds that can look at the same set of 
facts or view history and arrive at conclusions 180 degrees apart from 
one another. As a fact of life, I guess people have been debating since 
the very beginning of time. This is one of the most amazing things that 
we deal with, here, and it makes our interchanges back and forth here 
all the more interesting every day.
  I happen to be a person with a more conservative viewpoint on life. 
Those of more liberal mind come to much different conclusions on many 
issues than this gentleman. The fact is that this country of ours has 
provided our people with more of the material things in life and other 
freedoms in life, too, than any nation in the history of mankind. 
People in other parts of the world cannot believe what we have. That is 
why we see other people around the world now shedding their shackles 
and trying to adopt our way of life.
  As I travel around the world and meet other people in other places, 
they are always asking me, how we can do these things for our people? 
They are amazed at what we do. Our domestic spending has increased 
while the defense budget has been steadily going down, to its lowest 
levels since the Korean war.
  I repeat that I am not saying that we should increase defense at the 
expense of providing our people with other things. Those things are 
important. In fact, that is why I want to defend this country. What 
good is it to have our freedoms we if we are not free or alive to enjoy 
them? That is the only point I am making.
  As Jesus referred to in the parable I mentioned earlier, your House 
gets plundered when you tie up a strong man. I do not want to tie up 
this strong man.
  Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to urge my colleagues to 
support this burdensharing amendment, which I am proud to have co-
authored. This amendment seeks to continue the progress we made last 
year in embarking on a comprehensive approach to achieving more 
participation by our allies in our common defense. A virtually 
identical amendment was adopted by the House last year by a vote of 353 
to 62; I hope that we can again demonstrate our resolve this year in 
obtaining greater burdensharing by our allies.
  Since the beginning of the cold war, the United States has 
contributed trillions of dollars to the defense of the West. As we all 
know, the people of the United States accepted this burden willingly, 
because we understood after two world wars that the defense of Europe 
was essential to the stability of the West and the security of America.
  Since the end of the cold war, many of us have called on our allies 
to accept a greater share of the burden toward our mutual defense. With 
the demise of the Soviet Union, we knew that our military 
infrastructure in Europe could be reduced and our allies could be 
expected to perform more significant roles in their own--and our 
common--defense.
  Beginning in 1992, I joined others in Congress in offering the first 
burdensharing amendments of the post-cold war period. We called for a 
reduction in the number of U.S. troops stationed overseas, and urged 
the administration to seek greater financial contributions from our 
allies to support the U.S. presence. And we achieved some success, 
particularly with our Asian allies.
  But burdensharing by our allies should not simply consist of digging 
deeper into their treasuries to pay for a U.S. troop presence, for 
American soldiers are not mercenaries. Instead, we must demand that our 
allies bear more of the roles, risks and responsibilities of full 
partners in regional security, whether it be in Europe, Asia or 
elsewhere. With the likelihood of global nuclear confrontation 
declining and the risks to the United States itself reduced, Americans 
should no longer be expected to bear an inordinate share of the defense 
burden.
  To achieve this goal, last year my colleagues and I altered our 
strategy to achieve increased allied burdensharing. For the first time, 
we sought a comprehensive, long-range approach with the view that other 
nations should take more concrete actions, and that the administration 
can work harder to achieve our objectives.
  First, our legislation called on the President to seek increases in 
allied burdensharing in four areas: additional host nation financial 
support, increased defense expenditures to support the common defense, 
greater participation in multinational military operations like United 
Nations peacekeeping or the NATO Bosnia operation, and a larger share 
of foreign assistance worldwide. It also provided the President with 
certain authorities to use as leverage in seeking these increases.
  Second, it broadened U.S. burdensharing efforts by seeking allied 
actions beyond simply providing contributions to the payment of costs 
incurred by the U.S. Government for stationing personnel overseas. This 
will contribute substantially to a more far-reaching, long-term goal of 
promoting responsibility-sharing rather than just cash payments, by our 
allies.
  Third, it avoided the limited approach of previous legislation which 
required reductions in U.S. forces stationed overseas if our allies 
failed to increase their burdensharing contributions. Instead, it 
provided proper incentives to achieve greater burdensharing by our 
allies, and it initiated the necessary and substantive analysis that 
will enable Congress to take unilateral action--if necessary--in the 
future.
  In promoting greater burdensharing, this amendment also sought to 
save taxpayer dollars. That's why several citizens groups, including 
Citizens Against Government Waste, Taxpayers for Common Sense, and The 
Concord Coalition, heartily endorsed our initiative.
  With agreement by the Senate and enactment by the President, our 
burdensharing provision became law last September and we received the 
Defense Department's first burdensharing report required by the 
legislation in March of this year. The report notes that our allies are 
performing well in one of the areas of the areas of concern specified 
in the measure--increased foreign assistance spending--but notes that 
serious deficiencies remain in others. For example, the report states 
that:

       We are concerned about current and prospective levels of 
     defense spending in Europe, and continue to urge our allies 
     to maintain defense budgets at appropriate levels and reverse 
     negative trends in spending.

  As the Defense Department has acknowledged, our comprehensive 
burdensharing agenda is making progress in achieving greater efforts by 
our allies. But we must do more. That's why I believe we must renew our 
comprehensive approach again this year--and demonstrate to both our 
allies and the administration that we are serious about getting other 
nations to contribute their fair share to our common defense. Vote for 
this important amendment.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the defense 
authorization bill and the rule under which it is being considered. 
There was a time when this Chambers' walls rang with debate on the 
important issues facing our great Nation. Not long ago, the defense 
authorization bill, the source of nearly half of all the discretionary 
spending in the Federal budget, was considered under an open rule. The 
present rule fails to offer much of any opportunity for Members of 
Congress outside of the National Security Committee and the defense 
appropriators to influence and impact the defense authorization 
process. The committee has asked for $2.6 billion beyond the 
President's request for a total defense authorization of $268.2 
billion. Yet, discourse today has disappointedly been reduced to 
essentially a rubber stamp. Curtailing debate to preapproved topics 
guarantees that the pressing issues before us are not discussed, much 
less resolved. We are squandering the opportunity to restructure our 
military during a period in which the United States faces no credible 
threat or military equal. We should be engaging in the comprehensive 
discussion of defense strategy and force structure necessary to prepare 
us for the uncertain challenges of tomorrow.
  Change seems to be the buzzword of the upcoming century. Wherever one 
turns,

[[Page H3961]]

change is emphasized. Unfortunately, the bill offered by the House 
National Security Committee neither reflects nor embraces change. This 
bill focuses on keeping what existed rather than addressing in a 
serious manner, how U.S. military policy should move forward. The 
committee simply decided to retain as much of the cold war assumptions 
within the context of the authorization measure, as much at least as 
this military budget will allow. For example, H.R. 1119 continues 
funding for major weapons programs that were specifically designed for 
use against a military configuration and challenge that collapsed with 
the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Yet, it keeps us in the race to 
design and fund weapons systems, which responds to a measuring stick 
which continues to be whether or not our weapons can outperform their 
Russian counterparts. No one, including Pentagon officials, holds 
privileged insight into the security and political landscape of 
tomorrow, but I would advance that the world will not require the 
identical military capabilities that characterized cold war strategies. 
H.R. 1119 dangerously and wastefully assumes that our long term future 
will resemble our recent past.
  H.R. 1119 includes an additional $331 million for advance procurement 
of the B-2 stealth bomber beyond the 21 aircraft previously authorized. 
Yet, the Department of Defense's [DOD] 1995 heavy bomber force study 
concluded that a fleet of only 20 B-2 stealth bombers would be adequate 
to meet any current or future threats against the United States. And 
both the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff support this conclusion, adding that the high cost of additional 
B-2 bombers will require the retirement of forces with greater overall 
capability and the misuse of funds to achieve this purpose. Secretary 
Cohen stated that ``the disadvantages far outweigh the advantages of 
additional B-2s.'' Arguments in favor of additional B-2 bombers stress 
that there will be no substitute for long-range air power in the 
security environment of tomorrow. I wholeheartedly disagree, and would 
submit that we are entering an era in which the value of an education 
and the investment in people has assumed as much or more importance 
than a weapon. What would make the American people feel safer? Knowing 
that their government is building additional B-2 bombers and 
constructing a national defense missile system to thwart an unlikely 
attack, or knowing that their children will be able to attend college 
and that their parents will receive the Social Security and Medicare 
benefits they tirelessly worked for over the years? This bill may 
increase the likelihood of victory on the battlefields of the 21st 
century, but is it worth handicapping our chances for success in the 
classroom? H.R. 1119 simply does not defend our genuine vital 
interests.
  The winners in this bill are clearly the weapons manufacturers, whose 
programs the Pentagon will continue to be forced fed. Weapons 
manufacturers furthermore will continue to benefit from and receive 
taxpayer financed subsidies for merger-related costs which results in 
laid off workers and shut down plants. Although, the DOD itself has 
admitted that it can not directly attribute any savings to military 
related industries restructuring, the Rules Committee rejected an 
amendment I supported that would have ensured that taxpayers realize 
actual cost savings in the form of reduced contract prices before 
defense contractors are awarded subsidies. Apparently, accountability 
and smart investment of taxpayer dollars are not viewed as a required 
policy path to the Rules Committee, which denied the House the 
opportunity to discuss this questionable program and practice of 
misusing taxpayer dollars.
  By realizing that our national defense requires investment in people 
and not only the weapons they operate, I am encouraged by some 
provisions included in H.R. 1119. Capable weapons do not guarantee 
victory in and of themselves; investment in personnel and maintenance 
is equally important. Since 1989, we have appropriately downsized the 
uniformed services by 25 percent while stepping up the pace of 
operations abroad. The net result, familiar to so many Federal 
employees these days, is that service members are asked to do much more 
with less. By addressing shortfalls in compensation, housing, and 
health care, H.R. 1119 takes giant steps toward improving the quality 
of life for U.S. service members. Furthermore, these provisions will 
also improve our ability to recruit high quality personnel and enhance 
retention levels. All new initiatives are intimately linked to 
readiness and therefore bolster the safety of our Nation.
  National security in the next century will not be confined to the 
national security establishment per se. Accordingly, we must 
incorporate other elements, such as diplomacy, sound trade policies, 
and foreign assistance programs in any national security strategy. By 
pursuing other policies outside the traditional realm of military 
programs, we can proactively shape our international environment to 
protect our vital interests. More resources should be diverted to 
minimizing the risks of the uncertain security environment of the 
future. Yet, despite the remarkable achievements of the Nunn-Lugar 
program that has greatly accelerated the safe dismantling, destruction, 
and storage of thousands of nuclear warheads once pointed at the United 
States, H.R. 1119 shamefully decreases program funding by $97.5 
million.
  We must also make a concerted effort to call on others around the 
globe that benefit from our military's presence to take on greater 
responsibility in matters of their own national defense. American 
citizens are eager to reap the rewards of the peace dividend they were 
promised after the end of the cold war. With so many domestic 
programs--quality housing, affordable education, environmental 
protection, and job training--suffering from inadequate funding, it is 
necessary that we hold the defense budget to the same level of 
scrutiny, accountability, and constraint that govern the appropriations 
of other Federal programs. Our Federal budget must adequately reflect 
the integral components of a national security strategy--namely 
economic, educational, and environmental security. I intend to vote no 
if this measure H.R. 1119 is not substantially modified--it isn't just 
the dollar figure but the programs and policy path it commits us to--
this policy persists within the time warp of the cold war when we need 
a military and defense policy for the 21st century.

  Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, today, as part of the Defense 
Authorization Act, we are honoring those Americans who served during 
the cold war.
  With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, a 46-year conflict 
between the Free World and Soviet totalitarianism ended. Yet little was 
said to acknowledge the close of this momentous struggle. Perhaps 
because the cold war was like no other conflict in our Nation's 
history, we have seemed slow to recognize our debt to those who made 
victory possible.
  We have passed a supreme test of our national character. This 46-
year-long struggle placed unprecedented burdens on our Nation. We lived 
with the threat of a nuclear war that could shatter the Earth's 
environment and destroy civilization. We shouldered the awesome 
responsibilities of standard-bearer for the Free World. We sent our 
military personnel to the far corners of the globe.
  During the cold war, dedicated Americans, in and out of uniform, rose 
to the long-term challenge of protecting their democratic institutions 
and the future of the Free World. Some 24 million soldiers, sailors, 
airmen, and marines served around the world. More than 100,000 lost 
their lives fighting communism in Korea, Vietnam, and other foreign 
battlegrounds.
  Our intelligence personnel vigilantly monitored our adversaries. Our 
diplomats held alliances together, defused crises, and negotiated 
treaties to limit the risk of nuclear war. Our scientists, engineers, 
and technicians brought America's overwhelming technological 
capabilities to our defense. And Americans of all walks of life 
accepted the responsibilities of world leadership and the risks of 
nuclear war--and kept our economy growing and our democratic 
institutions strong.
  It is now time to recognize all Americans who served during the long, 
demanding years of the cold war. Because of them, our country and the 
world can look ahead to a brighter future, unclouded by fears of a 
nuclear holocaust or the triumph of totalitarianism.
  Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 1119. 
This is an important measure that makes positive steps toward balancing 
budgetary constraints with defense needs. I would like to thank 
Chairman Spence and Congressman Dellums for their assistance in dealing 
with issues of concern to me and the people of Guam. I would also like 
to thank Chairmen Hefley, Buyer, and Bateman for their leadership in 
the subcommittees as we dealt with issues surrounding the bill. Though 
I have some minor reservations regarding certain provisions of the 
authorization, I am encouraged by the balance struck financially and 
within Defense Department priorities.
  As members of the House National Security Committee, we and other 
Members of Congress have realized, the quality of life for our service 
men and women must be protected. I am encouraged by measures in this 
bill that serve to improve the quality of life for our Armed Forces. 
First, a 2.8-percent pay raise shows our commitment to the men and 
women in uniform. The pay raise is badly needed and will help to 
alleviate the disparity between military and private sector pay. 
Second, this measure recommends the use of a portion of funding 
allocated for family housing improvements by the Air Force to be used 
at Andersen AFB, Guam. As is the case with other bases across the 
country and overseas, family housing at Andersen is below standards. 
This important quality of life issue for families stationed at Andersen 
can now be addressed.

[[Page H3962]]

  I am grateful for the assistance of members of the committee and 
their staff in including two other important provisions. I have long 
been concerned that my district, and other U.S. territories, have not 
been given serious consideration during Theater Missile Defense 
planning and ultimately, National Missile Defense planning. I am 
encouraged by the cooperation I received from Chairman Weldon to ensure 
that this does not continue. While Guam may be an unlikely target for 
any nation that developed the capabilities and possessed the will, the 
time to ensure proper protection for the territories is now, during the 
development phase, not when the United States is deploying a system.
  I also thank the members of the committee for accepting my amendment 
concerning the use of foreign workers for A-76 base operating 
contracting. This measure will help ensure that American citizens are 
not displaced by foreign workers in the execution of this competitive 
contracting assessment.
  Mr. Chairman, I do have to express some concern regarding a few items 
within the authorization. First, I am sure I am not alone in expressing 
disappointment that the bill does not authorize funding for the 
construction of a National Guard Readiness Center. This is of grave 
concern to me. The Guam Army National Guard is the only guard unit that 
does not have an armory. The Guam Guard uses formerly abandoned 
construction company barracks. The National Guard borrows space from 
the Navy. The Navy Armory is over 10 miles from the guard training 
site. This causes continually training delays and problems. 
Unfortunately, this type of situation does not seem to be of concern to 
the National Guard Bureau. I find it shocking that we broaden our 
dependence on the guard yet cannot properly equip them for training. 
Second, I am concerned about misguided, jingoistic measures which 
prohibit property from being conveyed to a State-owned shipping 
company. This has broad implications beyond the narrow concerns of 
competitiveness between ports. In my district, the local community has 
worked hard to recover from the impacts of BRAC and this action would 
be a further impediment to the right of local determination of reuse 
plans best for the community and their progress toward full economic 
recovery.
  Mr. Chairman, though there may be individual concerns for each Member 
of this House, I urge my colleagues to support this measure and vote 
for H.R. 1119.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 169, the committee amendment in the 
nature of a substitute printed in the bill is considered as an original 
bill for the purpose of amendment and is considered as having been 
read.
  The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is 
as follows:

                               H.R. 1119

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998''.

     SEC. 2. ORGANIZATION OF ACT INTO DIVISIONS; TABLE OF 
                   CONTENTS.

       (a) Divisions.--This Act is organized into three divisions 
     as follows:
       (1) Division A--Department of Defense Authorizations.
       (2) Division B--Military Construction Authorizations.
       (3) Division C--Department of Energy National Security 
     Authorizations and Other Authorizations.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Organization of Act into divisions; table of contents.
Sec. 3. Congressional defense committees defined.

            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Sec. 101. Army.
Sec. 102. Navy and Marine Corps.
Sec. 103. Air Force.
Sec. 104. Defense-wide activities.
Sec. 105. Reserve components.
Sec. 106. Defense Inspector General.
Sec. 107. Chemical Demilitarization Program.
Sec. 108. Defense health programs.
Sec. 109. Defense Export Loan Guarantee Program.

                       Subtitle B--Other Matters

Sec. 121. Limitation on obligation of funds for the Seawolf Submarine 
              program.
Sec. 122. Report on annual budget submission regarding the reserve 
              components.

         TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Sec. 201. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 202. Amount for basic and applied research.
Sec. 203. Dual-use technology program.

    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

Sec. 211. Manufacturing technology program.
Sec. 212. Report on Strategic Environmental Research and Development 
              Program.
Sec. 213. Tactical unmanned aerial vehicles.
Sec. 214. Revisions to membership of and appointment authority for 
              National Ocean Research Leadership Council.
Sec. 215. Maintenance and repair of real property at Air Force 
              installations.
Sec. 216. Expansion of eligibility for Defense Experimental Program to 
              Stimulate Competitive Research.
Sec. 217. Limitation on use of funds for adaption of Integrated 
              Defensive Electronic Countermeasures (IDECM) program to 
              F/A-18E/F aircraft and A/V-8B aircraft.
Sec. 218. Bioassay testing of veterans exposed to ionizing radiation 
              during military service.

             Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense Programs

Sec. 231. Budgetary treatment of amounts requested for procurement for 
              Ballistic Missile Defense programs.
Sec. 232. Cooperative ballistic missile defense program.
Sec. 233. Deployment dates for core theater missile defense programs
Sec. 234. Annual report on threat posed to the United States by weapons 
              of mass destruction, ballistic missiles, and cruise 
              missiles.
Sec. 235. Director of Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.
Sec. 236. Tactical high energy laser program.

                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Sec. 301. Operation and maintenance funding.
Sec. 302. Working capital funds.
Sec. 303. Armed Forces Retirement Home.
Sec. 304. Transfer from National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund.
Sec. 305. Refurbishment and installation of air search radar.
Sec. 306. Refurbishment of M1-A1 tanks.
Sec. 307. Procurement and electronic commerce technical assistance 
              program.
Sec. 308. Availability of funds for separation pay for defense 
              acquisition personnel.

                 Subtitle B--Military Readiness Issues

Sec. 311. Expansion of scope of quarterly readiness reports.
Sec. 312. Limitation on reallocation of funds within operation and 
              maintenance appropriations.
Sec. 313. Operation of prepositioned fleet, National Training Center, 
              Fort Irwin, California.
Sec. 314. Prohibition of implementation of tiered readiness system.
Sec. 315. Reports on transfers from high-priority readiness 
              appropriations.
Sec. 316. Report on Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff Exercise Program 
              and Partnership for Peace program.
Sec. 317. Quarterly reports on execution of operation and maintenance 
              appropriations.

                     Subtitle C--Civilian Personnel

Sec. 321. Pay practices when overseas teachers transfer to general 
              schedule positions.
Sec. 322. Use of approved fire-safe accommodations by Government 
              employees on official business.

                   Subtitle D--Depot-Level Activities

Sec. 331. Extension of authority for aviation depots and naval 
              shipyards to engage in defense-related production and 
              services.
Sec. 332. Exclusion of certain large maintenance and repair projects 
              from percentage limitation on contracting for depot-level 
              maintenance.
Sec. 333. Restrictions on contracts for performance of depot-level 
              maintenance and repair at certain facilities.
Sec. 334. Core logistics functions of Department of Defense.
Sec. 335. Centers of Industrial and Technical Excellence.
Sec. 336. Personnel reductions, Army depots participating in Army 
              Workload and Performance System.

                  Subtitle E--Environmental Provisions

Sec. 341. Revision of membership terms for Strategic Environmental 
              Research and Development Program scientific advisory 
              board.
Sec. 342. Amendments to authority to enter into agreements with other 
              agencies in support of environmental technology 
              certification.
Sec. 343. Authorization to pay negotiated settlement for environmental 
              cleanup at former Department of Defense sites in Canada.
Sec. 344. Modifications of authority to store and dispose of nondefense 
              toxic and hazardous materials.
Sec. 345. Revision of report requirement for Navy program to monitor 
              ecological effects of organotin.
Sec. 346. Partnerships for investment in innovative environmental 
              technologies.
Sec. 347. Pilot program to test an alternative technology for 
              eliminating solid and liquid waste emissions during ship 
              operations.

  Subtitle F--Commissaries and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities

Sec. 361. Reorganization of laws regarding commissaries and exchanges 
              and other morale, welfare, and recreation activities.

[[Page H3963]]

Sec. 362. Merchandise and pricing requirements for commissary stores.
Sec. 363. Limitation on noncompetitive procurement of brand-name 
              commercial items for resale in commissary stores.
Sec. 364. Transfer of jurisdiction over exchange, commissary, and 
              morale, welfare, and recreation activities to Under 
              Secretary of Defense (Comptroller).
Sec. 365. Public and private partnerships to benefit morale, welfare, 
              and recreation activities.
Sec. 366. Treatment of certain amounts received by Defense Commissary 
              Agency.
Sec. 367. Authorized use of appropriated funds for relocation of Navy 
              Exchange Service Command.

                       Subtitle G--Other Matters

Sec. 371. Assistance to local educational agencies that benefit 
              dependents of members of the Armed Forces and Department 
              of Defense civilian employees.
Sec. 372. Continuation of Operation Mongoose.
Sec. 373. Inclusion of Air Force depot maintenance as operation and 
              maintenance budget activity group.
Sec. 374. Programs to commemorate 50th anniversary of Marshall Plan and 
              Korean conflict.
Sec. 375. Prohibition on use of Special Operations Command budget for 
              base operation support.
Sec. 376. Continuation and expansion of demonstration program to 
              identify overpayments made to vendors.
Sec. 377. Applicability of Federal printing requirements to Defense 
              Automated Printing Service.
Sec. 378. Base operations support for military installations on Guam.

              TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

                       Subtitle A--Active Forces

Sec. 401. End strengths for active forces.

                       Subtitle B--Reserve Forces

Sec. 411. End strengths for Selected Reserve.
Sec. 412. End strengths for reserves on active duty in support of the 
              Reserves.
Sec. 413. End strengths for military technicians (dual status).
Sec. 414. Increase in number of members in certain grades authorized to 
              serve on active duty in support of the reserves.

              Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations

Sec. 421. Authorization of appropriations for military personnel.

                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

                  Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy

Sec. 501. Limitation on number of general and flag officers who may 
              serve in positions outside their own service.
Sec. 502. Exclusion of certain retired officers from limitation on 
              period of recall to active duty.
Sec. 503. Clarification of officers eligible for consideration by 
              selection boards.
Sec. 504. Authority to defer mandatory retirement for age of officers 
              serving as chaplains.

                 Subtitle B--Reserve Component Matters

Sec. 511. Individual Ready Reserve activation authority.
Sec. 512. Termination of Mobilization Income Insurance Program.
Sec. 513. Correction of inequities in medical and dental care and death 
              and disability benefits for reserve members who incur or 
              aggravate an illness in the line of duty.
Sec. 514. Time-in-grade requirements for reserve commissioned officers 
              retired during force drawdown period.
Sec. 515. Authority to permit non-unit assigned officers to be 
              considered by vacancy promotion board to general officer 
              grades.
Sec. 516. Grade requirement for officers eligible to serve on 
              involuntary separation boards.
Sec. 517. Limitation on use of Air Force Reserve AGR personnel for Air 
              Force base security functions.

                    Subtitle C--Military Technicians

Sec. 521. Authority to retain on the reserve active-status list until 
              age 60 military technicians in the grade of brigadier 
              general.
Sec. 522. Military technicians (dual status).
Sec. 523. Non-dual status military technicians.

  Subtitle D--Measures To Improve Recruit Quality and Reduce Recruit 
                               Attrition

Sec. 531. Reform of military recruiting systems.
Sec. 532. Improvements in medical prescreening of applicants for 
              military service.
Sec. 533. Improvements in physical fitness of recruits.

              Subtitle E--Military Education and Training

Sec. 541. Independent panel to review military basic training.
Sec. 542. Reform of Army drill sergeant selection and training process.
Sec. 543. Requirement for candidates for admission to United States 
              Naval Academy to take oath of allegiance.
Sec. 544. Reimbursement of expenses incurred for instruction at service 
              academies of persons from foreign countries.
Sec. 545. United States Naval Postgraduate School.
Sec. 546. Air Force Academy cadet foreign exchange program.
Sec. 547. Training in human relations matters for Army drill sergeant 
              trainees.
Sec. 548. Study of feasibility of gender-segregated basic training.

              Subtitle F--Military Decorations and Awards

Sec. 551. Study of new decorations for injury or death in line of duty.
Sec. 552. Purple heart to be awarded only to members of the armed 
              forces.
Sec. 553. Eligibility for Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal for 
              participation in Operation Joint Endeavor or Operation 
              Joint Guard.
Sec. 554. Waiver of time limitations for award of certain decorations 
              to specified persons.

                       Subtitle G--Other Matters

Sec. 561. Suspension of temporary early retirement authority.
Sec. 562. Treatment of educational accomplishments of National Guard 
              Challenge Program participants.
Sec. 563. Authority for personnel to participate in management of 
              certain non-Federal entities.
Sec. 564. Crew requirements of WC-130J aircraft.
Sec. 565. Comptroller General study of Department of Defense civil 
              military programs.
Sec. 566. Treatment of participation of members in Department of 
              Defense civil military programs.
Sec. 567. Continuation of support to senior military colleges.
Sec. 568. Restoration of missing persons authorities applicable to 
              Department of Defense as in effect before enactment of 
              National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997.
Sec. 569. Establishment of sentence of confinement for life without 
              eligibility for parole.
Sec. 570. Limitation on appeal of denial of parole for offenders 
              serving life sentence.
Sec. 571. Establishment of Public Affairs Branch in the Army.

          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

                     Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances

Sec. 601. Increase in basic pay for fiscal year 1998.
Sec. 602. Annual adjustment of basic pay and protection of member's 
              total compensation while performing certain duty.
Sec. 603. Use of food cost information to determine basic allowance for 
              subsistence.
Sec. 604. Consolidation of basic allowance for quarters, variable 
              housing allowance, and overseas housing allowances.

           Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays

Sec. 611. One-year extension of certain bonuses and special pay 
              authorities for reserve forces.
Sec. 612. One-year extension of certain bonuses and special pay 
              authorities for nurse officer candidates, registered 
              nurses, and nurse anesthetists.
Sec. 613. One-year extension of authorities relating to payment of 
              other bonuses and special pays.
Sec. 614. Increase in minimum monthly rate of hazardous duty incentive 
              pay for certain members.
Sec. 615. Availability of multiyear retention bonus for dental 
              officers.
Sec. 616. Increase in variable and additional special pays for certain 
              dental officers.
Sec. 617. Special pay for duty at designated hardship duty locations.
Sec. 618. Selected Reserve reenlistment bonus.
Sec. 619. Selected Reserve enlistment bonus for former enlisted 
              members.
Sec. 620. Special pay or bonuses for enlisted members extending tours 
              of duty overseas.
Sec. 621. Increase in amount of family separation allowance.
Sec. 622. Change in requirements for Ready Reserve muster duty 
              allowance.

            Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances

Sec. 631. Travel and transportation allowances for dependents of member 
              sentenced by court-martial.
Sec. 632. Dislocation allowance.

    Subtitle D--Retired Pay, Survivor Benefits, and Related Matters

Sec. 641. Time in which certain changes in beneficiary under survivor 
              benefit plan may be made.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

Sec. 651. Definition of sea duty for purposes of career sea pay.
Sec. 652. Loan repayment program for commissioned officers in certain 
              health professions.
Sec. 653. Conformance of NOAA commissioned officers separation pay to 
              separation pay for members of other uniformed services.
Sec. 654. Reimbursement of Public Health Service officers for adoption 
              expenses.
Sec. 655. Payment of back quarters and subsistence allowances to World 
              War II veterans who served as guerrilla fighters in the 
              Philippines.
Sec. 656. Space available travel for members of selected reserve.
Sec. 657. Study on military personnel at, near, or below the poverty 
              line.
Sec. 658. Implementation of Department of Defense supplemental food 
              program for military personnel outside the United States.

[[Page H3964]]

                   TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS

                    Subtitle A--Health Care Services

Sec. 701. Expansion of retiree dental insurance plan to include 
              surviving spouse and child dependents of certain deceased 
              members.
Sec. 702. Provision of prosthetic devices to covered beneficiaries.

                      Subtitle B--TRICARE Program

Sec. 711. Addition of definition of TRICARE program to title 10.
Sec. 712. Plan for expansion of managed care option of TRICARE program.

          Subtitle C--Uniformed Services Treatment Facilities

Sec. 721. Implementation of designated provider agreements for 
              Uniformed Services Treatment Facilities.
Sec. 722. Limitation on total payments.
Sec. 723. Continued acquisition of reduced-cost drugs.

   Subtitle D--Other Changes to Existing Laws Regarding Health Care 
                               Management

Sec. 731. Waiver or reduction of copayments under overseas dental 
              program.
Sec. 732. Premium collection requirements for medical and dental 
              insurance programs.
Sec. 733. Consistency between CHAMPUS and medicare in payment rates for 
              services.
Sec. 734. Use of personal services contracts for provision of health 
              care services and legal protection for providers.
Sec. 735. Portability of State licenses for Department of Defense 
              health care professionals.
Sec. 736. Standard form and requirements regarding claims for payment 
              for services.
Sec. 737. Medical personnel conscience clause.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

Sec. 741. Continued admission of civilians as students in physician 
              assistant training program of Army Medical Department.
Sec. 742. Emergency health care in connection with overseas activities 
              of On-Site Inspection Agency of Department of Defense.
Sec. 743. Comptroller General study of adequacy and effect of maximum 
              allowable charges for physicians under CHAMPUS.
Sec. 744. Comptroller General study of Department of Defense pharmacy 
              programs.
Sec. 745. Comptroller General study of Navy graduate medical education 
              program.
Sec. 746. Study of expansion of pharmaceuticals by mail program to 
              include additional medicare-eligible covered 
              beneficiaries.

  TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED 
                                MATTERS

                     Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy

Sec. 801. Case-by-case waivers of domestic source limitations.
Sec. 802. Expansion of authority to enter into contracts crossing 
              fiscal years to all severable services contracts not 
              exceeding a year.
Sec. 803. Clarification of vesting of title under contracts.
Sec. 804. Exclusion of disaster relief, humanitarian, and peacekeeping 
              operations from restrictions on use of undefinitized 
              contract actions.
Sec. 805. Limitation and report on payment of restructuring costs under 
              defense contracts.
Sec. 806. Authority relating to purchase of certain vehicles.
Sec. 807. Multiyear procurement contracts.
Sec. 808. Domestic source limitation amendments.
Sec. 809. Repeal of expiration of domestic source limitation for 
              certain naval vessel propellers.

                       Subtitle B--Other Matters

Sec. 821. Repeal of certain acquisition reports and requirements.
Sec. 822. Extension of authority for use of test and evaluation 
              installations by commercial entities.
Sec. 823. Requirement to develop and maintain list of firms not 
              eligible for defense contracts.

      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

Sec. 901. Limitation on operation and support funds for the Office of 
              the Secretary of Defense.
Sec. 902. Components of National Defense University.
Sec. 903. Authorization for the Marine Corps University to employ 
              civilian professors.
Sec. 904. Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs.
Sec. 905. White House Communications Agency.
Sec. 906. Revision to required frequency for provision of policy 
              guidance for contingency plans.
Sec. 907. Termination of the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office.

                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                     Subtitle A--Financial Matters

Sec. 1001. Transfer authority.
Sec. 1002. Incorporation of classified annex.
Sec. 1003. Authority for obligation of unauthorized fiscal year 1997 
              defense appropriations.
Sec. 1004. Authorization of supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 
              1997.
Sec. 1005. Increase in fiscal year 1996 transfer authority.
Sec. 1006. Fisher House trust funds.
Sec. 1007. Flexibility in financing closure of certain outstanding 
              contracts for which a small final payment is due.

                Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards

Sec. 1021. Relationship of certain laws to disposal of vessels for 
              export from the Naval Vessel Register and the National 
              Defense Reserve Fleet.
Sec. 1022. Authority to enter into a long-term charter for a vessel in 
              support of the Surveillance Towed-Array Sensor (SURTASS) 
              program.
Sec. 1023. Transfer of two specified obsolete tugboats of the Army.
Sec. 1024. Naming of a DDG-51 class destroyer the U.S.S. Thomas F. 
              Connolly.
Sec. 1025. Congressional review period with respect to transfer of the 
              ex-U.S.S. Midway (CV-41).

                  Subtitle C--Counter-Drug Activities

Sec. 1031. Prohibition on use of National Guard for civil-military 
              activities under State drug interdiction and counter-drug 
              activities plan.

       Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Report Requirements and Repeals

Sec. 1041. Repeal of miscellaneous obsolete reports required by prior 
              defense authorization Acts.
Sec. 1042. Repeal of annual report requirement relating to training of 
              special operations forces with friendly foreign forces.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

Sec. 1051. Authority for special agents of the Defense Criminal 
              Investigative Service to execute warrants and make 
              arrests.
Sec. 1052. Study of investigative practices of military criminal 
              investigative organizations relating to sex crimes.
Sec. 1053. Technical and clerical amendments.
Sec. 1054. Display of POW/MIA flag.
Sec. 1055. Certification required before observance of moratorium on 
              use by Armed Forces of antipersonnel landmines.
Sec. 1056. Protection of safety-related information voluntarily 
              provided by air carriers.
Sec. 1057. National Guard Challenge Program to create opportunities for 
              civilian youth.
Sec. 1058. Lease of non-excess personal property of the military 
              departments.
Sec. 1059. Commendation of members of the Armed Forces and Government 
              civilian personnel who served during the Cold War.

  TITLE XI--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF FORMER SOVIET 
                                 UNION

Sec. 1101. Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs.
Sec. 1102. Fiscal year 1998 funding allocations.
Sec. 1103. Prohibition on use of funds for specified purposes.
Sec. 1104. Limitation on use of funds until specified reports are 
              submitted.
Sec. 1105. Limitation on use of funds until submission of 
              certification.
Sec. 1106. Use of funds for chemical weapons destruction facility.
Sec. 1107. Limitation on use of funds for storage facility for Russian 
              fissile material.
Sec. 1108. Limitation on use of funds for weapons storage security.
Sec. 1109. Report to Congress on issues regarding payment of taxes or 
              duties on assistance provided to Russia under Cooperative 
              Threat Reduction programs.
Sec. 1110. Limitation on obligation of funds for a specified period.
Sec. 1111. Availability of funds.

              TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS

Sec. 1201. Reports to Congress relating to United States forces in 
              Bosnia.
Sec. 1202. One-year extension of counterproliferation authorities.
Sec. 1203. Report on future military capabilities and strategy of the 
              People's Republic of China.
Sec. 1204. Temporary use of general purpose vehicles and nonlethal 
              military equipment under acquisition and cross servicing 
              agreements.

            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

Sec. 2001. Short title.

                            TITLE XXI--ARMY

Sec. 2101. Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects.
Sec. 2102. Family housing.
Sec. 2103. Improvements to military family housing units.
Sec. 2104. Authorization of appropriations, Army.
Sec. 2105. Correction in authorized uses of funds, Fort Irwin, 
              California.

                            TITLE XXII--NAVY

Sec. 2201. Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects.
Sec. 2202. Family housing.
Sec. 2203. Improvements to military family housing units.
Sec. 2204. Authorization of appropriations, Navy.
Sec. 2205. Authorization of military construction project at Naval Air 
              Station, Pascagoula, Mississippi, for which funds have 
              been appropriated.

[[Page H3965]]

                         TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE

Sec. 2301. Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition 
              projects.
Sec. 2302. Family housing.
Sec. 2303. Improvements to military family housing units.
Sec. 2304. Authorization of appropriations, Air Force.
Sec. 2305. Authorization of military construction project at McConnell 
              Air Force Base, Kansas, for which funds have been 
              appropriated.

                      TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES

Sec. 2401. Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land 
              acquisition projects.
Sec. 2402. Military housing planning and design.
Sec. 2403. Improvements to military family housing units.
Sec. 2404. Energy conservation projects.
Sec. 2405. Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies.
Sec. 2406. Correction in authorized uses of funds, McClellan Air Force 
              Base, California.
Sec. 2407. Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 1995 
              projects.

   TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT 
                                PROGRAM

Sec. 2501. Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects.
Sec. 2502. Authorization of appropriations, NATO.

            TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

Sec. 2601. Authorized Guard and Reserve construction and land 
              acquisition projects.
Sec. 2602. Authorization of military construction projects for which 
              funds have been appropriated.
Sec. 2603. Army Reserve construction project, Salt Lake City, Utah.

        TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS

Sec. 2701. Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be 
              specified by law.
Sec. 2702. Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1995 
              projects.
Sec. 2703. Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1994 
              projects.
Sec. 2704. Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1993 
              projects.
Sec. 2705. Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1992 
              projects.
Sec. 2706. Extension of availability of funds for construction of Over-
              the-Horizon Radar in Puerto Rico.
Sec. 2707. Effective date.

                    TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

 Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing 
                                Changes

Sec. 2801. Use of mobility enhancement funds for unspecified minor 
              construction.
Sec. 2802. Limitation on use of operation and maintenance funds for 
              facility repair projects.
Sec. 2803. Leasing of military family housing, United States Southern 
              Command, Miami, Florida.
Sec. 2804. Use of financial incentives provided as part of energy 
              savings and water conservation activities.
Sec. 2805. Congressional notification requirements regarding use of 
              Department of Defense housing funds for investments in 
              nongovernmental entities.

        Subtitle B--Real Property And Facilities Administration

Sec. 2811. Increase in ceiling for minor land acquisition projects.
Sec. 2812. Administrative expenses for certain real property 
              transactions.
Sec. 2813. Disposition of proceeds from sale of Air Force Plant 78, 
              Brigham City, Utah.

            Subtitle C--Defense Base Closure and Realignment

Sec. 2821. Consideration of military installations as sites for new 
              Federal facilities.
Sec. 2822. Prohibition against conveyance of property at military 
              installations to State-owned shipping companies.

                      Subtitle D--Land Conveyances

                        Part I--Army Conveyances

Sec. 2831. Land conveyance, James T. Coker Army Reserve Center, Durant, 
              Oklahoma.
Sec. 2832. Land conveyance, Fort A. P. Hill, Virginia.
Sec. 2833. Expansion of land conveyance, Indiana Army Ammunition Plant, 
              Charlestown, Indiana.
Sec. 2834. Modification of land conveyance, Lompoc, California.
Sec. 2835. Modification of land conveyance, Rocky Mountain Arsenal, 
              Colorado.
Sec. 2836. Correction of land conveyance authority, Army Reserve 
              Center, Anderson, South Carolina.
Sec. 2837. Land conveyance, Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
Sec. 2838. Land conveyance, Gibson Army Reserve Center, Chicago, 
              Illinois.
Sec. 2839. Land conveyance, Fort Dix, New Jersey.

                       Part II--Navy Conveyances

Sec. 2851. Correction of lease authority, Naval Air Station, Meridian, 
              Mississippi.

                    Part III--Air Force Conveyances

Sec. 2861. Land transfer, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.
Sec. 2862. Study of land exchange options, Shaw Air Force Base, South 
              Carolina.
Sec. 2863. Land conveyance, March Air Force Base, California.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

Sec. 2881. Repeal of requirement to operate Naval Academy dairy farm.
Sec. 2882. Long-term lease of property, Naples Italy.
Sec. 2883. Designation of military family housing at Lackland Air Force 
              Base, Texas, in honor of Frank Tejeda, a former Member of 
              the House of Representatives.

                   TITLE XXIX--SIKES ACT IMPROVEMENT

Sec. 2901. Short title.
Sec. 2902. Definition of Sikes Act for purposes of amendments.
Sec. 2903. Codification of short title of Act.
Sec. 2904. Integrated natural resource management plans.
Sec. 2905. Review for preparation of integrated natural resource 
              management plans.
Sec. 2906. Annual reviews and reports.
Sec. 2907. Transfer of wildlife conservation fees from closed military 
              installations.
Sec. 2908. Federal enforcement of integrated natural resource 
              management plans and enforcement of other laws.
Sec. 2909. Natural resource management services.
Sec. 2910. Definitions.
Sec. 2911. Cooperative agreements.
Sec. 2912. Repeal of superseded provision.
Sec. 2913. Clerical amendments.
Sec. 2914. Authorizations of appropriations.

 DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND 
                          OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

      TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

         Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations

Sec. 3101. Weapons activities.
Sec. 3102. Environmental restoration and waste management.
Sec. 3103. Other defense activities.
Sec. 3104. Defense nuclear waste disposal.

                Subtitle B--Recurring General Provisions

Sec. 3121. Reprogramming.
Sec. 3122. Limits on general plant projects.
Sec. 3123. Limits on construction projects.
Sec. 3124. Fund transfer authority.
Sec. 3125. Authority for conceptual and construction design.
Sec. 3126. Authority for emergency planning, design, and construction 
              activities.
Sec. 3127. Funds available for all national security programs of the 
              Department of Energy.
Sec. 3128. Authority relating to transfers of defense environmental 
              management funds.

   Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations

Sec. 3131. Ballistic Missile Defense National Laboratory Program.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

Sec. 3141. Plan for stewardship, management, and certification of 
              warheads in the nuclear weapons stockpile.
Sec. 3142. Repeal of obsolete reporting requirements.
Sec. 3143. Revisions to defense nuclear facilities workforce 
              restructuring plan requirements.
Sec. 3144. Extension of authority for appointment of certain 
              scientific, engineering, and technical personnel.
Sec. 3145. Report on proposed contract for Hanford Tank Waste 
              Vitrification project.
Sec. 3146. Limitation on conduct of subcritical nuclear weapons tests.
Sec. 3147. Limitation on use of certain funds until future use plans 
              are submitted.
Sec. 3148. Plan for external oversight of national laboratories.
Sec. 3149. University-based research center.
Sec. 3150. Stockpile stewardship program.
Sec. 3151. Reports on advanced supercomputer sales to certain foreign 
              nations.

          TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

Sec. 3201. Authorization.
Sec. 3202. Plan for transfer of facilities from jurisdiction of Defense 
              Nuclear Facilities Safety Board to jurisdiction of 
              Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

                TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE

Sec. 3301. Authorized uses of stockpile funds.
Sec. 3302. Disposal of beryllium copper master alloy in National 
              Defense Stockpile.
Sec. 3303. Disposal of titanium sponge in National Defense Stockpile.
Sec. 3304. Conditions on transfer of stockpiled platinum reserves for 
              Treasury use.
Sec. 3305. Restrictions on disposal of certain manganese ferro.
Sec. 3306. Required procedures for disposal of strategic and critical 
              materials.

                 TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

Sec. 3401. Authorization of appropriations.

[[Page H3966]]

Sec. 3402. Price requirement on sale of certain petroleum during fiscal 
              year 1998.
Sec. 3403. Termination of assignment of Navy officers to Office of 
              Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves.

                  TITLE XXXV--PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION

     Subtitle A--Authorization of Expenditures From Revolving Fund

Sec. 3501. Short title.
Sec. 3502. Authorization of expenditures.
Sec. 3503. Purchase of vehicles.
Sec. 3504. Expenditures only in accordance with treaties.

          Subtitle B--Facilitation of Panama Canal Transition

Sec. 3511. Short title; references.
Sec. 3512. Definitions relating to Canal transition.

    Part I--Transition Matters Relating to Commission Officers and 
                               Employees

Sec. 3521. Authority for the Administrator of the Commission to accept 
              appointment as the Administrator of the Panama Canal 
              Authority.
Sec. 3522. Post-Canal Transfer Personnel Authorities.
Sec. 3523. Enhanced authority of Commission to establish compensation 
              of Commission officers and employees.
Sec. 3524. Travel, transportation, and subsistence expenses for 
              Commission personnel no longer subject to Federal Travel 
              Regulation.
Sec. 3525. Enhanced recruitment and retention authorities.
Sec. 3526. Transition separation incentive payments.
Sec. 3527. Labor-management relations.
Sec. 3528. Availability of Panama Canal Revolving Fund for severance 
              pay for certain employees separated by Panama Canal 
              Authority after Canal Transfer Date.

Part II--Transition Matters Relating to Operation and Administration of 
                                 Canal

Sec. 3541. Establishment of procurement system and board of contract 
              appeals.
Sec. 3542. Transactions with the Panama Canal Authority.
Sec. 3543. Time limitations on filing of claims for damages.
Sec. 3544. Tolls for small vessels.
Sec. 3545. Date of actuarial evaluation of FECA liability.
Sec. 3546. Notaries public.
Sec. 3547. Commercial services.
Sec. 3548. Transfer from President to Commission of certain regulatory 
              functions relating to employment classification appeals.
Sec. 3549. Enhanced printing authority.
Sec. 3550. Technical and conforming amendments.

                  TITLE XXXVI--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

Sec. 3601. Authorization of appropriations for fiscal year 1998.
Sec. 3602. Repeal of obsolete annual report requirement concerning 
              relative cost of shipbuilding in the various coastal 
              districts of the United States.
Sec. 3603. Provisions relating to maritime security fleet program.
Sec. 3604. Authority to utilize replacement vessels and capacity.
Sec. 3605. Authority to convey national defense reserve fleet vessel.

     SEC. 3. CONGRESSIONAL DEFENSE COMMITTEES DEFINED.

       For purposes of this Act, the term ``congressional defense 
     committees'' means--
       (1) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the Senate; and
       (2) the Committee on National Security and the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives.
            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

     SEC. 101. ARMY.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998 for procurement for the Army as follows:
       (1) For aircraft, $1,535,264,000.
       (2) For missiles, $1,176,516,000.
       (3) For weapons and tracked combat vehicles, 
     $1,519,527,000.
       (4) For ammunition, $1,093,802,000.
       (5) For other procurement, $2,640,277,000.

     SEC. 102. NAVY AND MARINE CORPS.

       (a) Navy.--Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated 
     for fiscal year 1998 for procurement for the Navy as follows:
       (1) For aircraft, $6,172,950,000.
       (2) For weapons, including missiles and torpedoes, 
     $1,214,687,000.
       (3) For shipbuilding and conversion, $7,654,977,000.
       (4) For other procurement, $3,073,432,000.
       (b) Marine Corps.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal year 1998 for procurement for the 
     Marine Corps in the amount of $442,807,000.
       (c) Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition.--Funds are hereby 
     authorized to be appropriated for procurement of ammunition 
     for the Navy and the Marine Corps in the amount of 
     $470,355,000.

     SEC. 103. AIR FORCE.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998 for procurement for the Air Force as follows:
       (1) For aircraft, $6,770,900,000.
       (2) For missiles, $2,389,183,000.
       (3) For ammunition, $436,984,000.
       (4) For other procurement, $6,574,096,000.

     SEC. 104. DEFENSE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998 for Defense-wide procurement in the amount of 
     $1,836,989,000.

     SEC. 105. RESERVE COMPONENTS.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998 for procurement of aircraft, vehicles, 
     communications equipment, and other equipment for the reserve 
     components of the Armed Forces as follows:
       (1) For the Army National Guard, $102,700,000.
       (2) For the Air National Guard, $117,775,000.
       (3) For the Army Reserve, $90,400,000.
       (4) For the Naval Reserve, $118,000,000.
       (5) For the Air Force Reserve, $167,630,000.
       (6) For the Marine Corps Reserve, $98,600,000.
       (7) For the Coast Guard Reserve, $5,250,000.

     SEC. 106. DEFENSE INSPECTOR GENERAL.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998 for procurement for the Inspector General of the 
     Department of Defense in the amount of $1,800,000.

     SEC. 107. CHEMICAL DEMILITARIZATION PROGRAM.

       There is hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998 the amount of $610,700,000 for--
       (1) the destruction of lethal chemical agents and munitions 
     in accordance with section 1412 of the Department of Defense 
     Authorization Act, 1986 (50 U.S.C. 1521); and
       (2) the destruction of chemical warfare materiel of the 
     United States that is not covered by section 1412 of such 
     Act.

     SEC. 108. DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAMS.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998 for the Department of Defense for procurement for 
     carrying out health care programs, projects, and activities 
     of the Department of Defense in the total amount of 
     $279,068,000.

     SEC. 109. DEFENSE EXPORT LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998 for the Department of Defense for carrying out the 
     Defense Export Loan Guarantee Program in the total amount of 
     $1,231,000.
                       Subtitle B--Other Matters

     SEC. 121. LIMITATION ON OBLIGATION OF FUNDS FOR THE SEAWOLF 
                   SUBMARINE PROGRAM.

       (a) Limitation.--The Secretary of the Navy may not obligate 
     more than 50 percent of the funds appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998 for Shipbuilding and Conversion for the Navy that 
     are specified as being available for the Seawolf submarine 
     program until the Secretary certifies to the congressional 
     defense committees that the Secretary will include in the 
     future-years defense program accompanying the fiscal year 
     1999 budget for the Department of Defense not less than 50 
     percent of the amount necessary to fully fund incorporation 
     into each of the first four vessels in the New Attack 
     Submarine program the technology insertion opportunities 
     specified in subsection (b).
       (b) Technology Insertion Opportunities.--The technology 
     insertion opportunities referred to in subsection (a) are 
     those technology insertion opportunities available for the 
     first four vessels in the New Attack Submarine program that 
     were presented by the Assistant Secretary of the Navy 
     (Research, Development, and Acquisition) in testimony before 
     the Procurement Subcommittee of the Committee on National 
     Security of the House of Representatives on March 18, 1997.

     SEC. 122. REPORT ON ANNUAL BUDGET SUBMISSION REGARDING THE 
                   RESERVE COMPONENTS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 1013 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 10544. Budget information

       ``(a) Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the 
     congressional committees specified in subsection (d), at the 
     same time that the President submits the budget for a fiscal 
     year under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, a 
     report on amounts requested in that budget for the reserve 
     components.
       ``(b) Content.--The report shall include the following:
       ``(1) A description of the anticipated effect that the 
     amounts requested (if approved by Congress) will have to 
     enhance the capabilities of each of the reserve components.
       ``(2) A listing, with respect to each such component, of 
     each of the following:
       ``(A) The amount requested for each major weapon system for 
     which funds are requested in the budget for that component.
       ``(B) The amount requested for each item of equipment 
     (other than a major weapon system) for which funds are 
     requested in the budget for that component.
       ``(c) Inclusion of Information in Next FYDP.--The Secretary 
     of Defense shall specifically display in the each future-
     years defense program (or program revision) submitted to 
     Congress under section 221 of this title the amounts 
     programmed for procurement of equipment for each of the 
     reserve components.
       ``(d) Congressional Committees Specified.--The 
     congressional committees referred to in subsection (a) are 
     the following:
       ``(1) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the Senate.
       ``(2) The Committee on National Security and the Committee 
     on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.
       ``(e) Exclusion of Coast Guard Reserve.--In this section, 
     the term `reserve components' does not include the Coast 
     Guard Reserve.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``10544. Budget information.''.

[[Page H3967]]

         TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

     SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998 for the use of the Department of Defense for 
     research, development, test, and evaluation as follows:
       (1) For the Army, $4,752,913,000.
       (2) For the Navy, $7,946,996,000.
       (3) For the Air Force, $14,659,736,000.
       (4) For Defense-wide activities, $9,914,080,000, of which--
       (A) $279,683,000 is authorized for the activities of the 
     Director, Test and Evaluation; and
       (B) $23,384,000 is authorized for the Director of 
     Operational Test and Evaluation.

     SEC. 202. AMOUNT FOR BASIC AND APPLIED RESEARCH.

       (a) Fiscal Year 1998.--Of the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated by section 201, $4,131,871,000 shall be 
     available for basic research and applied research projects.
       (b) Basic Research and Applied Research Defined.--For 
     purposes of this section, the term ``basic research and 
     applied research'' means work funded in program elements for 
     defense research and development under Department of Defense 
     category 6.1 or 6.2.

     SEC. 203. DUAL-USE TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.

       (a) Funding Requirement.--Of the amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorizations in section 201 for the 
     Department of Defense for science and technology programs for 
     each of fiscal years 1998 through 2001, at least the 
     following percentages of such amounts shall be available in 
     the applicable fiscal year only for dual-use projects of the 
     Department of Defense:
       (1) For fiscal year 1998, 5 percent.
       (2) For fiscal year 1999, 7 percent.
       (3) For fiscal year 2000, 10 percent.
       (4) For fiscal year 2001, 15 percent.
       (b) Senior Official for Dual-Use Program.--The person 
     responsible for developing policy relating to, and ensuring 
     effective implementation of, the dual-use technology program 
     of the Department of Defense is the senior official 
     designated by the Secretary of Defense under section 203(b) 
     of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2451).
       (c) Limitation on Obligations.--(1) Except as provided in 
     paragraph (2), funds made available pursuant to subsection 
     (a) may not be obligated until the senior official referred 
     to in subsection (b) approves the obligation.
       (2) Paragraph (1) does not apply with respect to funds made 
     available pursuant to subsection (a) to the Defense Advanced 
     Research Projects Agency.
       (3) Funds made available pursuant to subsection (a) may be 
     used for a dual-use project only if the contract, cooperative 
     agreement, or other transaction by which the project is 
     carried out is entered into through the use of competitive 
     procedures.
       (d) Transfer Authority.--In addition to the transfer 
     authority provided in section 1001, the Secretary of Defense 
     may transfer funds made available pursuant to subsection (a) 
     for a dual-use project from a military department or defense 
     agency to another military department or defense agency to 
     ensure efficient implementation of the dual-use technology 
     program. The Secretary may delegate the authority provided in 
     the preceding sentence to the senior official referred to in 
     subsection (b).
       (e) Federal Cost Share.--(1) The share contributed by the 
     Secretary of a military department or the head of a defense 
     agency for the cost of a dual-use project during fiscal years 
     1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001 may not be greater than 50 percent 
     of the cost of the project for that fiscal year.
       (2) In calculating the share of the costs of a dual-use 
     program contributed by a military department or a non-
     Government entity, the Secretaries of the military 
     departments may not consider in-kind contributions.
       (f) Definitions.--In this section, the terms ``dual-use 
     technology program'', ``dual-use project'', and ``science and 
     technology program'' have the meanings provided by section 
     203(h) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2452).
    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

     SEC. 211. MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.

       Section 2525 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Funding Requirement.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2), 
     the Secretary of Defense shall make available each fiscal 
     year for the Manufacturing Technology Program the greater of 
     the following amounts:
       ``(A) 0.25 percent of the amount available for the fiscal 
     year concerned for the demonstration and validation, 
     engineering and manufacturing development, operational 
     systems development, and procurement programs of the military 
     departments and Defense Agencies.
       ``(B) The amount authorized to be appropriated by law for 
     the fiscal year concerned for projects of the military 
     departments and Defense Agencies under the Manufacturing 
     Technology Program.
       ``(2) Paragraph (1) applies to fiscal years 1998, 1999, and 
     2000.
       ``(f) Transfer Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may 
     transfer funds made available pursuant to subsection (e) from 
     a military department or Defense Agency to another military 
     department or Defense Agency to ensure efficient 
     implementation of the Manufacturing Technology Program. The 
     Secretary may delegate the authority provided in the 
     preceding sentence to the Under Secretary of Defense for 
     Acquisition and Technology. Authority to transfer funds under 
     this subsection is in addition to any other authority 
     provided by law to transfer funds (whether enacted before, 
     on, or after the date of the enactment of this section) and 
     is not subject to any dollar limitation or notification 
     requirement contained in any other such authority to transfer 
     funds.
       ``(g) Report.--(1) At the same time the President submits 
     to Congress the budget for fiscal year 1999 pursuant to 
     section 1105(a) of title 31, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to Congress a report that--
       ``(A) specifies the plans of the Secretary for expenditures 
     under the program during fiscal years 1998, 1999, and 2000; 
     and
       ``(B) assesses the effectiveness of the program.
       ``(2) The Secretary shall submit an updated version of such 
     report at the same time the President submits the budget for 
     each fiscal year after fiscal year 1999 during which the 
     program is in effect shall include--
       ``(A) an assessment of whether the funding of the program, 
     as provided pursuant to the funding requirement of subsection 
     (e), is sufficient; and
       ``(B) any recommendations considered appropriate by the 
     Secretary for changes in, or an extension of, the funding 
     requirement of subsection (e).''.

     SEC. 212. REPORT ON STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND 
                   DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.

       (a) Report.--Not later than February 28, 1998, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report 
     containing, for each project or activity of the Strategic 
     Environmental Research and Development Program--
       (1) an explanation of why the project or activity is not 
     duplicative of environmentally related research, development, 
     and demonstration activities of other departments and 
     agencies of the Federal Government, of State and local 
     governments, or of other organizations engaged in such 
     activities; and
       (2) an explanation of why the project or activity is 
     uniquely related to and necessary for the mission of the 
     Department of Defense.
       (b) Limitation on Use of Funds Pending Submission of 
     Report.--Not more than 50 percent of the funds appropriated 
     for the Strategic Environmental Research and Development 
     Program pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in 
     section 201(4) may be expended until the Secretary of Defense 
     submits the report required under this section.

     SEC. 213. TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES.

       (a) Prohibition on Funding for Outrider ACTD Program.--No 
     funds authorized to be appropriated under section 201 may be 
     obligated for the Outrider Advanced Concept Technology 
     Demonstration (ACTD) program.
       (b) Funding Requirements.--Of the funds authorized to be 
     appropriated for tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (TUAV) 
     under section 201--
       (1) $10,000,000 shall be available to carry out a 
     competition for an unmanned aerial vehicle capable of 
     vertical takeoff and landing; and
       (2) $11,500,000 shall be available to provide a Predator 
     Unmanned Aerial Vehicle system equipped with synthetic 
     aperture radar and associated equipment to facilitate the 
     development of a common Tactical Control System for unmanned 
     aerial vehicles.

     SEC. 214. REVISIONS TO MEMBERSHIP OF AND APPOINTMENT 
                   AUTHORITY FOR NATIONAL OCEAN RESEARCH 
                   LEADERSHIP COUNCIL.

       (a) Membership Revisions.--Section 7902(b) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out paragraph (11); and
       (2) in paragraph (17), by striking out ``One member'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``Not more than four members''.
       (b) Appointment Authority Revisions.--Section 7902 of such 
     title is amended--
       (1) in paragraphs (14), (15), (16), and (17) of subsection 
     (b), by striking out ``chairman'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``President''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(j) Delegation of Appointment Authority.--The President 
     may delegate the authority to make appointments under 
     subsection (b) to the head of a department, without authority 
     to redelegate.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Section 7902 of such title 
     is further amended--
       (A) in subsection (b), by redesignating paragraphs (12), 
     (13), (14), (15), (16), and (17) as paragraphs (11), (12), 
     (13), (14), (15), and (16), respectively; and
       (B) in subsection (d), by striking out ``(14), (15), (16), 
     or (17)'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``(13), (14), (15), 
     or (16)''.
       (2) Section 282 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2473) is 
     amended by striking out subsection (c).

     SEC. 215. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF REAL PROPERTY AT AIR 
                   FORCE INSTALLATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 949 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 9782. Maintenance and repair of real property

       ``(a) Allocation of Funds.--The Secretary of the Air Force 
     shall allocate funds authorized to be appropriated by a 
     provision described in subsection (c) and a provision 
     described in subsection (d) for maintenance and repair of 
     real property at military installations of the Department of 
     the Air Force without regard to whether the installation 
     is supported with funds authorized by a provision 
     described in subsection (c) or (d).
       ``(b) Mixing of Funds Prohibited on Individual Projects.--
     The Secretary of the Air

[[Page H3968]]

     Force may not combine funds authorized to be appropriated by 
     a provision described in subsection (c) and funds authorized 
     to be appropriated by a provision described in subsection (d) 
     for an individual project for maintenance and repair of real 
     property at a military installation of the Department of the 
     Air Force.
       ``(c) Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation Funds.--
     The provision described in this subsection is a provision of 
     a national defense authorization Act that authorizes funds to 
     be appropriated for a fiscal year to the Air Force for 
     research, development, test, and evaluation.
       ``(d) Operation and Maintenance Funds.--The provision 
     described in this subsection is a provision of a national 
     defense authorization Act that authorizes funds to be 
     appropriated for a fiscal year to the Air Force for operation 
     and maintenance.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``9782. Maintenance and repair of real property.''.

     SEC. 216. EXPANSION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR DEFENSE EXPERIMENTAL 
                   PROGRAM TO STIMULATE COMPETITIVE RESEARCH.

       Section 257 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337; U.S.C. 2358 note) is 
     amended by adding at the end of subsection (d) the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(3) In this section, the term `State' means a State of 
     the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth 
     of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and 
     the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.''.

     SEC. 217. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR ADAPTION OF 
                   INTEGRATED DEFENSIVE ELECTRONIC COUNTERMEASURES 
                   (IDECM) PROGRAM TO F/A-18E/F AIRCRAFT AND A/V-
                   8B AIRCRAFT.

       Not more than 50 percent of the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated in section 201(2) for development of the 
     Integrated Defensive Electronic Countermeasures (IDECM) 
     program for adaption to the F/A-18E/F aircraft and the AV-8B 
     aircraft may be obligated until the amount authorized in 
     section 201(2) for development of the IDECM program for 
     adaption to the F/A-18C/D aircraft is obligated.

     SEC. 218. BIOASSAY TESTING OF VETERANS EXPOSED TO IONIZING 
                   RADIATION DURING MILITARY SERVICE.

       Of the amount provided in section 201(4), $300,000 shall be 
     available for the Nuclear Test Personnel Review Program 
     conducted by the Defense Special Weapons Agency.
             Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense Programs

     SEC. 231. BUDGETARY TREATMENT OF AMOUNTS REQUESTED FOR 
                   PROCUREMENT FOR BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) Requirement for Inclusion in Budget of BMDO.--(1) 
     Chapter 9 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     inserting after section 222 the following new section:

     ``Sec. 224. Ballistic missile defense programs: amounts for 
       procurement

       ``(a) Requirement.--Any amount in the budget submitted to 
     Congress under section 1105 of title 31 for any fiscal year 
     for procurement for the National Missile Defense program or 
     for any system that is part of the core theater missile 
     defense program shall be set forth under the account of the 
     Department of Defense for Defense-wide procurement and, 
     within that account, under the subaccount (or other budget 
     activity level) for the Ballistic Missile Defense 
     Organization.
       ``(b) Core Theater Ballistic Missile Defense Program.--For 
     purposes of this section, the core theater missile defense 
     program consists of the systems specified in section 234 of 
     the Ballistic Missile Defense Act of 1995 (10 U.S.C. 2431 
     note).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 222 the following new item:

``224. Ballistic missile defense programs: amounts for procurement.''.

     SEC. 232. COOPERATIVE BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE PROGRAM.

       (a) Requirement for New Program Element.--The Secretary of 
     Defense shall establish a program element for the Ballistic 
     Missile Defense Organization, to be referred to as the 
     ``Cooperative Ballistic Missile Defense Program'', to support 
     technical and analytical cooperative efforts between the 
     United States and other nations that contribute to United 
     States ballistic missile defense capabilities. All 
     international cooperative ballistic missile defense programs 
     of the Department of Defense shall be budgeted and 
     administered through that program element.
       (b) Relationship to Other Program Elements.--The program 
     element established pursuant to subsection (a) is in addition 
     to the program elements for activities of the Ballistic 
     Missile Defense Organization required under section 251 of 
     the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 
     (Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 233; 10 U.S.C. 221 note).

     SEC. 233. DEPLOYMENT DATES FOR CORE THEATER MISSILE DEFENSE 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) Change in Deployment Dates.--Section 234(a) of the 
     Ballistic Missile Defense Act of 1995 (subtitle C of title II 
     of Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 229; 10 U.S.C. 2431 note) is 
     amended--
       (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking out 
     ``, to be carried out so as to achieve the specified 
     capabilities'';
       (2) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``, with a first unit 
     equipped (FUE) during fiscal year 1998'';
       (3) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``Navy Lower Tier 
     (Area) system'' and all that follows through ``fiscal year 
     1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``Navy Area Defense 
     system'';
       (4) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by striking out ``with a'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``to be carried out so as to achieve a''; and
       (B) by striking out ``fiscal year 1998'' and ``fiscal year 
     2000'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``fiscal year 2000'' and 
     ``fiscal year 2004'', respectively; and
       (5) in paragraph (4), by striking out ``Navy Upper Tier 
     (Theater Wide) system, with'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``Navy Theater Wide system, to be carried out so as to 
     achieve''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments for Program Element Name 
     Changes.--Section 251(a) of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 
     110 Stat. 233; 10 U.S.C. 221 note) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``Navy Lower Tier 
     (Area) system'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``Navy Area 
     Defense system''; and
       (2) in paragraph (4), by striking out ``Navy Upper Tier 
     (Theater Wide) system'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``Navy 
     Theater Wide system''.

     SEC. 234. ANNUAL REPORT ON THREAT POSED TO THE UNITED STATES 
                   BY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, BALLISTIC 
                   MISSILES, AND CRUISE MISSILES.

       (a) Annual Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit 
     to Congress by January 30 of each year a report on the 
     threats posed to the United States and allies of the United 
     States--
       (1) by weapons of mass destruction, ballistic missiles, and 
     cruise missiles; and
       (2) by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, 
     ballistic missiles, and cruise missiles.
       (b) Consultation.--Each report submitted under subsection 
     (a) shall be prepared in consultation with the Director of 
     Central Intelligence.
       (c) Matters To Be Included.--Each report submitted under 
     subsection (a) shall include the following:
       (1) Identification of each foreign country and non-State 
     organization that possesses weapons of mass destruction, 
     ballistic missiles, or cruise missiles, and a description of 
     such weapons and missiles with respect to each such foreign 
     country and non-State organization.
       (2) A description of the means by which any foreign country 
     and non-State organization that has achieved capability with 
     respect to weapons of mass destruction, ballistic missiles, 
     or cruise missiles has achieved that capability, including a 
     description of the international network of foreign countries 
     and private entities that provide assistance to foreign 
     countries and non-State organizations in achieving that 
     capability.
       (3) An examination of the doctrines that guide the use of 
     weapons of mass destruction in each foreign country that 
     possesses such weapons.
       (4) An examination of the existence and implementation of 
     the control mechanisms that exist with respect to nuclear 
     weapons in each foreign country that possesses such weapons.
       (5) Identification of each foreign country and non-State 
     organization that seeks to acquire or develop (indigenously 
     or with foreign assistance) weapons of mass destruction, 
     ballistic missiles, or cruise missiles, and a description of 
     such weapons and missiles with respect to each such foreign 
     country and non-State organization.
       (6) An assessment of various possible timelines for the 
     achievement by foreign countries and non-State organizations 
     of capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction, 
     ballistic missiles, and cruise missiles, taking into account 
     the probability of whether the Russian Federation and the 
     People's Republic of China will comply with the Missile 
     Technology Control Regime, the potential availability of 
     assistance from foreign technical specialists, and the 
     potential for independent sales by foreign private entities 
     without authorization from their national Governments.
       (7) For each foreign country or non-State organization that 
     has not achieved the capability to target the United States 
     or its territories with weapons of mass destruction, 
     ballistic missiles, or cruise missiles as of the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, an estimate of how far in advance the 
     United States is likely to be warned before such foreign 
     country or non-State organization achieves that capability.
       (8) For each foreign country or non-State organization that 
     has not achieved the capability to target members of the 
     United States Armed Forces deployed abroad with weapons of 
     mass destruction, ballistic missiles, or cruise missiles as 
     of the date of the enactment of this Act, an estimate of how 
     far in advance the United States is likely to be warned 
     before such foreign country or non-State organization 
     achieves that capability.
       (d) Classification.--Each report under subsection (a) shall 
     be submitted in classified and unclassified form.

     SEC. 235. DIRECTOR OF BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE ORGANIZATION.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 8 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 203. Director of Ballistic Missile Defense 
       Organization

       ``(a) Grade.--The position of Director of the Ballistic 
     Missile Defense Organization--
       ``(1) may only be held by an officer of the armed forces on 
     the active-duty list; and
       ``(2) shall be designated under section 601 of this title 
     as a position of importance and responsibility to carry the 
     grade of general or admiral or lieutenant general or vice 
     admiral.
       ``(b) Line of Authority to Secretary of Defense.--The 
     Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization 
     reports directly to the

[[Page H3969]]

     Secretary of Defense and (if so directed by the Secretary) 
     the Deputy Secretary of Defense, without intervening review 
     or approval by any other officer of the Department of 
     Defense, with respect to all matters pertaining to the 
     management of ballistic missile defense programs for which 
     the Director has responsibility (including matters pertaining 
     to the status of those programs and the budgets for those 
     programs).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such subchapter is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new item:

``203. Director of Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.''.

     SEC. 236. TACTICAL HIGH ENERGY LASER PROGRAM.

       (a) Transfer of Program.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     transfer the Tactical High Energy Laser program from the 
     Secretary of the Army to the Director of the Ballistic 
     Missile Defense Organization, to be carried out under the 
     Cooperative Ballistic Missile Defense Program established 
     pursuant to section 232(a).
       (b) Authorization.--Of the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated in section 201, $38,200,000 is authorized for 
     the Tactical High Energy Laser program.
                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

     SEC. 301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FUNDING.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998 for the use of the Armed Forces and other 
     activities and agencies of the Department of Defense for 
     expenses, not otherwise provided for, for operation and 
     maintenance, in amounts as follows:
       (1) For the Army, $17,185,034,000.
       (2) For the Navy, $21,372,699,000.
       (3) For the Marine Corps, $2,381,245,000.
       (4) For the Air Force, $18,745,985,000.
       (5) For Defense-wide activities, $10,030,057,000.
       (6) For the Army Reserve, $1,202,891,000.
       (7) For the Naval Reserve, $849,711,000.
       (8) For the Marine Corps Reserve, $110,366,000.
       (9) For the Air Force Reserve, $1,629,120,000.
       (10) For the Army National Guard, $2,266,432,000.
       (11) For the Air National Guard, $2,985,969,000.
       (12) For the Defense Inspector General, $136,580,000.
       (13) For the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed 
     Forces, $6,952,000.
       (14) For Environmental Restoration, Army, $377,337,000.
       (15) For Environmental Restoration, Navy, $277,500,000.
       (16) For Environmental Restoration, Air Force, 
     $378,900,000.
       (17) For Environmental Restoration, Defense-wide, 
     $27,900,000.
       (18) For Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense 
     Sites, $202,300,000.
       (19) For Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid 
     programs, $50,000,000.
       (20) For Drug Interdiction and Counter-drug Activities, 
     Defense-wide, $661,671,000.
       (21) For the Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation, and 
     Environmental Restoration Trust Fund, $10,000,000.
       (22) For Medical Programs, Defense, $9,975,382,000.
       (23) For Cooperative Threat Reduction programs, 
     $284,700,000.
       (24) For Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund, 
     $1,467,500,000.

     SEC. 302. WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998 for the use of the Armed Forces and other 
     activities and agencies of the Department of Defense for 
     providing capital for working capital and revolving funds in 
     amounts as follows:
       (1) For the Defense Working Capital Funds, $971,952,000.
       (2) For the National Defense Sealift Fund, $1,181,626,000.

     SEC. 303. ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME.

       There is hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998 from the Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund 
     the sum of $79,977,000 for the operation of the Armed Forces 
     Retirement Home, including the United States Soldiers' and 
     Airmen's Home and the Naval Home.

     SEC. 304. TRANSFER FROM NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE 
                   TRANSACTION FUND.

       (a) Transfer Authority.--To the extent provided in 
     appropriations Acts, not more than $150,000,000 is authorized 
     to be transferred from the National Defense Stockpile 
     Transaction Fund to operation and maintenance accounts for 
     fiscal year 1998 in amounts as follows:
       (1) For the Army, $50,000,000.
       (2) For the Navy, $50,000,000.
       (3) For the Air Force, $50,000,000.
       (b) Treatment of Transfers.--Amounts transferred under this 
     section--
       (1) shall be merged with, and be available for the same 
     purposes and the same period as, the amounts in the accounts 
     to which transferred; and
       (2) may not be expended for an item that has been denied 
     authorization of appropriations by Congress.
       (c) Relationship to Other Transfer Authority.--The transfer 
     authority provided in this section is in addition to the 
     transfer authority provided in section 1001.

     SEC. 305. REFURBISHMENT AND INSTALLATION OF AIR SEARCH RADAR.

       Of the amount authorized to be appropriated pursuant to 
     section 301(2) for operation and maintenance for the Navy, 
     $6,000,000 shall be available only for the refurbishment and 
     installation of the AN/SPS-48E air search radar for the Ship 
     Self Defense System at the Integrated Ship Defense Systems 
     Engineering Center, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Wallops 
     Islands, Virginia.

     SEC. 306. REFURBISHMENT OF M1-A1 TANKS.

       Of the amount authorized to be appropriated pursuant to 
     section 301(1) for operation and maintenance for the Army, 
     $35,000,000 shall be available only for refurbishment of M1-
     A1 tanks at the Anniston Army Depot under the AIM-XXI program 
     if the Secretary of Defense determines that the cost 
     effectiveness of the pilot AIM-XXI program is validated 
     through user trials conducted at the National Training 
     Center, Fort Irwin, California.

     SEC. 307. PROCUREMENT AND ELECTRONIC COMMERCE TECHNICAL 
                   ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

       (a) Authorization.--Subject to subsection (c), of the 
     amount authorized to be appropriated under section 301(5), 
     $15,000,000 shall be available for carrying out the 
     provisions of chapter 142 of title 10, United States Code.
       (b) Prohibition.--Subject to subsection (c), the Secretary 
     of Defense may not obligate or expend any funds available for 
     research, development, test, and evaluation to establish or 
     operate a resource center or program to provide technical 
     assistance relating to electronic commerce.
       (c) Limitation.--Subsections (a) and (b) apply only in the 
     event of the consolidation of the procurement technical 
     assistance program and the electronic commerce resource 
     program as a single technical assistance program funded with 
     amounts available for operation and maintenance.

     SEC. 308. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR SEPARATION PAY FOR 
                   DEFENSE ACQUISITION PERSONNEL.

       Of the amount authorized to be appropriated pursuant to 
     section 301(5) for operation and maintenance for Defense-wide 
     activities, $100,000,000 shall be available only for the 
     payment of separation pay for defense acquisition personnel 
     (other than pursuant to section 5597 of title 5, United 
     States Code).
                 Subtitle B--Military Readiness Issues

     SEC. 311. EXPANSION OF SCOPE OF QUARTERLY READINESS REPORTS.

       (a) Expanded Reports Required.--Section 482 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 482. Quarterly readiness reports

       ``(a) Quarterly Reports Required.--Not later than 30 days 
     after the end of each calendar-year quarter, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of 
     the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the 
     House of Representatives a report on military readiness. The 
     report for a quarter shall contain the information required 
     by subsections (b) (d), and (e).
       ``(b) Readiness Problems and Remedial Actions.--Each report 
     shall specifically describe--
       ``(1) readiness problems or deficiencies identified using 
     the assessments considered under subsection (c);
       ``(2) planned remedial actions; and
       ``(3) the key indicators and other relevant information 
     related to the identified problem or deficiency.
       ``(c) Consideration of Readiness Assessments.--The 
     information required under subsection (b) to be included in 
     the report for a quarter shall be based on readiness 
     assessments that are provided during that quarter--
       ``(1) to any council, committee, or other body of the 
     Department of Defense--
       ``(A) that has responsibility for readiness oversight; and
       ``(B) whose membership includes at least one civilian 
     officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense at the 
     level of Assistant Secretary of Defense or higher;
       ``(2) by senior civilian and military officers of the 
     military departments and the commanders of the unified and 
     specified commands; and
       ``(3) as part of any regularly established process of 
     periodic readiness reviews for the Department of Defense as a 
     whole.
       ``(d) Comprehensive Readiness Indicators.--Each report 
     shall also include information regarding each military 
     department (and an evaluation of such information) with 
     respect to each of the following readiness indicators:
       ``(1) Personnel strength.--
       ``(A) Individual personnel status.
       ``(B) Historical and projected personnel trends.
       ``(2) Personnel turbulence.--
       ``(A) Recruit quality.
       ``(B) Borrowed manpower.
       ``(C) Personnel stability.
       ``(3) Other personnel matters.--
       ``(A) Personnel morale.
       ``(B) Medical and dental readiness.
       ``(C) Recruit shortfalls.
       ``(4) Training.--
       ``(A) Training unit readiness and proficiency.
       ``(B) Operations tempo.
       ``(C) Training funding.
       ``(D) Training commitments and deployments.
       ``(5) Logistics--equipment fill.--
       ``(A) Deployed equipment.
       ``(B) Equipment availability.
       ``(C) Equipment that is not mission capable.
       ``(D) Age of equipment.
       ``(E) Condition of nonpacing items.
       ``(6) Logistics--equipment maintenance.--
       ``(A) Maintenance backlog.
       ``(7) Logistics--supply.--
       ``(A) Availability of ordnance and spares.
       ``(e) Unit Readiness Indicators.--Each report shall also 
     include information regarding the readiness of each unit of 
     the armed forces at the battalion, squadron, or an equivalent 
     level (or a higher level) that received a readiness rating of 
     C-3 (or below) for any month of the calendar-year quarter 
     covered by the report. With respect to each such unit, the 
     report shall separately provide the following information:

[[Page H3970]]

       ``(1) The unit designation and level of organization.
       ``(2) The overall readiness rating for the unit for the 
     quarter and each month of the quarter.
       ``(3) The resource area or areas (personnel, equipment and 
     supplies on hand, equipment condition, or training) that 
     adversely affected the unit's readiness rating for the 
     quarter.
       ``(4) If the unit received a readiness rating below C-1 in 
     personnel for the quarter, the primary reason for the lower 
     rating, by reason code and definition.
       ``(5) If the unit received a readiness rating below C-1 in 
     equipment and supplies on hand for the quarter, the primary 
     reason for the lower rating, by reason code and definition.
       ``(6) If the unit received a readiness rating below C-1 in 
     equipment condition for the quarter, the primary reason for 
     the lower rating, by reason code and definition.
       ``(7) If the unit received a readiness rating below C-1 in 
     training for the quarter, the primary reason for the lower 
     rating, by reason code and definition.
       ``(f) Classification of Reports.--A report under this 
     section shall be submitted in unclassified form. To the 
     extent the Secretary of Defense determines necessary, the 
     report may also be submitted in classified form.''.
       (b) Implementation Plan to Examine Readiness Indicators.--
     Not later than January 15, 1998, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to the congressional defense committees a plan--
       (1) specifying the manner in which the Secretary will 
     implement the additional reporting requirement of subsection 
     (d) of section 482 of title 10, United States Code, as added 
     by this section; and
       (2) specifying the criteria proposed to be used to evaluate 
     the readiness indicators identified in such subsection (d).
       (c) Limitation Pending Receipt of Implementation Plan.--Of 
     the amount available for fiscal year 1998 for operation and 
     support activities of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, 
     10 percent may not be obligated until after the date on which 
     the implementation plan required by subsection (b) is 
     submitted.
       (d) First Report; Transition.--The first report required 
     under section 482 of title 10, United States Code, as amended 
     by subsection (a), shall be submitted not later than October 
     31, 1997. Until the report required for the third quarter of 
     1998 is submitted, the Secretary of Defense may omit the 
     information required by subsection (d) of such section if the 
     Secretary determines that it is impracticable to comply with 
     such subsection with regard to the preceding reports.

     SEC. 312. LIMITATION ON REALLOCATION OF FUNDS WITHIN 
                   OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Limitation.--Whenever the Secretary of Defense proposes 
     to reallocate funds within an O&M budget activity in a manner 
     described in subsection (b), the reallocation may be made 
     only--
       (1) after the Secretary submits to the congressional 
     defense committees notice of the proposed reallocation; and
       (2) if the procedures generally applicable to transfers of 
     funds between appropriations of the Department of Defense 
     have been followed with respect to such reallocation.
       (b) Covered Reallocations.--Subsection (a) applies in the 
     case of any reallocation of funds from a subactivity of an 
     O&M budget activity to another subactivity within the same 
     O&M budget activity or to another O&M budget activity within 
     the same operation and maintenance appropriation if the 
     amount to be reallocated, when added to any previous amounts 
     reallocated from that subactivity for that fiscal year, is in 
     excess of $10,000,000.
       (c) O&M Budget Activity Defined.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term ``O&M budget activity'' means a budget 
     activity within an operation and maintenance appropriation of 
     the Department of Defense for a fiscal year.
       (d) Covered Fiscal Years.--This section applies with 
     respect to funds appropriated for fiscal years 1998, 1999, 
     and 2000.

     SEC. 313. OPERATION OF PREPOSITIONED FLEET, NATIONAL TRAINING 
                   CENTER, FORT IRWIN, CALIFORNIA.

       Of the amount authorized to be appropriated pursuant to 
     section 301(1) for operation and maintenance for the Army, 
     $60,200,000 shall be available only to pay costs associated 
     with the operation of the prepositioned fleet of equipment 
     during training rotations at the National Training Center, 
     Fort Irwin, California.

     SEC. 314. PROHIBITION OF IMPLEMENTATION OF TIERED READINESS 
                   SYSTEM.

       (a) Prohibition.--The Secretary of a military department 
     may not implement, or be required to implement, a readiness 
     system for units of the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction 
     of that Secretary under which a military unit would be 
     categorized into one of several categories (or ``tiers'') 
     according to the likelihood that the unit will be required to 
     respond to a military conflict and the time in which the unit 
     will be required to respond, if that system would have the 
     effect of changing the methods used as of October 1, 1996, by 
     the Armed Forces under the jurisdiction of that Secretary for 
     determining the priorities for allocating to such military 
     units funding, personnel, equipment, equipment maintenance, 
     and training resources, and the associated levels of 
     readiness of those units that result from those priorities.
       (b) Report to Congress Requesting Waiver.--If the Secretary 
     of Defense determines that implementation, for one or more of 
     the Armed Forces, of a tiered readiness system that is 
     otherwise prohibited by subsection (a) would be in the 
     national security interests of the United States, the 
     Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of 
     the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the 
     House of Representatives a report setting forth that 
     determination of the Secretary, together with the rationale 
     for that determination, and a request for the enactment of 
     legislation to allow implementation of such a system.

     SEC. 315. REPORTS ON TRANSFERS FROM HIGH-PRIORITY READINESS 
                   APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Annual and Quarterly Reports Required.--Chapter 23 of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new section:

     ``Sec. 483. Reports on transfers from high-priority readiness 
       appropriations

       ``(a) Annual Reports.--Not later than the date on which the 
     President submits the budget for a fiscal year to Congress 
     pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to the 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 House of Representatives a report on 
     transfers during the preceding fiscal year from funds 
     available for each covered budget activity.
       ``(b) Quarterly Reports.--Not later than 30 days after the 
     end of each quarter of a fiscal year, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to the congressional committees 
     specified in subsection (a) a report on transfers, during 
     that fiscal year quarter, from funds available for each 
     covered budget activity.
       ``(c) Matters To Be Included.--In each report under 
     subsection (a) or (b), the Secretary of Defense shall include 
     for each covered budget activity the following:
       ``(1) A statement, for the period covered by the report, 
     of--
       ``(A) the total amount of transfers into funds available 
     for that activity;
       ``(B) the total amount of transfers from funds available 
     for that activity; and
       ``(C) the net amount of transfers into, or out of, funds 
     available for that activity.
       ``(2) A detailed explanation of the transfers into, and out 
     of, funds available for that activity during the period 
     covered by the report.
       ``(d) Covered Budget Activity Defined.--In this section, 
     the term `covered budget activity' means each of the 
     following:
       ``(1) The budget activity groups (known as `subactivities') 
     within the Operating Forces budget activity of the annual 
     Operation and Maintenance, Army, appropriation that are 
     designated as follows:
       ``(A) All subactivities under the category of Land Forces.
       ``(B) Land Forces Depot Maintenance.
       ``(C) Base Support.
       ``(D) Maintenance of Real Property.
       ``(2) The Air Operations budget activity groups (known as 
     `subactivities') within the Operating Forces budget activity 
     of the annual Operation and Maintenance, Navy, appropriation 
     that are designated as follows:
       ``(A) Mission and Other Flight Operations.
       ``(B) Fleet Air Training.
       ``(C) Aircraft Depot Maintenance.
       ``(D) Base Support.
       ``(E) Maintenance of Real Property.
       ``(3) The Ship Operations budget activity groups (known as 
     `subactivities') within the Operating Forces budget activity 
     of the annual Operation and Maintenance, Navy, appropriation 
     that are designated as follows:
       ``(A) Mission and Other Ship Operations.
       ``(B) Ship Operational Support and Training.
       ``(C) Ship Depot Maintenance.
       ``(D) Base Support.
       ``(E) Maintenance of Real Property.
       ``(4) The Expeditionary Forces budget activity groups 
     (known as `subactivities') within the Operating Forces budget 
     activity of the annual Operation and Maintenance, Marine 
     Corps, appropriation that are designated as follows:
       ``(A) Operational Forces.
       ``(B) Depot Maintenance.
       ``(C) Base Support.
       ``(D) Maintenance of Real Property.
       ``(5) The Air Operations and Combat Related Operations 
     budget activity groups (known as `subactivities') within the 
     Operating Forces budget activity of the annual Operation and 
     Maintenance, Air Force, appropriation that are designated as 
     follows:
       ``(A) Primary Combat Forces.
       ``(B) Primary Combat Weapons.
       ``(C) Air Operations Training.
       ``(D) Depot Maintenance.
       ``(E) Base Support.
       ``(F) Maintenance of Real Property.
       ``(6) The Mobility Operations budget activity group (known 
     as a `subactivity') within the Mobilization budget activity 
     of the annual Operation and Maintenance, Air Force, 
     appropriation that is designated as Airlift Operations.
       ``(e) Termination.--The requirements specified in 
     subsections (a) and (b) shall terminate upon the submission 
     of the annual report under subsection (a) covering fiscal 
     year 2000.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``483. Reports on transfers from high-priority readiness 
              appropriations.''.

     SEC. 316. REPORT ON CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF EXERCISE 
                   PROGRAM AND PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE PROGRAM.

       (a) Report.--Not later than February 16, 1998, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed 
     Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security 
     of the House of Representatives a report on the military 
     exercises conducted by the Department of Defense during 
     fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997 and the military exercises 
     planned to be conducted during fiscal years 1998, 1999, and 
     2000, under the training exercises program known as the 
     ``CJCS Exercise Program'' and under the training exercises 
     program known as the Partnership for Peace program.
       (b) Information on Exercises Conducted or To Be 
     Conducted.--The report under subsection (a) shall include the 
     following information for each such exercise, which shall be 
     set

[[Page H3971]]

     forth by fiscal year and shown within fiscal year by the 
     sponsoring command:
       (1) Name of the exercise.
       (2) Type, description, duration, and objectives of the 
     exercise
       (3) Command sponsoring the exercise.
       (4) Participating units, including the number of personnel 
     participating in each unit.
       (5) For each participating unit, the percentage of the 
     tasks on that unit's specification of tasks knows as a 
     Mission Essential Task List (or comparable specification, in 
     the case of any of the Armed Forces that do not maintain a 
     Mission Essential Task List designation) scheduled to be 
     performed as part of the exercise.
       (6) The cost of the exercise to the Chairman of the Joint 
     Chiefs of Staff and the cost to each of the Armed Forces 
     participating in the exercise, with a description of the 
     categories of activities for which those costs are incurred 
     in each such case.
       (7) The priority of the exercise in relation to all other 
     exercises planned by the sponsoring command to be conducted 
     during that fiscal year.
       (8) In the case of an exercise conducted under the 
     Partnership for Peace program, the country with which each 
     the exercise was conducted.
       (c) Assessment.--The report shall include--
       (1) an assessment of the ability of each of the Armed 
     Forces to meet requirements of the CJCS Exercise Program and 
     the Partnership for Peace program with available assets;
       (2) an assessment of the training value of each exercise 
     covered in the report to each unit participating in the 
     exercise, including for each such unit an assessment of the 
     value of the percentage under subsection (b)(5) as an 
     indicator of the training value of the exercise for that 
     unit; and
       (3) options to minimize the negative effects on operational 
     and personnel tempo resulting from the CJCS Exercise Program 
     and the Partnership for Peace program.
       (d) Funding Limitation Pending Receipt of Report.--Of the 
     funds available for fiscal year 1998 for the conduct of the 
     CJSC Exercise Program, not more than 50 percent may be 
     expended before the report under subsection (a) is submitted.

     SEC. 317. QUARTERLY REPORTS ON EXECUTION OF OPERATION AND 
                   MAINTENANCE APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Report Required.--Chapter 23 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 483, as added by 
     section 315, the following new section:

     ``Sec. 484. Quarterly reports on execution of operation and 
       maintenance appropriations

       ``(a) Report Required.--Not later than 60 days after the 
     end of each quarter of a fiscal year, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to the 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 House of Representatives a report 
     containing budget execution data for each budget activity 
     group (known as a `subactivity') within the annual operation 
     and maintenance appropriations for the period covered by the 
     report. A report shall cover all preceding quarters of the 
     fiscal year involved.
       ``(b) Manner of Presenting Data.--The budget execution data 
     required under subsection (a) shall be displayed for the 
     fiscal year involved in the same manner used in the operation 
     and maintenance tables contained in the budget justification 
     document entitled `O-1 Exhibit' submitted to Congress in 
     support of the budget of the Department of Defense, as 
     included in the budget of the President submitted under 
     section 1105 of title 31.
       ``(c) Required Information.--The following information 
     shall be provided for each budget activity group:
       ``(1) Amounts authorized to be appropriated.
       ``(2) Amounts appropriated.
       ``(3) Direct obligations.
       ``(4) Total obligational authority.
       ``(5) Amounts related to unbudgeted contingency operations.
       ``(6) Direct obligations related to unbudgeted contingency 
     operations.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 483, as added by section 315, the 
     following new item:

``484. Quarterly reports on execution of operation and maintenance 
              appropriations.''.
                     Subtitle C--Civilian Personnel

     SEC. 321. PAY PRACTICES WHEN OVERSEAS TEACHERS TRANSFER TO 
                   GENERAL SCHEDULE POSITIONS.

       Section 5334(d) of title 5, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking out ``is deemed increased by 20 percent'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``shall be increased by such amount 
     as may be authorized, if any, under regulations issued by the 
     Secretary of Defense, but not to exceed 20 percent,''.

     SEC. 322. USE OF APPROVED FIRE-SAFE ACCOMMODATIONS BY 
                   GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS.

       (a) Percentage Use Requirement.--Section 5707a of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (a) through (d) as 
     subsections (b) through (e), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after the section heading the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(a)(1) For the purpose of making payments under this 
     chapter for lodging expenses incurred in a State, each agency 
     shall ensure that not less than 90 percent of the commercial-
     lodging room nights for employees of that agency for a fiscal 
     year are booked in approved places of public accommodation.
       ``(2) Each agency shall establish explicit procedures to 
     satisfy the percentage requirement of paragraph (1).''.
       (b) Definitions.--Such section is further amended by adding 
     at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(f) For purposes of this section:
       ``(1) The term `agency' does not include the government of 
     the District of Columbia.
       ``(2) The term `approved places of public accommodation' 
     means hotels, motels, and other places of public 
     accommodation that are listed by the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency as meeting the requirements of the fire 
     prevention and control guidelines described in section 29 of 
     the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 
     U.S.C. 2225).
       ``(3) The term `State' means any State, the District of 
     Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth 
     of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Trust Territory of the 
     Pacific Islands, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, or 
     any other territory or possession of the United States.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--Such section is further 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), as redesignated by subsection 
     (a)(1)--
       (A) by striking out ``places of public accommodation that 
     meet the requirements of the fire prevention and control 
     guidelines described in section 29 of the Federal Fire 
     Prevention and Control Act of 1974'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``approved places of public accommodation''; and
       (B) by striking out ``as defined in section 4 of the 
     Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974'';
       (2) in subsection (c), as redesignated by subsection 
     (a)(1), by striking out ``does not meet the requirements of 
     the fire prevention and control guidelines described in 
     section 29 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 
     1974'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``is not an approved 
     place of public accommodation''; and
       (3) in subsection (e), as redesignated by subsection 
     (a)(1)--
       (A) by striking out ``encourage'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``facilitate the ability of ''; and
       (B) by striking out ``places of public accommodation that 
     meet the requirements of the fire prevention and control 
     guidelines described in section 29 of the Federal Fire 
     Prevention and Control Act of 1974'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``approved places of public accommodation''.
       (d) Report on Implementation.--Not later than March 31, 
     1998, the Administrator of General Services, after 
     consultation with the agencies covered by section 5707a of 
     title 5, United States Code, shall submit to Congress a 
     report describing the procedures established by each agency 
     to satisfy the percentage requirement imposed by subsection 
     (a) of such section, as amended by this section.
                   Subtitle D--Depot-Level Activities

     SEC. 331. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR AVIATION DEPOTS AND 
                   NAVAL SHIPYARDS TO ENGAGE IN DEFENSE-RELATED 
                   PRODUCTION AND SERVICES.

       Section 1425(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510; 104 Stat. 1684) is 
     amended by striking out ``September 30, 1997'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``September 30, 1999''.

     SEC. 332. EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN LARGE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR 
                   PROJECTS FROM PERCENTAGE LIMITATION ON 
                   CONTRACTING FOR DEPOT-LEVEL MAINTENANCE.

       Section 2466 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     inserting after subsection (a) the following new subsection:
       ``(b) Treatment of Certain Large Projects.--If a 
     maintenance or repair project concerning an aircraft carrier 
     or submarine that is contracted for performance by non-
     Federal Government personnel and that accounts for five 
     percent or more of the funds made available in a fiscal year 
     to a military department or a Defense Agency for depot-level 
     maintenance and repair workload, the project and the funds 
     necessary for the project shall not be considered when 
     applying the percentage limitation specified in subsection 
     (a) to that military department or Defense Agency.''.

     SEC. 333. RESTRICTIONS ON CONTRACTS FOR PERFORMANCE OF DEPOT-
                   LEVEL MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR AT CERTAIN 
                   FACILITIES.

       (a) Depot-Level Maintenance and Repair Defined.--(1) 
     Chapter 146 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     inserting before section 2461 the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2460. Definition of depot-level maintenance and repair

       ``(a) In General.--In this chapter, the term `depot-level 
     maintenance and repair' means material maintenance or repair 
     requiring the overhaul, upgrading, or rebuilding of parts, 
     assemblies, or subassemblies, and the testing and reclamation 
     of equipment as necessary, regardless of the source of funds 
     for the maintenance or repair. The term includes all aspects 
     of software maintenance and such portions of interim 
     contractor support, contractor logistics support, or any 
     similar contractor support for the performance of services 
     that are described in the preceding sentence.
       ``(b) Exception.--The term does not include the procurement 
     of a major weapon system modification or upgrade, except 
     where the changes to the system are primarily for safety 
     reasons, to correct a deficiency, or to improve program 
     performance.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by inserting before the item relating to section 
     2461 the following new item:

``2460. Definition of depot-level maintenance and repair.''.

       (b) Restriction on Certain Contracts.--Section 2469 of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended--

[[Page H3972]]

       (1) in subsections (a) and (b), by striking out ``or 
     repair'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``and repair''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Restriction on Contracts at Certain Facilities.--
       ``(1) Restriction.--The Secretary of Defense may not enter 
     into any contract for the performance of depot-level 
     maintenance and repair of weapon systems or other military 
     equipment of the Department of Defense, or for the 
     performance of management functions related to depot-level 
     maintenance and repair of such systems or equipment, at any 
     military installation where a depot-level maintenance and 
     repair facility was approved in 1995 for closure under the 
     Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of 
     title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note). In 
     the preceding sentence, the term `military installation' 
     includes a former military installation closed under the Act 
     that was a military installation when it was approved for 
     closure under the Act.
       ``(2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply with 
     respect to an installation or former installation described 
     in such paragraph if the Secretary of Defense certifies to 
     Congress, not later than 45 days before entering into a 
     contract for depot-level maintenance and repair at the 
     installation or former installation, that--
       ``(A) not less than 80 percent of the capacity at each of 
     the depot-level maintenance and repair activities of the 
     military department concerned is being utilized on an ongoing 
     basis to perform industrial operations in support of the 
     depot-level maintenance and repair of weapon systems and 
     other military equipment of the Department of Defense;
       ``(B) the Secretary has determined, on the basis of a 
     detailed analysis (which the Secretary shall submit to 
     Congress with the certification), that the total amount of 
     the costs of the proposed contract to the Government, both 
     recurring and nonrecurring and including any costs associated 
     with planning for and executing the proposed contract, would 
     be less than the costs that would otherwise be incurred if 
     the depot-level maintenance and repair to be performed under 
     the contract were performed using equipment and facilities of 
     the Department of Defense;
       ``(C) all of the information upon which the Secretary 
     determined that the total costs to the Government would be 
     less under the contract is available for examination; and
       ``(D) none of the depot-level maintenance and repair to be 
     performed under the contract was considered, before July 1, 
     1995, to be a core logistics capability of the military 
     department concerned pursuant to section 2464 of this title.
       ``(3) Capacity of depot-level activities.--For purposes of 
     paragraph (2)(A), the capacity of depot-level maintenance and 
     repair activities shall be considered to be the same as the 
     maximum potential capacity identified by the Defense Base 
     Closure and Realignment Commission for purposes of the 
     selection in 1995 of military installations for closure or 
     realignment under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment 
     Act of 1990, without regard, after 1995, to any limitation on 
     the maximum number of Federal employees (expressed as full 
     time equivalent employees or otherwise), Federal 
     employment levels, or the actual availability of equipment 
     to support depot-level maintenance and repair.
       ``(4) GAO review.--At the same time that the Secretary 
     submits the certification and analysis to Congress under 
     paragraph (2), the Secretary shall submit a copy of the 
     certification and analysis to the Comptroller General. The 
     Comptroller General shall review the analysis and the 
     information referred to in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2) 
     and, not later than 30 days after Congress receives the 
     certification, submit to Congress a report containing a 
     statement regarding whether the Comptroller General concurs 
     with the determination of the Secretary included in the 
     certification pursuant to subparagraph (B) of that paragraph.
       ``(5) Application.--This subsection shall apply with 
     respect to any contract described in paragraph (1) that is 
     entered into, or proposed to be entered into, after January 
     1, 1997.''.

     SEC. 334. CORE LOGISTICS FUNCTIONS OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

       Section 2464(a) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``a logistics 
     capability (including personnel, equipment, and facilities)'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``a core logistics capability 
     that is Government-owned and Government-operated (including 
     Government personnel and Government-owned and Government-
     operated equipment and facilities)'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``the logistics'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``the core logistics''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(3) Those core logistics activities identified under 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) shall include the capability, 
     facilities, and equipment to maintain and repair all types of 
     weapon systems and other military equipment that are 
     identified by the Secretary, in consultation with the Joint 
     Chiefs of Staff, as necessary to enable the armed forces to 
     fulfill the national military strategy, including the 
     capability and capacity to maintain and repair any new 
     mission-essential weapon system or materiel within four years 
     after the system or materiel achieves initial operational 
     capability.
       ``(4) The Secretary of Defense shall require the 
     performance of core logistics activities identified under 
     paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) at Government-owned, Government-
     operated facilities of the Department of Defense (including 
     Government-owned, Government-operated facilities of a 
     military department) and shall assign such facilities 
     sufficient workload to ensure cost efficiency and technical 
     proficiency in peacetime while preserving the surge capacity 
     and reconstitution capabilities necessary to meet the 
     military contingencies provided for in the national military 
     strategy.''.

     SEC. 335. CENTERS OF INDUSTRIAL AND TECHNICAL EXCELLENCE.

       (a) Designation and Purpose.--(1) Chapter 146 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 2474. Centers of Industrial and Technical Excellence: 
       designation; public-private partnerships

       ``(a) Designation.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
     designate each depot-level activity of the military 
     departments and the Defense Agencies (other than facilities 
     approved for closure or major realignment under the Defense 
     Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title 
     XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note)) as a Center 
     of Industrial and Technical Excellence in the recognized core 
     competencies of the activity.
       ``(2) The Secretary shall establish a policy to encourage 
     the Secretary of each military department and the head of 
     each Defense Agency to reengineer industrial processes and 
     adopt best-business practices at their depot-level activities 
     in connection with their core competency requirements, so as 
     to serve as recognized leaders in their core competencies 
     throughout the Department of Defense and in the national 
     technology and industrial base (as defined in section 2500(1) 
     of this title).
       ``(b) Public-Private Partnerships.--The Secretary of 
     Defense shall enable Centers of Industrial and Technical 
     Excellence to form public-private partnerships for the 
     performance of depot-level maintenance and repair and shall 
     encourage the use of such partnerships to maximize the 
     utilization of the capacity at such Centers.
       ``(c) Additional Work.--The policy required under 
     subsection (a) shall include measures to enable a private 
     sector entity that enters into a partnership arrangement 
     under subsection (b) or leases excess equipment and 
     facilities at a Center of Industrial and Technical Excellence 
     pursuant to section 2471 of this title to perform 
     additional work at the Center, subject to the limitations 
     outlined in subsection (b) of such section, outside of the 
     types of work normally assigned to the Center.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``2474. Centers of Industrial and Technical Excellence: designation; 
              public-private partnerships.''.

       (b) Reporting Requirement.--Not later than March 1, 1998, 
     the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on 
     the policies established by the Secretary pursuant to section 
     2474 of title 10, United States Code, to implement the 
     requirements of such section. The report shall include--
       (1) the details of any public-private partnerships entered 
     into as of that date under subsection (b) of such section;
       (2) the details of any leases entered into as of that date 
     under section 2471 of such title with authorized entities for 
     dual-use (military and nonmilitary) purposes; and
       (3) the effect that the partnerships and leases had on 
     capacity utilization, depot rate structures, and readiness.

     SEC. 336. PERSONNEL REDUCTIONS, ARMY DEPOTS PARTICIPATING IN 
                   ARMY WORKLOAD AND PERFORMANCE SYSTEM.

       The Secretary of the Army may not carry out a reduction in 
     force of civilian employees at the five Army depots 
     participating in the demonstration and testing of the Army 
     Workload and Performance System until after the date on which 
     the Secretary submits to Congress a report certifying that--
       (1) the Army Workload and Performance System is fully 
     operational; and
       (2) the manpower audits being performed by the Comptroller 
     General, the Army Audit Agency, and the Inspector General of 
     the Army as of the date of the enactment of this Act have 
     been completed.
                  Subtitle E--Environmental Provisions

     SEC. 341. REVISION OF MEMBERSHIP TERMS FOR STRATEGIC 
                   ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 
                   SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD.

       Section 2904(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     in paragraph (4) by striking out ``three'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``not less than two and not more than four''.

     SEC. 342. AMENDMENTS TO AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS 
                   WITH OTHER AGENCIES IN SUPPORT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 
                   TECHNOLOGY CERTIFICATION.

       (a) Authority To Enter Into Agreements With Indian 
     Tribes.--Section 327 of the National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2483) 
     is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``, or with an Indian 
     tribe,'' after ``with an agency of a State or local 
     government'';
       (2) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f); and
       (3) by inserting after subsection (d) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(e) Definition.--In this section, the term `Indian tribe' 
     has the meaning given that term by section 101(36) of the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601(36)).''.
       (b) Elimination of Certain Limitation on Authority.--
     Subsection (b)(1) of such section is amended by striking out 
     ``in carrying out its environmental restoration activities''.

[[Page H3973]]

     SEC. 343. AUTHORIZATION TO PAY NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT FOR 
                   ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP AT FORMER DEPARTMENT OF 
                   DEFENSE SITES IN CANADA.

       (a) Authorization.--To the extent provided in 
     appropriations Acts, the Secretary of Defense may pay an 
     amount to the Government of Canada of not more than 
     $100,000,000 (in fiscal year 1996 constant dollars), for 
     purposes of implementing the October 1996 negotiated 
     settlement between the United States and Canada relating to 
     environmental cleanup at various sites in Canada that were 
     formerly used by the Department of Defense.
       (b) Method of Payment.--The amount authorized by subsection 
     (a) shall be paid in 10 annual payments, with the first 
     payment made in fiscal year 1998.
       (c) Fiscal Year 1998 Payment.--The payment under this 
     section for fiscal year 1998 shall be made from amounts 
     appropriated pursuant to section 301(5).

     SEC. 344. MODIFICATIONS OF AUTHORITY TO STORE AND DISPOSE OF 
                   NONDEFENSE TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.

       (a) Authority To Store Materials Owned by Members of the 
     Armed Forces.--Section 2692(a) of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``either'' before ``by the Department''; 
     and
       (2) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``or by a member of the armed forces (or a 
     dependent of the member) assigned to or provided military 
     housing on the installation''.
       (b) Additional Exception to Limitation on Storage and 
     Disposal.--Section 2692(b) of such title is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (9) as 
     paragraphs (2) through (10), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting before paragraph (2) (as so redesignated) 
     the following new paragraph (1):
       ``(1) the storage, treatment, or disposal of materials that 
     will be or have been used in connection with an activity of 
     the Department of Defense or in connection with a service to 
     be performed on an installation of the Department for the 
     benefit of the Department;''.
       (c) Modification to Exception Relating to Storage or 
     Disposal of Explosives To Assist Law Enforcement Agencies.--
     Section 2692(b) of such title is amended in paragraph (3) (as 
     redesignated by subsection (b))--
       (1) by striking out ``Federal law enforcement'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``Federal, State, or local law 
     enforcement''; and
       (2) by striking out ``Federal agency'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``Federal, State, or local agency''.
       (d) Modification to Exception Relating to Storage of 
     Material in Connection With Use of a Defense Facility.--
     Section 2692(b) of such title is amended in paragraph (9) (as 
     redesignated by subsection (b))--
       (1) by striking out ``by a private person in connection 
     with the authorized and compatible use by that person of an 
     industrial-type'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``in 
     connection with the authorized use of a''; and
       (2) by striking out ``; and'' at the end and inserting in 
     lieu thereof the following: ``including the use of such a 
     facility for testing materiel and training personnel;''.
       (e) Modification to Exception Relating to Treatment and 
     Disposal of Material in Connection With Use of a Defense 
     Facility.--Section 2692(b) of such title is amended in 
     paragraph (10) (as redesignated by subsection (b))--
       (1) by striking out ``by a private person in connection 
     with the authorized and compatible commercial use by that 
     person of an industrial-type'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``in connection with the authorized use of a'';
       (2) by striking out ``with that person'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``or agreement with the prospective user'';
       (3) by striking out ``for that person's'' in subparagraph 
     (B) and inserting in lieu thereof ``for the prospective 
     user's''; and
       (4) by striking out the period at the end and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``; and''.
       (f) Additional Exception Relating to Space Launch 
     Facilities.--Section 2692(b) of such title is further amended 
     by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(11) the storage of any material that is not owned by the 
     Department of Defense if the Secretary of the military 
     department concerned determines that the material is required 
     or generated in connection with the use of a space launch 
     facility located on an installation of the Department of 
     Defense or on other land controlled by the United States.''.
       (g) Technical Amendments.--(1) Section 2692(a)(1) of such 
     title is amended by striking out ``storage'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``storage, treatment,''.
       (2) The heading for section 2692 of such title is amended 
     to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 2692. Storage, treatment, and disposal of nondefense 
       toxic and hazardous materials''.

       (3) The item relating to section 2692 in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 159 of such title is 
     amended to read as follows:

``2692. Storage, treatment, and disposal of nondefense toxic and 
              hazardous materials.''.

     SEC. 345. REVISION OF REPORT REQUIREMENT FOR NAVY PROGRAM TO 
                   MONITOR ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF ORGANOTIN.

       Section 333(e) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2486) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking out ``June 1'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``October 30'';
       (2) by striking out paragraphs (1) and (2);
       (3) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs 
     (1) and (2), respectively; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) A description of the present and future use, if any, 
     of antifouling paints containing organotin on naval 
     vessels.''.

     SEC. 346. PARTNERSHIPS FOR INVESTMENT IN INNOVATIVE 
                   ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES.

       (a) Authority.--Subject to subsection (b), the Secretary of 
     Defense may enter into a partnership with one or more private 
     sector entities to demonstrate and validate innovative 
     environmental technologies.
       (b) Limitations.--The Secretary of Defense may enter into a 
     partnership with respect to an environmental technology under 
     subsection (a)--
       (1) subject to such terms and conditions as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate and in the national interest; and
       (2) only if the Secretary determines that the technology 
     has clear potential to be of significant value to the 
     Department of Defense in carrying out its environmental 
     activities.
       (c) Funding.--Under a partnership entered into under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary may provide funds to the 
     partner or partners from appropriations available to the 
     Department of Defense for environmental activities, for a 
     period of up to five years.
       (d) Report.--In the annual report required under section 
     2706(a) of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall include the following information with respect 
     to partnerships entered into under this section:
       (1) The number of such partnerships.
       (2) A description of the nature of the technology involved 
     in each such partnership.
       (3) A list of all partners in such partnerships.
       (e) Coordination.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure 
     that the Department of Defense coordinates with the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in any 
     verification sponsored by the Department of technologies 
     demonstrated and validated by a partnership entered into 
     under this section.
       (f) Termination of Authority.--The authority to enter into 
     agreements under subsection (a) shall terminate three years 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 347. PILOT PROGRAM TO TEST AN ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY FOR 
                   ELIMINATING SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE EMISSIONS 
                   DURING SHIP OPERATIONS.

       (a) Determination by Secretary of the Navy.--(1) The 
     Secretary of the Navy shall make a determination whether the 
     alternative technology described in paragraph (2) has the 
     clear potential for significant benefit to the Navy.
       (2) The technology referred to in paragraph (1) is an 
     alternative technology designed to thermally treat on 
     shipboard all kinds of liquid and solid wastes generated on 
     an operating ship by means of a plasma arc melter system that 
     is compact, stationary, and uses a high alumina refractory 
     hearth.
       (b) Pilot Program.--If the determination made under 
     subsection (a)(1) is in the affirmative, the Secretary shall 
     establish a pilot program to test the alternative technology. 
     In conducting the test, the Secretary shall seek to 
     demonstrate whether the technology is valid, cost-effective, 
     and in compliance with environmental laws and regulations.
       (c) Funding.--From funds appropriated pursuant to the 
     authorization in section 301(2), the Secretary of the Navy 
     may use not more than $4,000,000 to carry out the pilot 
     program.
       (d) Report.--(1) If the determination made under subsection 
     (a)(1) is in the affirmative, upon completion of the test 
     conducted under the pilot program the Secretary shall submit 
     to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the 
     Committee on National Security of the House of 
     Representatives a report setting forth in detail the results 
     of the test. The report shall include recommendations on 
     whether the alternative technology merits implementation on 
     naval vessels and such other recommendations as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate.
       (2) If the determination made under subsection (a)(1) is in 
     the negative, the Secretary shall submit to the committees 
     referred to in paragraph (1) a report containing the analysis 
     and data used by the Secretary in making the determination 
     and such other recommendations as the Secretary considers 
     appropriate.
  Subtitle F--Commissaries and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities

     SEC. 361. REORGANIZATION OF LAWS REGARDING COMMISSARIES AND 
                   EXCHANGES AND OTHER MORALE, WELFARE, AND 
                   RECREATION ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Description of Chapter.--(1) The heading of chapter 147 
     of title 10, United States Code, is amended to read as 
     follows:

 ``CHAPTER 147--COMMISSARIES AND EXCHANGES AND OTHER MORALE, WELFARE, 
                      AND RECREATION ACTIVITIES''.

       (2) The tables of chapters at the beginning of subtitle A, 
     and at the beginning of part IV of subtitle A, of such title 
     are amended by striking out the item relating to chapter 147 
     and inserting in lieu thereof the following new item:

``147. Commissaries and Exchanges and Other Morale, Welfare, and 
    Recreation Activities...................................2481''.....

       (b) Transfer and Redesignation of Unrelated Provisions.--
     (1) Section 2481 of title 10, United States Code, is 
     transferred to chapter 159 of such title, inserted after 
     section 2685, and redesignated as section 2686.
       (2) Sections 2483 and 2490 of such title are transferred to 
     the end of subchapter III of chapter 169 of such title and 
     redesignated as sections 2867 and 2868, respectively.
       (3) Section 2491 of such title is redesignated as section 
     2500.
       (c) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 147 of title

[[Page H3974]]

     10, United States Code, is amended by striking out the items 
     relating to sections 2481, 2483, and 2490.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 159 
     of such title is amended by inserting after the item relating 
     to section 2685 the following new item:

``2686. Utilities and services: sale; expansion and extension of 
              systems and facilities.''.

       (3) The table of sections at the beginning of subchapter 
     III of chapter 169 of such title is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new items:

``2867. Sale of electricity from alternate energy and cogeneration 
              production facilities.

``2868. Utility services: furnishing for certain buildings.''.
       (4) The table of sections at the beginning of subchapter I 
     of chapter 148 of such title is amended by striking out the 
     item relating to section 2491 and inserting in lieu thereof 
     the following new item:

``2500. Definitions.''.

       (d) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Section 2534(d) of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended by striking out ``section 
     2491(1)'' both places it appears and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``section 2500(1)''.
       (2) Section 2865(b)(2) of such title is amended by striking 
     out ``section 2483(b)(2)'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``section 2867(b)(2)''.

     SEC. 362. MERCHANDISE AND PRICING REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMISSARY 
                   STORES.

       (a) Authorized Commissary Merchandise Categories.--
     Subsection (b) of section 2486 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out the matter preceding paragraph (1) and 
     inserting in lieu thereof the following: ``(b) Authorized 
     Commissary Merchandise Categories.--Merchandise sold in, at, 
     or by commissary stores may include items only in the 
     following categories:''; and
       (2) by striking out paragraph (11) and inserting in lieu 
     thereof the following new paragraph:
       ``(11) Subject to the congressional notification 
     requirements of subsection (f), such other merchandise 
     categories as the Secretary of Defense may prescribe.''.
       (b) Alteration of Uniform Sales Price Surcharge or 
     Adjustment.--Subsection (c) of such section is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``Uniform Sales Price Surcharge or 
     Adjustment.--'' after ``(c)'';
       (2) by striking out ``in commissary stores.'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``in, at, or by commissary stores.''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``The 
     uniform percentage in effect on the date of the enactment of 
     the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 
     may not be changed except by a law enacted after such 
     date.''.
       (c) Establishment of Sales Price.--Subsection (d) of such 
     section is amended to read as follows:
       ``(d) Sales Price Establishment.--The Secretary of Defense 
     shall establish the sales price of each item of merchandise 
     sold in, at, or by commissary stores at the level that will 
     recoup the actual product cost of the item (consistent with 
     this section and sections 2484 and 2685 of this title).''.
       (d) Congressional Notification; Special Rules.--Such 
     section is further amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsections:
       ``(f) Congressional Notification.--(1) Any change in the 
     pricing policies for merchandise sold in, at, or by 
     commissary stores, and any addition of a merchandise category 
     under subsection (a)(11), shall not take effect until the 
     Secretary of Defense submits written notice of the proposed 
     change or addition to Congress and a period of 90 days of 
     continuous session of Congress expires following the date on 
     which notice was received.
       ``(2) For purposes of this subsection, the continuity of a 
     session of Congress is broken only by an adjournment of the 
     Congress sine die, and the days on which either House is not 
     in session because of an adjournment or recess of more than 
     three days to a day certain are excluded in a computation of 
     such 90-day period.
       ``(g) Special Rule for Certain Merchandise.--(1) 
     Notwithstanding the general requirement that merchandise sold 
     in, at, or by commissary stores be commissary store 
     inventory, the Secretary of Defense may authorize the sale of 
     items in the merchandise categories specified in paragraph 
     (2) as noncommissary store inventory. Subsections (c) and (d) 
     shall not apply to the pricing of such items of merchandise.
       ``(2) The merchandise categories referred to in paragraph 
     (1) are as follows:
       ``(A) Magazines and other periodicals.
       ``(B) Tobacco products.''.
       (e) Clerical and Conforming Amendments.--Such section is 
     further amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``In General.--'' after 
     ``(a)''; and
       (2) in subsection (e)--
       (A) by inserting ``Special Rule for Brand-Name Commercial 
     Items.--'' after ``(e)''; and
       (B) by striking out ``in commissary stores'' both places it 
     appears and inserting in lieu thereof ``in, at, or by 
     commissary stores''.
       (f) Effect of Amendment.--(1) In the case of merchandise 
     categories authorized, before the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, for sale in, at, or by commissary stores pursuant 
     to regulations prescribed under subsection (b)(11) of section 
     2486 of title 10, United States Code, as in effect before 
     such date, the Secretary of Defense may continue to authorize 
     the sale of such merchandise categories in, at, or by 
     commissary stores after such date notwithstanding the 
     amendment made by subsection (a)(2). However, the sale in 
     commissary store of such merchandise categories shall be 
     subject to the other requirements of such section 2486.
       (2) Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
     Congress a report specifying the commissary merchandise 
     categories covered by paragraph (1).

     SEC. 363. LIMITATION ON NONCOMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT OF BRAND-
                   NAME COMMERCIAL ITEMS FOR RESALE IN COMMISSARY 
                   STORES.

       Section 2486(e) of title 10, United States Code, as amended 
     by section 362(e)(2), is further amended by adding at the end 
     the following new sentence: ``In determining whether a brand 
     name commercial item is regularly sold outside of commissary 
     stores, the Secretary shall consider only sales of the item 
     on a regional or national basis by commercial grocery or 
     other retail operations consisting of multiple stores.''.

     SEC. 364. TRANSFER OF JURISDICTION OVER EXCHANGE, COMMISSARY, 
                   AND MORALE, WELFARE, AND RECREATION ACTIVITIES 
                   TO UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (COMPTROLLER).

       (a) Comptroller Jurisdiction.--Section 135(c) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``and'' at the end of paragraph (4);
       (2) by striking out the period at the end of paragraph (5) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(6) in the areas of exchange, commissary, and 
     nonappropriated fund instrumentalities regarding morale, 
     welfare, and recreation activities.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 136(b) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by striking out ``exchange, 
     commissary, and nonappropriated fund activities,''.

     SEC. 365. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS TO BENEFIT MORALE, 
                   WELFARE, AND RECREATION ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Partnerships Authorized.--Chapter 147 of title 10, 
     United States Code, as amended by section 361, is further 
     amended by inserting before section 2482 the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 2481. Morale, welfare, and recreation activities: 
       leases and other contracts to benefit

       ``(a) Leases and Other Contracts Authorized.--The Secretary 
     of Defense may authorize a nonappropriated fund 
     instrumentality to enter into leases, licensing agreements, 
     concession agreements, and other contracts with private 
     persons and State or local governments involving real 
     property (and related personal property) under the control of 
     the nonappropriated fund instrumentality in order to 
     facilitate the provision of facilities, goods, or services to 
     authorized patrons of the nonappropriated fund 
     instrumentality.
       ``(b) Conditions.--A nonappropriated fund instrumentality 
     may enter into an authorized lease or other contract under 
     subsection (a) only if the nonappropriated fund 
     instrumentality determines, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of Defense, that--
       ``(1) the use of the property subject to the lease or 
     contract will provide appropriate space, or contribute to the 
     provision of goods and services, for a morale, welfare, or 
     recreation activity of the nonappropriated fund 
     instrumentality;
       ``(2) the lease or contract will not be inconsistent with 
     and will not adversely affect the mission of the Department 
     or the nonappropriated fund instrumentality; and
       ``(3) the lease or contract will enhance the use of the 
     property subject to the lease or contract.
       ``(c) Access to Resulting Facilities, Goods, or Services.--
     The use of a lease or contract under subsection (a) to 
     provide facilities, goods, or services shall not be construed 
     to permit the use of the resulting facilities, goods, or 
     services by persons who are not authorized patrons of the 
     nonappropriated fund instrumentality that is a party to the 
     lease or contract.
       ``(d) Lease and Contract Terms.--Subsection (b) of section 
     2667 of this title shall apply to a lease or contract under 
     subsection (a), except that references to the Secretary 
     concerned shall be deemed to mean the nonappropriated fund 
     instrumentality that is a party to the lease or contract.
       ``(e) Money Rentals.--Money rentals received pursuant to a 
     lease or contract under subsection (a) shall be treated in 
     the same manner as other receipts of the nonappropriated fund 
     instrumentality that is a party to the lease or contract, 
     except that use of the rentals shall be restricted to the 
     installation at which the property covered by the lease or 
     contract is located.
       ``(f) Definition.--In this section, the term 
     `nonappropriated fund instrumentality' means the Army and Air 
     Force Exchange Service, Navy Exchange Service Command, Marine 
     Corps exchanges, or any other instrumentality of the United 
     States under the jurisdiction of the armed forces which is 
     conducted for the comfort, pleasure, contentment, or physical 
     or mental improvement of members of the armed forces.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendments.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 147 of such title, as amended by section 
     361, is further amended by inserting before the item relating 
     to section 2482 the following new item:

``2481. Morale, welfare, and recreation activities: leases and other 
              contracts to benefit.''.

     SEC. 366. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN AMOUNTS RECEIVED BY DEFENSE 
                   COMMISSARY AGENCY.

       Section 2482 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Treatment of Certain Receipts.--(1) The Defense 
     Commissary Agency shall deposit

[[Page H3975]]

     amounts received from the sources specified in paragraph (2) 
     into the same account in which the proceeds from the 
     adjustment of, or surcharge on, commissary store prices 
     authorized by subsection (a) of section 2685 of this title 
     are deposited. In such amounts as provided in appropriations 
     Acts, the amounts deposited under this paragraph shall be 
     available for the purposes described in subsection (b) of 
     such section.
       ``(2) Paragraph (1) shall apply with respect to amounts 
     received by the Defense Commissary Agency from--
       ``(A) the sale of items for recycling;
       ``(B) the disposal of excess property;
       ``(C) license fees, royalties, incentive allowances, and 
     management and other fees; and
       ``(D) a nonappropriated fund instrumentality of the United 
     States.''.

     SEC. 367. AUTHORIZED USE OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS FOR RELOCATION 
                   OF NAVY EXCHANGE SERVICE COMMAND.

       The Navy Exchange Service Command is not required to 
     reimburse the United States for appropriated funds allotted 
     to the Navy Exchange Service Command during fiscal years 
     1994, 1995, and 1996 to cover costs incurred by the Navy 
     Exchange Service Command to relocate to Virginia Beach, 
     Virginia, and to lease headquarters space in Virginia Beach.
                       Subtitle G--Other Matters

     SEC. 371. ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES THAT 
                   BENEFIT DEPENDENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED 
                   FORCES AND DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN 
                   EMPLOYEES.

       (a) Continuation of Department of Defense Program for 
     Fiscal Year 1998.--Of the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to section 301(5) for operation and 
     maintenance for Defense-wide activities--
       (1) $30,000,000 shall be available for providing 
     educational agencies assistance (as defined in subsection 
     (d)(1)) to local educational agencies; and
       (2) $5,000,000 shall be available for making educational 
     agencies payments (as defined in subsection (d)(2)) to local 
     educational agencies.
       (b) Notification.--Not later than June 30, 1998, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall--
       (1) notify each local educational agency that is eligible 
     for educational agencies assistance for fiscal year 1998 of 
     that agency's eligibility for such assistance and the amount 
     of such assistance for which that agency is eligible; and
       (2) notify each local educational agency that is eligible 
     for an educational agencies payment for fiscal year 1998 of 
     that agency's eligibility for such payment and the amount of 
     the payment for which that agency is eligible.
       (c) Disbursement of Funds.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     disburse funds made available under paragraphs (1) and (2) of 
     subsection (a) not later than 30 days after the date on which 
     notification to the eligible local educational agencies is 
     provided pursuant to subsection (b).
       (d) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) The term ``educational agencies assistance'' means 
     assistance authorized under section 386(b) of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 
     102-484; 20 U.S.C. 7703 note).
       (2) The term ``educational agencies payments'' means 
     payments authorized under section 386(d) of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 
     102-484; 20 U.S.C. 7703 note).
       (3) The term ``local educational agency'' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 8013(9) of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7713(9)).
       (e) Technical Correction Relating to Original Assistance 
     Authority.--Section 386(c)(1) of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484; 
     20 U.S.C. 7703 note) is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``section 8003(a)'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``section 8003(a)(1)''; and
       (2) by striking out ``(20 U.S.C. 7703(a))'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``(20 U.S.C. 7703(a)(1))''.

     SEC. 372. CONTINUATION OF OPERATION MONGOOSE.

       Section 135 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(f) The Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall be 
     responsible for investigating evidence of fraud, waste, and 
     abuse uncovered as a result of the Department of Defense 
     program (known as Operation Mongoose) established to identify 
     and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse within the Department of 
     Defense, particularly fraud, waste, and abuse regarding 
     finance and accounting matters. The program shall continue 
     through fiscal year 2003.''.

     SEC. 373. INCLUSION OF AIR FORCE DEPOT MAINTENANCE AS 
                   OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET ACTIVITY 
                   GROUP.

       For fiscal year 1999 and each fiscal year thereafter, Air 
     Force depot-level maintenance of materiel shall be displayed 
     as one or more budget activity groups (known as 
     ``subactivities'') within the authorization request for 
     Operation and Maintenance, Air Force, in the proposed budget 
     for that fiscal year submitted to Congress pursuant to 
     section 1105 of title 31, United States Code.

     SEC. 374. PROGRAMS TO COMMEMORATE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF 
                   MARSHALL PLAN AND KOREAN CONFLICT.

       (a) Commemorative Programs.--(1) The Secretary of Defense 
     may conduct a program to commemorate the 50th anniversary of 
     the Marshall Plan that provided for the reconstruction of the 
     economies of Western Europe following World War II.
       (2) The Secretary may conduct a program to commemorate the 
     50th anniversary of the Korean conflict.
       (3) In conducting such commemorative programs, the 
     Secretary may coordinate, support, and facilitate other 
     programs and activities of the Federal Government, State and 
     local governments, and other persons in commemoration of the 
     Marshall Plan or the Korean conflict.
       (b) Marshall Plan Commemorative Activities.--The 
     commemorative programs authorized by subsection (a)(1) may 
     include activities and ceremonies--
       (1) to honor George C. Marshall, who developed the Marshall 
     Plan, for a lifetime of service to the United States as a 
     commissioned officer of the Army (including service during 
     World War II as Chief of Staff of the Army with the rank of 
     General of the Army) and as Secretary of Defense and 
     Secretary of State at the beginning of the Cold War; and
       (2) to provide the people of the United States with a clear 
     understanding and appreciation of the significance of 
     Marshall Plan.
       (c) Korean Conflict Commemorative Activities.--The 
     commemorative programs authorized by subsection (a)(2) may 
     include activities and ceremonies--
       (1) to provide the people of the United States with a clear 
     understanding and appreciation of the lessons and history of 
     the Korean conflict;
       (2) to thank and honor veterans of the Korean conflict and 
     their families;
       (3) to pay tribute to the sacrifices and contributions made 
     on the home front by the people of the United States during 
     the Korean conflict;
       (3) to highlight advances in technology, science, and 
     medicine related to military research conducted during the 
     Korean conflict;
       (4) to recognize the contributions and sacrifices made by 
     the allies of the United States in the Korean conflict; and
       (5) to highlight the role of the Armed Forces of the United 
     States, then and now, in maintaining world peace through 
     strength.
       (d) Names and Symbols.--The Secretary of Defense shall have 
     the sole and exclusive right to use the names ``The 
     Department of Defense 50th Anniversary of the Marshall 
     Plan'', ``50th Anniversary of the Marshall Plan'', and ``The 
     Korean Conflict Commemoration'', and such seal, emblems, and 
     badges incorporating such names 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.
       (e) Commemorative Account.--(1) There is established in the 
     Treasury an account to be known as the ``Department of 
     Defense 50th Anniversary of the Marshall Plan and Korean 
     Conflict Commemoration Account'', which shall be administered 
     by the Secretary of Defense as a single account. There 
     shall be deposited into the account all proceeds derived 
     from the Secretary's use of the exclusive rights described 
     in subsection (d). The Secretary may use funds in the 
     account only for the purpose of conducting the 
     commemorative programs authorized by subsection (a).
       (2) Not later than 60 days after completion of all 
     activities and ceremonies conducted as part of the 
     commemorative programs, the Secretary shall submit to 
     Congress a report containing an accounting of all the funds 
     deposited into and expended from the account or otherwise 
     expended under this section, and of any funds remaining in 
     the account. Unobligated funds remaining in the account on 
     that date shall be held in the account until transferred by 
     law.
       (f) Acceptance of Voluntary Services.--(1) 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 programs 
     authorized by subsection (a).
       (2) 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) 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.

     SEC. 375. PROHIBITION ON USE OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND 
                   BUDGET FOR BASE OPERATION SUPPORT.

       Section 167(f) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively;
       (2) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``In addition''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Funds provided for the special operations command as 
     part of the budget for the special operations command under 
     paragraph (1) may not be used to cover base operation support 
     expenses incurred at a military installation.''.

     SEC. 376. CONTINUATION AND EXPANSION OF DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM 
                   TO IDENTIFY OVERPAYMENTS MADE TO VENDORS.

       (a) Scope of Program.--Section 354 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 
     110 Stat. 268; 10 U.S.C. 2461 note) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking out the second sentence; 
     and
       (2) in subsection (b)(1), by striking out ``of the Defense 
     Logistics Agency that relate to (at least) fiscal years 1993, 
     1994, and 1995'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``relating to 
     fiscal years after fiscal year 1993 of the working-capital 
     funds and industrial, commercial, and support type activities 
     managed through the Defense Business Operations Fund, except 
     the Defense Logistics Agency to the extent such records have 
     already been audited''.

[[Page H3976]]

       (b) Collection Method; Contractor Payments.--Such section 
     is further amended by striking out subsections (d) and (e) 
     and inserting in lieu thereof the following new subsections:
       ``(d) Collection Method.--In the case of an overpayment to 
     a vendor identified under the demonstration program, the 
     Secretary shall require the use of the procedures specified 
     in section 32.611 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, 
     regarding a setoff against existing invoices for payment to 
     the vendor, as the first method by which the Department shall 
     seek to recover the amount of the overpayment (and any 
     applicable interest and penalties) from the vendor.
       ``(e) Fees for Contractor.--The Secretary shall pay to the 
     contractor under the contract entered into under the 
     demonstration program an amount not to exceed 25 percent of 
     the total amount recovered by the Department (through the 
     collection of overpayments and the use of setoffs) solely on 
     the basis of information obtained as a result of the audits 
     performed by the contractor under the program. When an 
     overpayment is recovered through the use of a setoff, amounts 
     for the required payment to the contractor shall be derived 
     from funds available to the working-capital fund or 
     industrial, commercial, or support type activity for which 
     the overpayment is recovered.''.

     SEC. 377. APPLICABILITY OF FEDERAL PRINTING REQUIREMENTS TO 
                   DEFENSE AUTOMATED PRINTING SERVICE.

       (a) Subchapter I of chapter 8 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 195. Defense Automated Printing Service: applicability 
       of Federal printing requirements

       ``The Defense Automated Printing Service shall comply fully 
     with the requirements of chapter 5 of title 44 relating to 
     the production and procurement of printing, binding, and 
     blank-book work.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such subchapter is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new item:

``195. Defense Automated Printing Service: applicability of Federal 
              printing requirements.''.

     SEC. 378. BASE OPERATIONS SUPPORT FOR MILITARY INSTALLATIONS 
                   ON GUAM.

       (a) Contractor Use of Nonimmigrant Aliens.--Each contract 
     for base operations support to be performed on Guam shall 
     contain a condition that work under the contract may not be 
     performed by any alien who is issued a visa or otherwise 
     provided nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii) 
     of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)).
       (b) Application of Section.--This section shall apply to 
     contracts entered into, amended, or otherwise modified on or 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                   TITLE IV--PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS
                       Subtitle A--Active Forces

     SEC. 401. END STRENGTHS FOR ACTIVE FORCES.

       The Armed Forces are authorized strengths for active duty 
     personnel as of September 30, 1998, as follows:
       (1) The Army, 495,000.
       (2) The Navy, 395,000.
       (3) The Marine Corps, 174,000.
       (4) The Air Force, 381,000.
                       Subtitle B--Reserve Forces

     SEC. 411. END STRENGTHS FOR SELECTED RESERVE.

       (a) In General.--The Armed Forces are authorized strengths 
     for Selected Reserve personnel of the reserve components as 
     of September 30, 1998, as follows:
       (1) The Army National Guard of the United States, 366,516.
       (2) The Army Reserve, 208,000.
       (3) The Naval Reserve, 94,294.
       (4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 42,000.
       (5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 107,377.
       (6) The Air Force Reserve, 73,431.
       (7) The Coast Guard Reserve, 8,000.
       (b) Waiver Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may vary 
     the end strength authorized by subsection (a) by not more 
     than 2 percent.
       (c) Adjustments.--The end strengths prescribed by 
     subsection (a) for the Selected Reserve of any reserve 
     component shall be proportionately reduced by--
       (1) the total authorized strength of units organized to 
     serve as units of the Selected Reserve of such component 
     which are on active duty (other than for training) at the end 
     of the fiscal year; and
       (2) the total number of individual members not in units 
     organized to serve as units of the Selected Reserve of such 
     component who are on active duty (other than for training or 
     for unsatisfactory participation in training) without their 
     consent at the end of the fiscal year.
     Whenever such units or such individual members are released 
     from active duty during any fiscal year, the end strength 
     prescribed for such fiscal year for the Selected Reserve of 
     such reserve component shall be proportionately increased by 
     the total authorized strengths of such units and by the total 
     number of such individual members.

     SEC. 412. END STRENGTHS FOR RESERVES ON ACTIVE DUTY IN 
                   SUPPORT OF THE RESERVES.

       Within the end strengths prescribed in section 411(a), the 
     reserve components of the Armed Forces are authorized, as of 
     September 30, 1998, the following number of Reserves to be 
     serving on full-time active duty or full-time duty, in the 
     case of members of the National Guard, for the purpose of 
     organizing, administering, recruiting, instructing, or 
     training the reserve components:
       (1) The Army National Guard of the United States, 22,310.
       (2) The Army Reserve, 11,500.
       (3) The Naval Reserve, 16,136.
       (4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 2,559.
       (5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 10,616.
       (6) The Air Force Reserve, 748.

     SEC. 413. END STRENGTHS FOR MILITARY TECHNICIANS (DUAL 
                   STATUS).

       (a) Authorization for Fiscal Year 1998.--The minimum number 
     of military technicians (dual status) as of the last day of 
     fiscal year 1998 for the reserve components of the Army and 
     the Air Force (notwithstanding section 129 of title 10, 
     United States Code) shall be the following:
       (1) For the Army Reserve, 5,503.
       (2) For the Army National Guard of the United States, 
     23,125.
       (3) For the Air Force Reserve, 9,802.
       (4) For the Air National Guard of the United States, 
     22,853.
       (b) Requests for Future Fiscal Years.--Section 115(g) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new sentence: ``In each budget submitted by the 
     President to Congress under section 1105 of title 31, the end 
     strength requested for military technicians (dual status) for 
     each reserve component of the Army and Air Force shall be 
     specifically set forth.''.

     SEC. 414. INCREASE IN NUMBER OF MEMBERS IN CERTAIN GRADES 
                   AUTHORIZED TO SERVE ON ACTIVE DUTY IN SUPPORT 
                   OF THE RESERVES.

       (a) Officers.--The table in section 12011(a) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Air     Marine
               ``Grade                  Army     Navy    Force    Corps
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Major or Lieutenant Commander.......    3,219   1,071     673      140
Lieutenant Colonel or Commander.....    1,524     520     672       90
Colonel or Navy Captain.............      437     188     274     30''.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (b) Senior Enlisted Members.--The table in section 12012(a) 
     of such title is amended to read as follows:

       

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Air     Marine
               ``Grade                  Army     Navy    Force    Corps
------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-9.................................     627     202      371       20
E-8.................................   2,585     429      900     94''.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

              Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations

     SEC. 421. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR MILITARY 
                   PERSONNEL.

       There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Department of Defense for military personnel for fiscal year 
     1998 a total of $69,539,862,000. The authorization in the 
     preceding sentence supersedes any other authorization of 
     appropriations (definite or indefinite) for such purpose for 
     fiscal year 1998.
                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
                  Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy

     SEC. 501. LIMITATION ON NUMBER OF GENERAL AND FLAG OFFICERS 
                   WHO MAY SERVE IN POSITIONS OUTSIDE THEIR OWN 
                   SERVICE.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 41 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 721. General and flag officers: limitation on 
       appointments, assignments, details, and duties outside an 
       officer's own service

       ``(a) Limitation.--An officer described in subsection (b) 
     may not be appointed, assigned, or detailed for a period in 
     excess of 90 days to a position external to that officer's 
     armed force if, immediately following such appointment, 
     assignment, or detail, the number of officers described in 
     subsection (b) serving in positions external to such 
     officers' armed force for a period in excess of 90 days would 
     be in excess of 24.5 percent of the total number of such 
     officers.
       ``(b) Covered Officers.--The officers covered by subsection 
     (a), and to be counted for the purposes of the limitation in 
     that subsection, are the following:
       ``(1) Any general or flag officer counted for purposes of 
     section 526(a) of this title.
       ``(2) Any general or flag officer serving in a joint duty 
     assignment position designated by the Chairman of the Joint 
     Chiefs of Staff under section 526(b) of this title.
       ``(3) Any colonel or Navy captain counted for purposes of 
     section 777(d)(1) of this title.
       ``(c) External Positions.--For purposes of this section, 
     the following positions shall be considered to be external to 
     an officer's armed force:
       ``(1) Any position (including a position in joint 
     education) that is a joint duty assignment for purposes of 
     chapter 38 of this title.
       ``(2) Any position in the Office of the Secretary of 
     Defense, a Defense Agency, or a Department of Defense Field 
     Activity.
       ``(3) Any position in the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Joint 
     Staff, or the headquarters of a combatant command (as defined 
     in chapter 6 of this title).
       ``(4) Any position in the National Guard Bureau.
       ``(5) Any position outside the Department of Defense, 
     including any position in the headquarters of the North 
     Atlantic Treaty Organization or any other international 
     military command, any combined or multinational command, or 
     military mission.
       ``(d) Assignments, Etc. For Periods in Excess of 90 Days.--
     For purposes of this section,

[[Page H3977]]

     the appointment, assignment, or detail of an officer to a 
     position shall be considered to be for a period in excess of 
     90 days unless the appointment, assignment, or detail 
     specifies that it is made a period of 90 days or less.
       ``(e) Waiver During Period of War or National Emergency.--
     The President may suspend the operation of this section 
     during any period of war or of national emergency declared by 
     Congress or the President.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``721. General and flag officers: limitation on appointments, 
              assignments, details, and duties outside an officer's own 
              service.''.

     SEC. 502. EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN RETIRED OFFICERS FROM 
                   LIMITATION ON PERIOD OF RECALL TO ACTIVE DUTY.

       Effective October 1, 1997, section 688(e) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``A member''; and
       (2) adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the following 
     officers:
       ``(A) A chaplain who is assigned to duty as a chaplain for 
     the period of active duty to which ordered.
       ``(B) A health care professional (as characterized by the 
     Secretary concerned) who is assigned to duty as a health care 
     professional for the period of active duty to which ordered.
       ``(C) An officer assigned to duty with the American Battle 
     Monuments Commission for the period of active duty to which 
     ordered.''.

     SEC. 503. CLARIFICATION OF OFFICERS ELIGIBLE FOR 
                   CONSIDERATION BY SELECTION BOARDS.

       (a) Officers on the Active-Duty List.--Section 619(d) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``grade--'' in the matter preceding 
     paragraph (1) and inserting in lieu thereof ``grade any of 
     the following officers:'';
       (2) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking out ``an officer'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``An officer''; and
       (B) by striking out ``; or'' at the end and inserting in 
     lieu thereof a period; and
       (3) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3) and in 
     that paragraph striking out ``an officer'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``An officer''; and
       (4) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph (2):
       ``(2) An officer who is recommended for promotion to that 
     grade in the report of an earlier selection board convened 
     under that section, in the case of such a report that has not 
     yet been approved by the President.''.
       (b) Officers on the Reserve Active-Status List.--Section 
     14301(c) of such title is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``grade--'' in the matter preceding 
     paragraph (1) and inserting in lieu thereof ``grade any of 
     the following officers:'';
       (2) by striking out ``an officer'' in each of paragraphs 
     (1), (2), and (3) and inserting in lieu thereof ``An 
     officer'';
       (3) by striking out the semicolon at the end of paragraph 
     (1) and inserting in lieu thereof a period;
       (4) by striking out ``; or'' at the end of paragraph (2) 
     and inserting in lieu thereof a period;
       (5) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3), as so amended, 
     as paragraphs (3) and (4), respectively, and in each such 
     paragraph striking out ``the next higher grade'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``that grade''; and
       (6) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph (2):
       ``(2) An officer who is recommended for promotion to that 
     grade in the report of an earlier selection board convened 
     under a provision referred to in paragraph (1), in the case 
     of such a report that has not yet been approved by the 
     President.''.
       (c) Clarifying Amendments.--Paragraphs (3) and (4) of 
     section 14301(c) of such title, as redesignated and amended 
     by subsection (b), are each amended by inserting before the 
     period at the end the following: ``, if that nomination is 
     pending before the Senate''.

     SEC. 504. AUTHORITY TO DEFER MANDATORY RETIREMENT FOR AGE OF 
                   OFFICERS SERVING AS CHAPLAINS.

       (a) Authority for Deferral of Retirement for Chaplains 
     Providing Direct Support to Units or Installations.--
     Subsection (c) of section 1251 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
     (3) and (4), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph (2):
       ``(2) The Secretary concerned may defer the retirement 
     under subsection (a) of an officer who is appointed or 
     designated as a chaplain if during the period of the 
     deferment the officer will be performing duties consisting 
     primarily of providing direct support as a chaplain to units 
     or installations.''.
       (b) Authority for Deferral of Retirement for Chief and 
     Deputy Chief of Chaplains.--Such section is further amended 
     by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) The Secretary concerned may defer the retirement 
     under subsection (a) of an officer who is the Chief of 
     Chaplains or Deputy Chief of Chaplains of that officer's 
     armed force. Such a deferment may not extend beyond the 
     first day of the month following the month in which the 
     officer becomes 68 years of age.''.
       (c) Qualification for Service as Navy Chief of Chaplains or 
     Deputy Chief of Chaplains.--(1) Section 5142(b) of such title 
     is amended by striking out ``, who are not on the retired 
     list,''.
       (2) Section 5142a of such title is amended by striking out 
     ``, who is not on the retired list,''.
                 Subtitle B--Reserve Component Matters

     SEC. 511. INDIVIDUAL READY RESERVE ACTIVATION AUTHORITY.

       (a) IRR Members Subject To Order to Active Duty Other Than 
     During War or National Emergency.--Section 10144 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a)'' before ``Within the Ready 
     Reserve''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(b)(1) Within the Individual Ready Reserve of each 
     reserve component there is a category of members, as 
     designated by the Secretary concerned, who are subject to 
     being ordered to active duty involuntarily in accordance with 
     section 12304 of this title. A member may not be placed in 
     that mobilization category unless--
       ``(A) the member volunteers for that category; and
       ``(B) the member is selected for that category by the 
     Secretary concerned, based upon the needs of the service and 
     the grade and military skills of that member.
       ``(2) A member of the Individual Ready Reserve may not be 
     carried in such mobilization category of members after the 
     end of the 24-month period beginning on the date of the 
     separation of the member from active service.
       ``(3) The Secretary shall designate the grades and military 
     skills or specialities of members to be eligible for 
     placement in such mobilization category.
       ``(4) A member in such mobilization category shall be 
     eligible for benefits (other than pay and training) as are 
     normally available to members of the Selected Reserve, as 
     determined by the Secretary of Defense.''.
       (b) Criteria for Ordering to Active Duty.--Subsection (a) 
     of section 12304 of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by inserting after ``of this title),'' the following: ``or 
     any member in the Individual Ready Reserve mobilization 
     category and designated as essential under regulations 
     prescribed by the Secretary concerned,''.
       (c) Maximum Number.--Subsection (c) of such section is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``and the Individual Ready Reserve'' after 
     ``Selected Reserve''; and
       (2) by inserting ``, of whom not more than 30,000 may be 
     members of the Individual Ready Reserve'' before the period 
     at the end.
       (d) Conforming Amendments.--Such section is further 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (f), by inserting ``or Individual Ready 
     Reserve'' after ``Selected Reserve'';
       (2) in subsection (g), by inserting ``, or member of the 
     Individual Ready Reserve,'' after ``to serve as a unit''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(i) For purposes of this section, the term `Individual 
     Ready Reserve mobilization category' means, in the case of 
     any reserve component, the category of the Individual Ready 
     Reserve described in section 10144(b) of this title.''.
       (e) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading of such section 
     is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 12304. Selected Reserve and certain Individual Ready 
       Reserve members; order to active duty other than during war 
       or national emergency''.

       (2) The item relating to section 12304 in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 1209 of such title is 
     amended to read as follows:

``12304. Selected Reserve and certain Individual Ready Reserve members; 
              order to active duty other than during war or national 
              emergency''.

     SEC. 512. TERMINATION OF MOBILIZATION INCOME INSURANCE 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 1214 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 12533. Termination of program

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall terminate the 
     insurance program in accordance with this section.
       ``(b) Termination of New Enrollments.--The Secretary may 
     not enroll a member of the Ready Reserve for coverage under 
     the insurance program after the date of the enactment of this 
     section.
       ``(c) Termination of Coverage.--(1) The enrollment under 
     the insurance program of insured members other than insured 
     members described in paragraph (2) is terminated as of the 
     date of the enactment of this section. The enrollment of 
     an insured member described in paragraph (2) is terminated 
     as of the date of the termination of the period of covered 
     service of that member described in that paragraph.
       ``(2) An insured member described in this paragraph is an 
     insured member who on the date of the enactment of this 
     section is serving on covered service for a period of 
     service, or has been issued an order directing the 
     performance of covered service, that satisfies or would 
     satisfy the entitlement-to-benefits provisions of this 
     chapter.
       ``(d) Termination of Payment of Benefits.--The Secretary 
     may not make any benefit payment under the insurance program 
     after the date of the enactment of this section other than to 
     an insured member who on that date (1) is serving on an order 
     to covered service, (2) has been issued an order directing 
     performance of covered service, or (3) has served on covered 
     service before that date for which benefits under the program 
     have not been paid to the member.
       ``(e) Termination of Insurance Fund.--The Secretary shall 
     close the Fund not later than 60 days after the date on which 
     the last benefit payment from the Fund is made. Any amount 
     remaining in the Fund when closed shall be covered into the 
     Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.''.

[[Page H3978]]

       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``12533. Termination of program.''.

     SEC. 513. CORRECTION OF INEQUITIES IN MEDICAL AND DENTAL CARE 
                   AND DEATH AND DISABILITY BENEFITS FOR RESERVE 
                   MEMBERS WHO INCUR OR AGGRAVATE AN ILLNESS IN 
                   THE LINE OF DUTY.

       (a) Medical and Dental Care for Dependents.--Section 
     1076(a)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (A);
       (2) by striking out the period at the end of subparagraph 
     (B) and inserting in lieu thereof ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) who incurs or aggravates an injury or illness in the 
     line of duty while serving on active duty for a period of 30 
     days or less and whose orders are subsequently modified to 
     extend the period of active duty to a period of more than 30 
     days.''.
       (b) Medical and Dental Care.--Section 1074a(a)(3) of such 
     title is amended by inserting ``while remaining overnight 
     immediately before the commencement of inactive-duty 
     training, or'' after ``in the line of duty''.
       (c) Eligibility for Disability Retirement.--Section 
     1204(2)(C) of such title is amended by inserting ``while 
     remaining overnight immediately before the commencement of 
     inactive-duty training, or'' after ``aggravated''.
       (d) Eligibility for Disability Separation.--Section 1206 of 
     such title is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) as 
     paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(2) the disability was incurred in the line of duty as a 
     result of--
       ``(A) performing active duty or inactive-duty training;
       ``(B) traveling directly to or from the place at which such 
     duty is performed; or
       ``(C) an injury, illness, or disease incurred or aggravated 
     while remaining overnight immediately before the commencement 
     of inactive-duty training, or while remaining overnight 
     between successive periods of inactive-duty training, at or 
     in the vicinity of the site of the inactive-duty training, if 
     the site is outside reasonable commuting distance of the 
     member's residence;''.
       (e) Recovery, Care, and Disposition of Remains.--Section 
     1481(a)(2)(D) of such title is amended by inserting 
     ``remaining overnight immediately before the commencement of 
     inactive-duty training, or'' after ``(D)''.
       (f) Entitlement to Basic Pay.--Section 204 of title 37, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting ``while remaining 
     overnight immediately before the commencement of inactive-
     duty training, or'' in subsections (g)(1)(D) and (h)(1)(D) 
     after ``in line of duty''.
       (g) Compensation for Inactive-Duty Training.--Section 
     206(a)(3)(C) of such title is amended by inserting ``while 
     remaining overnight immediately before the commencement of 
     inactive-duty training, or'' after ``in line of duty''.

     SEC. 514. TIME-IN-GRADE REQUIREMENTS FOR RESERVE COMMISSIONED 
                   OFFICERS RETIRED DURING FORCE DRAWDOWN PERIOD.

       (a) Authority Comparable to Active-Duty List Officers.--
     Subsection (d)(3) of section 1370 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(F) The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary 
     of a military department to reduce the three-year period 
     specified in subparagraph (A) to a period of not less than 
     two years in the case of retirements effective during the 
     period beginning on the date of the enactment of this 
     subparagraph and ending on September 30, 1999. The number 
     of officers in an armed force in a grade for whom a 
     reduction is made during any fiscal year in the period of 
     service-in-grade otherwise required under this paragraph 
     may not exceed the number equal to two percent of the 
     authorized reserve active status strength for that fiscal 
     year for officers of that armed force in that grade.''.
       (b) Technical Amendments.--Such section is further 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(2)(A), by inserting ``of'' after 
     ``reduce such period to a period''; and
       (2) in subsection (d)(1), by striking out ``chapter 1225'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``chapter 1223''.

     SEC. 515. AUTHORITY TO PERMIT NON-UNIT ASSIGNED OFFICERS TO 
                   BE CONSIDERED BY VACANCY PROMOTION BOARD TO 
                   GENERAL OFFICER GRADES.

       (a) Convening of Selection Boards.--Section 14101(a)(2) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``(except in the case of a board convened to consider 
     officers as provided in section 14301(e) of this title).''.
       (b) Eligibility for Consideration of Certain Army 
     Officers.--Section 14301 of such title is amended--
       (1) by striking out subsection (e); and
       (2) by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as subsections 
     (e) and (f), respectively.
       (c) General Officer Promotions.--Section 14308 of such 
     title is amended--
       (1) in subsection (e)(2), by inserting ``a grade below 
     colonel in'' after ``(2) an officer in''; and
       (2) in subsection (g)--
       (A) by inserting ``or the Air Force'' in the first sentence 
     after ``of the Army'' the first place it appears;
       (B) by striking out ``in that grade'' in the first sentence 
     and all that follows through ``Secretary of the Army'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``in the Army Reserve or the Air 
     Force Reserve, as the case may be, in that grade''; and
       (C) by striking out the second sentence.
       (d) Vacancy Promotions.--Section 14315(b)(1) of such title 
     is amended by striking out ``the duties'' in clause (A) and 
     all that follows through ``as a unit,'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``duties of a general officer of the next higher 
     reserve grade in the Army Reserve,''.

     SEC. 516. GRADE REQUIREMENT FOR OFFICERS ELIGIBLE TO SERVE ON 
                   INVOLUNTARY SEPARATION BOARDS.

       Section 14906(a)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking out ``a grade above lieutenant colonel or 
     commander'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``the grade of 
     lieutenant colonel or commander or a higher grade''.

     SEC. 517. LIMITATION ON USE OF AIR FORCE RESERVE AGR 
                   PERSONNEL FOR AIR FORCE BASE SECURITY 
                   FUNCTIONS.

       (a) Limitation.--The Secretary of the Air Force may not use 
     members of the Air Force Reserve who are AGR personnel for 
     the performance of force protection, base security, or 
     security police functions at an Air Force facility in the 
     United States until six months after the date on which the 
     Secretary submits to Congress a report on such use of AGR 
     personnel.
       (b) Matters To Be Included in Report.--The report under 
     subsection (a) shall include the following:
       (1) A statement of the planned scope, including each 
     planned location, of such use of AGR personnel during the 
     year in which the report is submitted and each of the five 
     subsequent years.
       (2) A detailed rationale for, and evaluation of, the cost 
     effectiveness of the use of AGR personnel to perform such 
     functions at Air Force facilities in the United States 
     compared to the use of Department of Defense civilian 
     personnel or contractor personnel for the performance of 
     these functions at those facilities.
       (3) A plan, including a cost estimate, for the 
     reemployment, conversion to AGR status, or retirement of 
     civilian employees and military technicians who are displaced 
     by the use of Air Force Reserve AGR personnel to perform 
     those functions.
       (c) AGR Personnel Defined.--For the purposes of this 
     section, the term ``AGR personnel'' means members of the Air 
     Force Reserve who are on active duty (other than for 
     training) in connection with organizing, administering, 
     recruiting, instructing, or training the Air Force Reserve.
                    Subtitle C--Military Technicians

     SEC. 521. AUTHORITY TO RETAIN ON THE RESERVE ACTIVE-STATUS 
                   LIST UNTIL AGE 60 MILITARY TECHNICIANS IN THE 
                   GRADE OF BRIGADIER GENERAL.

       (a) Retention.--Section 14702(a) of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``section 14506 or 14507'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``section 14506, 14507, or 14508''; 
     and
       (2) by striking out ``or colonel'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``colonel, or brigadier general''.
       (b) Technical Amendment.--Section 14508(c) of such title is 
     amended by striking out ``not later than the date on which 
     the officer becomes 60 years of age'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``not later than the last day of the month in which 
     the officer becomes 60 years of age''.

     SEC. 522. MILITARY TECHNICIANS (DUAL STATUS).

       (a) Definition.--Subsection (a) of section 10216 of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) In General.--(1) For purposes of this section and any 
     other provision of law, a military technician (dual status) 
     is a Federal civilian employee who--
       ``(A) is employed under section 3101 of title 5 or section 
     709 of title 32;
       ``(B) is required as a condition of that employment to 
     maintain membership in the Selected Reserve; and
       ``(C) is assigned to a position as a technician in the 
     administration and training of the Selected Reserve or in the 
     maintenance and repair of supplies or equipment issued to the 
     Selected Reserve or the armed forces.
       ``(2) Military technicians (dual status) shall be 
     authorized and accounted for as a separate category of 
     civilian employees.''.
       (b) Unit Membership and Dual-Status Requirement.--
     Subsection (d) of such section is amended to read as follows:
       ``(d) Unit Membership Requirement.--(1) Unless specifically 
     exempted by law, each individual who is hired as a military 
     technician (dual status) after December 1, 1995, shall be 
     required as a condition of that employment to maintain 
     membership in--
       ``(A) the unit of the Selected Reserve by which the 
     individual is employed as a military technician; or
       ``(B) a unit of the Selected Reserve that the individual is 
     employed as a military technician to support.
       ``(2) Paragraph (1) does not apply to a military technician 
     (dual status) who is employed by the Army Reserve in an area 
     other than Army Reserve troop program units.
       ``(e) Dual-Status Requirement.--(1) Funds appropriated for 
     the Department of Defense may not (except as provided in 
     paragraph (2)) be used for compensation as a military 
     technician of any individual hired as a military technician 
     after February 10, 1996, who is no longer a member of the 
     Selected Reserve.
       ``(2) The Secretary concerned may pay compensation 
     described in paragraph (1) to an individual described in that 
     paragraph who is no longer a member of the Selected Reserve 
     for a period not to exceed six months following the 
     individual's loss of membership in the Selected Reserve if 
     the Secretary determines such loss of membership was not due 
     to the failure of that individual to meet military 
     standards.''.

[[Page H3979]]

       (c) National Guard Dual-Status Requirement.--Section 709(b) 
     of title 32, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``Except as prescribed by the Secretary concerned, a 
     technician'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``A technician''.
       (d) Plan for Clarification of Statutory Authority of 
     Military Technicians.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
     submit to Congress, as part of the budget justification 
     materials submitted in support of the budget for the 
     Department of Defense for fiscal year 1999, a legislative 
     proposal to provide statutory authority and clarification 
     under title 5, United States Code--
       (A) for the hiring, management, promotion, separation, and 
     retirement of military technicians who are employed in 
     support of units of the Army Reserve or Air Force Reserve; 
     and
       (B) for the transition to the competitive service of an 
     individual who is hired as military technician in support of 
     a unit of the Army Reserve or Air Force Reserve and who (as 
     determined by the Secretary concerned) fails to maintain 
     membership in the Selected Reserve through no fault of the 
     individual.
       (2) The legislative proposal under paragraph (1) shall be 
     developed in consultation with the Director of the Office of 
     Personnel Management.
       (e) Conforming Repeal.--Section 8106 of Public Law 104-61 
     (109 Stat. 654; 10 U.S.C. 10101 note) is repealed.
       (f) Cross-Reference Corrections.--Section 10216(c)(1) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``subsection (a)(1)'' in subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D) 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``subsection (b)(1)''.
       (g) Conforming Amendments to Section 10216.--Section 10216 
     of title 10, United States Code, is further amended as 
     follows:
       (1) The heading of subsection (b) is amended by inserting 
     ``(Dual Status)'' after ``Military Technicians''.
       (2) Subsection (b)(1) is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``(dual status)'' after ``for military 
     technicians'';
       (B) by striking out ``dual status military technicians'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``military technicians (dual 
     status)'';
       (C) by inserting ``(dual status)'' after ``military 
     technicians'' in subparagraph (C).
       (3) Subsection (b)(2) is amended by inserting ``(dual 
     status)'' after ``military technicians'' both places it 
     appears.
       (4) Subsection (b)(3) is amended by inserting ``(dual 
     status)'' after ``Military technician''.
       (5) Subsection (c) is amended--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1)(A), by inserting 
     ``(dual status)'' after ``military technicians'';
       (B) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``dual status 
     technicians'' in subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D) and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``military technicians (dual 
     status)'';
       (C) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting ``(dual status)'' 
     after ``military technician''; and
       (D) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking out ``delineate--'' 
     and all that follows through ``or other reasons'' in clause 
     (ii) and inserting in lieu thereof ``delineate the specific 
     force structure reductions''.
       (h) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading of section 10216 
     of such title is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 10216. Military technicians (dual status)''.

       (2) The item relating to such section in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 1007 of such title is 
     amended to read as follows:

``10216. Military technicians (dual status).''.

       (i) Other Conforming Amendments.--(1) Section 115(g) of 
     such title is amended by inserting ``(dual status)'' in the 
     first sentence after ``military technicians'' and in the 
     second sentence after ``military technician''.
       (2) Section 115a(h) of such title is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``(displayed in the aggregate and 
     separately for military technicians (dual status) and non-
     dual status military technicians)'' in the matter preceding 
     paragraph (1) after ``of the following''; and
       (B) by striking out paragraph (3).

     SEC. 523. NON-DUAL STATUS MILITARY TECHNICIANS.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 1007 of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new section:

     ``Sec. 10217. Non-dual status military technicians

       ``(a) Definition.--For the purposes of this section and any 
     other provision of law, a non-dual status military technician 
     is a civilian employee of the Department of Defense who--
       ``(1) was hired as a military technician before the date of 
     the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1998 under any of the authorities specified in 
     subsection (d); and
       ``(2) as of the date of the enactment of that Act is not a 
     member of the Selected Reserve or after such date ceases to 
     be a member of the Selected Reserve.
       ``(b) Fiscal Year 1998 Limitation.--As of September 30 
     1998, the number of civilian employees of a military 
     department who are non-dual status military technicians may 
     not exceed the following:
       ``(1) For the Army Reserve, 1,200.
       ``(2) For the Army National Guard of the United States, 
     2,260.
       ``(3) For the Air Force Reserve, 0.
       ``(4) For the Air National Guard of the United States, 395.
       ``(c) Reductions for Future Years.--For each of the 10 
     fiscal years beginning with fiscal year 1999, the Secretary 
     of the military department concerned shall reduce the number 
     of non-dual status military technicians under the 
     jurisdiction of that Secretary, as of the end of that fiscal 
     year, from the authorized number for the preceding fiscal 
     year by not less--
       ``(1) 120, for the Army Reserve;
       ``(2) 226, for the Army National Guard of the United 
     States; and
       ``(3) 39, for the Air National Guard of the United States.
       ``(d) Employment Authorities.--The authorities referred to 
     in subsection (a) are the following:
       ``(1) Section 10216 of this title.
       ``(2) Section 709 of title 32.
       ``(3) The requirements referred to in section 8401 of title 
     5.
       ``(4) Section 8016 of the Department of Defense 
     Appropriations Act, 1996 (Public Law 104-61; 109 Stat. 654), 
     and any comparable provision provided on an annual basis in 
     the Department of Defense Appropriations Acts for fiscal 
     years 1984 through 1995.
       ``(5) Any memorandum of agreement between the Department of 
     Defense and the Office of Personnel Management providing for 
     the hiring of military technicians.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``10217. Non-dual status military technicians.''.

       (b) Plan for Non-Dual Status Technicians.--Not later than 
     March 31, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
     Congress a report setting forth recommendations of the 
     Secretary (including proposals for such legislative changes 
     as may be necessary to implement the recommendations of the 
     Secretary) for eliminating non-dual status military 
     technician positions. In developing the plan, the Secretary 
     shall consider (among other alternatives) the feasibility and 
     cost of each of the following:
       (1) Elimination or consolidation of functions and 
     positions.
       (2) Contracting for performance by contractor personnel of 
     functions currently performed by personnel in those 
     positions.
       (3) Conversion of those technicians and positions, in the 
     case of technicians of the Army National Guard of the United 
     States or the Air National Guard of the United States, to 
     State employment and positions or competitive service 
     employment positions under title 5, United States Code.
       (4) Conversion of those technicians or positions to 
     employment and positions in the competitive service under 
     title 5, United States Code, in the case of technicians of 
     the Army Reserve.
       (5) Use of incentives to facilitate the reductions required 
     under subsection (c) of section 10217 of title 10, United 
     States Code, as added by subsection (a).
  Subtitle D--Measures To Improve Recruit Quality and Reduce Recruit 
                               Attrition

     SEC. 531. REFORM OF MILITARY RECRUITING SYSTEMS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall carry out 
     reforms in the recruiting systems of the Army, Navy, Air 
     Force, and Marine Corps in order to improve the quality of 
     new recruits and to reduce attrition among recruits.
       (b) Specific Reforms.--As part of the reforms in military 
     recruiting systems to be undertaken under subsection (a), the 
     Secretary shall take the following steps:
       (1) Improve the system of separation codes used for 
     recruits who are separated during recruit training by (A) 
     revising and updating those codes to allow more accurate and 
     useful data collection about those separations, and (B) 
     prescribing regulations to ensure that those codes are 
     interpreted in a uniform manner by the military services.
       (2) Develop a reliable database for (A) analyzing service-
     wide data on reasons for attrition of new recruits, and (B) 
     undertaking service-wide measures to control and manage such 
     attrition.
       (3) Require that the Secretary of each military department 
     (A) adopt or strengthen incentives for recruiters to 
     thoroughly prescreen potential candidates for recruitment, 
     and (B) link incentives for recruiters, in part, to the 
     ability of a recruiter to screen out unqualified candidates 
     before enlistment.
       (4) Require that the Secretary of each military department 
     include as a measurement of recruiter performance the 
     percentage of persons enlisted by a recruiter who complete 
     initial combat training or basic training.
       (5) Assess trends in the number and use of waivers over the 
     1991-1997 period that were issued to permit applicants to 
     enlist with medical or other conditions that would otherwise 
     be disqualifying.
       (6) Require the Secretary of each military department to 
     implement policies and procedures (A) to ensure the prompt 
     separation of recruits who are unable to successfully 
     complete basic training, and (B) to remove those recruits 
     from the training environment while separation proceedings 
     are pending.
       (c) Report.--The Secretary shall submit to Congress a 
     report of the trends assessed under subsection (b)(5). The 
     information on those trends provided in the report shall be 
     shown by armed force and by category of waiver. The report 
     shall include recommendations of the Secretary for changing, 
     revising, or limiting the use of waivers referred to in that 
     subsection and shall be submitted not later than March 31, 
     1998.

     SEC. 532. IMPROVEMENTS IN MEDICAL PRESCREENING OF APPLICANTS 
                   FOR MILITARY SERVICE.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall improve the 
     medical prescreening of applicants for entrance into the 
     Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps.
       (b) Specific Steps.--As part of those improvements, the 
     Secretary shall take the following steps:
       (1) Require that each applicant for service in the Army, 
     Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps (A) provide to the Secretary 
     the name of the applicant's medical insurer and the names of 
     past medical providers, and (B) sign a release allowing the 
     Secretary to request and obtain medical records of the 
     applicant.
       (2) Require that the forms and procedures for medical 
     prescreening of applicants that are used

[[Page H3980]]

     by recruiters and by Military Entrance Processing Commands be 
     revised so as to ensure that medical questions are specific, 
     unambiguous, and tied directly to the types of medical 
     separations most common for recruits during basic training 
     and follow-on training.
       (3) Add medical screening tests to the examinations of 
     recruits carried out by Military Entrance Processing Station, 
     provide more thorough medical examinations to selected groups 
     of applicants, or both, to the extent that the Secretary 
     determines that to do so could be cost effective in reducing 
     attrition at basic training.
       (4) Assign the responsibility for evaluating medical 
     conditions of a recruit that are missed during accession 
     processing to an agency or contractor other than the Military 
     Entrance Processing Command which carried out the accession 
     processing of that recruit (such command being the 
     organization responsible for accession medical exams).
       (5) Require that the Secretary of each military department 
     test an applicant for entrance into the Armed Forces for use 
     of illegal drugs at the Military Entrance Processing Station 
     which carries out the accession processing of that recruit 
     (in addition to any subsequent drug testing that may be 
     required).

     SEC. 533. IMPROVEMENTS IN PHYSICAL FITNESS OF RECRUITS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall take steps 
     to improve the physical fitness of recruits before they enter 
     basic training.
       (b) Specific Steps.--As part of those improvements, the 
     Secretary shall take the following steps:
       (1) Direct the Secretary of each military department to 
     implement programs under which new recruits who are in the 
     Delayed Entry Program are encouraged to participate in 
     physical fitness activities before reporting to basic 
     training.
       (2) Develop a range of incentives for new recruits to 
     participate in physical fitness programs, as well as for 
     those recruits who improve their level of fitness while in 
     the Delayed Entry Program, which may include the use of 
     monetary or other incentives, access to Department of Defense 
     military fitness facilities, and access to military medical 
     facilities in the case of a recruit who is injured while 
     participating in physical activities with recruiters or other 
     military personnel.
       (3) Evaluate whether partnerships between recruiters and 
     reserve components, or other innovative arrangements, could 
     provide a pool of qualified personnel to assist in the 
     conduct of physical training programs for new recruits in the 
     Delayed Entry Program.
              Subtitle E--Military Education and Training

     SEC. 541. INDEPENDENT PANEL TO REVIEW MILITARY BASIC 
                   TRAINING.

       (a) Establishment.--There is hereby established a panel to 
     review the basic training programs of the Army, Navy, Air 
     Force, and Marine Corps and to make recommendations on 
     improvements to those programs.
       (b) Composition.--(1) The panel shall be composed of seven 
     members, appointed as follows:
       (A) Three members shall be appointed jointly by the 
     chairman and ranking minority party member of the Committee 
     on National Security of the House of Representatives.
       (B) Three members shall be appointed jointly by the 
     chairman and ranking minority party member of the Committee 
     on Armed Services of the Senate.
       (C) One member shall be appointed by the Secretary of 
     Defense.
       (2) The members of the panel shall choose one of the 
     members to chair the panel.
       (c) Qualifications.--Members of the panel shall be 
     appointed from among private United States citizens with 
     knowledge and expertise in one or more of the following:
       (1) Training of military personnel.
       (2) Social and cultural matters affecting entrance into the 
     Armed Forces and affecting military service, military 
     training, and military readiness, such knowledge and 
     expertise to have been gained through recognized research, 
     policy making and practical experience, as demonstrated by 
     retired military personnel, representatives from educational 
     organizations, and leaders from civilian industry and other 
     Government agencies.
       (3) Factors that define appropriate military job 
     qualifications, including physical, mental, and educational 
     factors.
       (4) Combat or other theater of war operations.
       (d) Panel Functions Relating to Basic Training Programs 
     Generally.--The panel shall review the course objectives, 
     structure, and length of the basic training programs of the 
     Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. As part of that 
     review, the panel shall (with respect to each of those 
     services) take the following measures:
       (1) Determine the current end-state objectives established 
     for graduates of basic training, particularly in regard to--
       (A) physical conditioning;
       (B) technical and physical skills proficiency;
       (C) knowledge;
       (D) military socialization, including the inculcation of 
     service values and attitudes; and
       (E) basic combat operational requirements.
       (2) Assess whether those current end-state objectives, and 
     basic training itself, should be modified (in structure, 
     length, focus, program of instruction, training methods or 
     otherwise) based, in part, on the following:
       (A) An assessment of the perspectives of operational units 
     on the quality and qualifications of the initial entry 
     training graduates being assigned to those units, considering 
     in particular whether the basic training system produces 
     graduates who arrive in operational units with an appropriate 
     level of skills, physical conditioning, and degree of 
     military socialization to meet unit requirements and needs.
       (B) An assessment of the demographics, backgrounds, 
     attitudes, experience, and physical fitness of new recruits 
     entering basic training, considering in particular the 
     question of whether, given the entry level demographics, 
     education, and background of new recruits, the basic training 
     systems and objectives are most efficiently and effectively 
     structured and conducted to produce graduates who meet 
     service needs.
       (C) An assessment of the perspectives of personnel who 
     conduct basic training with regard to measures required to 
     improve basic training.
       (e) Panel Functions Relating to Gender-Integrated and 
     Gender-Segregated Basic Training.--The panel shall review the 
     basic training policies of each of the Army, Navy, Air Force, 
     and Marine Corps with regard to gender-integrated and gender-
     segregated basic training. As part of that review, the panel 
     shall (with respect to each of those services) take the 
     following measures:
       (1) Determine the historical rationales for the 
     establishment and disestablishment of gender-integrated or 
     gender-segregated basic training.
       (2) Examine the current rationales for the use of gender-
     integrated or gender-segregated basic training and, as part 
     of such examination, evaluate whether at the time any of the 
     services made a decision to integrate, or to segregate, basic 
     training by gender, the Secretary of the military department 
     concerned had substantive reason to believe, or has since 
     developed data to support, any of the following:
       (A) That gender-integrated basic training, or gender-
     segregated basic training, improves the readiness or 
     performance of operational units
       (B) That the entry level of new recruits with regard to 
     physical condition, attitudes, and values is so different 
     from that required and expected in the military services in 
     general, and in operational units in particular, that an 
     intense period of focused training is required, free from the 
     additional challenges of training males and females together.
       (C) That a significant percentage of women entering basic 
     training experienced sexual abuse or assault before entering 
     military service and that gender-segregated basic training 
     (with same-sex drill instructors) provides the best 
     opportunity for such women to have positive military female 
     role models as mentors and to enter gender-integrated 
     operational forces from a position of confidence, strength, 
     and knowledge.
       (3) Assess whether the concept of ``training as you will 
     fight'' is a valid rationale for gender-integrated basic 
     training or whether the training requirements and objectives 
     for basic training are sufficiently different from those of 
     operational unit so that such concept, when balanced against 
     other factors relating to basic training, might not be a 
     sufficient rationale for gender-integrated basic training.
       (4) Assess the degree to which different standards have 
     been established, or if not established are in fact being 
     implemented, for males and females in basic training for 
     matters such as physical fitness, physical performance (such 
     as confidence and obstacle courses), military skills (such as 
     marksmanship and hand-grenade qualifications), and 
     nonphysical tasks required of individuals and, to the degree 
     that differing standards exist or are in fact being 
     implemented, assess the effect of the use of those differing 
     standards.
       (5) Assess the degree to which performance standards in 
     basic training are based on military readiness.
       (6) Review Department of Defense and military department 
     efforts to objectively measure or evaluate the effectiveness 
     of gender-integrated basic training, as compared to gender-
     segregated basic training, particularly with regard to the 
     adequacy and scope of the efforts and with regard to the 
     relevancy of findings to operational unit requirements.
       (7) Compare the pattern of attrition in gender-integrated 
     basic training units with the pattern of attrition in gender-
     segregated basic training units and assess the relevancy of 
     the findings of such comparison.
       (8) Compare the level of readiness and morale of gender-
     integrated basic training units with the level of readiness 
     and morale of gender-segregated units and assess the 
     relevancy of the findings of such comparison.
       (f) Recommendations.--The panel shall prepare--
       (1) an evaluation of gender-integrated and gender-
     segregated basic training programs, based upon the review 
     under subsection (e); and
       (2) recommendations for such changes to the current system 
     of basic training as the panel considers warranted.
       (g) Reports.--(1) Not later than six months after the 
     members of the panel are appointed, the panel shall submit an 
     interim report on its findings and conclusions to the 
     Secretary of Defense.
       (2) Not later than one year after establishment of the 
     panel, the panel shall submit a final report to the Secretary 
     of Defense. The final report shall include recommendations 
     for legislative and administrative changes to basic training 
     programs to improve the readiness and performance of initial 
     entry training graduates and to reduce attrition, both during 
     training and in the first term of enlistment.
       (h) Submission of Reports to Congress.--Not later than one 
     month after receipt of the panel's interim report and one 
     month after receipt of the panel's final report, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit the report to Congress 
     together with the views of the Secretary regarding the report 
     and the matter covered in the report.
       (i) Pay and Expenses of Members.--(1) Each member of the 
     panel who is not an employee of the Government shall be paid 
     at a rate equal to the daily equivalent of the annual rate of 
     basic pay payable for level IV of the Executive Schedule 
     under section 5315 of title 5, United States Code, for each 
     day (including travel time) during which the member is 
     engaged in the performance of the duties of the panel.

[[Page H3981]]

       (2) The members of the panel shall be allowed travel 
     expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates 
     authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of 
     chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from 
     their homes or regular places of business in the performance 
     of services for the panel.
       (j) Administrative Support.--(1) Upon the request of the 
     chairman of the panel, the Secretary of Defense may detail to 
     the panel, on a nonreimbursable basis, personnel of the 
     Department of Defense to assist the panel in carrying out its 
     duties.
       (2) The Secretary of Defense shall furnish to the panel 
     such administrative and support services as may be requested 
     by the chairman of the panel.
       (k) Funding.--The Secretary of Defense shall, upon the 
     request of the panel, make available to the panel such 
     amounts as the panel may require to carry out its duties 
     under this title.
       (l) Termination of the Panel.--The panel shall terminate 60 
     days after the date on which it submits its final report 
     under subsection (g).
       (m) Subsequent Consideration by Congress.--After submission 
     of the final report of the panel to Congress, the Congress 
     shall, based upon the results of the study (and such other 
     matters as Congress considers appropriate), consider whether 
     to require by law that the Secretaries of the military 
     departments conduct basic training on a gender-segregated 
     basis.

     SEC. 542. REFORM OF ARMY DRILL SERGEANT SELECTION AND 
                   TRAINING PROCESS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Army shall reform the 
     process for selection and training of drill sergeants for the 
     Army.
       (b) Measures To Be Taken.--As part of such reform, the 
     Secretary shall undertake the following measures (unless, in 
     the case of any such measure, the Secretary determines that 
     that measure would not result in improved effectiveness and 
     efficiency in the drill sergeant selection and training 
     process):
       (1) Review the overall process used by the Department of 
     the Army for selection of drill sergeants to determine--
       (A) if that process is providing drill sergeant candidates 
     in sufficient quantity and quality to meet the needs of the 
     training system; and
       (B) whether duty as a drill sergeant is a career-enhancing 
     assignment (or is seen by potential drill sergeant candidates 
     as a career-enhancing assignment) and what steps could be 
     taken to ensure that such duty is in fact a career-enhancing 
     assignment.
       (2) Incorporate into the selection process for all drill 
     sergeants the views and recommendations of the officers and 
     senior noncommissioned officers in the chain of command of 
     each candidate for selection (particularly those of senior 
     noncommissioned officers) regarding the candidate's 
     suitability and qualifications to be a drill sergeant.
       (3) Establish a requirement for psychological screening for 
     each drill sergeant candidate.
       (4) Reform the psychological screening process for drill 
     sergeant candidates to improve the quality, depth, and rigor 
     of that screening process.
       (5) Revise the evaluation system for drill sergeants in 
     training to provide for a so-called ``whole person'' 
     assessment that gives insight into the qualifications and 
     suitability of a drill sergeant candidate beyond the 
     candidate's ability to accomplish required performance tasks.
       (6) Revise the Army military personnel records system so 
     that, under specified conditions and circumstances, a drill 
     sergeant trainee who fails to complete the training to be a 
     drill sergeant and is denied graduation will not have the 
     fact of that failure recorded in those records. The 
     conditions and circumstances under which the authority 
     provided in the preceding sentence may be shall be prescribed 
     by the Secretary in regulations.
       (7) Provide each drill sergeant in training with the 
     opportunity, before or during that training, to work with new 
     recruits in initial entry training and to be evaluated on 
     that opportunity.
       (c) Report.--Not later than March 31, 1998, the Secretary 
     shall submit to the Committee on National Security of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Armed Services 
     of the Senate a report of the reforms adopted pursuant to 
     this section or, in the case of any measure specified in any 
     of paragraphs (1) through (7) of subsection (b) that was not 
     adopted, the rationale why that measure was not adopted.

     SEC. 543. REQUIREMENT FOR CANDIDATES FOR ADMISSION TO UNITED 
                   STATES NAVAL ACADEMY TO TAKE OATH OF 
                   ALLEGIANCE.

       (a) Requirement.--Section 6958 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(d) To be admitted to the Naval Academy, an appointee 
     must take and subscribe to an oath prescribed by the 
     Secretary of the Navy. If a candidate for admission refuses 
     to take and subscribe to the prescribed oath, the candidate's 
     appointment is terminated.''.
       (b) Exception for Midshipmen From Foreign Countries.--
     Section 6957 of such title is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(d) A person receiving instruction under this section is 
     not subject to section 6958(d) of this title.''.

     SEC. 544. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCURRED FOR INSTRUCTION 
                   AT SERVICE ACADEMIES OF PERSONS FROM FOREIGN 
                   COUNTRIES.

       (a) United States Military Academy.--Section 4344(b) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking out the period at the end 
     and inserting in lieu thereof the following: ``, except that 
     the reimbursement rates may not be less than the cost to the 
     United States of providing such instruction, including pay, 
     allowances, and emoluments, to a cadet appointed from the 
     United States.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) The amount of reimbursement waived under paragraph 
     (2) may not exceed 25 percent of the per-person reimbursement 
     amount otherwise required to be paid by a foreign country 
     under such paragraph, except in the case of not more than 
     five persons receiving instruction at the Academy under this 
     section at any one time.''.
       (b) Naval Academy.--Section 6957(b) of such title is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking out the period at the end 
     and inserting in lieu thereof the following: ``, except that 
     the reimbursement rates may not be less than the cost to the 
     United States of providing such instruction, including pay, 
     allowances, and emoluments, to a midshipman appointed from 
     the United States.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) The amount of reimbursement waived under paragraph 
     (2) may not exceed 25 percent of the per-person reimbursement 
     amount otherwise required to be paid by a foreign country 
     under such paragraph, except in the case of not more than 
     five persons receiving instruction at the Naval Academy under 
     this section at any one time.''.
       (c) Air Force Academy.--Section 9344(b) of such title is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking out the period at the end 
     and inserting in lieu thereof the following: ``, except that 
     the reimbursement rates may not be less than the cost to the 
     United States of providing such instruction, including pay, 
     allowances, and emoluments, to a cadet appointed from the 
     United States.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) The amount of reimbursement waived under paragraph 
     (2) may not exceed 25 percent of the per-person reimbursement 
     amount otherwise required to be paid by a foreign country 
     under such paragraph, except in the case of not more than 
     five persons receiving instruction at the Academy under this 
     section at any one time.''.

     SEC. 545. UNITED STATES NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL.

       (a) Authority to Admit Enlisted Members as Students.--
     Section 7045 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(a)''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) The Secretary may permit an enlisted member of the 
     armed forces who is assigned to the Naval Postgraduate School 
     or to a nearby command to receive instruction at the Naval 
     Postgraduate School. Admission of enlisted members for 
     instruction under this paragraph shall be on a space-
     available basis.'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking out ``the students'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``officers''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``In 
     the case of an enlisted member permitted to receive 
     instruction at the Postgraduate School, the Secretary of the 
     Navy shall charge that member only for such costs and fees as 
     the Secretary considers appropriate (taking into 
     consideration the admission of enlisted members on a space-
     available basis).''; and
       (3) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by striking out ``officers'' both places it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``members''; and
       (B) by striking out ``the same regulations'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``regulations, as determined appropriate by 
     the Secretary of the Navy,''.
       (b) Expansion of Authority to Admit Civilians as 
     Students.--Section 7047 of such title is amended to read as 
     follows:

     ``Sec. 7047. Civilian students at institutions of higher 
       education: admission

       ``(a) Admission on Tuition-Free, Exchange Basis.--(1) The 
     Secretary of the Navy may enter into an agreement with an 
     accredited institution of higher education (or a consortium 
     of such institutions) under which students described in 
     subsection (c) who are enrolled at that institution (or an 
     institution in such consortium) are permitted to receive 
     instruction at the Naval Postgraduate School on a space-
     available, tuition-free basis in exchange for which the 
     institution of higher education (or each institution in the 
     consortium) agrees to enroll, on a tuition-free basis, 
     officers of the armed forces or other persons properly 
     admitted for instruction at the Naval Postgraduate School.
       ``(2) Exchange of students under paragraph (1) need not be 
     on a one-for-one basis.
       ``(3) An exchange under such an agreement shall be on the 
     basis of in-kind reimbursement, with the total value of the 
     instruction provided during a year by the Naval Postgraduate 
     School to civilian students from the institutions that are 
     parties to the agreement being at least as great as the value 
     of instruction provided by those institutions to students 
     from the Naval Postgraduate School.
       ``(4) In determining the value of the in-kind reimbursement 
     for the instruction provided by the Naval Postgraduate 
     School, the Secretary shall use the same amount charged by 
     the Secretary for the provision of the same instruction to a 
     Federal employee who is not a Department of Defense employee.
       ``(5) The authority of the Secretary to accept an offer of 
     in-kind reimbursement under this subsection may not be 
     delegated below the level of Assistant Secretary of the Navy.
       ``(b) Admission on Cost-Reimbursable Basis.--(1) The 
     Secretary of the Navy may permit a student described in 
     subsection (c) who is enrolled at an accredited institution 
     of higher

[[Page H3982]]

     education that is a party to an agreement under subsection 
     (a) to receive instruction at the Naval Postgraduate School 
     on a cost-reimbursable, space-available basis.
       ``(2) The Secretary shall ensure that the value of any 
     reimbursement received under this subsection in the case of 
     any such student is not less than the amount charged by the 
     Secretary for the provision of the same instruction to a 
     Federal employee who is not a Department of Defense employee.
       ``(c) Eligible Students.--A student enrolled at an 
     accredited institution of higher education that is party to 
     an agreement under subsection (a) may be admitted to the 
     Naval Postgraduate School under subsection (a) or (b) if the 
     student--
       ``(1) is a citizen of the United States or is lawfully 
     admitted for permanent residence in the United States;
       ``(2) has a demonstrated ability, as determined by the 
     Secretary of the Navy, in a field of study designated by the 
     Secretary as related to naval warfare, armed conflict, or 
     national security; and
       ``(3) meets the academic requirements for the course or 
     courses for which the student seeks admission to the Naval 
     Postgraduate School.
       ``(d) Standards of Conduct.--Except as the Secretary of the 
     Navy otherwise determines necessary, a person receiving 
     instruction under this section is subject to the same 
     regulations governing attendance, discipline, dismissal, and 
     standards of study as apply to students who are officers of 
     the naval service.
       ``(e) Retention of Funds Received.--Amounts received under 
     subsection (b) to reimburse the Naval Postgraduate School for 
     the costs of providing instruction to students permitted to 
     attend the Naval Postgraduate School under this section shall 
     be credited to the current appropriation supporting the 
     operation and maintenance of the Naval Postgraduate 
     School.''.
       (c) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading of section 7045 
     of such title is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 7045. Officers of the other armed forces; enlisted 
       members: admission''.

       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 605 
     of such title is amended--
       (A) by striking out the item relating to section 7045 and 
     inserting in lieu thereof the following:

``7045. Officers of the other armed forces; enlisted members: 
              admission.'';

     and
       (B) by striking out the item relating to section 7047 and 
     inserting in lieu thereof the following:

``7047. Civilian students at institutions of higher education: 
              admission.''.

       (d) Amendment To Reflect Revised Civil Service Grade 
     Structure.--Section 7043(b) of such title is amended by 
     striking out ``grade GS-18 of the General Schedule under 
     section 5332 of title 5'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``level IV of the Executive Schedule''.

     SEC. 546. AIR FORCE ACADEMY CADET FOREIGN EXCHANGE PROGRAM.

       (a) Exchange Program Authorized.--Chapter 903 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 
     9344 the following new section:

     ``Sec. 9345. Exchange program with foreign military academies

       ``(a) Exchange Program Authorized.--The Secretary of the 
     Air Force may permit a student enrolled at a military academy 
     of a foreign country to receive instruction at the Air Force 
     Academy in exchange for an Air Force cadet receiving 
     instruction at that foreign military academy pursuant to an 
     exchange agreement entered into between the Secretary and 
     appropriate officials of the foreign country. Students 
     receiving instruction at the Academy under the exchange 
     program shall be in addition to persons receiving instruction 
     at the Academy under section 9344 of this title.
       ``(b) Limitations on Number and Duration of Exchanges.--An 
     exchange agreement under this section between the Secretary 
     and a foreign country shall provide for the exchange of 
     students on a one-for-one basis each fiscal year. Not more 
     than 10 Air Force cadets and a comparable number of students 
     from all foreign military academies participating in the 
     exchange program may be exchanged during any fiscal year. The 
     duration of an exchange may not exceed the equivalent of one 
     academic semester at the Air Force Academy.
       ``(c) Costs and Expenses.--(1) A student from a military 
     academy of a foreign country is not entitled to the pay, 
     allowances, and emoluments of an Air Force cadet by reason of 
     attendance at the Air Force Academy under the exchange 
     program, and the Department of Defense may not incur any cost 
     of international travel required for transportation of such a 
     student to and from the sponsoring foreign country.
       ``(2) The Secretary may provide a student from a foreign 
     country under the exchange program, during the period of the 
     exchange, with subsistence, transportation within the 
     continental United States, clothing, health care, and other 
     services to the same extent that the foreign country provides 
     comparable support and services to the exchanged Air Force 
     cadet in that foreign country.
       ``(3) The Air Force Academy shall bear all costs of the 
     exchange program from funds appropriated for the Academy. 
     Expenditures in support of the exchange program may not 
     exceed $50,000 during any fiscal year.
       ``(d) Application of Other Laws.--Subsections (c) and (d) 
     of section 9344 of this title shall apply with respect to a 
     student enrolled at a military academy of a foreign country 
     while attending the Air Force Academy under the exchange 
     program.
       ``(e) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe 
     regulations to implement this section. Such regulations may 
     include qualification criteria and methods of selection for 
     students of foreign military academies to participate in the 
     exchange program.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 9344 the following new item:

``9345. Exchange program with foreign military academies.''.
       (c) Repeal of Obsolete Limitation.--Section 9353(a) of such 
     title is amended by striking out ``After the date of the 
     accrediting of the Academy, the'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``The''.

     SEC. 547. TRAINING IN HUMAN RELATIONS MATTERS FOR ARMY DRILL 
                   SERGEANT TRAINEES.

       (a) Human Relations Training Required.--The Secretary of 
     the Army shall include as part of the training program for 
     drill sergeants a course in human relations. The course shall 
     be a minimum of two days in duration.
       (b) Resources.--In developing a human relations course 
     under this section, the Secretary shall use the capabilities 
     and expertise of the Defense Equal Opportunity Management 
     Institute (DEOMI).
       (c) Effective Date.--This section shall apply with respect 
     drill sergeant trainee classes that begin after the end of 
     the 90-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.

     SEC. 548. STUDY OF FEASIBILITY OF GENDER-SEGREGATED BASIC 
                   TRAINING.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of each military department 
     shall submit to Congress a report on gender-segregated 
     basic training. Each report shall give the views of the 
     Secretary--
       (1) on the feasibility and implications of conducting basic 
     training (or equivalent training) at the company level and 
     below through separate units for male and female recruits, 
     including the costs and other resource commitments required 
     to implement and conduct basic training in such a manner and 
     the implications for readiness and unit cohesion; and
       (2) assuming that basic training were to be conducted as 
     described in paragraph (1), on the feasibility and 
     implications of requiring drill instructors for basic 
     training units to be of the same sex as the recruits in those 
     units.
              Subtitle F--Military Decorations and Awards

     SEC. 551. STUDY OF NEW DECORATIONS FOR INJURY OR DEATH IN 
                   LINE OF DUTY.

       (a) Determination of Criteria for New Decoration.--(1) The 
     Secretary of Defense shall determine the appropriate name, 
     policy, award criteria, and design for two possible new 
     decorations.
       (2) The first such decoration would, if implemented, be 
     awarded to members of the Armed Forces who, while serving 
     under competent authority in any capacity with the Armed 
     Forces, are killed or injured in the line of duty as a result 
     of noncombat circumstances occurring--
       (A) as a result of an international terrorist attack 
     against the United States or a foreign nation friendly to the 
     United States;
       (B) while engaged in, training for, or traveling to or from 
     a peacetime or contingency operation; or
       (C) while engaged in, training for, or traveling to or from 
     service outside the territory of the United States as part of 
     a peacekeeping force.
       (3) The second such decoration would, if implemented, be 
     awarded to civilian nationals of the United States who, while 
     serving under competent authority in any capacity with the 
     Armed Forces, are killed or injured in the line of duty under 
     circumstances which, if they were members of the Armed 
     Forces, would qualify them for award of the Purple Heart or 
     the medal described in paragraph (2).
       (b) Limitation on Implementation.--Any such decoration may 
     only be implemented as provided by a law enacted after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.
       (c) Recommendation to Congress.--Not later than July 31, 
     1998, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a legislative 
     proposal that would, if enacted, establish the new 
     decorations developed pursuant to subsection (a). The 
     Secretary shall include with that proposal the Secretary's 
     recommendation concerning the need for, and propriety of, 
     each of the decorations.
       (d) Coordination.--The Secretary shall carry out this 
     section in coordination with the Secretaries of the military 
     departments and the Secretary of Transportation with regard 
     to the Coast Guard.

     SEC. 552. PURPLE HEART TO BE AWARDED ONLY TO MEMBERS OF THE 
                   ARMED FORCES.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 57 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 1131. Purple Heart: limitation to members of the armed 
       forces

       ``The decoration known as the Purple Heart (authorized to 
     be awarded pursuant to Executive Order 11016) may only be 
     awarded to a person who is a member of the armed forces at 
     the time the person is killed or wounded under circumstances 
     otherwise qualifying that person for award of the Purple 
     Heart.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``1131. Purple Heart: limitation to members of the armed forces.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--Section 1131 of title 10, United 
     States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with 
     respect to persons who are killed or wounded after the end of 
     the 180-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.

     SEC. 553. ELIGIBILITY FOR ARMED FORCES EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL 
                   FOR PARTICIPATION IN OPERATION JOINT ENDEAVOR 
                   OR OPERATION JOINT GUARD.

       (a) Inclusion of Operations.--For the purpose of 
     determining the eligibility of members

[[Page H3983]]

     and former members of the Armed Forces for the Armed Forces 
     Expeditionary Medal, the Secretary of Defense shall designate 
     participation in Operation Joint Endeavor or Operation Joint 
     Guard in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and in such 
     other areas in the region as the Secretary considers 
     appropriate, as service in an area that meets the general 
     requirements for the award of that medal.
       (b) Individual Determination.--The Secretary of the 
     military department concerned shall determine whether 
     individual members or former members of the Armed Forces who 
     participated in Operation Joint Endeavor or Operation Joint 
     Guard meet the individual service requirements for award of 
     the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal as established in 
     applicable regulations. A member or former member shall be 
     considered to have participated in Operation Joint Endeavor 
     or Operation Joint Guard if the member--
       (1) was deployed in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 
     or in such other area in the region as the Secretary of 
     Defense considers appropriate, in direct support of one or 
     both of the operations;
       (2) served on board a United States naval vessel operating 
     in the Adriatic Sea in direct support of one or both of the 
     operations; or
       (3) operated in airspace above the Republic of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina, or in such other area in the region as the 
     Secretary of Defense considers appropriate, while the 
     operations were in effect.
       (c) Operations Defined.--For purposes of this section:
       (1) The term ``Operation Joint Endeavor'' means operations 
     of the United States Armed Forces conducted in the Republic 
     of Bosnia and Herzegovina during the period beginning on 
     November 20, 1995, and ending on December 20, 1996, to assist 
     in implementing the General Framework Agreement and 
     Associated Annexes, initialed on November 21, 1995, in 
     Dayton, Ohio.
       (2) The term ``Operation Joint Guard'' means operations of 
     the United States Armed Forces conducted in the Republic of 
     Bosnia and Herzegovina as a successor to Operation Joint 
     Endeavor during the period beginning on December 20, 1996, 
     and ending on such date as the Secretary of Defense may 
     designate.

     SEC. 554. WAIVER OF TIME LIMITATIONS FOR AWARD OF CERTAIN 
                   DECORATIONS TO SPECIFIED PERSONS.

       (a) Waiver of Time Limitation.--Any limitation established 
     by law or policy for the time within which a recommendation 
     for the award of a military decoration or award must be 
     submitted shall not apply in the case of awards of 
     decorations described in subsections (b), (c), and (d), the 
     award of each such decoration having been determined by the 
     Secretary of the military department concerned to be 
     warranted in accordance with section 1130 of title 10, United 
     States Code.
       (b) Silver Star Medal.--Subsection (a) applies to the award 
     of the Silver Star Medal as follows:
       (1) To Joseph M. Moll, Jr. of Milford, New Jersey, for 
     service during World War II.
       (2) To Philip Yolinsky of Hollywood, Florida, for service 
     during the Korean Conflict.
       (c) Navy and Marine Corps Medal.--Subsection (a) applies to 
     the award of the Navy and Marine Corps Medal to Gary A. 
     Gruenwald of Damascus, Maryland, for service in Tunisia in 
     October 1977.
       (d) Distinguished Flying Cross.--Subsection (a) applies to 
     awards of the Distinguished Flying Cross for service during 
     World War II or Korea (including multiple awards to the same 
     individual) in the case of each individual concerning whom 
     the Secretary of the Navy (or an officer of the Navy acting 
     on behalf of the Secretary) submitted to the Committee on 
     National Security of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Armed Services of the Senate, before the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, a notice as provided in section 
     1130(b) of title 10, United States Code, that the award of 
     the Distinguished Flying Cross to that individual is 
     warranted and that a waiver of time restrictions prescribed 
     by law for recommendation for such award is recommended.
                       Subtitle G--Other Matters

     SEC. 561. SUSPENSION OF TEMPORARY EARLY RETIREMENT AUTHORITY.

       Notwithstanding subsection (i) of section 4403 of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 
     (Public Law 102-484; 10 U.S.C. 1293 note), the Secretary of a 
     military department may not use the authority provided under 
     such section to retire a member of the Armed Forces during 
     fiscal year 1998.

     SEC. 562. TREATMENT OF EDUCATIONAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF 
                   NATIONAL GUARD CHALLENGE PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS.

       Section 509 of title 32, United States Code, as added by 
     section 1057, is amended by adding at the end of subsection 
     (f) the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) In the case of a person who is selected for training 
     in a State program conducted under the National Guard 
     Challenge Program and who obtains a general education diploma 
     in connection with such training, the general education 
     diploma shall be treated as equivalent to a high school 
     diploma for purposes of determining the eligibility of the 
     person for enlistment in the armed forces.''.

     SEC. 563. AUTHORITY FOR PERSONNEL TO PARTICIPATE IN 
                   MANAGEMENT OF CERTAIN NON-FEDERAL ENTITIES.

       (a) Military Personnel.--(1) Chapter 53 of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1032 the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 1033. Participation in management of specified non-
       Federal entities: authorized activities

       ``(a) Authorization.--The Secretary concerned may authorize 
     a member of the armed forces under the Secretary's 
     jurisdiction, as part of that member's official duties, to 
     serve without compensation as a director, officer, or 
     trustee, or to otherwise participate, in the management of an 
     entity designated under subsection (b). Any such 
     authorization shall be made on a case-by-case basis, for a 
     particular member to participate in a specific capacity 
     with a specific designated entity. Such authorization may 
     be made only for the purpose of providing oversight and 
     advice to, and coordination with, the designated entity, 
     and participation of the member in the activities of the 
     designated entity may not extend to participation in the 
     day-to-day operations of the entity.
       ``(b) Designated Entities.--(1) The Secretary of Defense, 
     and the Secretary of Transportation in the case of the Coast 
     Guard when it is not operating as a service in the Navy, 
     shall designate those entities for which authorization under 
     subsection (a) may be provided. The list of entities so 
     designated may not be revised more frequently than 
     semiannually. In making such designations, the Secretary 
     shall designate each military welfare society and may 
     designate any other entity described in paragraph (3). No 
     other entities may be designated.
       ``(2) In this section, the term `military welfare society' 
     means the following:
       ``(A) Army Emergency Relief.
       ``(B) Air Force Aid Society, Inc.
       ``(C) Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society.
       ``(D) Coast Guard Mutual Assistance.
       ``(3) An entity described in this paragraph is an entity 
     that--
       ``(A) regulates and supports the athletic programs of the 
     service academies (including athletic conferences);
       ``(B) regulates international athletic competitions;
       ``(C) accredits service academies and other schools of the 
     armed forces (including regional accrediting agencies); or
       ``(D)(i) regulates the performance, standards, and policies 
     of military health care (including health care associations 
     and professional societies), and (ii) has designated the 
     position or capacity in that entity in which a member of the 
     armed forces may serve if authorized under subsection (a).
       ``(c) Publication of Designated Entities and of Authorized 
     Persons.--A designation of an entity under subsection (b), 
     and an authorization under subsection (a) of a member of the 
     armed forces to participate in the management of such an 
     entity, shall be published in the Federal Register.
       ``(d) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense, and the 
     Secretary of Transportation in the case of the Coast Guard 
     when it is not operating as a service in the Navy, shall 
     prescribe regulations to carry out this section.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     1032 the following new item:

``1033. Participation in management of specified non-Federal entities: 
              authorized activities.''.
       (b) Civilian Personnel.--(1) Chapter 81 of such title is 
     amended by inserting after section 1588 the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 1589. Participation in management of specified non-
       Federal entities: authorized activities

       ``(a) Authorization.--(1) The Secretary concerned may 
     authorize an employee described in paragraph (2), as part of 
     that employee's official duties, to serve without 
     compensation as a director, officer, or trustee, or to 
     otherwise participate, in the management of an entity 
     designated under subsection (b). Any such authorization shall 
     be made on a case-by-case basis, for a particular employee to 
     participate in a specific capacity with a specific designated 
     entity. Such authorization may be made only for the purpose 
     of providing oversight and advice to, and coordination with, 
     the designated entity, and participation of the employee in 
     the activities of the designated entity may not extend to 
     participation in the day-to-day operations of the entity.
       ``(2) Paragraph (1) applies to any employee of the 
     Department of Defense or, in the case of the Coast Guard when 
     not operating as a service in the Navy, of the Department of 
     Transportation. For purposes of this section, the term 
     `employee' includes a civilian officer.
       ``(b) Designated Entities.--(1) The Secretary of Defense, 
     and the Secretary of Transportation in the case of the Coast 
     Guard when it is not operating as a service in the Navy, 
     shall designate those entities for which authorization under 
     subsection (a) may be provided. The list of entities so 
     designated may not be revised more frequently than 
     semiannually. In making such designations, the Secretary 
     shall designate each military welfare society and may 
     designate any other entity described in paragraph (3). No 
     other entities may be designated.
       ``(2) In this section, the term `military welfare society' 
     means the following:
       ``(A) Army Emergency Relief.
       ``(B) Air Force Aid Society, Inc.
       ``(C) Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society.
       ``(D) Coast Guard Mutual Assistance.
       ``(3) An entity described in this paragraph is an entity 
     that--
       ``(A) regulates and supports the athletic programs of the 
     service academies (including athletic conferences);
       ``(B) regulates international athletic competitions;
       ``(C) accredits service academies and other schools of the 
     armed forces (including regional accrediting agencies); or
       ``(D)(i) regulates the performance, standards, and policies 
     of military health care (including health care associations 
     and professional societies), and (ii) has designated the 
     position or capacity in that entity in which a Federal 
     employee described in subsection (a)(2) may serve if 
     authorized under subsection (a).

[[Page H3984]]

       ``(c) Publication of Designated Entities and of Authorized 
     Persons.--A designation of an entity under subsection (b), 
     and an authorization under subsection (a) of an employee to 
     participate in the management of such an entity, shall be 
     published in the Federal Register.
       ``(d) Civilians Outside the Military Departments.--In this 
     section, the term `Secretary concerned' includes the 
     Secretary of Defense with respect to employees of the 
     Department of Defense who are not employees of a military 
     department.
       ``(e) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense, and the 
     Secretary of Transportation in the case of the Coast Guard 
     when it is not operating as a service in the Navy, shall 
     prescribe regulations to carry out this section.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     1588 the following new item:

``1589. Participation in management of specified non-Federal entities: 
              authorized activities.''.

     SEC. 564. CREW REQUIREMENTS OF WC-130J AIRCRAFT.

       (a) Study.--The Secretary of the Air Force shall conduct a 
     study of the crew requirements for WC-130J aircraft engaged 
     in the aerial weather reconnaissance mission involving the 
     eyewall penetration of tropical cyclones. The study shall 
     involve the operation of WC-130J aircraft in weather 
     reconnaissance missions configured to carry five crewmembers, 
     including a navigator. The study shall include the 
     participation of members of the Armed Forces assigned to 
     units currently engaged in weather reconnaissance operations.
       (b) Report.--The Secretary shall submit to Congress a 
     report on the results of the study. The report shall include 
     the views of members of the Armed Forces assigned to units 
     currently engaged in weather reconnaissance operations who 
     participated in the study.
       (c) Limitation on Revision to Personnel Requirements.--The 
     Secretary of the Air Force may not reduce the personnel 
     requirement levels of units that, as of the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, are engaged in weather reconnaissance 
     operations involving the eyewall penetration of tropical 
     cyclones, including requirements for navigators, below the 
     requirements established for those units as of October 1, 
     1997, until the end of the six-month period beginning on the 
     date on which the report required under subsection (b) is 
     submitted to Congress.

     SEC. 565. COMPTROLLER GENERAL STUDY OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
                   CIVIL MILITARY PROGRAMS.

       (a) Study Required.--The Comptroller General shall conduct 
     a study to evaluate the following:
       (1) The nature, extent, and cost to the Department of 
     Defense of the support and services being provided by units 
     and members of the Armed Forces to non-Department of Defense 
     organizations and activities under the authority of section 
     2012 of title 10, United States Code.
       (2) The degree to which the Armed Forces are in compliance 
     with the requirements of such section in the provision of 
     such support and services, especially the requirements that 
     the assistance meet specific requirements relative to 
     military training and that the assistance provided be 
     incidental to military training.
       (3) The degree to which the regulations and procedures for 
     implementing such section, as required by subsection (f) of 
     such section, are consistent with the requirements of such 
     section.
       (4) The effectiveness of the Secretary of Defense and the 
     Secretaries of the military departments in conducting 
     oversight of the implementation of such section, and the 
     provision of such support and services under such section, to 
     ensure compliance with the requirements of such section.
       (b) Submission of Report.--Not later than March 31, 1998, 
     the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report 
     containing the results of the study required by subsection 
     (a).

     SEC. 566. TREATMENT OF PARTICIPATION OF MEMBERS IN DEPARTMENT 
                   OF DEFENSE CIVIL MILITARY PROGRAMS.

       Section 2012 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (g) and (h) as subsections 
     (h) and (i), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(g) Treatment of Member's Participation in Provision of 
     Support or Services.--(1) The Secretary of a military 
     department may not require or request a member of the armed 
     forces to submit for consideration by a selection board 
     (including a promotion board, command selection board, or any 
     other kind of selection board) evidence of the member's 
     participation in the provision of support and services to 
     non-Department of Defense organizations and activities under 
     this section or the member's involvement in, or support of, 
     other community relations and public affairs activities of 
     the armed forces. A selection board may not evaluate a member 
     on the basis of the member's participation or involvement in, 
     or support of, such support, services, or activities.
       ``(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to the 
     following members:
       ``(A) A member who is in a public affairs career field.
       ``(B) A member who is not in a public affairs career field, 
     but who is serving, at the time the member is considered by a 
     selection board, in a public affairs position specified in 
     service authorization documents or who served in such a 
     position within three years before being considered by a 
     selection board.''.

     SEC. 567. CONTINUATION OF SUPPORT TO SENIOR MILITARY 
                   COLLEGES.

       (a) Definition of Senior Military Colleges.--For purposes 
     of this section, the term ``senior military colleges'' means 
     the following:
       (1) Texas A&M University.
       (2) Norwich University.
       (3) The Virginia Military Institute.
       (4) The Citadel.
       (5) Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
       (6) North Georgia College and State University.
       (b) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The senior military colleges consistently have provided 
     substantial numbers of highly qualified, long-serving leaders 
     to the Armed Forces.
       (2) The quality of the military leaders produced by the 
     senior military colleges is, in part, the result of the 
     rigorous military environment imposed on students attending 
     the senior military colleges by the colleges, as well as the 
     result of the long-standing close support relationship 
     between the Corps of Cadets at each college and the Reserve 
     Officer Training Corps personnel at the colleges who serve as 
     effective leadership role models and mentors.
       (3) In recognition of the quality of the young leaders 
     produced by the senior military colleges, the Department of 
     Defense and the military services have traditionally 
     maintained special relationships with the colleges, including 
     the policy to grant active duty service in the Army to 
     graduates of the colleges who desire such service and who are 
     recommended for such service by their ROTC professors of 
     military science.
       (4) Each of the senior military colleges has demonstrated 
     an ability to adapt its systems and operations to changing 
     conditions in, and requirements of, the Armed Forces without 
     compromising the quality of leaders produced and without 
     interruption of the close relationship between the colleges 
     and the Department of Defense.
       (c) Sense of Congress.--In light of the findings in 
     subsection (b), it is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) the proposed initiative of the Secretary of the Army to 
     end the commitment to active duty service for all graduates 
     of senior military colleges who desire such service and who 
     are recommended for such service by their ROTC professors of 
     military science is short-sighted and contrary to the long-
     term interests of the Army;
       (2) as they have in the past, the senior military colleges 
     can and will continue to accommodate to changing military 
     requirements to ensure that future graduates entering 
     military service continue to be officers of superb quality 
     who are quickly assimilated by the Armed Forces and fully 
     prepared to make significant contributions to the Armed 
     Forces through extended military careers; and
       (3) decisions of the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary 
     of a military department that fundamentally and unilaterally 
     change the long-standing relationship of the Armed Forces 
     with the senior military colleges are not in the best 
     interests of the Department of Defense or the Armed Forces 
     and are patently unfair to students who made decisions to 
     enroll in the senior military colleges on the basis of 
     existing Department and Armed Forces policy.
       (d) Continuation of Support for Senior Military Colleges.--
     Section 2111a of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (g); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new 
     subsections:
       ``(d) Additional Support.--(1) The Secretaries of the 
     military departments shall ensure that each unit of the 
     Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps at a senior military 
     college provides support to the Corps of Cadets at the 
     college over and above the level of support associated with 
     the conduct of the formal Senior Reserve Officers' Training 
     Corps course of instruction.
       ``(2) This additional support shall include the following:
       ``(A) Mentoring, teaching, coaching, counseling and 
     advising cadets and cadet leaders in the areas of leadership, 
     military, and academic performance.
       ``(B) Involvement in cadet leadership training, 
     development, and evaluation, as well as drill, ceremonies, 
     parades, and inspections.
       ``(3) This additional support may include the following:
       ``(A) Advising cadet teams, clubs, and organizations.
       ``(B) Involvement in matters of discipline and 
     administration of the Corps of Cadets so long as such 
     involvement does not interfere with the conduct of the formal 
     Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps course of instruction 
     or the support required by paragraph (2).
       ``(e) Termination or Reduction of Program Prohibited.--The 
     Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military 
     departments may not take or authorize any action to terminate 
     or reduce a unit of the Senior Reserve Officers' Training 
     Corps at a senior military college unless the termination or 
     reduction is specifically requested by the college.
       ``(f) Assignment to Active Duty.--(1) The Secretary of the 
     Army shall ensure that a graduate of a senior military 
     college who desires to serve as a commissioned officer on 
     active duty upon graduation from the college, who is 
     medically and physically qualified for active duty, and who 
     is recommended for such duty by the professor of military 
     science at the college, shall be assigned to active duty. 
     This paragraph shall apply to a member of the program at a 
     senior military college who graduates from the college after 
     March 31, 1997.
       ``(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to 
     prohibit the Secretary of the Army from requiring a member of 
     the program who graduates from a senior military college to 
     serve on active duty.''.
       (e) Technical Corrections.--Subsection (g) of such section, 
     as redesignated by subsection (d)(1), is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``College'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``University''; and

[[Page H3985]]

       (2) in paragraph (6), by inserting before the period the 
     following: ``and State University''.
       (f) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading of such section 
     is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 2111a. Support for senior military colleges''.

       (2) The item relating to such section in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 103 of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended to read as follows:

``2111a. Support for senior military colleges.''.

     SEC. 568. RESTORATION OF MISSING PERSONS AUTHORITIES 
                   APPLICABLE TO DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AS IN 
                   EFFECT BEFORE ENACTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENSE 
                   AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997.

       (a) Applicability to Department of Defense Civilian 
     Employees and Contractor Employees.--(1) Section 1501 of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (A) by striking out subsection (c) and inserting in lieu 
     thereof the following:
       ``(c) Covered Persons.--Section 1502 of this title applies 
     in the case of the following persons:
       ``(1) Any member of the armed forces on active duty who 
     becomes involuntarily absent as a result of a hostile action, 
     or under circumstances suggesting that the involuntary 
     absence is a result of a hostile action, and whose status is 
     undetermined or who is unaccounted for.
       ``(2) Any civilian employee of the Department of Defense, 
     and any employee of a contractor of the Department of 
     Defense, who serves with or accompanies the armed forces in 
     the field under orders who becomes involuntarily absent as a 
     result of a hostile action, or under circumstances suggesting 
     that the involuntary absence is a result of a hostile action, 
     and whose status is undetermined or who is unaccounted 
     for.'', and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(f) Secretary Concerned.--In this chapter, the term 
     `Secretary concerned' includes, in the case of a civilian 
     employee of the Department of Defense or contractor of the 
     Department of Defense, the Secretary of the military 
     department or head of the element of the Department of 
     Defense employing the employee or contracting with the 
     contractor, as the case may be.''.
       (2) Section 1503(c) of such title is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``one military 
     officer'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``one individual 
     described in paragraph (2)'';
       (B) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
     (3) and (4), respectively; and
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph (2):
       ``(2) An individual referred to in paragraph (1) is the 
     following:
       ``(A) A military officer, in the case of an inquiry with 
     respect to a member of the armed forces.
       ``(B) A civilian, in the case of an inquiry with respect to 
     a civilian employee of the Department of Defense or of a 
     contractor of the Department of Defense.''.
       (3) Section 1504(d) of such title is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``who are and all the 
     follows in that paragraph and inserting in lieu thereof ``as 
     follows:
       ``(A) In the case of a board that will inquire into the 
     whereabouts and status of one or more members of the armed 
     forces (and no civilians described in subparagraph (B)), the 
     board shall be composed of officers having the grade of major 
     or lieutenant commander or above.
       ``(B) In the case of a board that will inquire into the 
     whereabouts and status of one or more civilian employees of 
     the Department of Defense or contractors of the Department of 
     Defense (and no members of the armed forces), the board 
     shall be composed of--
       ``(i) not less than three employees of the Department of 
     Defense whose rate of annual pay is equal to or greater than 
     the rate of annual pay payable for grade GS-13 of the General 
     Schedule under section 5332 of title 5; and
       ``(ii) such members of the armed forces as the Secretary 
     considers advisable.
       ``(C) In the case of a board that will inquire into the 
     whereabouts and status of both one or more members of the 
     armed forces and one or more civilians described in 
     subparagraph (B)--
       ``(i) the board shall include at least one officer 
     described in subparagraph (A) and at least one employee of 
     the Department of Defense described in subparagraph (B)(i); 
     and
       ``(ii) the ratio of such officers to such employees on the 
     board shall be roughly proportional to the ratio of the 
     number of members of the armed forces who are subjects of the 
     board's inquiry to the number of civilians who are subjects 
     of the board's inquiry.''; and
       (B) in paragraph (4), by striking out ``section 
     1503(c)(3)'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``section 
     1503(c)(4)''.
       (4) Paragraph (1) of section 1513 of such title is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(1) The term `missing person' means--
       ``(A) a member of the armed forces on active duty who is in 
     a missing status; or
       ``(B) a civilian employee of the Department of Defense or 
     an employee of a contractor of the Department of Defense who 
     serves with or accompanies the armed forces in the field 
     under orders and who is in a missing status.''.
       (b) Report on Preliminary Assessment of Status.--(1) 
     Section 1502 of such title is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a)(2)--
       (i) by striking out ``10 days'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``48 hours''; and
       (ii) by striking out ``Secretary concerned'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``theater component commander with 
     jurisdiction over the missing person'';
       (B) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c);
       (C) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new 
     subsection (b):
       ``(b) Transmission Through Theater Component Commander.--
     Upon reviewing a report under subsection (a) recommending 
     that a person by placed in a missing status, the theater 
     component commander shall ensure that all necessary actions 
     are being taken, and all appropriate assets are being used, 
     to resolve the status of the missing person. Not later than 
     14 days after receiving the report, the theater component 
     commander shall forward the report to the Secretary of 
     Defense or the Secretary concerned in accordance with 
     procedures prescribed under section 1501(b) of this title. 
     The theater component commander shall include with such 
     report a certification that all necessary actions are being 
     taken, and all appropriate assets are being used, to resolve 
     the status of the missing person.''; and
       (D) in subsection (c), as redesignated by subparagraph (B), 
     by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``The 
     theater component commander through whom the report with 
     respect to the missing person is transmitted under subsection 
     (b) shall ensure that all pertinent information relating to 
     the whereabouts and status of the missing person that results 
     from the preliminary assessment or from actions taken to 
     locate the person is properly safeguarded to avoid loss, 
     damage, or modification.''.
       (2) Section 1503(a) of such title is amended by striking 
     out ``section 1502(a)'', and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``section 1502(b)''.
       (3) Section 1513 of such title is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new paragraph:
       ``(8) The term `theater component commander' means, with 
     respect to any of the combatant commands, an officer of any 
     of the armed forces who (A) is commander of all forces of 
     that armed force assigned to that combatant command, and (B) 
     is directly subordinate to the commander of the combatant 
     command.''.
       (c) Frequency of Subsequent Reviews.--Subsection (b) of 
     section 1505 of such title is amended to read as follows:
       ``(b) Frequency of Subsequent Reviews.--(1) In the case of 
     a missing person who was last known to be alive or who was 
     last suspected of being alive, the Secretary shall appoint a 
     board to conduct an inquiry with respect to a person under 
     this subsection--
       ``(A) on or about three years after the date of the initial 
     report of the disappearance of the person under section 
     1502(a) of this title; and
       ``(B) not later than every three years thereafter.
       ``(2) In addition to appointment of boards under paragraph 
     (1), the Secretary shall appoint a board to conduct an 
     inquiry with respect to a missing person under this 
     subsection upon receipt of information that could result in a 
     change of status of the missing person. When the Secretary 
     appoints a board under this paragraph, the time for 
     subsequent appointments of a board under paragraph (1)(B) 
     shall be determined from the date of the receipt of such 
     information.
       ``(3) The Secretary is not required to appoint a board 
     under paragraph (1) with respect to the disappearance of any 
     person--
       ``(A) more than 30 years after the initial report of the 
     disappearance of the missing person required by section 1502 
     of this title; or
       ``(B) if, before the end of such 30-year period, the 
     missing person is accounted for.''.
       (d) Penalties for Wrongful Withholding of Information.--
     Section 1506 of such title is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following new 
     subsection (e):
       ``(e) Wrongful Withholding.--Except as provided in 
     subsections (a) through (d), any person who knowingly and 
     willfully withholds from the personnel file of a missing 
     person any information relating to the disappearance or 
     whereabouts and status of a missing person shall be fined as 
     provided in title 18 or imprisoned not more than one year, or 
     both.''.
       (e) Information To Accompany Recommendation of Status of 
     Death.--Section 1507(b) of such title is amended adding at 
     the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(3) A description of the location of the body, if 
     recovered.
       ``(4) If the body has been recovered and is not 
     identifiable through visual means, a certification by a 
     practitioner of an appropriate forensic science that the body 
     recovered is that of the missing person.''.
       (f) Scope of Preenactment Review.--(1) Section 1509 of such 
     title is amended--
       (A) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); and
       (B) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new 
     subsection (c):
       ``(c) Special Rule for Persons Classified as `KLA/BNR'.--In 
     the case of a person described in subsection (b) who was 
     classified as `killed in action/body not recovered', the case 
     of that person may be reviewed under this section only if the 
     new information referred to in subsection (a) is 
     compelling.''.
       (2)(A) The heading of such section is amended by inserting 
     ``, special interest'' after ``Preenactment''.
       (B) The item relating to such section in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 76 of such title is 
     amended by inserting ``, special interest'' after 
     ``Preenactment''.

     SEC. 569. ESTABLISHMENT OF SENTENCE OF CONFINEMENT FOR LIFE 
                   WITHOUT ELIGIBILITY FOR PAROLE.

       (a) Establishment of Sentence.--(1) Chapter 47 of title 10, 
     United States Code (the Uniform Code of Military Justice), is 
     amended by inserting after section 856 (article 56) the 
     following new section (article):

     ``Sec. 856a. Art. 56a. Sentence of confinement for life 
       without eligibility for parole

       ``(a) For any offense for which a sentence of confinement 
     for life may be adjudged, a court-martial may adjudge a 
     sentence of confinement for life without eligibility for 
     parole.

[[Page H3986]]

       ``(b) An accused who is sentenced to confinement for life 
     without eligibility for parole shall be confined for the 
     remainder of the accused's life unless--
       ``(1) the sentence is set aside or otherwise modified as a 
     result of--
       ``(A) action taken by the convening authority, the 
     Secretary concerned, or another person authorized to act 
     under section 860 of this title (article 60); or
       ``(B) any other action taken during post-trial procedure 
     and review under any other provision of subchapter IX;
       ``(2) the sentence is set aside or otherwise modified as a 
     result of action taken by a Court of Criminal Appeals, the 
     Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, or the Supreme Court; 
     or
       ``(3) the accused is pardoned.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of subchapter 
     VIII of such chapter is amended by inserting after the item 
     relating to section 856 (article 56) the following new item:

``856a. 56a. Sentence of confinement for life without eligibility for 
              parole.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--Section 856a of title 10, United 
     States Code (article 56a of the Uniform Code of Military 
     Justice), as added by subsection (a), shall be applicable 
     only with respect to an offense committed after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 570. LIMITATION ON APPEAL OF DENIAL OF PAROLE FOR 
                   OFFENDERS SERVING LIFE SENTENCE.

       (a) Exclusive Authority To Grant Parole on Appeal of 
     Denial.--Section 952 of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a)'' before ``The Secretary''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(b) In a case in which parole for an offender serving a 
     sentence of confinement for life is denied, only the 
     President or the Secretary concerned may grant the offender 
     parole on appeal of that denial. The authority to grant 
     parole on appeal in such a case may not be delegated.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--This section shall apply only with 
     respect to any decision to deny parole made after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 571. ESTABLISHMENT OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS BRANCH IN THE ARMY.

       (a) New Special Branch.--Section 3064(a) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs 
     (4) and (5); and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(3) the Public Affairs Corps;''.
       (b) Public Affairs Corps.--(1) Chapter 307 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 3083. Public Affairs Corps

       ``There is a Public Affairs Corps in the Army. The Public 
     Affairs Corps consists of--
       ``(1) the Chief of the Public Affairs Corps;
       ``(2) commissioned officers of the Regular Army appointed 
     therein; and
       ``(3) other members of the Army assigned thereto by the 
     Secretary of the Army.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``3083. Public Affairs Corps.''.
       (c) Transition.--The Secretary of the Army shall implement 
     the amendments made by this section not later than October 1, 
     1998.
          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS
                     Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances

     SEC. 601. INCREASE IN BASIC PAY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998.

       (a) Waiver of Section 1009 Adjustment.--The adjustment, to 
     become effective during fiscal year 1998, required by section 
     1009(b) of title 37, United States Code (as amended by 
     section 602), in the rate of monthly basic pay authorized 
     members of the uniformed services by section 203(a) of such 
     title shall not be made.
       (b) Increase in Basic Pay.--Effective on January 1, 1998, 
     the rates of basic pay of members of the uniformed services 
     are increased by 2.8 percent.

     SEC. 602. ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT OF BASIC PAY AND PROTECTION OF 
                   MEMBER'S TOTAL COMPENSATION WHILE PERFORMING 
                   CERTAIN DUTY.

       (a) In General.--Section 1009 of title 37, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 1009. Certain elements of compensation: adjustment; 
       protection against change

       ``(a) Elements of Compensation.--In this section, the term 
     `elements of compensation' means--
       ``(1) the monthly basic pay authorized members of the 
     uniformed services by section 203(a) of this title;
       ``(2) the basic allowance for subsistence authorized 
     members of the uniformed services by section 402 of this 
     title; and
       ``(3) the basic allowance for housing authorized members of 
     the uniformed services by section 403 of this title.
       ``(b) Annual Adjustment of Basic Pay.--Effective as of the 
     first day of the first applicable pay period beginning on or 
     after January 1 of each calendar year, the rates of basic pay 
     of members of the uniformed services shall be increased by 
     the percentage (rounded to the nearest one-tenth of one 
     percent) equal to the percentage by which the Employment Cost 
     Index for the base quarter of the year before the preceding 
     calendar year exceeds the Employment Cost Index for the base 
     quarter of the second year before the preceding calendar year 
     (if at all).
       ``(c) Allocation of Adjustment.--(1) Subject to paragraph 
     (2), whenever the President determines such action to be in 
     the best interest of the Government, the President may 
     allocate the percentage increase in basic pay among such pay 
     grade and years-of-service categories as the President 
     considers appropriate.
       ``(2) In making any allocation under paragraph (1), the 
     amount of the increase in basic pay for any given pay grade 
     and years-of-service category after the allocation under 
     paragraph (1) may not be less than 75 percent of the amount 
     of the increase that otherwise would have been effective with 
     respect to such pay grade and years-of-service category under 
     subsection (b).
       ``(3) Whenever the President plans to use the authority 
     provided under paragraph (1) with respect to any anticipated 
     increase in the compensation of members of the uniformed 
     services, the President shall advise the Congress, at the 
     earliest practicable time before the effective date of the 
     increase, regarding the proposed allocation of the 
     increase among pay grade and years-of-service categories.
       ``(d) Protection of Member's Total Compensation While 
     Performing Certain Duty.--(1) The total daily amount of the 
     elements of compensation, described in subsection (a), 
     together with other pay and allowances under this title, to 
     be paid to a member of the uniformed services who is 
     temporarily assigned to duty away from the member's permanent 
     duty station or to duty under field conditions at the 
     member's permanent duty station shall not be less, for any 
     day during the assignment period, than the total amount, for 
     the day immediately preceding the date of the assignment, of 
     the elements of compensation and other pay and allowances of 
     the member.
       ``(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to an 
     element of compensation or other pay or allowance of a member 
     during an assignment described in such paragraph to the 
     extent that the element of compensation or other pay or 
     allowance is reduced or terminated due to circumstances 
     unrelated to the assignment.
       ``(e) Other Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) The term `Employment Cost Index' means the Employment 
     Cost Index (wages and salaries, private industry workers) 
     published quarterly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
       ``(2) The term `base quarter', for each year, means the 
     three-month period ending on September 30 of such year.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The item relating to such section 
     in the table of sections at the beginning of chapter 19 of 
     such title is amended to read as follows:

``1009. Certain elements of compensation: adjustment; protection 
              against change.''.

     SEC. 603. USE OF FOOD COST INFORMATION TO DETERMINE BASIC 
                   ALLOWANCE FOR SUBSISTENCE.

       (a) Food-Cost Based Allowance.--Section 402 of title 37, 
     United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 402. Basic allowance for subsistence

       ``(a) Entitlement; Rate; Adjustment.--(1) Except as 
     otherwise provided by law, each member of a uniformed service 
     described in subsection (b) or (c) is entitled to a basic 
     allowance for subsistence. The rate for the allowance shall 
     be prescribed in regulations by the Secretary of Defense 
     after consultation with the Secretaries concerned specified 
     in subparagraphs (D), (E), and (F) of section 101(5) of this 
     title. The allowance may be paid in advance for a period of 
     not more than three months.
       ``(2) Whenever basic pay is increased pursuant to section 
     1009 of this title or another law, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall adjust the basic allowance for subsistence at the same 
     rate as the most recent adjustment made to the cost of the 
     moderate food plan of the Department of Agriculture (one of 
     the four official food plans used by the Department of 
     Agriculture under the Food Stamp Act of 1977) to reflect 
     changes in the cost of the diet described by the moderate 
     food plan.
       ``(b) Enlisted Members.--An enlisted member is entitled to 
     the basic allowance for subsistence on a daily basis if the 
     member is entitled to basic pay and one or more of the 
     following applies with respect to the member:
       ``(1) Rations in kind are not available.
       ``(2) Rations in kind are available, but the Secretary of 
     Defense authorizes the payment of the basic allowance for 
     subsistence.
       ``(3) Permission to mess separately is granted.
       ``(4) The member is assigned to duty under emergency 
     conditions where no messing facilities of the United States 
     are available.
       ``(5) The member is on an authorized leave of absence, is 
     confined in a hospital, or is performing travel under orders 
     away from the member's designated post of duty (except when 
     rations in kind are available and the Secretary of Defense 
     does not authorize the payment of the basic allowance for 
     subsistence.).
       ``(c) Officers.--An officer of a uniformed service who is 
     entitled to basic pay is entitled, at all times, to the basic 
     allowances for subsistence. An aviation cadet of the Navy, 
     Air Force, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard is entitled to the 
     same basic allowance for subsistence as is provided for an 
     officer of the Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard, 
     respectively.
       ``(d) Special Rule for Certain Members Authorized to Mess 
     Separately.--Under regulations and in areas prescribed by the 
     Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Transportation 
     with respect to the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a 
     service in the Navy, an enlisted member who is granted 
     permission to mess separately, and whose duties require the 
     member to buy at least one meal from other than a messing 
     facility of the United States, is entitled to not more than 
     the pro rata allowance authorized for each such meal for an 
     enlisted member when rations in kind are not available.
       ``(e) Payment for Rations in Kind Actually Received.--The 
     Secretary of Defense may require a member of the uniformed 
     services to pay

[[Page H3987]]

     for rations in kind actually received by the member while 
     entitled to a basic allowance for subsistence.
       ``(f) Administration.--(1) The Secretary of Defense may 
     prescribe regulations for the administration of this section.
       ``(2) For purposes of subsection (b)(5), a member shall not 
     be considered to be performing travel under orders away from 
     his designated post of duty if the member--
       ``(A) is an enlisted member serving the member's first tour 
     of active duty;
       ``(B) has not actually reported to a permanent duty station 
     pursuant to orders directing such assignment; and
       ``(C) is not actually traveling between stations pursuant 
     to orders directing a change of station.
       ``(g) Percentage Limitation on Enlisted Members Receiving 
     Allowance.--(1) This subsection apples with respect to 
     enlisted members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine 
     Corps who, when present at their permanent duty station and 
     at which adequate messing facilities of the United States are 
     available, reside without dependents in Government quarters. 
     The Secretary concerned may not provide a basic allowance for 
     subsistence to more than 12 percent of such members under the 
     jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned.
       ``(2) The Secretary concerned may exceed the percentage 
     limitation specified in paragraph (1) if the Secretary 
     determines that compliance would increase costs to the 
     Government, would impose financial hardships on members 
     otherwise entitled to a basic allowance for subsistence, or 
     would reduce the quality of life for such members.
       ``(3) This subsection shall not apply to a member described 
     in paragraph (1) when the member is not residing at the 
     member's permanent duty station.
       ``(h) Rations in Kind for Certain Reserves.--(1) The 
     Secretary concerned may provide rations in kind, or a part 
     thereof, to an enlisted member of a reserve component or of 
     the National Guard when the member's instruction or duty 
     periods, described in section 206(a) of this title, total at 
     least eight hours in a calendar day. The Secretary concerned 
     may provide the member with a commutation when rations in 
     kind are not available.
       ``(2) This subsection shall not apply with respect to an 
     enlisted member of a reserve component or of the National 
     Guard who is entitled to basic pay.
       ``(i) Use of Messing Facilities.--The Secretary of Defense, 
     in consultation with the Secretaries concerned, shall 
     establish policies regarding the use of messing facilities of 
     the United States, including field messing facilities.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Section 404(b)(2) of title 
     37, United States Code, is amended by striking out ``under 
     section 402(e) of this title'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``by the Secretary of Defense''.
       (2) Section 1012 of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking out ``section 402(b)(3)'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``section 402(h)''.
       (3) Section 6912 of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking out ``section 402(a) and (b)'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``section 402(c)''.

     SEC. 604. CONSOLIDATION OF BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR QUARTERS, 
                   VARIABLE HOUSING ALLOWANCE, AND OVERSEAS 
                   HOUSING ALLOWANCES.

       (a) Consolidation of Allowances.--Section 403 of title 37, 
     United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 403. Basic allowance for housing

       ``(a) Components of Basic Allowance for Housing.--The basic 
     allowance for housing consists of the following components:
       ``(1) A basic allowance for quarters for members of the 
     uniformed services stationed in the United States and, under 
     certain circumstances, members on duty outside of the United 
     States whose dependents continue to reside in the United 
     States.
       ``(2) A overseas station housing allowance for members on 
     duty outside of the United States to reflect housing costs 
     incurred by the members.
       ``(3) A family separation housing allowance for members 
     with dependents when the movement of the dependents to the 
     members' permanent station is not authorized at the expense 
     of the United States.
       ``(b) Eligibility for Allowance.--(1) Except as otherwise 
     provided by law, a member of a uniformed service who is 
     entitled to basic pay shall receive the component or 
     components of the basic allowance for housing to which the 
     member is entitled under this section at the monthly rates 
     prescribed in connection with the component under this 
     section or other provision of law. The amount of the 
     allowance for a member will vary according to the pay grade 
     in which the member is assigned or distributed for basic pay 
     purposes and the member's dependency status.
       ``(2) The basic allowance for housing may be paid in 
     advance.
       ``(c) Effect of Assignment to Government Quarters.--(1) 
     Except as otherwise provided by law, a member of a uniformed 
     service who is assigned to quarters of the United States 
     appropriate to the grade, rank, or rating of the member and 
     adequate for the member and dependents, if with dependents, 
     is not entitled to a basic allowance for housing. In this 
     section, the term `quarters of the United States' includes a 
     housing facility under the jurisdiction of a uniformed 
     service.
       ``(2) A member without dependents who is in a pay grade 
     above pay grade E-6 and is assigned to quarters of the United 
     States may elect not to occupy those quarters and instead 
     receive the basic allowance for housing to which the member 
     is otherwise entitled.
       ``(3) A member without dependents who is in pay grade E-6 
     and is assigned to quarters of the United States that do not 
     meet the minimum adequacy standards established by the 
     Secretary of Defense for members in such pay grade may elect 
     not to occupy those quarters and instead to receive the basic 
     allowance for housing to which the member is otherwise 
     entitled. The Secretary concerned may deny the right to make 
     an election under this paragraph if the Secretary determines 
     that the exercise of such an election would adversely affect 
     a training mission, military discipline, or military 
     readiness.
       ``(4) In the case of a member with dependents who is 
     assigned to quarters of the United States at a location or 
     under circumstances that, as determined by the Secretary 
     concerned, require the member's dependents to reside at 
     different location, the member shall receive a basic 
     allowance for housing as if the member were assigned to duty 
     in the area in which the dependents reside and did not reside 
     in quarters of the United States.
       ``(d) Effect of Field Duty and Sea Duty.--(1) The Secretary 
     concerned may deny the basic allowance for housing to a 
     member of a uniformed service without dependents when the 
     member is assigned to field duty with a unit conducting field 
     operations.
       ``(2) A member of a uniformed service without dependents 
     who is in a pay grade below pay grade E-6 is not entitled to 
     a basic allowance for housing while on sea duty. After taking 
     into consideration the availability of quarters for members 
     serving in pay grade E-5, the Secretary concerned may 
     authorize the payment of a basic allowance for housing to a 
     member without dependents who is serving in such pay grade 
     and is assigned to sea duty.
       ``(3) Notwithstanding section 421 of this title, two 
     members of the uniformed services in a pay grade below pay 
     grade E-6 who are married to each other, have no other 
     dependents, and are simultaneously assigned to sea duty are 
     jointly entitled to one basic allowance for housing during 
     the period of such simultaneous sea duty. The amount of the 
     allowance shall be based on the without dependents rate for 
     the pay grade of the senior member of the couple. However, 
     this paragraph shall not apply to a couple if one or both of 
     the members are entitled to a basic allowance for housing 
     under paragraph (2).
       ``(4) For purposes of this subsection, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall prescribe, by regulation, definitions of the 
     terms `field duty' and `sea duty'.
       ``(e) Basic Allowance for Quarters.--(1) The Secretary of 
     Defense shall determine the costs of adequate housing in a 
     military housing area for all members of the uniformed 
     services entitled to a basic allowance for quarters in that 
     area. The Secretary shall base the determination upon the 
     costs of adequate housing for civilians with comparable 
     income levels in the same area.
       ``(2) The monthly amount of a basic allowance for quarters 
     for an area of the United States for a member of a uniformed 
     service is equal to difference between--
       ``(A) the monthly cost of housing in that area, as 
     determined by the Secretary of Defense, for members of the 
     uniformed services serving in the same pay grade and with the 
     same dependency status as the member; and
       ``(B) 15 percent of the national average monthly cost of 
     housing in the United States, as determined by the Secretary, 
     for members of the uniformed services serving in the same pay 
     grade and with the same dependency status as the member.
       ``(3) The rates of basic allowance for quarters shall be 
     reduced as necessary to comply with this paragraph. The total 
     amount that may be paid for a fiscal year for the basic 
     allowance for quarters is the product of--
       ``(A) the total amount authorized to be paid for such 
     allowance for the preceding fiscal year (as adjusted under 
     paragraph (5)); and
       ``(B) a fraction--
       ``(i) the numerator of which is the index of the national 
     average monthly cost of housing for June of the preceding 
     fiscal year; and
       ``(ii) the denominator of which is the index of the 
     national average monthly cost of housing for June of the 
     fiscal year before the preceding fiscal year.
       ``(4) An adjustment in the rates of basic allowance for 
     quarters as a result of the Secretary's redetermination of 
     housing costs in an area shall take effect on the same date 
     as the effective date of the next increase in basic pay under 
     section 1009 of this title or other provision of law.
       ``(5) In making a determination under paragraph (3) for a 
     fiscal year, the amount authorized to be paid for the 
     preceding fiscal year for the basic allowance for quarters 
     shall be adjusted to reflect changes during the year for 
     which the determination is made in the number, grade 
     distribution, geographic distribution, and dependency status 
     of members of the uniformed services entitled to the 
     allowance from the number of such members during the 
     preceding fiscal year.
       ``(6) So long as a member of a uniformed service retains 
     uninterrupted eligibility to receive a basic allowance for 
     quarters within an area of the United States, the monthly 
     amount of the allowance for the member may not be reduced as 
     a result of changes in housing costs in the area, changes in 
     the national average monthly cost of housing, or the 
     promotion of the member.
       ``(f) Overseas Station Housing Allowance.--(1) The 
     Secretary of Defense may prescribe an overseas station 
     housing allowance for a member of a uniformed service who is 
     on duty outside of the United States. The Secretary shall 
     base the station housing allowance on housing costs in the 
     overseas area in which the member is assigned.
       ``(2) So long as a member of a uniformed service retains 
     uninterrupted eligibility to receive an overseas station 
     housing allowance in an overseas area and the actual monthly 
     cost of housing for the member is not reduced, the monthly

[[Page H3988]]

     amount of the overseas station housing allowance may not be 
     reduced as a result of changes in housing costs in the area 
     or the promotion of the member. The monthly amount of the 
     allowance may be adjusted to reflect changes in currency 
     rates.
       ``(g) Family Separation Housing Allowance.--(1) A member of 
     a uniformed service with dependents who is on permanent duty 
     at a location described in paragraph (2) is entitled to a 
     family separation housing allowance under this subsection at 
     a monthly rate equal to the rate of basic allowance for 
     quarters or overseas station housing allowance established 
     for that location for members without dependents in the same 
     grade.
       ``(2) A permanent duty location referred to in paragraph 
     (1) is a location--
       ``(A) to which the movement of the member's dependents is 
     not authorized at the expense of the United States under 
     section 406 of this title, and the member's dependents do not 
     reside at or near the location; and
       ``(B) at which quarters of the United States are not 
     available for assignment to the member.
       ``(3) The allowance provided under this subsection is in 
     addition to any other allowance or per diem that the member 
     is otherwise entitled to under this title.
       ``(h) Partial Allowance.--(1) The Secretary of Defense may 
     prescribe a partial basic allowance for housing for a member 
     of a uniformed service without dependents who is not entitled 
     to the allowance pursuant to subsection (c) or (d).
       ``(2) In the case of a member of a uniformed service who is 
     assigned to quarters of the United States and pays child 
     support, the Secretary of Defense may authorize the payment 
     of a partial basic allowance for housing, at a rate 
     prescribed by the Secretary, on account of the member's 
     payment of the child support. The allowance shall be at a 
     reduced rate to reflect the member's assignment to quarters 
     of the United States. The amount of the partial allowance 
     shall not exceed the monthly rate of the member's child 
     support. The payment of a partial allowance under this 
     paragraph to a member may be in addition to any allowance 
     paid to the member under paragraph (1).
       ``(i) Special Rules for Certain Members.--(1)(A) In the 
     case of a member of a reserve component of a uniformed 
     service without dependents who is called or ordered to active 
     duty (other than for training) or a retired member without 
     dependents ordered to active duty under section 688(a) of 
     title 10, the member shall be considered to be assigned to 
     duty at the location of the primary residence of the member 
     at the time of the call or order for purposes of determining 
     the amount of the member's basic allowance for housing.
       ``(B) If a member described in subparagraph (A) is called 
     or ordered to active duty for less than 30 days, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall prescribe the amount of the basic 
     allowance for housing to be paid to the member.
       ``(C) This paragraph shall not apply to a member described 
     in subparagraph (A) if the member is authorized 
     transportation of household goods under section 406 of this 
     title as part of the call or order to active duty or if the 
     primary residence of the member is not owned by the member or 
     the member is not responsible for rental payments.
       ``(2) A member of a uniformed service without dependents 
     who is in pay grade E-4 (four or more years' service), or 
     above, is entitled to a basic allowance for housing while the 
     member is in a travel or leave status between permanent duty 
     stations, including time granted as delay en route or proceed 
     time, when the member is not assigned to quarters of the 
     United States. Notwithstanding subsection (e)(2), the rate of 
     basic allowance for quarters for such a member shall be equal 
     to the national average monthly cost of housing in the United 
     States, as determined by the Secretary, for members of the 
     uniformed services serving in the same pay grade and with the 
     same dependency status as the member.
       ``(3) The eligibility of an aviation cadet of the Navy, Air 
     Force, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard for a basic allowance for 
     housing shall be determined as if the aviation cadet were  a  
     member  of  the  uniformed  services  in  pay  grade E-4.
       ``(4) In the case of a member without dependents who is 
     assigned to duty inside the United States, the location or 
     the circumstances of which make it necessary that the member 
     be reassigned under the conditions of low cost or no cost 
     permanent change of station or permanent change of 
     assignment, the member may be treated as if the member were 
     not reassigned if the Secretary concerned determines that it 
     would be inequitable to base the member's entitlement to, and 
     amount of, a basic allowance for housing on the area to which 
     the member is reassigned.
       ``(j) Administration.--(1) The Secretary concerned may make 
     such determinations as may be necessary to administer this 
     section, including determinations of dependency and 
     relationship. When warranted by the circumstances, the 
     Secretary concerned may reconsider and change or modify any 
     such determination. This authority may be delegated by the 
     Secretary concerned. Any determination made under this 
     section with regard to a member of the uniformed services is 
     final and is not subject to review by any accounting officer 
     of the United States or a court, unless there is fraud or 
     gross negligence.
       ``(2) Parking facilities (including utility connections) 
     provided members of the uniformed services for house trailers 
     and mobile homes not owned by the Government shall not be 
     considered to be quarters for the purposes of this section or 
     any other provision of law. Any fees established by the 
     Government for the use of such a facility shall be 
     established in an amount sufficient to cover the cost of 
     maintenance, services, and utilities and to amortize the cost 
     of construction of the facility over the 25-year period 
     beginning with the completion of such construction.
       ``(k) Temporary Continuation of Allowance.--(1) The 
     Secretary of Defense, or the Secretary of Transportation in 
     the case of the Coast Guard when not operating as a service 
     in the Navy, may allow the dependents of a member of the 
     armed forces who dies while on active duty and whose 
     dependents are occupying family housing provided by the 
     Department of Defense, or by the Department of Transportation 
     in the case of the Coast Guard, other than on a rental basis 
     on the date of the member's death to continue to occupy such 
     housing without charge for a period of 180 days.
       ``(2) The Secretary concerned may pay an allowance for 
     housing to the dependents of a member of the uniformed 
     services who dies while on active duty and whose dependents 
     are not occupying a housing facility under the jurisdiction 
     of a uniformed service on the date of the member's death or 
     are occupying such housing on a rental basis on such date, or 
     whose dependents vacate such housing sooner than 180 days 
     after the date of the member's death. The amount of the 
     allowance shall be the same amount that would otherwise be 
     payable to the deceased member under this section if the 
     member had not died. The payment of an allowance under this 
     paragraph shall terminate 180 days after the date of the 
     member's death.''.
       (b) Repeal of Superseded Authorities.--(1) Section 403a of 
     title 37, United States Code, is repealed.
       (2) Section 405 of such title is amended--
       (A) by striking out subsection (b); and
       (B) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as subsections 
     (b) and (c), respectively.
       (3) Section 427 of such title is amended--
       (A) by striking out subsection (a); and
       (B) in subsection (b)--
       (i) by striking out ``(b) Additional Separation 
     Allowance.--'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``(a) 
     Availability of Separation Allowance.--'';
       (ii) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``including 
     subsection (a)'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``including 
     section 403(g) of this title'';
       (iii) in paragraph (4)--
       (I) by striking out ``(4) A member'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``(b) Effect of Election to Serve Unaccompanied Tour 
     of Duty.--A member'';
       (II) by striking out ``paragraph (1)(A) of this 
     subsection'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``subsection 
     (a)(1)(A)''; and
       (iv) in paragraph (5)--
       (I) by striking out ``(5) Section 421'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``(c) Effect of Dependent Entitled to Basic 
     Pay.--Section 421''; and
       (II) by striking out ``paragraph (1)(D)'' both places it 
     appears and inserting in lieu thereof ``subsection 
     (a)(1)(D)''.
       (4) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 7 of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out the 
     items relating to sections 403 and 403a and inserting in lieu 
     thereof the following new item:

``403. Basic allowance for housing.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Title 37, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (A) in section 101(25), by striking out ``basic allowance 
     for quarters (including any variable housing allowance or 
     station housing allowance)'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``basic allowance for housing'';
       (B) in section 406(c), by striking out ``sections 404 and 
     405'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``sections 403(f), 404, 
     and 405'';
       (C) in section 420(c), by striking out ``quarters'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``housing'';
       (D) in section 551(3)(D), by striking out ``basic allowance 
     for quarters'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``basic 
     allowance for housing''; and
       (E) in section 1014(a), by striking out ``basic allowance 
     for quarters'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``basic 
     allowance for housing''.
       (2) Title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (A) in section 708(c)(1), by striking out ``basic allowance 
     for quarters or basic allowance for subsistence'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``basic allowance for housing under 
     section 403 of title 37, basic allowance for subsistence 
     under section 402 of such title,'';
       (B) in section 2830(a)--
       (i) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``basic allowance for 
     quarters'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``basic allowance 
     for housing under section 403 of title 37''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``basic allowance 
     for quarters'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``basic 
     allowance for housing'';
       (C) in section 2882(b)--
       (i) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``section 403(b)'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``section 403''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``basic allowance 
     for quarters'' and all that follows through the end of the 
     paragraph and inserting in lieu thereof ``basic allowance for 
     housing under section 403 of title 37.'';
       (D) in section 7572(b)--
       (i) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``the total of--'' 
     and all that follows through the end of the paragraph and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``the basic allowance for housing 
     payable under section 403 of title 37 to a member of the same 
     pay grade without dependents for the period during which the 
     member is deprived of quarters on board ship.''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``basic allowance 
     for quarters'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``basic 
     allowance for housing''; and
       (E) in section 7573, by striking out ``basic allowance for 
     quarters'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``basic allowance 
     for housing under section 403 of title 37''.
       (3) Section 5561(6)(D) of title 5, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking out ``basic allowance for quarters'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``basic allowance for housing''.
       (4) Section 107(b) of title 32, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking out ``and quarters'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``and housing''.

[[Page H3989]]

       (5) Section 4(k)(10) of the Military Selective Service Act 
     (50 U.S.C. App. 454(k)(10)) is amended by striking out ``as 
     such terms'' and all that follows through ``extended or 
     amended'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``shall be entitled 
     to receive a dependency allowance equal to the basic 
     allowance for quarters provided for persons in pay grade E-1 
     under section 403 of title 37, United States Code,''.
       (d) Transition to Basic Allowance for Housing.--The 
     Secretary of Defense shall develop and implement a plan to 
     incrementally manage the rate of growth of the various 
     components of the basic allowance for housing authorized by 
     section 403 of title 37, United States Code (as amended by 
     subsection (a)), during a transition period of not more than 
     six years. During the transition period, the Secretary may 
     continue to use the authorities provided under sections 403, 
     403a, 405(b), and 427(a) of title 37, United States Code (as 
     in effect on the day before the date of the enactment of this 
     Act), but subject to such modifications as the Secretary 
     considers necessary, to provide allowances for members of the 
     uniformed services.
       (e) Availability of Funds to Reduce Out-Of-Pocket Housing 
     Costs.--Of the amount authorized to be appropriated pursuant 
     to section 421 for military personnel, $35,000,000 shall be 
     available to the Secretary of Defense to increase the rates 
     of basic allowance for quarters authorized members of the 
     Armed Forces by section 403 of title 37, United States Code 
     (as amended by subsection (a)), so as to further reduce out-
     of-pocket housing costs incurred by members of the Armed 
     Forces.
           Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays

     SEC. 611. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BONUSES AND SPECIAL 
                   PAY AUTHORITIES FOR RESERVE FORCES.

       (a) Special Pay for Health Professionals in Critically 
     Short Wartime Specialties.--Section 302g(f) of title 37, 
     United States Code, is amended by striking out ``September 
     30, 1998'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``September 30, 
     1999''.
       (b) Selected Reserve Reenlistment Bonus.--Section 308b(f) 
     of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1998'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 1999''.
       (c) Selected Reserve Enlistment Bonus.--Section 308c(e) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1998'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 1999''.
       (d) Special Pay for Enlisted Members Assigned to Certain 
     High Priority Units.--Section 308d(c) of title 37, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking out ``September 30, 
     1998'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``September 30, 1999''.
       (e) Selected Reserve Affiliation Bonus.--Section 308e(e) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1998'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 1999''.
       (f) Ready Reserve Enlistment and Reenlistment Bonus.--
     Section 308h(g) of title 37, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking out ``September 30, 1998'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``September 30, 1999''.
       (g) Prior Service Enlistment Bonus.--Section 308i(i) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1998'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 1999''.

     SEC. 612. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BONUSES AND SPECIAL 
                   PAY AUTHORITIES FOR NURSE OFFICER CANDIDATES, 
                   REGISTERED NURSES, AND NURSE ANESTHETISTS.

       (a) Nurse Officer Candidate Accession Program.--Section 
     2130a(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking out ``September 30, 1998'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``September 30, 1999''.
       (b) Accession Bonus for Registered Nurses.--Section 
     302d(a)(1) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking out ``September 30, 1998'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``September 30, 1999''.
       (c) Incentive Special Pay for Nurse Anesthetists.--Section 
     302e(a)(1) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking out ``September 30, 1998'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``September 30, 1999''.

     SEC. 613. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF AUTHORITIES RELATING TO 
                   PAYMENT OF OTHER BONUSES AND SPECIAL PAYS.

       (a) Aviation Officer Retention Bonus.--Section 301b(a) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1998,'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 1999,''.
       (b) Reenlistment Bonus for Active Members.--Section 308(g) 
     of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1998'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 1999''.
       (c) Enlistment Bonuses for Members With Critical Skills.--
     Sections 308a(c) and 308f(c) of title 37, United States Code, 
     are each amended by striking out ``September 30, 1998'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``September 30, 1999''.
       (d) Special Pay for Nuclear Qualified Officers Extending 
     Period of Active Duty.--Section 312(e) of title 37, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking out ``September 30, 
     1998'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``September 30, 1999''.
       (e) Nuclear Career Accession Bonus.--Section 312b(c) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1998'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 1999''.
       (f) Nuclear Career Annual Incentive Bonus.--Section 312c(d) 
     of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``October 1, 1998'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``October 
     1, 1999''.
       (g) Repayment of Education Loans for Certain Health 
     Professionals Who Serve in the Selected Reserve.--Section 
     16302(d) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking out ``October 1, 1998'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``October 1, 1999''.

     SEC. 614. INCREASE IN MINIMUM MONTHLY RATE OF HAZARDOUS DUTY 
                   INCENTIVE PAY FOR CERTAIN MEMBERS.

       (a) Aerial Flight Crewmembers.--The table in subsection (b) 
     of section 301 of title 37, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``110'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``150''; and
       (2) by striking out ``125'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``150''.
       (b) Air Weapons Controller Aircrew.--The table in 
     subsection (c)(2)(A) of such section is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``100'' in the first column of amounts 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``150'';
       (2) by striking out ``110'' in the last column of amounts 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``150''; and
       (3) by striking out ``125'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``150''.
       (c) Other Members.--Subsection (c)(1) of such section is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking out ``$110'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``$150''; and
       (2) by striking out ``$165'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``$225''.

     SEC. 615. AVAILABILITY OF MULTIYEAR RETENTION BONUS FOR 
                   DENTAL OFFICERS.

       (a) Availability of Retention Bonus.--Chapter 5 of title 
     37, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 
     301d the following new section:

     ``Sec. 301e. Multiyear retention bonus: dental officers of 
       the armed forces

       ``(a) Bonus Authorized.--(1) A dental officer described in 
     subsection (b) who executes a written agreement to remain on 
     active duty for two, three, or four years after completion of 
     any other active-duty service commitment may, upon acceptance 
     of the written agreement by the Secretary of the military 
     department concerned, be paid a retention bonus as provided 
     in this section.
       ``(2) The amount of a retention bonus under paragraph (1) 
     may not exceed $14,000 for each year covered by a four-year 
     agreement. The maximum yearly retention bonus for two-year 
     and three-year agreements shall be reduced to reflect the 
     shorter service commitment.
       ``(b) Officers Automatically Eligible.--Subsection (a) 
     applies to an officer of the armed forces who--
       ``(1) is an officer of the Dental Corps of the Army or the 
     Navy or an officer of the Air Force designated as a dental 
     officer;
       ``(2) has a dental specialty in oral and maxillofacial 
     surgery;
       ``(3) is in a pay grade below pay grade 0-7;
       ``(4) has at least eight years of creditable service 
     (computed as described in section 302b(g) of this title) or 
     has completed any active-duty service commitment incurred for 
     dental education and training; and
       ``(5) has completed initial residency training (or will 
     complete such training before September 30 of the fiscal year 
     in which the officer enters into an agreement under 
     subsection (a)).
       ``(c) Extension of Bonus to Other Dental Officers.--At the 
     discretion of the Secretary of the military department 
     concerned, the Secretary may enter into a written agreement 
     described in subsection (a)(1) with a dental officer who does 
     not have the dental specialty specified in subsection (b)(2), 
     and pay a retention bonus to such an officer as provided in 
     this section, if the officer otherwise satisfies the 
     eligibility requirements specified in subsection (b). The 
     Secretaries shall exercise the authority provided in this 
     section in a manner consistent with regulations prescribed by 
     the Secretary of Defense.
       ``(d) Refunds.--(1) Refunds shall be required, on a pro 
     rata basis, of sums paid under this section if the officer 
     who has received the payment fails to complete the total 
     period of active duty specified in the agreement, as 
     conditions and circumstances warrant.
       ``(2) An obligation to reimburse the United States imposed 
     under paragraph (1) is for all purposes a debt owed to the 
     United States.
       ``(3) A discharge in bankruptcy under title 11, United 
     States Code, that is entered less than five years after the 
     termination of an agreement under this section does not 
     discharge the member signing such agreement from a debt 
     arising under such agreement or under paragraph (1). This 
     paragraph applies to any case commenced under title 11 after 
     the date of the enactment of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 301d the following new item:

``301e. Multiyear retention bonus: dental officers of the armed 
              forces.''.

     SEC. 616. INCREASE IN VARIABLE AND ADDITIONAL SPECIAL PAYS 
                   FOR CERTAIN DENTAL OFFICERS.

       (a) Variable Special Pay for Junior Officers.--Paragraph 
     (2) of section 302b(a) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking out subparagraphs (C) through (F) and 
     inserting in lieu thereof the following new subparagraphs:
       ``(C) $7,000 per year, if the officer has at least six but 
     less than eight years of creditable service.
       ``(D) $12,000 per year, if the officer has at least eight 
     but less than 12 years of creditable service.
       ``(E) $10,000 per year, if the officer has at least 12 but 
     less than 14 years of creditable service.
       ``(F) $9,000 per year, if the officer has at least 14 but 
     less than 18 years of creditable service.

[[Page H3990]]

       ``(G) $8,000 per year, if the officer has 18 or more years 
     of creditable service.''.
       (b) Variable Special Pay for Senior Officers.--Paragraph 
     (3) of such section is amended by striking out ``$1,000'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$7,000''.
       (c) Additional Special Pay.--Paragraph (4) of such section 
     is amended by striking out subparagraphs (B) through (D) and 
     inserting in lieu thereof the following new subparagraphs:
       ``(B) $6,000 per year, if the officer has at least three 
     but less than 10 years of creditable service.
       ``(C) $15,000 per year, if the officer has 10 or more years 
     of creditable service.''.

     SEC. 617. SPECIAL PAY FOR DUTY AT DESIGNATED HARDSHIP DUTY 
                   LOCATIONS.

       (a) Special Pay Authorized.--Section 305 of title 37, 
     United States Code, is amended by striking out subsection (a) 
     and inserting in lieu thereof the following new subsection:
       ``(a) Special Pay Authorized.--A member of a uniformed 
     service who is entitled to basic pay may be paid

      special pay under this section at a monthly rate not to 
     exceed $300 while the member is on duty at a location in 
     the United States or outside the United States designated 
     by the Secretary of Defense as a hardship duty 
     location.''.
       (b) Cross References and Regulations.--Such section is 
     further amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by inserting ``Exception for Certain Members Serving in 
     Certain Locations.--'' after ``(b)''; and
       (B) by striking out ``as foreign duty pay'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``as hardship duty location pay'';
       (2) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by inserting ``Exception for Members Receiving Career 
     Sea Pay.--'' after ``(c)''; and
       (B) by striking out ``special pay under this section'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``hardship duty location pay under 
     subsection (a)''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     prescribe regulations for the provision of hardship duty 
     location pay under subsection (a), including the actual 
     monthly rates at which the special pay will be available.''.
       (c) Clerical Amendments.--(1) the heading of such section 
     is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 305. Special pay: hardship duty location pay''.

       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 5 of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out the 
     item relating to section 305 and inserting in lieu thereof 
     the following new item:

``305. Special pay: hardship duty location pay.''.

       (d) Conforming Amendment.--Section 907(d) of such title is 
     amended by striking out ``duty at certain places'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``duty at a hardship duty 
     location''.
       (e) Transition.--Until such time as the Secretary of 
     Defense prescribes regulations regarding the provision of 
     hardship duty location pay under section 305 of title 37, 
     United States Code, as amended by this section, the Secretary 
     may continue to use the authority provided by such section 
     305, as in effect on the day before the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, to provide special pay to enlisted members of 
     the uniformed services on duty at certain places.

     SEC. 618. SELECTED RESERVE REENLISTMENT BONUS.

       (a) Eligible Members.--Subsection (a)(1) of section 308b of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``ten years'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``14 years''.
       (b) Bonus Amounts; Payment.--Subsection (b) of such section 
     is amended to read as follows:
       ``(b)(1) The amount of a bonus under this section may not 
     exceed--
       ``(A) $2,500, in the case of a member who reenlists or 
     extends an enlistment for a period of three years; and
       ``(B) $5,000, in the case of a member who reenlists or 
     extends an enlistment for a period of six years.
       ``(2) The bonus shall be paid according to a payment 
     schedule determined by the Secretary concerned, except that 
     the initial payment to a member may not exceed one-half the 
     total bonus amount for the member.''.
       (c) Number of Individual Bonuses.--Subsection (c) of such 
     section is amended to read as follows:
       ``(c) A member may not be paid more than one six-year bonus 
     or two three-year bonuses under this section.''.
       (d) Effect of Failure to Serve Satisfactorily.--Subsection 
     (d) of such section is amended to read as follows:
       ``(d) A member who receives a bonus under this section and 
     who fails, during the period for which the bonus was paid, to 
     serve satisfactorily in the element of the Selected Reserve 
     of the Ready Reserve with respect to which the bonus was paid 
     shall refund to the United States an amount that bears the 
     same relation to the amount of the bonus paid to the member 
     as the period that the member failed to serve satisfactorily 
     bears to the total period for which the bonus was paid.''.

     SEC. 619. SELECTED RESERVE ENLISTMENT BONUS FOR FORMER 
                   ENLISTED MEMBERS.

       (a) Eligible Persons.--Subsection (a)(2) of section 308i of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     subparagraph (A) and inserting in lieu thereof the following 
     new subparagraph:
       ``(A) has completed a military obligation but has less than 
     14 years of total military service;'';
       (b) Bonus Amounts; Payment.--Subsection (b) of such section 
     is amended to read as follows:
       ``(b)(1) The amount of a bonus under this section may not 
     exceed--
       ``(A) $2,500, in the case of a person who enlists for a 
     period of three years; and
       ``(B) $5,000, in the case of a person who enlists for a 
     period of six years.
       ``(2) The bonus shall be paid according to a payment 
     schedule determined by the Secretary concerned, except that 
     the initial payment to a person may not exceed one-half the 
     total bonus amount for the person.''.

       (c) Limitations.--Subsection (c) of such section is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(c)(1) A person may not be paid more than one six-year 
     bonus or two three-year bonuses under this section.
       ``(2) A person may not be paid a bonus under this section 
     unless the specialty associated with the position the person 
     is projected to occupy as a member of the Selected Reserve is 
     a specialty in which--
       ``(A) the person successfully served while a member on 
     active duty; and
       ``(B) the person attained a level of qualification while a 
     member commensurate with the grade and years of service of 
     the member.''.

     SEC. 620. SPECIAL PAY OR BONUSES FOR ENLISTED MEMBERS 
                   EXTENDING TOURS OF DUTY OVERSEAS.

       (a) Inclusion of Bonus Incentive.--(1) Section 314 of title 
     37, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 314. Special pay or bonus: qualified enlisted members 
       extending duty at designated locations overseas

       ``(a) Covered Members.--This section applies with respect 
     to an enlisted member of an armed force who--
       ``(1) is entitled to basic pay;
       ``(2) has a specialty that is designated by the Secretary 
     concerned for the purposes of this section;
       ``(3) has completed a tour of duty (as defined in 
     accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary 
     concerned) at a location outside the 48 contiguous States and 
     the District of Columbia that is designated by the Secretary 
     concerned for the purposes of this section; and
       ``(4) at the end of that tour of duty executes an agreement 
     to extend that tour for a period of not less than one year.
       ``(b) Special Pay or Bonus Authorized.--Under regulations 
     prescribed by the Secretary concerned, an enlisted member 
     described in subsection (a) is entitled, upon acceptance by 
     the Secretary concerned of the agreement providing for 
     extension of the member's tour of duty, to either--
       ``(1) special pay for duty performed during the period of 
     the extension at a rate of not more than $80 per month, as 
     prescribed by the Secretary concerned; or
       ``(2) a bonus of up to $2,000 per year, as prescribed by 
     the Secretary concerned, for specialty requirements at 
     designated locations.
       ``(c) Selection and Payment of Special Pay or Bonus.--Not 
     later than the date on which the Secretary concerned accepts 
     an agreement described in subsection (a)(4) providing for the 
     extension of a member's tour of duty, the Secretary concerned 
     shall notify the member regarding whether the member will 
     receive special pay or a bonus under this section. The 
     payment rate for the special pay or bonus shall be fixed at 
     the time of the agreement and may not be changed during the 
     period of the extended tour of duty. The Secretary concerned 
     may pay a bonus under this section either in a lump sum or 
     installments.
       ``(d) Repayment of Bonus.--(1) If a member who receives all 
     or part of a bonus under this section fails to complete the 
     total period of extension specified in the agreement 
     described in subsection (a)(4), the Secretary concerned may 
     require the member to repay the United States, on a pro rata 
     basis and to the extent that the Secretary determines 
     conditions and circumstances warrant, amounts paid to the 
     member under this section.
       ``(2) An obligation to repay the United States imposed 
     under paragraph (1) is for all purposes a debt owed to the 
     United States.
       ``(3) A discharge in bankruptcy under title 11 that is 
     entered less than five years after the termination of the 
     agreement does not discharge the member signing the agreement 
     from a debt arising under the agreement or under paragraph 
     (1). This paragraph applies to any case commenced under title 
     11 on or after October 1, 1997.
       ``(e) Effect of Rest and Recuperative Absence.--A member 
     who elects to receive one of the benefits specified in 
     section 705(b) of title 10 as part of the extension of a tour 
     of duty is not entitled to the special pay or bonus 
     authorized by this section for the period of the extension of 
     duty for which the benefit under such section is provided.''.

       (2) The item relating to section 314 in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 5 of such title is 
     amended to read as follows:

``314. Special pay or bonus: qualified enlisted members extending duty 
              at designated locations overseas.''.

       (b) Application of Amendment.--Section 314 of title 37, 
     United States Code, as amended by subsection (a), shall apply 
     with respect to an agreement to extend a tour of duty as 
     provided in such section executed on or after October 1, 
     1997.

     SEC. 621. INCREASE IN AMOUNT OF FAMILY SEPARATION ALLOWANCE.

       Section 427 of title 37, United States Code (as amended by 
     section 604(b)(3)), is further amended in subsection (a)(1) 
     by striking out ``$75'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``$100''.

     SEC. 622. CHANGE IN REQUIREMENTS FOR READY RESERVE MUSTER 
                   DUTY ALLOWANCE.

       Section 433(c) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended--

[[Page H3991]]

       (1) in the first sentence, by striking out ``and shall be'' 
     and all that follows through ``is performed''; and
       (2) by inserting after the first sentence the following new 
     sentence: ``The allowance may be paid to the member on or 
     before the date on which the muster duty is performed, but 
     shall be paid not later than 30 days after the date on which 
     the muster duty is performed.''.
            Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances

     SEC. 631. TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES FOR DEPENDENTS 
                   OF MEMBER SENTENCED BY COURT-MARTIAL.

       Section 406(h)(2)(C) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking out the comma at the end of clause (iii) 
     and all that follows through ``title 10.'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof a period.

     SEC. 632. DISLOCATION ALLOWANCE.

       Section 407 of title 37, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``Sec. 407. Travel and transportation allowances: dislocation 
       allowance

       ``(a) Basic Eligibility.--(1) Under regulations prescribed 
     by the Secretary concerned, a member of a uniformed service 
     described in paragraph (2) is entitled to a dislocation 
     allowance at the rate set forth in the tables in subsection 
     (c) for the member's pay grade and dependency status.
       ``(2) A member of the uniformed services referred to in 
     paragraph (1) is any of the following:
       ``(A) A member who makes a change of permanent station and 
     the member's dependents actually make an authorized move in 
     connection with the change, including a move by the 
     dependents--
       ``(i) to join the member at the member's duty station after 
     an unaccompanied tour of duty when the member's next tour of 
     duty is an accompanied tour at the same station; and
       ``(ii) to a location designated by the member after an 
     accompanied tour of duty when the member's next tour of duty 
     is an unaccompanied tour at the same duty station.
       ``(B) A member whose dependents actually move pursuant to 
     section 405a(a), 406(e), 406(h), or 554 of this title.
       ``(C) A member whose dependents actually move from their 
     place of residence under circumstances described in section 
     406a of this title.
       ``(D) A member who is without dependents and--
       ``(i) actually moves to a new permanent station where the 
     member is not assigned to quarters of the United States; or
       ``(ii) actually moves from a place of residence under 
     circumstances described in section 406a of this title.
       ``(E) A member who is ordered to move in connection with 
     the closure or realignment of a military installation and, as 
     a result, the member's dependents actually move or, in the 
     case of a member without dependents, the member actually 
     moves.
       ``(3) If a dislocation allowance is paid under this 
     subsection to a member described in subparagraph (C) or 
     (D)(ii), the member is not entitled to another dislocation 
     allowance as a member described in subparagraph (A) or (E) in 
     connection with the same move.
       ``(b) Second Allowance Authorized Under Certain 
     Circumstances.--(1) Under regulations prescribed by the 
     Secretary concerned, whenever a member is entitled to a 
     dislocation allowance as a member described in subparagraph 
     (C) or (D)(ii) of subsection (a)(2), the member is also 
     entitled to a second dislocation allowance at the rate set 
     forth in the tables in subsection (c) for the member's pay 
     grade and dependency status if, subsequent to the member or 
     the member's dependents actually moving from their place of 
     residence under circumstances described in section 406a of 
     this title, the member or member's dependents complete that 
     move to a new location and then actually move from that new 
     location to another location also under circumstances 
     described in section 406a of this title.
       ``(2) If a second dislocation allowance is paid under this 
     subsection, the member is not entitled to a dislocation 
     allowance as a member described in subparagraph (A) or (E) of 
     subsection (a)(2) in connection with those moves.
       ``(c) Dislocation Allowance Rates.--(1) A dislocation 
     allowance under this section shall be paid at the following 
     monthly rates, based on a member's pay grade and dependency 
     status:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Paygrade              Without dependents    With dependents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
O-10............................          $2,061.75           $2,538.00
O-9.............................           2,061.75            2,538.00
O-8.............................           2,061.75            2,538.00
O-7.............................           2,061.75            2,538.00
O-6.............................           1,891.50            2,285.25
O-5.............................           1,821.75            2,202.75
O-4.............................           1,688.25            1,941.75
O-3.............................           1,353.00            1,606.50
O-2.............................           1,073.25            1,371.75
O-1.............................             903.75            1,226.25
------------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Paygrade              Without dependents    With dependents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
O-3E............................          $1,461.00           $1,726.50
O-2E............................           1,242.00            1,557.75
O-1E............................           1,068.00            1,439.25
------------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Paygrade              Without dependents    With dependents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
W-5.............................          $1,715.25           $1,874.25
W-4.............................           1,523.25            1,718.25
W-3.............................           1,280.00            1,574.25
W-2.............................           1,137.00            1,448.25
W-1.............................             951.75            1,252.50
------------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Paygrade              Without dependents    With dependents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-9.............................          $1,251.00           $1,649.25
E-8.............................           1,148.25            1,520.25
E-7.............................             981.00            1,411.50
E-6.............................             888.00            1,304.25
E-5.............................             819.00            1,173.00
E-4.............................             712.50            1,020.00
E-3.............................             699.00              949.50
E-2.............................             567.75              903.75
E-1.............................             506.25              903.75
------------------------------------------------------------------------


       ``(2) For each calendar year after 1997, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall adjust the rates in the tables in paragraph (1) 
     by the percentage equal to the rate of change of the national 
     average monthly cost of housing, as determined by the 
     Secretary under section 403 of this title for that calendar 
     year.
       ``(d) Fiscal Year Limitation; Exceptions.--(1) A member is 
     not entitled to more than one dislocation allowance during a 
     fiscal year unless--

       ``(A) the Secretary concerned finds that the exigencies of 
     the service require the member to make more than one change 
     of permanent station during the fiscal year;
       ``(B) the member is ordered to a service school as a change 
     of permanent station;
       ``(C) the member's dependents are covered by section 
     405a(a), 406(e), 406(h), or 554 of this title; or
       ``(D) subparagraph (C) or (D)(ii) of subsection (a)(2) or 
     subsection (b) apply with respect to the member or the 
     member's dependents.
       ``(2) This subsection does not apply in time of national 
     emergency or in time of war.
       ``(e) First or Last Duty.--A member is not entitled to 
     payment of a dislocation allowance when ordered from the 
     member's home to the member's first duty station or from the 
     member's last duty station to the member's home.
       ``(f) Rule of Construction.--For purposes of this section, 
     a member whose dependents may not make an authorized move in 
     connection with a change of permanent station is considered a 
     member without dependents.
       ``(g) Advance Payment.--A dislocation allowance payable 
     under this section may be paid in advance.''.
    Subtitle D--Retired Pay, Survivor Benefits, and Related Matters

     SEC. 641. TIME IN WHICH CERTAIN CHANGES IN BENEFICIARY UNDER 
                   SURVIVOR BENEFIT PLAN MAY BE MADE.

       (a) Extension of Time for Change.--Section 1450(f)(1)(C) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting before 
     the period at the end the following: ``, except that such a 
     change of election to change a beneficiary under the Plan 
     from a former spouse to a spouse may be made at any time 
     after the person providing the annuity remarries (rather than 
     only within one year after the date on which that person 
     marries)''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply with respect to marriages occurring before, on, 
     or after the date of the enactment of this Act.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

     SEC. 651. DEFINITION OF SEA DUTY FOR PURPOSES OF CAREER SEA 
                   PAY.

       Section 305a(d) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking out ``, ship-based 
     staff, or ship-based aviation unit'';
       (2) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking out ``or ship-based 
     staff'';
       (3) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
     (3) and (4), respectively; and
       (4) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(2) The Secretary concerned may designate duty performed 
     by a member while serving on a ship the primary mission of 
     which is accomplished either while under way or in port as 
     `sea duty' for purposes of this section, even though the duty 
     is performed while the member is permanently or temporarily 
     assigned to a ship-based staff or other unit not covered by 
     paragraph (1).''.

     SEC. 652. LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAM FOR COMMISSIONED OFFICERS IN 
                   CERTAIN HEALTH PROFESSIONS.

       (a) Chapter 109 of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2173. Education loan repayment program: commissioned 
       officers in specified health professions

       ``(a) Authority To Repay Education Loans.--For the purpose 
     of maintaining adequate numbers of commissioned officers of 
     the armed forces on active duty who are qualified in the 
     various health professions, the Secretary of a military 
     department may repay, in the case of a person described in 
     subsection (b), a loan that was used by the person to finance 
     education regarding a health profession and was obtained from 
     a governmental entity, private financial institution, school, 
     or other authorized entity.
       ``(b) Eligible Persons.--To be eligible to obtain a loan 
     repayment under this section, a person must--
       ``(1) satisfy one of the academic requirements specified in 
     subsection (c);
       ``(2) be fully qualified for, or hold, an appointment as a 
     commissioned officer in one of the health professions; and
       ``(3) sign a written agreement to serve on active duty, or, 
     if on active duty, to remain on active duty for a period in 
     addition to any other incurred active duty obligation.
       ``(c) Academic Requirements.--One of the following academic 
     requirements must be satisfied for purposes of determining 
     the eligibility of a person for a loan repayment under this 
     section:

[[Page H3992]]

       ``(1) The person must be fully qualified in a health 
     profession that the Secretary of the military department 
     concerned has determined to be necessary to meet identified 
     skill shortages.
       ``(2) The person must be enrolled as a full-time student in 
     the final year of a course of study at an accredited 
     educational institution leading to a degree

      in a health profession other than medicine or osteopathic 
     medicine.
       ``(3) The person must be enrolled in the final year of an 
     approved graduate program leading to specialty qualification 
     in medicine, dentistry, osteopathic medicine, or other health 
     profession.
       ``(d) Certain Person Ineligible.--Participants of the Armed 
     Forces Health Professions Scholarship and Financial 
     Assistance program under subchapter I of chapter 105 of this 
     title and students of the Uniformed Services University of 
     the Health Sciences established under section 2112 of this 
     title are not eligible for the repayment of an education loan 
     under this section.
       ``(e) Loan Repayments.--(1) Subject to the limits 
     established by paragraph (2), a loan repayment under this 
     section may consist of payment of the principal, interest, 
     and related expenses of a loan obtained by a person described 
     in subsection (b) for--
       ``(A) all educational expenses, comparable to all 
     educational expenses recognized under section 2127(a) of this 
     title for participants in the Armed Forces Health Professions 
     Scholarship and Financial Assistance program; and
       ``(B) reasonable living expenses, not to exceed expenses 
     comparable to the stipend paid under section 2121(d) of this 
     title for participants in the Armed Forces Health Professions 
     Scholarship and Financial Assistance program.
       ``(2) For each year of obligated service that a person 
     agrees to serve in an agreement described in subsection 
     (b)(3), the Secretary of the military department concerned 
     may pay not more than $22,000 on behalf of the person. This 
     maximum amount shall be increased annually by the Secretary 
     of Defense effective October 1 of each year by a percentage 
     equal to the percent increase in the average annual cost of 
     educational expenses and stipend costs of a single 
     scholarship under the Armed Forces Health Professions 
     Scholarship and Financial Assistance program. The total 
     amount that may be repaid on behalf of any person may not 
     exceed an amount determined on the basis of a four-year 
     active duty service obligation.
       ``(f) Active Duty Service Obligation.--(1) A person 
     entering into an agreement described in subsection (b)(3) 
     incurs an active duty service obligation. The length of this 
     obligation shall be determined under regulations prescribed 
     by the Secretary of Defense, but those regulations may not 
     provide for a period of obligation of less than one year for 
     each maximum annual amount, or portion thereof, paid on 
     behalf of the person for qualified loans.
       ``(2) For persons on active duty before entering into the 
     agreement, the active duty service obligation shall be served 
     consecutively to any other incurred obligation.
       ``(g) Effect of Failure To Complete Obligation.--A 
     commissioned officer who is relieved of the officer's active 
     duty obligation under this section before the completion of 
     that obligation may be given, with or without the consent of 
     the officer, any alternative obligation comparable to any of 
     the alternative obligations authorized by section 2123(e) of 
     this title for participants in the Armed Forces Health 
     Professions Scholarship and Financial Assistance program.
       ``(h) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     prescribe regulations to carry out this section, including 
     standards for qualified loans and authorized payees and other 
     terms and conditions for the making of loan repayments.''.

       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``2173. Education loan repayment program: commissioned officers in 
              specified health professions.''.

     SEC. 653. CONFORMANCE OF NOAA COMMISSIONED OFFICERS 
                   SEPARATION PAY TO SEPARATION PAY FOR MEMBERS OF 
                   OTHER UNIFORMED SERVICES.

       (a) Elimination of Limitations on Amount of Separation 
     Pay.--Section 9 of the Coast and Geodetic Survey Commissioned 
     Officers' Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 853h) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``, or $30,000, 
     whichever is less'';
       (2) in subsection (b)(2), by striking ``, but in no event 
     more than $15,000''; and
       (3) in subsection (d), by striking ``(1)'', and by striking 
     paragraph (2).
       (b) Waiver of Recoupment of Amounts Withheld for Tax 
     Purposes From Certain Separation Pay.--Section 9(e)(2) of the 
     Coast and Geodetic Survey Commissioned Officers' Act of 1948 
     (33 U.S.C. 853h) is amended in the first sentence by 
     inserting before the period at the end the following: ``, 
     less the amount of Federal income tax withheld from such pay 
     (such withholding being at the flat withholding rate for 
     Federal income tax withholding, as in effect pursuant to 
     regulations prescribed under chapter 24 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986)''.
       (c) Effective Date and Application.--The amendments made by 
     this section shall take effect on October 1,

      1996, and shall apply to payments of separation pay that are 
     made after September 30, 1997.

     SEC. 654. REIMBURSEMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE OFFICERS FOR 
                   ADOPTION EXPENSES.

       Section 221(a) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 
     213a(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(16) Section 1052, Reimbursement for adoption 
     expenses.''.

     SEC. 655. PAYMENT OF BACK QUARTERS AND SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCES 
                   TO WORLD WAR II VETERANS WHO SERVED AS 
                   GUERRILLA FIGHTERS IN THE PHILIPPINES.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of the military department 
     concerned shall pay, upon request, to an individual described 
     in subsection (b) the amount determined with respect to that 
     individual under subsection (c).
       (b) Covered Individuals.--A payment under subsection (a) 
     shall be made to any individual who as a member of the Armed 
     Forces during World War II--
       (1) was captured within the territory of the Philippines by 
     Japanese forces;
       (2) escaped from captivity; and
       (3) served as a guerrilla fighter in the Philippines during 
     the period from January 1942 through February 1945.
       (c) Amount To Be Paid.--The amount of a payment under 
     subsection (a) shall be the amount of quarters and 
     subsistence allowance which accrued to an individual 
     described in subsection (b) during the period specified in 
     paragraph (3) of subsection (b) and which was not paid to 
     that individual. For the purposes of this subsection, the 
     Secretary of War shall be deemed to have determined that 
     conditions in the Philippines during the specified period 
     justified payment under applicable regulations of quarters 
     and subsistence allowances at the maximum special rate for 
     duty where emergency conditions existed. The Secretary shall 
     apply interest compounded at the three-month Treasury bill 
     rate.
       (d) Payment to Survivors.--In the case of any individual 
     described in subsection (b) who is deceased, payment under 
     this section with respect to that individual shall be made to 
     that individual's nearest surviving relative, as determined 
     by the Secretary concerned.

     SEC. 656. SPACE AVAILABLE TRAVEL FOR MEMBERS OF SELECTED 
                   RESERVE.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 157 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 2646. Space available travel: members of Selected 
       Reserve

       ``(a) Availability.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     prescribe regulations to allow members of the Selected 
     Reserve in good standing (as determined by the Secretary 
     concerned), and dependents of such members, to receive 
     transportation on aircraft of the Department of Defense on a 
     space available basis under the same terms and conditions as 
     apply to members of the armed forces on active duty and 
     dependents of such members.
       ``(b) Condition on Dependent Transportation.--A dependent 
     of a member of the Selected Reserve may be provided 
     transportation under this section only when the dependent is 
     actually accompanying the member on the travel.''.

       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``2646. Space available travel: members of Selected Reserve.''.

     SEC. 657. STUDY ON MILITARY PERSONNEL AT, NEAR, OR BELOW THE 
                   POVERTY LINE.

       (a) Requirement.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a 
     study of members of the Armed Forces and their dependents who 
     subsist at, near, or below the poverty line.
       (b) Matters To Be Included.--The study shall include the 
     following:
       (1) An analysis of potential solutions for mitigating or 
     eliminating income levels for members of the Armed Forces 
     that result in certain members and their dependents 
     subsisting at, near, or below the poverty line, including 
     potential solutions involving changes in the systems and 
     rates of--
       (A) basic allowance for subsistence for members of the 
     Armed Forces under section 402 of title 37, United States 
     Code;
       (B) basic allowance for quarters for members of the Armed 
     Forces under section 403 of such title; and
       (C) variable housing allowance for members of the Armed 
     Forces under section 403a of such title.
       (2) An analysis of the effect of the amendments made by 
     sections 603 and 604 of this Act regarding the calculation of 
     the basic allowance for subsistence and the consolidation of 
     the basic allowance for quarters and variable housing 
     allowance on mitigating or eliminating income levels for 
     members of the Armed Forces that result in certain members 
     and their dependents subsisting at, near, or below the 
     poverty line (as defined in section 673(2) of the Omnibus 
     Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, including any revision 
     required by that section).
       (3) Identification of the populations of members of the 
     Armed Forces and their dependents most likely to need income 
     support under Federal programs (and the number of individuals 
     in each population), including--
       (A) the populations living in areas of the United States 
     where housing costs are notably high; and
       (B) the populations living outside the United States.
       (4) The desirability of increasing rates of basic pay 
     during a defined number of years by varying percentages 
     depending on pay grade, so as to provide for greater 
     increases for members in lower pay grades than for higher pay 
     grades.
       (c) Submission to Congress.--Not later than 180 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 
     submit to Congress the findings of the study conducted under 
     subsection (a).

     SEC. 658. IMPLEMENTATION OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
                   SUPPLEMENTAL FOOD PROGRAM FOR MILITARY 
                   PERSONNEL OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES.

       (a) Funding.--Section 1060a(b) of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the

[[Page H3993]]

     end the following new sentence: ``Pending receipt of such 
     funds from the Secretary of Agriculture for any fiscal year, 
     the Secretary of Defense may use funds appropriated to the 
     Department of Defense for that fiscal year for operations and 
     maintenance to carry out, and to avoid delay in 
     implementation of, the program referred to in subsection (a) 
     during any fiscal year.''.
       (b) Submission of Plan to Congress.--Not later than 90 days 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to Congress a plan for implementing the 
     special supplemental food program under section 1060a of 
     title 10, United States Code, as amended by subsection (a).

                   TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS
                    Subtitle A--Health Care Services

     SEC. 701. EXPANSION OF RETIREE DENTAL INSURANCE PLAN TO 
                   INCLUDE SURVIVING SPOUSE AND CHILD DEPENDENTS 
                   OF CERTAIN DECEASED MEMBERS.

       Section 1076c(b)(4) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)--
       (A) by striking out ``dies'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``died''; and
       (B) by striking out ``or'' at the end of the subparagraph;
       (2) by striking out the period at the end of subparagraph 
     (B) and inserting in lieu thereof ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) who died while on active duty for a period of more 
     than 30 days and whose eligible dependents are not eligible, 
     or no longer eligible, for dental benefits under section 
     1076a of this title pursuant to subsection (i)(2) of such 
     section.''.

     SEC. 702. PROVISION OF PROSTHETIC DEVICES TO COVERED 
                   BENEFICIARIES.

       (a) Inclusion Among Authorized Care.--Subsection (a) of 
     section 1077 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(15) Prosthetic devices, as determined by the Secretary 
     of Defense to be necessary because of significant conditions 
     resulting from trauma, congenital anomalies, or disease.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Subsection (b) of such section 
     is amended by striking out paragraph (2) and inserting in 
     lieu thereof the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Hearing aids, orthopedic footwear, and spectacles, 
     except that, outside of the United States and at stations 
     inside the United States where adequate civilian facilities 
     are unavailable, such items may be sold to dependents at cost 
     to the United States.''.
                      Subtitle B--TRICARE Program

     SEC. 711. ADDITION OF DEFINITION OF TRICARE PROGRAM TO TITLE 
                   10.

       Section 1072 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(7) The term `TRICARE program' means the managed health 
     care program that is established by the Department of Defense 
     under the authority of this chapter, principally section 1097 
     of this title, and includes the competitive selection of 
     contractors to financially underwrite the delivery of health 
     care services under the Civilian Health and Medical Program 
     of the Uniformed Services.''.

     SEC. 712. PLAN FOR EXPANSION OF MANAGED CARE OPTION OF 
                   TRICARE PROGRAM.

       (a) Expansion Plan Required.--The Secretary of Defense 
     shall prepare a plan for the expansion of the managed care 
     option of the TRICARE program, known as TRICARE Prime, into 
     areas of the United States located outside of the catchment 
     areas of medical treatment facilities of the uniformed 
     services, but in which the managed care option is a cost-
     effective alternative because of--
       (1) the significant number of covered beneficiaries under 
     chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, including retired 
     members of the Armed Forces and their dependents, who reside 
     in the areas; and
       (2) the presence in the areas of sufficient nonmilitary 
     health care provider networks.
       (b) Alternatives.--As an alternative to expansion of the 
     managed care option of the TRICARE program to areas of the 
     United States in which there is few or no nonmilitary health 
     care provider networks, the Secretary shall include in the 
     plan required under subsection (a) an evaluation of the 
     feasibility and cost-effectiveness of providing a member of 
     the Armed Forces on active duty who is stationed in such an 
     area, or whose dependents reside in such an area, with one or 
     both of the following:
       (1) A monetary stipend to assist the member in obtaining 
     health care services for the member or the member's 
     dependents.
       (2) A reduction in the cost-sharing requirements applicable 
     to the TRICARE program options otherwise available to the 
     member to match the reduced cost-sharing responsibilities of 
     the managed care option of the TRICARE program.
       (c) Submission of Plan.--Not later than March 1, 1998, the 
     Secretary shall submit to Congress the plan required under 
     subsection (a).
          Subtitle C--Uniformed Services Treatment Facilities

     SEC. 721. IMPLEMENTATION OF DESIGNATED PROVIDER AGREEMENTS 
                   FOR UNIFORMED SERVICES TREATMENT FACILITIES.

       (a) Commencement of Health Care Services Under Agreement.--
     Subsection (c) of section 722 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201, 
     10 U.S.C. 1073 note) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B);
       (2) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``Unless''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) The Secretary may modify the effective date 
     established under paragraph (1) for an agreement to permit a 
     transition period of not more than six months between the 
     date on which the agreement is executed by the parties and 
     the date on which the designated provider commences the 
     delivery of health care services under the agreement.''.
       (b) Temporary Continuation of Existing Participation 
     Agreements.--Subsection (d) of such section is amended by 
     inserting before the period at the end the following: ``, 
     including any transitional period provided by the Secretary 
     under paragraph (2) of such subsection''.

     SEC. 722. LIMITATION ON TOTAL PAYMENTS.

       Section 726(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201, 10 U.S.C. 1073 
     note) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     sentence: ``In establishing the ceiling rate for enrollees 
     with the designated providers who are also eligible for the 
     Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed 
     Services, the Secretary of Defense shall take into account 
     the health status of the enrollees.''.

     SEC. 723. CONTINUED ACQUISITION OF REDUCED-COST DRUGS.

       Section 722 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 10 U.S.C. 1073 note) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(g) Continued Acquisition of Reduced-Cost Drugs.--A 
     designated provider shall be treated as part of the 
     Department of Defense for purposes of section 8126 of title 
     38, United States Code, in connection with the provision by 
     the designated provider of health care services to covered 
     beneficiaries pursuant to the participation agreement of the 
     designated provider under section 718(c) of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 
     101-510; 42 U.S.C. 248c note) or pursuant to the agreement 
     entered into under subsection (b).''.
   Subtitle D--Other Changes to Existing Laws Regarding Health Care 
                               Management

     SEC. 731. WAIVER OR REDUCTION OF COPAYMENTS UNDER OVERSEAS 
                   DENTAL PROGRAM.

       Section 1076a(h) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking out ``Secretary'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``Secretary of Defense''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``In 
     the case of such an overseas dental plan, the Secretary may 
     waive or reduce the copayments otherwise required by 
     subsection (e) to the extent the Secretary determines 
     appropriate for the effective and efficient operation of the 
     plan.''.

     SEC. 732. PREMIUM COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR MEDICAL AND 
                   DENTAL INSURANCE PROGRAMS.

       (a) Selected Reserve Dental Insurance.--Paragraph (3) of 
     section 1076b(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(3) The Secretary of Defense shall establish procedures 
     for the collection of the member's share of the premium for 
     coverage by the dental insurance plan. Not later than October 
     1, 1998, the Secretary shall permit a member to pay the 
     member's share of the premium through a deduction and 
     withholding from basic pay payable to the member for inactive 
     duty training or basic pay payable to the member for active 
     duty.''.
       (b) Retiree Dental Insurance Plan.--Paragraph (2) of 
     section 1076c(c) of such title is amended to read as follows:
       ``(2) In the regulations prescribed under subsection (h), 
     the Secretary of Defense shall establish procedures for the 
     payment by enrolled members and by other enrolled covered 
     beneficiaries of premiums charged for coverage by the dental 
     insurance plan. Not later than October 1, 1998, the Secretary 
     shall permit a member enrolled in the plan and entitled to 
     retired pay to pay the member's share of the premium through 
     a deduction and withholding from the retired pay of the 
     member.''.
       (c) Implementation Plan.--Not later than March 1, 1998, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a plan to 
     permit, not later than October 1, 1998--
       (1) an enrollee in the Selected Reserve dental insurance 
     plan authorized under section 1076b of title 10, United 
     States Code, to pay the enrollee's share of the premium for 
     such insurance through a deduction and withholding from basic 
     pay payable to the enrollee;
       (2) a retired member of the uniformed services enrolled in 
     the dental insurance plan authorized under section 1076c of 
     such title to pay the enrollee's share of the premium for 
     such insurance through a deduction and withholding from 
     retired pay payable to the enrollee; and
       (3) a retired member of the uniformed services enrolled in 
     the managed care option of the TRICARE

      program known as TRICARE Prime to pay the enrollee's share 
     of the premium for such option through a deduction and 
     withholding from retired pay payable to the enrollee.

     SEC. 733. CONSISTENCY BETWEEN CHAMPUS AND MEDICARE IN PAYMENT 
                   RATES FOR SERVICES.

       (a) Conformity Between Rates.--Section 1079(h) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by striking out paragraphs 
     (1), (2), and (3) and inserting in lieu thereof the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), payment 
     for a charge for services by an individual health care 
     professional (or other noninstitutional health care provider) 
     for which a

[[Page H3994]]

     claim is submitted under a plan contracted for under 
     subsection (a) shall be equal to an amount determined to be 
     appropriate, to the extent practicable, in accordance with 
     the same reimbursement rules as apply to payments for similar 
     services under title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1395 et seq.). The Secretary of Defense shall 
     determine the appropriate payment amount under this paragraph 
     in consultation with the other administering Secretaries.''.
       (b) Reduced Rates Authorized.--Paragraph (5) of such 
     section is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     sentence: ``With the consent of the health care provider, the 
     Secretary is also authorized to reduce the authorized payment 
     for certain health care services below the amount otherwise 
     required by the payment limitations under paragraph (1).''.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--Such section is further 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (5), by striking out ``paragraph (4), the 
     Secretary'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``paragraph (2), 
     the Secretary of Defense''; and
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) as 
     paragraphs (2), (3), and (4), respectively.

     SEC. 734. USE OF PERSONAL SERVICES CONTRACTS FOR PROVISION OF 
                   HEALTH CARE SERVICES AND LEGAL PROTECTION FOR 
                   PROVIDERS.

       (a) Use of Contracts Outside Medical Treatment 
     Facilities.--Section 1091(a) of title 10, United States Code, 
     is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``The Secretary of 
     Defense''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) The Secretary of Defense may also enter into personal 
     services contracts to carry out other health care 
     responsibilities of the Secretary, such as the provision of 
     medical screening examinations at Military Entrance 
     Processing Stations, at locations outside medical treatment 
     facilities, as determined necessary pursuant to regulations 
     issued by the Secretary.''.
       (b) Defense of Suits.--Section 1089 of such title is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by adding at the end the following 
     new sentence: ``This subsection shall also apply if the 
     physician, dentist, nurse, pharmacist, or paramedical or 
     other supporting personnel (or the estate of such person) 
     involved is serving under a personal services contract 
     entered into by the Secretary of Defense under section 1091 
     of this title.''; and
       (2) in subsection (f)--
       (A) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(f)''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) With respect to the Secretary of Defense and the 
     Armed Forces Retirement Home Board, the authority provided by 
     paragraph (1) also includes the authority to provide for 
     reasonable attorney's fees for persons described in 
     subsection (a), as determined necessary pursuant to 
     regulations issued by the head of the agency concerned.''.

     SEC. 735. PORTABILITY OF STATE LICENSES FOR DEPARTMENT OF 
                   DEFENSE HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS.

       Section 1094 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(d)(1) Notwithstanding any law regarding the licensure of 
     health care providers, a health-care professional described 
     in paragraph (2) may practice the health profession or 
     professions of the health-care professional in any State, the 
     District of Columbia, or a Commonwealth, territory, or 
     possession of the United States, regardless of whether the 
     practice occurs in a health care facility of the Department 
     of Defense, a civilian facility affiliated with the 
     Department of Defense, or any other location authorized by 
     the Secretary of Defense .
       ``(2) A health-care professional referred to in paragraph 
     (1) is a member of the armed forces who--
       ``(A) has a current license to practice medicine, 
     osteopathic medicine, dentistry, or another health 
     profession; and
       ``(B) is performing authorized duties for the Department of 
     Defense.''.

     SEC. 736. STANDARD FORM AND REQUIREMENTS REGARDING CLAIMS FOR 
                   PAYMENT FOR SERVICES.

       (a) Clarification of Existing Requirements.--Section 1106 
     of title 10, United States Code, is amended to read as 
     follows:

     ``Sec. 1106. Submittal of claims: standard form; time limits

       ``(a) Standard Form.--The Secretary of Defense, after 
     consultation with the other administering Secretaries, shall 
     prescribe by regulation a standard form for the submission of 
     claims for the payment of health care services provided under 
     this chapter.
       ``(b) Time for Submission.--A claim for payment for 
     services shall be submitted as provided in such regulations 
     not later than one year after the services are provided.''.

       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking out the item relating to section 1106 and 
     inserting in lieu thereof the following new item:

``1106. Submittal of claims: standard form; time limits.''.

     SEC. 737. MEDICAL PERSONNEL CONSCIENCE CLAUSE.

       (a) Secretary of Defense Policy.--The Secretary of Defense 
     shall establish a uniform policy for the Army, Navy, and Air 
     Force establishing the circumstances under which covered 
     members (as defined in subsection (d)) of the Army, Navy, and 
     Air Force may refuse, based on conscience, to perform an 
     abortion (or participate in the performance of an abortion) 
     or provide a covered family planning service (or participate 
     in the provision of such a service).
       (b) Conscience Clause.--(1) The policy established under 
     subsection (a) shall provide that a member of the Army, Navy, 
     or Air Force who is a covered member may not be required to 
     perform an abortion (or participate in the performance of an 
     abortion), or to provide a covered family planning service 
     (or participate in the provision of such a service), if the 
     member believes that to do so would be wrong on moral, 
     ethical or religious grounds.
       (2) Paragraph (1) does not apply in a case in which refusal 
     to perform an abortion (or participate in the performance of 
     an abortion) or provide a covered family planning service 
     would pose a life-threatening risk to the patient.
       (c) Covered Family Planning Services.--For the purposes of 
     this section, a covered family planning service is any of the 
     following:
       (1) Contraceptive services, not limited to the prescription 
     or provision of a pharmaceutical preparation, device, or 
     chemical method.
       (2) Surgical sterilization.
       (d) Covered Member.--In this section, the term ``covered 
     member'' means a member of the Army, Navy, or Air Force who--
       (1) in the case of the Army, is a member of the Medical 
     Corps, Dental Corps, Nurse Corps, Medical Service Corps, 
     Veterinary Corps, or Army Medical Specialist Corps or is an 
     enlisted member directly engaged in or directly supporting 
     medically related activities;
       (2) in the case of the Navy, is a member of the Medical 
     Corps, Dental Corps, Nurse Corps, or Medical Service Corps or 
     is an enlisted member directly engaged in or directly 
     supporting medically related activities; and
       (3) in the case of the Air Force, is designated as a 
     medical officer, dental officer, Air Force nurse, medical 
     service officer, or biomedical science officer or is an 
     enlisted member directly engaged in or directly supporting 
     medically related activities.

       (e) Effective Date.--The policy established pursuant to 
     subsection (a) shall apply with respect to any refusal on or 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act to perform an 
     abortion (or participate in the performance of an abortion) 
     or to provide a covered family planning service.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

     SEC. 741. CONTINUED ADMISSION OF CIVILIANS AS STUDENTS IN 
                   PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT TRAINING PROGRAM OF ARMY 
                   MEDICAL DEPARTMENT.

       (a) Civilian Attendance.--(1) Chapter 407 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 4416. Academy of Health Sciences: admission of 
       civilians in physician assistant training program

       ``(a) Reciprocal Agreements With Colleges.--The Secretary 
     of the Army may enter into an agreement with an accredited 
     institution of higher education under which students of the 
     institution may attend the physician assistant training 
     program conducted by the Army Medical Department at the 
     Academy of Health Sciences at Fort Sam Houston, Texas, during 
     the didactic portion of the program. In exchange for the 
     admission of such students, the institution of higher 
     education shall agree to provide such academic services as 
     the Secretary and the institution consider to be appropriate 
     to support the physician assistant training program at the 
     Academy. The Secretary shall ensure that the Army Medical 
     Department does not incur any additional costs as a result of 
     the agreement than the

      Department would incur to obtain such academic services in 
     the absence of the agreement.
       ``(b) Selection of Students.--The attendance of civilian 
     students at the Academy pursuant to an agreement under 
     subsection (a) may not result in a decrease in the number of 
     members of the armed forces enrolled in the physician 
     assistant training program. In consultation with the 
     institution of higher education that is a party to the 
     agreement, the Secretary shall establish qualifications and 
     methods of selection for students to receive instruction at 
     the Academy. The qualifications established shall be 
     comparable to those generally required for admission to the 
     physician assistant training program at the Academy.
       ``(c) Rules of Attendance.--Except as the Secretary 
     determines necessary, a civilian student who receives 
     instruction at the Academy pursuant to an agreement entered 
     into under subsection (a) shall be subject to the same 
     regulations governing attendance, discipline, discharge, and 
     dismissal as apply to other persons attending the Academy.
       ``(d) Report.--For each year in which an agreement under 
     subsection (a) is in effect, the Secretary shall submit to 
     Congress a report specifying the number of civilian students 
     who received instruction at the Academy under the agreement 
     during the period covered by the report and accessing the 
     benefits to the United States of the agreement.
       ``(e) Academy Defined.--In this section, the term `Academy' 
     means the Academy of Health Sciences of the Army Medical 
     Department at Fort Sam Houston, Texas.''.

       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``4416. Academy of Health Sciences: admission of civilians in physician 
              assistant training program.''.

       (b) Effect on Existing Demonstration Program.--An agreement 
     entered into under the demonstration program for the 
     admission of civilians as physician assistant students at the 
     Academy of Health Sciences, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, 
     established pursuant to section 732 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337; 
     108 Stat. 2810)

[[Page H3995]]

     shall be treated as an agreement entered into under section 
     4416 of title 10, United States Code (as added by subsection 
     (a)). The agreement may be extended in such manner and for 
     such period as the parties to the agreement consider 
     appropriate consistent with such section 4416.

     SEC. 742. EMERGENCY HEALTH CARE IN CONNECTION WITH OVERSEAS 
                   ACTIVITIES OF ON-SITE INSPECTION AGENCY OF 
                   DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

       (a) Payment of Expenses for Emergency Health Care.--Chapter 
     152 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
     after section 2549 the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2549a. Emergency health care: overseas activities of 
       On-Site Inspection Agency

       ``(a) Authority to Pay Expenses.--From funds appropriated 
     for the necessary expenses of the On-Site Inspection Agency 
     of the Department of Defense, the Secretary of Defense may 
     pay or reimburse an employee of the Agency, a member of the 
     uniformed services or a civilian employee assigned or 
     detailed to the Agency, or an employee of a contractor 
     operating under a contract with the Agency, for emergency 
     health care services obtained by the employee, member, or 
     contractor employee while permanently or temporarily on duty 
     in a state of the former Soviet Union or the former Warsaw 
     Pact.
       ``(b) Initial Deposits.--The expenses for emergency health 
     care that may be paid or reimbursed under subsection (a) 
     include initial deposits for emergency care and inpatient 
     care.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 2549 the following new item:

``2549a. Emergency health care: overseas activities of On-Site 
              Inspection Agency.''.

     SEC. 743. COMPTROLLER GENERAL STUDY OF ADEQUACY AND EFFECT OF 
                   MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE CHARGES FOR PHYSICIANS UNDER 
                   CHAMPUS.

       (a) Study Required.--The Comptroller General shall conduct 
     a study regarding the adequacy of the maximum allowable 
     charges for physicians established under the Civilian Health 
     and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS) and 
     the effect of such charges on the participation of physicians 
     in CHAMPUS. The study shall include an evaluation of the 
     following:
       (1) The methodology used by the Secretary of Defense to 
     establish maximum allowable charges for physicians under 
     CHAMPUS, and whether such methodology conforms to the 
     requirements of section 1079(h) of title 10, United States 
     Code.
       (2) The differences between the established charges under 
     CHAMPUS and reimbursement rates for similar services under 
     title XVIII of the Social Security Act and other health care 
     programs.
       (3) The basis for physician complaints that the CHAMPUS 
     established charges are too low.
       (4) The difficultly of CHAMPUS in ensuring physician 
     compliance with the CHAMPUS established charges in the 
     absence of legal mechanisms to enforce compliance, and the 
     effect of noncompliance on patient out-of-pocket expenses.
       (5) The effect of the established charges under CHAMPUS on 
     the participation of physicians in CHAMPUS, and the extent 
     and success of Department of Defense efforts to increase 
     physician participation in areas with low participation 
     rates.
       (b) Submission of Report.--Not later than March 1, 1998, 
     the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report 
     containing the results of the study required by subsection 
     (a).

     SEC. 744. COMPTROLLER GENERAL STUDY OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
                   PHARMACY PROGRAMS.

       Not later than March 31, 1998, the Comptroller General 
     shall submit to Congress a study evaluating the pharmacy 
     programs of the Department of Defense. The study shall 
     include an examination of the following:
       (1) The merits and feasibility of establishing a uniform 
     formulary for military treatment facility pharmacies and 
     civilian contractor pharmacy benefit administrators.
       (2) The extent of, and cost impacts from, military 
     treatment facility pharmacies denying covered beneficiaries 
     under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, pharmacy 
     care access and shifting such beneficiaries to other sources 
     of pharmacy care.
       (3) The merits and feasibility of implementing other 
     pharmacy benefit management best practices at military 
     treatment facility and civilian contractor pharmacies.

       (4) The cost impacts of TRICARE program contractors being 
     unable to procure pharmaceuticals at discounted prices 
     pursuant to section 8126 of title 38, United States Code, and 
     potential ways to increase the discounts available to TRICARE 
     program contractors, with appropriate controls.

     SEC. 745. COMPTROLLER GENERAL STUDY OF NAVY GRADUATE MEDICAL 
                   EDUCATION PROGRAM.

       (a) Study Required.--The Comptroller General shall conduct 
     a study to evaluate the validity of the recommendations made 
     by the Medical Education Policy Council of the Bureau of 
     Medicine and Surgery of the Navy regarding restructuring the 
     graduate medical education program of the Department of the 
     Navy. The study shall specifically address the Council's 
     recommendations relating to residency training conducted at 
     Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth, Virginia, and National 
     Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland.
       (b) Submission of Report.--Not later than March 1, 1998, 
     the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress and the 
     Secretary of the Navy a report containing the results of the 
     study required by subsection (a).
       (c) Moratorium on Restructuring.--Until the report required 
     by subsection (b) is submitted to Congress, the Secretary of 
     the Navy may not make any change in the types of residency 
     programs conducted under the Navy graduate medical education 
     program or the locations at which such residency programs are 
     conducted or otherwise restructure the Navy graduate medical 
     education program.

     SEC. 746. STUDY OF EXPANSION OF PHARMACEUTICALS BY MAIL 
                   PROGRAM TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE 
                   COVERED BENEFICIARIES.

       Not later than six months after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
     Congress a report regarding the feasibility and advisability 
     of expanding the category of persons eligible to participate 
     in the demonstration project for the purchase of prescription 
     pharmaceuticals by mail, as required by section 702(a) of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 
     (Public Law 102-484; 10 U.S.C. 1079 note), to include persons 
     referred to in section 1086(c) of title 10, United States 
     Code, who are covered by subsection (d)(1) of such section 
     and reside in the United States outside of the catchment area 
     of a medical treatment facility of the uniformed services.

  TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED 
                                MATTERS

                     Subtitle A--Acquisition Policy

     SEC. 801. CASE-BY-CASE WAIVERS OF DOMESTIC SOURCE 
                   LIMITATIONS.

       (a) Requirement for Case-by-Case Waivers.--Section 2534(d) 
     of title 10, United States Code, is amended in the matter 
     appearing before paragraph (1) by striking out ``waive the 
     limitation in subsection (a) with respect to the procurement 
     of an item listed in that subsection if the Secretary 
     determines'' and inserting in lieu thereof the following: 
     ``waive, on a case-by-case basis, the limitation in 
     subsection (a) in the case of a specific procurement of an 
     item listed in that subsection if the Secretary determines, 
     for that specific procurement,''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply with respect to contracts entered into after the 
     expiration of the 30-day period beginning on the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 802. EXPANSION OF AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS 
                   CROSSING FISCAL YEARS TO ALL SEVERABLE SERVICES 
                   CONTRACTS NOT EXCEEDING A YEAR.

       (a) Expanded Authority.--Section 2410a of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 2410a. Severable services contracts for periods 
       crossing fiscal years

       ``(a) Authority.--The Secretary of Defense or the Secretary 
     of a military department may enter into a contract for 
     procurement of severable services for a period that begins in 
     one fiscal year and ends in the next fiscal year if (without 
     regard to any option to extend the period of the contract) 
     the contract period does not exceed one year.
       ``(b) Obligation of Funds.--Funds made available for a 
     fiscal year may be obligated for the total amount of a 
     contract entered into under the authority of subsection 
     (a).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The item relating to that section 
     in the table of sections at the beginning of chapter 141 of 
     such title is amended to read as follows:

``2410a. Severable services contracts for periods crossing fiscal 
              years.''.

     SEC. 803. CLARIFICATION OF VESTING OF TITLE UNDER CONTRACTS.

       Section 2307 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:

       ``(i) Vesting of Title.--If a contract made by the head of 
     an agency provides for title to property to vest in the 
     United States, such title shall vest in accordance with the 
     terms of the contract, regardless of any security interest in 
     the property asserted by the contractor.''.

     SEC. 804. EXCLUSION OF DISASTER RELIEF, HUMANITARIAN, AND 
                   PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS FROM RESTRICTIONS ON 
                   USE OF UNDEFINITIZED CONTRACT ACTIONS.

       Section 2326 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking out paragraph (4); and
       (B) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (4); and
       (2) in subsection (g)(1), by adding at the end the 
     following new subparagraphs:
       ``(E) Purchases in support of contingency operations.
       ``(F) Purchases in support of humanitarian or peacekeeping 
     operations, as defined in 2302(7)(B) of this title.
       ``(G) Purchases in support of emergency work and other 
     disaster relief operations performed pursuant to the Robert 
     T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5121 et seq.).''.

     SEC. 805. LIMITATION AND REPORT ON PAYMENT OF RESTRUCTURING 
                   COSTS UNDER DEFENSE CONTRACTS.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 137 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 2324 the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 2325. Restructuring costs

       ``(a) Limitation on Payment of Restructuring Costs.--(1) 
     The Secretary of Defense may not pay, under section 2324 of 
     this title, a defense contractor for restructuring costs 
     associated with a business combination of the contractor 
     unless the Secretary determines in writing either--

[[Page H3996]]

       ``(A) that the amount of savings for the Department of 
     Defense associated with the restructuring, based on audited 
     cost data, will be at least twice the amount of the costs 
     allowed; or
       ``(B) that the amount of savings for the Department of 
     Defense associated with the restructuring, based on audited 
     cost data, will exceed the amount of the costs allowed and 
     that the business combination will result in the preservation 
     of a critical capability that otherwise might be lost to the 
     Department.
       ``(2) The Secretary may not delegate the authority to make 
     a determination under paragraph (1) to an official of the 
     Department of Defense below the level of an Assistant 
     Secretary of Defense.
       ``(b) Report.--Not later than March 1 in each of 1998, 
     1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     submit to Congress a report containing the following:
       ``(1) For each defense contractor to which the Secretary 
     has paid, under section 2324 of this title, restructuring 
     costs associated with a business combination, a summary of 
     the following:
       ``(A) The amount of savings for the Department of Defense 
     associated with such business combination that has been 
     realized as of the date of the report, based on audited cost 
     data.
       ``(B) An estimate, as of the date of the report, of the 
     amount of savings for the Department of Defense associated 
     with such business combination that is expected to be 
     achieved in the future.
       ``(2) An identification of any business combination for 
     which the Secretary has paid restructuring costs under 
     section 2324 of this title during the preceding calendar year 
     and, for each such business combination--
       ``(A) the supporting rationale for allowing such costs;
       ``(B) factual information associated with the determination 
     made under subsection (a) with respect to such costs; and
       ``(C) a discussion of whether the business combination 
     would have proceeded without the payment of restructuring 
     costs by the Secretary.
       ``(3) An assessment of the degree of vertical integration 
     resulting from business combinations of defense contractors 
     and a discussion of the measures taken by the Secretary of 
     Defense to increase the ability of the Department of Defense 
     to monitor vertical integration trends and address any 
     resulting negative consequences.
       ``(c) Definition.--In this section, the term `business 
     combination' includes a merger or acquisition.''.

       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     2324 the following new item:

``2325. Restructuring costs.''.

       (b) Effective Date.--Section 2325 of title 10, United 
     States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with 
     respect to business combinations that occur after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

       (c) Repeal of Superseded Provision.--Subsection (a) of 
     section 818 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1995 (10 U.S.C. 2324 note) is repealed.

     SEC. 806. AUTHORITY RELATING TO PURCHASE OF CERTAIN VEHICLES.

       Section 2253(a)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking out ``$12,000'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``$30,000''.

     SEC. 807. MULTIYEAR PROCUREMENT CONTRACTS.

       (a) Requirement for Authorization by Law in Acts Other Than 
     Appropriations Acts.--(1) Subsection (i) of section 2306b of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) In the case of the Department of Defense, a multiyear 
     contract may not be entered into for any fiscal year under 
     this section unless the contract is specifically authorized 
     by law in an Act other than an appropriations Act.''.
       (2) Paragraph (3) of section 2306b(i) of title 10, United 
     States Code, as added by paragraph (1), shall not apply with 
     respect to a contract authorized by law before the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

       (b) Codification of Annual Recurring Multiyear Procurement 
     Requirements.--(1) Such section is further amended by adding 
     at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(l) Various Additional Requirements With Respect to 
     Multiyear Defense Contracts.--(1)(A) The head of an agency 
     may not initiate a contract described in subparagraph (B) 
     unless the congressional defense committees are notified of 
     the proposed contract at least 30 days in advance of the 
     award of the proposed contract.
       ``(B) Subparagraph (A) applies to the following contracts:
       ``(i) A multiyear contract--
       ``(I) that employs economic order quantity procurement in 
     excess of $20,000,000 in any one year of the contract; or
       ``(II) that includes an unfunded contingent liability in 
     excess of $20,000,000.
       ``(ii) Any contract for advance procurement leading to a 
     multiyear contract that employs economic order quantity 
     procurement in excess of $20,000,000 in any one year.
       ``(2) The head of an agency may not initiate a multiyear 
     contract for which the economic order quantity advance 
     procurement is not funded at least to the limits of the 
     Government's liability.
       ``(3) The head of an agency may not initiate a multiyear 
     procurement contract for any system (or component thereof) if 
     the value of the multiyear contract would exceed $500,000,000 
     unless authority for the contract is specifically provided in 
     an appropriations Act.
       ``(4) The head of an agency may not terminate a multiyear 
     procurement contract until 10 days after the date on which 
     notice of the proposed termination is provided to the 
     congressional defense committees.
       ``(5) The execution of multiyear authority shall require 
     the use of a present value analysis to determine lowest cost 
     compared to an annual procurement.
       ``(6) This subsection does not apply to the National 
     Aeronautics and Space Administration or to the Coast Guard.
       ``(7) In this subsection, the term `congressional defense 
     committees' means the following:
       ``(A) The Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the 
     Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations of 
     the Senate.
       ``(B) The Committee on National Security of the House of 
     Representatives and the Subcommittee on National Security of 
     the Committee on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives.''.
       (2) The amendment made by paragraph (1) shall take effect 
     on October 1, 1998.
       (c) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--Such section is 
     further amended as follows:
       (1) Subsection (a) is amended--
       (A) by striking out ``finds--'' in the matter preceding 
     paragraph (1) and inserting in lieu thereof ``finds each of 
     the following:'';
       (B) by capitalizing the initial letter of the first word in 
     each of paragraphs (1) through (6);
       (C) by striking out the semicolon at the end of paragraphs 
     (1) through (4) and inserting in lieu thereof a period; and
       (D) by striking out ``; and'' at the end of paragraph (5) 
     and inserting in lieu thereof a period.
       (2) Subsection (d)(1) is amended by striking out 
     ``paragraph (1)'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``subsection 
     (a)''.
       (3) Subsection (i)(1) is amended by striking ``five-year'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``future-years''.
       (4) Subsection (k) is amended by striking out 
     ``subsection'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``section''.

     SEC. 808. DOMESTIC SOURCE LIMITATION AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Addition of Shipboard Work Stations.--Section 
     2534(a)(3)(B) of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``and'' before ``totally''; and
       (2) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, and shipboard work stations''.
       (b) Extension of Domestic Source Limitation for Valves and 
     Machine Tools.--Section 2534(c)(2)(C) of such title is 
     amended by striking out ``October 1, 1996'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``October 1, 2001''.

     SEC. 809. REPEAL OF EXPIRATION OF DOMESTIC SOURCE LIMITATION 
                   FOR CERTAIN NAVAL VESSEL PROPELLERS.

       Section 2534(c) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking out paragraph (4).
                       Subtitle B--Other Matters

     SEC. 821. REPEAL OF CERTAIN ACQUISITION REQUIREMENTS AND 
                   REPORTS

       (a) Repeal of Reporting Requirement for Nonmajor 
     Acquisition Programs.--Section 2220(b) of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking out ``and nonmajor''.
       (b) Repeal of Additional Documentation Requirement for 
     Competition Exception for International Agreements.--Section 
     2304(f) of title 10, United States Code, is amended in 
     paragraph (2)(E) by striking out ``procedures and such 
     document is approved by the competition advocate for the 
     procuring activity.'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``procedures.''.
       (c) Elimination of Completion Status Requirement in Certain 
     Selected Acquisition Reports.--Section 2432(h)(2) of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out subparagraph (D); and
       (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (E) and (F) as 
     subparagraphs (D) and (E), respectively.
       (d) Repeal of Requirement To Establish Procurement 
     Competition Goals.--Section 913 of the Department of Defense 
     Authorization Act, 1986 (Public Law 99-145; 99 Stat. 687; 10 
     U.S.C. 2302 note), is repealed.
       (e) Repeal of Annual Report by Advocates for Competition.--
     Section 20(b) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act 
     (41 U.S.C. 418(b)) is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``and'' at the end of paragraph (3)(B);
       (2) by striking out paragraph (4); and
       (3) by redesignating paragraphs (5), (6), and (7) as 
     paragraphs (4), (5), and (6), respectively.
       (f) Repeal of Review and Report Relating to Procurement 
     Regulations.--Section 25 of the Office of Federal Procurement 
     Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 421) is amended--
       (1) by striking out paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of 
     subsection (c); and
       (2) by striking out subsection (g).

     SEC. 822. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR USE OF TEST AND 
                   EVALUATION INSTALLATIONS BY COMMERCIAL 
                   ENTITIES.

       Section 2681(g) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking out ``September 30, 1998'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``September 30, 2000''.

     SEC. 823. REQUIREMENT TO DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN LIST OF FIRMS 
                   NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEFENSE CONTRACTS.

       (a) Development and Maintenance of List.--Section 2327 of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections 
     (e) and (f), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(d) List of Firms Subject to Subsection (b).--(1) The 
     Secretary of Defense shall develop and maintain a list of all 
     firms and subsidiaries of firms that have been subject to the 
     prohibition in subsection (b) since the date occurring five 
     years before the date of the enactment of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998. The Secretary 
     shall make the list available to the public.

[[Page H3997]]

       ``(2) A firm or subsidiary included on the list maintained 
     under paragraph (1) may request the Secretary of Defense to 
     remove such firm or subsidiary from the list if its foreign 
     ownership circumstances have significantly changed. Upon 
     receipt of such request, the Secretary shall determine if 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (b) still apply to the 
     firm or subsidiary. If the Secretary determines such 
     paragraphs no longer apply, the Secretary shall remove the 
     firm or subsidiary from the list.
       ``(3) The head of an agency shall provide a copy of the 
     list maintained under paragraph (1) to each firm or 
     subsidiary of a firm that submits a bid or proposal in 
     response to a solicitation issued by the Department of 
     Defense.
       ``(4) The head of an agency shall prohibit each firm or 
     subsidiary of a firm awarded a contract by the agency from 
     using in the performance of the contract any equipment, 
     parts, or services that are provided by a firm or subsidiary 
     included on the list maintained under paragraph (1).''.
       (b) Removal From List.--Section 2327(c)(1)(A) of such title 
     is amended by inserting after ``United States,'' the 
     following: ``the Secretary shall remove the firm or 
     subsidiary from the list maintained under subsection (d)(1) 
     and''.
      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

     SEC. 901. LIMITATION ON OPERATION AND SUPPORT FUNDS FOR THE 
                   OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.

       (a) Reduction in Funds.--The amount of funds appropriated 
     pursuant to section 301 that are available for operation and 
     support activities of the Office of the Secretary of Defense 
     may not exceed the amount equal to 80 percent of the amount 
     of funds requested for such purpose in the budget submitted 
     by the President to Congress under section 1105 of title 31, 
     United States Code, for fiscal year 1998.
       (b) Limitation Pending Receipt of Previously Required 
     Reports.--Of the amount available for fiscal year 1998 for 
     operation and support activities of the Office of the 
     Secretary of Defense (as limited pursuant to subsection (a)), 
     not more than 90 percent may be obligated until each of the 
     following reports has been submitted to the congressional 
     defense committees:
       (1) The report required by section 901(c) of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 
     104-106; 110 Stat. 401).
       (2) The report required by section 904(b) of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 
     104-201; 110 Stat. 2619).

     SEC. 902. COMPONENTS OF NATIONAL DEFENSE UNIVERSITY.

       (a) Employment and Compensation of Civilian Faculty.--
     Section 1595(d)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking out ``Institute for National Strategic 
     Study,'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``Institute for 
     National Strategic Studies, the Information Resources 
     Management College,''.
       (b) Preparation of Budget Requests.--Section 2162(d)(2) of 
     such title is amended by inserting after ``the Armed Forces 
     Staff College,'' the following: ``the Institute for National 
     Strategic Studies, the Information Resources Management 
     College,''.

     SEC. 903. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MARINE CORPS UNIVERSITY TO 
                   EMPLOY CIVILIAN PROFESSORS.

       (a) In General.--Subsections (a) and (c) of 7478 of title 
     10, United States Code, are amended by striking ``or at the 
     Marine Corps Command and Staff College'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``or at a school of the Marine Corps 
     University''.
       (b) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading of such section 
     is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 7478. Naval War College and Marine Corps University: 
       civilian faculty members''.

       (2) The item relating to such section in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 643 of such title is 
     amended to read as follows:

``7478. Naval War College and Marine Corps University: civilian faculty 
              members.''.

     SEC. 904. CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF CHINESE MILITARY AFFAIRS.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
       (1) The strategic relationship between the United States 
     and the People's Republic of China will be very important for 
     future peace and security, not only in the Asia-Pacific 
     region but around the world.
       (2) The United States does not view China as an enemy, nor 
     consider that the coming century necessarily will see a new 
     great power competition between the two nations.
       (3) The end of the Cold War has eliminated what had been 
     the one fundamental common strategic interest of the United 
     States and China, that of containing the Soviet Union.
       (4) The rapid economic rise and stated geopolitical 
     ambitions of China will pose challenges that will require 
     careful management in order to preserve peace and protect the 
     national security interests of the United States.
       (5) The ability of the Department of Defense, and the 
     United States Government more generally, to develop sound 
     security and military strategies is hampered by a limited 
     understanding of Chinese strategic goals and military 
     capabilities. The low priority accorded the study of Chinese 
     strategic and military affairs within the Government and 
     within the academic community has contributed to this limited 
     understanding.
       (6) There is a need for a United States national institute 
     for research and assessment of political, strategic, and 
     military affairs in the People's Republic of China. Such an 
     institute should be capable of providing analysis for the 
     purpose of shaping United States military strategy and policy 
     with regard to China and should be readily accessible to 
     senior leaders within the Department of Defense, but should 
     maintain academic and intellectual independence so that that 
     analysis is not first shaped by policy.
       (b) Establishment of Center for the Study of Chinese 
     Military Affairs.--(1) Chapter 108 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 2165. National Defense University: Center for the 
       Study of Chinese Military Affairs

       ``(a) Establishment.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
     establish a Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs 
     (hereinafter in this section referred to as the `Center') as 
     part of the National Defense University. The Center shall be 
     organized as an independent institute under the University.
       ``(2) The Director of the Center shall be a distinguished 
     scholar of proven academic, management, and leadership 
     credentials with a superior record of achievement and 
     publication regarding Chinese political, strategic, and 
     military affairs. The Director shall be appointed by the 
     Secretary of Defense in consultation with the chairman and 
     ranking minority party member of the Committee on National 
     Security of the House of Representatives and the chairman and 
     ranking minority party member of the Committee on Armed 
     Services of the Senate.
       ``(b) Mission.--The mission of the Center is to study the 
     national goals and strategic posture of the People's Republic 
     of China and the ability of that nation to develop, field, 
     and deploy an effective military instrument in support of 
     its national strategic objectives.
       ``(c) Areas of Study.--The Center shall conduct research 
     relating to the People's Republic of China as follows:
       ``(1) To assess the potential of that nation to act as a 
     global great power, the Center shall conduct research that 
     considers the policies and capabilities of that nation in a 
     regional and world-wide context, including Central Asia, 
     Southwest Asia, Europe, and Latin America, as well as the 
     Asia-Pacific region.
       ``(2) To provide a fuller assessment of the areas of study 
     referred to in paragraph (1), the Center shall conduct 
     research on--
       ``(A) economic trends relative to strategic goals and 
     military capabilities;
       ``(B) strengths and weaknesses in the scientific and 
     technological sector; and
       ``(C) relevant demographic and human resource factors on 
     progress in the military sphere.
       ``(3) The Center shall conduct research on the armed forces 
     of the People's Republic of China, taking into account the 
     character of those armed forces and their role in Chinese 
     society and economy, the degree of their technological 
     sophistication, and their organizational and doctrinal 
     concepts. That research shall include inquiry into the 
     following matters:
       ``(A) Concepts concerning national interests, objectives, 
     and strategic culture.
       ``(B) Grand strategy, military strategy, military 
     operations, and tactics.
       ``(C) Doctrinal concepts at each of the four levels 
     specified in subparagraph (B).
       ``(D) The impact of doctrine on China's force structure 
     choices.
       ``(E) The interaction of doctrine and force structure at 
     each level to create an integrated system of military 
     capabilities through procurement, officer education, 
     training, and practice and other similar factors.
       ``(d) Faculty of the Center.--(1) The core faculty of the 
     Center should comprise mature scholars capable of providing 
     diverse perspectives on Chinese political, strategic, and 
     military thought. Center scholars shall demonstrate the 
     following competencies and capabilities:
       ``(A) Analysis of national strategy, military strategy, and 
     doctrine.
       ``(B) Analysis of force structure and military 
     capabilities.
       ``(C) Analysis of--
       ``(i) issues relating to weapons of mass destruction, 
     military intelligence, defense economics, trade, and 
     international economics; and
       ``(ii) the relationship between those issues and grand 
     strategy, science and technology, the sociology of human 
     resources and demography, and political science.
       ``(2) A substantial number of Center scholars shall be 
     competent in the Chinese language. The Center shall include a 
     core of junior scholars capable of providing linguistics and 
     translation support to the Center.
       ``(e) Activities of the Center.--The activities of the 
     Center shall include other elements appropriate to its 
     mission, including the following:
       ``(1) The Center should include an active conference 
     program with an international reach.
       ``(2) The Center should conduct an international 
     competition for a Visiting Fellowship in Chinese Military 
     Affairs and Chinese Security Issues. The term of the 
     fellowship should be for one year, renewable for a second. 
     The visitor should contract to produce a major publication in 
     the visitor's area of expertise.
       ``(3) The Center shall provide funds to support at least 
     one trip per analyst per year to China and the region and to 
     support visits of Chinese military leaders to the Center.
       ``(4) The Center shall support well defined, distinguished, 
     signature publications.
       ``(5) Center scholars shall have appropriate access to 
     intelligence community assessments of Chinese military 
     affairs.
       ``(f) Studies and Reports.--The Director may contract for 
     studies and reports from the private sector to supplement the 
     work of the Center.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``2165. National Defense University: Center for the Study of Chinese 
              Military Affairs.''.
       (c) Implementation Report.--Not later than January 1, 1998, 
     the Secretary of Defense shall

[[Page H3998]]

     submit to Congress a report stating the timetable and 
     organizational plan for establishing the Center for the Study 
     of Chinese Military Affairs under section 2165 of title 10, 
     United States Code, as added by subsection (b).
       (d) Startup of Center.--The Secretary shall establish the 
     Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs under 
     section 2165 of title 10, United States Code, as added by 
     subsection (b), not later than March 1, 1998, and shall 
     appoint the first Director of the Center not later than June 
     1, 1998.
       (e) First Year Funding.--Of the amount available to the 
     Secretary of Defense for fiscal year 1998 for Defense-wide 
     operation and maintenance (other than funds otherwise 
     available for the activities of the National Defense 
     University), the Secretary shall make $5,000,000 available 
     for the Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs 
     established under section 2165 of title 10, United States 
     Code, as added by subsection (b).

     SEC. 905. WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS AGENCY.

       Of the amount appropriated pursuant to section 301 for 
     operation and maintenance for fiscal year 1998, not more than 
     $55,000,000 may be made available for the White House 
     Communications Agency.

     SEC. 906. REVISION TO REQUIRED FREQUENCY FOR PROVISION OF 
                   POLICY GUIDANCE FOR CONTINGENCY PLANS.

       Section 113(g)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking out ``annually''; 
     and
       (2) in the second sentence, by inserting ``be provided 
     every two years or more frequently as needed and shall'' 
     after ``Such guidance shall''.

     SEC. 907. TERMINATION OF THE DEFENSE AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE 
                   OFFICE.

       (a) Termination of Office.--The organization within the 
     Department of Defense known as the Defense Airborne 
     Reconnaissance Office is terminated. No funds available for 
     the Department of Defense may be used for the operation of 
     that Office after the date specified in subsection (d).
       (b) Transfer of Functions.--(1) Subject to paragraphs (2) 
     and (3), the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the 
     Defense Intelligence Agency the functions that were performed 
     on the day before the date of the enactment this Act by the 
     Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office relating to its 
     responsibilities for management oversight and coordination of 
     defense airborne reconnaissance capabilities.
       (2) The Secretary shall determine which functions are 
     appropriate for transfer under paragraph (1). In making such 
     determination, the Secretary shall ensure that program 
     management, development and acquisition, operations, and 
     related responsibilities for individual programs within the 
     Defense Airborne Reconnaissance program remain within the 
     military departments.
       (3) Any functions transferred under this subsection shall 
     be subject to the authority, direction, and control of the 
     Secretary.
       (c) Report.--(1) Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     submit to the committees named in paragraph (2) a report 
     containing the Secretary's plan for terminating and 
     transferring the functions of the Defense Airborne 
     Reconnaissance Office.
       (2) The committees referred to in paragraph (1) are--
       (A) the Committee on Armed Services and the Select 
     Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; and
       (B) the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the 
     Committee on National Security of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (d) Effective Date.--Subsection (a) shall take effect at 
     the end of the 120-day period beginning on the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.
                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS
                     Subtitle A--Financial Matters

     SEC. 1001. TRANSFER AUTHORITY.

       (a) Authority To Transfer Authorizations.--(1) Upon 
     determination by the Secretary of Defense that such action is 
     necessary in the national interest, the Secretary may 
     transfer amounts of authorizations made available to the 
     Department of Defense in this division for fiscal year 1998 
     between any such authorizations for that fiscal year (or any 
     subdivisions thereof). Amounts of authorizations so 
     transferred shall be merged with and be available for the 
     same purposes as the authorization to which transferred.
       (2) The total amount of authorizations that the Secretary 
     of Defense may transfer under the authority of this section 
     may not exceed $2,000,000,000.
       (b) Limitations.--The authority provided by this section to 
     transfer authorizations--
       (1) may only be used to provide authority for items that 
     have a higher priority than the items from which authority is 
     transferred; and
       (2) may not be used to provide authority for an item that 
     has been denied authorization by Congress.
       (c) Effect on Authorization Amounts.--A transfer made from 
     one account to another under the authority of this section 
     shall be deemed to increase the amount authorized for the 
     account to which the amount is transferred by an amount equal 
     to the amount transferred.
       (d) Notice to Congress.--The Secretary shall promptly 
     notify Congress of each transfer made under subsection (a).

     SEC. 1002. INCORPORATION OF CLASSIFIED ANNEX.

       (a) Status of Classified Annex.--The Classified Annex 
     prepared by the Committee on National Security of the House 
     of Representatives to accompany the bill H.R. 1119 of the One 
     Hundred Fifth Congress and transmitted to the President is 
     hereby incorporated into this Act.
       (b) Construction With Other Provisions of Act.--The amounts 
     specified in the Classified Annex are not in addition to 
     amounts authorized to be appropriated by other provisions of 
     this Act.
       (c) Limitation on Use of Funds.--Funds appropriated 
     pursuant to an authorization contained in this Act that are 
     made available for a program, project, or activity referred 
     to in the Classified Annex may only be expended for such 
     program, project, or activity in accordance with such terms, 
     conditions, limitations, restrictions, and requirements as 
     are set out for that program, project, or activity in the 
     Classified Annex.
       (d) Distribution of Classified Annex.--The President shall 
     provide for appropriate distribution of the Classified Annex, 
     or of appropriate portions of the annex, within the executive 
     branch of the Government.

     SEC. 1003. AUTHORITY FOR OBLIGATION OF UNAUTHORIZED FISCAL 
                   YEAR 1997 DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Authority.--The amounts described in subsection (b) may 
     be obligated and expended for programs, projects, and 
     activities of the Department of Defense in accordance with 
     fiscal year 1997 defense appropriations.
       (b) Covered Amounts.--The amounts referred to in subsection 
     (a) are the amounts provided for programs, projects, and 
     activities of the Department of Defense in fiscal year 1997 
     defense appropriations that are in excess of the amounts 
     provided for such programs, projects, and activities in 
     fiscal year 1997 defense authorizations.
       (c) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
       (1) Fiscal year 1997 defense appropriations.--The term 
     ``fiscal year 1997 defense appropriations'' means amounts 
     appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department of 
     Defense for fiscal year 1997 in the Department of Defense 
     Appropriations Act, 1997 (as contained in section 101(b) of 
     Public Law 104-208).
       (2) Fiscal year 1997 defense authorizations.--The term 
     ``fiscal year 1997 defense authorizations'' means amounts 
     authorized to be appropriated for the Department of Defense 
     for fiscal year 1997 in the National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201).

     SEC. 1004. AUTHORIZATION OF SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR 
                   FISCAL YEAR 1997.

       Amounts authorized to be appropriated to the Department of 
     Defense for fiscal year 1997 in the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201) 
     are hereby adjusted, with respect to any such authorized 
     amount, by the amount by which appropriations pursuant to 
     such authorization were increased (by a supplemental 
     appropriation) or decreased (by a rescission), or both, in 
     the 1997 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for 
     Recovery from Natural Disasters, and for Overseas 
     Peacekeeping Efforts, Including Those in Bosnia.

     SEC. 1005. INCREASE IN FISCAL YEAR 1996 TRANSFER AUTHORITY.

       Section 1001(a)(2) of the National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 100 Stat. 2630) 
     is amended by striking out ``$2,000,000,000'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``$3,100,000,000''.

     SEC. 1006. FISHER HOUSE TRUST FUNDS.

       Section 2221(c) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated for any 
     fiscal year from a trust fund specified in subsection (a) any 
     amount referred to in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) (as 
     applicable to that trust fund), such amount to be available 
     only for the purposes stated in that paragraph. With respect 
     to any such amount, the preceding sentence is the specific 
     authorization by law required by section 1321(b)(2) of title 
     31.''.

     SEC. 1007. FLEXIBILITY IN FINANCING CLOSURE OF CERTAIN 
                   OUTSTANDING CONTRACTS FOR WHICH A SMALL FINAL 
                   PAYMENT IS DUE.

       (a) Closure of Outstanding Contracts.--The Secretary of 
     Defense may make the final payment on a contract to which 
     this section applies from the account established pursuant to 
     subsection (d).
       (b) Covered Contracts.--This section applies to any 
     contract of the Department of Defense--
       (1) that was entered into before December 5, 1990; and
       (2) for which an unobligated balance of an appropriation 
     that had been initially applied to the contract was canceled 
     before December 5, 1990, pursuant to section 1552 of title 
     31, United States Code, as in effect before that date.
       (c) Authority Limited to Small Final Payments.--The 
     Secretary may use the authority provided by this section only 
     for a contract for which the amount of the final payment due 
     is not greater than the micro-purchase threshold (as defined 
     in section 32 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act 
     (41 U.S.C. 428)).
       (d) Account.--The Secretary may establish an account for 
     the purposes of this section. The Secretary may from time to 
     time transfer into the account, from funds available to the 
     Department of Defense for procurement or for research, 
     development, test, and evaluation, such amounts as the 
     Secretary determines to be needed for the purposes of the 
     account, except that no such transfer may be made that 
     would result in the balance of the account exceeding 
     $1,000,000. Amounts in the account may be used only for 
     the purposes of this section.
       (e) Closure of Account.--When the Secretary determines that 
     all contracts to which this section applies have been closed 
     and there is no further need for the account established 
     under subsection (d), the Secretary shall close

[[Page H3999]]

     the account. Any amounts remaining in the account shall be 
     covered into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.
                Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards

     SEC. 1021. RELATIONSHIP OF CERTAIN LAWS TO DISPOSAL OF 
                   VESSELS FOR EXPORT FROM THE NAVAL VESSEL 
                   REGISTER AND THE NATIONAL DEFENSE RESERVE 
                   FLEET.

       (a) Naval Vessel Register.--(1) Section 7305 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(e) Relationship to Toxic Substances Control Act.--(1) 
     Subject to paragraph (2), the sale of a vessel under this 
     section for export, or any subsequent resale of a vessel sold 
     under this section for export--
       ``(A) is not a disposal or a distribution in commerce under 
     section 6 or 12(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 
     U.S.C. 2605 and 2611(a)) or an export of hazardous waste 
     under section 3017 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 
     6938); and
       ``(B) is not subject to section 12(b) of the Toxic 
     Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)).
       ``(2)(A) Paragraph (1) applies to a vessel being sold for 
     export only if, before the sale of such vessel, any item 
     listed in subparagraph (B) containing polychlorinated 
     biphenyls is removed from the vessel.
       ``(B) Subparagraph (A) covers any transformer, large high 
     or low voltage capacitor, or hydraulic or heat transfer 
     fluid.''.
       (2) Section 7306a of such title is amended--
       (A) in the heading, by adding at the end the following: 
     ``or operational training'';
       (B) in subsection (a), by inserting ``or operational 
     training'' after ``purposes''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Relationship to Other Laws.--The sinking of a vessel 
     for an experimental purpose or for operational training 
     pursuant to subsection (a) is not--
       ``(1) a disposal or a distribution in commerce under 
     section 6 or 12(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 
     U.S.C. 2605 and 2611(a)); or
       ``(2) the transport of material for the purpose of dumping 
     it into ocean waters, or the dumping of material transported 
     from a location outside the United States, under section 101 
     of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 
     1972 (33 U.S.C. 1411).''.
       (b) National Defense Reserve Fleet.--(1) Section 510(i) of 
     the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 U.S.C. App. 1160(i)) is 
     amended--
       (A) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(i)''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2)(A) Subject to subparagraph (B), the sale under this 
     subsection of a vessel from the National Defense Reserve 
     Fleet for export, or any subsequent resale of a vessel sold 
     from the Fleet for export--
       ``(i) is not a disposal or a distribution in commerce under 
     section 6 or 12(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 
     U.S.C. 2605 and 2611(a)) or an export of hazardous waste 
     under section 3017 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 
     6938); and
       ``(ii) is not subject to subsection (b) of section 12 of 
     the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2611).
       ``(B)(i) Subparagraph (A) applies to a vessel being sold 
     for export only if, before the sale of such vessel, any item 
     listed in clause (ii) containing polychlorinated biphenyls is 
     removed from the vessel.
       ``(ii) Clause (i) covers any transformer, large high or low 
     voltage capacitor, or hydraulic or heat transfer fluid.''.
       (2) Section 6 of the National Maritime Heritage Act of 1994 
     (Public Law 103-451; 108 Stat. 4776; 16 U.S.C. 5405) is 
     amended--
       (A) in subsections (a)(1) and (b)(2)--
       (i) by inserting ``or 510(i)'' after ``508''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``or 1160(i)'' after ``1158''; and
       (B) in subsection (c)(1)(A), by striking out ``1999'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``2001''.

     SEC. 1022. AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO A LONG-TERM CHARTER FOR A 
                   VESSEL IN SUPPORT OF THE SURVEILLANCE TOWED-
                   ARRAY SENSOR (SURTASS) PROGRAM.

       The Secretary of the Navy is authorized to enter into a 
     contract in accordance with section 2401 of title 10, United 
     States Code, for the charter, for a period through 
     fiscal year 2003, of the vessel RV CORY CHOUEST (United 
     States official number 933435) in support of the 
     Surveillance Towed-Array Sensor (SURTASS) program.

     SEC. 1023. TRANSFER OF TWO SPECIFIED OBSOLETE TUGBOATS OF THE 
                   ARMY.

       (a) Authority To Transfer Vessels.--The Secretary of the 
     Army may transfer the two obsolete tugboats of the Army 
     described in subsection (b) to the Brownsville Navigation 
     District, Brownsville, Texas.
       (b) Vessels Covered.--Subsection (a) applies to the 
     following two decommissioned tugboats of the Army, each of 
     which is listed as of the date of the enactment of this Act 
     as being surplus to the needs of the Army: the Normandy (LT-
     1971) and the Salerno (LT-1953).
       (c) Transfers To Be at No Cost to United States.--A 
     transfer authorized by this section shall be made at no cost 
     to the United States.
       (d) Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may require such 
     additional terms and conditions in connection with the 
     transfers authorized by this section as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate.

     SEC. 1024. NAMING OF A DDG-51 CLASS DESTROYER THE U.S.S. 
                   THOMAS F. CONNOLLY.

       It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of the Navy 
     should name a guided missile destroyer of the DDG-51 class 
     the U.S.S. Thomas F. Connolly, in honor of Vice Admiral 
     Thomas F. Connolly (1909-1996), of the State of Minnesota, 
     who during an active-duty naval career extending from 1933 to 
     1971 became a leading architect of the modern United States 
     Navy .

     SEC. 1025. CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW PERIOD WITH RESPECT TO 
                   TRANSFER OF THE EX-U.S.S. MIDWAY (CV-41).

       In applying section 7306 of title 10, United States Code, 
     with respect to the transfer of the decommissioned aircraft 
     carrier ex-U.S.S. MIDWAY (CV-41), subsection (d)(1)(B) of 
     that section shall be applied by substituting ``30 calendar 
     days'' for ``60 days of continuous session of Congress''.
                  Subtitle C--Counter-Drug Activities

     SEC. 1031. PROHIBITION ON USE OF NATIONAL GUARD FOR CIVIL-
                   MILITARY ACTIVITIES UNDER STATE DRUG 
                   INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES PLAN.

       Section 112 of title 32, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (g) and (h) as subsections 
     (h) and (i), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(g) Prohibition on Certain Civil-Military Activities.--
     Funds provided under this section may not be used to conduct 
     activities, including community-outreach programs, designed 
     to reduce the demand for illegal drugs among persons who are 
     not members of the National Guard or their dependents.''.
       Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Report Requirements and Repeals

     SEC. 1041. REPEAL OF MISCELLANEOUS OBSOLETE REPORTS REQUIRED 
                   BY PRIOR DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACTS.

       (a) Report on Removal of Basic Point Defense Missile System 
     From Naval Amphibious Vessels.--Section 1437 of the 
     Department of Defense Authorization Act, 1986 (Public Law 99-
     145; 99 Stat. 757), is repealed.
       (b) Report Concerning the Stretchout of Major Defense 
     Acquisition Programs.--Section 117 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 1989 (Public Law 100-456; 102 
     Stat. 1933), is repealed.
       (c) Report Concerning the B-2 Aircraft Program.--Section 
     115 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Years 1990 and 1991 (Public Law 101-189; 103 Stat. 1373) is 
     repealed.

     SEC. 1042. REPEAL OF ANNUAL REPORT REQUIREMENT RELATING TO 
                   TRAINING OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES WITH 
                   FRIENDLY FOREIGN FORCES.

       Section 2011 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking out subsection (e).
                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

     SEC. 1051. AUTHORITY FOR SPECIAL AGENTS OF THE DEFENSE 
                   CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE TO EXECUTE 
                   WARRANTS AND MAKE ARRESTS.

       (a) Authority.--Chapter 81 of title 10, United States Code, 
     is amended by inserting after section 1585 the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 1585a. Special agents of the Defense Criminal 
       Investigative Service: authority to execute warrants and 
       make arrests

       ``(a) Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may authorize 
     any DCIS special agent--
       ``(1) to execute and serve any warrant or other process 
     issued under the authority of the United States; and
       ``(2) to make arrests without a warrant--
       ``(A) for any offense against the United States committed 
     in the presence of that agent; and
       ``(B) for any felony cognizable under the laws of the 
     United States if the agent has probable cause to believe that 
     the person to be arrested has committed or is committing the 
     felony.
       ``(b) Attorney General Guidelines.--Authority of a DCIS 
     special agent under subsection (a) may be exercised only in 
     accordance with guidelines approved by the Attorney General.
       ``(c) DCIS Special Agent Defined.--In this section, the 
     term `DCIS special agent' means an employee of the Department 
     of Defense who is a special agent of the Defense Criminal 
     Investigative Service (or any successor to that service).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 1585 the following new item:

``1585a. Special agents of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service: 
              authority to execute warrants and make arrests.''.

     SEC. 1052. STUDY OF INVESTIGATIVE PRACTICES OF MILITARY 
                   CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE ORGANIZATIONS RELATING 
                   TO SEX CRIMES.

       (a) Independent Study Required.--(1) The Secretary of 
     Defense shall provide for an independent study 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.
       (2) The Secretary shall provide for the study to be 
     conducted by the National Academy of Public Administration. 
     The amount of a contract for the study may not exceed 
     $2,000,000.
       (3) The Secretary shall require that all components of the 
     Department of Defense cooperate fully with the organization 
     carrying out the study.
       (b) Matters To Be Included in Study.--The Secretary shall 
     require that the organization conducting the study under this 
     section specifically consider each of the following matters:
       (1) The need (if any) for greater organizational 
     independence and autonomy for the military criminal 
     investigative organizations than exists under current chain-
     of-command structures within the military departments.
       (2) The authority of each of the military criminal 
     investigative organizations to investigate allegations of sex 
     crimes and other criminal sexual misconduct and the policies 
     of those organizations for carrying out such investigations.
       (3) The training (including training in skills and 
     techniques related to the conduct of interviews) provided by 
     each of those organizations

[[Page H4000]]

     to agents or prospective agents responsible for conducting or 
     providing support to investigations of alleged sex crimes and 
     other criminal sexual misconduct, including--
       (A) the extent to which that training is comparable to the 
     training provided by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and 
     other civilian law enforcement agencies; and
       (B) the coordination of training and investigative policies 
     related to alleged sex crimes and other criminal sexual 
     misconduct of each of those organizations with the Federal 
     Bureau of Investigation and other civilian Federal law 
     enforcement agencies.
       (4) The procedures and relevant professional standards of 
     each military criminal investigative organization with regard 
     to recruitment and hiring of agents, including an evaluation 
     of the extent to which those procedures and standards provide 
     for--
       (A) sufficient screening of prospective agents based on 
     background investigations; and
       (B) obtaining sufficient information about the 
     qualifications and relevant experience of prospective agents.
       (5) The advantages and disadvantages of establishing, 
     within each of the military criminal investigative 
     organizations or within the Defense Criminal Investigative 
     Service only, of a special unit for the investigation of 
     alleged sex crimes and other criminal sexual misconduct.
       (6) The clarity of guidance for, and consistency of 
     investigative tactics used by, each of the military criminal 
     investigative organizations for the investigation of alleged 
     sex crimes and other criminal sexual misconduct, together 
     with a comparison with the guidance and tactics used by the 
     Federal Bureau of Investigation and other civilian law 
     enforcement agencies for such investigations.
       (7) The number of allegations of agent misconduct in the 
     investigation of sex crimes and other criminal sexual 
     misconduct for each of those organizations, together with a 
     comparison with the number of such allegations concerning 
     agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other 
     civilian law enforcement agencies for such investigations.
       (8) The procedures of each of the military criminal 
     investigative organizations for administrative identification 
     (known as ``titling'') of persons suspected of committing sex 
     crimes or other criminal sexual misconduct, together with a 
     comparison with the comparable procedures of the Federal 
     Bureau of Investigation and other civilian Federal law 
     enforcement agencies for such investigations.
       (9) The accuracy, timeliness, and completeness of reporting 
     of sex crimes and other criminal sexual misconduct by each of 
     the military criminal investigative organizations to the 
     National Crime Information Center maintained by the 
     Department of Justice.
       (10) Any recommendation for legislation or administrative 
     action to revise the organizational or operational 
     arrangements of the military criminal investigative 
     organizations or to alter recruitment, training, or 
     operational procedures, as they pertain to the investigation 
     of sex crimes and other criminal sexual misconduct.
       (c) Report.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall require the 
     organization conducting the study under this section to 
     submit to the Secretary a report on the study not later than 
     one year after the date of the enactment of this Act. The 
     organization shall include in the report its findings and 
     conclusions concerning each of the matters specified in 
     subsection (b).
       (2) The Secretary shall submit the report under paragraph 
     (1), together with the Secretary's comments on the report, to 
     Congress not later than 30 days after the date on which 
     the report is submitted to the Secretary under paragraph 
     (1).
       (d) Military Criminal Investigative Organization Defined.--
     For the purposes of this section, the term ``military 
     criminal investigative organization'' means any of the 
     following:
       (1) The Army Criminal Investigation Command.
       (2) The Naval Criminal Investigative Service.
       (3) The Air Force Office of Special Investigations.
       (4) The Defense Criminal Investigative Service.
       (e) Criminal Sexual Misconduct Defined.--For the purposes 
     of this section, the term ``criminal sexual misconduct'' 
     means conduct by a member of the Armed Forces involving 
     sexual abuse, sexual harassment, or other sexual misconduct 
     that constitutes an offense under the Uniform Code of 
     Military Justice.

     SEC. 1053. TECHNICAL AND CLERICAL AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Title 10, United States Code.--Title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended as follows:
       (1) The tables of chapters at the beginning of subtitle A, 
     and at the beginning of part I of subtitle A, are each 
     amended by striking out ``471'' in the item relating to 
     chapter 23 and inserting in lieu thereof ``481''.
       (2) The tables of chapters at the beginning of subtitle A, 
     and at the beginning of part IV of subtitle A, are each 
     amended by striking out ``2540'' in the item relating to 
     chapter 152 and inserting in lieu thereof ``2541''.
       (3) Section 116(b)(2) is amended by striking out ``such 
     subsection'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``subsection 
     (a)''.
       (4) Section 129c(e) is amended by striking out ``section 
     115a(g)(2)'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``section 
     115a(e)(2)''.
       (5) Section 382(g) is amended by striking out ``the date of 
     the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1997'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``September 
     23, 1996''.
       (6) The table of sections at the beginning of subchapter I 
     of chapter 21 is amended by striking out the items relating 
     to sections 424 and 425 and inserting in lieu thereof the 
     following:

``424. Disclosure of organizational and personnel information: 
              exemption for Defense Intelligence Agency, National 
              Reconnaissance Office, and National Imagery and Mapping 
              Agency.''.
       (7) Section 445 is amended--
       (A) by striking out ``(1)'' before ``Except with'';
       (B) by redesignating subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) as 
     paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), respectively;
       (C) by striking out ``(2)'' before ``Whenever it appears'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``(b) Injunctive Relief.--''; 
     and
       (D) by striking out ``paragraph (1)'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``subsection (a)''.
       (8) Section 858b is amended in the first sentence by 
     striking out ``forfeiture'' and all that follows through 
     ``due that member'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``forfeiture of pay, or of pay and allowances, due that 
     member''.
       (9) Section 943(c) is amended--
       (A) in the third sentence, by striking out ``such 
     positions'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``positions 
     referred to in the preceding sentences''; and
       (B) by capitalizing the initial letter of the third word of 
     the subsection heading.
       (10) Section 954 is amended by striking out ``this'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``his''.
       (11) Section 972(b) is amended by striking out ``the date 
     of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1996'' in the matter preceding paragraph (1) 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``February 10, 1996''.
       (12) Section 976(f) is amended by striking out ``shall,'' 
     and all that follows and inserting in lieu thereof ``shall be 
     fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or 
     both, except that, in the case of an organization (as defined 
     in section 18 of such title), the fine shall not be less than 
     $25,000.''.
       (13) Section 977 is amended--
       (A) in subsection (c), by striking out ``Beginning on 
     October 1, 1996, not more than'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``Not more than''; and
       (B) in subsection (d)(2), by striking out ``before October 
     1, 1996,'' and all that follows through ``so assigned'' the 
     second place it appears.
       (14) Section 1129(c) is amended--
       (A) by striking out ``the date of the enactment of this 
     section,'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``November 30, 
     1993,''; and
       (B) by striking out ``before the date of the enactment of 
     this section or'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``before such 
     date or''.
       (15) Section 1151(b) is amended by striking out ``with'' in 
     the subsection heading and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``With''.
       (16) Section 1152(g) is amended by inserting ``(1)'' before 
     ``The Secretary may''.
       (17) Section 1408(d) is amended--
       (A) by striking out ``To'' in the subsection heading and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``to''; and
       (B) by redesignating the second paragraph (6) as paragraph 
     (7).
       (18) Section 1599c(c)(1)(F) is amended by striking out 
     ``Sections 106(f)'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``Sections 
     106(e)''.
       (19) Section 1763 is amended--
       (A) by striking out ``On and after October 1, 1993, the 
     Secretary of Defense'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``The 
     Secretary of Defense''; and
       (B) by striking out ``secretaries'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``Secretaries''.
       (20) Section 2010(e) is repealed.
       (21) Section 2208(k) is repealed.
       (22)(A) Section 2306(h) is amended by inserting ``for the 
     purchase of property'' after ``Multiyear contracting 
     authority''.
       (B)(i) The heading of section 2306b is amended to read as 
     follows:

     ``Sec. 2306b. Multiyear contracts: acquisition of property''.

       (ii) The item relating to such section in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 137 of such title is 
     amended to read as follows:

``2306b. Multiyear contracts: acquisition of property.''.

       (23) Section 2306b(k) is amended by striking out ``this 
     subsection'' in the first sentence and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``this section''.
       (24) Section 2315(a) is amended by striking out ``the 
     Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``division E of the Clinger-Cohen 
     Act of 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.)''.
       (25) Section 2371a is amended by inserting ``Defense'' 
     before ``Advanced Research Projects Agency''.
       (26) Section 2401a(a) is amended by striking out ``leasing 
     of such vehicles'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``such 
     leasing''.
       (27) Section 2466(e) is repealed.
       (28) Section 2684(b) is amended by striking out ``, United 
     States Code,''.
       (29) Section 2885 is amended by striking out ``five years 
     after the date of the enactment of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``on February 10, 2001''.
       (30) Section 12733(3) is amended--
       (A) by inserting a comma after ``(B)''; and
       (B) by striking out ``the date of the enactment of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``September 23, 1996,''.
       (b) Title 37, United States Code.--Section 205(d) of title 
     37, United States Code, is amended by striking out the period 
     after ``August 1, 1979'' and inserting in lieu thereof a 
     comma.
       (c) Public Law 104-201.--Effective as of September 23, 
     1996, and as if included therein as enacted, the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 
     104-201) is amended as follows:
       (1) Section 367 (110 Stat. 2496) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a), by striking out ``Subchapter II of 
     chapter'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``Chapter''; and

[[Page H4001]]

       (B) in subsection (b), by striking out ``subchapter'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``chapter''.
       (2) Section 614(b)(2)(B) (110 Stat. 2544) is amended by 
     striking out ``the period'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``the semicolon''.
       (3) Section 802(1) (110 Stat. 2604) is amended by striking 
     out ``1995'' in the first quoted matter therein and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``1996''.
       (4) Section 829(c) (110 Stat. 2612) is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``Section 2502(b)'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``Section 2502(c)''; and
       (B) by redesignating paragraph (3) as subparagraph (C) of 
     paragraph (2).
       (d) Other Annual Defense Authorization Acts.--
       (1) of The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106) is amended as follows:
       (A) Section 533(b) (110 Stat. 315) is amended by inserting 
     before the period at the end the following: ``and the 
     amendments made by subsection (b), effective as of October 5, 
     1994''.
       (B) Section 1501(d)(1) (110 Stat. 500) is amended by 
     striking out ``337(b)'' and ``2717'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``377(b)'' and ``2737'', respectively.
       (2) Section 845 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160; 10 U.S.C. 2371 
     note) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a), by inserting ``Defense'' before 
     ``Advanced''; and
       (B) in the section heading, by inserting ``defense'' after 
     the third word.
       (3) The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1993 (Public Law 102-484) is amended as follows:
       (A) Section 812(c) (10 U.S.C. 1723 note) is amended by 
     inserting ``and Technology'' after ``for Acquisition''.
       (B) Subsection (e) of section 4471 (10 U.S.C. 2501 note) is 
     amended--
       (i) by realigning that subsection so as to be flush to the 
     margin; and
       (ii) by capitalizing the initial letter of the third word 
     of the subsection heading.
       (4) Section 807(b)(2)(A) of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993 (Public Law 
     102-190; 10 U.S.C. 2320 note) is amended by inserting before 
     the period the following: ``and Technology''.
       (5) The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1991 (Public Law 101-510) is amended as follows:
       (A) Section 1205 (10 U.S.C. 1746 note) is amended by 
     striking out ``Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition'' 
     each place it appears and inserting in lieu thereof ``Under 
     Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology''.
       (B) Section 2921 (10 U.S.C. 2687 note) is amended--
       (i) in subsection (e)(3)(B), by striking out 
     ``Subcommittees'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``Subcommittee''; and
       (ii) in subsection (f)(2), by striking out ``the Committees 
     on Armed Services of the Senate and House of 
     Representatives'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``the 
     Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee 
     on National Security of the House of Representatives''.
       (6) Section 1121(c) of the National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Years 1988 and 1989 (Public Law 100-180; 10 
     U.S.C. 113 note) is amended by striking out ``under this 
     section--'' and all that follow through ``fiscal year 1990'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``under this section may not 
     exceed 5,000 during any fiscal year''.
       (d) Title 5, United States Code.--Title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended as follows:
       (1) Section 3329(b) is amended by striking out ``a position 
     described in subsection (c)'' the second place it appears.
       (2) Section 5315 is amended--
       (A) in the item relating to the Chief Information Officer 
     of the Department of the Interior, by inserting ``the'' 
     before ``Interior''; and
       (B) in the item relating to the Chief Information Officer 
     of the Department of the Treasury, by inserting ``the'' 
     before ``Treasury''.
       (3) Section 5316 is amended by striking out ``Atomic 
     Energy'' after ``Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``Nuclear and Chemical and 
     Biological Defense Programs''.
       (e) Acquisition Policy Statutes.--
       (1) Section 309 of the Federal Property and Administrative 
     Services Act of 1949 (41 U.S.C. 259) is amended by striking 
     out ``and'' at the end of subsection (b)(2).
       (2) The Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act is amended 
     as follows:
       (A) The item relating to section 27 in the table of 
     contents in section 1 is amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 27. Restrictions on disclosing and obtaining contractor bid or 
              proposal information or source selection information.''.

       (B) Section 6(d) (41 U.S.C. 405(d)) is amended--
       (i) by striking out the period at the end of paragraph 
     (5)(J) and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon;
       (ii) by moving paragraph (6) two ems to the left; and
       (iii) in paragraph (12), by striking out ``small business'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``small businesses''.
       (C) Section 35(b)(2) (41 U.S.C. 431(b)(2)) is amended by 
     striking out ``commercial'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``commercially available''.
       (3) Section 6 of the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (41 
     U.S.C. 605) is amended in subsections (d) and (e) by striking 
     out ``(as in effect on September 30, 1995)'' each place it 
     appears.
       (4) Subsections (d)(1) and (e) of section 16 of the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 645) are each amended by striking out 
     ``concerns'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``concern''.
       (f) Coordination With Other Amendments.--For purposes of 
     applying amendments made by provisions of this Act other than 
     provisions of this section, this section shall be treated as 
     having been enacted immediately before the other provisions 
     of this Act.

     SEC. 1054. DISPLAY OF POW/MIA FLAG.

       (a) Required Display.--The POW/MIA flag shall be displayed 
     at the locations specified in subsection (c) each year on 
     POW/MIA flag display days. Such display shall serve (1) as 
     the symbol of the Nation's concern and commitment to 
     achieving the fullest possible accounting of Americans who, 
     having been prisoners of war or missing in action, still 
     remain unaccounted for, and (2) as the symbol of the Nation's 
     commitment to achieving the fullest possible accounting for 
     Americans who in the future may become prisoners of war, 
     missing in action, or otherwise unaccounted for as a result 
     of hostile action.
       (b) Days for Flag Display.--(1) For purposes of this 
     section, POW/MIA flag display days are the following:
       (A) Armed Forces Day, the third Saturday in May.
       (B) Memorial Day, the last Monday in May.
       (C) Flag Day, June 14.
       (D) Independence Day, July 4.
       (E) National POW/MIA Recognition Day.
       (F) Veterans Day, November 11.
       (2) In the case of display at United States Postal Service 
     post offices (required by subsection (c)(8)), POW/MIA flag 
     display days in any year include, in addition to the days 
     specified in paragraph (1), the last business day before each 
     such day that itself is not a business day.
       (c) Locations for Flag Display.--The locations for the 
     display of the POW/MIA flag under this section are the 
     following:
       (1) The Capitol.
       (2) The White House.
       (3) The Korean War Veterans Memorial and the Vietnam 
     Veterans Memorial.
       (4) Each national cemetery.
       (5) The buildings containing the primary offices of--
       (A) the Secretary of State;
       (B) the Secretary of Defense;
       (C) the Secretary of Veterans Affairs; and
       (D) the Director of the Selective Service System.
       (6) Each major military installation, as designated by the 
     Secretary of Defense.
       (7) Each Department of Veterans Affairs medical center.
       (8) Each United States Postal Service post office.
       (d) Coordination With Other Display Requirement.--Display 
     of the POW/MIA flag at the Capitol pursuant to paragraph (1) 
     of subsection (c) is in addition to the display of that flag 
     in the Rotunda of the Capitol required by Senate Concurrent 
     Resolution 5 of the 101st Congress, agreed to on February 22, 
     1989 (103 Stat. 2533).
       (e) Requirements Concerning Display at Specified 
     Locations.--(1) Display of the POW/MIA flag at the buildings 
     specified in paragraphs (1), (2), (5), and (7) of subsection 
     (c) shall be on, or on the grounds of, each such building.
       (2) Display of that flag pursuant to paragraph (5) of 
     subsection (c) at the buildings containing the primary 
     offices of the officials specified in that paragraph shall be 
     in an area visible to the public.
       (3) Display of that flag at United States Postal Service 
     post offices pursuant to paragraph (8) of subsection (c) 
     shall be on the grounds or in the public lobby of each such 
     post office.
       (f) POW/MIA Flag Defined.--As used in this section, the 
     term ``POW/MIA flag'' means the National League of Families 
     POW/MIA flag recognized officially and designated by section 
     2 of Public Law 101-355 (36 U.S.C. 189).
       (g) Regulations for Implementation.--Within 180 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, the head of each 
     department, agency, or other establishment responsible for a 
     location specified in subsection (c) (other than the Capitol) 
     shall prescribe such regulations as necessary to carry out 
     this section.
       (h) Procurement and Distribution of Flags.--Within 30 days 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Administrator of General Services shall procure POW/MIA flags 
     and distribute them as necessary to carry out this section.
       (i) Repeal of Prior Law.--Section 1084 of Public Law 102-
     190 (36 U.S.C. 189 note) is repealed.

     SEC. 1055. CERTIFICATION REQUIRED BEFORE OBSERVANCE OF 
                   MORATORIUM ON USE BY ARMED FORCES OF 
                   ANTIPERSONNEL LANDMINES.

       Any moratorium imposed by law (whether enacted before, on, 
     or after the date of the enactment of this Act) on the use of 
     antipersonnel landmines by the Armed Forces may be 
     implemented only if (and after) the Secretary of Defense, 
     after consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs 
     of Staff, certifies to Congress that--
       (1) the moratorium will not adversely affect the ability of 
     United States forces to defend against attack on land by 
     hostile forces; and
       (2) the Armed Forces have systems that are effective 
     substitutes for antipersonnel landmines.

     SEC. 1056. PROTECTION OF SAFETY-RELATED INFORMATION 
                   VOLUNTARILY PROVIDED BY AIR CARRIERS.

       (a) Authority To Protect Information.--Section 2640 of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (h) and (i) as subsections 
     (i) and (j), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (g) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(h) Authority to Protect Safety-Related Information 
     Voluntarily Provided by An Air Carrier.--(1) In any case in 
     which an air carrier voluntarily provides safety-related 
     information to the Secretary for purposes of this section, 
     the Secretary may (notwithstanding any

[[Page H4002]]

     other provision of law) withhold the information from public 
     disclosure if the Secretary determines that--
       ``(A) disclosure of the information would inhibit the air 
     carrier from voluntarily providing safety-related information 
     to the Secretary; and
       ``(B) the information would aid--
       ``(i) the Secretary in carrying out his responsibilities 
     under this section; or
       ``(ii) the head of another agency in carrying out the 
     safety responsibilities of the agency.
       ``(2) If the Secretary provides to the head of another 
     agency safety-related information described in paragraph (1) 
     with respect to which the Secretary has made a determination 
     described in that paragraph, the head of that agency shall 
     (notwithstanding any other provision of law) withhold the 
     information from public disclosure.''.
       (b) Applicability.--Subsection (h) of section 2640 of title 
     10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall 
     apply with respect to requests for information made on or 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 1057. NATIONAL GUARD CHALLENGE PROGRAM TO CREATE 
                   OPPORTUNITIES FOR CIVILIAN YOUTH.

       (a) Program Authority.--Chapter 5 of title 32, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new section:

     ``Sec. 509. National Guard Challenge Program of opportunities 
       for civilian youth

       ``(a) Program Authority and Purpose.--The Secretary of 
     Defense, acting through the Chief of the National Guard 
     Bureau, may conduct a National Guard civilian youth 
     opportunities program (to be known as the `National Guard 
     Challenge Program') to use the National Guard to provide 
     military-based training, including supervised work experience 
     in community service and conservation projects, to civilian 
     youth who cease to attend secondary school before graduating 
     so as to improve the life skills and employment potential of 
     such youth.
       ``(b) Conduct of the Program.--The Secretary of Defense 
     shall provide for the conduct of the National Guard Challenge 
     Program in such States as the Secretary considers to be 
     appropriate, except that Federal expenditures under the 
     program may not exceed $50,000,000 for any fiscal year.
       ``(c) Program Agreements.--(1) To carry out the National 
     Guard Challenge Program in a State, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall enter into an agreement with the Governor of the State 
     or, in the case of the District of Columbia, with the 
     commanding general of the District of Columbia National 
     Guard, under which the Governor or the commanding general 
     will establish, organize, and administer the National Guard 
     Challenge Program in the State.
       ``(2) The agreement may provide for the Secretary to 
     provide funds to the State for civilian personnel costs 
     attributable to the use of civilian employees of the National 
     Guard in the conduct of the National Guard Challenge Program.
       ``(d) Matching Funds Required.--The amount of assistance 
     provided under this section to a State program of the 
     National Guard Challenge Program may not exceed--
       ``(1) for fiscal year 1998, 75 percent of the costs of 
     operating the State program during that year;
       ``(2) for fiscal year 1999, 70 percent of the costs of 
     operating the State program during that year;
       ``(3) for fiscal year 2000, 65 percent of the costs of 
     operating the State program during that year; and
       ``(4) for fiscal year 2001 and each subsequent fiscal year, 
     60 percent of the costs of operating the State program during 
     that year.
       ``(e) Persons Eligible to Participate in Program.--A school 
     dropout from secondary school shall be eligible to 
     participate in the National Guard Challenge Program. The 
     Secretary of Defense shall prescribe the standards and 
     procedures for selecting participants from among school 
     dropouts.
       ``(f) Authorized Benefits for Participants.--(1) To the 
     extent provided in an agreement entered into in accordance 
     with subsection (c) and subject to the approval of the 
     Secretary of Defense, a person selected for training in the 
     National Guard Challenge Program may receive the following 
     benefits in connection with that training:
       ``(A) Allowances for travel expenses, personal expenses, 
     and other expenses.
       ``(B) Quarters.
       ``(C) Subsistence.
       ``(D) Transportation.
       ``(E) Equipment.
       ``(F) Clothing.
       ``(G) Recreational services and supplies.
       ``(H) Other services.
       ``(I) Subject to paragraph (2), a temporary stipend upon 
     the successful completion of the training, as characterized 
     in accordance with procedures provided in the agreement.
       ``(2) In the case of a person selected for training in the 
     National Guard Challenge Program who afterwards becomes a 
     member of the Civilian Community Corps under subtitle E of 
     title I of the National and Community Service Act of 1990 (42 
     U.S.C. 12611 et seq.), the person may not receive a temporary 
     stipend under paragraph (1)(I) while the person is a member 
     of that Corps. The person may receive the temporary stipend 
     after completing service in the Corps unless the person 
     elects to receive benefits provided under subsection (f) or 
     (g) of section 158 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 12618).
       ``(g) Program Personnel.--(1) Personnel of the National 
     Guard of a State in which the National Guard Challenge 
     Program is conducted may serve on full-time National Guard 
     duty for the purpose of providing command, administrative, 
     training, or supporting services for the program. For the 
     performance of those services, any such personnel may be 
     ordered to duty under section 502(f) of this title for not 
     longer than the period of the program.
       ``(2) A Governor participating in the National Guard 
     Challenge Program and the commanding general of the District 
     of Columbia National Guard (if the District of Columbia 
     National Guard is participating in the program) may procure 
     by contract the temporary full time services of such civilian 
     personnel as may be necessary to augment National Guard 
     personnel in carrying out the National Guard Challenge 
     Program in that State.
       ``(3) Civilian employees of the National Guard performing 
     services for the National Guard Challenge Program and 
     contractor personnel performing such services may be 
     required, when appropriate to achieve the purposes of the 
     program, to be members of the National Guard and to wear the 
     military uniform.
       ``(h) Equipment and Facilities.--(1) Equipment and 
     facilities of the National Guard, including military property 
     of the United States issued to the National Guard, may be 
     used in carrying out the National Guard Challenge Program.
       ``(2) Activities under the National Guard Challenge Program 
     shall be considered noncombat activities of the National 
     Guard for purposes of section 710 of this title.
       ``(i) Status of Participants.--(1) A person receiving 
     training under the National Guard Challenge Program shall be 
     considered an employee of the United States for the purposes 
     of the following provisions of law:
       ``(A) Subchapter I of chapter 81 of title 5 (relating to 
     compensation of Federal employees for work injuries).
       ``(B) Section 1346(b) and chapter 171 of title 28 and any 
     other provision of law relating to the liability of the 
     United States for tortious conduct of employees of the United 
     States.
       ``(2) In the application of the provisions of law referred 
     to in paragraph (1)(A) to a person referred to in paragraph 
     (1)--
       ``(A) the person shall not be considered to be in the 
     performance of duty while the person is not at the assigned 
     location of training or other activity or duty authorized in 
     accordance with a program agreement referred to in subsection 
     (c), except when the person is traveling to or from that 
     location or is on pass from that training or other activity 
     or duty;
       ``(B) the person's monthly rate of pay shall be deemed to 
     be the minimum rate of pay provided for grade GS-2 of the 
     General Schedule under section 5332 of title 5; and
       ``(C) the entitlement of a person to receive compensation 
     for a disability shall begin on the day following the date on 
     which the person's participation in the National Guard 
     Challenge Program is terminated.
       ``(3) A person referred to in paragraph (1) may not be 
     considered an employee of the United States for any purpose 
     other than a purpose set forth in that paragraph.
       ``(j) Supplemental Resources.--(1) To carry out the 
     National Guard Challenge Program in a State, the Governor of 
     the State or, in the case of the District of Columbia, the 
     commanding general of the District of Columbia National Guard 
     may supplement funds made available under the program out of 
     other resources (including gifts) available to the Governor 
     or the commanding general. The Governor or the commanding 
     general may accept, use, and dispose of gifts or donations of 
     money, other property, or services for the National Guard 
     Challenge Program.
       ``(k) Report.--Within 90 days after the end of each fiscal 
     year, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a 
     report on the design, conduct, and effectiveness of the 
     National Guard Challenge Program during the preceding fiscal 
     year. In preparing the report, the Secretary shall coordinate 
     with the Governor of each State in which the National Guard 
     Challenge Program is carried out and, if the program is 
     carried out in the District of Columbia, with the commanding 
     general of the District of Columbia National Guard.
       ``(l) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) The term `State' includes the Commonwealth of Puerto 
     Rico, the territories, and the District of Columbia.
       ``(2) The term `school dropout' means an individual who is 
     no longer attending any school and who has not received a 
     secondary school diploma or a certificate from a program of 
     equivalency for such a diploma.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``509. National Guard Challenge Program of opportunities for civilian 
              youth.''.

     SEC. 1058. LEASE OF NON-EXCESS PERSONAL PROPERTY OF THE 
                   MILITARY DEPARTMENTS.

       (a) Receipt of Fair Market Value.--Subsection (b)(4) of 
     section 2667 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking out ``, in the case of the lease of real 
     property,''.
       (b) Competitive Selection.--Such section is further 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(g)(1) If a proposed lease under subsection (a) involves 
     only personal property, the lease term exceeds one year, and 
     the fair market value of the lease interest exceeds $100,000, 
     as determined by the Secretary concerned, the Secretary shall 
     use competitive procedures to select the lessee.
       ``(2) Not later than 45 days before entering into a lease 
     referred to in paragraph (1), the Secretary concerned shall 
     submit to Congress written notice describing the terms of the 
     proposed lease and the competitive procedures used to select 
     the lessee.''.

[[Page H4003]]

     SEC. 1059. COMMENDATION OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND 
                   GOVERNMENT CIVILIAN PERSONNEL WHO SERVED DURING 
                   THE COLD WAR.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
       (1) During the period of the Cold War, from the end of 
     World War II until the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, 
     the United States and the Soviet Union engaged in a global 
     military rivalry.
       (2) This rivalry, potentially the most dangerous military 
     confrontation in the history of mankind, has come to a close 
     without a direct superpower military conflict.
       (3) Military and civilian personnel of the Department of 
     Defense, personnel in the intelligence community, members of 
     the foreign service, and other officers and employees of the 
     United States faithfully performed their duties during the 
     Cold War.
       (4) Many such personnel performed their duties while 
     isolated from family and friends and served overseas under 
     frequently arduous conditions in order to protect the United 
     States and achieve a lasting peace.
       (5) The discipline and dedication of those personnel were 
     fundamental to the prevention of a superpower military 
     conflict.
       (b) Congressional Commendation.--The Congress hereby 
     commends, and expresses its gratitude and appreciation for, 
     the service and sacrifices of the members of the Armed Forces 
     and civilian personnel of the Government who contributed to 
     the historic victory in the Cold War.
  TITLE XI--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF FORMER SOVIET 
                                 UNION

     SEC. 1101. SPECIFICATION OF COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--For purposes of section 301 and other 
     provisions of this Act, Cooperative Threat Reduction programs 
     are the programs specified in subsection (b) of section 406 
     of title 10, United States Code, as added by section 1110.
       (b)  Fiscal Year 1998 Cooperative Threat Reduction Funds 
     Defined.--As used in this title, the term ``fiscal year 1998 
     Cooperative Threat Reduction funds'' means the funds 
     appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations 
     in section 301 for Cooperative Threat Reduction programs.

     SEC. 1102. FISCAL YEAR 1998 FUNDING ALLOCATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Of the fiscal year 1998 Cooperative Threat 
     Reduction funds, not more than the following amounts may be 
     obligated for the purposes specified:
       (1) For strategic offensive arms elimination in Russia, 
     $77,900,000.
       (2) For strategic nuclear arms elimination in Ukraine, 
     $76,700,000.
       (3) For fissile material containers in Russia, $7,000,000.
       (4) For planning and design of a chemical weapons 
     destruction facility in Russia, $14,400,000.
       (5) For planning, design, and construction of a storage 
     facility for Russian fissile material, $57,700,000.
       (6) For weapons storage security in Russia, $23,500,000.
       (7) For activities designated as Defense and Military-to-
     Military Contacts in Russia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan, 
     $7,000,000.
       (8) For military-to-military programs of the United States 
     that focus on countering the threat of proliferation of 
     weapons of mass destruction and that include the security 
     forces of the independent states of the former Soviet Union 
     other than Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakstan, 
     $2,000,000.
       (9) For activities designated as Other Assessments/
     Administrative Support $18,500,000.
       (b) Limited Authority To Vary Individual Amounts.--(1) If 
     the Secretary of Defense determines that it is necessary to 
     do so in the national interest, the Secretary may, subject to 
     paragraph (2), obligate amounts for the purposes stated in 
     any of the paragraphs of subsection (a) in excess of the 
     amount specified for those purposes in that paragraph, but 
     not in excess of 115 percent of that amount. However, the 
     total amount obligated for the purposes stated in the 
     paragraphs in subsection (a) may not by reason of the use of 
     the authority provided in the preceding sentence exceed the 
     sum of the amounts specified in those paragraphs.
       (2) An obligation for the purposes stated in any of the 
     paragraphs in subsection (a) in excess of the amount 
     specified in that paragraph may be made using the authority 
     provided in paragraph (1) only after--
       (A) the Secretary submits to Congress notification of the 
     intent to do so together with a complete discussion of the 
     justification for doing so; and
       (B) 15 days have elapsed following the date of the 
     notification.

     SEC. 1103. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR SPECIFIED 
                   PURPOSES.

       (a) In General.--No fiscal year 1998 Cooperative Threat 
     Reduction funds, and no funds appropriated for Cooperative 
     Threat Reduction programs for any prior fiscal year and 
     remaining available for obligation, may be obligated or 
     expended for any of the following purposes:
       (1) Conducting with Russia any peacekeeping exercise or 
     other peacekeeping-related activity.
       (2) Provision of housing.
       (3) Provision of assistance to promote environmental 
     restoration.
       (4) Provision of assistance to promote job retraining.
       (b) Limitation With Respect to Defense Conversion 
     Assistance.--None of the funds appropriated pursuant to this 
     Act or any other Act may be obligated or expended for the 
     provision of assistance to Russia or any other state of the 
     former Soviet Union to promote defense conversion.

     SEC. 1104. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS UNTIL SPECIFIED 
                   REPORTS ARE SUBMITTED.

       No fiscal year 1998 Cooperative Threat Reduction funds may 
     be obligated or expended until 15 days after the date that is 
     the latest of the following:
       (1) The date on which the President submits to Congress the 
     determinations required under subsection (c) of section 211 
     of Public Law 102-228 (22 U.S.C. 2551 note) with respect to 
     any certification transmitted to Congress under subsection 
     (b) of that section during the period beginning on September 
     23, 1996, and ending on the date of the enactment of this 
     Act.
       (2) The date on which the Secretary of Defense submits to 
     Congress the annual report required to be submitted not later 
     than January 31, 1998, under section 1206(a) of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 
     104-106; 110 Stat. 471; 22 U.S.C. 5955 note).
       (3) The date on which the Secretary of Defense submits to 
     Congress the report for fiscal year 1997 required under 
     section 1205(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 2883; 22 
     U.S.C. 5952 note).

     SEC. 1105. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS UNTIL SUBMISSION OF 
                   CERTIFICATION.

       (a) Limitation on Use of Funds Until Submission of 
     Certification.--No fiscal year 1998 Cooperative Threat 
     Reduction funds may be obligated or expended for strategic 
     offensive arms elimination projects in Russia related to the 
     START II Treaty (as defined in section 1302(d) of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 
     (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2701)) until 30 days after the 
     date on which the President submits to Congress a 
     certification in writing that--
       (1) implementation of the projects would benefit the 
     national security interest of the United States; and
       (2) Russia has agreed to share the cost for the projects.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 15 days after the date that the 
     President submits to Congress the certification under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the 
     congressional defense committees a report describing the 
     arrangement between the United States and Russia with respect 
     to the sharing of costs for strategic offensive arms 
     elimination projects in Russia related to the START II 
     Treaty.

     SEC. 1106. USE OF FUNDS FOR CHEMICAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION 
                   FACILITY.

       (a) Limitation on Use of Funds Until Submission of 
     Notifications to Congress.--No fiscal year 1998 Cooperative 
     Threat Reduction funds may be obligated or expended for 
     planning and design of a chemical weapons destruction 
     facility until 15 days after the date that is the later of 
     the following:
       (1) The date on which the Secretary of Defense submits to 
     Congress notification of an agreement between the United 
     States and Russia with respect to such chemical weapons 
     destruction facility that includes--
       (A) an agreement providing for a limitation on the 
     financial contribution by the United States for the facility;
       (B) an agreement that the United States will not pay the 
     costs for infrastructure determined by Russia to be necessary 
     to support the facility; and
       (C) an agreement on the site of the facility.
       (2) The date on which the Secretary of Defense submits to 
     Congress notification that the Government of Russia has 
     formally approved a plan--
       (A) that allows for the destruction of chemical weapons in 
     Russia; and
       (B) that commits Russia to pay a portion of the cost for 
     the facility.
       (b) Prohibition on Use of Funds for Facility 
     Construction.--No fiscal year 1998 Cooperative Threat 
     Reduction funds authorized to be obligated in section 
     1102(a)(4) for planning and design of a chemical weapons 
     destruction facility in Russia may be used for construction 
     of such facility.

     SEC. 1107. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR STORAGE FACILITY 
                   FOR RUSSIAN FISSILE MATERIAL.

       (a) Limitation on Use of Fiscal Year 1998 Funds.--No fiscal 
     year 1998 Cooperative Threat Reduction funds may be obligated 
     or expended for planning, design, or construction of a 
     storage facility for Russian fissile material until 15 days 
     after the date that is the later of the following:
       (1) The date on which the Secretary of Defense submits to 
     Congress notification of an agreement between the United 
     States and Russia that the total share of the cost to the 
     United States for such facility will not exceed $275,000,000.
       (2) The date on which the Secretary submits to Congress 
     notification of an agreement between the United States and 
     Russia incorporating the principle of transparency with 
     respect to the use of the facility.
       (b) Limitation on Use of Funds for Fiscal Years Before 
     Fiscal Year 1998.--None of the funds appropriated for 
     Cooperative Threat Reduction programs for a fiscal year 
     before fiscal year 1998 and remaining available for 
     obligation on the date of the enactment of this Act may be 
     obligated or expended for planning, design, or construction 
     of a storage facility for Russian fissile material until--
       (1) the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional 
     defense committees a report on the costs and schedule for the 
     planning, design, and construction of the facility and 
     transparency issues relating to the facility; and
       (2) 15 days have elapsed following the date of the 
     notification.

[[Page H4004]]

     SEC. 1108. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR WEAPONS STORAGE 
                   SECURITY.

       No fiscal year 1998 Cooperative Threat Reduction funds may 
     be obligated or expended for weapons storage security in 
     Russia until--
       (1) the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional 
     defense committees notification of an agreement between the 
     United States and Russia on audits and examinations with 
     respect to weapons storage security; and
       (2) 15 days have elapsed following the date of the 
     notification.

     SEC. 1109. REPORT TO CONGRESS ON ISSUES REGARDING PAYMENT OF 
                   TAXES OR DUTIES ON ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO 
                   RUSSIA UNDER COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION 
                   PROGRAMS.

       Not later than September 30, 1997, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to Congress a report on--
       (1) any disputes between the United States and Russia with 
     respect to payment by the United States of taxes or duties on 
     assistance provided to Russia under a Cooperative Threat 
     Reduction program, including a description of the nature of 
     each dispute, the amount of payment disputed, whether the 
     dispute was resolved, and if the dispute was resolved, the 
     means by which the dispute was resolved;
       (2) the actions taken by the Secretary to prevent disputes 
     between the United States and Russia with respect to payment 
     by the United States of taxes or duties on assistance 
     provided to Russia under a Cooperative Threat Reduction 
     program;
       (3) any agreements between the United States and Russia 
     with respect to payment by the United States of taxes or 
     duties on assistance provided to Russia under a Cooperative 
     Threat Reduction program; and
       (4) any proposals of the Secretary on actions that should 
     be taken to prevent disputes between the United States and 
     Russia with respect to payment by the United States of 
     taxes or duties on assistance provided to Russia under a 
     Cooperative Threat Reduction program.

     SEC. 1110. LIMITATION ON OBLIGATION OF FUNDS FOR A SPECIFIED 
                   PERIOD.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 20 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 406. Use of Cooperative Threat Reduction program 
       funds: limitation

       ``(a) In General.--In carrying out Cooperative Threat 
     Reduction programs during any fiscal year, the Secretary of 
     Defense may use funds appropriated for those programs only to 
     the extent that those funds were appropriated for that fiscal 
     year or for either of the two preceding fiscal years.
       ``(b) Definition of Cooperative Threat Reduction 
     Programs.--In this section, the term `Cooperative Threat 
     Reduction programs' means the following programs with respect 
     to states of the former Soviet Union:
       ``(1) Programs to facilitate the elimination, and the safe 
     and secure transportation and storage, of nuclear, chemical, 
     and other weapons and their delivery vehicles.
       ``(2) Programs to facilitate the safe and secure storage of 
     fissile materials derived from the elimination of nuclear 
     weapons.
       ``(3) Programs to prevent the proliferation of weapons, 
     components, and weapons-related technology and expertise.
       ``(4) Programs to expand military-to-military and defense 
     contacts.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``406. Use of Cooperative Threat Reduction program funds: 
              limitation.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--Section 406 of title 10, United States 
     Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with respect to 
     fiscal years beginning with fiscal year 1998.

     SEC. 1111. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.

       Funds appropriated pursuant to the authorization of 
     appropriations in section 301 for Cooperative Threat 
     Reduction programs shall be available for obligation for 
     three fiscal years.
              TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS

     SEC. 1201. REPORTS TO CONGRESS RELATING TO UNITED STATES 
                   FORCES IN BOSNIA.

       (a) Secretary of Defense Reports on Nonmilitary Tasks 
     Carried Out by United States Forces.--(1) The Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees 
     two reports identifying each activity being carried out, as 
     of the date of the report, by covered United States forces in 
     Bosnia that is an activity that (as determined by the 
     Secretary) is expected to be performed by an international or 
     local civilian organization once the multinational 
     peacekeeping mission in Bosnia is concluded.
       (2) For purposes of this paragraph, covered United States 
     forces in Bosnia are United States ground forces in the 
     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina that are assigned to the 
     multinational peacekeeping force known as the Stabilization 
     Force (SFOR) or to any other multinational peacekeeping force 
     that is a successor to the Stabilization Force.
       (3) The Secretary shall include in each report under 
     paragraph (1), for each activity identified in that 
     paragraph, the following:
       (A) The number of United States military personnel 
     involved.
       (B) Whether forces assigned to the SFOR (or successor 
     multinational force) from other nations also participated in 
     that activity.
       (C) The justification for using military forces rather than 
     civilian organizations to perform that activity.
       (4) The first report under paragraph (1) shall be submitted 
     not later than December 1, 1997. The second such report shall 
     be submitted not later than March 31, 1998.
       (b) Presidential Report on Political and Military 
     Conditions in Bosnia.--(1) Not later than December 15, 1997, 
     the President shall submit to Congress a report on the 
     political and military conditions in the Republic of Bosnia 
     and Herzegovina (hereafter in this section referred to as 
     Bosnia-Herzegovina). Of the funds available to the Secretary 
     of Defense for fiscal year 1998 for the operation of United 
     States ground forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina during that fiscal 
     year, no more than 60 percent may be expended before the 
     report is submitted.
       (2) The report under paragraph (1) shall include a 
     discussion of the following:
       (A) The date on which the transition from the multinational 
     force known as the Stabilization Force to the planned 
     multinational successor force to be known as the Deterrence 
     Force will occur and how the decision as to that date will 
     impact the estimates of costs associated with the operation 
     of United States ground forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina during 
     fiscal year 1998 as contained in the President's budget for 
     fiscal year 1998.
       (B) The military and political considerations that will 
     affect the decision to carry out such a transition.
       (C) The incremental, per-month cost increases the 
     Department of Defense resulting from a decision to delay the 
     transition from the Stabilization Force to the Deterrence 
     Force.
       (D) The unresolved political, economic, and military issues 
     within Bosnia-Herzegovina that may affect the estimate of the 
     Secretary of the costs of complete withdrawal of United 
     States forces from Bosnia-Herzegovina, the timeframe for 
     force reductions for such withdrawal, and the timing of 
     complete withdrawal of United States forces from Bosnia-
     Herzegovina.
       (E) A detailed explanation and timetable for carrying out 
     the President's commitment to withdraw all United States 
     ground forces from Bosnia-Herzegovina by the end of June 
     1998, including the planned date of commencement and 
     completion of the withdrawal.
       (F) Any plan to maintain or expand other Bosnia-related 
     operations (such as the operation designated as Operation 
     Deliberate Guard) if tensions in Bosnia-Herzegovina remain 
     sufficient to delay the transition from the Stabilization 
     Force to the Deterrence Force and the estimated cost 
     associated with each such operation.
       (G) Whether allied nations participating in the Bosnia 
     mission have similar plans to increase and maintain troop 
     strength or maintain ground forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina and, 
     if so, the identity of each such country and a description of 
     that country's plans.
       (3) As used in this subsection, the term ``Stabilization 
     Force'' (referred to as ``SFOR'') means the follow-on force 
     to the Implementation Force (known as ``IFOR'') in the 
     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and other countries in the 
     region, authorized under United Nations Security Council 
     Resolution 1008 (December 12, 1996).

     SEC. 1202. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF COUNTERPROLIFERATION 
                   AUTHORITIES.

       Section 1505 of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Control Act 
     of 1992 (title XV of Public Law 102-484; 22 U.S.C. 5859a) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (d)(3), by striking out ``or'' after 
     ``fiscal year 1996,'' and by inserting ``, or $15,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 1998'' before the period at the end; and
       (2) in subsection (f), by striking out ``1997'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``1998''.

     SEC. 1203. REPORT ON FUTURE MILITARY CAPABILITIES AND 
                   STRATEGY OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA.

       (a) Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall prepare a 
     report, in both classified and unclassified form, on the 
     future pattern of military modernization of the People's 
     Republic of China. The report shall address the probable 
     course of military-technological development in the People's 
     Liberation Army and the development of Chinese grand 
     strategy, security strategy, and military strategy, and of 
     military organizations and operational concepts, through 
     2015.
       (b) Matters To Be Included.--The report shall include 
     analyses and forecasts of the following:
       (1) The goals of Chinese grand strategy, security strategy, 
     and military strategy.
       (2) Trends in Chinese political grand strategy meant to 
     establish the People's Republic of China as the leading 
     political power in the Asia-Pacific region and as a political 
     and military presence in other regions of the world, 
     including Central Asia, Southwest Asia, Europe, and Latin 
     America.
       (3) Developments in Chinese military doctrine, focusing on 
     (but not limited to) efforts to exploit the emerging 
     Revolution in Military Affairs or to conduct preemptive 
     strikes.
       (4) Efforts by the People's Republic of China to develop 
     long-range air-to-air or air defense missiles designed to 
     target special support aircraft such as Airborne Warning and 
     Control System (AWACS) aircraft, Joint Surveillance and 
     Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) aircraft, or other 
     command and control, intelligence, airborne early warning, or 
     electronic warfare aircraft.
       (5) Efforts by the People's Republic of China to develop a 
     capability to conduct ``information warfare'' at the 
     strategic, operational, and tactical levels of war.
       (6) Efforts by the People's Republic of China to develop a 
     capability to establish control of space or to deny access 
     and use of military and commercial space systems in times of 
     crisis or war, including programs to place weapons in space 
     or to develop earth-based weapons capable of attacking space-
     based systems.
       (7) Trends that would lead the People's Republic of China 
     toward the development of advanced intelligence, 
     surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities, including 
     gaining access to commercial or third-party systems with 
     military significance.
       (8) Efforts by the People's Republic of China to develop 
     highly accurate and stealthy ballistic

[[Page H4005]]

     and cruise missiles, including sea-launched cruise missiles, 
     particularly in numbers sufficient to conduct attacks capable 
     of overwhelming projected defense capabilities in the Asia-
     Pacific region.
       (9) Development by the People's Republic of China of 
     command and control networks, particularly those capable of 
     battle management of long-range precision strikes.
       (10) Programs of the People's Republic of China involving 
     unmanned aerial vehicles, particularly those with extended 
     ranges or loitering times or potential strike capabilities.
       (11) Exploitation by the People's Republic of China for 
     military purposes of the Global Positioning System or other 
     similar systems (including commercial land surveillance 
     satellites), with such analysis and forecasts focusing 
     particularly on those signs indicative of an attempt to 
     increase accuracy of weapons or situational awareness of 
     operating forces.
       (12) Development by the People's Republic of China of 
     capabilities for denial of sea control, including such 
     systems as advanced sea mines, improved submarine 
     capabilities, or land-based sea-denial systems.
       (13) Continued development by the People's Republic of 
     China of follow-on forces, particularly forces capable of 
     rapid air or amphibious assault.
       (c) Submission of Report.--The report shall be submitted to 
     Congress not later than March 15, 1998.

     SEC. 1204. TEMPORARY USE OF GENERAL PURPOSE VEHICLES AND 
                   NONLETHAL MILITARY EQUIPMENT UNDER ACQUISITION 
                   AND CROSS SERVICING AGREEMENTS.

       Section 2350(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking out ``other items'' in the second sentence and 
     all that follows through ``United States Munitions List'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``other nonlethal items of military 
     equipment which are not designated as significant military 
     equipment on the United States Munitions List promulgated''.
            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

     SEC. 2001. SHORT TITLE.

       This division may be cited as the ``Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998''.
                            TITLE XXI--ARMY

     SEC. 2101. AUTHORIZED ARMY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION 
                   PROJECTS.

       (a) Inside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2104(a)(1), the Secretary of the Army may acquire real 
     property and carry out military construction projects for the 
     installations and locations inside the United States, and in 
     the amounts, set forth in the following table:


                     Army: Inside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
             State                       Location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona........................  Fort Huachuca..........     $20,000,000
California.....................  Fort Irwin.............     $11,150,000
                                 Naval Weapons Station,      $23,000,000
                                  Concord.
Colorado.......................  Fort Carson............     $47,300,000
Georgia........................  Fort Gordon............     $22,000,000
                                 Hunter Army Air Field,      $54,000,000
                                  Fort Stewart..........
Hawaii.........................  Schofield Barracks.....     $44,000,000
Indiana........................  Crane Army Ammunition        $7,700,000
                                  Activity.
Kansas.........................  Fort Leavenworth.......     $63,000,000
                                 Fort Riley.............     $25,800,000
Kentucky.......................  Fort Campbell..........     $43,700,000
                                 Fort Knox..............      $7,200,000
Missouri.......................  Fort Leonard Wood......      $3,200,000
New Jersey.....................  Fort Monmouth..........      $2,050,000
New Mexico.....................  White Sands Missile          $6,900,000
                                  Range.
New York.......................  Fort Drum..............     $24,400,000
North Carolina.................  Fort Bragg.............     $61,900,000
Oklahoma.......................  Fort Sill..............     $25,000,000
South Carolina.................  Fort Jackson...........      $5,400,000
                                 Naval Weapons Station,       $7,700,000
                                  Charleston.
Texas..........................  Fort Bliss.............      $7,700,000
                                 Fort Hood..............     $27,200,000
                                 Fort Sam Houston.......     $16,000,000
Virginia.......................  Fort A.P. Hill.........      $5,400,000
                                 Fort Myer..............      $8,200,000
                                 Fort Story.............      $2,050,000
Washington.....................  Fort Lewis.............     $33,000,000
CONUS Classified...............  Classified Location....      $6,500,000
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................    $614,900,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       
       (b) Outside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2104(a)(2), the Secretary of the Army may acquire real 
     property and carry out military construction projects for the 
     locations outside the United States, and in the amounts, set 
     forth in the following table:


                     Army: Outside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
            Country                      Location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Germany........................  Ansbach................     $22,000,000
                                 Heidelberg.............      $8,800,000
                                 Mannheim...............      $6,200,000
                                 Military Support Group,      $6,000,000
                                  Kaiserslautern........
Korea..........................  Camp Casey.............      $5,100,000

[[Page H4006]]

 
                                 Camp Castle............      $8,400,000
                                 Camp Humphreys.........     $32,000,000
                                 Camp Red Cloud.........     $23,600,000
                                 Camp Stanley...........      $7,000,000
Overseas Classified............  Overseas Classified....     $37,000,000
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................    $156,100,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2102. FAMILY HOUSING.

       (a) Construction and Acquisition.--Using amounts 
     appropriated pursuant to authorization of appropriations in 
     section 2104(a)(5)(A), the Secretary of the Army may 
     construct or acquire family housing units (including land 
     acquisition) at the installations, for the purposes, and in 
     the amounts set forth in the following table:


                                              Army: Family Housing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or Location             Purpose                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona...............................  Fort Huachuca............  55 Units.....................      $8,000,000
Hawaii................................  Schofield Barracks.......  132 Units....................     $26,600,000
Maryland..............................  Fort George Meade........  56 Units.....................      $7,900,000
New Jersey............................  Picatinny Arsenal........  35 Units.....................      $7,300,000
North Carolina........................  Fort Bragg...............  174 Units....................     $20,150,000
Texas.................................  Fort Bliss...............  91 Units.....................     $12,900,000
                                        Fort Hood................  130 Units....................     $18,800,000
                                                                                                 ---------------
                                                                     Total......................    $103,950,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       
       (b) Planning and Design.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2104(a)(5)(A), the Secretary of the Army may carry out 
     architectural and engineering services and construction 
     design activities with respect to the construction or 
     improvement of family housing units in an amount not to 
     exceed $9,550,000.

     SEC. 2103. IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING UNITS.

       Subject to section 2825 of title 10, United States Code, 
     and using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization 
     of appropriations in sections 2104(a)(5)(A), the Secretary of 
     the Army may improve existing military family housing units 
     in an amount not to exceed $89,200,000.

     SEC. 2104. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, ARMY.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     1997, for military construction, land acquisition, and 
     military family housing functions of the Department of the 
     Army in the total amount of $2,055,364,000 as follows:
       (1) For military construction projects inside the United 
     States authorized by section 2101(a), $425,850,000.
       (2) For the military construction projects outside the 
     United States authorized by section 2101(b), $162,600,000.
       (3) For unspecified minor military construction projects 
     authorized by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, 
     $6,000,000.
       (4) For architectural and engineering services and 
     construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United 
     States Code, $71,577,000.
       (5) For military family housing functions:
       (A) For construction and acquisition, planning and design 
     and improvement of military family housing and facilities, 
     $200,400,000.
       (B) For support of military family housing (including the 
     functions described in section 2833 of title 10, United 
     States Code), $1,148,937,000.
       (6) For the construction of the National Range Control 
     Center, White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, authorized by 
     section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (division B of Public Law 104-201; 
     110 Stat. 2763), $18,000,000.
       (7) For the construction of the whole barracks complex 
     renewal, Fort Knox, Kentucky, authorized by section 2101(a) 
     of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1997 (division B of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2763), 
     $22,000,000.
       (b) Limitation on Total Cost of Construction Projects.--
     Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 
     2853 of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost 
     variation authorized by law, the total cost of all projects 
     carried out under section 2101 of this Act may not exceed--
       (1) the total amount authorized to be appropriated under 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a);
       (2) $14,400,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2101(a) for the construction of the Force XXI Soldier 
     Development School at Fort Hood, Texas);
       (3) $24,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2101(a) for rail yard expansion at Fort Carson, 
     Colorado);
       (4) $43,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2101(a) for the construction of a disciplinary 
     barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas);
       (5) $36,500,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2101(a) for the construction of a barracks at Hunter 
     Army Airfield, Fort Stewart, Georgia);
       (6) $44,200,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2101(a) for the construction of a barracks at Fort 
     Bragg, North Carolina); and
       (7) $17,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2101(a) for the construction of a barracks at Fort 
     Sill, Oklahoma).

     SEC. 2105. CORRECTION IN AUTHORIZED USES OF FUNDS, FORT 
                   IRWIN, CALIFORNIA.

       In the case of amounts appropriated pursuant to the 
     authorization of appropriations in section 2104(a)(1) of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 
     (division B of Public Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 3029) and 
     section 2104(a)(1) of the Military Construction Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (division B of Public Law 104-106; 
     110 Stat. 524) for a military construction project for Fort 
     Irwin, California, involving the construction of an air field 
     for the National Training Center at Barstow-Daggett, 
     California, the Secretary of the Army may use such amounts 
     for the construction of a heliport at the same location.
                            TITLE XXII--NAVY

     SEC. 2201. AUTHORIZED NAVY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION 
                   PROJECTS.

       (a) Inside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2204(a)(1), the Secretary of the Navy may acquire real 
     property and carry out military construction projects for 
     the installations and locations inside the United States, 
     and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:


                     Navy: Inside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
             State                       Location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona........................  Marine Corps Air            $12,250,000
                                  Station, Yuma.........
                                 Navy Detachment, Camp       $11,426,000
                                  Navajo................
California.....................  Marine Corps Air            $24,150,000
                                  Station, Camp
                                  Pendleton.............

[[Page H4007]]

 
                                 Marine Corps Air             $8,700,000
                                  Station, Miramar......
                                 Marine Corps Air-Ground      $3,810,000
                                  Combat Center,
                                  Twentynine Palms......
                                 Marine Corps Base, Camp     $60,069,000
                                  Pendleton.............
                                 Naval Air Facility, El      $11,000,000
                                  Centro................
                                 Naval Air Station,          $19,600,000
                                  North Island..........
                                 Naval Amphibious Base,      $10,100,000
                                  Coronado..............
                                 Naval Construction           $3,200,000
                                  Battalion Center, Port
                                  Hueneme...............
Connecticut....................  Naval Submarine Base,       $18,300,000
                                  New London............
Florida........................  Naval Air Station,           $3,480,000
                                  Jacksonville..........
                                 Naval Air Station,           $1,300,000
                                  Whiting Field.
                                 Naval Station, Mayport.     $17,940,000
Hawaii.........................  Marine Corps Air            $19,000,000
                                  Station, Kaneohe Bay..
                                 Naval Communications         $3,900,000
                                  and Telecommunications
                                  Area Master Station
                                  Eastern Pacific,
                                  Honolulu..............
                                 Naval Station, Pearl        $25,000,000
                                  Harbor.
Illinois.......................  Naval Training Center,      $41,220,000
                                  Great Lakes...........
Indiana........................  Naval Surface Warfare        $4,120,000
                                  Center, Crane.........
Maryland.......................  Naval Electronics            $2,610,000
                                  System Command, St.
                                  Ingoes................
Mississippi....................  Naval Air Station,           $7,050,000
                                  Meridian..............
North Carolina.................  Marine Corps Air             $8,800,000
                                  Station, Cherry Point.
                                 Marine Corps Air            $19,900,000
                                  Station, New River....
Rhode Island...................  Naval Undersea Warfare       $8,900,000
                                  Center Division,
                                  Newport...............
South Carolina.................  Marine Corps Air            $17,730,000
                                  Station, Beaufort.....
                                 Marine Corps Reserve         $3,200,000
                                  Detachment Parris
                                  Island................
Texas..........................  Naval Air Station,             $800,000
                                  Corpus Christi........
Virginia.......................  AEGIS Training Center,       $6,600,000
                                  Dahlgren.
                                 Fleet Combat Training        $7,000,000
                                  Center, Dam Neck......
                                 Naval Air Station,          $18,240,000
                                  Norfolk...............
                                 Naval Air Station,          $34,000,000
                                  Oceana.
                                 Naval Amphibious Base,       $8,685,000
                                  Little Creek..........
                                 Naval Shipyard,             $29,410,000
                                  Norfolk, Portsmouth...
                                 Naval Station, Norfolk.     $18,850,000
                                 Naval Surface Warfare       $13,880,000
                                  Center, Dahlgren......
                                 Naval Weapons Station,      $14,547,000
                                  Yorktown..............
Washington.....................  Naval Air Station,           $1,100,000
                                  Whidbey Island.
                                 Puget Sound Naval            $4,400,000
                                  Shipyard, Bremerton...
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................    $524,267,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       
       (b) Outside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2204(a)(2), the Secretary of the Navy may acquire real 
     property and carry out military construction projects for the 
     installations and locations outside the United States, and in 
     the amounts, set forth in the following table:


                     Navy: Outside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
            Country                      Location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bahrain........................  Administrative Support      $30,100,000
                                  Unit, Bahrain.........
Guam...........................  Naval Communications         $4,050,000
                                  and Telecommunications
                                  Area Master Station
                                  Western Pacific, Guam.
Italy..........................  Naval Air Station,          $21,440,000
                                  Sigonella.
                                 Naval Support Activity,      $8,200,000
                                  Naples.
Puerto Rico....................  Naval Station,                 $500,000
                                  Roosevelt Roads.
United Kingdom.................  Joint Maritime               $2,330,000
                                  Communications Center,
                                  St. Mawgan............
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................     $66,620,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2202. FAMILY HOUSING.

       (a) Construction and Acquisition.--Using amounts 
     appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations 
     in section 2204(a)(5)(A), the Secretary of the Navy may 
     construct or acquire family housing units (including land 
     acquisition) at the installations, for the purposes, and in 
     the amounts set forth in the following table:


                                              Navy: Family Housing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or Location             Purpose                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California............................  Marine Corps Air Station,  166 Units....................     $28,881,000
                                         Miramar.................

[[Page H4008]]

 
                                        Marine Corps Air-Ground    132 Units....................     $23,891,000
                                         Combat Center,
                                         Twentynine Palms........
                                        Marine Corps Base, Camp    171 Units....................     $22,518,000
                                         Pendleton...............
                                        Naval Air Station,         128 Units....................     $23,226,000
                                         Lemoore.................
                                        Naval Complex, San Diego.  94 Units.....................     $13,500,000
Hawaii................................  Naval Complex, Pearl       84 Units.....................     $17,900,000
                                         Harbor..................
Louisiana.............................  Naval Complex, New         100 Units....................     $11,930,000
                                         Orleans.................
Texas.................................  Naval Complex, Kingsville  212 Units....................     $22,250,000
                                         and Corpus Christi......
Washington............................  Naval Complex, Bangor....  118 Units....................     $15,700,000
                                                                                                 ---------------
                                                                     Total......................    $179,796,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       
       (b) Planning and Design.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriation in section 
     2204(a)(5)(A), the Secretary of the Navy may carry out 
     architectural and engineering services and construction 
     design activities with respect to the construction or 
     improvement of military family housing units in an amount not 
     to exceed $15,100,000.

     SEC. 2203. IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING UNITS.

       Subject to section 2825 of title 10, United States Code, 
     and using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization 
     of appropriations in section 2204(a)(5)(A), the Secretary of 
     the Navy may improve existing military family housing units 
     in an amount not to exceed $214,282,000.

     SEC. 2204. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, NAVY.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     1997, for military construction, land acquisition, and 
     military family housing functions of the Department of the 
     Navy in the total amount of $2,053,025,000 as follows:
       (1) For military construction projects inside the United 
     States authorized by section 2201(a), $524,267,000.
       (2) For military construction projects outside the United 
     States authorized by section 2201(b), $66,120,000.
       (3) For unspecified minor construction projects authorized 
     by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, $9,960,000.
       (4) For architectural and engineering services and 
     construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United 
     States Code, $46,659,000.
       (5) For military family housing functions:
       (A) For construction and acquisition, planning and design 
     and improvement of military family housing and facilities, 
     $409,178,000.
       (B) For support of military housing (including functions 
     described in section 2833 of title 10, United States Code), 
     $976,504,000.
       (6) For construction of bachelor enlisted quarters at Naval 
     Hospital, Great Lakes, Illinois, authorized by section 
     2201(a) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1997 (division B of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 
     2766), $5,200,000.
       (7) For construction of bachelor enlisted quarters at Naval 
     Station, Roosevelt Roads, Puerto Rico, authorized by section 
     2201(a) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1997 (division B of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 
     2767), $14,600,000.
       (8) For construction of a large anecohic chamber facility 
     at Patuxent River Naval Air Warfare Center, Maryland, 
     authorized by section 2201(a) of the Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (division B of Public 
     Law 102-484; 106 Stat. 2590), $9,000,000.
       (b) Limitation on Total Cost of Construction Projects.--
     Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 
     2853 of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost 
     variation authorized by law, the total cost of all projects 
     carried out under section 2201 of this Act may not exceed the 
     total amount authorized to be appropriated under paragraphs 
     (1) and (2) of subsection (a).
       (c) Adjustment.--The total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to paragraphs (1) through (8) of 
     subsection (a) is the sum of the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated in such paragraphs, reduced by $8,463,000, which 
     represents the combination of project savings resulting from 
     favorable bids, reduced overhead costs, and cancellations due 
     to force structure changes.

     SEC. 2205. AUTHORIZATION OF MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT AT 
                   NAVAL AIR STATION, PASCAGOULA, MISSISSIPPI, FOR 
                   WHICH FUNDS HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATED.

       (a) Authorization.--The table in section 2201(a) of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 
     (division B of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2766) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking out the amount identified as the total and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$594,982,000''; and
       (2) by inserting after the item relating to Stennis Space 
     Center, Mississippi, the following new item:


------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Naval Air Station,           $4,990,000
                                  Pascagoula.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 2204(a) of such Act 
     (110 Stat. 2769) is amended--
       (1) in the matter preceding the paragraphs, by striking out 
     ``$2,213,731,000'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``$2,218,721,000''; and
       (2) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``$579,312,000'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$584,302,000''.
                         TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE

     SEC. 2301. AUTHORIZED AIR FORCE CONSTRUCTION AND LAND 
                   ACQUISITION PROJECTS.

       (a) Inside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2304(a)(1), the Secretary of the Air Force may acquire real 
     property and carry out military construction projects for the 
     installations and locations inside the United States, and in 
     the amounts, set forth in the following table:


                   Air Force: Inside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
             State                       Location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama........................  Maxwell Air Force Base.     $14,874,000
Alaska.........................  Clear Air Station......     $67,069,000
                                 Eielson Air Force Base.      $7,764,000
                                 Indian Mountain........      $1,991,000
Arizona........................  Luke Air Force Base....     $10,000,000
Arkansas.......................  Little Rock Air Force        $3,400,000
                                  Base.
California.....................  Edwards Air Force Base.      $2,887,000
                                 Vandenberg Air Force        $26,876,000
                                  Base.
Colorado.......................  Buckley Air National         $6,718,000
                                  Guard Base.

[[Page H4009]]

 
                                 Falcon Air Force            $10,551,000
                                  Station.
                                 Peterson Air Force Base      $4,081,000
                                 United States Air Force     $15,229,000
                                  Academy.
Florida........................  Eglin Auxiliary Field 9      $6,470,000
                                 MacDill Air Force Base.      $1,543,000
Georgia........................  Moody Air Force Base...      $9,100,000
                                 Robins Air Force Base..     $27,763,000
Idaho..........................  Mountain Home Air Force     $17,719,000
                                  Base.
Kansas.........................  McConnell Air Force         $11,669,000
                                  Base.
Louisiana......................  Barksdale Air Force         $19,410,000
                                  Base.
Mississippi....................  Keesler Air Force Base.     $30,855,000
Missouri.......................  Whiteman Air Force Base     $40,419,000
Nevada.........................  Nellis Air Force Base..      $1,950,000
New Jersey.....................  McGuire Air Force Base.     $18,754,000
North Carolina.................  Pope Air Force Base....     $20,656,000
North Dakota...................  Grand Forks Air Force        $8,560,000
                                  Base.
                                 Minot Air Force Base...      $5,200,000
Ohio...........................  Wright-Patterson Air        $19,350,000
                                  Force Base.
Oklahoma.......................  Tinker Air Force Base..      $9,655,000
                                 Vance Air Force Base...      $6,700,000
South Carolina.................  Shaw Air Force Base....      $6,072,000
South Dakota...................  Ellsworth Air Force          $6,600,000
                                  Base.
Tennessee......................  Arnold Air Force Base..     $20,650,000
Texas..........................  Dyess Air Force Base...     $10,000,000
                                 Laughlin Air Force Base       4,800,000
                                 Randolph Air Force Base      $2,488,000
Utah...........................  Hill Air Force Base....      $6,470,000
Virginia.......................  Langley Air Force Base.      $4,031,000
Washington.....................  Fairchild Air Force          $7,366,000
                                  Base.
                                 McChord Air Force Base.      $9,655,000
CONUS Classified...............  Classified Location....      $6,175,000
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................    $511,520,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       
       (b) Outside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2304(a)(2), the Secretary of the Air Force may acquire real 
     property and carry out military construction projects for the 
     installations and locations outside the United States, and in 
     the amounts, set forth in the following table:


                  Air Force: Outside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
            Country                      Location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Germany........................  Spangdahlem Air Base...     $18,500,000
Italy..........................  Aviano Air Base........     $15,220,000
Korea..........................  Kunsan Air Base........     $10,325,000
                                 Osan Air Base..........     $11,100,000
Portugal.......................  Lajes Field, Azores....      $4,800,000
United Kingdom.................  Royal Air Force,            $11,400,000
                                  Lakenheath.
Overseas Classified............  Classified Location....     $31,100,000
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................    $102,445,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2302. FAMILY HOUSING.

       (a) Construction and Acquisition.--Using amounts 
     appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations 
     in section 2304(a)(5)(A), the Secretary of the Air Force may 
     construct or acquire family housing units (including land 
     acquisition) at the installations, for the purposes, and 
     in the amounts set forth in the following table:


                                            Air Force: Family Housing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or Location             Purpose                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona...............................  Davis-Monthan Air Force    70 Units.....................      $9,800,000
                                         Base....................
California............................  Edwards Air Force Base...  95 Units.....................     $16,800,000
                                        Travis Air Force Base....  70 Units.....................      $9,714,000
                                        Vandenberg Air Force Base  108 Units....................     $17,100,000
Delaware..............................  Dover Air Force Base.....  Ancillary Facility...........        $831,000
District of Columbia..................  Bolling Air Force Base...  46 Units.....................      $5,100,000

[[Page H4010]]

 
Florida...............................  MacDill Air Force Base...  58 Units.....................     $10,000,000
                                        Tyndall Air Force Base...  32 Units.....................      $4,200,000
Georgia...............................  Robins Air Force Base....  60 Units.....................      $6,800,000
Idaho.................................  Mountain Home Air Force    60 Units.....................     $11,032,000
                                         Base....................
Kansas................................  McConnell Air Force Base.  19 Units.....................      $2,951,000
                                        McConnell Air Force Base.  Ancillary Facility...........        $581,000
Mississippi...........................  Columbus Air Force Base..  50 Units.....................      $6,200,000
                                        Keesler Air Force Base...  40 Units.....................      $5,000,000
Montana...............................  Malmstrom Air Force Base.  28 Units.....................      $4,842,000
New Mexico............................  Kirtland Air Force Base..  180 Units....................     $20,900,000
North Dakota..........................  Grand Forks Air Force      42 Units.....................      $7,936,000
                                         Base....................
Texas.................................  Dyess Air Force Base.....  70 Units.....................     $10,503,000
                                        Goodfellow Air Force Base  3 Units......................        $500,000
                                        Lackland Air Force Base..  50 Units.....................      $7,400,000
                                        Sheppard Air Force Base..  40 Units.....................      $7,400,000
Wyoming...............................  F. E. Warren Air Force     52 Units.....................      $6,853,000
                                         Base....................
                                                                                                 ---------------
                                                                     Total......................    $172,443,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       
       (b) Planning and Design.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2304(a)(5)(A), the Secretary of the Air Force may carry out 
     architectural and engineering services and construction 
     design activities with respect to the construction or 
     improvement of military family housing units in an amount not 
     to exceed $11,971,000.

     SEC. 2303. IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING UNITS.

       Subject to section 2835 of title 10, United States Code, 
     and using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization 
     of appropriations in section 2304(a)(5)(A), the Secretary of 
     the Air Force may improve existing military family housing 
     units in an amount not to exceed $156,995,000.

     SEC. 2304. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, AIR FORCE.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     1997, for military construction, land acquisition, and 
     military family housing functions of the Department of the 
     Air Force in the total amount of $1,810,090,000 as follows:
       (1) For military construction projects inside the United 
     States authorized by section 2301(a), $505,435,000.
       (2) For military construction projects outside the United 
     States authorized by section 2301(b), $102,445,000.
       (3) For unspecified minor construction projects authorized 
     by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, $8,545,000.
       (4) For architectural and engineering services and 
     construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United 
     States Code, $45,880,000.
       (5) For military housing functions:
       (A) For construction and acquisition, planning and design 
     and improvement of military family housing and facilities, 
     $341,409,000.
       (B) For support of military family housing (including the 
     functions described in section 2833 of title 10, United 
     States Code), $830,234,000.
       (b) Limitation on Total Cost of Construction Projects.--
     Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 
     2853 of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost 
     variation authorized by law, the total cost of all projects 
     carried out under section 2301 of this Act may not exceed--
       (1) the total amount authorized to be appropriated under 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a); and
       (2) $11,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2301(a) for the construction of a B-2 low 
     observability restoration facility at Whiteman Air Force 
     Base, Missouri).
       (c) Adjustment.--The total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to paragraphs (1) through (5) of 
     subsection (a) is the sum of the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated in such paragraphs, reduced by $23,858,000, 
     which represents the combination of project savings resulting 
     from favorable bids, reduced overhead costs, and 
     cancellations due to force structure changes.

     SEC. 2305. AUTHORIZATION OF MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT AT 
                   MCCONNELL AIR FORCE BASE, KANSAS, FOR WHICH 
                   FUNDS HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATED.

       (a) Authorization.--The table in section 2301(a) of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 
     (division B of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2771) is amended 
     in the item relating to McConnell Air Force Base, Kansas, by 
     striking out ``$19,130,000'' in the amount column and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$25,830,000''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 2304 of such Act (110 
     Stat. 2774) is amended--
       (1) in the matter preceding the paragraph, by striking out 
     ``$1,894,594,000'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``$1,901,294,000'' and
       (2) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``$603,834,000'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$610,534,000''.
                      TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES

     SEC. 2401. AUTHORIZED DEFENSE AGENCIES CONSTRUCTION AND LAND 
                   ACQUISITION PROJECTS.

       (a) Inside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2405(a)(1), the Secretary of Defense may acquire real 
     property and carry out military construction projects for the 
     installations and locations inside the United States, and in 
     the amounts, set forth in the following table:


               Defense Agencies: Inside the United States.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
             Agency                      Location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defense Commissary Agency......  Fort Lee, Virginia.....      $9,300,000
Defense Finance and Accounting   Columbus Center, Ohio..      $9,722,000
 Service.......................
                                 Naval Air Station,           $6,906,000
                                  Millington, Tennessee.
                                 Naval Station, Norfolk,     $12,800,000
                                  Virginia..............
                                 Naval Station, Pearl        $10,000,000
                                  Harbor, Hawaii........
Defense Intelligence Agency....  Bolling Air Force Base,      $7,000,000
                                  District of Columbia..
                                 Redstone Arsenal,           $32,700,000
                                  Alabama.
Defense Logistics Agency.......  Defense Distribution        $16,656,000
                                  Depot--DDNV, Virginia.

[[Page H4011]]

 
                                 Defense Distribution        $15,500,000
                                  New Cumberland--DDSP,
                                  Pennsylvania..........
                                 Defense Fuel Support        $22,100,000
                                  Point, Craney Island,
                                  Virginia..............
                                 Defense General Supply       $5,200,000
                                  Center, Richmond
                                  (DLA), Virginia.......
                                 Elmendorf Air Force         $21,700,000
                                  Base, Alaska..........
                                 Naval Air Station,           $9,800,000
                                  Jacksonville, Florida.
                                 Truax Field, Wisconsin.      $4,500,000
                                 Westover Air Reserve         $4,700,000
                                  Base, Massachusetts...
                                 CONUS Various, CONUS        $11,275,000
                                  Various...............
Defense Medical Facilities       Fort Campbell, Kentucky     $13,600,000
 Office........................
                                 Fort Detrick, Maryland.      $5,300,000
                                 Fort Lewis, Washington.      $5,000,000
                                 Hill Air Force Base,         $3,100,000
                                  Utah.
                                 Holloman Air Force           $3,000,000
                                  Base, New Mexico......
                                 Lackland Air Force           $3,000,000
                                  Base, Texas...........
                                 Marine Corps Combat Dev     $19,000,000
                                  Com, Quantico,
                                  Virginia..............
                                 McGuire Air Force Base,     $35,217,000
                                  New Jersey............
                                 Naval Air Station,           $2,750,000
                                  Pensacola, Florida....
                                 Naval Station, Everett,      $7,500,000
                                  Washington............
                                 Naval Station, San           $2,100,000
                                  Diego, California.....
                                 Naval Submarine Base,        $2,300,000
                                  New London,
                                  Connecticut...........
                                 Robins Air Force Base,      $19,000,000
                                  Georgia...............
                                 Tinker Air Force Base,       $6,500,000
                                  Oklahoma..............
                                 Wright-Patterson Air         $2,750,000
                                  Force Base, Ohio......
National Security Agency.......  Fort Meade, Maryland...     $29,800,000
Special Operations Command.....  Eglin Auxiliary Field        $6,100,000
                                  3, Florida.
                                 Fort Benning, Georgia..     $12,314,000
                                 Fort Bragg, North            $1,500,000
                                  Carolina.
                                 Hurlburt Field, Florida      $2,450,000
                                 Naval Amphibious Base,       $7,400,000
                                  Coronado, California..
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................    $389,440,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       
       (b) Outside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2405(a)(2), the Secretary of Defense may acquire real 
     property and carry out military construction projects for the 
     installations and locations outside the United States, and in 
     the amounts, set forth in the following table:


              Defense Agencies: Outside the United States.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
             Agency                      Location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ballistic Missile Defense        Pacific Missile Range,       $4,565,000
 Organization.                    Kwajalein Atoll.......
Defense Logistics Agency.......  Defense Fuel Support        $16,000,000
                                  Point, Guam...........
                                 Moron Air Base, Spain..     $14,400,000
Defense Medical Facilities       Andersen Air Force           $3,700,000
 Office........................   Base, Guam............
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................     $38,665,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2402. MILITARY HOUSING PLANNING AND DESIGN.

       Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of 
     appropriations in section 2405(a)(13)(A), the Secretary of 
     Defense may carry out architectural and engineering services 
     and construction design activities with respect to the 
     construction or improvement of military family housing units 
     in an amount not to exceed $50,000.

     SEC. 2403. IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING UNITS.

       Subject to section 2825 of title 10, United States Code, 
     and using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization 
     of appropriation in section 2405(a)(12)(A), the Secretary of 
     Defense may improve existing military family housing units in 
     an amount not to exceed $4,900,000.

     SEC. 2404. ENERGY CONSERVATION PROJECTS.

       Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of 
     appropriations in section 2405(a)(10), the Secretary of 
     Defense may carry out energy conservation projects under 
     section 2865 of title 10, United States Code.

     SEC. 2405. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, DEFENSE AGENCIES.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     1997, for military construction, land acquisition, and 
     military family housing functions of the Department of 
     Defense (other than the military departments), in the total 
     amount of $2,711,761,000 as follows:
       (1) For military construction projects inside the United 
     States authorized by section 2401(a), $382,390,000
       (2) For military construction projects outside the United 
     States authorized by section 2401(a), $34,965,000.
       (3) For military construction projects at Anniston Army 
     Depot, Alabama, ammunition demilitarization facility, 
     authorized by section 2101(a) of the Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (division B of the 
     Public Law 102-484; 106 Stat. 2587), which was originally 
     authorized as an Army construction project, but which became 
     a Defense Agencies construction project by reason of the 
     amendments made by section 142 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337; 
     108 Stat. 2689), $9,900,000.
       (4) For military construction projects at Walter Reed Army 
     Institute of Research, Maryland, hospital replacement, 
     authorized by section 2401(a) of the Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (division B of Public 
     Law 102-484; 106 Stat. 2599), $20,000,000.
       (5) For military construction projects at Umatilla Army 
     Depot, Oregon, authorized by section 2401(a) of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (division 
     B of the Public Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 3040), as amended by 
     section 2407 of the Military Construction Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1996 (110 Stat. 539) and section 2407(2) of 
     this Act, $57,427,000.

[[Page H4012]]

       (6) For military construction projects at Defense Finance 
     and Accounting Service, Columbus, Ohio, authorized by section 
     2401(a) of the Military Construction Authorization Act of 
     Fiscal Year 1996 (division B of Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 
     535), $14,200,000.
       (7) For contingency construction projects of the Secretary 
     of Defense under section 2804 of title 10, United States 
     Code, $9,844,000.
       (8) For unspecified minor construction projects under 
     section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, $25,257,000.
       (9) For architectural and engineering services and 
     construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United 
     States Code, $34,350,000.
       (10) For Energy Conservation projects authorized by section 
     2403, $25,000,000.
       (11) For base closure and realignment activities as 
     authorized by the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 
     1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 
     2687 note), $2,060,854,000.
       (12) For military family housing functions:
       (A) For improvement and planning of military family housing 
     and facilities, $4,950,000.
       (B) For support of military housing (including functions 
     described in section 2833 of title 10, United States Code), 
     $32,724,000 of which not more than $27,673,000 may be 
     obligated or expended for the leasing of military family 
     housing units worldwide.
       (b) Limitation of Total Cost of Construction Projects.--
     Notwithstanding the cost variation authorized by section 2853 
     of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost 
     variations authorized by law, the total cost of all projects 
     carried out under section 2401 of this Act may not exceed the 
     total amount authorized to be appropriated under paragraphs 
     (1) and (2) of subsection (a).

     SEC. 2406. CORRECTION IN AUTHORIZED USES OF FUNDS, MCCLELLAN 
                   AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA.

       In the case of amounts appropriated pursuant to the 
     authorization of appropriations in section 2405(a)(1) of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 
     (division B of Public Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 3041) for a 
     military construction project involving the upgrade of the 
     hospital facility at McClellan Air Force Base, California, 
     the Secretary of Defense may use such amounts for the 
     following medical construction projects authorized by section 
     2401 of this Act:
       (1) The Aeromedical Clinic Addition at Andersen Air Base, 
     Guam, in the amount of $3,700,000.
       (2) The Occupational Health Clinic Facility at Tinker Air 
     Force Base, Oklahoma, in the amount of $6,500,000.

     SEC. 2407. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT FISCAL YEAR 
                   1995 PROJECTS.

       The table in section 2401 of the Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (division B of Public 
     Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 3040), as amended by section 2407 of 
     the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1996 (division B of Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 539), under 
     the agency heading relating to Chemical Weapons and Munitions 
     Destruction, is further amended--
       (1) in the item relating to Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas, 
     by striking out ``$115,000,000'' in the amount column and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$134,000,000''; and
       (2) in the item relating to Umatilla Army Depot, Oregon, by 
     striking out ``$186,000,000'' in the amount column and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$187,000,000''.
   TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT 
                                PROGRAM

     SEC. 2501. AUTHORIZED NATO CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION 
                   PROJECTS.

       The Secretary of Defense may make contributions for the 
     North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security Investment 
     program as provided in section 2806 of title 10, United 
     States Code, in an amount not to exceed the sum of the amount 
     authorized to be appropriated for this purpose in section 
     2502 and the amount collected from the North Atlantic Treaty 
     Organization as a result of construction previously financed 
     by the United States.

     SEC. 2502. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, NATO.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     years beginning after September 30, 1997, for contributions 
     by the Secretary of Defense under section 2806 of title 10, 
     United States Code, for the share of the United States of the 
     cost of projects for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     Security Investment program authorized by section 2501, in 
     the amount of $166,300,000.
            TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

     SEC. 2601. AUTHORIZED GUARD AND RESERVE CONSTRUCTION AND LAND 
                   ACQUISITION PROJECTS.

       (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1997, for the 
     costs of acquisition, architectural and engineering services, 
     and construction of facilities for the Guard and Reserve 
     Forces, and for contributions therefor, under chapter 1803 of 
     title 10, United States Code (including the cost of 
     acquisition of land for those facilities), the following 
     amounts:
       (1) For the Department of the Army--
       (A) for the Army National Guard of the United States, 
     $45,098,000; and
       (B) for the Army Reserve, $69,831,000.
       (2) For the Department of the Navy, for the Naval and 
     Marine Corps Reserve, $40,561,000.
       (3) For the Department of the Air Force--
       (A) for the Air National Guard of the United States, 
     $137,275,000; and
       (B) for the Air Force Reserve, $34,443,000.
       (b) Adjustment.--The amount authorized to be appropriated 
     pursuant to subsection (a)(1)(B) is reduced by $7,900,000, 
     which represents the combination of project savings resulting 
     from favorable bids, reduced overhead costs, and 
     cancellations due to force structure changes.

     SEC. 2602. AUTHORIZATION OF MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS 
                   FOR WHICH FUNDS HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATED.

       (a) Army National Guard, Hilo, Hawaii.--Paragraph (1)(A) of 
     section 2601 of the Military Construction Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1997 (division B of Public Law 104-201; 110 
     Stat. 2780) is amended by striking out ``$59,194,000'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$65,094,000'' to account for a 
     project involving additions and alterations to an Army 
     aviation support facility in Hilo, Hawaii.
       (b) Naval and Marine Corps Reserve, New Orleans.--Paragraph 
     (2) of such section is amended by striking out 
     ``$32,779,000'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``$37,579,000'' 
     to account for a project for the construction of bachelor 
     enlisted quarters at Naval Air Station, New Orleans, 
     Louisiana.

     SEC. 2603. ARMY RESERVE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, SALT LAKE CITY, 
                   UTAH.

       With regard to the military construction project for the 
     Army Reserve concerning construction of a reserve center and 
     organizational maintenance shop in Salt Lake City, Utah, to 
     be carried out using funds appropriated pursuant to the 
     authorization of appropriations in section 2601(1)(B), the 
     Secretary of the Army may enter into an agreement with the 
     State of Utah under which the State agrees to provide 
     financial or in-kind contributions toward land acquisition, 
     site preparation, environmental assessment and remediation, 
     relocation, and other costs in connection with the project.
        TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS

     SEC. 2701. EXPIRATION OF AUTHORIZATIONS AND AMOUNTS REQUIRED 
                   TO BE SPECIFIED BY LAW.

       (a) Expiration of Authorizations After Three Years.--Except 
     as provided in subsection (b), all authorizations contained 
     in titles XXI through XXVI for military construction 
     projects, land acquisition, family housing projects and 
     facilities, and contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty 
     Organization Security Investment program (and authorizations 
     of appropriations therefor) shall expire on the later of--
       (1) October 1, 2000; or
       (2) the date for the enactment of an Act authorizing funds 
     for military construction for fiscal year 2001.
       (b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to 
     authorizations for military construction projects, land 
     acquisition, family housing projects and facilities, and 
     contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     Security Investment program (and authorizations of 
     appropriations therefor), for which appropriated funds have 
     been obligated before the later of--
       (1) October 1, 2000; or
       (2) the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds 
     for fiscal year 2001 for military construction projects, land 
     acquisition, family housing projects and facilities, or 
     contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     Security Investment program.

     SEC. 2702. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 
                   1995 PROJECTS.

       (a) Extension.--Notwithstanding section 2701 of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 
     (division B of Public Law 103-337, 108 Stat. 
     3046), authorizations for the projects set forth in the 
     tables in subsection (b), as provided in section 2101, 
     2201, 2202, 2301, 2302, 2401, or 2601 of that Act, shall 
     remain in effect until October 1, 1998, or the date of the 
     enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military 
     construction for fiscal year 1999, whichever is later.
       (b) Tables.--The tables referred to in subsection (a) are 
     as follows:


                                  Army: Extension of 1995 Project Authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or Location             Project                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California............................  Fort Irwin...............  National Training Center          $10,000,000
                                                                    Airfield Phase I............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



[[Page H4013]]


                                 Navy: Extension of 1995 Project Authorizations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or Location             Project                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maryland..............................  Indian Head Naval Surface  Upgrade Power Plant..........      $4,000,000
                                         Warfare Center..........
                                        Indian Head Naval Surface  Denitrification/Acid Mixing        $6,400,000
                                         Warfare Center..........   Facility....................
Virginia..............................  Norfolk Marine Corps       Bachelor Enlisted Quarters...      $6,480,000
                                         Security Force Battalion
                                         Atlantic................
Washington............................  Naval Station Puget        New Construction (Housing            $780,000
                                         Sound, Everett..........   Office).....................
Conus Classified......................  Classified Location......  Aircraft Fire/Rescue &             $2,200,000
                                                                    Vehicle Maintenance Facility
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                               Air Force: Extension of 1995 Project Authorizations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or Location             Project                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California............................  Beale Air Force Base.....  Consolidated Support Center..     $10,400,000
                                        Los Angeles Air Force      Family Housing (50 Units)....      $8,962,000
                                         Station.................
North Carolina........................  Pope Air Force Base......  Combat Control Team Facility.      $2,400,000
                                        Pope Air Force Base......  Fire Training Center.........      $1,100,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                           Defense Agencies: Extension of 1995 Project Authorizations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or Location             Project                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama...............................  Anniston Army Depot......  Carbon Filtration System.....      $5,000,000
Arkansas..............................  Pine Bluff Arsenal.......  Ammunition Demilitarization      $115,000,000
                                                                    Facility....................
California............................  Defense Contract           Administrative Facility......      $5,100,000
                                         Management Office, El
                                         Segundo.................
Oregon................................  Umatilla Army Depot......  Ammunition Demilitarization      $186,000,000
                                                                    Facility....................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



[[Page H4014]]


                          Army National Guard: Extension of 1995 Project Authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  State                    Installation or Location             Project               Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California..............................  Camp Roberts..............  Combat Pistol Range.......        $952,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                             Naval Reserve: Extension of 1995 Project Authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or Location             Project                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Georgia...............................  Naval Air Station          Training Center..............      $2,650,000
                                         Marietta................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2703. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 
                   1994 PROJECTS.

       (a) Extension.--Notwithstanding section 2701 of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 
     (division B of Public Law 103-160, 107 Stat. 1880), 
     authorizations for the projects set forth in the table in 
     subsection (b), as provided in section 2201 of that Act and 
     extended by section 2702 of the Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (division B of Public 
     Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2783), shall remain in effect until 
     October 1, 1998, or the date of the enactment of an Act 
     authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
     1999, whichever is later.
       (b) Table.--The table referred to in subsection (a) is as 
     follows:


                                 Navy: Extension of 1994 Project Authorizations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or Location             Project                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California............................  Camp Pendleton Marine      Sewage Facility..............      $7,930,000
                                         Corps Base..............
Connecticut...........................  New London Naval           Hazardous Waste Facility.....      $1,450,000
                                         Submarine Base..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2704. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 
                   1993 PROJECTS.

       (a) Extension.--Notwithstanding section 2701 of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 
     (division B of Public Law 102-484; 106 Stat. 2602), the 
     authorizations for the projects set forth in the tables in 
     subsection (b), as provided in section 2101 or 2601 of that 
     Act and extended by section 2702 of the Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (division B of Public 
     Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 541) and section 2703 of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (division 
     B of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2784), shall remain in 
     effect until October 1, 1998, or the date of the enactment of 
     an Act authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal 
     year 1999, whichever is later.
       (b) Tables.--The tables referred to in subsection (a) are 
     as follows:


                                  Army: Extension of 1993 Project Authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  State                    Installation or location             Project               Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arkansas................................  Pine Bluff Arsenal........  Ammunition                     $15,000,000
                                                                       Demilitarization Support
                                                                       Facility.................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                          Army National Guard: Extension of 1993 Project Authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  State                    Installation or Location             Project               Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama.................................  Union Springs.............  Armory....................        $813,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2705. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 
                   1992 PROJECTS.

       (a) Extension.--Notwithstanding section 2701 of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1992 
     (division B of Public Law 102-190; 105 Stat. 1535), 
     authorizations for the projects set forth in the table in 
     subsection (b), as provided in section 2101 of that Act and 
     extended by section 2702 of the Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (division B of Public 
     Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 3047), section 2703 of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (division 
     B of Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 543), and section 2704 of 
     the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1997 (division B of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2784), 
     shall remain in effect until October 1, 1998, or the date of 
     the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military 
     construction for fiscal year 1999, whichever is later.
       (b) Table.--The table referred to in subsection (a) is as 
     follows:


                                 Army: Extension of 1992 Project Authorizations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  State                    Installation or location             Project               Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oregon..................................  Umatilla Army Depot.......  Ammunition                      $3,600,000
                                                                       Demilitarization Support
                                                                       Facility.................
                                          Umatilla Army Depot.......  Ammunition                      $7,500,000
                                                                       Demilitarization
                                                                       Utilities................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2706. EXTENSION OF AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 
                   CONSTRUCTION OF OVER-THE-HORIZON RADAR IN 
                   PUERTO RICO.

       Amounts appropriated under the heading ``Drug Interdiction 
     and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense'' in the Department of 
     Defense Appropriations Act, 1995 (Public Law 103-335; 108 
     Stat. 2615), and transferred to the ``Military Construction, 
     Navy'' appropriation for construction of a Relocatable Over-
     the-Horizon Radar at Naval Station Roosevelt Roads, Puerto 
     Rico, shall remain available for obligation until October 1, 
     1998, or the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing 
     funds for military

[[Page H4015]]

     construction for fiscal year 1999, whichever is later.

     SEC. 2707. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Titles XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV, and XXVI shall take 
     effect on the later of--
       (1) October 1, 1997; or
       (2) the date of the enactment of this Act.
                    TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS
 Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family Housing 
                                Changes

     SEC. 2801. USE OF MOBILITY ENHANCEMENT FUNDS FOR UNSPECIFIED 
                   MINOR CONSTRUCTION.

       (a) Congressional Notification.--Subsection (b)(2) of 
     section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new sentence: ``This 
     paragraph shall apply even though the project is to be 
     carried out using funds made available to enhance the 
     deployment and mobility of military forces and supplies.''.
       (b) Restriction on Use of Operation and Maintenance 
     Funds.--Subsection (c) of such section is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``paragraph (2)'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``paragraphs (2) and (3)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) The limitations specified in paragraph (1) shall not 
     apply if the unspecified minor military construction project 
     is to be carried out using funds made available to enhance 
     the deployment and mobility of military forces and 
     supplies.''.
       (c) Technical Amendments.--Such section is further 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1)--
       (A) by striking out ``minor military construction 
     projects'' in the first sentence and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``unspecified minor military construction projects'';
       (B) by striking out ``A minor'' in the second sentence and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``An unspecified minor''; and
       (C) by striking out ``a minor'' in the last sentence and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``an unspecified minor'';
       (2) in subsection (b)(1), by striking out ``A minor'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``An unspecified minor'';
       (3) in subsection (b)(2), by striking out ``a minor'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``an unspecified minor''; and
       (4) in subsection (c), by striking out ``unspecified 
     military'' each place it appears and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``unspecified minor military''.

     SEC. 2802. LIMITATION ON USE OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 
                   FUNDS FOR FACILITY REPAIR PROJECTS.

       Section 2811 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsections:
       ``(d) Congressional Notification.--When a decision is made 
     to carry out a repair project under this section with an 
     estimated cost in excess of $10,000,000, the Secretary 
     concerned shall submit to the appropriate committees of 
     Congress a report containing--
       ``(1) the justification for the repair project and the 
     current estimate of the cost of the project; and
       ``(2) the justification for carrying out the project under 
     this section.
       ``(e) Repair Project Defined.--In this section, the term 
     `repair project' means a project to restore a real property 
     facility, system, or component to such a condition that it 
     may effectively be used for its designated functional 
     purpose.''.

     SEC. 2803. LEASING OF MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING, UNITED STATES 
                   SOUTHERN COMMAND, MIAMI, FLORIDA.

       (a) Leases to Exceed Maximum Rental.--Section 2828(b) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``paragraph (3)'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``paragraphs (3) and (4)'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) The Secretary of the Army may lease not more than 
     eight housing units in the vicinity of Miami, Florida, for 
     key and essential personnel, as designated by the Secretary, 
     for the United States Southern Command for which the 
     expenditure for the rental of such units (including the cost 
     of utilities, maintenance, and operation, including security 
     enhancements) exceeds the expenditure limitations in 
     paragraphs (2) and (3). The total amount for all leases under 
     this paragraph may not exceed $280,000 per year, and no lease 
     on any individual housing unit may exceed $60,000 per 
     year.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Paragraph (5) of such section, 
     as redesignated by subsection (a)(2), is amended by striking 
     out ``paragraphs (2) and (3)'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``paragraphs (2), (3), and (4)''.

     SEC. 2804. USE OF FINANCIAL INCENTIVES PROVIDED AS PART OF 
                   ENERGY SAVINGS AND WATER CONSERVATION 
                   ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Energy Savings.--Section 2865 of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(1), by striking out ``and financial 
     incentives described in subsection (d)(2)'';
       (2) in subsection (d)(2), by adding at the end the 
     following new sentence: ``Financial incentives received under 
     this paragraph or section 2866(a)(2) of this title shall be 
     credited to an appropriation account designated by the 
     Secretary of Defense.''; and
       (3) in subsection (f), by adding at the end the following 
     new sentence: ``Each report shall also describe the types and 
     amount of financial incentives received under subsection 
     (d)(2) and section 2866(a)(2) of this title during the period 
     covered by the report and the appropriation account or 
     accounts to which the incentives were credited.''.
       (b) Water Conservation.--Section 2866(b) of such title is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking out ``Savings.--'' in the subsection 
     heading and inserting in lieu thereof ``Savings and Financial 
     Incentives.--(1)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Financial incentives received under this section 
     shall be used as provided in section 2865(d)(2) of this 
     title.''.

     SEC. 2805. CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS REGARDING 
                   USE OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE HOUSING FUNDS FOR 
                   INVESTMENTS IN NONGOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES.

       Section 2875 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Congressional Notification Required.--Amounts in the 
     Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund or the 
     Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied Housing 
     Improvement Fund may be used to make a cash investment under 
     this section in a nongovernmental entity only after the end 
     of the 30-day period beginning on the date the Secretary of 
     Defense submits written notice of, and justification for, the 
     investment to the appropriate committees of Congress.''.
        Subtitle B--Real Property And Facilities Administration

     SEC. 2811. INCREASE IN CEILING FOR MINOR LAND ACQUISITION 
                   PROJECTS.

       (a) Increase.--Section 2672 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by striking out ``$200,000'' both places it 
     appears in subsection (a) and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``$500,000''.
       (b) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The section heading for such 
     section is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 2672. Acquisition: interests in land when cost is not 
       more than $500,000''.

       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 159 
     of such title is amended by striking out the item relating to 
     section 2672 and inserting in lieu thereof the following new 
     item:

``2672. Acquisition: interests in land when cost is not more than 
              $500,000.''.

     SEC. 2812. ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES FOR CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY 
                   TRANSACTIONS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 159 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 2695. Acceptance of funds to cover administrative 
       expenses relating to certain real property transactions

       ``(a) Authority To Accept.--In connection with a real 
     property transaction described in subsection (b) with a non-
     Federal person or entity, the Secretary of a military 
     department may accept amounts provided by the person or 
     entity to cover administrative expenses incurred by the 
     Secretary in entering into the transaction.
       ``(b) Covered Transactions.--Subsection (a) applies to the 
     following transactions:
       ``(1) The conveyance or exchange of real property.
       ``(2) The grant of an easement over, in, or upon real 
     property of the United States.
       ``(3) The lease or license of real property of the United 
     States.
       ``(c) Use of Amounts Collected.--Amounts collected under 
     subsection (a) for administrative expenses shall be credited 
     to the appropriation, fund, or account from which the 
     expenses were paid. Amounts so credited shall be merged with 
     funds in such appropriation, fund, or account and shall be 
     available for the same purposes and subject to the same 
     limitations as the funds with which merged.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 159 of such title is amended by adding 
     at the end the following:

``2695. Acceptance of funds to cover administrative expenses relating 
              to certain real property transactions.''.

     SEC. 2813. DISPOSITION OF PROCEEDS FROM SALE OF AIR FORCE 
                   PLANT 78, BRIGHAM CITY, UTAH.

       Notwithstanding subparagraph (A) of section 204(h)(2) of 
     the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 
     (40 U.S.C. 485(h)(2)), the entire amount derived from the 
     sale of Air Force Plant 78 in Brigham City, Utah, and 
     deposited in the special account in the Treasury established 
     pursuant to such section shall, to the extent provided in 
     appropriations Acts, be available to the Secretary of the Air 
     Force for facility maintenance, repair, or environmental 
     restoration at other industrial plants of the Department of 
     the Air Force.
            Subtitle C--Defense Base Closure and Realignment

     SEC. 2821. CONSIDERATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS SITES 
                   FOR NEW FEDERAL FACILITIES.

       (a) 1988 Law.--Section 204(b)(5) of the Defense 
     Authorization Amendments and Base Closure and Realignment Act 
     (Public Law 100-526; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking out ``subparagraph 
     (B)'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``subparagraphs (B) and 
     (C)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C)(i) Before acquiring non-Federal real property as the 
     location for a new or replacement Federal facility of any 
     type, the head of the Federal agency acquiring the property 
     shall consult with the Secretary regarding the feasibility 
     and cost advantages of using Federal property or facilities 
     at a military installation to be closed or realigned under 
     this title as the location for the new or replacement 
     facility. In considering the availability and suitability of 
     a specific military installation, the Secretary and the head 
     of the Federal agency involved shall consult with the 
     redevelopment authority with

[[Page H4016]]

     respect to the installation and comply with the redevelopment 
     plan for the installation.
       ``(ii) Not later than 30 days after acquiring non-Federal 
     real property as the location for a new or replacement 
     Federal facility, the head of the Federal agency acquiring 
     the property shall submit to Congress a report containing the 
     results of the consultation under clause (i) and the reasons 
     why military installations referred to in such clause that 
     are located within the area to be served by the new or 
     replacement Federal facility or within a 200-mile radius of 
     the new or replacement facility, whichever area is greater, 
     were considered to be unsuitable or unavailable for the site 
     of the new or replacement facility.''.
       (b) 1990 Law.--Section 2905(b)(5) of the Defense Base 
     Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-510; 10 
     U.S.C. 2687 note) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking out ``subparagraph 
     (B)'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``subparagraphs (B) and 
     (C)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C)(i) Before acquiring non-Federal real property as the 
     location for a new or replacement Federal facility of any 
     type, the head of the Federal agency acquiring the property 
     shall consult with the Secretary regarding the feasibility 
     and cost advantages of using Federal property or facilities 
     at a military installation to be closed or realigned under 
     this part as the location for the new or replacement 
     facility. In considering the availability and suitability of 
     a specific military installation, the Secretary and the head 
     of the Federal agency involved shall consult with the 
     redevelopment authority with respect to the installation and 
     comply with the redevelopment plan for the installation.
       ``(ii) Not later than 30 days after acquiring non-Federal 
     real property as the location for a new or replacement 
     Federal facility, the head of the Federal agency acquiring 
     the property shall submit to Congress a report containing the 
     results of the consultation under clause (i) and the reasons 
     why military installations referred to in such clause that 
     are located within the area to be served by the new or 
     replacement Federal facility or within a 200-mile radius of 
     the new or replacement facility, whichever area is greater, 
     were considered to be unsuitable or unavailable for the site 
     of the new or replacement facility.''.

     SEC. 2822. PROHIBITION AGAINST CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY AT 
                   MILITARY INSTALLATIONS TO STATE-OWNED SHIPPING 
                   COMPANIES.

       (a) Prohibition Against Direct Conveyance.--In disposing of 
     real property in connection with the closure of a military 
     installation under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment 
     Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 
     U.S.C. 2687 note), the Secretary of Defense may not convey 
     any portion of the property (by sale, lease, or other method) 
     to a State-owned shipping company.
       (b) Prohibition Against Indirect Conveyance.--The Secretary 
     of Defense shall impose as a condition on each conveyance of 
     real property located at such an installation the requirement 
     that the property may not be subsequently conveyed (by sale, 
     lease, or other method) to a State-owned shipping company.
       (c) Reversionary Interest.--If the Secretary determines at 
     any time that real property located at such an installation 
     and conveyed under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment 
     Act of 1990 has been conveyed to a State-owned shipping 
     company in violation of subsection (b) or is otherwise being 
     used by a State-owned shipping company in violation of such 
     subsection, all right, title, and interest in and to the 
     property shall revert to the United States, and the United 
     States shall have immediate right of entry thereon.
       (d) Definition.--In this section, the term ``State-owned 
     shipping company'' means a commercial shipping company owned 
     or controlled by a foreign country.
                      Subtitle D--Land Conveyances

                        Part I--Army Conveyances

     SEC. 2831. LAND CONVEYANCE, JAMES T. COKER ARMY RESERVE 
                   CENTER, DURANT, OKLAHOMA.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey, without consideration, to Big Five Community 
     Services, Incorporated, a nonprofit organization operating in 
     Durant, Oklahoma, all right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in and to a parcel of real property located at 
     1500 North First Street in Durant, Oklahoma, and containing 
     the James T. Coker Army Reserve Center, if the Secretary 
     determines that the Reserve Center is excess to the needs of 
     the Armed Forces.
       (b) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the real property to be conveyed under 
     subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory 
     to the Secretary. The cost of the survey shall be borne by 
     Big Five Community Services, Incorporated.
       (c) Condition on Conveyance.--The conveyance authorized 
     under subsection (a) shall be subject to the condition that 
     Big Five Community Services, Incorporated, retain the 
     conveyed property for educational purposes.
       (d) Reversion.--If the Secretary determines at any time 
     that the real property conveyed under subsection (a) is not 
     being used for the purpose specified in subsection (c), all 
     right, title, and interest in and to such real property, 
     including any improvements thereon, shall revert to the 
     United States, and the United States shall have the right of 
     immediate entry thereon.
       (e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.

     SEC. 2832. LAND CONVEYANCE, FORT A. P. HILL, VIRGINIA.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey to Caroline County, Virginia (in this section referred 
     to as the ``County''), all right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in and to a parcel of unimproved real property 
     consisting of approximately 10 acres located at Fort A. P. 
     Hill, Virginia. The purpose of the conveyance is to permit 
     the County to establish a solid waste transfer and recycling 
     facility on the property.
       (b) Consideration.--As consideration for the conveyance 
     under subsection (a), the County shall permit the Army, at no 
     cost, to dispose of not less than 1,800 tons of solid waste 
     annually at the facility established on the conveyed 
     property. The obligation of the County to accept solid waste 
     under this subsection shall not commerce until after the 
     solid waste transfer and recycling facility on the conveyed 
     property becomes operational, and the establishment of a 
     solid waste collection and transfer site on the .36-acre 
     parcel described in subsection (d)(2) shall not be construed 
     to impose the obligation.
       (c) Disclaimer.--The United States shall not be responsible 
     for the provision or cost of utilities or any other 
     improvements necessary to carry out the conveyance under 
     subsection (a) or to establish or operate the solid waste 
     transfer and recycling facility intended for the property.
       (d) Reversion.--(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), if 
     the Secretary determines that a solid waste transfer and 
     recycling facility is not operational, before December 31, 
     1999, on the real property conveyed under subsection (a), all 
     right, title, and interest in and to such real property, 
     including any improvements thereon, shall revert to the 
     United States, and the United States shall have the right of 
     immediate entry thereon.
       (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to a parcel 
     of approximately .36 acres of the approximately 10-acre 
     parcel to be conveyed under subsection (a), which is included 
     in the larger conveyance to permit the County to establish 
     a solid waste collection and transfer site for residential 
     waste.
       (e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.

     SEC. 2833. EXPANSION OF LAND CONVEYANCE, INDIANA ARMY 
                   AMMUNITION PLANT, CHARLESTOWN, INDIANA.

       (a) Additional Conveyance.--Subsection (a) of section 2858 
     of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1996 (Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 571) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``The Secretary of the 
     Army''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) The Secretary may also convey to the State, without 
     consideration, an additional parcel of real property at the 
     Indiana Army Ammunition Plant consisting of approximately 500 
     acres located along the Ohio River.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Such section is further amended 
     by striking out ``conveyance'' both places it appears in 
     subsections (b) and (d) and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``conveyances''.

     SEC. 2834. MODIFICATION OF LAND CONVEYANCE, LOMPOC, 
                   CALIFORNIA.

       (a) Change in Authorized Uses of Land.--Section 834(b)(1) 
     of the Military Construction Authorization Act, 1985 (Public 
     Law 98-407; 98 Stat. 1526), is amended by striking out 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B) and inserting in lieu thereof the 
     following new subparagraphs:
       ``(A) for educational and recreational purposes;
       ``(B) for open space; or''.
       (b) Conforming Deed Changes.--With respect to the land 
     conveyance made pursuant to section 834 of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act, 1985, the Secretary of the 
     Army shall execute and file in the appropriate office or 
     offices an amended deed or other appropriate instrument 
     effectuating the changes to the authorized uses of the 
     conveyed property resulting from the amendment made by 
     subsection (a).

     SEC. 2835. MODIFICATION OF LAND CONVEYANCE, ROCKY MOUNTAIN 
                   ARSENAL, COLORADO.

       Section 5(c) of Public Law 102-402 (106 Stat. 1966) is 
     amended by striking out ``The transferred property shall be 
     sold in advertised sales'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``The Administrator shall convey the transferred property to 
     Commerce City, Colorado, in a negotiated sale,''.

     SEC. 2836. CORRECTION OF LAND CONVEYANCE AUTHORITY, ARMY 
                   RESERVE CENTER, ANDERSON, SOUTH CAROLINA.

       (a) Identification of Recipient.--Subsection (a) of section 
     2824 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1997 (division B of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 
     2793) is amended by striking out ``County of Anderson, South 
     Carolina (in this section referred to as the `County')'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``Board of Education, Anderson 
     County, South Carolina (in this section referred to as the 
     `Board')''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Subsections (b) and (c) of such 
     section are amended by striking out ``County'' each place it 
     appears and inserting in lieu thereof ``Board''.

     SEC. 2837. LAND CONVEYANCE, FORT BRAGG, NORTH CAROLINA.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey, without consideration, to the Town of Spring Lake, 
     North Carolina (in this section referred to as the ``Town''), 
     all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to 
     a parcel of unimproved real property consisting of 
     approximately 50 acres located at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. 
     The purpose of the

[[Page H4017]]

     conveyance is to improve access by the Town to a waste 
     treatment facility and to permit economic development.
       (b) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the real property to be conveyed under 
     subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey 
     satisfactory to the Secretary. The cost of the survey 
     shall be borne by the Town.
       (c) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.

     SEC. 2838. LAND CONVEYANCE, GIBSON ARMY RESERVE CENTER, 
                   CHICAGO, ILLINOIS.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey, without consideration, to the Lawndale Business and 
     Local Development Corporation (in this section referred to as 
     the ``Corporation''), a nonprofit organization organized in 
     the State of Illinois, all right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in and to a parcel of real property, including 
     improvements thereon, that is located at 4454 West Cermak 
     Road in Chicago, Illinois, and contains the Gibson Army 
     Reserve Center.
       (b) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the real property to be conveyed under 
     subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory 
     to the Secretary. The cost of the survey shall be borne by 
     the Corporation.
       (c) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.

     SEC. 2839. LAND CONVEYANCE, FORT DIX, NEW JERSEY.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey, without consideration, to the Borough of Wrightstown, 
     New Jersey (in this section referred to as the ``Borough''), 
     all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to 
     a parcel of real property (including improvements thereon) 
     consisting of approximately 44.69 acres located at Fort Dix, 
     New Jersey, for the purpose of permitting the Borough to 
     develop the parcel for educational and economic purposes.
       (b) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the real property to be conveyed under 
     subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory 
     to the Secretary. The cost of the survey shall be borne by 
     the Borough.
       (c) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.

                       Part II--Navy Conveyances

     SEC. 2851. CORRECTION OF LEASE AUTHORITY, NAVAL AIR STATION, 
                   MERIDIAN, MISSISSIPPI.

       (a) Correction of Lessee.--Subsection (a) of section 2837 
     of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1997 (division B of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2798) 
     is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``State of Mississippi (in this section 
     referred to as the `State')'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``County of Lauderdale, Mississippi (in this section referred 
     to as the `County')''; and
       (2) by striking out ``The State'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``The County''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Subsections (b) and (c) of such 
     section are amended by striking out ``State'' each place it 
     appears and inserting in lieu thereof ``County''.

                    Part III--Air Force Conveyances

     SEC. 2861. LAND TRANSFER, EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, FLORIDA.

       (a) Transfer.--Jurisdiction over the real property 
     withdrawn by Executive Order 4525, dated October 1, 1826, 
     which consists of approximately 440 acres of land at Cape San 
     Blas, Gulf County, Florida, and any improvements thereon, is 
     transferred from the administrative jurisdiction of the 
     Secretary of Transportation to the administrative 
     jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Air Force, without 
     reimbursement. Executive Order 4525 is revoked, and the 
     transferred real property shall be administered by the 
     Secretary of the Air Force pursuant to the Federal Property 
     and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 471 et 
     seq.) and such other laws as may be applicable to Federal 
     real property.
       (b) Use of Property.--The real property transferred under 
     subsection (a) may be used in conjunction with operations at 
     Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.
       (c) Legal Description.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the real property to be transferred under this 
     section shall be determined by a survey satisfactory to the 
     Secretary of the Air Force. The cost of the survey shall be 
     borne by the Secretary of the Air Force.

     SEC. 2862. STUDY OF LAND EXCHANGE OPTIONS, SHAW AIR FORCE 
                   BASE, SOUTH CAROLINA.

       Section 2874 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 583) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(g) Study of Exchange Options.--To facilitate the use of 
     a land exchange to acquire the real property described in 
     subsection (a), the Secretary of the Air Force shall conduct 
     a study to identify real property in the possession of the 
     Air Force (located in the State of South Carolina or 
     elsewhere) that satisfies the requirements of subsection 
     (b)(2), is acceptable to the party holding the property to be 
     acquired, and is otherwise suitable for exchange under this 
     section. Not later than three months after the date of the 
     enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1998, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a 
     report containing the results of the study.''.

     SEC. 2863. LAND CONVEYANCE, MARCH AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Air Force 
     may convey to Air Force Village West, Incorporated (in this 
     section referred to as the ``Corporation''), of Riverside, 
     California, all right, title, and interest of the United 
     States in and to a parcel of real property located at March 
     Air Force Base, California, and consisting of approximately 
     75 acres, as more fully described in subsection (c).
       (2) If the Secretary does not make the conveyance 
     authorized by paragraph (1) to the Corporation on or before 
     January 1, 2006, the Secretary shall convey the real property 
     instead to the March Joint Powers Authority, the 
     redevelopment authority established for March Air Force Base.
       (b) Consideration.--As consideration for the conveyance 
     under subsection (a), the Corporation shall pay to the United 
     States an amount equal to the fair market value of the real 
     property, as determined by the Secretary.
       (c) Land Description.--The real property to be conveyed 
     under this section is contiguous to land conveyed to the 
     Corporation pursuant to section 835 of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act, 1985 (Public Law 98-407; 98 
     Stat. 1527), and lies within sections 27, 28, 33, and 34 of 
     Township 3 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and 
     Meridian, County of Riverside, California. The exact acreage 
     and legal description of the real property shall be 
     determined by a survey satisfactory to the Secretary. The 
     cost of the survey shall be borne by the party receiving the 
     property.
       (d) Technical Corrections Regarding Previous Conveyance.--
     Section 835 of the Military Construction Authorization Act, 
     1985 (Public Law 98-407; 98 Stat. 1527), is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by striking out ``subsection (b)'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``subsection (a)''; and
       (2) in subsection (c), by striking out ``Clark Street,'' 
     and all that follows through the period and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``Village West Drive, on the west by Allen Avenue, on 
     the south by 8th Street, and the north is an extension of 
     11th Street between Allen Avenue and Clark Street.''.
                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

     SEC. 2881. REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT TO OPERATE NAVAL ACADEMY 
                   DAIRY FARM.

       (a) Operation.--(1) Chapter 603 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 6976. Operation of Naval Academy dairy farm

       ``(a) Discretion Regarding Continued Operation.--(1) 
     Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Navy may 
     terminate or reduce the dairy or other operations conducted 
     at the Naval Academy dairy farm located in Gambrills, 
     Maryland.
       ``(2) Notwithstanding the termination or reduction of 
     operations at the Naval Academy dairy farm under paragraph 
     (1), the real property containing the dairy farm (consisting 
     of approximately 875 acres)--
       ``(A) may not be declared to be excess real property to the 
     needs of the Navy or transferred or otherwise disposed of by 
     the Navy or any Federal agency; and
       ``(B) shall be maintained in its rural and agricultural 
     nature.
       ``(b) Lease Authority.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2), to 
     the extent that the termination or reduction of operations at 
     the Naval Academy dairy farm permit, the Secretary of the 
     Navy may lease the real property containing the dairy farm, 
     and any improvements and personal property thereon, to such 
     persons and under such terms as the Secretary considers 
     appropriate. In leasing any of the property, the Secretary 
     may give a preference to persons who will continue dairy 
     operations on the property.
       ``(2) Any lease of property at the Naval Academy dairy farm 
     shall be subject to a condition that the lessee maintain the 
     rural and agricultural nature of the leased property.
       ``(c) Effect of Other Laws.--Nothing in section 6971 of 
     this title shall be construed to require the Secretary of the 
     Navy or the Superintendent of the Naval Academy to operate a 
     dairy farm for the Naval Academy in Gambrills, Maryland, or 
     any other location.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``6976. Operation of Naval Academy dairy farm.''.
       (b) Conforming Repeal of Existing Requirements.--Section 
     810 of the Military Construction Authorization Act, 1968 
     (Public Law 90-110; 81 Stat. 309), is repealed.

     SEC. 2882. LONG-TERM LEASE OF PROPERTY, NAPLES ITALY.

       (a) Authority.--Subject to subsection (d), the Secretary of 
     the Navy may acquire by long-term lease structures and real 
     property relating to a regional hospital complex in Naples, 
     Italy, that the Secretary determines to be necessary for 
     purposes of the Naples Improvement Initiative.
       (b) Lease Term.--Notwithstanding section 2675 of title 10, 
     United States Code, the lease authorized by subsection (a) 
     shall be for a term of not more than 20 years.
       (c) Expiration of Authority.--The authority of the 
     Secretary to enter into a lease under subsection (a) shall 
     expire on September 30, 2002.
       (d) Authority Contingent on Appropriations Acts.--The 
     authority of the Secretary to enter into a lease under 
     subsection (a) is available only to the extent or in the 
     amount provided in advance in appropriations Acts.

[[Page H4018]]

     SEC. 2883. DESIGNATION OF MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING AT LACKLAND 
                   AIR FORCE BASE, TEXAS, IN HONOR OF FRANK 
                   TEJEDA, A FORMER MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF 
                   REPRESENTATIVES.

       The military family housing developments to be constructed 
     at two locations on Government property at Lackland Air Force 
     Base, Texas, under the authority of subchapter IV of chapter 
     169 of title 10, United States Code, shall be designated by 
     the Secretary of the Air Force, at an appropriate time, as 
     follows:
       (1) The northern development shall be designated as ``Frank 
     Tejeda Estates North''.
       (2) The southern development shall be designated as ``Frank 
     Tejeda Estates South''.
                   TITLE XXIX--SIKES ACT IMPROVEMENT

     SEC. 2901. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Sikes Act Improvement 
     Amendments of 1997''.

     SEC. 2902. DEFINITION OF SIKES ACT FOR PURPOSES OF 
                   AMENDMENTS.

       In this title, the term ``Sikes Act'' means the Act 
     entitled ``An Act to promote effectual planning, development, 
     maintenance, and coordination of wildlife, fish, and game 
     conservation and rehabilitation in military 
     reservations'', approved September 15, 1960 (16 U.S.C. 
     670a et seq.), commonly referred to as the ``Sikes Act''.

     SEC. 2903. CODIFICATION OF SHORT TITLE OF ACT.

       The Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a et seq.) is amended by 
     inserting before title I the following new section:

     ``SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       ``This Act may be cited as the `Sikes Act'.''.

     SEC. 2904. INTEGRATED NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLANS.

       (a) Plans Required.--Section 101(a) of the Sikes Act (16 
     U.S.C. 670a(a)) is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``is authorized to'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``shall'';
       (2) by striking out ``in each military reservation in 
     accordance with a cooperative plan'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof the following: ``on military installations. Under the 
     program, the Secretary shall prepare and implement for each 
     military installation in the United States an integrated 
     natural resource management plan'';
       (3) by inserting after ``reservation is located'' the 
     following: ``, except that the Secretary is not required to 
     prepare such a plan for a military installation if the 
     Secretary determines that preparation of such a plan for the 
     installation is not appropriate''; and
       (4) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(a)'' and adding at the 
     end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Consistent with essential military requirements to 
     enhance the national security of the United States, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall manage each military installation 
     to provide--
       ``(A) for the conservation of fish and wildlife on the 
     military installation and sustained multipurpose uses of 
     those resources, including hunting, fishing, and trapping; 
     and
       ``(B) public access that is necessary or appropriate for 
     those uses.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Title I of the Sikes Act is 
     amended--
       (1) in section 101(b) (16 U.S.C. 670a(b)), in the matter 
     preceding paragraph (1), by striking out ``cooperative plan'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``integrated natural resource 
     management plan'';
       (2) in section 101(b)(4) (16 U.S.C. 670a(b)(4)), by 
     striking out ``cooperative plan'' each place it appears and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``integrated natural resource 
     management plan'';
       (3) in section 101(c) (16 U.S.C. 670a(c)), in the matter 
     preceding paragraph (1) by striking out ``a cooperative 
     plan'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``an integrated natural 
     resource management plan'';
       (4) in section 101(d) (16 U.S.C. 670a(d)), in the matter 
     preceding paragraph (1) by striking out ``cooperative plans'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``integrated natural resource 
     management plans'';
       (5) in section 101(e) (16 U.S.C. 670a(e)), by striking out 
     ``Cooperative plans'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``Integrated natural resource management plans'';
       (6) in section 102 (16 U.S.C. 670b), by striking out ``a 
     cooperative plan'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``an 
     integrated natural resource management plan'';
       (7) in section 103 (16 U.S.C. 670c), by striking out ``a 
     cooperative plan'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``an 
     integrated natural resource management plan'';
       (8) in section 106(a) (16 U.S.C. 670f(a)), by striking out 
     ``cooperative plans'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``integrated natural resource management plans''; and
       (9) in section 106(c) (16 U.S.C. 670f(c)), by striking out 
     ``cooperative plans'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``integrated natural resource management plans''.
       (c) Contents of Plans.--Section 101(b) of the Sikes Act (16 
     U.S.C. 670a(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (C), by striking out ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) in subparagraph (D), by striking out the semicolon at 
     the end and inserting in lieu thereof a comma; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraphs:
       ``(E) wetland protection and restoration, and wetland 
     creation where necessary, for support of fish or wildlife,
       ``(F) consideration of conservation needs for all 
     biological communities, and
       ``(G) the establishment of specific natural resource 
     management goals, objectives, and time-frames for proposed 
     actions;'';
       (2) by striking out paragraph (3);
       (3) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3);
       (4) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(2) shall for the military installation for which it is 
     prepared--
       ``(A) address the needs for fish and wildlife management, 
     land management, forest management, and wildlife-oriented 
     recreation,
       ``(B) ensure the integration of, and consistency among, the 
     various activities conducted under the plan,
       ``(C) ensure that there is no net loss in the capability of 
     installation lands to support the military mission of the 
     installation,
       ``(D) provide for sustained use by the public of natural 
     resources, to the extent that such use is not inconsistent 
     with the military mission of the installation or the needs of 
     fish and wildlife management,
       ``(E) provide the public access to the installation that is 
     necessary or appropriate for that use, to the extent that 
     access is not inconsistent with the military mission of the 
     installation, and
       ``(F) provide for professional enforcement of natural 
     resource laws and regulations;''; and
       (5) in paragraph (4)(A), by striking out ``collect the fees 
     therefor,'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``collect, spend, 
     administer, and account for fees therefor,''.
       (d) Public Comment.--Section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 
     U.S.C. 670a) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(f) Public Comment.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     provide an opportunity for public comment on each integrated 
     natural resource management plan prepared under subsection 
     (a).''.

     SEC. 2905. REVIEW FOR PREPARATION OF INTEGRATED NATURAL 
                   RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLANS.

       (a) Review of Military Installations.--
       (1) Review.--The Secretary of each military department 
     shall, by not later than nine months after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act--
       (A) review each military installation in the United States 
     that is under the jurisdiction of that Secretary to determine 
     the military installations for which the preparation of an 
     integrated natural resource management plan under section 101 
     of the Sikes Act, as amended by this title, is appropriate; 
     and
       (B) submit to the Secretary of Defense a report on those 
     determinations.
       (2) Report to congress.--The Secretary of Defense shall, by 
     not later than 12 months after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, submit to the Congress a report on the reviews 
     conducted under paragraph (1). The report shall include--
       (A) a list of those military installations reviewed under 
     paragraph (1) for which the Secretary of Defense determines 
     the preparation of an integrated natural resource management 
     plan is not appropriate; and
       (B) for each of the military installations listed under 
     subparagraph (A), an explanation of the reasons such a plan 
     is not appropriate.
       (b) Deadline for Integrated Natural Resource Management 
     Plans.--Not later than two years after the date of the 
     submission of the report required under subsection (a)(2), 
     the Secretary of Defense shall, for each military 
     installation for which the Secretary has not determined under 
     subsection (a)(2)(A) that preparation of an integrated 
     natural resource management plan is not appropriate--
       (1) prepare and begin implementing such a plan mutually 
     agreed to by the Secretary of the Interior and the head of 
     the appropriate State agencies under section 101(a) of the 
     Sikes Act, as amended by this title; or
       (2) in the case of a military installation for which there 
     is in effect a cooperative plan under section 101(a) of the 
     Sikes Act on the day before the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, complete negotiations with the Secretary of the Interior 
     and the heads of the appropriate State agencies regarding 
     changes to that plan that are necessary for the plan to 
     constitute an integrated natural resource plan that complies 
     with that section, as amended by this title.
       (c) Public Comment.--The Secretary of Defense shall provide 
     an opportunity for the submission of public comments on--
       (1) integrated natural resource management plans proposed 
     pursuant to subsection (b)(1); and
       (2) changes to cooperative plans proposed pursuant to 
     subsection (b)(2).

     SEC. 2906. ANNUAL REVIEWS AND REPORTS.

       Section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a) is amended by 
     adding after subsection (f) (as added by section 2904(d)) the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(g) Reviews and Reports.--
       ``(1) Secretary of defense.--The Secretary of Defense 
     shall, by not later than March 1 of each year, review the 
     extent to which integrated natural resource management plans 
     were prepared or in effect and implemented in accordance with 
     this Act in the preceding year, and submit a report on the 
     findings of that review to the committees. Each report shall 
     include--
       ``(A) the number of integrated natural resource management 
     plans in effect in the year covered by the report, including 
     the date on which each plan was issued in final form or most 
     recently revised;
       ``(B) the amount of moneys expended on conservation 
     activities conducted pursuant to those plans in the year 
     covered by the report, including amounts expended under the 
     Legacy Resource Management Program established under section 
     8120 of the Act of November 5, 1990 (Public Law 101-511; 104 
     Stat. 1905); and
       ``(C) an assessment of the extent to which the plans comply 
     with the requirements of subsection (b)(1) and (2), including 
     specifically the extent to which the plans ensure in 
     accordance with subsection (b)(2)(C) that there is no net 
     loss of lands to support the military missions of military 
     installations.
       ``(2) Secretary of the interior.--The Secretary of the 
     Interior, by not later than March 1 of each year and in 
     consultation with State

[[Page H4019]]

     agencies responsible for conservation or management of fish 
     or wildlife, shall submit a report to the committees on the 
     amount of moneys expended by the Department of the 
     Interior and those State agencies in the year covered by 
     the report on conservation activities conducted pursuant 
     to integrated natural resource management plans.
       ``(3) Committees defined.--For purposes of this subsection, 
     the term `committees' means the Committee on Resources and 
     the Committee on National Security of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Armed Services and the 
     Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate.''.

     SEC. 2907. TRANSFER OF WILDLIFE CONSERVATION FEES FROM CLOSED 
                   MILITARY INSTALLATIONS.

       Section 101(b)(4)(B) of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 
     670a(b)(4)(B)) is amended by inserting before the period at 
     the end the following: ``, unless that military installation 
     is subsequently closed, in which case the fees may be 
     transferred to another military installation to be used for 
     the same purposes''.

     SEC. 2908. FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT OF INTEGRATED NATURAL RESOURCE 
                   MANAGEMENT PLANS AND ENFORCEMENT OF OTHER LAWS.

       Title I of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a et seq.) is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating section 106, as amended by section 
     2904(b), as section 109; and
       (2) by inserting after section 105 the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 106. FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT OF OTHER LAWS.

       ``All Federal laws relating to the conservation of natural 
     resources on Federal lands may be enforced by the Secretary 
     of Defense with respect to violations of those laws which 
     occur on military installations within the United States.''.

     SEC. 2909. NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES.

       Title I of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a et seq.) is 
     amended by inserting after section 106 (as added by section 
     2908) the following new section:

     ``SEC. 107. NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES.

       ``The Secretary of each military department shall ensure 
     that sufficient numbers of professionally trained natural 
     resource management personnel and natural resource law 
     enforcement personnel are available and assigned 
     responsibility to perform tasks necessary to comply with this 
     Act, including the preparation and implementation of 
     integrated natural resource management plans.''.

     SEC. 2910. DEFINITIONS.

       Title I of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a et seq.) is 
     amended by inserting after section 107 (as added by section 
     2909) the following new section:

     ``SEC. 108. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this title:
       ``(1) Military installation.--The term `military 
     installation'--
       ``(A) means any land or interest in land owned by the 
     United States and administered by the Secretary of Defense or 
     the Secretary of a military department; and
       ``(B) includes all public lands withdrawn from all forms of 
     appropriation under public land laws and reserved for use by 
     the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of a military 
     department.
       ``(2) State fish and wildlife agency.--The term `State fish 
     and wildlife agency' means an agency of State government that 
     is responsible under State law for managing fish or wildlife 
     resources.
       ``(3) United states.--The term `United States' means the 
     States, the District of Columbia, and the territories and 
     possessions of the United States.''.

     SEC. 2911. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.

       (a) Cost Sharing.--Section 103a(b) of the Sikes Act (16 
     U.S.C. 670c-1(b)) is amended by striking out ``matching 
     basis'' each place it appears and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``cost-sharing basis''.
       (b) Accounting.--Section 103a(c) of the Sikes Act (16 
     U.S.C. 670c-1(c)) is amended by inserting before the period 
     at the end the following: ``, and shall not be subject to 
     section 1535 of that title''.

     SEC. 2912. REPEAL OF SUPERSEDED PROVISION.

       Section 2 of the Act of October 27, 1986 (Public Law 99-
     561; 16 U.S.C. 670a-1), is repealed.

     SEC. 2913. CLERICAL AMENDMENTS.

       Title I of the Sikes Act, as amended by this title, is 
     amended--
       (1) in the heading for the title by striking out ``MILITARY 
     RESERVATIONS'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``MILITARY 
     INSTALLATIONS'';
       (2) in section 101(a) (16 U.S.C. 670a(a)), by striking out 
     ``the reservation'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``the 
     installation'';
       (3) in section 101(b)(4) (16 U.S.C. 670a(b)(4))--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking out ``the 
     reservation'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``the 
     installation''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking out ``the military 
     reservation'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``the military 
     installation'';
       (4) in section 101(c) (16 U.S.C. 670a(c))--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``a military 
     reservation'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``a military 
     installation''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``the reservation'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``the installation'';
       (5) in section 102 (16 U.S.C. 670b), by striking out 
     ``military reservations'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``military installations''; and
       (6) in section 103 (16 U.S.C. 670c)--
       (A) by striking out ``military reservations'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``military installations''; and
       (B) by striking out ``such reservations'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``such installations''.

     SEC. 2914. AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Programs on Military Installations.--Subsections (b) 
     and (c) of section 109 of the Sikes Act (as redesignated by 
     section 1408) are each amended by striking out ``1983'' and 
     all that follows through ``1993,'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``1983 through 2000,''.
       (b) Programs on Public Lands.--Section 209 of the Sikes Act 
     (16 U.S.C. 670o) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking out ``the sum of 
     $10,000,000'' and all that follows through ``to enable the 
     Secretary of the Interior'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``$4,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1998 through 2000, to 
     enable the Secretary of the Interior''; and
       (2) in subsection (b), by striking out ``the sum of 
     $12,000,000'' and all that follows through ``to enable the 
     Secretary of Agriculture'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``$5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1998 through 2000, to 
     enable the Secretary of Agriculture''.
               DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL
            SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
      TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
         Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations

     SEC. 3101. WEAPONS ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Stockpile Stewardship.--Funds are hereby authorized to 
     be appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
     1998 for stockpile stewardship in carrying out weapons 
     activities necessary for national security programs in the 
     amount of $1,733,400,000, to be allocated as follows:
       (1) For core stockpile stewardship, $1,257,100,000, to be 
     allocated as follows:
       (A) For operation and maintenance, $1,158,290,000.
       (B) For plant projects (including maintenance, restoration, 
     planning, construction, acquisition, modification of 
     facilities, and the continuation of projects authorized in 
     prior years, and land acquisition related thereto), 
     $98,810,000, to be allocated as follows:
       Project 97-D-102, dual-axis radiographic hydrotest 
     facility, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New 
     Mexico, $46,300,000.
       Project 96-D-102, stockpile stewardship facilities 
     revitalization, Phase VI, various locations, $19,810,000.
       Project 96-D-103, ATLAS, Los Alamos National Laboratory, 
     Los Alamos, New Mexico, $13,400,000.
       Project 96-D-105, contained firing facility addition, 
     Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, 
     California, $19,300,000.
       (2) For inertial fusion, $414,800,000, to be allocated as 
     follows:
       (A) For operation and maintenance, $217,000,000.
       (B) For the following plant project (including maintenance, 
     restoration, planning, construction, acquisition, and 
     modification of facilities, and land acquisition related 
     thereto), $197,800,000, to be allocated as follows:
       Project 96-D-111, national ignition facility, location to 
     be determined, $197,800,000.
       (3) For technology transfer and education, $61,500,000, to 
     be allocated as follows:
       (A) For technology transfer, $52,500,000.
       (B) For education, $9,000,000.
       (b) Stockpile Management.--Funds are hereby authorized to 
     be appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
     1998 for stockpile management in carrying out weapons 
     activities necessary for national security programs in the 
     amount of $2,024,150,000, to be allocated as follows:
       (1) For operation and maintenance, $1,868,265,000.
       (2) For plant projects (including maintenance, restoration, 
     planning, construction, acquisition, modification of 
     facilities, and the continuation of projects authorized in 
     prior years, and land acquisition related thereto), 
     $155,885,000, to be allocated as follows:
       Project 98-D-123, stockpile management restructuring 
     initiative, tritium factory modernization and consolidation, 
     Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $11,000,000.
       Project 98-D-124, stockpile management restructuring 
     initiative, Y-12 Plant consolidation, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 
     $6,450,000.
       Project 98-D-125, tritium extraction facility, Savannah 
     River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $9,650,000.
       Project 98-D-126, accelerator production of tritium, 
     various locations, $67,865,000.
       Project 97-D-122, nuclear materials storage facility 
     renovation, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New 
     Mexico, $9,200,000.
       Project 97-D-124, steam plant wastewater treatment facility 
     upgrade, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, $1,900,000.
       Project 96-D-122, sewage treatment quality upgrade (STQU), 
     Pantex Plant, Amarillo, Texas, $6,900,000.
       Project 96-D-123, retrofit heating, ventilation, and air 
     conditioning and chillers for ozone protection, Y-12 Plant, 
     Oak Ridge, Tennessee, $2,700,000.
       Project 95-D-122, sanitary sewer upgrade, Y-12 Plant, Oak 
     Ridge, Tennessee, $12,600,000.
       Project 94-D-124, hydrogen fluoride supply system, Y-12 
     Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, $1,400,000.
       Project 94-D-125, upgrade life safety, Kansas City Plant, 
     Kansas City, Missouri, $2,000,000.
       Project 93-D-122, life safety upgrades, Y-12 Plant, Oak 
     Ridge, Tennessee, $2,100,000.
       Project 92-D-126, replace emergency notification system, 
     various locations, $3,200,000.
       Project 88-D-122, facilities capability assurance program, 
     various locations, $18,920,000.

[[Page H4020]]

       (c) Program Direction.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 1998 
     for program direction in carrying out weapons activities 
     necessary for national security programs in the amount of 
     $208,500,000.

     SEC. 3102. ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND WASTE MANAGEMENT.

       (a) Environmental Restoration.--Funds are hereby authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal 
     year 1998 for environmental restoration in carrying out 
     environmental restoration and waste management activities 
     necessary for national security programs in the amount of 
     $1,000,973,000, of which $388,000,000 shall be allocated to 
     the uranium enrichment decontamination and decommissioning 
     fund.
       (b) Closure Projects.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 1998 
     for closure projects carried out in accordance with section 
     3143 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2836; 42 U.S.C. 
     7274n) in the amount of $905,800,000.
       (c) Waste Management.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 1998 
     for waste management in carrying out environmental 
     restoration and waste management activities necessary for 
     national security programs in the amount of $1,536,344,000, 
     to be allocated as follows:
       (1) For operation and maintenance, $1,455,576,000.
       (2) For plant projects (including maintenance, restoration, 
     planning, construction, acquisition, modification of 
     facilities, and the continuation of projects authorized in 
     prior years, and land acquisition related thereto), 
     $80,768,000, to be allocated as follows:
       Project 98-D-401, H-tank farm storm water systems upgrade, 
     Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $1,000,000.
       Project 97-D-402, tank farm restoration and safe 
     operations, Richland, Washington, $13,961,000.
       Project 96-D-408, waste management upgrades, various 
     locations, $8,200,000.
       Project 95-D-402, install permanent electrical service, 
     Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Carlsbad, New Mexico, $176,000.
       Project 95-D-405, industrial landfill V and construction/
     demolition landfill VII, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 
     $3,800,000.
       Project 95-D-407, 219-S secondary containment upgrade, 
     Richland, Washington, $2,500,000.
       Project 94-D-404, Melton Valley storage tank capacity 
     increase, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, 
     Tennessee, $1,219,000.
       Project 94-D-407, initial tank retrieval systems, Richland, 
     Washington, $15,100,000.
       Project 93-D-187, high-level waste removal from filled 
     waste tanks, Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, 
     $17,520,000.
       Project 92-D-172, hazardous waste treatment and processing 
     facility, Pantex Plant, Amarillo, Texas, $5,000,000.
       Project 89-D-174, replacement high-level waste evaporator, 
     Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $1,042,000.
       Project 86-D-103, decontamination and waste treatment 
     facility, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, 
     California, $11,250,000.
       (d) Technology Development.--Funds are hereby authorized to 
     be appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
     1998 for technology development in carrying out environmental 
     restoration and waste management activities necessary for 
     national security programs in the amount of $182,881,000.
       (e) Nuclear Materials and Facilities Stabilization.--Funds 
     are hereby authorized to be appropriated to the Department of 
     Energy for fiscal year 1998 for nuclear materials and 
     facilities stabilization in carrying out environmental 
     restoration and waste management activities necessary for 
     national security programs in the amount of $1,244,021,000, 
     to be allocated as follows:
       (1) For operation and maintenance, $1,159,114,000.
       (2) For plant projects (including maintenance, restoration, 
     planning, construction, acquisition, modification of 
     facilities, and the continuation of projects authorized in 
     prior years, and land acquisition related thereto), 
     $84,907,000, to be allocated as follows:
       Project 98-D-453, plutonium stabilization and handling 
     system for plutonium finishing plant, Richland, Washington, 
     $8,136,000.
       Project 98-D-700, road rehabilitation, Idaho National 
     Engineering Laboratory, Idaho, $500,000.
       Project 97-D-450, Actinide packaging and storage facility, 
     Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $18,000,000.
       Project 97-D-451, B-Plant safety class ventilation 
     upgrades, Richland, Washington, $2,000,000.
       Project 97-D-470, environmental monitoring laboratory, 
     Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $5,600,000.
       Project 97-D-473, health physics site support facility, 
     Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $4,200,000.
       Project 96-D-406, spent nuclear fuels canister storage and 
     stabilization facility, Richland, Washington, $16,744,000.
       Project 96-D-461, electrical distribution upgrade, Idaho 
     National Engineering Laboratory, Idaho, $2,927,000.
       Project 96-D-464, electrical and utility systems upgrade, 
     Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, Idaho National Engineering 
     Laboratory, Idaho, $14,985,000.
       Project 96-D-471, chlorofluorocarbon heating, ventilation, 
     and air conditioning and chiller retrofit, Savannah River 
     Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $8,500,000.
       Project 95-D-155, upgrade site road infrastructure, 
     Savannah River Site, South Carolina, $2,713,000.
       Project 95-D-456, security facilities consolidation, Idaho 
     Chemical Processing Plant, Idaho National Engineering 
     Laboratory, Idaho, $602,000.
       (f) Program Direction.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 1998 
     for program direction in carrying out environmental 
     restoration and waste management activities necessary for 
     national security programs in the amount of $288,251,000.
       (g) Policy and Management.--Funds are hereby authorized to 
     be appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
     1998 for policy and management in carrying out environmental 
     restoration and waste management activities necessary for 
     national security programs in the amount of $20,000,000.
       (h) Environmental Science Program.--Funds are hereby 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Energy for 
     fiscal year 1998 for the environmental science program in 
     carrying out environmental restoration and waste management 
     activities necessary for national security programs in the 
     amount of $55,000,000.
       (i) Hanford Tank Waste Vitrification.--Funds are hereby 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Energy for 
     fiscal year 1998 for the Hanford Tank Waste Vitrification 
     project, subject to the provisions of section 3145, in the 
     amount of $70,000,000.
       (j) Adjustment.--The total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to this section is the sum of the 
     amounts authorized to be appropriated in subsections (a) 
     through (h) reduced by the sum of $20,000,000, to be derived 
     from non-safety-related contractor training expenses.

     SEC. 3103. OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Department of Energy for fiscal year 1998 for other defense 
     activities in carrying out programs necessary for national 
     security in the amount of $1,512,551,000, to be allocated as 
     follows:
       (1) For verification and control technology, $428,600,000, 
     to be allocated as follows:
       (A) For nonproliferation and verification research and 
     development, $190,000,000.
       (B) For arms control, $205,000,000.
       (C) For intelligence, $33,600,000.
       (2) For nuclear safeguards and security, $47,200,000.
       (3) For security investigations, $25,000,000.
       (4) For emergency management, $17,000,000.
       (5) For program direction, $68,900,000.
       (6) For worker and community transition assistance, 
     $22,000,000, to be allocated as follows:
       (A) For worker and community transition, $20,000,000.
       (B) For program direction, $2,000,000.
       (7) For fissile materials control and disposition, 
     $103,451,000, to be allocated as follows:
       (A) For operation and maintenance, $99,451,000.
       (B) For program direction, $4,000,000.
       (8) For environment, safety, and health, defense, 
     $73,000,000, to be allocated as follows:
       (A) For the Office of Environment, Safety, and Health 
     (Defense), $63,000,000.
       (B) For program direction, $10,000,000.
       (9) For the Office of Hearings and Appeals, $1,900,000.
       (10) For nuclear energy, $47,000,000, to be allocated as 
     follows:
       (A) For nuclear technology research and development 
     (electrometallurgical), $12,000,000.
       (B) For international nuclear safety (Soviet-designed 
     reactors), $25,000,000.
       (C) For Russian plutonium reactor core conversion, 
     $10,000,000.
       (11) For naval reactors development, $678,500,000, to be 
     allocated as follows:
       (A) For operation and maintenance, $648,920,000.
       (B) For program direction, $20,080,000.
       (C) For plant projects (including maintenance, restoration, 
     planning, construction, acquisition, modification of 
     facilities, and the continuation of projects authorized in 
     prior years, and land acquisition related thereto), 
     $9,500,000, to be allocated as follows:
       Project 98-D-200, site laboratory/facility upgrade, various 
     locations, $1,200,000.
       Project 97-D-201, advanced test reactor secondary coolant 
     refurbishment, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Idaho, 
     $4,100,000.
       Project 95-D-200, laboratory systems and hot cell upgrades, 
     various locations, $1,100,000.
       Project 90-N-102, expended core facility dry cell project, 
     Naval Reactors Facility, Idaho, $3,100,000.

     SEC. 3104. DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Department of Energy for fiscal year 1998 for payment to the 
     Nuclear Waste Fund established in section 302(c) of the 
     Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10222(c)) in the 
     amount of $190,000,000.
                Subtitle B--Recurring General Provisions

     SEC. 3121. REPROGRAMMING.

       (a) In General.--Until the Secretary of Energy submits to 
     the congressional defense committees the report referred to 
     in subsection (b) and a period of 30 days has elapsed after 
     the date on which such committees receive the report, the 
     Secretary may not use amounts appropriated pursuant to this 
     title for any program--
       (1) in amounts that exceed, in a fiscal year--
       (A) 110 percent of the amount authorized for that program 
     by this title; or
       (B) $1,000,000 more than the amount authorized for that 
     program by this title; or
       (2) which has not been presented to, or requested of, 
     Congress.
       (b) Report.--(1) The report referred to in subsection (a) 
     is a report containing a full and complete statement of the 
     action proposed to be

[[Page H4021]]

     taken and the facts and circumstances relied upon in support 
     of such proposed action.
       (2) In the computation of the 30-day period under 
     subsection (a), there shall be excluded any day on which 
     either House of Congress is not in session because of an 
     adjournment of more than 3 days to a day certain.
       (c) Limitations.--(1) In no event may the total amount of 
     funds obligated pursuant to this title exceed the total 
     amount authorized to be appropriated by this title.
       (2) Funds appropriated pursuant to this title may not be 
     used for an item for which Congress has specifically denied 
     funds.

     SEC. 3122. LIMITS ON GENERAL PLANT PROJECTS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy may carry out any 
     construction project under the general plant projects 
     authorized by this title if the total estimated cost of the 
     construction project does not exceed $2,000,000.
       (b) Report to Congress.--If, at any time during the 
     construction of any general plant project authorized by this 
     title, the estimated cost of the project is revised because 
     of unforeseen cost variations and the revised cost of the 
     project exceeds $2,000,000, the Secretary shall immediately 
     furnish a complete report to the congressional defense 
     committees explaining the reasons for the cost variation.

     SEC. 3123. LIMITS ON CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.

       (a) In General.--(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     construction on a construction project may not be started or 
     additional obligations incurred in connection with the 
     project above the total estimated cost, whenever the current 
     estimated cost of the construction project, which is 
     authorized by section 3101, 3102, or 3103, or which is in 
     support of national security programs of the Department of 
     Energy and was authorized by any previous Act, exceeds by 
     more than 25 percent the higher of--
       (A) the amount authorized for the project; or
       (B) the amount of the total estimated cost for the project 
     as shown in the most recent budget justification data 
     submitted to Congress.
       (2) An action described in paragraph (1) may be taken if--
       (A) the Secretary of Energy has submitted to the 
     congressional defense committees a report on the actions and 
     the circumstances making such action necessary; and
       (B) a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on which 
     the report is received by the committees.
       (3) In the computation of the 30-day period under paragraph 
     (2), there shall be excluded any day on which either House of 
     Congress is not in session because of an adjournment of 
     more than 3 days to a day certain.
       (b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to any 
     construction project which has a current estimated cost of 
     less than $5,000,000.

     SEC. 3124. FUND TRANSFER AUTHORITY.

       (a) Transfer to Other Federal Agencies.--The Secretary of 
     Energy may transfer funds authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Department of Energy pursuant to this title to other 
     Federal agencies for the performance of work for which the 
     funds were authorized. Funds so transferred may be merged 
     with and be available for the same purposes and for the same 
     period as the authorizations of the Federal agency to which 
     the amounts are transferred.
       (b) Transfer Within Department of Energy; Limitations.--(1) 
     Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary of Energy may 
     transfer funds authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Department of Energy pursuant to this title between any such 
     authorizations. Amounts of authorizations so transferred may 
     be merged with and be available for the same purposes and for 
     the same period as the authorization to which the amounts are 
     transferred.
       (2) Not more than five percent of any such authorization 
     may be transferred between authorizations under paragraph 
     (1). No such authorization may be increased or decreased by 
     more than five percent by a transfer under such paragraph.
       (3) The authority provided by this section to transfer 
     authorizations--
       (A) may only be used to provide funds for items relating to 
     weapons activities necessary for national security programs 
     that have a higher priority than the items from which the 
     funds are transferred; and
       (B) may not be used to provide authority for an item that 
     has been denied funds by Congress.
       (c) Notice to Congress.--The Secretary of Energy shall 
     promptly notify the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate 
     and the Committee on National Security of the House of 
     Representatives of any transfer of funds to or from 
     authorizations under this title.

     SEC. 3125. AUTHORITY FOR CONCEPTUAL AND CONSTRUCTION DESIGN.

       (a) Requirement for Conceptual Design.--(1) Subject to 
     paragraph (2) and except as provided in paragraph (3), before 
     submitting to Congress a request for funds for a construction 
     project that is in support of a national security program of 
     the Department of Energy, the Secretary of Energy shall 
     complete a conceptual design for that project. The Secretary 
     shall submit to Congress a report on each conceptual design 
     completed under this paragraph.
       (2) If the estimated cost of completing a conceptual design 
     for a construction project exceeds $3,000,000, the Secretary 
     shall submit to Congress a request for funds for the 
     conceptual design before submitting a request for funds for 
     the construction project.
       (3) The requirement in paragraph (1) does not apply to a 
     request for funds--
       (A) for a construction project the total estimated cost of 
     which is less than $2,000,000; or
       (B) for emergency planning, design, and construction 
     activities under section 3126.
       (b) Authority for Construction Design.--(1) Within the 
     amounts authorized by this title, the Secretary of Energy may 
     carry out construction design (including architectural and 
     engineering services) in connection with any proposed 
     construction project if the total estimated cost for such 
     design does not exceed $600,000.
       (2) If the total estimated cost for construction design in 
     connection with any construction project exceeds $600,000, 
     funds for such design must be specifically authorized by law.

     SEC. 3126. AUTHORITY FOR EMERGENCY PLANNING, DESIGN, AND 
                   CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Authority.--The Secretary of Energy may use any funds 
     available to the Department of Energy pursuant to an 
     authorization in this title, including those funds authorized 
     to be appropriated for advance planning and construction 
     design under sections 3101, 3102, and 3103, to perform 
     planning, design, and construction activities for any 
     Department of Energy national security program construction 
     project that, as determined by the Secretary, must proceed 
     expeditiously in order to protect public health and safety, 
     to meet the needs of national defense, or to protect 
     property.
       (b) Limitation.--The Secretary may not exercise the 
     authority under subsection (a) in the case of any 
     construction project until the Secretary has submitted to the 
     congressional defense committees a report on the activities 
     that the Secretary intends to carry out under this section 
     and the circumstances making such activities necessary.
       (c) Specific Authority.--The requirement of section 
     3125(b)(2) does not apply to emergency planning, design, and 
     construction activities conducted under this section.

     SEC. 3127. FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR ALL NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS 
                   OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY.

       Subject to the provisions of appropriations Acts and 
     section 3121, amounts appropriated pursuant to this title for 
     management and support activities and for general plant 
     projects are available for use, when necessary, in connection 
     with all national security programs of the Department of 
     Energy.

     SEC. 3128. AUTHORITY RELATING TO TRANSFERS OF DEFENSE 
                   ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT FUNDS.

       (a) Transfer Authority for Defense Environmental Management 
     Funds.--The Secretary of Energy shall provide the manager of 
     each field office of the Department of Energy with the 
     authority to transfer defense environmental management funds 
     from a program or project under the jurisdiction of the 
     office to another such program or project. Any such transfer 
     may be made only once in a fiscal year to or from a program 
     or project, and the amount transferred to or from a program 
     or project may not exceed $5,000,000 in a fiscal year.
       (b) Determination.--A transfer may not be carried out by a 
     manager of a field office pursuant to the authority provided 
     under subsection (a) unless the manager determines that such 
     transfer is necessary to address a risk to health, safety, or 
     the environment or to assure the most efficient use of 
     defense environmental management funds at that field office.
       (c) Exemption From Reprogramming Requirements.--The 
     requirements of section 3121 shall not apply to transfers of 
     funds pursuant to subsection (a).
       (d) Notification.--The Secretary of Energy, acting through 
     the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental 
     Management, shall notify Congress of any transfer of funds 
     pursuant to subsection (a) not later than 30 days after such 
     a transfer occurs.
       (e) Limitation.--Funds transferred pursuant to subsection 
     (a) may not be used for an item for which Congress has 
     specifically denied funds or for a new program or project 
     that has not been authorized by Congress.
       (f) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) The term ``program or project'' means, with respect to 
     a field office of the Department of Energy, any of the 
     following:
       (A) A project listed in subsection (b) or (e) of section 
     3102 being carried out by the office.
       (B) A program referred to in subsection (a), (b), (c), (e), 
     or (g) of section 3102 being carried out by the office.
       (C) A project or program not described in subparagraph (A) 
     or (B) that is for environmental restoration or waste 
     management activities necessary for national security 
     programs of the Department of Energy, that is being carried 
     out by the office, and for which defense environmental 
     management funds have been authorized and appropriated before 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) The term ``defense environmental management funds'' 
     means funds appropriated to the Department of Energy pursuant 
     to an authorization for carrying out environmental 
     restoration and waste management activities necessary for 
     national security programs.
       (g) Duration of Authority.--The authority provided under 
     subsection (a) to a manager of a field office shall be in 
     effect for the period beginning on October 1, 1997, and 
     ending on September 30, 1998.
   Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations

     SEC. 3131. BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE NATIONAL LABORATORY 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Program.--The Secretary of Energy shall establish a 
     program for purposes of making available to the Secretary of 
     Defense the expertise of the national laboratories for the 
     ballistic missile defense programs of the Department of 
     Defense.
       (b) Task Force.--The Secretary of Energy shall conduct the 
     program through a task force consisting of the directors of 
     the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Sandia National 
     Laboratories, and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. 
     The chairmanship of the task force

[[Page H4022]]

     shall rotate each year among the directors of the 
     laboratories. The director of the Lawrence Livermore National 
     Laboratory shall serve as the first chairman.
       (c) Activities.--Under the program, the national 
     laboratories shall carry out those activities necessary to 
     respond to requests for assistance from the Secretary of 
     Defense with respect to the ballistic missile defense 
     programs of the Department of Defense. Such activities may 
     include the identification of technical modifications and 
     test techniques, the analysis of physics problems, the 
     consolidation of range and test activities, and the analysis 
     and simulation of theater missile defense deployment 
     problems.
       (d) Funding.--Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated 
     by section 3101(a)(1), $50,000,000 shall be available only 
     for the program authorized by this section.
                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

     SEC. 3141. PLAN FOR STEWARDSHIP, MANAGEMENT, AND 
                   CERTIFICATION OF WARHEADS IN THE NUCLEAR 
                   WEAPONS STOCKPILE.

       (a) Plan Requirement.--The Secretary of Energy shall 
     develop and annually update a plan for maintaining the 
     nuclear weapons stockpile. The plan shall cover, at a 
     minimum, stockpile stewardship, stockpile management, and 
     program direction and shall be consistent with the 
     programmatic and technical requirements of the most recent 
     annual Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Memorandum.
       (b) Plan Elements.--The plan and each update of the plan 
     shall set forth the following:
       (1) The number of warheads (including active and inactive 
     warheads) for each type of warhead in the nuclear weapons 
     stockpile.
       (2) The current age of each warhead type, and any plans for 
     stockpile lifetime extensions and modifications or 
     replacement of each warhead type.
       (3) The process by which the Secretary of Energy is 
     assessing the lifetime, and requirements for lifetime 
     extension or replacement, of the nuclear and nonnuclear 
     components of the warheads (including active and inactive 
     warheads) in the nuclear weapons stockpile.
       (4) The process used in recertifying the safety, security, 
     and reliability of each warhead type in the nuclear weapons 
     stockpile.
       (5) Any concerns which would affect the ability of the 
     Secretary of Energy to recertify the safety, security, or 
     reliability of warheads in the nuclear weapons stockpile 
     (including active and inactive warheads).
       (c) Annual Submission of Plan to Congress.--The Secretary 
     of Energy shall submit to Congress the plan developed under 
     subsection (a) not later than March 15, 1998, and shall 
     submit an updated version of the plan not later than March 15 
     of each year thereafter. The plan shall be submitted in both 
     classified and unclassified form.
       (d) Repeal of Superseded Requirements.--The following 
     provisions of law are repealed:
       (1) Subsection (d) of section 3138 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160; 
     107 Stat. 1947; 42 U.S.C. 2121 note).
       (2) Section 3153 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 624; 42 
     U.S.C. 2121 note).
       (3) Section 3159 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 626; 42 
     U.S.C. 7271b note).
       (4) Section 3156 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2841; 42 
     U.S.C. 7271c).

     SEC. 3142. REPEAL OF OBSOLETE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

       The following provisions of law are repealed:
       (1) Subsection (e) of section 1436 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 1989 (Public Law 100-456; 102 
     Stat. 2075; 42 U.S.C. 2121 note).
       (2) Section 3143 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 (Public Law 101-189; 103 Stat. 
     1681; 42 U.S.C. 7271a).
       (3) Section 3134 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484; 106 Stat. 2639).

     SEC. 3143. REVISIONS TO DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES WORKFORCE 
                   RESTRUCTURING PLAN REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Repeal of Period for Notification of Changes in 
     Workforce.--Section 3161(c)(1) of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (42 U.S.C. 
     7274h(c)(1)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A); 
     and
       (2) by striking out subparagraph (B).
       (b) Repeal of Requirements for Plan Updates and Submission 
     to Congress.--Subsections (e) and (f) of section 3161 of such 
     Act are repealed.
       (c) Prohibition on Use of Funds for Local Impact 
     Assistance.--None of the funds authorized to be appropriated 
     to the Department of Energy pursuant to section 3103(6) may 
     be used for local impact assistance from the Department of 
     Energy under section 3161(c)(6) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     7274h(c)(6)).
       (d) Treatment of Federal Employees.--Section 3161 of such 
     Act, as amended by subsection (b), is further amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Treatment of Federal Employees.--This section does 
     not apply to employees of the Department of Energy.''.
       (e) Effect on USEC Privatization Act.--Nothing in this 
     section shall be construed as diminishing the obligations of 
     the Secretary of Energy under section 3110(a)(5) of the USEC 
     Privatization Act (Public Law 104-134; 110 Stat. 1321-341; 42 
     U.S.C. 2297h-8(a)(5)).
       (f) Termination.--Section 3161 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     7274h) is repealed, effective on September 30, 1999.

     SEC. 3144. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR APPOINTMENT OF CERTAIN 
                   SCIENTIFIC, ENGINEERING, AND TECHNICAL 
                   PERSONNEL.

       Section 3161 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 3095; 42 
     U.S.C. 7231 note) is amended--
       (1) by striking out subsection (c); and
       (2) in subsection (d)(1), by striking out ``1997'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``1999''.

     SEC. 3145. REPORT ON PROPOSED CONTRACT FOR HANFORD TANK WASTE 
                   VITRIFICATION PROJECT.

       (a) Prior Notice to Congressional Defense Committees Before 
     Entering Into Contract.--(1) The Secretary of Energy may not 
     enter into a contract for the Hanford Tank Waste 
     Vitrification project until--
       (A) the Secretary submits a report on the proposed contract 
     to the congressional defense committees; and
       (B) a period of 30 days of continuous session of Congress 
     has expired following the date on which the report is 
     submitted.
       (2) For purposes of paragraph (1)(B), the continuity of a 
     session of Congress is broken only by an adjournment of the 
     Congress sine die, and the days on which either House is not 
     in session because of an adjournment of more than three days 
     to a day certain are excluded in the computation of such 30-
     day period.
       (b) Report.--A report under subsection (a)(1) shall include 
     the following:
       (A) A description of the activities to be carried out under 
     the contract.
       (B) A description of the funds expended, and the funds 
     obligated but not expended, as of the date of the report on 
     remediation of Hanford tank waste since 1989.
       (C) A description of the contractual and financial aspects 
     of the contract, including any provisions relating to the 
     risk of nonperformance and risk assumption by the United 
     States and the contractor or contractors.
       (D) An analysis of the cost to the United States of the 
     proposed contract, including a detailed analysis of the 
     annual budget authority and outlay requirements for the life 
     of the project.
       (E) If the proposed contract contemplates construction of 
     two projects, an analysis of the basis for the selection of 
     the two projects, and a detailed analysis of the costs to the 
     United States of two projects compared to the costs to the 
     United States of one project.
       (F) If the proposed contract provides for financing of the 
     project (or projects) by an entity or entities other than the 
     United States, a detailed analysis of the costs of such 
     financing compared to the costs of financing the project (or 
     projects) by the United States.

     SEC. 3146. LIMITATION ON CONDUCT OF SUBCRITICAL NUCLEAR 
                   WEAPONS TESTS.

       The Secretary of Energy may not conduct any subcritical 
     nuclear weapons tests using funds available to the Secretary 
     for fiscal year 1998 until 30 days after the Secretary 
     submits to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and 
     the Committee on National Security of the House of 
     Representatives a detailed report on the manner in which 
     funds available to the Secretary for fiscal years 1996 and 
     1997 to conduct such tests were used.

     SEC. 3147. LIMITATION ON USE OF CERTAIN FUNDS UNTIL FUTURE 
                   USE PLANS ARE SUBMITTED.

       (a) Limitation.--The Secretary of Energy may not use more 
     than 80 percent of the funds available to the Secretary 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     3102(f) (relating to policy and management) until the 
     Secretary submits the plans described in subsection (b).
       (b) Plans.--The plans referred to in subsection (a) are the 
     draft future use plan and the final future use plan required 
     under section 3153(f) of the National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2840; 
     42 U.S.C. 7274k).

     SEC. 3148. PLAN FOR EXTERNAL OVERSIGHT OF NATIONAL 
                   LABORATORIES.

       (a) Plan Requirement.--The Secretary of Energy, acting 
     through the Assistant Secretary for Defense Programs, shall 
     develop a plan for the external oversight of the national 
     laboratories.
       (b) Plan Elements.--The plan shall--
       (1) provide for the establishment of an external oversight 
     committee comprised of representatives of industry and 
     academia for the purpose of making recommendations to the 
     Secretary of Energy and the congressional defense committees 
     on the productivity of the laboratories and on the 
     excellence, relevance, and appropriateness of the research 
     conducted by the laboratories; and
       (2) provide for the establishment of a competitive peer 
     review process for funding basic research at the 
     laboratories.
       (c) Submission to Congress.--The Secretary of Energy shall 
     submit the plan to the congressional defense committees not 
     later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act.
       (d) National Laboratories Covered.--For purposes of this 
     section, the national laboratories are--
       (1) the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, 
     California;
       (2) the Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New 
     Mexico;
       (3) the Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New 
     Mexico; and
       (4) the Nevada Test Site.

     SEC. 3149. UNIVERSITY-BASED RESEARCH CENTER.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
       (1) The maintenance of scientific and engineering 
     competence in the United States is vital to long-term 
     national security and the defense

[[Page H4023]]

     and national security missions of the Department of Energy.
       (2) Engaging the universities and colleges of the Nation in 
     research on long-range problems of vital national security 
     interest will be critical to solving the technology 
     challenges faced within the defense and national programs of 
     the Department of Energy in the next century.
       (3) Enhancing collaboration among the national 
     laboratories, universities and colleges, and industry will 
     contribute significantly to the performance of these 
     Department of Energy missions.
       (b) Center.--The Secretary of Energy shall establish a 
     university-based research center at a location that can 
     develop the most effective collaboration among national 
     laboratories, universities and colleges, and industry in 
     support of scientific and engineering advancement in key 
     Department of Energy defense program areas.
       (c) Funding.--Of the funds authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Department of Energy in fiscal year 1998, the Secretary 
     shall make $5,000,000 available for the establishment and 
     operation of the Center.

     SEC. 3150. STOCKPILE STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) Eliminating the threat posed by nuclear weapons to the 
     United States is an important national security goal.
       (2) As long as nuclear threats remain, the nuclear 
     deterrent of the United States must be effective and 
     reliable.
       (3) A safe, secure, effective, and reliable United States 
     nuclear stockpile is central to the current nuclear 
     deterrence strategy of the United States.
       (4) The Secretary of Energy has undertaken a stockpile 
     stewardship and management program to ensure the safety, 
     security, effectiveness, and reliability of the nuclear 
     weapons stockpile of the United States, consistent with all 
     United States treaty requirements and the requirements of the 
     nuclear deterrence strategy of the United States.
       (5) It is the policy of the current administration that new 
     nuclear weapon designs are not required to effectively 
     implement the nuclear deterrence strategy of the United 
     States.
       (b) Policy.--It is the policy of the United States that--
       (1) activities of the stockpile stewardship program shall 
     be directed toward ensuring that the United States possesses 
     a safe, secure, effective, and reliable nuclear stockpile, 
     consistent with the national security requirements of the 
     United States; and
       (2) stockpile stewardship activities of the United States 
     shall be conducted in conformity with the terms of the Treaty 
     on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (TIAS 6839) and 
     the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty signed by the President on 
     September 24, 1996, when and if that treaty enters into 
     force.

     SEC. 3151. REPORTS ON ADVANCED SUPERCOMPUTER SALES TO CERTAIN 
                   FOREIGN NATIONS.

       (a) Reports.--The Secretary of Energy shall require that 
     any company that is a participant in the Accelerated 
     Strategic Computing Initiative (ASCI) program of the 
     Department of Energy report to the Secretary and to the 
     Secretary of Defense each sale by that company to a country 
     designated as a Tier III country of a computer capable of 
     operating at a speed in excess of 2,000,000 theoretical 
     operations per second (MTOPS). The report shall include a 
     description of the following with respect to each such sale:
       (1) The anticipated end-use of the computer sold.
       (2) The software included with the computer.
       (3) Any arrangement under the terms of the sale regarding--
       (A) upgrading the computer;
       (B) servicing of the computer; or
       (C) the furnishing of spare parts for the computer.
       (b) Covered Countries.--For purposes of this section, the 
     countries designated as Tier III countries are the countries 
     listed as ``computer tier 3'' eligible countries in part 
     740.7 of title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as in 
     effect on June 10, 1997 (or any successor list).
       (c) Quarterly Submission of Reports.--The Secretary of 
     Energy shall require that reports under subsection (a) be 
     submitted quarterly.
       (d) Annual Report.--The Secretary of Energy shall submit to 
     Congress an annual report containing all information received 
     under subsection (a) during the preceding year. The first 
     annual report shall be submitted not later than July 1, 1998.
          TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

     SEC. 3201. AUTHORIZATION.

       There are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 
     1998, $17,500,000 for the operation of the Defense Nuclear 
     Facilities Safety Board under chapter 21 of the Atomic Energy 
     Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2286 et seq.).

     SEC. 3202. PLAN FOR TRANSFER OF FACILITIES FROM JURISDICTION 
                   OF DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD TO 
                   JURISDICTION OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.

       (a) Plan Requirement.--(1) The Defense Nuclear Facilities 
     Safety Board (in this section referred to as the ``Board'') 
     shall develop, in consultation with the Secretary of Energy 
     and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a plan for--
       (A) increasing the authority of the Nuclear Regulatory 
     Commission to include the regulation of Department of Energy 
     defense nuclear facilities; and
       (B) decreasing or eliminating the functions of the Board 
     with respect to such facilities under chapter 21 of the 
     Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2286 et seq.).
       (2) The plan shall be submitted to Congress not later than 
     six months after the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (b) Plan Elements.--The plan shall include the following:
       (1) A list of facilities as described in subsection (c).
       (2) A schedule for the orderly transfer of such facilities 
     from the jurisdiction of the Board to the jurisdiction of the 
     Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
       (3) Recommendations on the order in which the facilities 
     should be transferred, including such recommendations as the 
     Board considers appropriate with respect to the suitability 
     of the various facilities for transfer and the 
     appropriateness for the various facilities of the schedule 
     for conducting the transfer.
       (4) Such other provisions as the Board considers necessary 
     to carry out an orderly transfer under paragraph (2).
       (c) List of Facilities.--The plan shall contain a list of 
     all Department of Energy defense nuclear facilities, grouped 
     according to the following criteria:
       (1) Facilities that are similar to facilities regulated by 
     the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.
       (2) Facilities that are in compliance with Department of 
     Energy nuclear safety requirements and Board recommendations 
     in existence on the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (3) Facilities the regulation of which would involve the 
     Nuclear Regulatory Commission in unique national security 
     interests, including the classified design and configuration 
     of a nuclear weapon or explosive device.
       (d) Facility Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``Department of Energy defense nuclear facility'' has the 
     meaning provided by section 318 of the Atomic Energy Act of 
     1954 (42 U.S.C. 2286g), except that the term includes such a 
     facility that is under construction or is planned by the 
     Secretary of Energy to be constructed.
       (e) Repeal of Prohibition on Use of Funds.--Section 210 of 
     the Department of Energy National Security and Military 
     Applications of Nuclear Energy Authorization Act of 1981 (42 
     U.S.C. 7272) is repealed.
                TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE

     SEC. 3301. AUTHORIZED USES OF STOCKPILE FUNDS.

       (a) Obligation of Stockpile Funds.--During fiscal year 
     1998, the National Defense Stockpile Manager may obligate up 
     to $73,000,000 of the funds in the National Defense Stockpile 
     Transaction Fund for the authorized uses of such funds under 
     section 9(b)(2) of the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock 
     Piling Act (50 U.S.C. 98h(b)(2)).
       (b) Additional Obligations.--The National Defense Stockpile 
     Manager may obligate amounts in excess of the amount 
     specified in subsection (a) if the National Defense Stockpile 
     Manager notifies Congress that extraordinary or emergency 
     conditions necessitate the additional obligations. The 
     National Defense Stockpile Manager may make the additional 
     obligations described in the notification after the end of 
     the 45-day period beginning on the date Congress receives the 
     notification.
       (c) Limitations.--The authorities provided by this section 
     shall be subject to such limitations as may be provided in 
     appropriations Acts.

     SEC. 3302. DISPOSAL OF BERYLLIUM COPPER MASTER ALLOY IN 
                   NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE.

       (a) Disposal Authorization.--Pursuant to section 5(b) of 
     the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act (50 
     U.S.C. 98d(b)), the National Defense Stockpile Manager may 
     dispose of all beryllium copper master alloy from the 
     National Defense Stockpile provided for in section 4 of such 
     Act (50 U.S.C. 98c) as part of continued efforts to modernize 
     the Stockpile.
       (b) Precondition for Disposal.--Before beginning the 
     disposal of beryllium copper master alloy under subsection 
     (a), the National Defense Stockpile Manager shall certify to 
     Congress that the disposal of beryllium copper master alloy 
     will not adversely affect the capability of the National 
     Defense Stockpile to supply the strategic and critical 
     material needs of the United States.
       (c) Consultation With Market Impact Committee.--In 
     disposing of beryllium copper master alloy under subsection 
     (a), the National Defense Stockpile Manager shall consult 
     with the Market Impact Committee established under section 
     10(c) of the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling 
     Act (50 U.S.C. 98h-1(c)) to ensure that the disposal of 
     beryllium copper master alloy does not disrupt the domestic 
     beryllium industry.
       (d) Extended Sales Contracts.--The National Defense 
     Stockpile Manager shall provide for the use of long-term 
     sales contracts for the disposal of beryllium copper master 
     alloy under subsection (a) so that the domestic beryllium 
     industry can re-absorb this material into the market in a 
     gradual and nondisruptive manner. However, no such contract 
     shall provide for the disposal of beryllium copper master 
     alloy over a period longer than eight years, beginning on the 
     date of the commencement of the first contract under this 
     section.
       (e) Relationship to Other Disposal Authority.--The disposal 
     authority provided in subsection (a) is new disposal 
     authority and is in addition to, and shall not affect, any 
     other disposal authority provided by law regarding beryllium 
     copper master alloy.
       (f) Beryllium Copper Master Alloy Defined.--For purposes of 
     this section, the term ``beryllium copper master alloy'' 
     means an alloy of nominally four percent beryllium in copper.

     SEC. 3303. DISPOSAL OF TITANIUM SPONGE IN NATIONAL DEFENSE 
                   STOCKPILE.

       (a) Disposal Required.--Subject to subsection (b), the 
     National Defense Stockpile Manager shall dispose of 34,800 
     short tons of titanium sponge contained in the National 
     Defense

[[Page H4024]]

     Stockpile provided for in section 4 of the Strategic and 
     Critical Materials Stock Piling Act (50 U.S.C. 98c) and 
     excess to stockpile requirements.
       (b) Consultation With Market Impact Committee.--In 
     disposing of titanium sponge under subsection (a), the 
     National Defense Stockpile Manager shall consult with the 
     Market Impact Committee established under section 10(c) of 
     the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act (50 
     U.S.C. 98h-1(c)) to ensure that the disposal of titanium 
     sponge does not disrupt the domestic titanium industry.
       (c) Relationship to Other Disposal Authority.--The disposal 
     authority provided in subsection (a) is new disposal 
     authority and is in addition to, and shall not affect, any 
     other disposal authority provided by law regarding titanium 
     sponge.

     SEC. 3304. CONDITIONS ON TRANSFER OF STOCKPILED PLATINUM 
                   RESERVES FOR TREASURY USE.

       (a) Imposition of Conditions.--Any transfer of platinum 
     contained in the National Defense Stockpile provided for in 
     section 4 of the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock 
     Piling Act (50 U.S.C. 98c) to the Secretary of the Treasury 
     for use to mint and issue bullion and proof platinum coins or 
     for any other purpose shall be subject to the conditions 
     contained in this section.
       (b) Yearly Limitation.--The quantity of platinum 
     transferred from the stockpile to the Secretary of the 
     Treasury may not exceed 200,000 troy ounces during any fiscal 
     year, of which not more than 81,600 troy ounces per year may 
     be platinum of the highest quality specification.
       (c) Replacement Upon Notice.--The Secretary of the Treasury 
     shall replace platinum received from the stockpile within one 
     year after receiving notice from the Secretary of Defense 
     specifying the quantity and quality of transferred platinum 
     to be replaced and the need for replacement.
       (d) Costs.--Any transfer of platinum from the stockpile to 
     the Secretary of the Treasury shall be made without the 
     expenditure of any funds available to the Department of 
     Defense. The Secretary of the Treasury shall be responsible 
     for all costs incurred in connection with the transfer, 
     subsequent to the transfer, or in connection with the 
     replacement of the transferred platinum, such as 
     transportation, storage, testing, refining, or casting costs.

     SEC. 3305. RESTRICTIONS ON DISPOSAL OF CERTAIN MANGANESE 
                   FERRO.

       (a) Requirement for Remelting by Domestic Ferroalloy 
     Producers.--High carbon manganese ferro in the National 
     Defense Stockpile that does not meet the National Defense 
     Stockpile classification of Grade One, Specification 30(a), 
     as revised May 22, 1992, may be sold only for remelting by a 
     domestic ferroalloy producer unless the President determines 
     that a domestic ferroalloy producer is not available to 
     acquire the material. After the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, the President may not reclassify high carbon manganese 
     ferro stored in the National Defense Stockpile as of that 
     date.
       (b) Domestic Ferroalloy Producer Defined.--For purposes of 
     this section, the term ``domestic ferroalloy producer'' means 
     a company or other business entity that, as determined by the 
     President--
       (1) is engaged in operations to upgrade manganese ores of 
     metallurgical grade or manganese ferro; and
       (2) conducts a significant level of its research, 
     development, engineering, and upgrading operations in the 
     United States.
       (c) Consultation With Market Impact Committee.--In 
     disposing of high carbon manganese ferro in the National 
     Defense Stockpile, the National Defense Stockpile Manager 
     shall consult with the Market Impact Committee established 
     under section 10(c) of the Strategic and Critical Materials 
     Stock Piling Act (50 U.S.C. 98h-1(c)) to ensure that the 
     disposal of high carbon manganese ferro does not disrupt the 
     domestic manganese ferro industry.
       (d) Conforming Repeal.--Section 3304 of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 
     104-106; 110 Stat. 629) is repealed.

     SEC. 3306. REQUIRED PROCEDURES FOR DISPOSAL OF STRATEGIC AND 
                   CRITICAL MATERIALS.

       Section 6(b) of the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock 
     Piling Act (50 U.S.C. 98e(b)) is amended in the first 
     sentence by striking out ``materials from the stockpile shall 
     be made by formal advertising or competitive negotiation 
     procedures.'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``strategic and 
     critical materials from the stockpile shall be made in 
     accordance with the next sentence.''.
                 TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

     SEC. 3401. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Secretary of Energy $117,000,000 for fiscal year 1998 for the 
     purpose of carrying out activities under chapter 641 of title 
     10, United States Code, relating to the naval petroleum 
     reserves (as defined in section 7420(2) of such title). Funds 
     appropriated pursuant to such authorization shall remain 
     available until expended.

     SEC. 3402. PRICE REQUIREMENT ON SALE OF CERTAIN PETROLEUM 
                   DURING FISCAL YEAR 1998.

       Notwithstanding section 7430(b)(2) of title 10, United 
     States Code, during fiscal year 1998, any sale of any part of 
     the United States share of petroleum produced from Naval 
     Petroleum Reserves Numbered 1, 2, and 3 shall be made at a 
     price not less than 90 percent of the current sales price, as 
     estimated by the Secretary of Energy, of comparable petroleum 
     in the same area.

     SEC. 3403. TERMINATION OF ASSIGNMENT OF NAVY OFFICERS TO 
                   OFFICE OF NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE 
                   RESERVES.

       (a) Termination of Assignment Requirement.--Section 2 of 
     Public Law 96-137 (42 U.S.C. 7156a) is repealed.
       (b) Effect on Existing Assignments.--In the case of an 
     officer of the Navy assigned, as of the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, to a management position within the Office of 
     Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves, the Secretary of the 
     Navy may continue such assignment notwithstanding the repeal 
     of section 2 of Public Law 96-137 (42 U.S.C. 7156a), except 
     that such assignment may not extend beyond the date of the 
     sale of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 (Elk Hills) 
     pursuant to subtitle B of title XXXIV of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 
     10 U.S.C. 7420 note).
                  TITLE XXXV--PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION
     Subtitle A--Authorization of Expenditures From Revolving Fund

     SEC. 3501. SHORT TITLE.

       This subtitle may be cited as the ``Panama Canal Commission 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998''.

     SEC. 3502. AUTHORIZATION OF EXPENDITURES.

       (a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), the Panama 
     Canal Commission is authorized to use amounts in the Panama 
     Canal Revolving Fund to make such expenditures within the 
     limits of funds and borrowing authority available to it in 
     accordance with law, and to make such contracts and 
     commitments, as may be necessary under the Panama Canal Act 
     of 1979 (22 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.) for the operation, 
     maintenance, improvement, and administration of the Panama 
     Canal for fiscal year 1998.
       (b) Limitations.--For fiscal year 1998, the Panama Canal 
     Commission may expend from funds in the Panama Canal 
     Revolving Fund not more than $85,000 for official reception 
     and representation expenses, of which--
       (1) not more than $23,000 may be used for official 
     reception and representation expenses of the Supervisory 
     Board of the Commission;
       (2) not more than $12,000 may be used for official 
     reception and representation expenses of the Secretary of the 
     Commission; and
       (3) not more than $50,000 may be used for official 
     reception and representation expenses of the Administrator of 
     the Commission.

     SEC. 3503. PURCHASE OF VEHICLES.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the funds 
     available to the Commission shall be available for the 
     purchase and transportation to the Republic of Panama of 
     passenger motor vehicles built in the United States, the 
     purchase price of which shall not exceed $22,000 per vehicle.

     SEC. 3504. EXPENDITURES ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH TREATIES.

       Expenditures authorized under this subtitle may be made 
     only in accordance with the Panama Canal Treaties of 1977 and 
     any law of the United States implementing those treaties.
          Subtitle B--Facilitation of Panama Canal Transition

     SEC. 3511. SHORT TITLE; REFERENCES.

       (a) Short Title.--This subtitle may be cited as the 
     ``Panama Canal Transition Facilitation Act of 1997''.
       (b) References.--Except as otherwise expressly provided, 
     whenever in this subtitle an amendment or repeal is expressed 
     in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other 
     provision, the reference shall be considered to be made to a 
     section or other provision of the Panama Canal Act of 1979 
     (22 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.).

     SEC. 3512. DEFINITIONS RELATING TO CANAL TRANSITION.

       Section 3 (22 U.S.C. 3602) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(d) For purposes of this Act:
       ``(1) The term `Canal Transfer Date' means December 31, 
     1999, such date being the date specified in the Panama Canal 
     Treaty of 1977 for the transfer of the Panama Canal from the 
     United States of America to the Republic of Panama.
       ``(2) The term `Panama Canal Authority' means the entity 
     created by the Republic of Panama to succeed the Panama Canal 
     Commission as of the Canal Transfer Date.''.

    PART I--TRANSITION MATTERS RELATING TO COMMISSION OFFICERS AND 
                               EMPLOYEES

     SEC. 3521. AUTHORITY FOR THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE COMMISSION 
                   TO ACCEPT APPOINTMENT AS THE ADMINISTRATOR OF 
                   THE PANAMA CANAL AUTHORITY.

       (a) Authority for Dual Role.--Section 1103 (22 U.S.C. 3613) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) The Congress consents, for purposes of the 8th clause 
     of article I, section 9 of the Constitution of the United 
     States, to the acceptance by the individual serving as 
     Administrator of the Commission of appointment by the 
     Republic of Panama to the position of Administrator of the 
     Panama Canal Authority. Such consent is effective only if 
     that individual, while serving in both such positions, serves 
     as Administrator of the Panama Canal Authority without 
     compensation, except for payments by the Republic of Panama 
     of travel and entertainment expenses, including per diem 
     payments.''.
       (b) Waiver of Certain Conflict-of-Interest Statutes.--Such 
     section is further amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsections:
       ``(d) The Administrator, with respect to participation in 
     any matter as Administrator of the Panama Canal Commission 
     (whether such participation is before, on, or after the date 
     of the enactment of the Panama Canal Transition Facilitation 
     Act of 1997), shall not be subject to section 208 of title 
     18, United States Code, insofar as the matter relates to 
     prospective employment as Administrator of the Panama Canal 
     Authority.

[[Page H4025]]

       ``(e) If the Republic of Panama appoints as the 
     Administrator of the Panama Canal Authority the individual 
     serving as the Administrator of the Commission and if that 
     individual accepts the appointment--
       ``(1) the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as 
     amended (22 U.S.C. 611 et seq.), shall not apply to that 
     individual with respect to service as the Administrator of 
     the Panama Canal Authority;
       ``(2) that individual, with respect to participation in any 
     matter as the Administrator of the Panama Canal Commission, 
     is not subject to section 208 of title 18, United States 
     Code, insofar as the matter relates to service as, or 
     performance of the duties of, the Administrator of the Panama 
     Canal Authority; and
       ``(3) that individual, with respect to official acts 
     performed as the Administrator of the Panama Canal Authority, 
     is not subject to the following:
       ``(A) Sections 203 and 205 of title 18, United States Code.
       ``(B) Effective upon termination of the individual's 
     appointment as Administrator of the Panama Canal Commission 
     at noon on the Canal Transfer Date, section 207 of title 18, 
     United States Code.
       ``(C) Sections 501(a) and 502(a)(4) of the Ethics in 
     Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), with respect to 
     compensation received for, and service in, the position of 
     Administrator of the Panama Canal Authority.''.

     SEC. 3522. POST-CANAL TRANSFER PERSONNEL AUTHORITIES.

       (a) Waiver of Certain Post-employment Restrictions for 
     Commission Personnel Becoming Employees of the Panama Canal 
     Authority.--Section 1112 (22 U.S.C. 3622) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Effective as of the Canal Transfer Date, section 207 
     of title 18, United States Code, shall not apply to an 
     individual who is an officer or employee of the Panama Canal 
     Authority, but only with respect to official acts of that 
     individual as an officer or employee of the Authority and 
     only in the case of an individual who was an officer or 
     employee of the Commission and whose employment with the 
     Commission was terminated at noon on the Canal Transfer 
     Date.''.
       (b) Consent of Congress for Acceptance by Reserve and 
     Retired Members of the Armed Forces of Employment by Panama 
     Canal Authority.--Such section is further amended by adding 
     after subsection (e), as added by subsection (a), the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(f)(1) The Congress consents to the following persons 
     accepting civil employment (and compensation for that 
     employment) with the Panama Canal Authority for which the 
     consent of the Congress is required by the last paragraph of 
     section 9 of article I of the Constitution of the United 
     States, relating to acceptance of emoluments, offices, or 
     titles from a foreign government:
       ``(A) Retired members of the uniformed services.
       ``(B) Members of a reserve component of the armed forces.
       ``(C) Members of the Commisioned Reserve Corps of the 
     Public Health Service.
       ``(2) The consent of the Congress under paragraph (1) is 
     effective without regard to subsection (b) of section 908 of 
     title 37, United States Code (relating to approval required 
     for employment of Reserve and retired members by foreign 
     governments).''.

     SEC. 3523. ENHANCED AUTHORITY OF COMMISSION TO ESTABLISH 
                   COMPENSATION OF COMMISSION OFFICERS AND 
                   EMPLOYEES.

       (a) Repeal of Limitations on Commission Authority.--The 
     following provisions are repealed:
       (1) Section 1215 (22 U.S.C. 3655), relating to basic pay.
       (2) Section 1219 (22 U.S.C. 3659), relating to salary 
     protection upon conversion of pay rate.
       (3) Section 1225 (22 U.S.C. 3665), relating to minimum 
     level of pay and minimum annual increases.
       (b) Savings Provision.--Section 1202 (22 U.S.C. 3642) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) In the case of an individual who is an officer or 
     employee of the Commission on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of the Panama Canal Transition Facilitation Act of 
     1997 and who has not had a break in service with the 
     Commission since that date, the rate of basic pay for that 
     officer or employee on or after that date may not be less 
     than the rate in effect for that officer or employee on the 
     day before that date of enactment except--
       ``(1) as provided in a collective bargaining agreement;
       ``(2) as a result of an adverse action against the officer 
     or employee; or
       ``(3) pursuant to a voluntary demotion.''.
       (c) Cross-Reference Amendments.--(1) Section 1216 (22 
     U.S.C. 3656) is amended by striking out ``1215'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``1202''.
       (2) Section 1218 (22 U.S.C. 3658) is amended by striking 
     out ``1215'' and ``1217'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``1202'' and ``1217(a)'', respectively.

     SEC. 3524. TRAVEL, TRANSPORTATION, AND SUBSISTENCE EXPENSES 
                   FOR COMMISSION PERSONNEL NO LONGER SUBJECT TO 
                   FEDERAL TRAVEL REGULATION.

       (a) Repeal of Applicability of Title 5 Provisions.--(1) 
     Section 1210 (22 U.S.C. 3650) is amended by striking out 
     subsections (a), (b), and (c).
       (2) Section 1224 (22 U.S.C. 3664) is amended--
       (A) by striking out paragraph (10); and
       (B) by redesignating paragraphs (11) through (20) as 
     paragraphs (10) through (19), respectively.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Section 1210 is further 
     amended--
       (A) by redesignating subsection (d)(1) as subsection (a) 
     and in that subsection striking out ``paragraph (2)'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``subsection (b)''; and
       (B) by redesignating subsection (d)(2) as subsection (b) 
     and in that subsection--
       (i) striking out ``Notwithstanding paragraph (1), an'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``An''; and
       (ii) striking out ''referred to in paragraph (1)'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``who is a citizen of the Republic 
     of Panama''.
       (2) The heading of such section is amended to read as 
     follows:

                        ``air transportation''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on January 1, 1999.

     SEC. 3525. ENHANCED RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION AUTHORITIES.

       (a) Recruitment, Relocation, and Retention Bonuses.--
     Section 1217 (22 U.S.C. 3657) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (e);
       (2) in subsection (e) (as so redesignated), by striking out 
     ``for the same or similar work performed in the United States 
     by individuals employed by the Government of the United 
     States'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``of the individual to 
     whom the compensation is paid''; and
       (3) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new 
     subsections:
       ``(c)(1) The Commission may pay a recruitment bonus to an 
     individual who is newly appointed to a position with the 
     Commission, or a relocation bonus to an employee of the 
     Commission who must relocate to accept a position, if the 
     Commission determines that the Commission would be likely, in 
     the absence of such a bonus, to have difficulty in filling 
     the position.
       ``(2) A recruitment or relocation bonus may be paid to an 
     employee under this subsection only if the employee enters 
     into an agreement with the Commission to complete a period of 
     employment with the Commission established by the Commission. 
     If the employee voluntarily fails to complete such period of 
     employment or is separated from service in such employment as 
     a result of an adverse action before the completion of such 
     period, the employee shall repay the entire amount of the 
     bonus.
       ``(3) A relocation bonus under this subsection may be paid 
     as a lump sum. A recruitment bonus under this subsection 
     shall be paid on a pro rata basis over the period of 
     employment covered by the agreement under paragraph (2). A 
     bonus under this subsection may not be considered to be 
     part of the basic pay of an employee.
       ``(d)(1) The Commission may pay a retention bonus to an 
     employee of the Commission if the Commission determines 
     that--
       ``(A) the employee has unusually high or unique 
     qualifications and those qualifications make it essential for 
     the Commission to retain the employee for a period specified 
     by the Commission ending not later than the Canal Transfer 
     Date, or the Commission otherwise has a special need for the 
     services of the employee making it essential for the 
     Commission to retain the employee for a period specified by 
     the Commission ending not later than the Canal Transfer Date; 
     and
       ``(B) the employee would be likely to leave employment with 
     the Commission before the end of that period if the retention 
     bonus is not paid.
       ``(2) A retention bonus under this subsection--
       ``(A) shall be in a fixed amount;
       ``(B) shall be paid on a pro rata basis (over the period 
     specified by the Commission as essential for the retention of 
     the employee), with such payments to be made at the same time 
     and in the same manner as basic pay; and
       ``(C) may not be considered to be part of the basic pay of 
     an employee.
       ``(3) A decision by the Commission to exercise or to not 
     exercise the authority to pay a bonus under this subsection 
     shall not be subject to review under any statutory procedure 
     or any agency or negotiated grievance procedure except under 
     any of the laws referred to in section 2302(d) of title 5, 
     United States Code.''.
       (b) Educational Services.--Section 1321(e)(2) (22 U.S.C. 
     3731(e)(2)) is amended by striking out ``and persons'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``, to other Commission employees 
     when determined by the Commission to be necessary for their 
     recruitment or retention, and to other persons''.

     SEC. 3526. TRANSITION SEPARATION INCENTIVE PAYMENTS.

       Chapter 2 of title I (22 U.S.C. 3641 et seq.) is amended by 
     adding at the end of subchapter III the following new 
     section:

               ``transition separation incentive payments

       ``Sec. 1233. (a) In applying to the Commission and 
     employees of the Commission the provisions of section 663 of 
     the Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government 
     Appropriations Act, 1997 (as contained in section 101(f) of 
     division A of Public Law 104-208; 110 Stat. 3009-383), 
     relating to voluntary separation incentives for employees of 
     certain Federal agencies (in this section referred to as 
     `section 663')--
       ``(1) the term `employee' shall mean an employee of the 
     Commission who has served in the Republic of Panama in a 
     position with the Commission for a continuous period of at 
     least three years immediately before the employee's 
     separation under an appointment without time limitation and 
     who is covered under the Civil Service Retirement System or 
     the Federal Employees' Retirement System under subchapter III 
     of chapter 83 or chapter 84, respectively, of title 5, United 
     States Code, other than--
       ``(A) an employee described in any of subparagraphs (A) 
     through (F) of subsection (a)(2) of section 663; or
       ``(B) an employee of the Commission who, during the 24-
     month period preceding the date

[[Page H4026]]

     of separation, has received a recruitment or relocation bonus 
     under section 1217(c) of this Act or who, within the 12-month 
     period preceding the date of separation, received a retention 
     bonus under section 1217(d) of this Act;
       ``(2) the strategic plan under subsection (b) of section 
     663 shall include (in lieu of the matter specified in 
     subsection (b)(2) of that section)--
       ``(A) the positions to be affected, identified by 
     occupational category and grade level;
       ``(B) the number and amounts of separation incentive 
     payments to be offered; and
       ``(C) a description of how such incentive payments will 
     facilitate the successful transfer of the Panama Canal to the 
     Republic of Panama;
       ``(3) a separation incentive payment under section 663 may 
     be paid to a Commission employee only to the extent necessary 
     to facilitate the successful transfer of the Panama Canal by 
     the United States of America to the Republic of Panama as 
     required by the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977;
       ``(4) such a payment--
       ``(A) may be in an amount determined by the Commission not 
     to exceed $25,000; and
       ``(B) may be made (notwithstanding the limitation specified 
     in subsection (c)(2)(D) of section 663) in the case of an 
     eligible employee who voluntarily separates (whether by 
     retirement or resignation) during the 90-day period beginning 
     on the date of the enactment of this section or during the 
     period beginning on October 1, 1998, and ending on 
     December 31, 1998;
       ``(5) in the case of not more than 15 employees who (as 
     determined by the Commission) are unwilling to work for the 
     Panama Canal Authority after the Canal Transfer Date and who 
     occupy critical positions for which (as determined by the 
     Commission) at least two years of experience is necessary to 
     ensure that seasoned managers are in place on and after the 
     Canal Transfer Date, such a payment (notwithstanding 
     paragraph (4))--
       ``(A) may be in an amount determined by the Commission not 
     to exceed 50 percent of the basic pay of the employee; and
       ``(B) may be made (notwithstanding the limitation specified 
     in subsection (c)(2)(D) of section 663) in the case of such 
     an employee who voluntarily separates (whether by retirement 
     or resignation) during the 90-day period beginning on the 
     date of the enactment of this section; and
       ``(6) the provisions of subsection (f) of section 663 shall 
     not apply.
       ``(b) A decision by the Commission to exercise or to not 
     exercise the authority to pay a transition separation 
     incentive under this section shall not be subject to review 
     under any statutory procedure or any agency or negotiated 
     grievance procedure except under any of the laws referred to 
     in section 2302(d) of title 5, United States Code.''.

     SEC. 3527. LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS.

       Section 1271 (22 U.S.C. 3701) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new subsection:
       ``(c)(1) This subsection applies to any matter that becomes 
     the subject of collective bargaining between the Commission 
     and the exclusive representative for any bargaining unit of 
     employees of the Commission during the period beginning on 
     the date of the enactment of this subsection and ending on 
     the Canal Transfer Date.
       ``(2)(A) The resolution of impasses resulting from 
     collective bargaining between the Commission and any such 
     exclusive representative during that period shall be 
     conducted in accordance with such procedures as may be 
     mutually agreed upon between the Commission and the exclusive 
     representative (without regard to any otherwise applicable 
     provisions of chapter 71 of title 5, United States Code). 
     Such mutually agreed upon procedures shall become effective 
     upon transmittal by the Chairman of the Commission to the 
     Congress of notice of the agreement to use those procedures 
     and a description of those procedures.
       ``(B) The Federal Services Impasses Panel shall not have 
     jurisdiction to resolve any impasse between the Commission 
     and any such exclusive representative in negotiations over a 
     procedure for resolving impasses.
       ``(3) If the Commission and such an exclusive 
     representative do not reach an agreement concerning a 
     procedure for resolving impasses with respect to a bargaining 
     unit and transmit notice of the agreement under paragraph (2) 
     on or before July 1, 1998, the following shall be the 
     procedure by which collective bargaining impasses between the 
     Commission and the exclusive representative for that 
     bargaining unit shall be resolved:
       ``(A) If bargaining efforts do not result in an agreement, 
     the parties shall request the Federal Mediation and 
     Conciliation Service to assist in achieving an agreement.
       ``(B) If an agreement is not reached within 45 days after 
     the date on which either party requests the assistance of the 
     Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service in writing (or 
     within such shorter period as may be mutually agreed upon by 
     the parties), the parties shall be considered to be at an 
     impasse and shall request the Federal Services Impasses Panel 
     of the Federal Labor Relations Authority to decide the 
     impasse.
       ``(C) If the Federal Services Impasses Panel fails to issue 
     a decision within 90 days after the date on which its 
     services are requested (or within such shorter period as may 
     be mutually agreed upon by the parties), the efforts of the 
     Panel shall be terminated.
       ``(D) In such a case, the Chairman of the Panel (or another 
     member in the absence of the Chairman) shall immediately 
     determine the matter by a drawing (conducted in such manner 
     as the Chairman (or, in the absence of the Chairman, such 
     other member) determines appropriate) between the last offer 
     of the Commission and the last offer of the exclusive 
     representative, with the offer chosen through such drawing 
     becoming the binding resolution of the matter.
       ``(4) In the case of a notice of agreement described in 
     paragraph (2)(A) that is transmitted to the Congress as 
     described in the second sentence of that paragraph after July 
     1, 1998, the impasse resolution procedures covered by that 
     notice shall apply to any impasse between the Commission and 
     the other party to the agreeement that is unresolved on the 
     date on which that notice is transmitted to the Congress.''.

     SEC. 3528. AVAILABILITY OF PANAMA CANAL REVOLVING FUND FOR 
                   SEVERANCE PAY FOR CERTAIN EMPLOYEES SEPARATED 
                   BY PANAMA CANAL AUTHORITY AFTER CANAL TRANSFER 
                   DATE.

       (a) Availability of Revolving Fund.--Section 1302(a) (22 
     U.S.C. 3712(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(10) Payment to the Panama Canal Authority, not later 
     than the Canal Transfer Date, of such amount as is computed 
     by the Commission to be the future amount of severance pay to 
     be paid by the Panama Canal Authority to employees whose 
     employment with the Authority is terminated, to the extent 
     that such severance pay is attributable to periods of service 
     performed with the Commission before the Canal Transfer Date 
     (and assuming for purposes of such computation that the 
     Panama Canal Authority, in paying severance pay to terminated 
     employees, will provide for crediting of periods of service 
     with the Commission).''.
       (b) Stylistic Amendments.--Such section is further 
     amended--
       (1) by striking out ``for--'' in the matter preceding 
     paragraph (1) and inserting in lieu thereof ``for the 
     following purposes:'';
       (2) by capitalizing the initial letter of the first word in 
     each of paragraphs (1) through (9);
       (3) by striking out the semicolon at the end of each of 
     paragraphs (1) through (7) and inserting in lieu thereof a 
     period; and
       (4) by striking out ``; and'' at the end of paragraph (8) 
     and inserting in lieu thereof a period.

PART II--TRANSITION MATTERS RELATING TO OPERATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF 
                                 CANAL

     SEC. 3541. ESTABLISHMENT OF PROCUREMENT SYSTEM AND BOARD OF 
                   CONTRACT APPEALS.

       Title III of the Panama Canal Act of 1979 (22 U.S.C. 3601 
     et seq.) is amended by inserting after the title heading the 
     following new chapter:

                        ``Chapter 1--Procurement


                          ``procurement system

       ``Sec. 3101. (a) Panama Canal Acquisition Regulation.--(1) 
     The Commission shall establish by regulation a comprehensive 
     procurement system. The regulation shall be known as the 
     `Panama Canal Acquisition Regulation' (in this section 
     referred to as the `Regulation') and shall provide for the 
     procurement of goods and services by the Commission in a 
     manner that--
       ``(A) applies the fundamental operating principles and 
     procedures in the Federal Acquisition Regulation;
       ``(B) uses efficient commercial standards of practice; and
       ``(C) is suitable for adoption and uninterrupted use by the 
     Republic of Panama after the Canal Transfer Date.
       ``(2) The Regulation shall contain provisions regarding the 
     establishment of the Panama Canal Board of Contract Appeals 
     described in section 3102.
       ``(b) Supplement to Regulation.--The Commission shall 
     develop a Supplement to the Regulation (in this section 
     referred to as the `Supplement') that identifies both the 
     provisions of Federal law applicable to procurement of goods 
     and services by the Commission and the provisions of Federal 
     law waived by the Commission under subsection (c).
       ``(c) Waiver Authority.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the 
     Commission shall determine which provisions of Federal law 
     should not apply to procurement by the Commission and may 
     waive those laws for purposes of the Regulation and 
     Supplement.
       ``(2) For purposes of paragraph (1), the Commission may not 
     waive--
       ``(A) section 27 of the Office of Federal Procurement 
     Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 423);
       ``(B) the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (41 U.S.C. 601 et 
     seq.), other than section 10(a) of such Act (41 U.S.C 
     609(a)); or
       ``(C) civil rights, environmental, or labor laws.
       ``(d) Consultation With Administrator for Federal 
     Procurement Policy.--In establishing the Regulation and 
     developing the Supplement, the Commission shall consult with 
     the Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy.
       ``(e) Effective Date.--The Regulation and the Supplement 
     shall take effect on the date of publication in the Federal 
     Register, or January 1, 1999, whichever is earlier.


                ``panama canal board of contract appeals

       ``Sec. 3102. (a) Establishment.--(1) The Secretary of 
     Defense, in consultation with the Commission, shall establish 
     a board of contract appeals, to be known as the Panama Canal 
     Board of Contract Appeals, in accordance with section 8 of 
     the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (41 U.S.C. 607). Except as 
     otherwise provided by this section, the Panama Canal Board of 
     Contract Appeals (in this section referred to as the `Board') 
     shall be subject to the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (41 
     U.S.C. 601 et seq.) in the same manner as any other agency 
     board of contract appeals established under that Act.
       ``(2) The Board shall consist of three members. At least 
     one member of the Board shall be licensed to practice law in 
     the Republic of Panama. Individuals appointed to the Board 
     shall take an oath of office, the form of which shall be 
     prescribed by the Secretary of Defense.
       ``(b) Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Appeals.--
     Notwithstanding section 10(a)(1) of the Contract Disputes Act 
     of 1978 (41 U.S.C. 609(a)(1)) or any other provision of law, 
     the Board shall have exclusive jurisdiction to decide

[[Page H4027]]

     an appeal from a decision of a contracting officer under 
     section 8(d) of such Act (41 U.S.C. 607(d)).
       ``(c) Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Protests.--The Board 
     shall decide protests submitted to it under this subsection 
     by interested parties in accordance with subchapter V of 
     title 31, United States Code. Notwithstanding section 3556 of 
     that title, section 1491(b) of title 28, United States Code, 
     and any other provision of law, the Board shall have 
     exclusive jurisdiction to decide such protests. For purposes 
     of this subsection--
       ``(1) except as provided in paragraph (2), each reference 
     to the Comptroller General in sections 3551 through 3555 of 
     title 31, United States Code, is deemed to be a reference to 
     the Board;
       ``(2) the reference to the Comptroller General in section 
     3553(d)(3)(C)(ii) of such title is deemed to be a reference 
     to both the Board and the Comptroller General;
       ``(3) the report required by paragraph (1) of section 
     3554(e) of such title shall be submitted to the Comptroller 
     General as well as the committees listed in such paragraph;
       ``(4) the report required by paragraph (2) of such section 
     shall be submitted to the Comptroller General as well as 
     Congress; and
       ``(5) section 3556 of such title shall not apply to the 
     Board, but nothing in this subsection shall affect the right 
     of an interested party to file a protest with the appropriate 
     contracting officer.
       ``(d) Procedures.--The Board shall prescribe such 
     procedures as may be necessary for the expeditious decision 
     of appeals and protests under subsections (b) and (c).
       ``(e) Commencement.--The Board shall begin to function as 
     soon as it has been established and has prescribed procedures 
     under subsection (d), but not later than January 1, 1999.
       ``(f) Transition.--The Board shall have jurisdiction under 
     subsection (b) and (c) over any appeals and protests filed on 
     or after the date on which the Board begins to function. Any 
     appeals and protests filed before such date shall remain 
     before the forum in which they were filed.
       ``(g) Other Functions.--The Board may perform functions 
     similar to those described in this section for such other 
     matters or activities of the Commission as the Commission may 
     determine and in accordance with regulations prescribed by 
     the Commission.''.

     SEC. 3542. TRANSACTIONS WITH THE PANAMA CANAL AUTHORITY.

       Section 1342 (22 U.S.C. 3752) is amended--
       (1) by designating the text of the section as subsection 
     (a); and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsections:
       ``(b) The Commission may provide office space, equipment, 
     supplies, personnel, and other in-kind services to the Panama 
     Canal Authority on a nonreimbursable basis.
       ``(c) Any executive department or agency of the United 
     States may, on a reimbursable basis, provide to the Panama 
     Canal Authority materials, supplies, equipment, work, or 
     services requested by the Panama Canal Authority, at such 
     rates as may be agreed upon by that department or agency and 
     the Panama Canal Authority.''.

     SEC. 3543. TIME LIMITATIONS ON FILING OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES.

       (a) Filing of Administrative Claims With Commission.--
     Sections 1411(a) (22 U.S.C. 3771(a)) and 1412 (22 U.S.C. 
     3772) are each amended in the last sentence by striking out 
     ``within 2 years after'' and all that follows through ``of 
     1985,'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``within one year after 
     the date of the injury or the date of the enactment of the 
     Panama Canal Transition Facilitation Act of 1997,''.
       (b) Filing of Judicial Actions.--The penultimate sentence 
     of section 1416 (22 U.S.C. 3776) is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``one year'' the first place it appears 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``180 days''; and
       (2) by striking out ``claim, or'' and all that follows 
     through ``of 1985,'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``claim or 
     the date of the enactment of the Panama Canal Transition 
     Facilitation Act of 1997,''.

     SEC. 3544. TOLLS FOR SMALL VESSELS.

       Section 1602(a) (22 U.S.C. 3792(a)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking out ``supply ships, 
     and yachts'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``and supply 
     ships''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new sentence: 
     ``Tolls for small vessels (including yachts), as defined by 
     the Commission, may be set at rates determined by the 
     Commission without regard to the preceding provisions of this 
     subsection.''.

     SEC. 3545. DATE OF ACTUARIAL EVALUATION OF FECA LIABILITY.

       Section 5(a) of the Panama Canal Commission Compensation 
     Fund Act of 1988 (22 U.S.C. 3715c(a)) is amended by striking 
     out ``Upon the termination of the Panama Canal Commission'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``By March 31, 1998''.

     SEC. 3546. APPOINTMENT OF NOTARIES PUBLIC.

       Section 1102a (22 U.S.C. 3612a) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(g)(1) The Commission may appoint any United States 
     citizen to have the general powers of a notary public to 
     perform, on behalf of Commission employees and their 
     dependents outside the United States, any notarial act that a 
     notary public is required or authorized to perform within the 
     United States. Unless an earlier expiration is provided by 
     the terms of the appointment, any such appointment shall 
     expire three months after the Canal Transfer Date.
       ``(2) Every notarial act performed by a person acting as a 
     notary under paragraph (1) shall be as valid, and of like 
     force and effect within the United States, as if executed by 
     or before a duly authorized and competent notary public in 
     the United States.
       ``(3) The signature of any person acting as a notary under 
     paragraph (1), when it appears with the title of that 
     person's office, is prima facie evidence that the signature 
     is genuine, that the person holds the designated title, and 
     that the person is authorized to perform a notarial act.''.

     SEC. 3547. COMMERCIAL SERVICES.

       Section 1102b (22 U.S.C. 3612b) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new subsection:
       ``(e) The Commission may conduct and promote commercial 
     activities related to the management, operation, or 
     maintenance of the Panama Canal. Any such commercial activity 
     shall be carried out consistent with the Panama Canal Treaty 
     of 1977 and related agreements.''.

     SEC. 3548. TRANSFER FROM PRESIDENT TO COMMISSION OF CERTAIN 
                   REGULATORY FUNCTIONS RELATING TO EMPLOYMENT 
                   CLASSIFICATION APPEALS.

       Sections 1221(a) and 1222(a) (22 U.S.C. 3661(a), 3662(a)) 
     are amended by striking out ``President'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``Commission''.

     SEC. 3549. ENHANCED PRINTING AUTHORITY.

       Section 1306(a) (22 U.S.C. 3714b(a)) is amended by striking 
     out ``Section 501'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``Sections 
     501 through 517 and 1101 through 1123''.

     SEC. 3550. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Clerical Amendments.--The table of contents in section 
     1 is amended--
       (1) by striking out the item relating to section 1210 and 
     inserting in lieu thereof the following:

``Sec. 1210. Air transportation.'';
       (2) by striking out the items relating to sections 1215, 
     1219, and 1225;
       (3) by inserting after the item relating to section 1232 
     the following new item:

``Sec. 1233. Transition separation incentive payments.'';
     and
       (4) by inserting after the item relating to the heading of 
     title III the following:

                        ``Chapter 1--Procurement

``Sec. 3101. Procurement system.
``Sec. 3102. Panama Canal Board of Contract Appeals.''.

       (b) Amendment To Reflect Prior Change in Compensation of 
     Administrator.--Section 5315 of title 5, United States Code, 
     is amended by striking out the following:
       ``Administrator of the Panama Canal Commission.''.
       (c) Amendments To Reflect Change in Travel and 
     Transportation Expenses Authority.--(1) Section 5724(a)(3) of 
     title 5, United States Code, is amended by striking out ``, 
     the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,'' and all that follows 
     through ``Panama Canal Act of 1979'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico''.
       (2) Section 5724a(j) of such title is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``and'' after ``Northern Mariana 
     Islands,''; and
       (B) by striking out ``United States, and'' and all that 
     follows through the period at the end and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``United States.''.
       (3) The amendments made by this subsection shall take 
     effect on January 1,1999.
       (d) Miscellaneous Technical Amendments.--
       (1) Section 3(b) (22 U.S.C. 3602(b)) is amended by striking 
     out ``the Canal Zone Code'' and all that follows through 
     ``other laws'' the second place it appears and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``laws of the United States and regulations 
     issued pursuant to such laws''.
       (2)(A) The following provisions are each amended by 
     striking out ``the effective date of this Act'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``October 1, 1979'': sections 3(b), 3(c), 
     1112(b), and 1321(c)(1).
       (B) Section 1321(c)(2) is amended by striking out ``such 
     effective date'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``October 1, 
     1979''.
       (C) Section 1231(c)(3)(A) (22 U.S.C. 3671(c)(3)(A)) is 
     amended by striking out ``the day before the effective date 
     of this Act'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``September 30, 
     1979''.
       (3) Section 1102a(h), as redesignated by section 3546(1), 
     is amended by striking out ``section 1102B'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``section 1102b''.
       (4) Section 1110(b)(2) (22 U.S.C. 3620(b)(2)) is amended by 
     striking out ``section 16 of the Act of August 1, 1956 (22 
     U.S.C. 2680a),'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``section 207 
     of the Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 3927)''.
       (5) Section 1212(b)(3) (22 U.S.C. 3652(b)(3)) is amended by 
     striking out ``as last in effect before the effective date of 
     section 3530 of the Panama Canal Act Amendments of 1996'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``as in effect on September 22, 
     1996''.
       (6) Section 1243(c)(2) (22 U.S.C. 3681(c)(2)) is amended by 
     striking out ``retroactivity'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``retroactively''.
       (7) Section 1341(f) (22 U.S.C. 3751(f)) is amended by 
     striking out ``sections 1302(c)'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``sections 1302(b)''.
                  TITLE XXXVI--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

     SEC. 3601. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 
                   1998.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1998, to be available without fiscal year limitation if 
     so provided in appropriations Act, for the use of the 
     Department of Transportation for the Maritime Administration 
     as follows:

[[Page H4028]]

       (1) For expenses necessary for operations and training 
     activities, $70,000,000.
       (2) For expenses under the loan guarantee program 
     authorized by title XI of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 
     App. U.S.C. 1271 et seq.), $39,000,000 of which--
       (A) $35,000,000 is for the cost (as defined in section 
     502(5) of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 
     661a(5))) of loan guarantees under the program; and
       (B) $4,000,000 is for administrative expenses related to 
     loan guarantee commitments under the program.

     SEC. 3602. REPEAL OF OBSOLETE ANNUAL REPORT REQUIREMENT 
                   CONCERNING RELATIVE COST OF SHIPBUILDING IN THE 
                   VARIOUS COASTAL DISTRICTS OF THE UNITED STATES.

       (a) Repeal.--Section 213 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 
     (46 App. U.S.C. 1123), is amended by striking out paragraph 
     (c).
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Such section is further 
     amended--
       (1) by striking out ``on--'' in the matter preceding 
     paragraph (a) and inserting in lieu thereof ``on the 
     following:'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (a) and (b) as paragraphs 
     (1) and (2), respectively;
       (3) by striking out the semicolon at the end of each of 
     those paragraphs and inserting in lieu thereof a period; and
       (4) by realigning those paragraphs so as to be indented 2 
     ems from the left margin.

     SEC. 3603. PROVISIONS RELATING TO MARITIME SECURITY FLEET 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Authority of Contractors To Operate Self-Propelled Tank 
     Vessels in Noncontiguous Domestic Trades.--Section 656(b) of 
     the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 App. U.S.C. 1187e(b)) is 
     amended by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(b)'', and by adding at 
     the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Subsection (a) shall not apply to operation by a 
     contractor of a self-propelled tank vessel in a noncontiguous 
     domestic trade, or to ownership by a contractor of an 
     interest in a self-propelled tank vessel that operates in a 
     noncontiguous domestic trade.''.
       (b) Relief from Delay in Certain Operations Following 
     Documentation.--Section 652(c) of the Merchant Marine Act, 
     1936 (46 U.S.C. 1187a(c)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following: ``The third sentence of section 901(b)(1) shall 
     not apply to a vessel included in an operating agreement 
     under this subtitle.''.

     SEC. 3604. AUTHORITY TO UTILIZE REPLACEMENT VESSELS AND 
                   CAPACITY.

       Section 653(d)(1) of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 App. 
     U.S.C. 1187c(d)(1)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) a contractor or other person that commits to make 
     available a vessel or vessel capacity under the Emergency 
     Preparedness Program or another primary sealift readiness 
     program approved by the Secretary of Defense may, during the 
     activation of that vessel or capacity under that program, 
     operate or employ in foreign commerce a foreign-flag vessel 
     or foreign-flag vessel capacity as a temporary replacement 
     for the activated vessel or capacity; and''.

     SEC. 3605. AUTHORITY TO CONVEY NATIONAL DEFENSE RESERVE FLEET 
                   VESSEL.

       (a) Authority To Convey.--The Secretary of Transportation 
     may convey all right, title, and interest of the United 
     States Government in and to the vessel GOLDEN BEAR (United 
     States official number 239932) to the Artship Foundation, 
     located in Oakland, California (in this section referred to 
     as the ``recipient''), for use as a multi-cultural center for 
     the arts.
       (b) Terms of Conveyance.--
       (1) Delivery of vessel.--In carrying out subsection (a), 
     the Secretary shall deliver the vessel--
       (A) at the place where the vessel is located on the date of 
     conveyance;
       (B) in its condition on that date; and
       (C) at no cost to the United States Government.
       (2) Additional terms.--The Secretary may require such 
     additional terms in connection with the conveyance authorized 
     by this section as the Secretary considers appropriate.
       (c) Other Unneeded Equipment.--The Secretary may convey to 
     the recipient of the vessel conveyed under this section any 
     unneeded equipment from other vessels in the National Defense 
     Reserve Fleet, for use to restore the vessel conveyed under 
     this section to museum quality.

  The CHAIRMAN. No amendments to the committee amendment in the nature 
of a substitute are in order except amendments printed in House Report 
105-137, amendments considered printed in the report, and amendments en 
bloc described in section 3 of the resolution.
  Except as specified in section 5 of the resolution, each amendment 
shall be considered only in the order printed in the report, may be 
offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered 
as having been read, and shall not be subject to a demand for a 
division of the question.
  Unless otherwise specified in the report or in the resolution, each 
amendment printed in the report shall be debatable for 10 minutes, 
equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent of the 
amendment, and shall not be subject to amendment, except that the 
chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on National 
Security each may offer one pro forma amendment for the purpose of 
further debate on any pending amendment.
  Consideration of amendments 8 and 9 printed in part 1 of the report 
shall begin with an additional period of general debate, which shall be 
confined to the subject of the United States forces in Bosnia and shall 
not exceed 1 hour, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 
ranking minority member.
  It shall be in order at any time for the chairman of the Committee on 
National Security or his designee to offer amendments en bloc 
consisting of amendments printed in part 2 of the report not earlier 
disposed of or germane modifications of any such amendment. The 
amendments en bloc shall be considered as having been read, except that 
modifications shall be reported, shall be debatable for 20 minutes, 
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the committee, or their designees, shall not be subject to 
amendment and shall not be subject to a demand for a division of the 
question.
  The original proponent of an amendment included in the amendments en 
bloc may insert a statement in the Congressional Record immediately 
before disposition of the amendments en bloc.
  The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone until a time 
during further consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request 
for a recorded vote on any amendment made in order by the resolution 
and may reduce to not less than 5 minutes the time for voting by 
electronic device on any postponed question that immediately follows 
another vote by electronic device without intervening business, 
provided that the time for voting by electronic device on the first in 
any series of questions shall not be less than 15 minutes.
  The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may recognize for 
consideration of amendments made in order by the resolution out of the 
order in which they are printed, but not sooner than 1 hour after the 
chairman of the Committee on National Security or a designee announces 
from the floor a request to that effect.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in part 1 of 
House Report 105-137.


                 Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Sanders

  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Sanders:
       At the end of the bill (page 540, after line 21) insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. 3606. REDUCTION OF OVERALL AUTHORIZED SPENDING LEVELS

       The total amount provided under Divisions A, B, and C 
     respectively of this bill shall each be reduced by 5% in each 
     of the fiscal years 1998 and 1999.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. 
Sanders] and a Member opposed, the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. 
Spence] each will control 15 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. Sanders].
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 5 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill provides for $268 billion in defense spending 
for fiscal year 1998, $2.6 billion more than was requested by President 
Clinton. My amendment provides for an across-the-board 5 percent cut in 
overall defense spending as authorized by this bill. It will cut $13.4 
billion.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment is about national priorities and is the 
only amendment that has been allowed on the floor which calls for a cut 
in military spending.
  The bottom line that we are discussing here is pretty simple. At a 
time when the cold war is over, when the Soviet Union no longer exists, 
when we are militarily outspending all of our so-called enemies by huge 
amounts, we do not need to continue spending this kind of money for the 
military. We do not need to fund the military at almost the same level 
it was at the heart of the cold war.
  Mr. Chairman, when we talk about U.S. military spending, we must also 
put it in the context of the current world situation. While we are now 
spending $264 billion, our NATO allies are also spending over $200 
billion. Combined, we and our allies are spending close to $500 billion 
on the military.

[[Page H4029]]

  How much are our so-called enemies spending? Cuba, $300 million; 
Libya, $1.4 billion; Syria, $1.8 billion; North Korea, $2.4 billion; 
Iraq, $2.7 billion; Iran, $3.4 billion; China, I do not know that China 
is an enemy, I gather they are going to get MFN status, they are 
spending $32 billion. I do not believe that Russia is also our enemy, 
being that we are heavily funding them, but they are spending $82 
billion, just to mention.
  What all of this means is that the United States alone is spending 
many times more than all of our so-called enemies combined, and if we 
add NATO into the equation, the numbers become absurd. Cuba, Libya, 
Syria, North Korea, Iraq, and Iran combined spend $12 billion a year on 
the military, while we are proposing in this budget $268 billion, more 
than 20 times the combined spending of all of these so-called enemies.

                              {time}  1645

  Further, this budget does not include the tens of billions we spend 
on the intelligence budget.
  Mr. Chairman, the question that all of us must ask is when is enough 
enough?
  Yes, all of us want the United States to have the strongest military 
in the world, but when we spend so much on defense, we are adding to a 
very large national debt and are terribly ignoring the pressing 
domestic needs that tens and tens of millions of Americans are facing, 
needs which are getting worse.
  Let us get our priorities straight.
  Mr. Chairman, when we spend this much money on the military, we have 
to cut Medicare by $115 billion. That is wrong. When we spend this much 
money on the military, we are asked to cut veterans' benefits, 
veterans' health care over the next 5 years by $5 billion. So we are 
spending money on B-2 bombers and star wars, and we say, ``Thank you,'' 
to the men and women who served in World War II, Korea and Vietnam. 
``We don't care about you; we're worried about B-2 bombers and star 
wars.'' That is wrong. When we spend this much money on the military, 
we are cutting back $13 billion on Medicaid for hospitals that serve 
the poorest people in America. Yes, let us spend a $100 billion dollars 
defending Europe, but when someone is poor, they need to go into a 
hospital, Uncle Sam is not there for them. And when we spend this much 
money on the military, drastic cut backs take place in housing and 
other important needs.
  There are some people on this Congress who are proposing cuts in 
Social Security. Yes, more money for B-2 bombers; cutbacks in Social 
Security. Millions of American families, thousands in the State of 
Vermont, cannot afford to send their kids to college. We spend $30 
billion for higher education, and we are proposing $268 billion for the 
military. In my view those priorities are absolutely wrong.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a great Nation, but our priorities are wrong. 
People on the other side and on this side talk about balancing the 
budget. Well, do my colleagues know what? Military spending has 
something to do with the deficit, too. So I hope that our deficit hawks 
who talk about the $5 trillion debt will come on board and say, no, if 
we are serious about moving toward a balanced budget, we have got to 
cut military spending.
  Mr. Chairman, bottom line is priorities, we are spending too much. 
Let us cut military spending by 5 percent and still retain by far the 
strongest military on earth.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I might 
consume.
  (Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the 
amendment offered by my colleague, the gentleman from Vermont. This 
amendment would impose a 5 percent reduction across each of the three 
major parts of the bill and would have a devastating impact. This 
amendment would reduce the bill's funding levels by $13.4 billion, 
leaving us with a bill $10 billion less than even the President asked 
for.
  The amendment would impose draconian cuts to important quality of 
life modernization and readiness programs that are so critical to 
insuring that our military forces remain the best trained and equipped 
in the world. In one stroke it would undo all of Congress' efforts over 
the last 2 years in trying to revitalize our military forces.
  Several weeks ago the House adopted the fiscal year 1998 budget 
resolution and agreed to abide by spending restrictions. H.R. 1119 
complies with the budget agreement and the budget resolution, and 
representing a real decline of 1.3 percent relative to current spending 
is not enough in this gentleman's mind. However this Congress reached a 
bipartisan agreement with the White House on a plan to balance the 
budget by 2002, and H.R. 1119 complies with the agreement. It is 
refreshing, it is a refreshing change, to be able to say that the 
President is not contesting this point.
  The amendment distributes the $13 billion in cuts as a 5 percent 
reduction in each of the three major divisions of the bill. The result 
would be to slash military construction and family housing projects 
critical to providing a decent quality of life to our military 
personnel and their families by over $450 million. We heard Mr. Hefley 
talk about what we are doing right now in that area.
  The amendment would also cut over $12.3 billion from already 
underfunded modernization readiness and personnel accounts further 
widening the dangerous gap between our Nation's military strategy and 
its defense program. Such a reduction would require the wholesale 
cancellation of programs, drastic curtailment of operations and 
possibly the involuntary separation of service personnel.
  Finally, as drafted, this amendment would reduce Department of Energy 
national security and environmental programs by almost $600 million.
  I urge all Members to think carefully about the message this 
amendment sends to our men and women who are throughout this world 
trying to defend this country. At a time when they are spending more 
time away from their families supporting forward deployments and 
contingency operations around the world this amendment will hit them 
hard, below the belt I might add. Instead of cutting their resources, 
we should be taking positive steps to insure that military personnel 
are getting what they need to do their demanding jobs and provide for 
their families.
  I urge Members to demonstrate their commitment to the men and women 
in our armed services by opposing this amendment and supporting H.R. 
1119.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Dellums], my friend and colleague.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, first let me say that I rise in support of my 
distinguished colleague's amendment. Given the constrained balanced 
budget environment within which we are operating and debating this bill 
and the strategic realities, we can indeed reduce the military budget 
by the modest of articulated by my distinguished colleague.
  We did our own QDR, Mr. Chairman, and we determined independently 
that without drastic changes that these cuts could indeed be achieved 
without the draconian notions that have recently been articulated that 
has been argued would be the result of the gentleman's amendment.
  Now let me underscore for emphasis something that my distinguished 
colleague who offered the amendment pointed out. Mr. Chairman, people 
may not know this, but if we balanced on a balanced scale what the 
United States spends on its military budget and the military budget 
collectively of the rest of the world, it would be roughly even. We 
spend as much as every other nation in the world.
  Now many of those other nations in the world are our friends and 
allies in treaties with us, in cooperative relationships. We take them 
off the other end and place them with us. America and its allies spent 
in excess of 80 percent of the world's military budget, which means 
even worse case scenario America and its friends out spend the rest of 
the world four to one.
  Where is our fear? We can indeed cut this budget. This is a modest 
cut.
  I urge my colleagues: the only time we have an opportunity to step up 
to this and make a cut that American

[[Page H4030]]

people understand viscerally the military budget can be cut, the cold 
war is over, Mr. Chairman, and we need to move on with it. We are 
spending an extraordinary amount of money, and we can sustain this kind 
of cut. I urge my colleagues to support the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Missouri [Mr. Skelton].
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak against the amendment.
  The military of the United States is not some amorphous thing, it is 
not a green glob of protoplasm. Mr. Chairman, it is people, my 
neighbors, my colleagues' neighbors, mostly young men and young women. 
In speaking against this amendment I speak for the young sergeants and 
petty officers who come from all across America. In cutting this budget 
by $13 billion it would cut into the personnel accounts, it would cause 
that mother of that sergeant to have that sergeant/husband gone more 
often because the operational tempo would increase. It would cut the 
O&M that has the ability to fix the appliances in their rundown place 
in Germany. It would not allow them to live as they should.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from California [Mr. Filner].
  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. 
Sanders], and I thank him for his amendment.
  My colleagues, recently this House approved a balanced budget deal. 
That budget was and is a bad deal for the residents of my town of San 
Diego and a bad deal for America. Yes, we balance the budget, but we 
balance the budget on the backs of our Nation's veterans, our children, 
our elderly, and our working families. That deal put a deep freeze on 
funding for our Nation's veterans and cut real dollars from our 
Department of Veterans Affairs. It cut pensions for the neediest of 
veterans, froze funding for the veterans hospitals for the next 5 
years, and permanently cut compensation for service connected disabled 
veterans.
  Mr. Chairman, what happened to the promise that America made with our 
Nation's veterans? That promise was forgotten in the budget deal, and 
that budget deal compromises those promises to the past but ignores 
also our commitments to the future. It underfunds the Nation's 
infrastructure needs by billions of dollars and dramatically cuts 
investments in our Nation's future workers. Head Start, summer jobs, 
education funding, which serve to give all children an opportunity for 
a brighter future, are cut in this budget deal, and it makes the 
transition from welfare to work more difficult by eliminating jobs for 
job training and child care and housing.
  Half of the Nation's 10 million uninsured children remain uninsured 
in that budget, while lavish tax cuts are doled out to those making 
$500,000 a year. Medicaid is cut $13 billion. Medicaid is cut $115 
billion.
  Americans deserve a better deal, a real balanced budget through kept 
promises, shared sacrifices and necessary investments in the future. We 
should support the Sanders amendment so we Americans can get a better 
budget deal.
  I thank the gentleman for his amendment.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Weldon].
  (Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to 
this amendment.
  The ultimate irony here is that I have in fact joined my colleague on 
efforts involving protecting working people. What he fails to mention 
is that in our defense in aerospace cuts we have, in fact, caused 1 
million union workers in this country to lose their jobs.
  Now he talks about compassion. What he does not mention in his 
amendment are the additional hundreds of thousands of UAW, IAM, IEU, 
IBEW workers and building trades workers who will walk the streets with 
the other 1 million workers that have been displaced because of what he 
wants to do in additional cuts.
  Now let me also correct the gentleman. He said that we added over $2 
billion above what the President asked for. Well, I would submit to the 
gentleman he has not done his homework, because after the President 
gave us his budget he came back and asked for $1 billion of additional 
money beyond that.
  Now if the gentleman would bother to ask the committee, he would have 
found out that the President asked for $474 million this year, $2.3 
billion for everything. That was the President's request after his 
budget. Or he would have found out the President asked for $300 million 
for flying hours above his budget. The gentleman would have found out 
he asked for $30 million for the THEL program above what his budget 
suggested.
  So to stand up here and put out misinformation is just flat out 
wrong, and to say the Soviet Union no longer exists, I have been to 50 
classified briefings this year. I do not know how many the gentleman 
has been in attendance of, but let me tell you that is not the 
impression I have. Maybe the gentleman knows about Yermentau Mountain. 
Maybe he has visited Beloretsk 15 and 16. Maybe he knows what that city 
of 65,000 people in the Urals has been doing for the past 18 years, 
spending billions of dollars.

                              {time}  1700

  Maybe the gentleman knows all of those answers. Maybe the gentleman 
knows the instability occurring in the Middle East. Maybe the gentleman 
is aware of what is happening in North Korea. What we have done, what 
we have done, is provided for the best defense we can within the budget 
constraints, and it should be based on fact and not rhetoric for 
tomorrow morning's newspaper.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Oregon [Mr. DeFazio].
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  One listening to this debate would think that there is not one penny 
that can be cut from the Pentagon budget without hurting our 
preparedness, or ignoring the needs of our enlisted families or the 
working people of America. This cut would total $13.4 billion. That is 
a lot of money.
  However, the Pentagon has $14.6 billion in unneeded inventory that 
exceeds the war needs of the United States for more than 100 years, and 
they still have a computer over there placing more orders. Not a penny. 
This 1 year's cut could be absorbed by their unneeded inventory.
  We heard we would have a gap between our strategy and the military 
program. Well, the strategy is absurd. We are going to fight two wars 
at once with no allies. Two World War II's at once with no allies. Our 
budget is two times the total of all our enemies combined. And they are 
saying we cannot depend on our allies, so we have to be able to fight 
two wars at once. If we cannot depend on our allies, why are we 
spending billions of dollars to expand NATO to former Soviet bloc 
countries.
  At one time in my life, we had a great warrior in the White House, 
and this warrior said it better than anybody else will say it here 
today. Dwight David Eisenhower. ``This world in arms, it is not 
spending money alone, it is spending the sweat of our labors, the 
genius of our scientists, the hopes of our children.''
  That is what this debate is all about. Every gun made, every warship 
launched, every rocket fired is, in a final sense, a theft from those 
who hunger, those who are not fed, and those who are cold and not 
clothed. That was a great warrior, Dwight David Eisenhower, a general 
who led us to victory in World War II. If he were here today, he would 
urge Members to support these justified cuts in the bloated Pentagon 
budget.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Pickett].
  Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding me this 
time. I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The funding for the defense program for 1998 is essentially a level 
funding. To take out 5 percent at this point would create undue 
turbulence. It would mean reductions in essential programs that could 
not be replaced.

[[Page H4031]]

  Today the United States has the finest military in the Nation's 
history. We need to keep it that way. The Sanders amendment will 
undermine our effort to attract and retain our quality of people, it 
will undermine our today's readiness by undercutting the operations and 
maintenance program, and it will undermine tomorrow's readiness by 
compromising our modernization program.
  Our Nation, by providing leadership and shaping the international 
security environment, can continue to help with the spread of peace and 
prosperity throughout the world. Only by maintaining our military 
posture to defend and advance U.S. interests and underwrite our 
commitments can we retain our preeminent position.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to defeat this amendment.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Owens].
  (Mr. OWENS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. OWENS. Mr. Chairman, I hope that this amendment sponsored by the 
gentleman from Vermont is not just another ceremony where we are 
talking to the wind. I think that the American people, the polls have 
shown the American people are gradually beginning to understand where 
the waste is in government. The waste is in the defense budget and we 
are not doing anything to help national security.
  National security right now, the primary component of national 
security is education. How well-educated our Americans are will 
determine where we go in the future with respect to our military might, 
our commercial might, right across the board. A better educated 
population is what is needed to guarantee that America will be the 
leader in all areas for the future.
  Mr. Chairman, $13.5 billion, we are talking about. Let us stop for a 
moment and consider the comparative costs. Five percent of the defense 
budget comes out to $13.5 billion per year, $13.5 billion. One can buy 
a lot of computers for schools for $13.5 billion. One can wire all the 
schools in America for $13.5 billion.
  We have shown that one of the goals of Congressional Black Caucus 
budget is to have every child eligible for Head Start, actually be able 
to go into Head Start by the year 2002. Well, we could get there right 
away because it would only cost $11 billion to cover every child 
eligible in America for Head Start. We have a paltry sum of $5 billion 
that the President proposed for construction, renovation and repair of 
schools, $5 billion over a 5-year period. The paltry sum of $5 billion 
was booted out of the budget agreement. It is too much.
  Now, ask the American people to take a look at comparative costs. 
Five percent of the defense budget is $13.5 billion for 1 year. We 
cannot afford to have a construction initiative sponsored by the 
President, $5 billion for 5 years? There is something radically wrong. 
We are blind men and women of the Congress continuing to go down the 
same road. If we put military in front of something or behind 
something, we are all for it, but it really has nothing to do with 
national security. National security means better education for 
America's future, and for that you have to spend money.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado [Mr. Hefley].
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, to quote Ronald Reagan, there you go again.
  Every year, liberals in this body think we can reach into the defense 
budget and take money for whatever the good things are that we want to 
do and our defense can continue to absorb the loss. The gentleman from 
New York [Mr. Owens] talks about let us spend it on education. Mr. 
Chairman, let me tell the gentleman, we spend over $300 billion a year 
on education in this country, more than we spend on the Department of 
Defense.
  Let me point out that this is real money that has real ramifications. 
Let me just talk about the area that I am most familiar with.
  The Sanders amendment would compel a $457 million reduction in 
military construction and military family housing. What would that 
mean? The amount is equivalent to the entire Navy and Marine Corps 
family housing construction program and the added funds the committee 
recommends for the Army family housing construction. Take all of that 
away. This amendment will mean a cut of funding for 3,345 family 
housing units, or 41 percent of the housing improvements in this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, a $457 million cut is equivalent to wiping out every 
American barracks project in the President's request and the entire 
$2,000 added to committee recommendations for all of the services. It 
is roughly equal to all of the MILCON provided in this bill for the 
reserve components, and the added funding recommended by the committee 
for the Army military construction.
  This amendment will severely damage the Nation's military 
infrastructure. It is easy to be cavalier and say, let us get it out of 
defense, but it does not work when you boil it down to what it actually 
means in the defense budget.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge a no, no, no on the Sanders amendment.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
New York [Mr. Owens].
  Mr. OWENS. Mr. Chairman, there are 80,000 jobs, high-tech jobs, that 
cannot be filled right now that are available in America; 80,000, and 
the number is growing. Our weapons are very sophisticated. If we do not 
pay more attention to education, we are going to have to call in the 
Chinese and the Russians to man our weapons, because they will be too 
sophisticated for our operators to run them.
  Education is the number one component of defense and security.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The previous speaker said real money and real people, so let me tell 
my colleagues about real money and real people. While we outspent our 
so-called enemies 20-to-1, 22 percent of the children in this country 
live in poverty.
  We have the highest rate of poverty in the industrialized world, and 
yet we spend the money on B-2 bombers and star wars and other exotic 
weapons systems that are not needed today. Real money, real people.
  Millions of families in America cannot afford to send their kids to 
college. The gentleman said $300 million on education; he forgot to say 
that was at the local level. Local property taxes, State taxes, $30 
billion at the Federal level, 8 times more on the military than we 
spend on education. That is absurd.
  Real money, real people. Tens of millions of Americans have no health 
insurance. They do not know what to do when they get sick, and they are 
saying, yes, let us take care of the people back home, rather than 
spending $100 billion a year defending Europe and Asia. Real money, 
real people.
  Real money, real people. Why did my colleagues on the other side cut 
veterans' programs? They are the people who defended this country. Now 
they are 70 and 80 and they are dying at VA hospitals. We have cut back 
on health care for veterans, and yet we have money for exotic weapons 
systems that we do not need.
  Bottom line, Mr. Chairman, we want the strongest military in the 
world, we have the strongest military in the world, but let us get our 
priorities straight. Let us talk about health care, education, protect 
our seniors, protect our veterans, and let us do the right thing and 
pass, pass, pass this amendment.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Sisisky].
  (Mr. SISISKY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SISISKY. Mr. Chairman, I would tell the gentleman from Vermont, I 
am interested in the same things that he is. Head Start is very 
important to me. I can assure the gentleman that education is very 
important to me, so important that I do not want a decline in the 
education in the military.
  I spoke in the general debate a little while ago about the quality of 
life in the military by making these trips around and what we found. 
The gentleman would not be very proud of how we are treating the 
families. Sixty-eight percent, 68 percent of the Army now is married, 
but guess what is happening?
  Let me just tell the gentleman, the biggest thrill that I have, I dug 
a hole

[[Page H4032]]

in the ground in an Army post to build three-, four-, and five-bedroom 
homes. The smiles on those people's faces was unbelievable.
  The gentleman talks about education. If he goes aboard an Aegis 
cruiser, Aegis destroyer or submarine, it is not the captain of the 
ship that explains the Aegis system, it is the third-class petty 
officer that explains it. And why? Because of the education we are 
giving in the military. This is one Member that does not want to 
decline the education in the military.
  Talk about health care. We ought to be ashamed of ourselves. We are 
pulling back on the retirees in this country in health care. We are not 
treating the people as we promised them, and now the gentleman wants to 
cut just a paltry $13.5 billion.
  Sure, there is money wasted in the Department of Defense, but I 
challenge the gentleman or anybody in this room to see where money is 
not wasted in some of these other programs, including education that we 
could save money in.
  Please, the gentleman from Colorado said no, no, no on this 
amendment; I say no, no, no, no, no on this amendment. Please vote 
against it.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Hunter].
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, everybody agrees, even the proponents of 
this amendment, that we have to have a national defense, and the 
question is how much? They have cited that we outspend other countries 
in the world for defense, and therefore, we should be able to take a 
$13 billion cut without pain and without effect on our military 
readiness.
  But there is another Congress that thought the same thing.

                              {time}  1715

  It was a Congress that voted to put together a defense budget just a 
few months before South Korea was invaded on June 25, 1950. I have read 
the transcripts from the testimony that came before that Congress. In 
fact, the Senate was so convinced that we were on top of the world, 
that we were so powerful, that we had nuclear weapons, high-tech, like 
the gentleman speaks of, that nobody would mess with us.
  So on June 25, 1950, we were invaded by North Korea, and within 3 
days they had taken Seoul and were driving south until we met them at 
the Puchon perimeter right at the tip of the Peninsula and gradually 
started to push them back up. We were unready for Korea. We committed 7 
army divisions to Korea, but we were unready for it, and 50,000 of 
those working Americans that the gentleman from Vermont who has 
propounded this amendment cares about so much came home in body bags.
  The folks that fight the wars are the working people of this country, 
and the greatest benefit we can give them is their return home. We give 
them a return home when we have overwhelming force, which is what we 
had in Desert Storm.
  We were too strong in Desert Storm. That was the argument. We were 
too powerful. We had come up with all of these weapons systems that 
received daily criticism in the Washington Post, like the Apache attack 
helicopter, the M-1 tank that did not get enough gas mileage, the 
Patriot missile system that took too long to develop. But when we put 
those systems in the field, we came home with a minimum of American 
casualties because we were ready.
  We used seven divisions in Korea. We used eight divisions in Desert 
Storm. So we fought these two regional contingencies. That makes 15 
army divisions. We only have 10 today. We have cut from 18 to 10 since 
Desert Storm. We have cut from 24 to 13 fighter air wings. We have cut 
from 545 Navy ships to 345.
  The President of the United States thinks that our procurement 
modernization budget should go to $60 billion. I can tell the Members 
what it was this year, it was $42.6. It was almost $18 billion less 
than President Clinton thought it should be, and his military advisors.
  Let us do what Hallmark Cards says about sending thanks to your 
friends with respect to our young people in the military. Because we 
care about them, let us send them the very best, the very best in 
equipment, and that means that we have to keep this defense budget at a 
minimum at the level that we have right now. We have really cut too 
deep.
  ``Peace through strength'' was a motto that we had all the way 
through the cold war, and it worked. We brought the Soviet Union to the 
bargaining table because we were strong. We are going to be able to 
maintain the peace in the future because we are strong. Please vote 
against this amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Vermont [Mr. Sanders].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 89, 
noes 332, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 214]

                                AYES--89

     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (OH)
     Campbell
     Capps
     Carson
     Clay
     Coyne
     Cummings
     Danner
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     Delahunt
     Dellums
     Doggett
     Duncan
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Furse
     Gilchrest
     Gutierrez
     Hastings (FL)
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hooley
     Jackson (IL)
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Klug
     Kucinich
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     McCarthy (MO)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKinney
     Meehan
     Meek
     Millender-McDonald
     Minge
     Mink
     Nadler
     Neal
     Obey
     Olver
     Owens
     Pascrell
     Paul
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Petri
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Rivers
     Rohrabacher
     Roukema
     Royce
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shays
     Stark
     Stokes
     Tierney
     Towns
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Woolsey
     Yates

                               NOES--332

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady
     Brown (FL)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cannon
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Ensign
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kim
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Maloney (CT)
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moakley
     Molinari
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Parker
     Pastor
     Paxon
     Pease
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Pickering

[[Page H4033]]


     Pickett
     Pitts
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Redmond
     Regula
     Reyes
     Riggs
     Riley
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ryun
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Adam
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Snyder
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wise
     Wolf
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Ackerman
     Conyers
     DeGette
     Dooley
     Gephardt
     Herger
     Lipinski
     Miller (CA)
     Oberstar
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Schiff
     Torres

                              {time}  1737

  Mrs. KENNELLY of Connecticut, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, and Messrs. 
RYUN, SAWYER, GREENWOOD, SMITH of Michigan, WYNN, and BRADY changed 
their vote from ``aye" to ``no.''
  Mr. SHAYS and Mrs. ROUKEMA changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  (By unanimous consent, Mr. SPENCE was allowed to speak out of order.)


                           Order of Business

  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to proceed out of order for 
the purpose of informing Members of the schedule for the remainder of 
the evening.
  Mr. Chairman, in order that Members might be able to plan for the 
evening, I would like to inform our membership that we plan to continue 
working. We have had many inquiries as to what our plans are for the 
evening from many Members.
  I would like to inform everyone that we intend to continue working on 
amendments tonight but to roll the votes until approximately 9. At that 
time we would vote on whatever amendments we have to vote on. Depending 
on how much debate there is on the amendments, we might get through 3 
or 4 amendments in this order: the Spence-Dellums amendment on reform; 
the Spence-Dellums amendment on supercomputers; the Harman amendment on 
abortion; the Shays-Frank on burdensharing.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed 
in part 1 of House Report 105-137.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Spence

  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Spence:

       Strike out section 308 (page 47, lines 14 through 21) and, 
     at the end of division A (page 379, after line 19), insert 
     the following new titles:
                 TITLE XIII--DEFENSE PERSONNEL REFORMS

     SEC. 1301. REDUCTION IN PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO MANAGEMENT 
                   HEADQUARTERS AND HEADQUARTERS SUPPORT 
                   ACTIVITIES.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 3 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 130a. Management headquarters and headquarters support 
       activities personnel: limitation

       ``(a) Limitation.--Effective October 1, 2001, the number of 
     management headquarters and headquarters support activities 
     personnel in the Department of Defense may not exceed the 75 
     percent of the baseline number.
       ``(b) Phased Reduction.--The number of management 
     headquarters and headquarters support activities personnel in 
     the Department of Defense--
       ``(1) as of October 1, 1998, may not exceed 90 percent of 
     the baseline number;
       ``(2) as of October 1, 1999, may not exceed 85 percent of 
     the baseline number; and
       ``(3) as of October 1, 2000, may not exceed 80 percent of 
     the baseline number.
       ``(c) Baseline Number.--In this section, the term `baseline 
     number' means the number of management headquarters and 
     headquarters support activities personnel in the Department 
     of Defense as of October 1, 1997.
       ``(d) Management Headquarters and Headquarters Support 
     Activities Personnel Defined.--In this section:
       ``(1) The term `management headquarters and headquarters 
     support activities personnel' means military and civilian 
     personnel of the Department of Defense who are assigned to, 
     or employed in, functions in management headquarters 
     activities or in management headquarters support activities.
       ``(2) The terms `management headquarters activities' and 
     `management headquarters support activities' have the 
     meanings given those terms in Department of Defense Directive 
     5100.73, entitled `Department of Defense Management 
     Headquarters and Headquarters Support Activities', as in 
     effect on November 12, 1996.
       ``(e) Limitation on Reassignment of Functions.--In carrying 
     out reductions in the number of personnel assigned to, or 
     employed in, management headquarters and headquarters support 
     activities in order to comply with this section, the 
     Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military 
     departments may not reassign functions in order to evade the 
     requirements of this section.
       ``(f) Flexibility.--If the Secretary of Defense determines, 
     and certifies to Congress, that the limitation in subsection 
     (b) with respect to any fiscal year would adversely affect 
     United States national security, the Secretary may waive the 
     limitation under that subsection with respect to that fiscal 
     year. If the Secretary of Defense determines, and certifies 
     to Congress, that the limitation in subsection (a) during 
     fiscal year 2001 would adversely affect United States 
     national security, the Secretary may waive the limitation 
     under that subsection with respect to that fiscal year. The 
     authority under this subsection may be used only once, with 
     respect to a single fiscal year.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``130a. Management headquarters and headquarters support activities 
              personnel: limitation.''.

       (b) Implementation Report.--Not later than January 15, 
     1998, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a 
     report--
       (1) containing a plan to achieve the personnel reductions 
     required by section 130a of title 10, United States Code, as 
     added by subsection (a); and
       (2) including the recommendations of the Secretary 
     regarding--
       (A) the revision, replacement, or augmentation of 
     Department of Defense Directive 5100.73, entitled 
     ``Department of Defense Management Headquarters and 
     Headquarters Support Activities'', as in effect on November 
     12, 1996; and
       (B) the revision of the definitions of the terms 
     ``management headquarters activities'' and ``management 
     headquarters support activities'' under that Directive so 
     that those terms apply uniformly throughout the Department of 
     Defense.
       (c) Codification of Prior Permanent Limitation on OSD 
     Personnel.--(1) Chapter 4 of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end a new section 143 consisting 
     of--
       (A) a heading as follows:

     ``Sec. 143. Office of the Secretary of Defense personnel: 
       limitation'';

     and
       (B) a text consisting of the text of subsections (a) 
     through (f) of section 903 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 
     110 Stat. 2617).
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``143. Office of the Secretary of Defense personnel: limitation.''.

       (3) Section 903 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2617) is 
     repealed.

     SEC. 1302. ADDITIONAL REDUCTION IN DEFENSE ACQUISITION 
                   WORKFORCE.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 87 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 1765. Limitations on number of personnel

       ``(a) Limitation.--Effective October 1, 2001, the number of 
     defense acquisition personnel may not exceed the baseline 
     number reduced by 124,000.
       ``(b) Phased Reduction.--The number of the number of 
     defense acquisition personnel--
       ``(1) as of October 1, 1998, may not exceed the baseline 
     number reduced by 40,000;
       ``(2) as of October 1, 1999, may not exceed the baseline 
     number reduced by 80,000; and
       ``(3) as of October 1, 2000, may not exceed the baseline 
     number reduced by 102,000.
       ``(c) Baseline Number.--For purposes of this section, the 
     baseline number is the total number of defense acquisition 
     personnel as of October 1, 1997.
       ``(d) Defense Acquisition Personnel Defined.--(1) In this 
     section, the term `defense acquisition personnel' means 
     military and civilian personnel (other than civilian 
     personnel described in paragraph (2)) who are assigned to, or 
     employed in, acquisition organizations of the Department of 
     Defense (as specified in Department of Defense Instruction 
     numbered 5000.58 dated January 14, 1992).
       ``(2) Such term does not include civilian employees of the 
     Department of Defense who are employed at a maintenance 
     depot.''.

[[Page H4034]]

       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``1765. Limitations on number of personnel.''.

       (b) Implementation Report.--Not later than January 15, 
     1998, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a 
     report--
       (1) containing a plan to achieve the personnel reductions 
     required by section 1765 of title 10, United States Code, as 
     added by subsection (a); and
       (2) containing any recommendations (including legislative 
     proposals) that the Secretary considers necessary to fully 
     achieve such reductions.
       (c) Technical Reference Correction.--Section 1721(c) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``November 25, 1988'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``November 12, 1996''.

     SEC. 1303. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR SEPARATION PAY FOR 
                   DEFENSE ACQUISITION PERSONNEL.

       Of the amount authorized to be appropriated pursuant to 
     section 301(5) for operation and maintenance for Defense-wide 
     activities, $100,000,000 shall be available only for the 
     payment of separation pay under section 5597 of title 5, 
     United States Code, to civilian employees of the Department 
     of Defense who are defense acquisition personnel (as defined 
     in section 1765(d) of title 10, United States Code).

     SEC. 1304. PERSONNEL REDUCTIONS IN UNITED STATES 
                   TRANSPORTATION COMMAND.

       (a) Purpose of Reduction.--The purpose of the reduction in 
     the number of United States Transportation Command personnel 
     is to recognize and continue the effort of the Secretary of 
     Defense to achieve the United States Transportation Command 
     reengineering reform plan to eliminate administrative 
     duplication and process inefficiencies.
       (b) Reduction in United States Transportation Command 
     Personnel.--(1) Effective October 1, 1998, the number of 
     United States Transportation Command personnel may not exceed 
     the number equal to the baseline number reduced by 1,000.
       (2) For purposes of this section, the baseline number is 
     the total number of United States Transportation Command 
     personnel as of September 30, 1997.
       (c) United States Transportation Command Personnel 
     Defined.--For purposes of this section, the term ``United 
     States Transportation Command personnel'' means military and 
     civilian personnel who are assigned to, or employed in, the 
     United States Transportation Command Headquarters, Air Force 
     Air Mobility Command, Navy Military Sealift Command, Army 
     Military Traffic Management Command, and Defense Courier 
     Service.
       (d) Source of Reductions.--In reducing the number of United 
     States Transportation Command personnel as required by 
     subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense shall limit such 
     reductions to the United States Transportation Command 
     personnel who are in the following occupational 
     classifications established to group similar occupations and 
     work positions into a consistent structure:
       (1) Enlisted members in the Functional Support and 
     Administration classification (designated as occupational 
     code 5XX), as described in Department of Defense Instruction 
     1312.1, dated August 9, 1995, regarding ``Department of 
     Defense Occupational Information Collection and Reporting''.
       (2) Officers in the General Officers and Executives 
     classification (designated as occupational code 1XX), 
     Administrators (designated as occupational code 7XX), and 
     Supply, Procurement, and Allied Officers classification 
     (designated as occupational code 8XX), as described in such 
     instruction.
       (3) Civilian personnel in the Program Management 
     classification (designated as occupational code GS-0340), 
     Accounting and Budget classification (designated as 
     occupational code GS-0500 and related codes), Business and 
     Industry classification (designated as occupational code GS-
     1100 and related codes), and Supply classification 
     (designated as occupational code GS-2000 and related codes), 
     as described in Office of Personnel Management document El-
     12, dated November 1, 1995, entitled ``Federal Occupational 
     Groups''.
       (e) Waiver Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may waive 
     or suspend operation of this section in the event of a war or 
     national emergency.
             TITLE XIV--DEFENSE BUSINESS PRACTICES REFORMS
            Subtitle A--Competitive Procurement Requirements

     SEC. 1401. COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT OF FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING 
                   SERVICES.

       (a) Competitive Procurement Required.--Chapter 165 of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 2784. Competitive procurement of finance and 
       accounting services

       ``(a) Study and Report.--(1) Not later than December 1, 
     1997, the Secretary of Defense shall initiate a study 
     regarding the competitive procurement of finance and 
     accounting services for the Department of Defense, including 
     non-appropriated fund instrumentalities of the Department of 
     Defense. The study shall analyze the conduct of competitions 
     among private-sector sources and the Defense Finance and 
     Accounting Service and other interested Federal agencies.
       ``(2) Not later than June 1, 1998, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to Congress a report containing the results of 
     the study conducted under paragraph (1).
       ``(b) Competitive Procurement Required.--Beginning not 
     later than October 1, 1999, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     competitively procure finance and accounting services for the 
     Department of Defense, including nonappropriated fund 
     instrumentalities of the Department of Defense. The Secretary 
     shall conduct competitions among private-sector sources and 
     the Defense Finance and Accounting Service and other 
     interested Federal agencies. Such a competition shall not 
     involve competition between components of the Defense Finance 
     and Accounting Service.
       ``(c) Improvement of Competitive Ability.--Before 
     conducting a competition under subsection (b) for the 
     procurement of finance and accounting services that are being 
     provided by a component of the Defense Finance and Accounting 
     Service, the Secretary of Defense shall provide the component 
     with an opportunity to establish its most efficient 
     organization.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``2784. Competitive procurement of finance and accounting services.''.

     SEC. 1402. COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT OF SERVICES TO DISPOSE OF 
                   SURPLUS DEFENSE PROPERTY.

       (a) Competitive Procurement Required.--(1) Chapter 153 of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after 
     section 2572 the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2573. Competitive procurement of services to dispose 
       of surplus property

       ``(a) Competitive Procurement of Services.--Beginning not 
     later than October 1, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     competitively procure services for the Department of Defense 
     in connection with the disposal of surplus property at each 
     site at which the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service 
     operates. The Secretary shall conduct competitions among 
     private-sector sources and the Defense Reutilization and 
     Marketing Service and other interested Federal agencies for 
     the performance of all such services at a particular site.
       ``(b) Improvement of Competitive Ability.--Before 
     conducting a competition under subsection (a) for the 
     procurement of services described in such subsection that are 
     being provided by a component of the Defense Reutilization 
     and Marketing Service, the Secretary of Defense shall provide 
     the component with an opportunity to establish its most 
     efficient organization.
       ``(c) Reporting Requirements.--Not later than 90 days after 
     the end of each fiscal year in which services for the 
     disposal of surplus property are competitively procured under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
     Congress a report specifying--
       ``(1) the type and volume of such services procured by the 
     Department of Defense during that fiscal year from the 
     Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service and from other 
     sources;
       ``(2) the former sites of the Defense Reutilization and 
     Marketing Service operated during that fiscal year by 
     contractors (other than the Defense Reutilization and 
     Marketing Service); and
       ``(3) the total amount of any fees paid by such contractors 
     in connection with the performance of such services during 
     that fiscal year.
       ``(d) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall 
     be construed to alter the requirements regarding the 
     identification or demilitarization of an item of excess 
     property or surplus property of the Department of Defense 
     before the disposal of the item.
       ``(e) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) The term `surplus property' means any personal excess 
     property which is not required for the needs and the 
     discharge of the responsibilities of all Federal agencies and 
     the disposal of which is the responsibility of the Department 
     of Defense.
       ``(2) The term `excess property' means any personal 
     property under the control of the Department of Defense which 
     is not required for its needs and the discharge of its 
     responsibilities, as determined by the Secretary of 
     Defense.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     2572 the following new item:

``2573. Competitive procurement of services to dispose of surplus 
              property.''.

       (b) Implementation Report.--Not later than March 1, 1998, 
     the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report--
       (1) containing a plan to implement the competitive 
     procurement requirements of section 2573 of title 10, United 
     States Code, as added by subsection (a); and
       (2) identifying other functions of the Defense 
     Reutilization and Marketing Service that the Secretary 
     considers suitable for performance by private-sector sources.

     SEC. 1403. COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT OF FUNCTIONS PERFORMED BY 
                   DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY.

       (a) Competitive Procurement Required.--Chapter 146 of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 2474. Competitive procurement of information services

       ``(a) Study and Report.--(1) Not later than December 1, 
     1997, the Secretary of Defense shall initiate a study 
     regarding the competitive procurement of those commercial and

[[Page H4035]]

     industrial type functions performed before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act by the Defense Information Systems 
     Agency, with particular regard to the functions performed at 
     the entities known as megacenters. The study shall analyze 
     the conduct of competitions among private-sector sources and 
     the Defense Information Systems Agency and other interested 
     Federal agencies.
       ``(2) Not later than June 1, 1998, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to Congress a report containing the results of 
     the study conducted under paragraph (1).
       ``(b) Competitive Procurement Required.--Beginning not 
     later than October 1, 1999, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     competitively procure those commercial and industrial type 
     functions performed before that date by the Defense 
     Information Systems Agency. The Secretary shall conduct 
     competitions among private-sector sources and the Defense 
     Information Systems Agency and other interested Federal 
     agencies.
       ``(c) Improvement of Competitive Ability.--Before 
     conducting a competition under subsection (b) for the 
     procurement of information services that are being provided 
     by a component of the Defense Information Systems Agency, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall provide the component with an 
     opportunity to establish its most efficient organization.
       ``(d) Exception for Classified Functions.--(1) The 
     requirement of subsection (b) shall not apply to the 
     procurement of services involving a classified function 
     performed by the Defense Information Systems Agency.
       ``(2) In this subsection, the term `classified function' 
     means any telecommunications or information services that--
       ``(A) involve intelligence activities;
       ``(B) involve cryptologic activities related to national 
     security;
       ``(C) involve command and control of military forces;
       ``(D) involve equipment that is an integral part of a 
     weapon or weapons system; or
       ``(E) are critical to the direct fulfillment of military or 
     intelligence missions (other than routine administrative and 
     business applications, such as payroll, finance, logistics, 
     and personnel management applications).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``2474. Competitive procurement of information services.''.

     SEC. 1404. COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT OF PRINTING AND 
                   DUPLICATION SERVICES.

       (a) Extension.--Subsection (a) of section 351 of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 
     (Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 266) is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``and 1997'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``through 1998''; and
       (2) by striking out ``Defense Printing Service'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``Defense Automation and Printing 
     Service''.
       (b) Prohibition on Surcharge for Services.--Such section is 
     further amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(d) Prohibition on Imposition of Surcharge.--The Defense 
     Automation and Printing Service may not impose a surcharge on 
     any printing and duplication service for the Department of 
     Defense that is procured from a source outside of the 
     Department.''.

     SEC. 1405. COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT OF CERTAIN OPHTHALMIC 
                   SERVICES.

       (a) Competitive Procurement Required.--Beginning not later 
     than October 1, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     competitively procure from private-sector sources, or other 
     sources outside of the Department of Defense, all ophthalmic 
     services related to the provision of single vision and 
     multivision eyeware for members of the Armed Forces, retired 
     members, and certain covered beneficiaries under chapter 55 
     of title 10, United States Code, who would otherwise receive 
     such ophthalmic services through the Department of Defense.
       (b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to the 
     extent that the Secretary of Defense determines that the use 
     of sources within the Department of Defense to provide such 
     ophthalmic services--
       (1) is necessary to meet the readiness requirements of the 
     Armed Forces; or
       (2) is more cost effective.
       (c) Completion of Existing Orders.--Subsection (a) shall 
     not apply to orders for ophthalmic services received on or 
     before September 30, 1998.

     SEC. 1406. COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT OF COMMERCIAL AND 
                   INDUSTRIAL TYPE FUNCTIONS BY DEFENSE AGENCIES .

       (a) Competition Required.--Section 2461 of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (f) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(g) Competitive Procurement By Defense Agencies.--(1) 
     Beginning not later than September 30, 1999 (unless an 
     earlier effective date is otherwise required for a specific 
     Defense Agency), the Secretary of Defense shall competitively 
     procure those commercial and industrial type functions 
     performed before that date by a Defense Agency. The Secretary 
     shall conduct competitions among private-sector sources and 
     the Defense Agency involved and other interested Federal 
     agencies.
       ``(2) Before conducting a competition under subsection (a) 
     for the procurement of a commercial or industrial type 
     function that is being performed by a component of a Defense 
     Agency, the Secretary of Defense shall provide the component 
     with an opportunity to establish its most efficient 
     organization.
       ``(3) In this subsection, the term `Defense Agency' means a 
     program activity specified in the table entitled `Program and 
     Financing' for operation and maintenance, Defense-wide 
     activities, in the budget of the President transmitted to 
     Congress for fiscal year 1998 pursuant to section 1105 of 
     title 31 (and any successor of such activity).''.
       (b) Implementation Report.--Not later than March 1, 1998, 
     the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report 
     containing a plan to implement the competitive procurement 
     requirements of section 2461(g) of title 10, United States 
     Code, as added by subsection (a).
                Subtitle B--Reform of Conversion Process

     SEC. 1411. DEVELOPMENT OF STANDARD FORMS REGARDING 
                   PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT AND REQUEST FOR 
                   PROPOSAL FOR CONVERSION OF CERTAIN OPERATIONAL 
                   FUNCTIONS OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS.

       (a) Standard Forms Required.--Chapter 146 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 
     2474, as added by section 1403, the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2475. Military installations: use of standard forms in 
       conversion process

       ``(a) Standardization of Requirements.--(1) The Secretary 
     of Defense shall develop standard forms (to be known as a 
     `standard performance work statement' and a `standard request 
     for proposal') to be used in the consideration for conversion 
     to contractor performance of those commercial services and 
     functions at military installations that have been converted 
     to contractor performance at a rate of 50 percent or more, as 
     determined under subsection (c).
       ``(2) A separate standard form shall be developed for each 
     service and function covered by paragraph (1) and the forms 
     shall be used throughout the Department of Defense in lieu of 
     the performance work statement and request for proposal 
     otherwise required under the procedures and requirements of 
     Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 (or any 
     successor administrative regulation or policy).
       ``(3) The Secretary shall develop and implement the 
     standard forms not later than October 1, 1998.
       ``(b) Inapplicability of Elements of OMB Circular A-76.--On 
     and after October 1, 1998, the procedures and requirements of 
     Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 regarding 
     performance work statements and requests for proposals shall 
     not apply with respect to the conversion to contractor 
     performance at a military installation of a service or 
     function for which a standard form is required under 
     subsection (a).
       ``(c) Determination of Contractor Performance Percentage.--
     In determining the percentage at which a particular 
     commercial service or function at military installations has 
     been converted to contractor performance, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall take into consideration all military 
     installations and use the final estimate of the percentage of 
     contractor performance of services and functions contained in 
     the most recent commercial and industrial activity inventory 
     database established under Office of Management and Budget 
     Circular A-76.
       ``(d) Exclusion of Multi-Function Conversion.--If a 
     commercial service or function for which a standard form is 
     developed under subsection (a) is combined with another 
     service or function (for which such a form is not required) 
     for purposes of considering the services and functions at the 
     military installation for conversion to contractor 
     performance, a standard form developed under subsection (a) 
     may not be used in the conversion process in lieu of the 
     procedures and requirements of Office of Management and 
     Budget Circular A-76 regarding performance work statements 
     and requests for proposals.
       ``(e) Effect on Other Laws.--Nothing in this section shall 
     be construed to supersede any other requirements or 
     limitations, specifically contained in this chapter, on the 
     conversion to contractor performance of activities performed 
     by civilian employees of the Department of Defense.
       ``(f) Military Installation Defined.--In this section, the 
     term `military installation' means a base, camp, post, 
     station, yard, center, homeport facility for any ship, or 
     other activity under the jurisdiction of the Department of 
     Defense, including any leased facility.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 2474, as added by section 1403, the 
     following new item:

``2475. Military installations: use of standard forms in conversion 
              process.''.

     SEC. 1412. STUDY AND NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR CONVERSION 
                   OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL TYPE FUNCTIONS TO 
                   CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE.

       (a) Notification.--Section 2461 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by striking out subsections (a) and (b) and 
     inserting in lieu thereof the following new subsections:
       ``(a) Notification of Conversion Study.--(1) In the case of 
     a commercial or industrial type function of the Department of 
     Defense that on October 1, 1980, was being performed by 
     Department of Defense civilian employees, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall notify Congress of any decision to study the 
     function for possible conversion to performance

[[Page H4036]]

     by a private contractor. The notification shall include 
     information regarding the anticipated length and cost of the 
     study.
       ``(2) A study of a commercial or industrial type function 
     for possible conversion to contractor performance shall 
     include the following:
       ``(A) A comparison of the performance of the function by 
     Department of Defense civilian employees and by private 
     contractor to determine whether contractor performance will 
     result in savings to the Government over the life of the 
     contract.
       ``(B) An examination of the potential economic effect on 
     employees who would be affected by the conversion, and the 
     potential economic effect on the local community and the 
     United States if more than 75 employees perform the function.
       ``(C) An examination of the effect of contracting for 
     performance of the function on the military mission of the 
     function.
       ``(b) Notification of Conversion Decision.--If, as a result 
     of the completion of a study under subsection (a) regarding 
     the possible conversion of a function to performance by a 
     private contractor, a decision is made to convert the 
     function to contractor performance, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall notify Congress of the conversion decision. The 
     notification shall--
       ``(1) indicate that the study conducted regarding 
     conversion of the function to performance by a private 
     contractor has been completed;
       ``(2) certify that the comparison required by subsection 
     (a)(2)(A) as part of the study demonstrates that the 
     performance of the function by a private contractor will 
     result in savings to the Government over the life of the 
     contract;
       ``(3) certify that the entire comparison is available for 
     examination; and
       ``(4) contain a timetable for completing conversion of the 
     function to contractor performance.''.
       (b) Waiver for Small Functions.--Subsection (d) of such 
     section is amended by striking out ``45 or fewer'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``20 or fewer''.

     SEC. 1413. COLLECTION AND RETENTION OF COST INFORMATION DATA 
                   ON CONTRACTED OUT SERVICES AND FUNCTIONS.

       (a) Collection and Retention Required.--Section 2463 of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (a) and (b) as subsections 
     (b) and (c), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after the section heading the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(a) Requirements In Connection With Conversion to 
     Contractor Performance.--With respect to each contract 
     converting the performance of a service or function of the 
     Department of Defense to contractor performance (and any 
     extension of such a contract), the Secretary of Defense shall 
     collect, during the term of the contract or extension, but 
     not to exceed five years, cost information data regarding 
     performance of the service or function by private contractor 
     employees. The Secretary shall provide for the permanent 
     retention of information collected under this subsection.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Such section is further 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), as redesignated by subsection 
     (a)(1)--
       (A) by striking out the subsection heading and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``Requirements In Connection With Return to 
     Employee Performance.--''; and
       (B) by striking out ``to which this section applies'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``described in subsection (c),''; 
     and
       (2) in subsection (c), as redesignated by subsection 
     (a)(1)----
       (A) by striking out the subsection heading and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``Covered Fiscal Years.--''; and
       (B) by striking out ``This section'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``Subsection (b)''.
       (c) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading of such section 
     is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 2463. Collection and retention of cost information 
       data on contracted out services and functions

       (2) The item relating to such section in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 146 of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended to read as follows:

``2463. Collection and retention of cost information data on contracted 
              out services and functions.''.
                       Subtitle C--Other Reforms

     SEC. 1421. REDUCTION IN OVERHEAD COSTS OF INVENTORY CONTROL 
                   POINTS.

       (a) Reduction in Costs Required.--The Secretary of Defense 
     shall take such actions as may be necessary to reduce the 
     annual overhead costs of the supply management activities of 
     the Defense Logistics Agency and the military departments 
     (known as Inventory Control Points) so that the annual 
     overhead costs are not more than eight percent of annual net 
     sales at standard price by the Inventory Control Points.
       (b) Time To Achieve Reduction.--The Secretary shall achieve 
     the cost reductions required by subsection (a) not later than 
     September 30, 2000.
       (c) Implementation Plan.--Not later than March 1, 1998, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a plan to 
     achieve the reduction in overhead costs required by 
     subsection (a).
       (d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
       (1) The term ``overhead costs'' means the total expenses of 
     the Inventory Control Points, excluding--
       (A) annual materiel costs; and
       (B) military and civilian personnel related costs, defined 
     as personnel compensation and benefits under the March 1996 
     Department of Defense Financial Management Regulations, 
     Volume 2A, Chapter 1, Budget Account Title File (Object 
     Classification Name/Code), object classifications 200, 211, 
     220, 221, 222, and 301.
       (2) The term ``net sales at standard price'' has the 
     meaning given that term in the March 1996 Department of 
     Defense Financial Management Regulations, Volume 2B, Chapter 
     9, and displayed in ``Exhibit Fund--14 Revenue and Expenses'' 
     for the supply management business areas.

     SEC. 1422. CONSOLIDATION OF PROCUREMENT TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 
                   AND ELECTRONIC COMMERCE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Consolidation of Assistance.--Chapter 142 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended as follows:
       (1) Sections 2412, 2414, 2417, and 2418 are each amended by 
     inserting ``and electronic commerce'' after ``procurement'' 
     each place it appears.
       (2) Section 2413 is amended--
       (A) in subsection (b), by striking out ``procurement 
     technical assistance'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``both 
     procurement technical assistance and electronic commerce 
     technical assistance''; and
       (B) in subsection (c), by inserting ``and electronic 
     commerce'' after ``procurement''.
       (b) Requirement To Use Competitive Procedures.--Section 
     2413 of such title is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(d) The Secretary shall use competitive procedures in 
     entering into cooperative agreements under subsection (a).''.
       (c) Limitation on Use of Funds.--Section 2417 of such title 
     is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``The Director'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof the following: ``(b) Administrative Costs.--The 
     Director''; and
       (2) by inserting before subsection (b) (as designated by 
     paragraph (1)) the following:
       ``(a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--In any fiscal year the 
     Secretary of Defense may use for the program authorized by 
     this chapter only funds specifically appropriated for the 
     program for that fiscal year.''.
       (d) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading for chapter 142 
     of such title is amended to read as follows:

``CHAPTER 142--PROCUREMENT AND ELECTRONIC COMMERCE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 
                               PROGRAM''.

       (2) The tables of chapters at the beginning of subtitle A, 
     and at the beginning of part IV of subtitle A, of such title 
     are each amended by striking out the item relating to chapter 
     142 and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

``142. Procurement and Electronic Commerce Technical Assista2411''.gram

       (3) The heading for section 2417 of such title is amended 
     to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 2417. Funding provisions''.

       (4) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 142 
     of such title is amended by striking out the item relating to 
     section 2417 and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

``2417. Funding provisions.''.

     SEC. 1423. PERMANENT AUTHORITY REGARDING CONVEYANCE OF 
                   UTILITY SYSTEMS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 159 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 2687 the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 2688. Utility systems: permanent conveyance authority

       ``(a) Conveyance Authority.--The Secretary of a military 
     department may convey a utility system, or part of a utility 
     system, under the jurisdiction of the Secretary to a 
     municipal, private, regional, district, or cooperative 
     utility company or other entity. The conveyance may consist 
     of all right, title, and interest of the United States in the 
     utility system or such lesser estate as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to serve the interests of the United 
     States.
       ``(b) Utility System Defined.--In this section, the term 
     `utility system' includes the following:
       ``(1) Electrical generation and supply systems.
       ``(2) Water supply and treatment systems.
       ``(3) Wastewater collection and treatment systems.
       ``(4) Steam or hot or chilled water generation and supply 
     systems.
       ``(5) Natural gas supply systems.
       ``(6) Sanitary landfills or lands to be used for sanitary 
     landfills.
       ``(7) Similar utility systems.
       ``(c) Consideration.--(1) The Secretary of a military 
     department may accept consideration received for a conveyance 
     under subsection (a) in the form of a cash payment or a 
     reduction in utility rate charges for a period of time 
     sufficient to amortize the monetary value of the utility 
     system, including any real property interests, conveyed.
       ``(2) Cash payments received shall be credited to an 
     appropriation account designated as appropriate by the 
     Secretary of Defense. Amounts so credited shall be available 
     for the same time period as the appropriation credited and 
     shall be used only for the purposes authorized for that 
     appropriation.
       ``(d) Congressional Notification.--A conveyance may not be 
     made under subsection (a) until--

[[Page H4037]]

       ``(1) the Secretary of the military department concerned 
     submits to the appropriate committees of Congress (as defined 
     in section 2801(c)(4) of this title) a report containing an 
     economic analysis (based upon accepted life-cycle costing 
     procedures approved by the Secretary of Defense) which 
     demonstrates that the full cost to the United States of the 
     proposed conveyance is cost-effective when compared with 
     alternative means of furnishing the same utility systems; and
       ``(2) a period of 21 days has elapsed after the date on 
     which the report is received by the committees.
       ``(e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary of 
     the military department concerned may require such additional 
     terms and conditions in a conveyance entered into under 
     subsection (a) as the Secretary considers appropriate to 
     protect the interests of the United States.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 2687 the following new item:

``2688. Utility systems: permanent conveyance authority.''.
           TITLE XV--MISCELLANEOUS ADDITIONAL DEFENSE REFORMS

     SEC. 1501. LONG-TERM CHARTER CONTRACTS FOR ACQUISITION OF 
                   AUXILIARY VESSELS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF 
                   DEFENSE.

       (a) Program Authorization.--Chapter 631 of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new section:

     ``Sec. 7233. Auxiliary vessels: authority for long-term 
       charter contracts

       ``(a) Authorized Contracts.--After September 30, 1998, the 
     Secretary of the Navy, subject to subsection (b), may enter 
     into a contract for the long-term lease or charter of a newly 
     built surface vessel, under which the contractor agrees to 
     provide a crew for the vessel for the term of the long-term 
     lease or charter, for any of the following:
       ``(1) The combat logistics force of the Navy.
       ``(2) The strategic sealift program of the Navy.
       ``(3) Other auxiliary support vessels for the Department of 
     Defense.
       ``(b) Contracts Required To Be Authorized by Law.--A 
     contract may be entered into under this section with respect 
     to specific vessels only if the Secretary is specifically 
     authorized by law to enter into such a contract with respect 
     to those vessels.
       ``(c) Funds for Contract Payments.--The Secretary may make 
     payments for contracts entered into under this section using 
     funds available for obligation during the fiscal year for 
     which the payments are required to be made. Any such contract 
     shall provide that the United States will not be required to 
     make a payment under the contract (other than a termination 
     payment, if required) before October 1, 2000.
       ``(d) Budgeting Provisions.--Any contract entered into 
     under this section shall be treated as a multiyear service 
     contract and as an operating lease for purposes of any 
     provision of law relating to the Federal budget and Federal 
     budget accounting procedures, including part C of title II of 
     the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 
     (2 U.S.C. 900 et seq.), and any regulation or directive 
     (including any directive of the Office of Management and 
     Budget) prescribed with respect to the Federal budget and 
     Federal budget accounting procedures.
       ``(e) Term of Contract.--In this section, the term `long-
     term lease or charter' means a lease, charter, service 
     contract, or conditional sale agreement with respect to a 
     vessel the term of which (including any option period) is for 
     a period of 20 years or more.
       ``(f) Option To Buy.--A contract entered into under the 
     authority of this section may contain options for the United 
     States to purchase one or more of the vessels covered by the 
     contract at any time during, or at the end of, the contract 
     period (including any option period) upon payment of an 
     amount not in excess of the unamortized portion of the cost 
     of the vessels plus amounts incurred in connection with the 
     termination of the financing arrangements associated with the 
     vessels.
       ``(g) Domestic Construction.--The Secretary shall require 
     in any contract entered into under this section that each 
     vessel to which the contract applies--
       ``(1) shall have been constructed in a shipyard within the 
     United States; and
       ``(2) upon delivery, shall be documented under the laws of 
     the United States.
       ``(h) Vessel Crewing.--The Secretary shall require in any 
     contract entered into under this section that the crew of any 
     vessel to which the contract applies be comprised of private 
     sector commercial mariners.
       ``(i) Contingent Waiver of Other Provisions of Law.--A 
     contract authorized by this section may be entered into 
     without regard to section 2401 or 2401a of this title if the 
     Secretary of Defense makes the following findings with 
     respect to that contract:
       ``(1) The need for the vessels or services to be provided 
     under the contract is expected to remain substantially 
     unchanged during the contemplated contract or option period.
       ``(2) There is a reasonable expectation that throughout the 
     contemplated contract or option period the Secretary of the 
     Navy (or, if the contract is for services to be provided to, 
     and funded by, another military department, the Secretary of 
     that military department) will request funding for the 
     contract at the level required to avoid contract 
     cancellation.
       ``(3) The use of such contract or the exercise of such 
     option is in the interest of the national defense.
       ``(j) Source of Funds for Termination Liability.--If a 
     contract entered into under this section is terminated, the 
     costs of such termination may be paid from--
       ``(1) amounts originally made available for performance of 
     the contract;
       ``(2) amounts currently available for operation and 
     maintenance of the type of vessels or services concerned and 
     not otherwise obligated; or
       ``(3) funds appropriated for those costs.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``7233. Auxiliary vessels: authority for long-term charter 
              contracts.''.

     SEC. 1502. FIBER-OPTICS BASED TELECOMMUNICATIONS LINKAGE OF 
                   MILITARY INSTALLATIONS.

       (a) Installation Required.--In at least one metropolitan 
     area of the United States containing multiple military 
     installations of one or more military department or Defense 
     Agency, the Secretary of Defense shall provide for the 
     installation of fiber-optics based telecommunications 
     technology to link as many of the installations in the area 
     as practicable in a privately dedicated telecommunications 
     network. The Secretary shall use a competitive process to 
     provide for the installation of the telecommunications 
     network through one or more new contracts.
       (b) Features of Network.--The telecommunications network 
     shall provide direct access to local and long distance 
     telephone carriers, allow for transmission of both classified 
     and unclassified information, and take advantage of the 
     various capabilities of fiber-optics based telecommunications 
     technology.
       (c) Time for Installation.--The telecommunications network 
     or networks to be installed under this section shall be 
     installed and operational not later than September 30, 1999.
       (d) Report on Implementation.--Not later than March 1, 
     1998, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the 
     congressional defense committees a report on the 
     implementation of subsections (a) and (b), including the 
     metropolitan area or areas selected for the 
     telecommunications network, the estimated cost of the 
     network, and potential areas for the future use of such 
     fiber-optics based telecommunications technology.

     SEC. 1503. REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT FOR CONTRACTOR GUARANTEES ON 
                   MAJOR WEAPON SYSTEMS.

       (a) Repeal.--Section 2403 of title 10, United States Code, 
     is repealed.
       (b) Clerical and Conforming Amendments.--(1) The table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 141 of such title is 
     amended by striking out the item relating to section 2403.
       (2) Section 803 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2604; 10 
     U.S.C. 2430 note) is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a), by striking out ``2403,'';
       (B) by striking out subsection (c); and
       (C) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (c).

     SEC. 1504. REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO MICRO-PURCHASES OF 
                   COMMERCIAL ITEMS.

       (a) In General.--Section 2304 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(l) Micro-Purchases.--(1) A contracting officer may not 
     award a contract or issue a purchase order to buy commercial 
     items for an amount equal to or less than the micro-purchase 
     threshold unless a member of the Senior Executive Service or 
     a general or flag officer makes a written determination 
     that--
       ``(A) the source or sources available for the commercial 
     item do not accept a preferred micro-purchase method, and the 
     contracting officer is seeking a source that does accept such 
     a method; or
       ``(B) the nature of the commercial item necessitates a 
     contract or purchase order so that terms and conditions can 
     be specified.
       ``(2) In this subsection:
       ``(A) The term `micro-purchase threshold' has the meaning 
     provided in section 32 of the Office of Federal Procurement 
     Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 428).
       ``(B) The term `preferred micro-purchase method' means the 
     use of the Government-wide commercial purchase card or any 
     other method for carrying out micro-purchases that Secretary 
     of Defense prescribes in the regulations implementing this 
     subsection.
       ``(3) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations 
     to implement this subsection. The regulations shall include 
     such additional preferred methods of carrying out micro-
     purchases, and such exceptions to the requirement of 
     paragraph (1), as the Secretary considers appropriate.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--Subsection (l) of section 2304 of 
     title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), 
     shall apply with respect to micro-purchases made on or after 
     October 1, 1997.

     SEC. 1505. AVAILABILITY OF SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURES TO 
                   COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCUREMENTS.

       (a) Armed Services Acquisitions.--Section 2304(g) of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended in paragraph (1)(B) by 
     striking out ``only''.
       (b) Civilian Agency Acquisitions.--Section 303(g) of the 
     Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (41 
     U.S.C.

[[Page H4038]]

     253(g)) is amended in paragraph (1)(B) by striking out 
     ``only''.

     SEC. 1506. TERMINATION OF THE ARMED SERVICES PATENT ADVISORY 
                   BOARD.

       (a) Termination of Board.--The organization within the 
     Department of Defense known as the Armed Services Patent 
     Advisory Board is terminated. No funds available for the 
     Department of Defense may be used for the operation of that 
     Board after the date specified in subsection (c).
       (b) Transfer of Functions.--All functions performed on the 
     day before the date of the enactment of this Act by the Armed 
     Services Patent Advisory Board (including performance of the 
     responsibilities of the Department of Defense for security 
     review of patent applications under chapter 17 of title 35, 
     United States Code) shall be transferred to the Defense 
     Technology Security Administration.
       (c) Effective Date.--Subsection (a) shall take effect at 
     the end of the 120-day period beginning on the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 1507. COORDINATION OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CRIMINAL 
                   INVESTIGATIONS AND AUDITS.

       (a) Board on Criminal Investigations.--Chapter 7 of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 182. Board on Criminal Investigations

       ``(a) Establishment.--(1) There is in the Department of 
     Defense a Board on Criminal Investigations. The Board 
     consists of the following officials:
       ``(A) The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, 
     Control, Communications, and Intelligence.
       ``(B) The head of the Army Criminal Investigation Command.
       ``(C) The head of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service.
       ``(D) The head of the Air Force Office of Special 
     Investigations.
       ``(2) To ensure cooperation between the military department 
     criminal investigative organizations and the Defense Criminal 
     Investigative Service, the Inspector General of the 
     Department of Defense shall serve as a nonvoting member of 
     the Board.
       ``(b) Functions of Board.--The Board shall provide for 
     coordination and cooperation between the military department 
     criminal investigative organizations so as to avoid 
     duplication of effort and maximize resources available to the 
     military department criminal investigative organizations.
       ``(c) Regional Working Groups.--The Board shall establish 
     working groups at the regional level to address and resolve 
     issues of jurisdictional responsibility that may arise 
     regarding criminal investigations involving a military 
     department criminal investigative organization. A working 
     group shall consist of managers or supervisors of the 
     military department criminal investigative organizations who 
     have the authority to make binding decisions regarding which 
     organization will conduct a particular criminal investigation 
     or whether a criminal investigation should be conducted 
     jointly.
       ``(d) Authority of Assistant Secretary.--In the event that 
     a regional working group or the Board is unable to resolve an 
     issue of investigative responsibility, the Assistant 
     Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communications, 
     and Intelligence shall have the responsibility to make a 
     final determination regarding the issue.
       ``(e) Military Department Criminal Investigative 
     Organization Defined.--In this section, the term `military 
     department criminal investigative organization' means any of 
     the following:
       ``(1) The Army Criminal Investigation Command.
       ``(2) The Naval Criminal Investigative Service.
       ``(3) The Air Force Office of Special Investigations.''.
       (b) Board on Audits.--Such chapter is further amended by 
     inserting after section 182, as added by subsection (a), the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 183. Board on Audits

       ``(a) Establishment.--(1) There is in the Department of 
     Defense a Board on Audits. The Board consists of the 
     following officials:
       ``(A) The Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller).
       ``(B) The Auditor General of the Army.
       ``(C) The Auditor General of the Navy.
       ``(D) The Auditor General of the Air Force.
       ``(E) The director of the Defense Contract Audit Agency.
       ``(2) To ensure cooperation between the defense auditing 
     organizations and the Office of the Inspector General of the 
     Department of Defense, the Inspector General of the 
     Department of Defense shall serve as a nonvoting member of 
     the Board.
       ``(b) Functions of Board.--The Board shall provide for 
     coordination and cooperation between the defense auditing 
     organizations so as to avoid duplication of effort and 
     maximize resources available to the defense auditing 
     organizations.
       ``(c) Regional Working Groups.--The Board shall establish 
     working groups at the regional level to address and resolve 
     issues of jurisdictional responsibility that may arise 
     regarding audits involving a defense auditing organization. A 
     working group shall consist of managers or supervisors of the 
     defense auditing organizations who have the authority to make 
     binding decisions regarding which defense auditing 
     organization will conduct a particular audit or whether an 
     audit should be conducted jointly.
       ``(d) Authority of Under Secretary of Defense 
     (Comptroller).--In the event that a regional working group or 
     the Board is unable to resolve an issue of jurisdictional 
     responsibility, the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) 
     shall have the responsibility to make a final determination 
     regarding the issue.
       ``(e) Defense Auditing Organization Defined.--In this 
     section, the term `defense auditing organization' means any 
     of the following:
       ``(1) The Army Audit Agency.
       ``(2) The Naval Audit Service.
       ``(3) The Air Force Audit Agency.
       ``(4) The Defense Contract Audit Agency.''.
       (c) Working Guidance.--Not later than December 31, 1997, 
     the Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such policies as may 
     be necessary for the operation of the Board on Criminal 
     Investigations and the Board on Audits established pursuant 
     to the amendments made by this section.
       (d) Clerical Amendments.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new items:

``182. Board on Criminal Investigations.
``183. Board on Audits.''.

     SEC. 1508. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND 
                   ADVISORY COMMITTEES.

       (a) Termination of Existing Advisory Committees.--(1) 
     Effective December 31, 1998, any advisory committee 
     established in, or administered or funded (in whole or in 
     part) by, the Department of Defense that (A) is in existence 
     on the day before the date of the enactment of this Act, and 
     (B) was not established by law, or expressly continued by 
     law, after January 1, 1995, is terminated.
       (2) For purposes of this section, the term ``advisory 
     committee'' means an entity that is subject to the provisions 
     of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.).
       (b) Report on Committees For Which Continuation Is 
     Requested.--Not later than March 1, 1998, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to Congress a report setting forth those 
     advisory committees subject to subsection (a) that the 
     Secretary proposes to continue. The Secretary shall include 
     in the report, for each such committee, the justification for 
     continuing the committee and a statement of the costs of such 
     continuation over the next four fiscal years. The Secretary 
     shall include in the report a proposal for any legislation 
     that may be required for the continuations proposed in the 
     report.
       (c) Policy for Future DOD Advisory Committees.--(1) Chapter 
     7 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
     after section 183, as added by section 1507(b), the following 
     new section:

     ``Sec. 184. Boards, commissions, and other advisory 
       committees: limitations

       ``(a) Limitation on Establishment.--No advisory committee 
     may be established in, or administered or funded (in whole or 
     in part) by, the Department of Defense except as specifically 
     provided by law after the date of the enactment of this 
     section.
       ``(b) Termination of Advisory Committees.--Each advisory 
     committee of the Department of Defense (whether established 
     by law, by the President, or by the Secretary of Defense) 
     shall terminate not later than the expiration of the four-
     year period beginning on the date of its establishment or on 
     the date of the most recent continuation of the advisory 
     committee by law.
       ``(c) Exception for Temporary Advisory Committees.--
     Subsection (a) does not apply to an advisory committee 
     established for a period of one year or less for the purpose 
     (as set forth in the charter of the advisory committee) of 
     examining a matter that is critical to the national security 
     of the United States.
       ``(d) Annual Report.--Not later than March 1 of each year 
     (beginning in 1999), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
     Congress a report on advisory committees of the Department of 
     Defense. In each such report, the Secretary shall identify 
     each advisory committee that the Secretary proposes to 
     support during the next fiscal year and shall set forth the 
     justification for each such committee and the projected costs 
     for that committee for the next fiscal year. In the case of 
     any advisory committee that is to terminate in the year 
     following the year in which the report is submitted pursuant 
     to subsection (b) and that the Secretary proposes be 
     continued by law, the Secretary shall include in the report a 
     request for continuation of the committee and a justification 
     and cost estimate for such continuation.
       ``(e) Advisory Committee Defined.--In this section, the 
     term `advisory committee' means an entity that is subject to 
     the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 
     U.S.C. App.).''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     183, as added by section 1507(d), the following new item:

``184. Boards, commissions, and other advisory committees: 
              limitations.''.

     SEC. 1509. ADVANCES FOR PAYMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--Subsection (a) of section 2396 of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``and'' at the end of paragraph (2);
       (2) by striking out the period at the end of paragraph (3) 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

[[Page H4039]]

       ``(4) public service utilities.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading of such section 
     is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 2396. Advances for payments for compliance with 
       foreign laws, rent in foreign countries, tuition, public 
       utility services, and pay and supplies of armed forces of 
       friendly foreign countries''.

       (2) The item relating to such section in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 141 of such title is 
     amended to read as follows:

``2396. Advances for payments for compliance with foreign laws, rent in 
              foreign countries, tuition, public utility services, and 
              pay and supplies of armed forces friendly foreign 
              countries.''.
     TITLE XVI--COMMISSION ON DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND STREAMLINING

     SEC. 1601. ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION.

       (a) Establishment.--There is hereby established a 
     commission to be known as the ``Commission on Defense 
     Organization and Streamlining'' (hereinafter in this title 
     referred to as the ``Commission'').
       (b) Composition.--The Commission shall be composed of nine 
     members, appointed as follows:
       (1) Two members shall be appointed by the chairman of the 
     Committee on National Security of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (2) Two members shall be appointed by the ranking minority 
     party member of the Committee on National Security of the 
     House of Representatives.
       (3) Two members shall be appointed by the chairman of the 
     Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.
       (4) Two members shall be appointed by the ranking minority 
     party member of the Committee on Armed Services of the 
     Senate.
       (5) One member, who shall serve as chairman of the 
     Commission, shall be appointed by at least three of the 
     Members of Congress referred to paragraphs (1) through (4) 
     acting jointly.
       (c) Qualifications.--Members of the Commission shall be 
     appointed from among private United States citizens with 
     knowledge and expertise in organization and management 
     matters.
       (d) Period of Appointment; Vacancies.--Members shall be 
     appointed for the life of the Commission. Any vacancy in the 
     Commission shall be filled in the same manner as the original 
     appointment.
       (e) Initial Organization Requirements.--(1) All 
     appointments to the Commission shall be made not later than 
     30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) The Commission shall convene its first meeting not 
     later than 30 days after the date on which all members of the 
     Commission have been appointed.
       (f) Security Clearances.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     expedite the processing of appropriate security clearances 
     for members of the Commission.

     SEC. 1602. DUTIES OF COMMISSION.

       (a) In General.--(1) The Commission shall examine the 
     missions, functions, and responsibilities of the Office of 
     the Secretary of Defense, the management headquarters and 
     headquarters support activities of the military departments 
     and Defense Agencies, and the various acquisition 
     organizations of the Department of Defense (and the 
     relationships among such Office, activities, and 
     organizations).
       (2) On the basis of such examination, the Commission shall 
     propose alternative organizational structures and alternative 
     allocations of authorities as it considers appropriate.
       (b) Duplication and Redundancy.-- In carrying out its 
     duties, the Commission shall identify areas of duplication 
     and recommend options to streamline, reduce, and eliminate 
     redundancies.
       (c) Special Requirements Regarding Office of Secretary.--
     The examination of the missions, functions, and 
     responsibilities of the Office of the Secretary of Defense 
     shall include the following:
       (1) An assessment of the appropriate functions of the 
     Office and whether the Office of the Secretary of Defense or 
     some of its component parts should be organized along mission 
     lines.
       (2) An assessment of the adequacy of the present 
     organizational structure to efficiently and effectively 
     support the Secretary in carrying out responsibilities in a 
     manner that ensures civilian authority in the Department of 
     Defense.
       (3) An assessment of the extent of unnecessary duplication 
     of functions between the Office of the Secretary of Defense 
     and the Joint Staff.
       (4) An assessment of the extent of unnecessary duplication 
     of functions between the Office of the Secretary of Defense 
     and the military departments.
       (5) An assessment of the appropriate number of Under 
     Secretaries of Defense, Assistant Secretaries of Defense, 
     Deputy Under Secretaries of Defense, and Deputy Assistant 
     Secretaries of Defense.
       (6) An assessment of any benefits or efficiencies derived 
     from decentralizing certain functions currently performed by 
     the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
       (d) Special Requirements Regarding Headquarters.--The 
     examination of the missions, functions, and responsibilities 
     of the management headquarters and headquarters support 
     activities of the military departments and Defense Agencies 
     shall include the following:
       (1) An assessment on the adequacy of the present 
     headquarters organization structure to efficiently and 
     effectively support the mission of the military departments 
     and the Defense Agencies.
       (2) An assessment of options to reduce the number of 
     personnel assigned to such headquarters staffs and 
     headquarters support activities.
       (3) An assessment of the extent of unnecessary duplication 
     of functions between the Office of the Secretary of Defense 
     and headquarters staffs of the military departments and the 
     Defense Agencies.
       (4) An assessment of the possible benefits that could be 
     derived from further functional consolidation between the 
     civilian secretariat of the military departments and the 
     staffs of the military service chiefs.
       (5) An assessment of the possible benefits that could be 
     derived from reducing the number of civilian officers in the 
     military departments who are appointed by and with the advice 
     and consent of the Senate.
       (e) Special Requirements Regarding Acquisition 
     Organizations.--The examination of the missions, functions, 
     and responsibilities of the various acquisition organizations 
     of the Department of Defense shall include the following:
       (1) An assessment of benefits of consolidation or selected 
     elimination of Department of Defense acquisition 
     organizations.
       (2) An assessment of the opportunities to streamline the 
     defense acquisition infrastructure that were realized as a 
     result of the enactment of the Federal Acquisition 
     Streamlining Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-355) and the 
     Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (divisions D and E of Public Law 
     104-106) or as result of other acquisition reform initiatives 
     implemented administratively during the period from 1993 
     through 1997.
       (3) An assessment of such other defense acquisition 
     infrastructure streamlining or restructuring options as the 
     Commission considers appropriate.
       (f) Cooperation From Government Officials.--In carrying out 
     its duties, the Commission should receive the full and timely 
     cooperation of the Secretary of Defense and any other United 
     States Government official responsible for providing the 
     Commission with analyses, briefings, and other information 
     necessary for the fulfillment of its responsibilities.

     SEC. 1603. REPORTS.

       The Commission shall submit to Congress an interim report 
     containing its preliminary findings and conclusions not later 
     than March 15, 1998, and a final report containing its 
     findings and conclusions not later than July 15, 1998.

     SEC. 1604. POWERS.

       (a) Hearings.--The Commission or, at its direction, any 
     panel or member of the Commission, may, for the purpose of 
     carrying out the provisions of this title, hold hearings, sit 
     and act at times and places, take testimony, receive 
     evidence, and administer oaths to the extent that the 
     Commission or any panel or member considers advisable.
       (b) Information.--The Commission may secure directly from 
     the Department of Defense and any other Federal department or 
     agency information that the Commission considers necessary to 
     enable the Commission to carry out its responsibilities under 
     this title.

     SEC. 1605. COMMISSION PROCEDURES.

       (a) Meetings.--The Commission shall meet at the call of the 
     Chairman.
       (b) Quorum.--(1) Five members of the Commission shall 
     constitute a quorum other than for the purpose of holding 
     hearings.
       (2) The Commission shall act by resolution agreed to by a 
     majority of the members of the Commission.
       (c) Commission.--The Commission may establish panels 
     composed of less than full membership of the Commission for 
     the purpose of carrying out the Commission's duties. The 
     actions of each such panel shall be subject to the review and 
     control of the Commission. Any findings and determinations 
     made by such a panel shall not be considered the findings and 
     determinations of the Commission unless approved by the 
     Commission.
       (d) Authority of Individuals To Act for Commission.--Any 
     member or agent of the Commission may, if authorized by the 
     Commission, take any action which the Commission is 
     authorized to take under this title.

     SEC. 1606. PERSONNEL MATTERS.

       (a) Pay of Members.--Members of the Commission shall serve 
     without pay by reason of their work on the Commission.
       (b) Travel Expenses.--The members of the Commission shall 
     be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of 
     subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies 
     under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States 
     Code, while away from their homes or regular places of 
     business in the performance of services for the Commission.
       (c) Staff.--(1) The chairman of the Commission may, without 
     regard to the provisions of title 5, United States Code, 
     governing appointments in the competitive service, appoint a 
     staff director and such additional personnel as may be 
     necessary to enable the Commission to perform its duties. The 
     appointment of a staff director shall be subject to the 
     approval of the Commission.
       (2) The chairman of the Commission may fix the pay of the 
     staff director and other personnel without regard to the 
     provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of 
     title 5, United States Code, relating to classification of 
     positions and General Schedule

[[Page H4040]]

     pay rates, except that the rate of pay fixed under this 
     paragraph for the staff director may not exceed the rate 
     payable for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 
     5316 of such title and the rate of pay for other personnel 
     may not exceed the maximum rate payable for grade GS-15 of 
     the General Schedule.
       (d) Detail of Government Employees.--Upon request of the 
     chairman of the Commission, the head of any Federal 
     department or agency may detail, on a nonreimbursable basis, 
     any personnel of that department or agency to the Commission 
     to assist it in carrying out its duties.
       (e) Procurement of Temporary and Intermittent Services.--
     The chairman of the Commission may procure temporary and 
     intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5, 
     United States Code, at rates for individuals which do not 
     exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay 
     payable for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 
     5316 of such title.

     SEC. 1607. MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.

       (a) Postal and Printing Services.--The Commission may use 
     the United States mails and obtain printing and binding 
     services in the same manner and under the same conditions as 
     other departments and agencies of the Federal Government.
       (b) Miscellaneous Administrative and Support Services.--The 
     Secretary of Defense shall furnish the Commission, on a 
     reimbursable basis, any administrative and support services 
     requested by the Commission.

     SEC. 1608. FUNDING.

       Funds for activities of the Commission shall be provided 
     from amounts appropriated for the Department of Defense for 
     operation and maintenance for Defense-wide activities for 
     fiscal year 1998. Upon receipt of a written certification 
     from the Chairman of the Commission specifying the funds 
     required for the activities of the Commission, the Secretary 
     of Defense shall promptly disburse to the Commission, from 
     such amounts, the funds required by the Commission as stated 
     in such certification.

     SEC. 1609. TERMINATION OF THE COMMISSION.

       The Commission shall terminate 60 days after the date of 
     the submission of its final report under section 1603.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from South Carolina 
[Mr. Spence] and a Member opposed, each will control 30 minutes.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, since no one rises in opposition to the 
amendment and it is not my intention to rise in opposition, I am in 
support, but with that explanation, I would ask unanimous consent that 
the balance of the time be yielded to this gentleman.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
California?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] will be 
recognized for 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence].
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 6 minutes.
  (Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I join the ranking Democrat on the 
Committee on National Security, the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Dellums] in jointly offering this amendment.
  This amendment is essentially H.R. 1778, the Defense Reform Act of 
1997, which was reported out of the House Committee on National 
Security last week by voice vote with some minor modifications and 
without provisions in that bill addressing environmental reforms.
  Mr. Chairman, I offer this important amendment in the hope and 
expectation that it will move us closer to effecting significant and 
much-needed reform of the Department of Defense. At the appropriate 
time, I will insert in the Record the applicable report language 
explaining the legislative history and intent of the provisions 
contained in this amendment.

                              {time}  1745

  Mr. Chairman, defense spending has suffered 13 consecutive years of 
real decline. At the same time, the Department of Defense is facing 
billions of dollars in readiness, quality of life, and modernization 
shortfalls. Complicating this situation, our military forces have been 
reduced by one-third over the last 10 years, and the recently released 
Quadrennial Defense Review recommends further force reductions even 
though our forces are busier than they have ever been.
  These realities have dramatically increased the imperative to 
aggressively pursue reforms in how the Department of Defense is 
organized, resourced and conducts its day-to-day business.
  The Spence-Dellums amendment builds on past committee initiatives to 
reform the Department of Defense, and it contains a number of 
organizational, business practice, acquisition, and policy reforms 
intended to compel the Department of Defense to operate more 
efficiently. According to the Congressional Budget Office, just the 
provisions of this amendment dealing with the downsizing of the 
bureaucracy will save $15.5 billion over the next 5 years and $5 
billion the year thereafter. This does not count any of the expected 
savings resulting from the various business practices and acquisition 
reforms contained in the bill.
  This amendment proposes action on several fronts: First, it addresses 
work force reductions. Over the past several years the committee has 
focused attention on the disproportionate size of the work force 
assigned to the Office of the Secretary of Defense headquarters staff 
and acquisition organizations. Retaining such an overstaffed 
bureaucracy is untenable when troops have been reduced by 33 percent.
  Second, this amendment also recognizes that there are many commercial 
functions which are currently performed by the Department which are 
neither inherently governmental nor directly related to the war-
fighting mission. Accordingly, it imposes business practice reforms by 
mandating that a number of commercial activities of the department, 
such as finance and accounting, information services and property 
disposal, be competitively procured. It does not mandate privatization, 
just competition. And in recognition of the fact that the private 
sector is not always more cost-effective than the public sector, the 
bill ensures that the existing work force will be able to compete.
  Spending on infrastructure and support services account for nearly 60 
percent of the defense budget. According to GAO, 45 percent of all 
active duty military personnel are assigned to infrastructure 
functions. This trend must be reversed. As the war-fighting element or 
the tooth of the military services becomes smaller by comparison to the 
infrastructure/support or tail, the risk of a hollow force becomes 
real. In the current budget environment, maintaining an effective 
combat capability demands a defense establishment that is smaller, more 
efficient and able to maintain critical war-fighting capability at a 
lower cost.
  This amendment has received the endorsement of the council for 
Citizens Against Government Waste and Americans For Tax Reform. I pause 
after that. That should be of interest to everyone, many of whom vote 
on the recommendations of these two organizations.
  Mr. Chairman, the imperative to reform how the Department of Defense 
conducts its business has never been greater. The Defense Reform Act of 
1997, and this amendment, achieves this goal. I strongly urge a ``yes'' 
vote on the Spence-Dellums defense reform amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, the report language referred to above, follows 
herewith:

                         Purpose and Background

       Consistent with the recently concluded bipartisan balanced 
     budget agreement, the fiscal year 1998 defense budget will 
     represent the 13th straight year of real decline 
     in defense spending. However, persistent shortfalls in 
     critical defense modernization, readiness and quality of life 
     accounts totaling billions of dollars over the Future Years 
     Defense Program remain with no realistic prospect of solution 
     within the existing budgetary framework. Exacerbating the 
     situation, U.S. military forces have been reduced by one-
     third over the last ten years and the recently released 
     Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) recommends further force 
     reductions, even though U.S. forces are busier than they have 
     ever been.
       The starkness of the realities facing the defense budget 
     have dramatically increased the imperative to aggressively 
     pursue reforms in how the Department of Defense is organized, 
     resourced and conducts its day to day business. While the 
     drive to achieve meaningful defense reform has existed for 
     decades, the results have been mixed with only marginal 
     improvements achieved.
       During the 104th Congress, the House National 
     Security Committee initiated a number of reforms in the areas 
     of acquisition policy, infrastructure and support services, 
     and DOD organization. These reforms were intended to increase 
     the overall efficiency of the Department while, at the same 
     time, preserving the critical military combat capability.
       In the acquisition policy area, the committee streamlined 
     and made more cost efficient

[[Page H4041]]

     the acquisition process through reforms of a number of 
     antiquated and restrictive federal acquisition laws. The 
     committee also mandated numerous studies and pilot programs 
     in the area of infrastructure and support services in an 
     effort to determine the benefits of shifting responsibility 
     for providing certain support services from the public sector 
     to the private. Given the Department's critical national 
     security mission, the committee recognizes there will always 
     be important support functions that must be performed, in 
     part or in whole, by DOD employees. However, with spending on 
     infrastructure and support services accounting for nearly 60 
     percent of the defense budget, the committee believes that 
     reality should not stand in the way of moving aggressively to 
     achieve greater efficiencies in non-critical support 
     functions such as printing, payroll and travel, just to cite 
     a few.
       With respect to DOD organization, the committee is 
     disappointed and concerned that its efforts to effect reform 
     in this area, undertaken with a cooperative spirit, have been 
     met with hostility and consistent non-compliance with 
     statutory direction. The facts underlying the need for DOD 
     organizational reform have not changed. In the same ten year 
     period that active duty military forces have been reduced by 
     33 percent, the size of the staff and support personnel 
     assigned to the Office of the Secretary of Defense has 
     increased by over 40 percent. This trend of growth in the 
     administrative support functions of the Department undermine 
     the credibility of any internal effort to attack the widely 
     recognized imbalance between combat forces and support 
     infrastructure.
       The committee acknowledges the QDR's review of defense 
     reform issues and resulting initiatives. However, the 
     committee notes with disappointment the lack of detail and 
     specifics on implementation of these initiatives. Further, 
     while the committee commends Secretary Cohen's commitment to 
     taking on defense reform through the establishment of the 
     Task Force on Defense Reform, the committee notes that the 
     results of that new review will not be known until late this 
     year.
       This legislation builds on past committee initiatives to 
     effect reform in the Department of Defense. It undertakes a 
     number of organizational, structural, defense business 
     practice, acquisition and policy reforms that will make the 
     Department operate more efficiently.
       The committee notes that, in implementing the provisions of 
     this bill, the Secretary of Defense may apply any applicable 
     workyear reductions resulting from sections 1401, 1402, 1403, 
     1405, 1406, and 1421 of this bill to the relevant 
     headquarters reductions and acquisition workforce reductions 
     required by sections 1301 and 1302. Further, the committee is 
     aware that there may be a ``double counting'' effect, whereby 
     a position being eliminated may, for example, fall into both 
     an acquisition workforce and headquarters definition. It is 
     the committee's intent that reductions in the workforce 
     resulting from this bill shall count toward all relevant 
     affected functions or organizations.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

                 Title XIII--Defense Personnel Reforms


      section 1301--reduction in personnel assigned to management 
            headquarters and headquarters support activities

       This section would require a 25 percent reduction in 
     management headquarters and headquarters support personnel, 
     as defined in DOD Instruction 5100.73, over four years and 
     implemented on an annual basis. In execution of this section, 
     the Department would base its reductions upon personnel 
     levels as of October 1, 1997. This section would also require 
     the Secretary of Defense to examine DOD Instruction 5100.73 
     and make recommendations to Congress by January 15, 1998 on a 
     revised directive that uniformly applies a DOD-wide 
     definition of management headquarters and headquarters 
     support functions.
       The committee continues to be concerned with the size and 
     cost of the Department's management headquarters and 
     headquarters support activities. Ten years after the 
     enactment of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense 
     Reorganization Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-433), the committee 
     believes that the Department requires a further reexamination 
     of the structure and size of its management headquarters and 
     headquarters support activities to eliminate unnecessary 
     duplication, outdated modes of organization, and wasteful 
     inefficiencies.
       The committee unsuccessfully sought to engage the 
     Department in the 104th Congress on the appropriate size, 
     composition and structure of its Military Department 
     Headquarters staffs. The committee notes with concern that 
     the Department has yet to submit the report and 
     recommendations required by section 904 of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 
     104-201). While the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) has 
     cited reducing and streamling management headquarters and 
     headquarters support activities as a priority, it has 
     postponed implementation of reductions until another internal 
     study reviews the issue and makes recommendations to the 
     Secretary of Defense by August 29, 1997.
       The committee is encouraged with the QDR's assertion that 
     the reduction of layers of oversight at headquarters and 
     operational commands and elimination of management and 
     support personnel will yield 10,000 military and 14,000 
     civilian positions. The committee concurs with the need to 
     drawdown unnecessary infrastructure and supports the 
     Department in this regard. However, the committee is 
     concerned the Department may not have an accurate 
     understanding of the costs associated with management 
     headquarters and headquarters support activities. 
     Specifically, the committee questions whether the Department 
     is relying upon the proper definition and whether the 
     governing DOD directive is being adequately implemented. The 
     committee is aware of several organizations that have not 
     been reported by DOD as management headquarters or 
     headquarters support, but appear to be performing those 
     functions. These organizations include the Air Force Studies 
     and Analyses Agency, U.S. Army's Forces Command Field Support 
     Activity, Air Combat Command's Studies and Analyses Squadron, 
     and the U.S. Atlantic Command's Information Systems Support 
     Group. Furthermore, the committee understands only a portion 
     of the headquarters staffs of the DOD Inspector General and 
     some Defense Agencies are reported by DOD as being management 
     headquarters or headquarters support. In addition, none of 
     the headquarters of the numbered air forces are currently 
     reported (although they were in the past), and the Navy's 
     Program Executive Offices apparently have not been reported 
     in spite of the DOD directive requiring their inclusion.
       The committee understands the Department intends to address 
     the inadequacies of the current definition of management 
     headquarters and headquarters support activities in its 
     August 29, 1997 report to the Secretary and looks forward to 
     specific recommendations to rectify this situation.


  Section 1302--Additional Reduction in Defense Acquisition Workforce

       This section would require the Department of Defense to 
     reduce its acquisition workforce by 42 percent by October 1, 
     2001, based upon projected fiscal year 1997 end-strength, in 
     order to achieve the reductions necessary to take full 
     advantage of legislated acquisition reforms, free up 
     resources for other unfunded priorities and spur needed 
     streamlining in the defense acquisition infrastructure. This 
     provision would also require the Secretary of Defense to 
     submit an implementation plan to Congress by January 15, 
     1998, containing any recommendations to include legislative 
     proposals the Secretary considers necessary to fully achieve 
     such reductions.
       In the 104th Congress, the committee addressed specific 
     concerns with the size and number of acquisition 
     organizations and positions relative to the declining 
     Department of Defense (DOD) budget and modernization program. 
     Many of the acquisition reforms initiated by the committee 
     were intended to ultimately reduce costs both to the private 
     sector as well as the federal government. Full implementation 
     of acquisition reforms can, and should, also result in 
     fundamental changes and reductions in the structure of the 
     Department's acquisition organizations. Specifically, it was 
     the intent of the committee in relieving the Department from 
     the burden of administering various antiquated and 
     restrictive federal procurement laws that substantially fewer 
     acquisition personnel would be required.
       In seeking to establish a balance between the Department's 
     diminished modernization program and the Department's 
     acquisition bureaucracy, the committee supported moderate 
     reductions in acquisition personnel in section 906 of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 
     (Public Law 104-106) and section 902 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201). 
     The committee understands that in implementing these 
     reductions, the Department exceeded the Congressional 
     mandates in fiscal year 1996 and plans to do so again in 
     fiscal year 1997.
       In addition to seeking overall reductions in personnel, the 
     committee sought to engage the Department in determining the 
     appropriate structure of its future acquisition workforce. 
     Section 906 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106) required the Department 
     to examine consolidation and reorganization options and 
     report to Congress on its recommendations. Unfortunately, the 
     report provided by the Department demonstrated no real effort 
     to consider the various organizational and management options 
     identified by the law and, not surprisingly, failed to 
     propose significant alternations to the current acquisition 
     infrastructure.
       The committee notes that the 1995 Commission on Roles and 
     Missions (CORM) sharply criticized the Department's 
     acquisition organizations for maintaining redundant staffs 
     and facilities for many types of common acquisition support 
     activities. Therefore, the committee rejects the Department's 
     conclusion in its report to Congress pursuant to section 906 
     of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1996 (Public Law 104-106) that it has adequately assessed 
     and implemented options for restructuring its acquisition 
     organizations for the purposes of improved efficiency.
       The committee strongly disagrees with the Department's 
     assertion that increased downsizing of the workforce would 
     place at risk the ability of the Department to equip combat 
     forces and modernize against future threats. Rather, the 
     committee regards the disproportionate size of the defense 
     acquisition personnel workforce and infrastructure relative 
     to the dramatically reduced procurement accounts as a serious 
     drain upon current and future resources. The committee

[[Page H4042]]

     believes that the Department's continued refusal to 
     restructure and streamline acquisition infrastructure will 
     result in the continued squandering of limited resources 
     urgently needed to address modernization, readiness and 
     quality of life shortfalls. In order to obtain independent 
     analysis of these issues and develop specific alternative 
     organizational options, elsewhere in this report, the 
     committee recommends a provision establishing the Commission 
     on Defense Organization and Streamlining to examine these 
     critical issues.
       The committee understands the Department's current plan 
     will result in an acquisition workforce of approximately 
     269,000 by October 1, 2000, using the definition included in 
     section 906 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106). Further, the 
     Department has stated plans to reduce its acquisition 
     workforce in excess of 20,000 positions in fiscal year 1997. 
     This section would result in a reduction of 95,000 
     acquisition positions in excess of the Department's current 
     plan over the next four years and, specifically, reduce 
     40,000 personnel in fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and 22,000 in 
     fiscal years 2000 and 2001.
       The provision would exempt from the required reductions 
     personnel who are employed at maintenance depots. In 
     addition, the committee expects the personnel covered under 
     the Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act of 1990 
     (DAWIA) will be protected, to the extent possible, from 
     overall reductions required in this section.


   section 1303--availabiity of funds for separation pay for defense 
                         acquisition personnel

       This section would make $100 million available for payment 
     of separation pay incentives only to defense acquisition 
     personnel who separate from the Department of Defense as a 
     result of reductions mandated by section 1302. The committee 
     believes the Department should be provided appropriate 
     management devices to implement these reductions equitably 
     while retaining the necessary skill levels and organizational 
     capacity. The committee expects the Secretary of Defense to 
     distribute these funds to the military departments, agencies 
     and organizations which ultimately are responsible for 
     offering the separation pay incentives, and will closely 
     monitor how these additional resources are expended.


  section 1304--personnel reductions in united states transportation 
                                command

       This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
     reduce administrative duplication and inefficiencies in the 
     United States Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM) and 
     eliminate 1,000 administrative positions across USTRANSCOM 
     components in addition to the reductions identified in the 
     fiscal year 1998 budget request.
       Despite the creation of USTRANSCOM, studies by the General 
     Accounting Office and USTRANSCOM, have reported that traffic 
     management processes within the Department of Defense (DOD) 
     remain fragmented, duplicative, and inefficient, primarily 
     due to the lack of integrated and standard business 
     practices. Personnel in each transportation component 
     continue to perform similar and duplicative functions, 
     resulting in different component staff separately negotiating 
     rates and processing claims often related to the same 
     shipment.
       The committee is aware that USTRANSCOM is reviewing options 
     to improve the management of customer requirements and 
     billing through contracted studies and the Joint Mobility 
     Control Group. Both options utilize standard business 
     practices which should improve transportation services, 
     transportation and financing systems, and allocation of 
     scarce resources. As these programs are fully implemented, 
     they will eliminate much of the duplicative work that exists. 
     The committee believes that as workload is reduced so should 
     the personnel performing such workload.
       As a result, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
     to reduce the workers assigned to USTRANSCOM to 70,755, or 
     1,000 workers below the estimated fiscal year 1997 
     endstrength levels. The Secretary should also take care to 
     ensure that the smaller components in USTRANSCOM do not 
     receive an disproportionate share of this reduction. These 
     reductions would not affect the Department's overall 
     endstrength level.

             Title XIV--Defense Business Practices Reforms

            Subtitle A--Competitive Procurement Requirements


    section 1401--competitive procurement of finance and accounting 
                                services

       This section would require that the Secretary of Defense 
     study the competitive procurement of the finance and 
     accounting services currently provided by the Defense Finance 
     and Accounting Service and provide a report, by June 1, 1998, 
     on the results of the study. The section also requires the 
     Secretary of Defense to competitively procure, consistent 
     with current procurement laws and regulation, DFAS services 
     starting in fiscal year 2000.
       It is the committee's view that there exists a robust 
     capability for the provision of financial and accounting 
     services in the private sector. There are no unique 
     requirements of the Department of Defense for finance and 
     accounting services that preclude the provision of such 
     services by the private sector. In light of these 
     considerations, the committee believes that a full and open 
     competition, consistent with current procurement laws and 
     regulations, between both government and private sector 
     sources for the provision of such services is appropriate. 
     The study undertaken during fiscal year 1998 should be 
     consistent with current laws.


section 1402--competitive procurement of services to dispose of surplus 
                            defense property

       This section would direct that the Secretary of Defense to 
     competitively procure the Defense Reutilization and Marketing 
     Service (DRMS) function of disposing of surplus property, by 
     October 1, 1998, and provide a plan, by March 1, 1998, for 
     implementing this section and to identify other DRMS 
     functions that lend themselves to outsourcing.
       Studies by both the Department of Defense (DOD) and the 
     National Performance Review identified DRMS as a non-
     inherently governmental function to be considered for 
     outsourcing. The committee is aware that the Defense 
     Logistics Agency announced a streamlining strategy for DRMS 
     in April 1997. In support of this strategy, the committee 
     recommends competing, consistent with current procurement 
     laws and regulations, all of the DRMS surplus property sales 
     functions starting in fiscal year 1999.
       The sale of surplus property is the last step in the DRMS 
     process, following the proper coding, demilitarization, 
     reutilization, transfer, and donation of property as 
     performed by DRMS federal employees. Prior to this date, the 
     committee directs the Secretary to allow the affected agency 
     or programs to establish their most efficient organizational 
     structure in order to compete with the private sector. The 
     committee expects that standard management systems will be 
     implemented in the surplus sales function to ensure adequate 
     oversight of the function by DRMS, and that all necessary 
     information should be made available to the private sector in 
     order to fully support the sale of surplus property.


section 1403--Competitive Procurement of Functions Performed by Defense 
                       Information Systems Agency

       This section would require that the Secretary of Defense 
     study the competitive procurement of all of the Defense 
     Information System Agency's (DISA) unclassified, non-
     inherently governmental commercial and industrial type 
     activities and provide a report, by June 1, 1998, on the 
     results of the study. The section also requires the Secretary 
     of Defense to competitively procure, consistent with current 
     procurement laws and regulations, DISA services starting in 
     fiscal year 2000.
       The committee recognizes that DISA has played a crucial 
     role in providing information technology support to the 
     Department of Defense. Today, however, most of DISA's 
     services are widely available in the private sector, often at 
     significantly lower costs. Current DISA services duplicated 
     by the private sector include data processing operations, 
     automated systems support, technical support, help centers, 
     software development, telecommunications, and executive 
     software management.
       The study undertaken during fiscal year 1998 should be 
     consistent with current laws. As part of the competition 
     process beginning in fiscal year 2000, the Secretary shall 
     allow the affected program to establish their most efficient 
     organizational structure for the competitions. In order to 
     ensure continuity of customer service, the committee 
     recommends allowing DISA to complete all customer orders 
     received by September 30, 1999.


   section 1404--Competitive Procurement of Printing and Duplication 
                                Services

       This section would extend, through fiscal year 1998, 
     section 351 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201) which directed the 
     Defense Printing Service, now known as the Defense Automation 
     and Printing Service (DAPS), to competitively procure at 
     least 70 percent of its printing and duplication work from 
     private sector sources. This section would also eliminate the 
     current surcharges levied by the DAPS for handling printing 
     orders that are sent to the Government Printing Office (GPO) 
     or to private contractors.
       Although DAPS successfully outsourced 70 percent of its 
     services in fiscal year 1996, the committee has received few 
     assurances that this success represents a permanent change in 
     DAPS business practices. Additionally, the committee has 
     learned that DAPS has placed a surcharge on all customer 
     orders DAPS passes on to its contractors. According to the 
     Air Force and Army, DAPS does not provide any direct value-
     added services for this surcharge.


  section 1405--competitive procurement of certain ophthalmic services

       This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
     contract for ophthalmic services related to providing 
     military members with single vision and multi-vision eyewear, 
     except those services needed to meet readiness requirements 
     or those that can be accomplished more cost-effectively by 
     the Department of Defense. This provision is based on a 
     recommendation made jointly by the U.S. Army Audit Agency and 
     Naval Audit Service.


section 1406--competitive procurement of commercial and industrial type 
                     functions by defense agencies

       This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
     competitively procure the defense agency commercial and 
     industrial functions by fiscal year 2000 and provide, by 
     March 1,

[[Page H4043]]

     1998, a plan to accomplish the requirements of this section.
       The committee is concerned that competition is not being 
     fully explored by the defense agencies. According to the 
     Department of Defense, the defense agencies will outsource an 
     estimated 14 percent of its commercial activities in fiscal 
     year 1997. In comparison, during the same period, the 
     military departments outsourced between 33 to 61 percent of 
     their commercial activities. For these reasons, the committee 
     directs the Secretary of Defense to compete these functions, 
     consistent with current procurement laws and regulations.
     Subtitle B--Reform of Conversion Process


section 1411--Development of Standard Forms Regarding Performance Work 
     Statement and Request for Proposal for Conversion of Certain 
            Operational Functions of Military Installations

       This section would require, by October 1, 1998, the 
     creation of standard Office of Management and Budget Circular 
     A-76 performance work statement (PWS) and request for 
     proposal (RFP) requirements for each base operations function 
     and service that the military departments have previously 
     studied and currently outsource on an average of 50 percent 
     or more across all the military departments. The standard PWS 
     and RFP would render the A-76 requirements, as they relate to 
     PWS and RFP, inapplicable at that time. The committee is 
     aware that within the military services, there is little 
     consistency for outsourcing non-inherently governmental base 
     operations functions and services. Specifically, the military 
     services conduct A-76 studies on activities that are similar, 
     if not exactly the same, as extensively studied and 
     outsourced functions in their own service or in the other 
     military services. This practice unnecessarily duplicates 
     effort and is costly.
       As discussed in a General Accounting Office report, ``Base 
     Operations: Challenges Confronting DOD as It Renews Emphasis 
     on Outsourcing,'' (GAO NSIAD 97-86), the development of 
     standard ``templates'' based on previous A-76 studies of 
     similar functional areas, would save the military services 
     time and resources in outsourcing these functions. The 
     following chart illustrates the base operations commercial 
     activities that were outsourced in fiscal year 1996, 
     highlighting the activities that were outsourced an average 
     of 50 percent or more.

                              [In percent]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Air           Marine
         Base operating activity           Force   Army    Corps    Navy
------------------------------------------------------------\1\---------
Natural resource.........................  (\2\)     45        0      64
Advertising and public relations.........  (\2\)      0        0       1
Financial and Payroll....................     10      0        0      29
Debt collection..........................  (\2\)      0    (\2\)       1
Bus services.............................  (\2\)     48        0      32
Laundry and dry cleaning.................    100     85       81      94
Custodial services.......................    100     88       82      86
Pest management..........................     23     22        0      37
Refuse collection and disposal services..     96     84       67      81
Food services............................     88     88       42      39
Furniture repair.........................      0     10    (\2\)     100
Office equipment maintenance and repair..    100     75       18     100
Motor vehicle operation..................     51     16        0      11
Motor vehicle maintenance................     47     30        0      21
Fire prevention and protection...........    1.4      3        0       1
Military clothing........................  (\2\)     24       58       0
Guard service............................      5     22        0      14
Electrical plants and systems O&M........     18     17      .02       4
Heating plants and systems O&M...........      0     38      .01       5
Water plants and systems O&M.............  (\2\)     32      .02      14
Sewage and waste plants O&M..............     14     27        0      18
Air conditioning and refrigeration plants      7     15       30      37
Other utilities O&M......................     21     25        0      24
Supply operations........................     26      9      .03      12
Warehousing and distribution of            (\2\)      0        0       7
 publications............................
Transportation management services.......     25      6      .02       9
Museum operations........................  (\2\)      4        0       0
Contractor-operated parts stores and         100     71      100   (\2\)
 civil engineering supply stores.........
Other installation services..............      8     10       14      22
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Marine Corps figures are as of July 1996; all others are as of the
  end of fiscal year 1996.
\2\ Not reported.
 
Note.--Percentages represent the portion of the workforce that is
  outsourced for a given function.
 
Source: GAO analysis of services' commercial activities inventory
  databases.

  Section 1412--Study and Notification Requirements for Conversion of 
   Commercial and Industrial Type Functions to Contractor Performance

       This section would amend section 2461 of title 10, United 
     States Code, to streamline the Department of Defense 
     reporting to Congress on outsourcing activities. The 
     committee believes that the current reporting requirements 
     are burdensome to the point of impeding certain outsourcing 
     reviews.


  Section 1413--Collection and Retention of Cost Information Data on 
                 Contracted Out Services and Functions

       This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
     collect cost information on all outsourced activities for 
     five years after a contract is awarded and create a permanent 
     storage site for the data.
       The committee is concerned with the poor and often lacking 
     data collection for outsourced activities. Department of 
     Defense (DOD) regulations currently require only three years 
     collection of cost information data for all outsourced 
     activities. According to the General Accounting Office, only 
     the Department of the Air Force consistently follows the data 
     collection guidelines. As a result of these inconsistencies, 
     DOD rarely collects or keeps data on outsourced activities. 
     The committee believes that data collection of previous and 
     ongoing outsourcing activities within the DOD is crucial to 
     identifying and developing accurate savings estimates of 
     these activities.

                       Subtitle C--Other Reforms


 Section 1421--Reduction in Overhead Costs of Inventory Control Points

       This section would require the Department of Defense (DOD) 
     inventory control points (ICP) to reduce their overhead costs 
     to eight percent of net sales by the end of fiscal year 2000, 
     and provide a plan, by March 1, 1998, for achieving this 
     goal.
       The current costs of overhead within the DOD inventory 
     control points is significantly greater than the private 
     sector. Even after taking into account the need to maintain a 
     wartime capacity, these costs are excessive. The committee 
     believes that the ICP management and work processes are ideal 
     business re-engineering candidates, given the extensive 
     commercial market for these services and the recent 
     improvements in private sector practices. In doing so, DOD is 
     encouraged to review the General Accounting Office reports 
     comparing DOD's inventory management practices with leading 
     industry practices (GAO/NSIAD 96-5 and 96-156) for revising 
     the way ICPs provide supply services. DOD should make 
     extensive use of such commercial options as consolidation and 
     outsourcing--particularly prime vendor and virtual prime 
     vendor deliveries for most repairable, hardware, and 
     consumable items. The use of prime and virtual prime vendors 
     provide the benefit of lowering distribution, warehousing, 
     and inventory costs, which reduces the customer rates in the 
     supply and distribution business areas of the working capital 
     funds.


  Section 1422--Consolidation of Procurement Technical Assistance and 
                Electronic Commerce Technical Assistance

       This section would create the Procurement and Electronic 
     Commerce Technical Assistance Program by combining services 
     of the current Electronic Commerce Resource Centers (ECRC) 
     and the Procurement Technical Assistance Centers (PTAC).
       During the last couple of years, the acquisition community 
     has instituted several reforms aimed at streamlining and 
     removing barriers to the federal acquisition process. The 
     passage of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 
     (Public Law 103-335) and the Federal Acquisition Reform Act 
     of 1996 (Division D of Public Law 104-106), along with 
     administrative actions taken by the Executive Branch to 
     streamline the acquisition process have helped to 
     fundamentally change the federal acquisition system. However, 
     despite these reforms, little has changed for the DOD 
     programs that support small business, particularly ECRC and 
     PTAC.
       Recent findings by the DOD Office of Inspector General 
     (OIG) (Electronic Commerce Resource Centers, Report No. 97-
     090 and Department of Defense Procurement Technical 
     Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program, report No. 97-007) 
     argue that the ECRC ``has not been efficient or cost 
     effective in promoting'' the use of electronic commerce or 
     electronic data interchange technologies between small 
     businesses and government organizations. The DOD-OIG also 
     states that PTAC is not complying with its authorizing 
     language in section 2415 of title 10, United States Code, 
     regarding the requirement to award grants based on the 
     comparative ranking of applicants and equitably distribute 
     grants across the Defense Contract Administration Service 
     regions. Finally, the OIG concluded that both ECRC and PTAC 
     functions overlap with services provided elsewhere in the 
     government. For these reasons, the committee believes the 
     programs should be consolidated to improve service delivery 
     and ensure the future of the program is consistent with the 
     rest of the acquisition community.


   Section 1423--Permanent Authority Regarding Conveyance of Utility 
                                Systems

       This section would authorize the secretary of a military 
     department to convey, with or without consideration, a 
     utility system, or part of a utility system, to a municipal, 
     private, regional, district, or cooperative utility company 
     or other entity. Such utility systems may include electrical 
     generation and supply systems, water supply and treatment 
     systems, wastewater collection and treatment system, steam, 
     hot or chilled water generation and supply systems, natural 
     gas supply systems, and sanitary landfills or lands to be 
     used for sanitary landfills. The provision would require the 
     secretary concerned to submit a 21-day notice-and-wait 
     announcement, to include a report containing an economic 
     analysis of the proposed conveyance, to Congress prior to 
     entering into any agreement to convey a utility system.

           Title XV--Miscellaneous Additional Defense Reforms


section 1501--long term charter contracts for acquisition of auxiliary 
                 vessels for the department of defense

       This section would remove several restrictions placed on 
     the Secretary of Defense that currently impede his ability to 
     enter into contracts for the long-term charter of ships built 
     in the United States to meet Department of Defense (DOD) 
     auxiliary fleet requirements. Specifically, this section 
     would grant the Secretary of the Navy general and permanent 
     authority to enter into contracts for the long term charter 
     of certain classes of logistics, sealift and other support 
     vessels. The Secretary would, however, be required to receive 
     Congressional authorization to enter into contracts for 
     specific vessels. It would also remove the requirement to 
     include the termination liability in the budget request for a 
     20-year lease or charter, would allow the Secretary to 
     request funds to cover only the annual lease payment of a 
     vessel in the fiscal year in which the payment will actually 
     be made, and would eliminate the role

[[Page H4044]]

     of the Office of Management and Budget in reviewing DOD long-
     term charter proposals.
       By removing these and other restrictions, the Secretary 
     would be able to enter into long-term charters for DOD 
     auxiliary ships which have been built with private sector 
     funds. This program would be virtually identical to the 
     highly successful build and charter program which was used to 
     provide the Marine Corps with its maritime prepositioning 
     ships in the mid-1980s and the Military Sealift Command (MSC) 
     with its T-5 tankers. It would offer the opportunity to 
     replace the aging fleet of MSC auxiliary ships and to replace 
     the prepositioned ammunition container ships for the Army and 
     Air Force in a timely manner.


section 1502--fiber-optics based telecommunications linkage of military 
                             installations

       This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
     competitively procure and install a dedicated fiber-optics-
     based network telecommunication service at a minimum of one 
     high military density locale, and report by March 1, 1998 on 
     the implementation of this section.
       The communications market has witnessed a rapid change in 
     the last decade. Driven by such proven technologies as fiber-
     optics and semiconductors, this change has also significantly 
     reduced the cost of telecommunication services while 
     providing greater flexibility and security. Fiber-optics 
     technology, in particular, is used extensively for 
     telecommunications services by the nation's intelligence 
     agencies and to upgrade the base telecommunications 
     infrastructure at four Marine Corps bases in fiscal year 
     1998.
       The committee is aware that fiber-optics technology can 
     also be used to create continuous telecommunication links in 
     areas where there are several similar Department of Defense 
     (DOD) users. Such links could eliminate all Federal 
     Communication Commission (FCC) regulated tolls for 
     communication between the DOD customers and reduce the access 
     tolls for local and long distance calls. In August 1996, the 
     Department of the Navy implemented a pilot study linking, by 
     fiber-optics, the telecommunications services at eleven 
     installations in the Norfolk, Virginia area. An April 1997 
     Department of the Navy audit report concluded that improved 
     management and services related to this pilot could generate 
     an estimated $21 million in savings, or 22 percent of total 
     costs, over the next six years.
       The committee is concerned that DOD has not demonstrated 
     sufficient vision and planning to take full advantage of 
     these cost-effective technologies and a deregulated 
     telecommunications market. Therefore, this section would 
     require the Secretary of Defense to compete among both 
     regulated and unregulated companies for the installation, in 
     at least one area within the United States that contains 
     multiple military facilities and installations, a fiber-
     optics based telecommunications network linking identified 
     military facilities and installations and achieve operational 
     capability for this network on or before September 30, 1999. 
     The committee is aware that such networks are capable of 
     providing all forms of communication including voice 
     telephony, data applications, video teleconferencing, 
     imaging, and video transmission. The committee believes that 
     the Secretary, in contracting for this fiber-optics 
     telecommunications network, should take advantage of the 
     range of capabilities of this technology wherever feasible 
     and affordable.


section 1503--repeal of requirement for contractor guarantees on major 
                             weapon systems

       This section would repeal section 2403 of title 10, United 
     States Code, which requires that a contract for the 
     production of a weapon system contain written guarantees 
     unless a waiver is obtained at the Assistant Secretary of 
     Defense level. It also requires Congressional notification in 
     certain circumstances.
       Based on work performed by the General Accounting Office 
     and other analysis, the committee is convinced that this 
     provision has not contributed to the effective protection of 
     the taxpayer's interests. To the contrary, the body of 
     evidence supports the conclusion that this provision has led 
     to sizable expenditures by the Department of Defense in the 
     course of purchasing contractor guarantees with little or no 
     concomitant benefit in return. In recommending the repeal of 
     this provision, however, the committee is cognizant of the 
     continuing ability of the Secretary of Defense to pursue 
     contractor guarantees on weapon system acquisitions where it 
     is determined that such an arrangement would protect the 
     government's interest and encourages the Secretary to take 
     such a step wherever warranted.


 section 1504--requirements relating to micro-purchases of commercial 
                                 items

       This section would impose a limitation on the use of 
     contracts or purchase orders for commercial items of a value 
     equal to or below the micro-purchase threshold of $2,500 
     unless a member of the Senior Executive Service or a general 
     or flag office makes a written determination such a contract 
     is necessary. The provision would also grant the Secretary of 
     Defense the discretion to prescribe regulations specifying 
     any further circumstances that may necessitate the used 
     contracts or purchase order below the micro-purchase 
     threshold.
       The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has 
     not taken advantage of the authorities provided by the 
     Federal Acquisition and Streamlining Act of 1994 (Public Law 
     103-712) in dispensing with the administrative burden 
     associated with transactions which occur at or below the 
     micro-purchase threshold. While representing the bulk of 
     the contract actions processed by the Department's 
     financial and contract management bureaucracy, such 
     purchases constitute a small fraction of the value of 
     transactions executed by the Department on an annual 
     basis. The committee believes that aggressive 
     implementation of the micro-purchase threshold authority 
     and of this provision could yield significant savings in 
     eliminating a portion of the administrative overhead 
     associated with defense purchases.


section 1505--availability of simplified procedures to commercial item 
                              procurements

       This section would amend existing law to modify the 
     circumstances under which a contracting officer could utilize 
     simplified procedures for the procurement of commercial 
     items. Currently, the authority to utilize simplified 
     procedures above the simplified acquisition threshold of 
     $100,000 is limited by a requirement for the contracting 
     officer to make a determination that ``only'' commercial 
     items will be proposed for a given procurement. Given that 
     this kind of prospective determination is difficult to make, 
     the restriction serves as an impediment to utilizing above-
     threshold simplified procedures as intended by the Clinger-
     Cohen Act of 1996 (Division D of Public Law 104-106). This 
     situation is particularly critical given that this authority 
     for above-threshold simplified procedures was extended by 
     Congress on a three-year test basis. Therefore, the committee 
     believes it is critical that the Department be afforded a 
     realistic opportunity to implement the flexibility and 
     potential benefits realized through the use simplified 
     procedures for commercial item procurements above the 
     simplified acquisition threshold in order to determine 
     whether such authority should be considered on a more 
     permanent basis.


 section 1506--termination of the armed services patent advisory board

       This section would terminate the Armed Services Patent 
     Advisory Board and transfer its functions to the Defense 
     Technology Security Administration (DTSA). The Armed Services 
     Patent Advisory Board is currently responsible for 
     coordinating security reviews of patent applications to 
     determine if they contain sensitive technical information, 
     the public release of which would be detrimental to national 
     security. In performing this function, the Board fulfills the 
     role assigned to the Department of Defense under chapter 17 
     of title 35, United States Code. The Patent Advisory Board is 
     an unfunded program and as such, is staffed with personnel 
     from the legal offices of the military departments.
       The committee notes that DTSA carries out nearly the same 
     technology security review function when reviewing export 
     license applications to determine if the technologies 
     involved would harm national security if exported to foreign 
     entities. In fact, DTSA and the Patent Advisory Board confer 
     with many of the same technical experts at field activities 
     of the military departments. The DTSA staff possesses 
     technical knowledge that enable it to prescreen items before 
     resorting to military field activities for analyses. A DTSA 
     review can therefore be more expeditious than reviews 
     coordinated by the Patent Advisory Board, since Board 
     personnel are primarily legal staff members with limited 
     knowledge of defense technologies. While the committee 
     recognizes that as an unfunded program the Board's 
     termination would not necessarily result in cost savings, the 
     committee believes that transfer of the security review 
     function to DTSA would result in more expeditious and 
     thorough reviews.


     section 1507--coordination of department of defense criminal 
                       investigations and audits

       This section would authorize the Department of Defense 
     (DOD) Criminal Investigative Service's Board on 
     Investigations with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
     Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence as 
     executor. This provision would also create a similar board 
     for the audit agencies with the DOD Undersecretary for 
     Defense (Comptroller) as its executor.
       The committee commends the DOD criminal investigative 
     services on their efforts to increase coordination, reduce 
     duplication, and improve the overall management of resources 
     through the Board on Investigations and the Regional Fraud 
     Working Groups. The committee believes the creation of a 
     Board on Audit would generate the same benefits, allowing DOD 
     to better handle the increasing workload from the Chief 
     Financial Officers Act and the changing accounting systems. 
     The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to finalize 
     the working guidance for the operation of both boards no 
     later than December 31, 1997. The committee believes that DOD 
     is best served by a productive and coordinated effort between 
     the service departments and the DOD Office of Inspector 
     General.


 section 1508--department of defense boards, commissions, and advisory 
                               committees

       This section would eliminate, by December 31, 1998, all 
     governing authorities for Department of Defense (DOD) 
     advisory committees other than those established in the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 
     (Public Law 104-106) or subsequent authorizations. This 
     provision would also require DOD to submit to Congress a 
     report

[[Page H4045]]

     and a legislative proposal, due March 1, 1998, identifying 
     advisory committees that warrant support and including 
     justification and projected costs associated with specific 
     advisory committees.
       The committee is aware the Department has, in response to 
     Presidential Executive Order 12838, ``Termination and 
     Limitation of Federal Advisory Committees,'' reduced 
     discretionary boards and commissions by almost one-third 
     since 1993. In compliance with section 1054 of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 
     104-106), the Department submitted a report to Congress on 
     the merits of remaining DOD boards and commissions. The 
     Department failed, however, to propose any significant 
     further elimination of its advisory committees. The committee 
     notes the current 53 discretionary and statutorily 
     established boards and commissions, to include the Advisory 
     Group on Electron Devices, Armed Forces Epidemiological 
     Board, and Inland Waterways Users Board, will cost an 
     estimated $16.2 million in fiscal year 1997. The committee is 
     concerned that many of the Department's remaining statutory 
     and discretionary boards and commissions may have outlived 
     their original purpose.
       The committee recognizes the value of readily available 
     expertise in the execution of the Department's duties. 
     Accordingly, this section would allow the Department of 
     Defense to establish advisory committees for one year or less 
     in duration without Congressional authorization for the 
     stated purpose of examining issues critical to national 
     security.


         section 1509--advances for payment of public services

       This section would expand the list of items that the 
     Department of Defense may pay in advance, from available 
     appropriations, to include public utility services. This 
     provision should lower administrative costs associated with 
     metering and billing for these services.

      Title XVI--Commission on Defense Organization and Streamling


                                overview

       The post-Cold War global security environment has witnessed 
     dramatic reductions in the size and capability of the U.S. 
     military force structure while the organizational composition 
     of the Department, especially at the management level, has 
     remained largely unchanged. Since 1987, the Army has lost 
     eight active divisions, the Navy has decommissioned three 
     carriers and over 200 ships, and the Air Force has cut 12 
     active and five reserve tactical wings. Notably, 1997 active 
     duty personnel levels are actually equivalent to 1950 pre-
     Korean War levels. Meanwhile, from 1985 to 1996, the Office 
     of the Secretary increased its staff 40 percent, military 
     department headquarters continue to maintain redundant 
     staffs, and, in spite of a 70 percent drop in procurement 
     accounts since 1985, the Department's acquisition 
     infrastructure has remained largely static.
       The committee maintains that the Department currently has 
     sufficient authority to reorganize and restructure itself but 
     has demonstrated little willingness to pursue such reforms. 
     Not since the passage of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of 
     Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-433) has 
     the defense establishment undergone significant scrutiny and 
     reform.
       To address these trends, the committee undertook a number 
     of initiatives during the 104th Congress to encourage and 
     compel the Department to focus on these matters and arrive at 
     its own options and solutions. The committee deliberately 
     chose not to legislate specific prescriptive remedies on the 
     belief that the Department was better suited to develop such 
     detail on its own. Therefore the committee provided the 
     Department with broad guidance and, where possible, relief 
     from existing statutory limitations and dictates on 
     organizational matters. To the committee's continuing 
     disappointment, the Department's response to these efforts 
     has ranged from passive resistance to outright defiance of 
     statutory direction. After two years of attempting a 
     preferred approach of cooperation and collaboration, the 
     committee finds itself no further along in effecting the 
     necessary change in the Department's management and 
     organizational structure.


               section 1601--establishment of commission

       In an effort to increase understanding and provide the 
     Congress with implementation options for reforming the 
     Department of Defense, this subtitle would establish a 
     commission to be known as the ``Commission on Defense 
     Reorganization and Streamling.'' The committee believes an 
     independent commission would serve to further the cause of 
     fundamental and much-needed defense organizational reform. 
     The commission would consist of nine members who are private 
     citizens with knowledge and expertise in organization and 
     management matters. Two members would be appointed by the 
     chairman of the House National Security Committee, two 
     members would be appointed by the ranking member of the House 
     National Security Committee, two members would be appointed 
     by the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and 
     two members would be appointed by the ranking member of the 
     Senate Armed Services Committee.
       This section would also provide for three of the four 
     appointing chairmen and ranking members to designate a 
     commission chairman. In addition, this section provides for 
     filling vacancies, and describes the initial organizational 
     requirements of the commission. It would require that all 
     members of the commission be required to hold appropriate 
     security clearance. The committee notes, however, that it is 
     not the intent of this subsection to disqualify those 
     individuals who do not currently hold clearances but who 
     could be provided appropriate clearances in a short period of 
     time. The committee expects that in such circumstances the 
     government would move to secure the necessary clearances as 
     expeditiously as possible.


                   section 1602--duties of commission

       This section would establish the duties of the commission, 
     which would be to make recommendations to increase overall 
     organizational effectiveness of the Department of Defense. 
     The commission shall examine the missions, functions, 
     responsibilities, and relationship therein, of the Office of 
     the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the management headquarters 
     and headquarters support activities of the Military 
     Departments and the Defense Agencies, and the Department's 
     various acquisition organizations and propose alternative 
     organizational structures and alternative allocation of 
     authorities where it deems appropriate. In carrying out its 
     duties, the commission shall identify areas of duplication 
     and recommend options to streamline, reduce, and eliminate 
     redundancies.
       This section would also require that the commission receive 
     full and timely cooperation of any U.S. government official 
     responsible for providing the commission with information 
     necessary to the fulfillment of its responsibilities.


                         section 1603--reports

       This section would direct the commission to submit an 
     interim report to the Congress by March 15, 1998, and a final 
     report by July 15, 1998, on its findings and conclusions, 
     with a provision for the incorporation of dissenting views.


                          Section 1604--Powers

       This section would establish the commission's authority to 
     hold hearings, take testimony, and receive evidence. The 
     provision would also authorize the commission to secure any 
     information from the Department of Defense and other federal 
     agencies as the commission deems necessary to carry out its 
     responsibilities.


                  Section 1605--Commission Procedures

       This section would establish the procedures by which the 
     commission shall conduct its business, describe the number of 
     members required for a quorum and authorize the commission to 
     establish panels for the purpose of carrying out the 
     commission's duties.


                    Section 1606--Personnel Matters

       This section would establish personnel policies for the 
     commission. Members of the commission would serve without 
     pay. The provision would authorize:
       (1) Reimbursement of expenses, including per diem in lieu 
     of subsistence, for travel in the performance of services for 
     the commission;
       (2) The chairman to appoint a staff director, subject to 
     the approval of the commission, and such additional personnel 
     as may also be necessary for the commission to perform its 
     duties;
       (3) The pay of the staff director and other personnel;
       (4) Federal government employees to be detailed to the 
     commission on a nonreimbursable basis and;
       (5) The chairman to procure temporary and intermittent 
     services.


         Section 1607--Miscellaneous Administrative Provisions

       This section would allow the commission to use the United 
     States mails and to obtain printing and binding services in 
     accordance with the procedures used by other federal 
     agencies. The provision would also require the Secretary of 
     Defense to furnish the commission with administrative and 
     support services, as requested, on a reimbursable basis.


                         Section 1608--Funding

       This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
     provide such sums as may be necessary for the activities of 
     the commission in fiscal year 1998.


              Section 1609--Termination of the Commission

       This section would terminate the commission 60 days after 
     the date of the submission of its report.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, my distinguished colleague the gentleman from South 
Carolina [Mr. Spence] has already laid out the specifics of the bill. I 
shall not be redundant. I simply want to first commend the gentleman 
from South Carolina for making a significant effort at the very outset 
to make this reform package a bipartisan effort.
  We both would agree that in its present form it is not perfect. 
Because this was on a fast track, we are only recently hearing from 
stakeholders in this reform legislation. We have made an effort to 
respond to them. I would say to my colleagues on this side of the

[[Page H4046]]

aisle that, while not perfect, I think this product can and should be 
supported as we move forward further into the legislative process, 
further having the opportunity to refine this process.
  I want to thank the gentleman from South Carolina for heeding the 
notion that while there was a yeoman effort to make reforms in 
fundamental environmental legislation, that because of the controversy 
and jurisdictional issues, that they saw the wisdom to withdraw title 
III. I deeply appreciate that.
  Third, I want to thank and commend the staff persons on both sides of 
the aisle who, I believe, negotiated with each other in good faith, 
sometimes when we were not here, negotiated with each other with the 
characteristics of transparency and openness and conviction. Those are 
very important factors.
  Mr. Chairman, as I have said on more than one occasion, any Member of 
Congress or any committee that thinks they can operate without 
competent and capable staff are living in a Never-Never Land. So I want 
to applaud both the competence, the capability, the integrity and the 
cooperation that took place between the two staffs as we arrived at 
this bipartisan effort. I think it was an excellent one.
  Given the fact that from time to time this is a contentious place, 
this may very well be a model of how both parties can work and function 
and operate when we are of one mind, attempting to address a myriad of 
problems that need to be discussed.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Bateman].
  Mr. BATEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I offer my strongest endorsement to the 
build and charter provision in this package of reforms.
  This provision is relatively simple and straightforward. It provides 
the Secretary of the Navy with authority to enter into long-term 
charters for auxiliary and naval support vessels built in U.S. 
shipyards. It is modeled after the highly successful build and charter 
program which allowed the Navy to retain its T-5 tankers and the Marine 
Corps to obtain its 13 maritime prepositioned vessels.
  These ships will be built in privately owned U.S. shipyards using 
private capital. Upon completion of these vessels, the shipowners will 
sign a long-term lease with the Navy to provide a fully crewed vessel.
  This provision will simply allow the Navy to request funding for the 
lease payments for these vessels in the year in which those payments 
are required to be paid. Under current practice, the Navy is required 
to request the budget authority in the first year of the lease for all 
of the payments due over the next 20 years. Without the ability to 
spread these payments over the term of the lease, the Navy will simply 
be unable to obtain the support capability it needs over the next 10 
years.
  The Navy will need 10 new fast combat dry cargo support ships just 
after the year 2000. Requirements for ammunition ships for the Air 
Force and Army have also been identified, as well as towed-array sensor 
ships. The reason I mention these various types of vessels is this 
provision will not only provide the opportunity for the Department of 
Defense to obtain the needed sealift support, but it also offers U.S.-
based shipyards the opportunity to build these vessels in sufficient 
quantities to gain the efficiencies needed to provide an economical 
product for the Navy.
  The amendment will not just benefit large shipyards but also many 
small shipyards throughout the country. The Navy is considering using 
this program for towed-array sensor ships, for replacing this aging 
class of ships. These ships range in length from 220 to 265 feet, a 
length that is well within the capability of smaller shipyards.
  Thus, this section in the reform amendment benefits large shipyards 
as well as the smaller yards and American merchant mariners and our 
national security. I urge my colleagues' support.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to allow the 
gentlewoman from California [Ms. Harman] the opportunity to manage the 
balance of the time on this side of the aisle.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
California?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and I thank the ranking member for yielding time to me and for giving 
me this opportunity, I again commend him for his professionalism, 
passion and poetry in the leadership role he serves on this committee.
  It is also an honor to serve with him and with our chairman, the 
gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence], and to rise in enthusiastic 
support of this bipartisan amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, we just voted down overwhelmingly an amendment to 
provide a 5-percent across-the-board cut in our defense budget. I voted 
against that amendment because I think that that form of cutting is not 
responsible. But it does not mean that all forms of cutting are not 
responsible. In fact, the pending amendment would cut at least $5.5 
billion from our defense budget and that is very responsible.
  I commend to those who voted for the Sanders amendment and to those 
who voted against the Sanders amendment this particular bipartisan 
Dellums-Spence amendment.
  I spoke earlier in general debate, and I said that I support more 
effective, less costly defense that is ready for the next war, not the 
last one. I want the Pentagon to take full advantage of the revolution 
in military affairs as it modernizes equipment and doctrine for future 
conflicts, because that will ultimately bring costs down and 
effectiveness up.
  But modernizing requires an initial investment. In today's tight 
budgetary climate, funding for that investment must come from 
reductions. And logically, those reductions should be in excess 
infrastructure and ossified management practices. Right now the 
Pentagon spends too much on activities that have nothing to do with 
national security. I repeat, they have nothing to do with national 
security.
  Sixty percent of the defense budget and 45 percent of all military 
personnel are dedicated to support, not to war-fighting. No business 
could survive with that ratio of overhead to production. Those of us on 
the Committee on National Security know that the tooth-to-tail ratio is 
way out of line, and many other Members know that too.
  Reform-minded Pentagon officials need our support. Just before he 
released the QDR, Secretary Cohen told me that it is important for 
Congress to keep the pressure on, to help his management team overcome 
internal resistance to reform. The amendment before us is the best way 
of keeping the pressure on, to help the Pentagon modernize its 
management procedures and to bring the tooth-to-tail ratio back to 
reality.
  This amendment has broad support not only within Congress and the 
civilian leadership in the Department but among concerned outside 
groups, too. One of these is BENS, Business Executives for National 
Security, a nonpartisan organization of Democratic and Republican 
business leaders whose advisers include people like former Secretary of 
Defense Bill Perry.
  In a letter distributed to all Members, BENS urges support of this 
amendment and underscores the need to reduce headquarters staff. This 
amendment would reduce those staffs by 25 percent, cut the cost of 
financial management, encourage cost saving public-private competition, 
and simplify acquisition procedures.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment moves us toward the objectives of the 
QDR. It continues the important work on acquisition reform that I think 
is the cornerstone of the legacy of former Secretary of Defense Bill 
Perry.

                              {time}  1800

  Modernizing our forces to take advantage of the revolution in 
military affairs requires what Secretary Cohen calls a revolution in 
business affairs. This amendment provides the ammunition for that 
revolution.
  It makes good defense sense and it makes good business sense to pass 
this amendment. Let us take advantage of the opportunity it presents, 
and let us make a real difference in how the Pentagon does business. We 
can do better, and it can cost us less.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Weldon].

[[Page H4047]]

  (Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of 
the amendment, and I want to again thank the chairman and the ranking 
member for their leadership in helping us address the need to reduce 
the infrastructure and better manage the Department of Defense.
  The changes that are recommended in this amendment are very serious, 
they are substantive, and they are needed. It allows us to bring down 
the cost of those people who oversee purchasing. The DOD civilian 
personnel, that is still too high. It allows us to make management 
reforms to bring in privatization where possible.
  But let me talk about one portion of this amendment that we dropped, 
Mr. Chairman, and that deals with environmental costs. Earlier I spoke 
about one of the most rapidly increasing portions of the defense 
budget, and that is the cost for environmental protection. I cited a 
ballpark figure at that time of $12 billion. The actual amount, Mr. 
Chairman, is $6 billion for DOE environmental costs, $4.8 billion for 
DOD costs. And those figures do not include the hundreds of millions of 
dollars that we spend either locally at our bases on research programs, 
through accounts that are managed by DARPA and a number of other 
agencies. So, when we add all of that up within DOD, we are spending 
close to $12 billion.
  Mr. Chairman, I take great pride in my environmental voting record, 
support for things like endangered species, wetlands protection, clean 
air. But we have to find a way to better utilize defense dollars to 
clean up our sites. And what we are not addressing in this amendment, 
but which I know our chairman supports, is an effort down the road to 
address the increasing environmental costs.
  Let me also add that under our chairman and ranking member, we have 
taken great steps. In fact, we introduced a whole new coordinating 
initiative with the oceanographic community in this country, not 
actually spending new money, but having the Navy work with nine other 
Federal agencies to better coordinate the money they spend on 
understanding the ocean ecosystem.
  It is a better use of DOD's assets, which are primarily for defense 
and for national security, but which also offers tremendous 
environmental opportunities. That is in the bill. And that is the kind 
of success that we take along with our efforts to help solve problems 
like the nuclear waste disposition problem in the Arctic by the 
Russians.
  So we are not saying that we should not be environmentally sensitive, 
and we are not saying that we should not be concerned. And where 
possible, the military, when it does its primary purpose, can also 
benefit us environmentally, we should take advantage of it. But we have 
to get control of the increasing costs. We have to find a way to 
provide flexibility so that, when we shut these bases down, and when 
one day we have kids playing in a playground or going to school on a 
military base and the next day after the base is closed we say it is a 
toxic waste site, that is just unacceptable.
  It is causing us to take more money from programs and from quality of 
life that is important. And I applaud my chairman and the ranking 
member of the leadership and I ask for consideration of this in the 
future.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I just listened to the last speaker, my good friend, 
the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Weldon], and would like to thank 
him for years of bipartisan cooperation under his leadership in the 
Subcommittee on Military Research and Development. I happen to agree 
with him that environmental issues need to be considered down the line.
  I was the sole vote on my side of the aisle against deleting all 
environmental issues from the base bill on which this amendment is 
based. I did so because, although the provisions in this original bill 
may not have been perfect, there are provisions that we should pass. 
There are ways to revise the Superfund law particularly and to provide 
for less costly, I think less costly, remediation of some of these 
closed bases and other sites, which will not only save scarce dollars 
but will get these lands back to community use faster.
  So I applaud what he is saying, and I pledge to work with him and 
anyone else on responsible ways to change the existing environmental 
practices so that they are more modern, less costly, and better for all 
the taxpayers.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. 
Abercrombie].
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, today represents a culmination of 7 
years of effort, bipartisan I would like to say, nonpartisan effort. I 
particularly want to thank the chairman, the gentleman from Virginia 
[Mr. Bateman]. This has been a dream of his since before I came into 
the Congress. I have been privileged to work with him on this issue, 
been privileged to work with the gentleman from California [Mr. Hunter] 
and the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. Taylor] to try and put together 
this legislation which will renew and revitalize American shipbuilding.
  Mr. Chairman, people expect in the United States of America that our 
strategic interests are going to be met, that our national interests 
are understood in a context of having a modern merchant marine 
industry. And yet we do not have it. On the contrary, it has been 
virtually wiped out.
  I do not believe, Mr. Chairman, that the average American understood 
that, even at this time. Yet this legislation and this reform package 
that has been put together under the leadership of the gentleman from 
South Carolina [Mr. Spence] and the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Dellums] is going to achieve that.
  As a result of the passage of this reform bill, we are going to see 
American ships built in American shipyards by American workers, flagged 
in America, and sailed by American seafarers. That is what is going to 
be accomplished today. We are doing it in a context that marries the 
public and the private sector. This takes us into a new age of 
shipbuilding, the revitalization of the American merchant marine.
  A vibrant, prosperous American merchant marine is in the direct 
strategic interests of the United States. Without it, the national 
interests of the United States, as manifested in military doctrine and 
material, are served in name only.
  Mr. Chairman, by voting for the reform bill today in support of the 
chairman's innovative amendment, we will give the Navy the authority to 
enter into long-term charters for the construction of strategic sealift 
and special mission auxiliary ships. This authority is absolutely 
essential because the Navy must replace these types of ships in its 
fleet.
  Many of these ships are near the end of their useful life. In fact, 
the average age of 21 of them is over 30 years. Just as a car, an older 
ship needs maintenance, Mr. Chairman, it gets more expensive by the 
age, it becomes less reliable. Unlike our personal cars, however, these 
ships have a critical mission. And we can ill afford to place our young 
men and women in harm's way and not have the sealift capability to 
provide them with the supplies and equipment that are essential during 
the perilous hours of need.
  It does not make good sense to throw good money after bad in trying 
to make Bandaid repairs to extend the life of a ship that is operating 
past its time. We are in a new era of fiscal responsibility that is 
recognized by the chairman where a premium must be placed on finding 
innovative ways to provide the Navy with the ships they need now, this 
century, not the next.
  Charter and build is the cost-effective answer that will permit the 
Navy to replace their aging sealift on auxiliary ships. For the last 
several years, Mr. Chairman, acquisition reform has received well-
deserved attention and most particularly in our Committee on National 
Security. Charter and build is in total keeping with the spirit and 
intent of acquisition reform; and equally important, it allows the 
private sector to participate in providing a cost-effective means to 
meet the auxiliary requirements of the Department of defense. It 
creates U.S. jobs, which will be filled by taxpayers who fuel the 
Treasury and our Government with revenue that allows us to provide for 
the common defense.
  For all of these reasons, Mr. Chairman, I request of all of the 
membership

[[Page H4048]]

today that they pay close attention to the sea change, no pun intended, 
Mr. Chairman, that is going to take place with the passage of the 
reform bill. After today, we will have taken the effective first step 
in seeing to it that not just reform has come to the American merchant 
marine, but that a new day, a new dawn is here for the American 
merchant marine.
  We have the chairman to thank. We have all the Members to thank, the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums], as I said, the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Bateman]. I hope that the first ship that comes out will 
take into consideration the chairman of our merchant marine panel, who 
has been so crucial in seeing to it that this day has finally come.
  Mr. Chairman, this is one of the proud days for this House, I think. 
We will have taken the steps necessary to see to it that an American 
merchant marine is reborn. Mr. Chairman, I ask for the full 
consideration of this reform bill by all the Members.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Hampshire [Mr. Bass].
  Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I guess, as with everyone else here today, I 
rise in strong support of the chairman's amendment on procurement 
reform. I am proud to serve as chairman of the Defense Work Group of 
the Committee on the Budget, and I can say that this is precisely the 
kind of reform that the committee has supported over the years.
  As one who has endorsed and introduced procurement reform 
legislation, I am pleased to see that the Committee on National 
Security is moving forward with this effort. We assume, and I think it 
is great, that we are going to see a reduction of 25 percent in the 
defense managed headquarters. Over 4 years, we will see a reduction of 
42 percent in defense acquisition work force over 4 years, and it is 
not all at the very end. According to the amendment, it will result in 
a 40,000 person reduction of personnel in fiscal year 1998 alone.
  Now, my distinguished colleague from California and others have 
talked about the fact that our military strength is reduced by 33 
percent and we now have 45 percent of those left in support functions, 
and that is too high. The amendment will save $15\1/2\ billion over 5 
years and $5 billion each year thereafter. And this responsible 
amendment does, in fact, free up the necessary resources that we need 
for readiness, for modernization, and for overdue improvements in pay 
and benefits for military personnel.
  I would just like to say that I rise in strong support of this 
amendment and urge the House to adopt it.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
New York [Mrs. Maloney].
  (Mrs. MALONEY of New York asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding, and I rise in opposition to a provision in the Spence 
amendment that threatens one of the basic tenets of our economy, full 
and open competition. And I hope that this particular provision is 
revised and improved as the legislation moves through the system.
  Section 1505 of the amendment of the gentleman from South Carolina 
[Mr. Spence] would allow the Government to limit competition when it 
buys noncommercial goods and services. Those are things that are 
specific to government needs, like aircraft engine spare parts, and 
government computer programs.
  Current law allows simplified procurement procedures for commercial 
goods and services. That is because prices of these items can be 
compared in the commercial marketplace. We all know how much to pay for 
a car, office supplies or furniture, and we can buy it off the shelf. 
It is anyone's guess how much that spare engine part is worth.
  Full and open competition guarantees lower prices, competitive 
bidding, provides an even playing field for businesses, and helps weed 
out fraud, favoritism, and abuse. It guarantees the Government the best 
price and value, while at the same time ensuring the integrity of the 
system and protecting taxpayers' dollars.
  The Government spends $200 billion a year on goods and services. That 
is $800 for every American taxpayer in the procurement system. The way 
that money is spent is extremely important. This particular provision, 
which removes full and open competition for noncommercial items, I 
believe is bad policy. I hope that this is changed. Otherwise, I 
support the amendment.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Florida [Mr. Foley].
  Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, let me state very strongly that there is no 
stronger advocate for national security veterans' issues or active duty 
personnel than the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence]. His fine 
amendment will bring the Pentagon into the 21st century.
  I think they are still living in the fifties over there. They are the 
world's largest bureaucracy. And I think, with this amendment, we will 
save considerable resources, $15 billion over the next 5 years, $5 
billion a year thereafter, streamlining the work force, making more 
prudent use of expenditures on everything that is involved with the 
Department of Defense.
  Clearly, this is an outstanding amendment. It should be supported by 
every Member of Congress to be able to use the limited resources we 
have to make certain our military personnel are adequately served in 
the field rather than those serving outside of the beltway.

                              {time}  1815

  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Horn].
  Mr. HORN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding this time 
to me.
  The gentleman has done a terrific job in putting this amendment 
together, and I urge my colleagues, regardless of party, ideology 
within the party, to support the Spence amendment. It is long overdue. 
Its passage will result in savings for the average taxpayer. Equally 
important, the Spence amendment will result in an efficient, well run 
Department of Defense.
  Now many of the Armed Services have already faced up to substantial 
downsizing. Parts of the Pentagon have shaped up as a result of some 
downsizing. But the fact is that Defense has too many people on the 
civilian side. They need to learn what every major corporation in 
America has learned, every large institution has learned.--Whether 
hospitals or universities--that when one streamlines the central 
administration, a more efficient organization results. There are less 
barriers in terms of the internal communications within a management 
system. And that is exactly what is needed.
  As chairman of the Subcommittee on Government Management, 
Information, and Technology, I have reviewed the Department of Defense 
on a number of occasions. It has 49 different accounting systems. That 
has created substantial chaos in trying to account for funds. No one 
has stolen them, to our knowledge, but no one can match up the 
expenditures with the purchase orders, the inventory, and all the rest 
of it that one needs.
  The Pentagon needs to learn more about privatizing. The Army has done 
that in some cases and has become very efficient in certain fleet 
management areas.
  So we need to support the Spence amendment because it is right for 
the country. It is right for the military. It is right for our defense. 
And, best of all, it is right for the taxpayers' pockets.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey [Mr. Frelinghuysen] who is the son of the Mr. Frelinghuysen I 
served with earlier.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the chairman's 
and ranking member's amendment which incorporates many of the 
provisions of the Defense Reform Act, including a provision that will 
give the Navy the authority to enter into long-term charters for the 
construction of combat logistics force, strategic sealift, and special 
mission auxiliary ships.
  The Navy currently has 21 replenishment ships that average over 30 
years of age. They are at the end of their useful lives and must be 
replaced. Continued operation of these old ships have resulted in 
increased operating costs,

[[Page H4049]]

decreased operating tempos, and additional maintenance and repair 
expenses.
  Through long-term charters, the Navy can afford to begin the 
replacement of these ships. Construction of Navy auxiliary ships in the 
United States will create thousands of shipyard jobs and help to 
sustain the Navy's core shipbuilding industrial base. This acquisition 
approach will also maximize the role of the private sector in providing 
the most cost-effective means of meeting the Department of Defense 
auxiliary fleet requirements.
  Again, I thank the gentleman for the opportunity to speak on behalf 
of his amendment.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Hunter].
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I wanted to thank our great chairman for 
putting this package together, and the gentlewoman from California [Ms. 
Harman] who has worked so hard on it and all the Members on both sides 
of the aisle.
  I think one theme that we have heard this year on the floor with this 
national security bill is bipartisanship. We have had to have that 
because we have had very tough times, the dollars are very scarce, and 
we have had to come together and find ways to save money so that we can 
modernize and buy the equipment that everybody, including the Clinton 
administration, says we need for our people in uniform.
  I just wanted to mention one thing that I know Ms. Harman has an 
interest in, and I do. It is the fact that while we have pulled our 
Army down from 18 divisions to 10 divisions, and almost nobody knows 
about it, we did it almost under the cover of darkness, we pulled our 
fighter air wings down from 24 fighter air wings to 13, and our Navy 
ships from 546 to 346. We have kept an army, literally two Marine Corps 
of shoppers, of professional acquisition folks, in DOD, and we thought 
it was prudent and reasonable to have the professional shopping corps 
in DOD no bigger than the United States Marine Corps. And this reform 
bill does that. It brings it down to the same force level as the U.S. 
Marine Corps.
  I think that is going to be beneficial, and I think when those end 
strength cuts come to the tail part of the Pentagon just like they have 
already come to the tooth part of the Pentagon; that is, the guys that 
actually carry the weapons and fight the wars, when we pare down the 
bureaucracy the same way we have pared down the people that are in the 
field, they are going to get together, and they are going to figure out 
ways to handle the contract with less than 15 people working that 
contract. Maybe they can handle it with five, to use computerization, 
to use simulation to do a lot of things that will bring about 
efficiencies so that when we have an extra defense dollar, we buy some 
ammo for that guy in the front lines, we buy that extra piece of 
equipment, we buy that high-technology equipment that all my colleagues 
are concerned about.
  I thank the gentleman for the time, and I thank the gentlewoman for 
all the work she has done.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
South Carolina [Mr. Spratt].
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, let me raise, since no one else is, some 
concerns about this bill.
  There are some breathtaking changes here. This bill would cut 
management personnel in the Department of Defense by 25 percent; it 
would cut people classified as acquisition management personnel by 42 
percent.
  Now I think that we need to impose external pressure on the Pentagon, 
the Department of Defense, in order to effect these cuts so that the 
overhead, the white-collar workers, are reduced commensurate with the 
reduction in force of the guys and women that fight the wars, but is 45 
percent, 42 percent, a sustainable number?
  Exactly whom are we cutting? Engineers? Accountants? And when we cut 
these people, will we emasculate program management to the point where 
we cannot oversee defense contractors, costing us money, buying things 
imprudently, $600 toilet seats again?
  And when we find that we have cut too far, if we have, will we go 
back out and contract the very same people who are now in a different 
guise as civilians, and we will pay them more because they will earn 
more and they will have bigger overhead themselves? Are we saving money 
or are we not?
  I do not think we have weighed sufficiently, the pros and cons, 
delved sufficiently into the Department of Defense to know whether or 
not we can sustain without some lasting damage a 25 percent cut in 
management personnel or a 42 percent cut. We are taking 124,000 
acquisition management workers off of 269,000.
  Then there is the enormous increase from $100,000 to $5 million where 
we will not have free and open competition. Is that a good idea? Have 
we adequately explored the risk inherent in that, or what is there?
  We have a letter, my colleagues can check everyone's office right 
now, a letter from the Chamber of Commerce expressing its concern that 
we are dispensing with free and open competition which is the best way 
to buy things.
  I may vote for it but I hope this is not the last word because I 
think there are some assumptions made here that have yet to be 
validated.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 11 minutes.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to first of all thank the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] and the gentlewoman from 
California [Ms. Harman] for their contribution in this effort.
  As has been mentioned before, it is truly a bipartisan effort.
  This thing just did not happen. People have talked about reform of 
this kind for a long time. As a matter of fact, we have had acquisition 
already. Mr. Clinger and I co-authored a bill on acquisition reform in 
1996, that will help us save billions of dollars, as has been pointed 
out by various people.
  We went further than that. We asked people in DOD and GAO and 
business how we can do things better to save more money, to put where 
it is needed more, and things that were not inherently military and 
that the Pentagon was doing, how we can get rid of those things.
  We have got ten recommendations from various groups, including, as I 
said, even DOD itself, GAO, businesses, and others. We put it out for 
everybody to shoot at for a couple of weeks, to offer amendments to and 
to give us their ideas about.
  But the main thing I wanted to do is just commend the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Dellums] and the gentlewoman from California [Ms. 
Harman] and the others on that side of the aisle for the 
bipartisanship, for the way in which they have handled this process. 
This is why it is jointly called the Spence-Dellums amendment, and why 
it is a bipartisan amendment. I ask our colleagues to vote in favor of 
the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time has expired.
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South 
Carolina [Mr. Spence].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 169, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. 
Spence] will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider Amendment No. 3 printed in part 1 of 
House Report 105-137.


                 Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Spence

  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Spence:
       Page 371, after line 20, insert the following:

                      Subtitle A--General Matters

       At the end of title XII (page 379, after line 19), insert 
     the following new section:

   Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Prevention of Technology Diversion

     SEC. 1231. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds as follows:
       (1) There have been numerous reports of United States-
     origin supercomputers being obtained by countries of 
     proliferation concern for use in weapon development programs.
       (2) China is considered by the United States Government to 
     be a country of proliferation concern.

[[Page H4050]]

       (3) According to United States officials, China has 
     acquired at least 47 United States-origin supercomputers.
       (4) Recent reports indicate that China has purchased 
     hundreds of supercomputers for use in its weapons programs 
     and that the United States is unsure of the location of those 
     supercomputers or the purposes for which they are being used.
       (5) China has refused to allow the United States to conduct 
     post-shipment verifications of dual-use items exported from 
     the United States to ensure that those items are not diverted 
     to military use.
       (6) China has in the past diverted dual-use items intended 
     for civilian use to military purposes.

     SEC. 1232. EXPORT APPROVALS FOR SUPERCOMPUTERS.

       (a) Prior Approval of Exports and Reexports.--The President 
     shall require that no digital computer with a composite 
     theoretical performance of more than 2,000 millions of 
     theoretical operations per second (MTOPS) may be exported or 
     reexported to a country specified in subsection (b) without 
     the prior written approval of the Secretary of Commerce, the 
     Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary 
     of State, and the Director of the Arms Control and 
     Disarmament Agency.
       (b) Covered Countries.--For purposes of subsection (a), the 
     countries specified in this subsection are the countries 
     listed as ``computer tier 3'' eligible countries in section 
     740.7(d) of title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as 
     in effect on June 10, 1997.
       (c) Time Limit.--The Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary 
     of Defense, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of State, 
     and the Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency 
     shall provide a written response to an application for export 
     approval under subsection (a) within 10 days after the 
     application is received. If any such Secretary or the 
     Director declines to approve the export of a computer, the 
     computer may be exported or reexported only pursuant to a 
     license issued by the Secretary of Commerce under the Export 
     Administration Regulations of the Department of Commerce, and 
     without regard to the licensing exceptions otherwise 
     authorized under section 740.7 of title 15 of the Code of 
     Federal Regulations, as in effect on June 10, 1997.

     SEC. 1233. REPORT ON EXPORTS OF SUPERCOMPUTERS.

       (a) Report.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the President shall provide to the 
     congressional committees specified in subsection (d) a report 
     identifying all exports of digital computers with a composite 
     theoretical performance of over 2,000 millions of theoretical 
     operations per second (MTOPS) to all countries since January 
     25, 1996. For each export, the report shall identify--
       (1) whether an export license was applied for and whether 
     one was granted;
       (2) the date of the transfer of the computer;
       (3) the United States manufacturer and exporter of the 
     computer;
       (4) the MTOPS level of the computer; and
       (5) the recipient country and end user.
       (b) Additional Information on Exports to Certain 
     Countries.--In the case of exports to countries specified in 
     subsection (c), the report under subsection (a) shall 
     identify the intended end use for the exported computer and 
     the assessment by the executive branch of whether the end 
     user is a military end user or an end user involved in 
     activities relating to nuclear, chemical, or biological 
     weapons or missile technology. Information provided under 
     this subsection may be submitted in classified form if 
     necessary.
       (c) Covered Countries.--For purposes of subsection (b), the 
     countries specified in this subsection are--
       (1) the countries listed as ``computer tier 3'' eligible 
     countries in section 740.7(d) of title 15 of the Code of 
     Federal Regulations, as in effect on June 10, 1997; and
       (2) the countries listed in section 740.7(e) of title 15 of 
     the Code of Federal Regulations, as in effect on June 10, 
     1997
       (d) Congressional Committees.--For purposes of subsection 
     (a), the congressional committees specified in this 
     subsection are the following:
       (1) The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 
     and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.
       (2) The Committee on International Relations and the 
     Committee on National Security of the House of 
     Representatives.

     SEC. 1234. POST-SHIPMENT VERIFICATION OF EXPORT OF 
                   SUPERCOMPUTERS.

       (a) Required Post-Shipment Verification.--The Secretary of 
     Commerce shall conduct post-shipment verification of each 
     supercomputer that is exported from the United States, on or 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, to a country 
     specified in subsection (c).
       (b) Covered Supercomputers.--Subsection (a) applies with 
     respect to a digital computer with a composite theoretical 
     performance in excess of 2,000 millions of theoretical 
     operations per seconds (MTOPS).
       (c) Covered Countries.--For purposes of subsection (a), the 
     countries specified in this subsection are the countries 
     listed as ``computer tier 3'' eligible countries in section 
     740.7 of title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as in 
     effect on June 10, 1997.
       (d) Annual Report.--The Secretary of Commerce shall submit 
     to the congressional committees specified in subsection (f) 
     an annual report on the results of post shipment 
     verifications conducted under this section during the 
     preceding year. Each such report shall include a list of all 
     such items exported from the United States to such countries 
     during the previous year and, with respect to each such 
     export, the following:
       (1) The destination country.
       (2) The date of export.
       (3) The intended end use and intended end user.
       (4) The results of the post-shipment verification.
       (c) Explanation When Verification Not Conducted.--If a 
     post-shipment verification has not been conducted in 
     accordance with subsection (a) with respect to any such 
     export during the period covered by a report, the Secretary 
     shall include in the report for that period a detailed 
     explanation of the reasons why such a post-shipment 
     verification was not conducted.
       (f) Congressional Committees.--For purposes of subsection 
     (a), the congressional committees specified in this 
     subsection are the following:
       (1) The Committee on National Security and the Committee on 
     International Relations of the House of Representatives.
       (2) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from South Carolina 
[Mr. Spence] and a Member opposed each will control 20 minutes.
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence] and the 
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Manzullo] each will control 20 minutes.
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I yield half my time to the gentleman 
from Connecticut [Mr. Gejdenson] and I ask unanimous consent that he be 
permitted to control that time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Illinois?
  There was no objection.

                              {time}  1830

  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes of my time to the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] and I ask unanimous consent 
that he be permitted to control that time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
South Carolina?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time will be distributed in the following manner: 
The gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence] for 10 minutes; the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] for 10 minutes; the gentleman 
from Illinois [Mr. Manzullo] for 10 minutes; and the gentleman from 
Connecticut [Mr. Gejdenson] for 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence].
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes.
  (Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I join the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Dellums] in offering this amendment to halt the diversion of sensitive 
technologies to potential adversaries.
  This amendment will fix a serious national security problem caused by 
the administration's decision last year to decontrol the export of so-
called supercomputers. Among many uses, supercomputers can help other 
countries design, build and test nuclear weapons, and to develop 
advanced conventional munitions. The administration's decision to relax 
exports controls has allowed the U.S. supercomputers to be exported to 
countries of proliferation concern without appropriate safeguards on 
how they are used.
  Earlier this year, the head of Russia's Ministry of Atomic Energy 
confirmed that Russia had obtained U.S. supercomputers for use at two 
of Russia's premier nuclear weapons research laboratories. According to 
the Russian Energy Minister, these supercomputers are 10 times more 
powerful than any computers the Russians have.
  In addition, U.S. officials have stated that at least 47 U.S. 
supercomputers have been sold to China. At least some of these, it has 
been reported, are under the control of the Chinese Academy of 
Sciences, which is involved in nuclear weapons and missile research. In 
fact, according to a report earlier this week, China has obtained 
hundreds of U.S. supercomputers, most of which cannot be accounted for 
by our U.S. officials and could easily be used for Chinese weapons 
research and development.

[[Page H4051]]

  As the New York Times, citing intelligence sources, reported earlier 
this month, the newly acquired computers could be used by the Chinese 
to design more efficient or lighter nuclear warheads that could be put 
on missiles capable of reaching the United States. The supercomputers 
sold to China would allow the country to significantly improve its 
nuclear weapons.
  The Spence-Dellums amendment would put Government officials back into 
the decision loop before such exports can occur. This amendment would 
reverse the administration's current honor system policy that relies on 
industry to figure out who should or should not receive this critical 
technology.
  Mr. Chairman, the national security implications of exporting these 
technologies are too significant, and the stakes too high, for U.S. 
policy to be one that leaves our Government blind, deaf and dumb to 
where our supercomputers are going. The Spence-Dellums amendment would 
put Government officials back to where they belong, protecting our 
security interests instead of remaining on the sidelines while Russia, 
China, and other nations of proliferation concern go on a shopping 
spree.
  Vote ``yes'' on the Spence-Dellums amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from New York [Mr. Gilman].
  (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  I rise in reluctant opposition to the Spence amendment. I have a high 
regard for the gentleman from South Carolina and I want to make 
certain, I want him to understand that my concern is more with the 
jurisdiction of this measure.
  This amendment, as drafted and submitted to the Committee on Rules, 
falls truly within the jurisdiction of the House Committee on 
International Relations. While the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. 
Spence] and the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] have held 
several hearings and briefings on the issue of supercomputer exports, 
they have not introduced any separate legislation or held any markups 
of this legislative proposal. In fact, this proposal was drafted and 
presented to our committee staff only after the conclusion of their 
markup process of the defense authorization bill.
  A spirited debate has already started about the implications of 
certain provisions contained within this amendment, particularly with 
respect to proposed changes in the export licensing and approval 
process. Many of these issues should have been resolved in the normal 
legislative process, and, I would add, they still can be with 
discussions among the members of the Committee on International 
Relations, which has sole jurisdiction over the export licensing and 
review process.
  Concerns have been raised in this debate that the adoption of this 
amendment is going to create a recipe for bureaucratic gridlock where 
the energies of our Bureau for Export Administration and the Commerce 
Department will be focused on reregulation and bureaucratic infighting, 
rather than on the monitoring and verification of supercomputer exports 
in countries of concern.
  Mr. Chairman, in light of the large number of the so-called tier 3 
target countries and their great diversity, ranging from Russia to 
China to Israel and to many of the countries in the Middle East and 
Eastern Europe, this amendment's one-size-fits-all approach to 
supercomputer licensing fails to prioritize among the proliferation 
threats in these very different countries.
  In regard to these very serious allegations of the unauthorized 
reexport of certain supercomputers to Russian nuclear weapons labs, the 
proposed amendment would only lead to a process where individual 
validated licenses would be required for the export or reexport of 
these items. But a presumption of denial or an outright policy of 
denial might well be needed in instances where there is a military end 
user or end use of the supercomputer.
  On the other hand, Mr. Chairman, an across-the-board de facto 
requirement for a validated license for all supercomputers over the 
2,000 MTOPS range for all military and civilian end uses and users for 
all of these countries is too far-reaching. Moreover, it fails to 
distinguish the real from the apparent proliferation threats.
  Mr. Chairman, in light of these views and my standing offer to meet 
with its authors and direct the Committee on International Relations to 
hold immediate hearings on and report out legislation addressing this 
critically important issue of supercomputer exports, I request that my 
colleagues defeat the amendment.
  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. This amendment 
proposes to kill a gnat with a bazooka. The amendment sounds good, but 
ignores technological reality on the world scene.
  First, some facts. Fact: Computers of between 2,000 and 7,000 MTOPS 
are widely available on the world market through individual computers, 
upgrade boards, parallel processing, and networking. We cannot turn 
back the technological clock.
  Fact: Computers in this range are not supercomputers. Supercomputers 
are far more advanced, with performance power in the hundreds of 
thousands of MTOPS, reaching as high as 1 million MTOPS.
  Fact: Increasing power levels of computers does not enable anyone to 
do anything unique. Our entire nuclear weapons arsenal and our pilot 
space program were designed on computers of two MTOPS or less. 
Increasing the MTOPS levels does not accomplish any new task. It just 
simply processes information at a faster rate. If we want to stop 
foreign military from developing weapons of mass destruction, we do not 
target computers, we focus on other technologies.
  Fact: Personal computers like those we have in our offices or at home 
will soon cross the 2,000 MTOPS barrier next year. Are we prepared to 
have the Secretaries of Defense, Commerce, State, Energy, and the 
Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency give written 
approval every time someone wishes to sell a personal computer overseas 
to a tier 3 country?
  That brings me to my fifth point. Tier 3 countries consist of 50 
nations, including Israel, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and India. Are we 
prepared to turn all of these markets over to our foreign competitors? 
Are we prepared to have four Cabinet Secretaries sign off on every 
computer sale of over 2,000 MTOPS to 50 countries? It will be a 
paperwork nightmare without any measurable reduction in the spread of 
weapons of mass destruction.
  We have to remember the last time we bungled supercomputer export 
control policy. The United States Government took so long to review a 
proposed Cray supercomputer sale to India that India turned around and 
created its own supercomputer industry. Now American firms compete 
against Indian firms selling so-called supercomputers all over the 
world, including China and Russia.
  I urge my colleagues to cut through the rhetoric and look at the 
facts. This amendment will not accomplish the goal we all aim to 
achieve, which is reducing the proliferation threat. I urge its defeat. 
Otherwise, Congress will surrender America's most innovative industry 
to our foreign competitors.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that control of the balance of 
the time delegated to me be given to the gentleman from Connecticut 
[Mr. Gejdenson].
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois [Mr. Hyde], the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary.
  (Mr. HYDE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, this is a simple amendment, and one might 
criticize it for not going far enough, because it only deals with 
computers that have a theoretical performance of more than 2,000 
millions of theoretical operations per second, but there are computers 
with less stated capacity that can be upgraded beyond that and perform 
the same functions, and they are not covered.

[[Page H4052]]

  This is a simple amendment that says, these are significant 
resources. We are transferring them and losing track of them. There are 
no end users. We do not know where they go, what purpose they are put 
to. We do know they are capable of helping countries design nuclear 
weapons faster and more accurately, and to transfer technology that is 
so advanced without knowing what its purpose is or where it ends up is 
just wrong. It is stupid.
  So this amendment, bipartisanly, seeks to correct that by asking for 
prior written approval of the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of 
Defense, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of State, and the 
Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.
  Now, one may say that that is a lot of paperwork and a lot of hoops 
to jump through. Well, there ought to be a lot of hoops. Somebody in 
these sensitive agencies ought to recognize that this transfer of this 
technology to a country like China or the former Soviet Union countries 
has consequences, serious consequences.
  So I am very pleased to support the amendment of the gentleman from 
South Carolina [Mr. Spence] and the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Dellums]. I note that it is bipartisan, and it will remedy a dangerous 
situation that we ought not let persist.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, first of all, I rise in support of this bipartisan 
amendment. I am the other side of the amendment, Spence-Dellums.
  I want my colleagues to know that I entered into this process as a 
person committed to arms control and committed to nonproliferation. I 
am not here nation-bashing, but I am an arms control person. I walked 
in the door 26\1/2\ years ago believing that we ought to deal with the 
issue of nonproliferation.
  Now, there has been a lot of talk about one-size-fits-all. There 
already is as we speak a licensing regime in place for the sale of 
high-end computers at the level of 2,000 MTOPS.

                              {time}  1845

  Mr. Chairman, there are four different combinations of user and end 
use: Military to military, license required; military to civilian, 
license required; civilian to military, license required. So what are 
we dealing with here? Civilian user to civilian end use, one aspect of 
a regime that already requires licensing. You already have one size 
fits all for tier-III countries, all of them. Let us lay that reality 
on the table. We can talk about that.
  Now, Mr. Chairman, the recent sale of a supercomputer to Russia is 
what brings us here. It calls into question, in this gentleman's 
opinion, the ability of the current export management system to catch 
errant sales of these high performance computers. Something must be 
done to ensure that technology we wish to control is indeed controlled 
in a way we require.
  The amendment, Mr. Chairman, would simply provide the Government with 
a 10-day opportunity with a peek, if you will, at civilian use to 
civilian end users to determine whether or not the proposed sale poses 
any proliferation concerns.
  Members ought to be concerned about the transfer of technology that 
can enhance the problem of proliferation, and if so, require the 
submission of a license application, the way you have to do in the 
other three, anyway. This would prevent the mistakes, as I said 
further. It would provide the Government with the assurance that its 
national security goal for nonproliferation will be adhered to.
  We are not here simply about selling, to make money. We are the 
Government. We have a responsibility to protect and preserve the 
prerogatives and the well-being of our people, so we are in the 
business of national security. Proliferation is a threat.
  Further, Mr. Chairman, by requiring postsale verification we can 
monitor where in fact these computers go, and if they are not ending up 
where they belong, we can develop new mechanisms to protect our 
nonproliferation goals. Contrary to the arguments of some, we cannot 
publish a comprehensive list of all nonsites of proliferation concerns. 
To do so would probably compromise sources and methods of intelligence. 
They know that and so do I. Take that off the table. It is a 
meaningless suggestion. To provide less than a comprehensive list, 
however, would mislead us into a false sense of confidence that it was 
sufficient to avoid sites on disclosed lists.
  For those who argue, look, computers are moving quickly; six months 
from now 2000 MTOPS will be obsolete, 7,000, 10,000. Let us just sell 
them. They can get these things on the open market.
  The answer to those who argue that the computing power at these 
levels of capability is ubiquitous, that is to say, is available 
everywhere, Mr. Chairman, and that we are not preventing capability 
from going to a nation but only providing U.S. firms with an 
opportunity to effectively do business, then have the debate on the 
issue of raising the threshold for control, if required. That is the 
answer to that question, lift the threshold. If we have a technology 
problem and technology is moving quickly, it is not to acquiesce, to 
say, gee, it is ubiquitous. We are about the business of control, so 
lift the level.
  Further, this amendment would require the administration to put 
regulations into effect for computers it has decided should be 
controlled. It only makes these controls more efficient. We can achieve 
these changes through legislation or administrative order, but they 
should be achieved for so long as we would continue to decide that the 
technology should be controlled.
  Mr. Chairman, this may not be a perfect instrument, but this is not 
the end of the process. We would move to conference. There are 
opportunities to deal with these matters.
  Finally, I want to share with my colleagues a slight vignette. I met 
yesterday or the day before with members of the administration to talk 
about this matter. I am a reasonable person. I am not here with a 
cannon to shoot a fly. I want to work these things out. But then I sat 
and I listened to brilliant people in the administration, and they kept 
saying, it will not work here, we cannot do this, nobody would want to 
put themselves on the line, et cetera; we would end up doing this, 
that, and the other.
  We had a brilliant conversation. I suddenly said, you know what? It 
occurs to me why the brilliance of this form of government, why there 
are independent branches of government: because you can get so close to 
this issue that you cannot see how to work your way out of it. You talk 
about a thousand reasons why it will not work, but that is why some of 
us have to take an arm's length approach, Mr. Chairman, and be policy 
makers who challenge the administration to figure out how to do it 
right.
  Because if we all were administrators, if we all just sat there 
saying there is no way to do it, some of us have to be optimists and 
idealists and hopeful people who put pressure on the process. That is 
what this amendment seeks to do. It is not perfect, but it puts it out 
there. It forces the administration to come to terms, or it forces us 
to deal with this issue with some kind of legislative clarity. At the 
end of the day it is our job to protect the American people, put 
pressure on the process. That is what we have done. I ask my colleagues 
to support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman 
from California [Ms. Harman].
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me, and I rise in reluctant opposition to a well-intended amendment 
offered by my colleagues, the ranking member and chairman of the 
Committee on National Security.
  Let me explain. I share their goal of preventing harmful 
proliferation. Of course I share it. As a member of the committee on 
National Security I spend much of my time, and we all do, trying to 
protect our country against harmful proliferation. But I do not think 
this legislation achieves the goal.
  In January, 1996, the United States decontrolled export of computers 
up to a speed of 7,000 MTOPS to so-called tier-III countries. This was 
done as a consequence of a study by independent experts commissioned by 
the United States government to determine what level of computer 
technology existed

[[Page H4053]]

outside the United States, and what level needed to be controlled for 
national security purposes.
  It was believed, correctly, in my view, that continuing to rigorously 
license widely available computer technology would undermine efforts to 
control truly significant technology. That is what is at issue here: 
how do we control truly significant technology. We all want to keep 
certain computer technology out of the hands of China and Russia, but 
this amendment would apply to a much broader group of countries, 
including Israel, one of our closest allies. It is overkill.
  I suggest that the best way to go is to support the existing export 
control laws. That is right, support the existing laws. Those who 
violate our export control laws, the ones on the books now, could face 
a prohibition of all exports for the company of up to 20 years, 10 
years in prison, and a $50,000 fine for each violation.
  Mr. Chairman, these are strict penalties. Enforcing existing 
sanctions is the right way to go. This unilateral approach to deny 
widely available technology will only hurt American companies, and will 
not help national security.
  I urge a ``no'' vote.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida [Mr. Porter Goss], chairman of the Permanent Select Committee 
on Intelligence.
  (Mr. GOSS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished gentleman from 
South Carolina, the chairman, for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Chairman, as chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence, my concern is that we should err on the side of caution. 
While I know that there are very good arguments that are being made by 
other people, including the distinguished chairman, and this is a 
debate that is very worthy, it is the same as the debate on encryption, 
in my view, where we have to make a balance in this House between 
national security, law enforcement, and our export opportunities and 
our economic opportunities and our economic muscle overseas.
  My view is based on the reports I have. We have three facts. One is 
that the administration has in fact relaxed controls twice. Where they 
have relaxed those controls in the case of the Russians, they have 
given the Russians a capability 10 times greater than anything they 
ever had before with regard to nuclear weapons. That is what concerns 
me.
  Secondly, I am very concerned that the Chinese academy of sciences, 
which is involved in nuclear weapons and missile research, has access 
to these computers also. That is a fact. That bothers me.
  Reports, there are reports we have that things are a little out of 
control in terms of areas of proliferation. This is not a good place to 
have things out of control. Proliferation of weapons of mass 
destruction is probably the single biggest categorical threat to our 
Nation that I can think of.
  So I think we ought to err on the side of caution. I think that the 
proposals in the amendment are definitely reasonable. I do not see 
anything in there, when talking about approvals and verifications, 
those are things that seem reasonable to me. I realize this is not the 
last word on this. I realize there are other sides to be heard on it as 
well, but I am going to support this amendment because I think it errs 
on the side of caution, which is where we ought to be on this issue.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Jacksonville, FL [Mrs. Fowler].
  (Mrs. FOWLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Mrs. FOWLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my strong support 
for this amendment. I urge my colleagues to support it also. It is 
unfortunate that this administration has sacrificed long-term national 
security for short-term economic gain. That is the bottom line.
  It has been verified that the supercomputers that have been sold to 
the Peoples Republic of China and to Russia can be turned around and 
used militarily against our young men and women, that we have allowed 
them to advance their technology by millions of times over what they 
would have been able to do. This is inexcusable, and we are going to 
pay the price for it. Our young men and women will pay the price for 
it.
  We need to support this amendment. It is a valid amendment, because 
the loosening of these export controls is what is going to be doing in 
our young men and women in uniform.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my strong support for this 
amendment and urge my colleagues to support it also. One of the great 
advantages the U.S. military has always had in the past was our 
technological superiority. U.S. troops have known that they were not 
only the best-trained in the world, but the best-equipped--and that 
gave them an edge on the battlefield. To preserve that edge, we 
carefully guarded much of our sophisticated technology to keep it from 
falling into the wrong hands.
  Unfortunately over the last several years, export controls on 
sensitive technology have been loosened to such a degree that we are 
eroding our own technological superiority. And the current rules on 
supercomputers are one of the worst aspects of the policy.
  I am particularly concerned about this policy with regard to the 
People's Republic of China. As revealed in a recent congressional 
hearing, the decontrol of highspeed supercomputers has led to the sale 
of at least 47 of them to the PRC over the last 15 months--and every 
one of those computers is at least four times as powerful as those 
currently in use by the majority of U.S. military systems. In addition, 
recent news reports indicate that perhaps hundreds of other computers 
nearly as powerful as those 47 have also been sold to China. Since 
China is not only doing everything possible to increase its military 
power projection and develop an indigenous military production 
capability, but is also a major proliferator of arms and technology 
throughout the world--this situation should be of serious concern to 
all Americans.
  Supercomputers can provide a user with the ability to essentially 
build a bomb in the basement--in other words, to design and test 
nuclear weapons without ever leaving the lab. This cuts down the time 
and expense involved in such activities dramatically--and also 
eliminates the tell-tale evidence of physical testing that our 
intelligence organizations can detect. Other uses include: 
Sophisticated weather forecasting, which is often crucial to military 
operations, and is very important in conducting studies for the use of 
chemical and biological weapons; making and breaking codes; 
miniaturizing nuclear weapons; and finding submarines on the ocean 
floor.
  The present regulations allow high performance computers to be 
exported without individual export licenses, which must be reviewed by 
the Department of Defense, and there is no follow-up on the sale. This 
means we don't know where the computers will end up, or even if they 
have been sold to another country. Since China has become a regular 
arms bazaar for rogue nations like Iran, Iraq, and Libya, this is a 
serious concern, and one which could have an impact on U.S. troops in 
the near future.
  By allowing what are, in effect, indiscriminate sales of powerful 
computers, the U.S. is giving a high-tech shot in the arm not only to 
the nation that none-too-gently reminded us last year that it has 
nuclear weapons pointed at our west coast, but to terrorist nations 
around the globe who have no respect for human life and who are of even 
greater concern to our national security in the near future.
  Mr. Chairman, I am a strong supporter of business and I believe in 
free trade. I also think the United States should remain engaged with 
China, which is an emerging superpower. However, we must not forget 
that it is a Communist country that is arming itself at a rapid rate 
and engaging in proliferation activities around the globe--and we 
should not be assisting with either of those activities. Free trade is 
to be desired, but commerce at all costs is not--especially when it 
provides a more level battlefield.
  This amendment will require notification of the Federal Government 
and more rigorous examination of any sales of computers rated at 2,000 
MTOPS (M-tops) and above to countries which may violate non-
proliferation agreements. It will not put an onerous burden on 
businesses, since it provides for timely evaluation of such requests; 
and it also contains a provision which will enable us to gain a more 
accurate picture of just how many supercomputers have gone to China and 
other nations since the current policy was established. I will vote for 
it, and I wholeheartedly encourage my colleagues to do the same.
  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman 
from California [Ms. Lofgren].
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge a no vote on the amendment 
before us. Much has been said about the change in export regulations.

[[Page H4054]]

 I would point out that the change to the current policy followed an 
uncontroverted study that determined it was not helpful to anyone to 
control the export of technology that you could go buy off the shelf 
someplace abroad.
  The change in policy was approved by the Department of Defense, by 
the State Department, by the Department of Commerce. I would like to 
quote two other individuals who urged that the policy be changed.
  In a letter to President Clinton signed by the gentleman from 
Missouri [Mr. Gephardt] and the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Gingrich], 
they said that ``it is difficult to understand the utility of 
controlling equipment and technology when it is so easily available to 
those from whom we are trying to keep it. Yet, by imposing controls, we 
are limiting the ability of American business to export some of their 
most marketable items.''
  That was true when the gentleman from Georgia and the gentleman from 
Missouri wrote to the President, and it is true today. Much has been 
said about the Chinese who have purchased an American computer that was 
really not all that super. I would like to note that today in the wire 
service it has been reported that the Chinese themselves are prepared 
and have developed a 13,000 MTOP computer for their own use and 
potentially for later sale. So if a 2,700 MTOP computer was indeed sold 
to the Chinese, perhaps it was a bargain, but they certainly do not 
need us to acquire a 13,000 MTOP computer.
  Mr. Chairman, I am very opposed to the proliferation of nuclear arms. 
I love our country and I want us to be safe. But I do not see the point 
in jeopardizing an entire sector of our economy to gain nothing by way 
of safety; to preclude the export of equipment that anyone can buy that 
is produced by rival companies in Italy, in France, in the United 
Kingdom, in Japan.
  This amendment does great damage to the economy for no value 
whatsoever to our security. I urge a ``no'' vote.

                              {time}  1900

  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman 
from California [Mrs. Tauscher].
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Connecticut 
for yielding time to me.
  I rise reluctantly to oppose the amendment by the gentleman from 
South Carolina [Mr. Spence] and the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Dellums]. There is no question that we must be diligent about guarding 
sensitive technology from countries that possess or we believe they 
possess nuclear weapons. Controlling the spread of nuclear weapons must 
be our top priority. But it makes no sense whatsoever to impose 
burdensome regulations on the export of computer technology that is 
widely available on the world market.
  Requiring American companies to secure export licenses which can take 
anywhere from 3 to 6 months will put them at a competitive 
disadvantage. The Clinton administration recognized in January 1996 
that permitting the export of computers that perform up to 7000 MTOPS 
should not require a license unless the exporter believed that the end 
use of the computer would be for proliferation purposes. Adequate civil 
penalties encourage companies not to violate the law.
  Mr. Chairman, current law appropriately balances the interests in 
selling computers with the need for national security. I urge my 
colleagues to oppose the Spence-Dellums amendment.
  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, we have a very clear situation here. We have lived 
through it before. The Defense Department at one time told American 
manufacturers of machine tools, you cannot export these, the quality is 
too good. Do you know what happened several years later? The Defense 
Department said, we want to get Japanese machine tools because they are 
more precise than American machine tools.
  This country does not live at the bottom of technology. If we are 
going to build the last decade's technology, it is going to come from 
lots of places around the globe. So this is not as if we are hampering 
just a few little sales at the top. What we are doing is killing the 
future of our technical ability. Why? We have been successful as a 
Nation, not because we have put an iron curtain around our technology 
understanding that today it is easier and easier to copy it. What we 
have done is profited off those systems and then developed the 
technology that has kept us ahead.
  Now, COCOM is gone. We have a new group. We are not quite sure what 
they are doing in Wassenegger. But every time we had a restriction, 
guess what, the Germans, the French, the English, the Japanese, they 
sold better stuff than we had. If we think Siemens and Olivetti and 
Japanese and French and English companies are going to be impressed by 
the action on the floor today, they will. Just as that German company 
Brocat was impressed, they said: Thank you, America; we have built a 
multimillion-dollar company because of your restrictions.
  Now, the end result of what will happen here is we will move 
intelligence and capital offshore so they do not have to come to 
America's rules and regulations and the Defense Department for a 
computer that operates at a speed which will be a home computer in 2 or 
3 years. This is no place for the Defense Department that has never 
been able to discern effectively the kind of technical issues at hand.
  I remember 6 years ago, Secretary Mosbacher decontrolled 286 
computers. Secretary Cheney went ballistic. He says, oh my God. What do 
we do with a 286 computer today? We could not figure out what to do 
with it.
  We have a situation here where the policies on this floor will drive 
away the kind of capital that our companies get to stay out in front. 
There is an American company today that ships its product to Russia so 
the Russians can add the control portion and then sell it worldwide. 
Those are jobs and developments that would happen here.
  When we take this action on the floor, if this legislation succeeds 
in the process, we will hurt the largest, most important industry in 
America, and we will do nothing for national security. By my 
colleague's own admission, the Chinese already have computers with this 
capability. The only thing we are going to do is turn the high speed 
computer market out of this country, hurt America's future and give 
somebody else control.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I would hope that everyone involved in the debate has read the 
legislation. If they have, it says that the President shall establish 
the process of prior approval. The President. So read the legislation.
  Now, I have already pointed out, Mr. Chairman, that there is already 
a licensing regime in place. What we have found is that in one aspect 
of it there, it is alike.
  Now, let me establish another fact. The Commerce Department on behalf 
of the interagency process, not DOD, the five agencies involved here, 
Department of Defense, ACDA, Energy, Department of State, and Commerce, 
the five agencies, move away from the rhetoric, deal with the facts. 
The Commerce has commissioned a study on the question of appropriate 
threshold levels for control. That study hopefully will look at whether 
or not 2000 MTOPS is appropriate or whether it is 3, 5, 7, 10 or 
whatever. At that particular point, all we are saying is, once you have 
established a level of threshold control, you need to be able to 
control it. We do not have to be too bright to understand that.
  The debate ought to be over what should be the threshold level. If 
the argument is that 2000 is obsolete, Commerce has commissioned an 
independent study to address that question. That is what the debate 
ought to be about, raising the level. But we are also charged with a 
fiduciary responsibility. We are the government. At whatever level the 
threshold is, we ought to agree that we ought to be able to control it. 
That is all this gentleman says. I am not unreasonable.
  Final point, Mr. Chairman, this is one part of the process. This is 
not the end of the process. We move from here to the conference. We 
engage. Hopefully the administration engages. And in the give and take, 
we figure out

[[Page H4055]]

what is in the best interest of the country. I walk away. But I have a 
responsibility, as all of us do, to impact the process.
  So, A, this is interagency; B, there is also a licensing regime; C, 
we ought to be talking about threshold levels and not these other 
extraneous matters. Once we establish a threshold level, whatever it 
is, we ought to be able to say that we ought to be able to control it.
  We have struck in this legislation some midground. Maybe it is not 
perfect. But we stepped up to our responsibility, and I believe that we 
stepped up to a midground that at least ought to allow the process to 
go to the next step. Let us engage both on a bicameral, bipartisan 
basis and hopefully across the two branches of government and at the 
end of the day do what is in the best interest of the American people.
  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The government and the private sector together made the decision that 
these systems were not controllable. So for all the rhetoric about our 
desires, the reality is, when the United States says no, this is buried 
somewhere in an interagency debate between DOD and Commerce, whether or 
not this 2000 MTOPS computer is to be sold, the process does not stop. 
What they do is they knock at another door.
  Can my colleagues imagine this debate in the Diet in Japan, the 
Germans, the French? I do not think so. And even the English.
  It makes sense for the United States to take actions that have a 
consequence. The consequence ought to be denying critical technologies 
to nations whose policies we do not trust. The action we are taking 
here today does not achieve that goal because what is clearly and 
universally available is the very same technology across the globe. The 
Bulgarians make supercomputers today and have for some time.
  So what we are going to do here today is say, well, we are going to 
ignore what has occurred in the past, the review, we are going to 
ignore that and we are hoping that somewhere in that whole other 
conference, it will get better.
  Do not bet on it getting better. Do not vote for this which is not 
defendable, I believe, on the facts, hoping that something good is 
going to come out of conference. It will only encourage Members who 
have never had the ability to make that tough decision. At what point 
are we just hurting ourselves? This is the point where we hurt 
ourselves.
  American industry and the American military have succeeded because we 
have been at the front end of technology, because we made those sales 
and we made them carefully. But some of the debates get a little silly. 
286 computers? 2000 MTOPS will be our home PC in the next 4 years.
  So what we are going to do here today is we are going to raise the 
proliferation banner, the national security banner wrongly, because I 
believe this will hurt our ability to compete.
  Where we saw one article from one company in Germany saying thank you 
America for your regulations, we will see more. We will slowly transfer 
the fastest growing, most important industry in this country offshore. 
Do Members think that companies that are going to be restricted by this 
are American hostages? Even the American companies have operations in 
France and England and across the globe? So what we will simply do is 
transfer talent, money, resource, and intelligence outside the borders 
of this country.
  We saw it before. The Defense Department would not let Americans 
export machine tools. And within a 5- to 6-year period, the Japanese 
had made so much progress, maximizing their markets, that the Defense 
Department was telling people, buy Japanese machine tools, they are 
better than ours.
  I do not want to be back here in 4 or 5 years trying to figure out 
how to resuscitate the most important piece of equipment in the 
information age because we took an easy shot across the bow of 
technology. We cannot put it back in the bottle. We cannot stop the 
Germans from selling it. We cannot stop the French from selling it. We 
cannot stop the Italians from selling it, and we are not going to stop 
the English from selling it. And we are sure not going to stop the 
Japanese from selling it.
  So what are we going to achieve? We are going to move the profits on 
these sales to foreign corporations and those corporations will develop 
the new technologies so that the next time we are debating this issue 
we will have to say, we hope the Japanese will sell us modern enough 
computers for America to compete.
  We have lost other industries as we sat by in electronics, in 
television, in machine tools, in so many others because we stumbled.
  Let us make sure the stumble does not occur here on the floor of the 
Congress. There are more jobs today in the information computer 
industry than there are in the automotive industry. They are growing 
faster and they are paying better. But we only succeed at the top end 
of technology because there are lots of developing countries and others 
who take the bottom of technology. The Chinese, the Indians, they can 
do it.
  Let me close with one other observation. This administration is a 
good administration. I agree with them on lots of things. When they got 
elected they denied the Chinese a telephone switching system because it 
was too fast. They were making ones faster in China and other countries 
were selling ones even faster. Let us not shoot ourselves in the foot.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Hunter].
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me.
  As the chairman who held the hearing serving the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Dellums] and the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. 
Spence] on this supercomputer transfer issue, let me say that they are 
absolutely right. The gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Gejdenson] and 
others who have spoken in a number of areas are absolutely wrong.
  Let us just walk through these. First, it was stated that these sales 
have been made carefully. They have not been made carefully. The first 
sales to the Soviet Union, the individuals who made the sales have 
been, according to the briefings that I have gotten, have been fired 
for making the sales. There are potential criminal actions for making 
the sales. So these were not prudent private people making sales.
  In interviewing the CEO's who were involved with these companies, 
there are two things here. First, they say they are confused by our 
supercomputer policy. Because as the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Dellums] points out, if we are selling the supercomputer to the 
agriculture department in China, ostensibly that is OK. But we all know 
that is a fiction because the military in China accesses everything.

                              {time}  1915

  So we have to presume conclusively it is going to the military. If 
they put military on the shipping order, then it is illegal. If they 
put Agriculture Department on the shipping order, then it is okay.
  Second, these sales damaged American security. We have talked to the 
experts, to our best scientists at our weapons laboratories, and they 
said two things.
  They said the sales to the Soviet Union that the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. McHale] held a press conference on, he was so proud 
about getting this American supercomputer, he did not get a Bulgarian 
computer or a French computer or Japanese computer. The Japanese have 
been pretty good about this. He got an American computer, and he was so 
proud about it that he held a press conference on having that 
particular computer. Our scientists said that helped the Russians only 
marginally because they have fairly sophisticated nuclear weapons 
capability.
  They said further, however, that the sales of the 47 supercomputers 
to China have helped China substantially in their military efforts and 
their nuclear weapons efforts.
  The gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] and the gentleman from 
South Carolina [Mr. Spence] are absolutely right with this amendment. 
Please vote for this amendment.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in favor of the Spence-Dellums 
amendment to this bill.

[[Page H4056]]

  Last fall, four supercomputers that are powerful enough to design 
nuclear weapons were sold by an American company to the premier nuclear 
weapons facility in Russia--Chelyabinsk 70, a place whose very 
existence was top secret until the end of the cold war. The company 
said that it didn't know that the facility was a weapons lab, and that 
they had been told that the supercomputers would be used to forecast 
the weather. But the only clouds these computers will be modeling will 
be the mushroom cloud of a nuclear blast. In fact, after the sale was 
disclosed, Viktor Mikhailov, head of Russia's Ministry of Atomic 
Energy, or Minatom, which controls the Nation's weapons labs, bragged 
that Russia had the supercomputers, admitting that they would be useful 
for mathematical modeling of nuclear blasts. The CEO of the American 
company had this to say: ``It is possible we were duped.'' I guess so.
  U.S. law currently calls for an export license on these powerful 
supercomputers to be requested by the company seeking the license only 
if it is suspect that the intended recipient might be a suspicious 
customer. As the Russian case shows, this honor system method just 
isn't working. Other than the most infamous foreign weapons facilities, 
American companies often have no way of knowing which recipients are 
the weather forecasters and which are the would-be proliferators. Once 
supercomputers get into the wrong hands, there is absolutely nothing we 
can do to recover them--all we can do is sit and hope that the nuclear 
weapons they are designing are never aimed at us.
  The Spence-Dellums amendment requires that every supercomputer 
exported to countries of proliferation concern--like Pakistan, India, 
China, Russia, and Syria--be accompanied by letters of approval from 
the Secretaries of Energy, Commerce, Defense and State, and from the 
Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. Moreover, it calls 
for a report to be provided to Congress which lists all exports of such 
supercomputers since January 25, 1996. If a supercomputer that is being 
proposed for export really will be used to forecast the weather, the 
sale will be approved. But if it is determined by the Government 
agencies charged with collecting such intelligence that the 
supercomputer sale would endanger U.S. national security, the sale will 
be denied. What's wrong with that? Let's take the export control job 
away from private industry and give it back to the people who should be 
doing it--the U.S. Government. Support the Spence-Dellums amendment.
  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Spence-
Dellums amendment.
  This amendment would reimpose on certain U.S.-made computers export 
licensing requirements that the President decided could be safely 
eliminated last year.
  The amendment will put U.S. computer manufacturers at a competitive 
disadvantage in 50 foreign countries, without doing anything to promote 
U.S. nonproliferation goals or national security.
  In this era of high-technology weaponry, our computer sector is 
critical to the strength of our defense industrial base. As several 
speaker have pointed out, if computers fall into the wrong hands, they 
can be put to military uses that can threaten our security. That is why 
our Government continues to impose conditions on their export.
  Technology and weapons programs are always changing, and U.S. export 
controls need to adapt. Last year, following a review by experts at 
Stanford University, the administration, with the support of the 
Defense Department, reached two important conclusions about computers 
that perform at and above the levels affected by this amendment First, 
these computers are widely available from numerous foreign suppliers. 
Second, only the most powerful of these computers have military 
applications that pose serious threats to U.S. national security.
  On the basis of this review, the administration decided to permit 
computers below that militarily critical level to be exported without 
individual approvals to civilian customers. Sales to military customers 
in 50 countries of concern still have to be individually licensed, a 
process that requires a Defense Department review.
  Earlier this year, we learned that a United States firm had sold 
high-performance computers to two Russian nuclear weapons labs--a clear 
violation of the new export control policy. If my understanding is 
correct, the Spence-Dellums amendment was inspired in part by this 
improper sale.
  But the facts assembled so far do not justify the costly reversal of 
policy this amendment would require.
  The Justice Department and the Customs Service are still 
investigating the Russian sale. The Commerce Department and our 
intelligence agencies are still trying to determine whether other high-
performance computers have ended up in the wrong hands. So far that 
does not appear to be the case.
  Before it has been proved that this problem extends beyond a single 
firm and a single country, this amendment proposes to impose burdensome 
new licensing requirements. This would be a new burden on an entire 
industry on its sales to 50 different foreign countries, several of 
which, like Israel, are close friends of the United States.
  This amendment is premature and unwarranted. It seeks to fix 
something that nobody has proved is broken. It seeks to turn back the 
technological clock. It will reimpose controls on computers that are 
widely available from foreign suppliers and pose little threat to the 
United States. This amendment won't make us more secure, but it will 
hurt our computer industry and the people it employs.
  I urge members to oppose the Spence-Dellums amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 169, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. 
Spence] will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed in part 1 of 
House Report 105-137.


                 Amendment No. 4 Offered by Ms. Harman

  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 4 offered by Ms. Harman:
       At the end of subtitle A of title VII (page 267, after line 
     19), insert the following new section:

     SEC. 703. RESTORATION OF POLICY AFFORDING ACCESS TO CERTAIN 
                   HEALTH CARE PROCEDURES FOR FEMALE MEMBERS OF 
                   THE ARMED FORCES AND DEPENDENTS AT DEPARTMENT 
                   OF DEFENSE FACILITIES.

       Section 1093 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking out ``(a) Restriction on 
     Use of Funds.--''; and
       (2) by striking out subsection (b).

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from California 
[Ms. Harman] and a Member opposed each will control 20 minutes.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Buyer] rises in 
opposition to the amendment and will be recognized for 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Harman].
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I am the mother of four children. I chose motherhood 
under the constitutional protections and access to medical care 
guaranteed by Roe versus Wade. Our service women and their dependents 
deserve the same chances to make their own choices.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment would do this. It would give U.S. service-
women stationed overseas access to Department of Defense health 
facilities by repealing a provision of law which bars these women from 
using their own funds to obtain legal abortion services in military 
hospitals.
  Mr. Chairman, women who volunteer to serve in our armed forces 
already give up many freedoms and risk their lives to defend our 
country. They should not have to sacrifice their privacy, their health 
and their basic constitutional rights to a policy with no valid 
military purpose.
  This is about women's health.
  Local facilities in foreign nations are not equipped to safely handle 
certain procedures, and medical standards may be far lower than those 
in the United States. We are putting some of our own at risk.
  And it is about fairness, too. Service-women and military dependents 
stationed abroad do not expect special treatment, only the right to 
receive the same services guaranteed to American women under Roe versus 
Wade, at their own expense, that are available in this country.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment does not permit taxpayer-funded abortions 
at military hospitals, nor does it compel any doctor who opposes 
abortion on principle or as a matter of conscience to perform an 
abortion. The amendment merely reinstates the policy that was in effect 
from 1973 to 1988 and again from 1993 to 1996.
  This is an issue with broad bipartisan support, including a majority 
of women

[[Page H4057]]

Members of this House and the bipartisan cochairs of our Women's 
Caucus.
  My amendment also has strong support from health care providers, 
organizations like the American Nurses Association, the American Public 
Health Association, the American Medical Women's Association, the 
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the Planned 
Parenthood Federation of America. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is also 
supported by the Department of Defense.
  In sum, Mr. Chairman, this is not about public funding. My amendment 
only permits women to pay for their choices. The issue is simple: 
Service-women and military dependents deserve equal access to health 
care procedures regardless of where they are stationed.
  Equal access to health care for women, that is the title of this 
amendment. That ought to be one of the principal objectives of our 
military in which women play so prominent a part.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2\1/2\ minutes.
  Over the past three decades, the availability of abortion services at 
military medical facilities has been subjected to numerous changes and 
interpretations.
  In January of 1993, President Clinton signed an Executive Order 
directing the Department of Defense to permit privately funded 
abortions to be performed in military treatment facilities. The changes 
ordered by the President, however, did not have the effect of greatly 
increasing access to abortion services. Few abortions were performed at 
military treatment facilities overseas for two principal reasons:
  First, the military had a difficult time finding health care 
professionals in uniform willing to perform abortions. In 1993, this 
policy permitting abortionists, when it was first promulgated, these 
military physicians refused to perform or assist in elective abortions. 
In response, the administration sought to hire a civilian doctor to do 
abortions in military facilities.
  So we have to ask the question: If the Harman amendment is adopted, 
not only would taxpayer-funded facilities overseas be used to support 
abortion on demand, but new personnel would be hired simply so that 
abortions could, in fact, be performed. Are all the expenses of 
searching for, hiring and supporting an abortionist to travel from base 
to base going to be picked up by the private funds? It is an 
interesting question to ask.
  Second, military doctors must in fact obey the laws of the countries 
where they are providing services, so that they still could not perform 
abortions in locations where abortions are not permitted even if the 
Harman amendment were in fact adopted.
  The current law is in fact consistent with the Hyde language. It 
allows military women and dependents to receive abortions in military 
facilities in cases of rape, incest, or when it is necessary to save 
the life of the mother. This is the same policy that has been in effect 
from June of 1988 until President Clinton signed the Executive Order.
  The House has voted several times to ban abortions in overseas 
military hospitals. In fact, between the 1996 defense authorization 
bill and the defense appropriations bill, the House voted eight times 
in favor of the ban. Furthermore, the House voted down the fiscal year 
1996 defense appropriation conference report because it did not contain 
an amendment to ban abortions in the military.
  In those overseas areas where the female beneficiaries do not have 
access to safe, legal abortions, beneficiaries have the option of using 
the space available travel for returning to the United States or 
traveling to another overseas location for the purpose of obtaining an 
abortion.
  Mr. Chairman, I would say that this is not an issue of whether it is 
women's rights or of men's rights, this is an issue of life and the use 
of those taxpayer funded facilities.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds just to point out 
to my colleague and good friend from Indiana, who is a lawyer himself, 
that section 1093(a) of title X, which remains in effect, which is not 
repealed by my amendment, says, ``Restriction on use of funds: Funds 
available to the Department of Defense may not be used to perform 
abortions except where the life of the mother would be endangered if 
the fetus were carried to term.''
  We are not using Federal funds for abortions. We are not repealing 
that section of law.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Dellums], the ranking member of the Committee on National Security and 
my good friend.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
this time.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to express my strong support for the amendment 
offered by my distinguished colleague from California. The ban in 
current law discriminates against women who have volunteered to serve 
their country by prohibiting them from exercising their legally 
protected right to choose simply because they are stationed overseas.
  In the United States abortion is a legal medical procedure. Whether 
one agrees with that or not, that is the reality. However, in many of 
the countries where our troops are stationed abortion is outlawed. 
Faced with a crisis pregnancy, a military woman or dependent would have 
to choose between risking an illegal abortion overseas or paying for 
transportation back to the United States. Sometimes that is not 
convenient or they do not have the resources.
  While DOD policy respects host country laws regarding abortion, to 
the extent feasible and consistent with legal obligations, service 
women stationed overseas should have the same access to abortion 
services as do women in the United States. Women who serve in our 
military deserve safe and sanitary medical care. They should not have 
to risk their health because they are forbidden to have access to 
American military hospitals for a procedure that is constitutionally 
protected. Now, we may agree or disagree with that, but that is the 
fact.
  This ban may cause a woman stationed overseas, who is facing an 
unintended pregnancy, to be forced to delay that procedure several 
weeks until she can travel to a location where safe, adequate care is 
available. For each week an abortion is delayed, the risk to the 
woman's health increases.
  Mr. Chairman, beyond the issues of health and access to medical care, 
I would argue that this is a fundamental and basic issue of equity. An 
American service woman should not have to lose any of the 
constitutional protections she has while serving the military simply 
because she is deployed to a U.S. military facility in another country. 
We should not deprive these women of the very rights they are assigned 
to protect when we send them overseas.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment offered 
by the distinguished gentlewoman from California [Ms. Harman].
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds to respond to the 
gentlewoman that I thoroughly understand that this is an issue about 
the restrictions on the use of the facilities.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
Hyde] the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary.
  (Mr. Hyde asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  My friend from California, [Mr. Dellums], said this is an equity 
issue, and he is right. I listened carefully to his debate, I listened 
to the gentlewoman from California's debate, and I daresay I listened 
to everybody on that side in the debate, and none of them will mention 
a baby. All they mention is the woman. The woman has a problem, the 
woman wants her privacy, she wants her health taken care of, she has 
constitutional rights.
  What about the baby? The forgotten man or woman. The little tiny 
innocent human life struggling to live. No, they want to use taxpayer 
facilities, forget who is going to pay for it. This is the use of 
taxpayer facilities to kill an innocent unborn child. Some of us find 
that abhorrent.
  I know the woman has rights. I know Roe versus Wade has declared open 
season on unborn children, but if there is any way this legislation 
narrows it

[[Page H4058]]

down and gives that little girl or little boy, even though unborn, a 
shot at living, we are for it and I am against abortions. It is not a 
question of funds.
  So the gentlewoman talks about choice. Choice? What are you choosing, 
vanilla, strawberry? Who has the right to choose to kill an innocent 
unborn child, even if it is their own? They do not own that child. So 
abortion is wrong.
  We are not in the business of having the military facilitate 
abortion. We are in the business of having the military win wars, not 
making war on an innocent little baby in the womb.

                              {time}  1930

  The choice was exercised when the woman got pregnant. And because you 
drape her in a uniform does not change the equation of a human life at 
stake. And another tiny, defenseless, voiceless cannot rise up, cannot 
vote, cannot escape human being, who ought to have the right to life as 
promised in our Declaration of Independence.
  I oppose the amendment of the gentlewoman of California [Ms. Harman], 
and I implore my colleagues on the other side to occasionally think 
about the baby and whether the little baby ought to have the right to 
live.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds.
  I just would like to say to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hyde] 
that I respect his deeply held views, and I assume he respects mine. 
The law of the land is Rowe versus Wade, which was carefully decided by 
the Supreme Court almost 30 years ago, and that is what is at issue 
here.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Olver].
  Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from California [Ms. 
Harman] profoundly for her leadership on this issue, which is so vital 
to the needs of American servicewomen.
  Mr. Chairman, denying our military servicewomen their constitutional 
right to seek safe medical treatment, whether overseas or at home, is 
wrong. The Harman amendment is not about supporting or paying for 
abortion. The Government will not put down one single penny to pay for 
these medical services. This amendment is about restoring access to 
health care to women in the military while they are away from home.
  Restricting access to medical treatment while in a foreign land 
threatens the very lives of our American servicewomen. Women that are 
denied health care which can be effectively and safely provided at our 
military bases will either seek unsafe treatment or will be forced to 
leave their service duties. Both scenarios undermine our military 
services.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important measure to restore 
safe and legal abortion to the women who dedicate their lives to 
serving our country.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida [Mr. Stearns], chairman of the Subcommittee on Health of the 
Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, well, here we go again. We have had this 
debate before and we had this amendment and we won overwhelmingly in 
the 104th Congress. This evening, this House is going to spend the 
greater part of the evening and perhaps all tomorrow talking about 
where are we going to spend billions and billions of dollars for 
defense. We will probably be covering over 50 amendments to the defense 
authorization bill. Some will adjust the levels up and down and will be 
having great debate.
  Mr. Chairman, the vote we take today should be made in an effort to 
provide our Nation with the best defense capabilities in the world. In 
fact, all but one vote will. What is that lone vote? Surprise, it is an 
abortion amendment. After overwhelmingly defeating this amendment in 
the 104th Congress and now putting this into law, we are faced again 
with this debate.
  I ask my colleagues tonight, does the abortion debate have any place 
in the authorization of billions of dollars for national defense? Of 
course not. Here is another question: Do they as taxpayers have any 
place funding facilities to provide abortions? Of course not.
  Abortion proponents argue that this is not an issue of taxpayer 
funding for abortion, that this amendment would require the woman to 
pay for her own abortion. Well, then, if taxpayers' dollars are not 
involved, where exactly would these procedures take place? If taxpayers 
are not involved, then this amendment would have no place in the 
defense authorization bill. Would it?
  The amendment to this bill exists because a part of what we are 
debating today is a funding level for the U.S. military medical 
facilities, precisely the place where the abortions must occur. Yes, 
taxpayers' dollars are very involved in this issue.
  Mr. Chairman, let us keep the contents of this bill dedicated to the 
subject at hand, to provide for a strong national defense in order to 
protect ourselves and our children. I oppose the Harman amendment and 
urge my colleagues to do the same.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California [Ms. Woolsey].
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, first let me thank my friend, the 
gentlewoman from California [Ms. Harman] for her leadership on this 
issue. She is truly a fighter for equal treatment for women in the 
military.
  Mr. Chairman, make no mistake about it, that is what this issue is 
really about. It is about equal treatment for servicewomen stationed 
overseas. This amendment is not about Federal support for abortion 
services. It is about giving women who have volunteered to serve their 
country the same protections that civilian women have here at home.
  Last Congress, the majority told servicewomen stationed overseas that 
they could not even spend their own money on abortion services in 
military hospitals. They sent a message loud and clear to each American 
servicewoman that their political agenda was more important than her 
health and her safety. Mr. Chairman, these women fight for our freedom 
every day. Let us not take their freedoms away.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland [Mr. Bartlett], a member of the committee.
  Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make just two 
very simple points, and I rise in strong opposition to the Harman 
amendment.
  The first point is that the law assures complete health care for our 
women in the military. If they have a pregnancy problem and their life 
is at risk, they are assured complete health care. But let me say very 
emphatically that killing preborn babies is not health care. Let me say 
it again. Killing preborn babies is not health care.
  The second point I want to make is that our military physicians and 
our military hospitals do not want to perform these abortions. They did 
not do it when we did not have a law precluding them from doing it. 
They do not want to do this. I rise in strong opposition to this 
amendment. The American people are opposed to it. We need to vote it 
down.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to our colleague, the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Farr].
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding me the time.
  I rise in strong support of this amendment. I think that the law that 
this Congress put into being is outrageous. It says that if she is a 
woman in the military serving in Washington, DC, and she needs medical 
services and the Government will not pay for them, she can use her own 
money. She can go down to local hospitals and go get that service, but 
if we put her in uniform overseas in foreign soil, she cannot get that 
service. If her health is at risk, she cannot get those services. It is 
outrageous.
  It says if she chooses to defend our Constitution, do not expect the 
Constitution to apply to her if she serves overseas. This is bad law. 
We ought to amend it. That is what this amendment does. I urge everyone 
to support it.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in the debate on the Harman amendment.
  I think this debate is really not about abortion. I think it is about 
our national security.
  National security assumes that you will have personal security. 
Existing law puts women in uniform at risk with their own health care 
when they serve our country on foreign soil.
  This amendment corrects that injustice which prohibits these same 
women in uniform from access to health care when they are in service 
abroad, even if they use their own money.

[[Page H4059]]

  Think about it. Women in uniform have pledged to uphold the 
Constitution of this country, which grants those women choice in these 
procedures.
  But because of existing misguided law which access at home but not 
abroad when they serve overseas it is taken away from them.
  We must not discriminate against women simply because they serve in 
the defense of our country.
  I urge support for this amendment.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Kentucky [Mr. Lewis], a member of the committee.
  Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to 
the amendment of Representative Harman. It allows abortions at overseas 
military bases. I commend my colleague on her bipartisan efforts to 
promote a strong national defense and her hard work on the Committee on 
National Security. However, this is an issue where I must respectfully 
disagree.
  I have said it before, and I will say it again: Government should not 
spend one penny to fund abortions. It is an emotionally charged debate 
that divides this great Nation. Due to that fact alone, it is not just 
for our Government to spend taxpayers' dollars on an issue that pits so 
many Americans against each other. Regardless of reimbursement, no 
Federal facility should be used to end the life of the unborn.
  Mr. Chairman, what is the purpose of our medical personnel in the 
military? Is it to take lives, or is it to protect lives? I believe the 
military's medical community is in the business of protecting the lives 
of innocent people. It nurtures those who are injured. It shelters the 
sick and the weak. And it seeks to make sure lives are saved, and that 
includes the life of the unborn. We should not stand by and allow 
abortions on military bases because it contradicts why we have 
personnel in our military.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield one minute to the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro], a former member of the Committee on National 
Security and a leader in this fight last year.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, this amendment restores the freedom to 
choose for military women serving overseas. It is fundamental that 
those who risk their lives to defend the rights of American citizens 
should, in fact, enjoy those same rights. Without this amendment, 
American women living overseas due to service in our military will be 
discriminated against. Their right to choose, a right which is 
protected by the Constitution and the Supreme Court, will be denied.
  This is not a question of using taxpayers' money to perform abortion. 
Women will pay for their abortions out of their own pockets. This is 
not a question requiring doctors to perform procedures with which they 
do not agree, because this amendment preserves the conscience clause. 
This is not a question of imposing a new policy. This has been the 
policy of this Government.
  This amendment ensures that women will have access to safe, sanitary 
medical care even when they are stationed abroad. This debate is, 
purely and simply, a question of a woman's right to choose. If American 
military women living overseas can be denied that right, what will 
protect the rights of American women living in this country?
  I urge my colleagues to support the Harman amendment.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
New Jersey [Mr. Pappas], a member of the committee.
  Mr. PAPPAS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
California was soundly defeated by a vote of 22 to 33 in the Committee 
on National Security. As has been the case in previous years, this 
amendment was defeated because Members recognized that Americans do not 
want their hard earned tax dollars paying for abortions.
  The funds that we appropriate for the Defense Department should be 
used to support our national security and not for other purposes. 
Americans do not support the use of public funds to support military 
hospitals where abortions would be performed. This amendment could mean 
taxpayer funds could be used to hire personnel to perform abortions as 
well as subsidies to the facilities where abortions would take place.
  Today's debate on the defense bill will be marked by having many 
Members debating about the lack of funding for certain aspects of our 
national defense. The Harman amendment would add more expenses to an 
otherwise tight budget.
  I urge my colleagues to defeat this amendment. Our military hospitals 
are dedicated to healing and nurturing human life. They should not be 
forced to facilitate the taking of the most innocent of human life.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I mentioned that this amendment has 
bipartisan support. I would now like to yield 1 minute to our colleague 
from Maryland [Mrs. Morella].
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
the time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Harman amendment. It 
would restore the guarantee that those members serving in our Armed 
Forces can exercise their full range of constitutionally protected 
rights. This amendment is not about using U.S. taxpayers' dollars to 
finance abortion. Rather, it is an effort to assure that service 
members and their dependents based in countries that do not allow 
abortion will be able to access the medical facilities which we provide 
for them to attend to their own medical needs as they see fit.
  Even if other servicemen and women are serving in developing 
countries where abortion is legal, they are not likely to find the same 
high standards of cleanliness, safety, and medical expertise that is 
available at a U.S. facility.
  The Harman amendment would simply allow service members and their 
dependents to obtain the same range of health services at those 
facilities that they can now obtain at home. This is not a complicated 
issue. The amendment would assure that those in our armed forces need 
not sacrifice their constitutional rights to serve their country.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana [Mr. Hostettler], a member of the committee.
  (Mr. HOSTETTLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)

                              {time}  1945

  Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. Just as 
the Supreme Court said in 1857 in the now infamous Dred Scott decision, 
that slavery was constitutional, that same institution has told us that 
for the time being we have to allow the killing of pre-born children. 
It has not, however, told us that Government has an obligation to 
provide this service. This amendment would do just that.
  This amendment obligates the United States to make sure abortion 
services and facilities are available at U.S. military bases. It is 
this obligation that I believe the Committee on National Security and 
the House soundly rejected last year on so many occasions and should 
again reject.
  Abortion remains a very decisive practice in America and indeed the 
world. Allowing abortions to be performed on military installation 
would bring that discord and dissension right on to our military bases 
complete with pickets and the like.
  The core principle at issue today, whether the Government is 
obligated to provide what is merely a right, is a serious issue with 
serious ramifications. Does the freedom of the press guaranteed by the 
first amendment obligate the Federal Government to provide every 
interested American with a printing press? Does the right to distribute 
pornography, which has been upheld by the court, obligate the military 
to distribute it to the troops? I think not.
  Congress has the clear responsibility under the Constitution to 
provide for the rules and regulations of the military. We must not make 
it the policy of the United States to use its military facilities to 
destroy an innocent pre-born life.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, Mr. Chairman.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California [Ms. Pelosi].

[[Page H4060]]

  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I too want to add my accommodation to the 
gentlewoman from California [Ms. Harman] for her exceptional leadership 
in fighting this fight for America's service women; really, really for 
all women in America, and I rise in strong support of the Harman 
amendment to the defense authorization bill to repeal the provision in 
this bill prohibiting abortion services in U.S. military hospitals 
overseas. This provision is a clear threat to the health and safety of 
women military personnel and military families and a threat to the 
constitutional rights of all American women.
  Mr. Chairman, women stationed overseas in service to their country 
depend on base hospitals for medical care. Access to comprehensive 
reproductive health is essential for all women, civilian or military. 
These women are citizens ready and willing to sacrifice their lives for 
our country. Under the bill, as it currently stands, however, these 
women are treated as second-class citizens. Under this bill these brave 
women would be denied access to safe medical care.
  The Harman amendment is not an issue of taxpayer funding. Women in 
the military had previously used and would continue to be required to 
use their own funds to obtain abortion services at military hospitals. 
The Harman amendment is not an issue of coercing medical providers to 
perform abortion services. The Harman amendment maintains the conscious 
clause already in effect. It is, however, the intent of the language in 
this bill to deny more women the right to choose.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Alabama [Mr. Aderholt].
  (Mr. ADERHOLT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the Harman 
amendment to the national security authorization bill and in support of 
current law which prohibits abortions in military facilities abroad. 
The Harman amendment would turn U.S. military hospitals into abortion 
clinics. How can we justify using U.S. military hospitals, military 
personnel and hard earned tax dollars for the destruction of innocent 
human life? Despite the arguments that these abortions would be 
privately funded, there would be some costs to the taxpayer.
  In 1993, when President Clinton argued that the military's policy to 
allow abortions on these U.S. facilities made many outraged military 
physicians refuse to perform this procedure. They rightly believe that 
this is simply not a procedure that should be performed in U.S. 
military hospitals.
  As Pope John Paul once stated, a nation which kills its own children 
is a nation without a future. I stand today with those who oppose the 
Harman amendment and support life.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
New York [Mrs. Lowey].
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Harman 
amendment, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  The fiscal year 1996 Defense Authorization Act went much further than 
a limitation on the use of government funds for abortion. It actually 
barred military women and dependents from using their own money to pay 
for abortion services at military bases, just as they would use their 
own funds to pay for those services if they were in the United States.
  The current law puts the health of our military women at risk. Many 
of these women are stationed in countries where there is just no access 
to safe and legal abortions outside of the military hospitals. A woman 
forced to seek an abortion at local facilities or forced to wait to 
travel to apply safe abortion services faces tremendous health risks.
  This amendment does not force the Department of Defense to pay for 
abortion. It simply gives women access to health care that they could 
receive if they were at home. It is unimaginable to me and to the 
American people that Congress would reward the American service women 
who have volunteered to serve this Nation by violating their 
constitutional right to assess abortion.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Hunter].
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding this 
time to me, and I want to thank the gentleman for his extraordinary 
leadership of this subcommittee and just echo his feelings here and 
those that have been given by many Members who are against allowing 
abortions to take place in military hospitals.
  Mr. Chairman, let us not involve the military in abortion. Is that a 
double standard? Yes, it is a double standard, and the military has a 
double standard in a number of areas with respect to marital fidelity, 
with respect to pornography on base, and yes, with respect to abortion. 
We have our young people focused on duty, honor and country, and that 
involves a higher standard sometimes than the general public.
  But do my colleagues know something? The general public likes that. 
They respect the military more than any other institution because they 
have the higher standard. Let us keep that higher standard, and let us 
stick with the committee's position, and I thank the gentleman for his 
extraordinary leadership on this issue.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee].
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from 
California for not giving up on this fight. This is very important to 
women all over this country. Prohibiting women from using their own 
funds to obtain abortion services at overseas U.S. military facilities 
endangers their health simply plain and simple. American women 
stationed overseas depend on their base hospitals for medical care and 
are often situated in areas where local facilities are inadequate or 
unavailable. If the defense authorization bill is enacted without this 
amendment, American military personnel overseas would face the prospect 
of a long medically dangerous wait to return to the United States if 
stationed in countries that ban abortions or the prospect of having the 
procedure done in an unsafe unsanitary foreign hospital, perhaps 
causing a woman facing crisis pregnancy to seek out a illegal unsafe 
abortion. This ban may cause a woman stationed overseas who is facing 
an unintended pregnancy to be forced to delay the procedure and again 
travel very dangerously.
  Let me make a point. No medical providers will be forced to perform 
these abortions if they do not desire. All three branches of the 
military have conscience clauses that do not allow them to do it if 
they do not desire to do so.
  Let me say that we need to give fair and equal treatment to the women 
in the military service. Let us support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Harman amendment 
repealing recently enacted provisions of current law that prohibits 
privately funded abortions at overseas Department of Defense medical 
facilities and to thank Congresswoman Harman for her leadership in 
bringing this amendment to the House floor.
  The ban on privately funded abortions at overseas Department of 
Defense medical facilities discriminates against women who have 
volunteered to serve their country by prohibiting them from exercising 
their legally protected right to choose simply because they are 
stationed overseas. We must ensure that American female military 
personnel and dependents of military personnel stationed overseas can 
exercise the same constitutional right to choose that is available to 
women in this country.
  Prohibiting women from using their own funds to obtain abortion 
services at overseas U.S. military facilities endangers their health. 
American women stationed overseas depend on their base hospitals for 
medical care, and are often situated in areas where local facilities 
are inadequate or unavailable. If the defense authorization bill is 
enacted without this amendment, American military personnel overseas 
would face the prospect of a long, medically dangerous wait to return 
to the United States if stationed in countries that bans abortions, or 
the prospect of having the procedure done in an unsafe, unsanitary 
foreign hospital perhaps causing a woman facing a crisis pregnancy to 
seek out an illegal, unsafe procedure.
  This ban may cause a woman stationed overseas who is facing an 
unintended pregnancy to be forced to delay the procedure for several 
weeks until she can travel to a location where safe, adequate care is 
available. For each week an abortion is delayed, the risk to the 
woman's health increases.
  This is not an issue of taxpayer funding for abortions. Under the 
amendment the patient,

[[Page H4061]]

not the Federal Government, would pay for the procedure.
  No medical providers will be forced to perform abortions. All three 
branches of the military have conscience clause provisions which permit 
medical personnel who have moral, religious, or ethical objections to 
abortion not to participate in the procedure. These conscience clauses 
remain intact.
  Simply put, current law does not ensure equal health service access 
for all members of the United States armed services. Barring women 
living overseas from using their own funds to receive reproductive 
health care procedures legally available in the United States, is at 
best hypocritical and at worst a serious danger to their health.
  Women in the armed services have committed themselves to protecting 
the constitutional rights of all the citizens of the United States, yet 
we choose time and time again to deny them the same rights that we 
extend to women on U.S. soil.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Harman amendment.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Michigan [Mr. Barcia].
  Mr. BARCIA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from California's amendment, and I urge my colleagues to 
support current policy that prevents Department of Defense medical 
treatment facilities from being used to perform abortions. The current 
policy does contain exceptions. If the life of the mother is in danger 
or in the case of rape or in the case of incest abortion is not 
prohibited.
  Yes, the Supreme Court upheld the woman's right to choose. However, 
the Supreme Court did not require nor commit U.S. taxpayers to pay for 
the procedure for military personnel or civilians.
  When this policy was repealed in 1993, a majority of military 
physicians refused to perform or assist in elective abortions. Our 
military doctors should not be obligated or forced to perform 
abortions, particularly if they are morally opposed to abortion.
  Pro-life Americans believe that it is improper that any tax dollars 
are used to perform abortions. We in Congress should not support any 
policy that ignores our citizens' unyielding belief in the right to 
life.
  Support current military policy. Support the ideals of our American 
citizens. Oppose this amendment.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
York [Mr. Nadler].
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I urge support of the Harman amendment 
which would reverse the shameful policy of forbidding women in our 
armed services from using their own money to pay for an abortion in a 
safe U.S. medical facility abroad. It is disgraceful that we require 
women who are serving their country to risk their health and lives to 
exercise their constitutional right to choose an abortion.
  Why should not women in the Armed Forces enjoy the same fundamental 
rights that all other women in the United States enjoy?
  This bill would deny our Nation's service women stationed abroad a 
right they are absoltely entitled to and can exercise when in the 
United States, but if they are stationed abroad, they are forced to 
wait until they can return to the United States for an abortion or to 
go what in many countries are substandard and unsafe foreign medical 
facilities.
  Whatever anyone in this Chamber may think about abortion, it is a 
constitutionally protected right of every American woman. Our service 
women are prepared to risk their lives to defend our values and to 
protect our freedoms. We should not require them to risk their lives to 
exercise their constitutional right to an abortion.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment and expunge the shame 
from our statute books.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 20 seconds to say that I 
believe it is shameful and a disgraceful as a policy of the United 
States, since none of the military doctors would perform an abortion, 
for us to use taxpayer funds to hire an abortionist. That would be a 
shameful policy if this Harman amendment would pass.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. 
Taylor].
  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank my 
subcommittee chairman for making this possible.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Harman amendment. That is 
not what our Nation should be about, and for those of of my colleagues 
who come to the floor on an annual basis, and this seems to be the only 
thing in the military that one can speak on, I would encourage my 
colleagues, if they really want to help the troops, why do you not try 
to help us find the funds so that we can get those 13,000 soldiers, 
sailors, airmen, and marines who are on food stamps, and two-thirds of 
whom have families of their own and children of their own, at least pay 
them enough so they are not eligible for food stamps?
  Where I come from there is a stigma to being on food stamps, and no 
one who serves our country should have to live with that kind of a 
stigma.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
New York [Mrs. Maloney].
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, only under a Republican 
Congress can a woman sign up to serve her country and have her rights 
denied in return. Last time I looked it was still legal for a woman to 
have the right to choose in this country, but only if she remains in 
this country. If she decides to serve her country overseas, then she 
loses that constitutional right.
  If a male member of the armed services needs medical attention 
overseas, he receives the best. If a female member of the armed 
services needs a specific medical procedure overseas, then she has to 
come back to the United States to get that procedure or go to a foreign 
hospital that may be unsanitary.
  This bill will not cost taxpayers one cent. The women will pick up 
the tab. All they want is the right to do it, and women have waited 
long enough to receive equal treatment in the military.
  I hope my colleagues will support the Harman amendment and give these 
most deserving soldiers back that which is rightfully theirs.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey [Mr. Smith].
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, today because virtually every 
military physician deployed around the globe, as a matter of deep 
conviction and conscience, has refused to facilitate a 1993 Clinton 
Executive Order on abortion, and because the Dornan amendment was 
signed into permanent law a few years later on February 10, 1996, 
overseas military hospitals continue to be havens of healing, nuturing 
and disease eradication, not baby killing centers.
  The Harman amendment, if enacted, would turn these healing facilities 
into abortion mills where unborn children could be dismembered or 
chemically poisoned on demand. The Harman amendment makes a false 
distinction based not on what happens in an abortion, a baby is 
violently killed, but in who provides the cash. It also completely 
overlooks costs borne by the taxpayers to facilitate that abortion, 
like the provision of operating rooms, the hiring of abortionists and 
the procurement of poisons and potions and suction machines.

                              {time}  2000

  This amendment says, in effect, it is okay to tear an unborn child, 
to rip an unborn child from limb to limb or to apply that baby with 
deadly poisons using a hypodermic needle, so long as somebody else 
seems to be footing most of the bill.
  Somebody earlier said that this is not about abortion. We hear that 
kind of excuse and defense every time we hear this on the floor. When 
the D.C. appropriations bill is up, it is a matter of home rule. When 
the Federal employees health benefits program ban on abortion comes up, 
it is labor-management negotiations. When the Hyde amendment comes up, 
it is a matter of rich versus poor women. Of course, that underscores 
the fact that the unborn of the poor seem to be more able to be 
discarded and are more expendable.
  Mr. Chairman, let me conclude. The Harman amendment facilitates the 
killing of unborn children, and there is no doubt about that. It treats 
helpless, defenseless infant baby boys and girls as a disease, or a 
cyst, or a tumor that can be excised at will.
  Medicine is all about curing and mitigating diseases. This is not 
maternal health care, this is not prenatal

[[Page H4062]]

health care, this is killing of unborn children and the exploitation of 
their mothers.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on the Harman amendment.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Moran].
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, how arrogant for comfortable male 
Members of Congress to stand here in such self-righteous judgment over 
the lives of women who choose to serve our country in the military. We 
ought to be honest about it. Let us be honest about it. What this bill 
does is to prevent women, even victims of rape, from being able to 
exercise the same civil rights that they are granted by law in this 
country. We are punishing them for choosing to serve in the military, 
and we know from recent experience that this is not an uncommon 
situation.
  Every one of my colleagues know that they are being hypocritical. If 
it was their daughter serving in the military who was the victim of a 
rape, they would not stand in such self-righteous judgment over her.
  Grant women who choose to serve our country the same rights that they 
would be entitled to as American citizens.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, this is the Hyde language, which is the 
exception for rape. I just wanted to let the gentleman know.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, this is the 
bill that says that it only applies if the life of the woman would be 
in danger. This is the bill I was given, and it does not apply to rape.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, it does.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds. If I could just 
have a copy of the code that the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Moran] 
was referring to, I would like to read that right now.
  Mr. Chairman, the restriction on the use of funds says, the one that 
remains in the code, ``except where the life of the mother would be 
endangered.'' There is no exception for rape and incest. I would like 
to put that in the Record.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to the gentlewoman 
from Connecticut [Mrs. Johnson], the cochair of the Women's Caucus.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from Connecticut [Mrs. Johnson] is 
recognized for 3 minutes.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support 
of the Harman amendment. Is this taxpayer funding of abortions? No, it 
is not. It is the hard-earned dollars of the service men and service 
women of America choosing, electing, to have a medical procedure. They 
are paying for it themselves.
  Now my colleagues say, but the hospital is there. What hospital in 
America does not allocate charges for overhead into their charges for a 
procedure? No hospital does not allocate overhead charges. So do not 
tell me they are not paying for whole freight, they are paying their 
whole freight. This is not taxpayer-funded abortions, this is privately 
funded abortions that women in our armed services overseas may choose 
or need to have for medical reasons.
  What about military personnel? Do we have to hire doctors? Of course 
we will not. These are overseas bases, service women, serve the 
dependents, and so they have obstetricians. And all obstetricians are 
trained, whether my colleagues like it or not, to do abortions as well 
as to do many other things. So one is not going to hire physicians. 
This is not taxpayer-funded abortion. This is far more than that.
  There was one other argument that was brought up here that I want to 
speak to. The military has a higher standard. Boy, I would never touch 
that argument, folks. It is not a higher standard to deny service men 
and women the same rights as the citizens they defend. That is an 
abomination of the concept of higher standards in the military, and I 
believe the military does command of its people very high standards.
  So what is this about? It is about discrimination. If one is a 
colonel or a major, if one is an officer, one can afford to fly home, 
one can afford to fly one's wife home; one can afford to fly one's 16-
year-old daughter that got in trouble home. If one is an enlisted man, 
one cannot. One is on space available.
  I see it as economic discrimination. Officers are not going to be 
affected, enlisted men are. But what is this really about? Listen to 
the language of all of the speakers. This is about abortion, pure and 
simple. This is not about taxpayer-funded abortions, this is about 
abortion.
  Now, I challenge the pro-life Members of this Congress, for God's 
sakes, bring a bill to the floor that bans all abortions in America, 
and if they can win it, fine. Then we will not have to keep debating 
these things. But as long as abortion is legal, let servicemen have the 
same access to abortion as other citizens do have.
  Not one of my colleagues who has spoken today, this is so distressing 
to me, because I believe it is unconscionable. Not one of my colleagues 
who has spoken today has introduced a bill that bans all abortions at 
all institutions. My colleagues want to ban abortions at a military 
hospital so military service women and the wives of enlisted men have 
no rights, because they are too far away, unless they want to go to the 
local hospital and risk death.
  I have made my points. If some want to ban abortion, do it, but do 
not do it selectively and leave military people without the rights of 
real Americans.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to close this 
debate to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Weldon], former United States 
Army doctor.
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise to strongly urge all of 
my colleagues to vote no on the Harman amendment. I can bring some 
perspective to this issue because I was in the United States Army 
Medical Corps when President Reagan ordered that abortions stop in 
military facilities, an order that was reversed by Bill Clinton in 
1993; and then this Congress corrected it. I can tell my colleagues 
that the men and women, the doctors and nurses in the Army Medical 
Corps supported the President because they did not want to have 
anything to do with this procedure. And the reason the people in the 
healing arts do not want to have anything to do with this procedure is 
because they know what it is. Even those who claim to be pro-choice 
will say to me, I would never perform one. And the reason for that is 
very clear. It is the destruction of a human life.
  We have no business in this Congress having anything to do with 
supporting abortion at military facilities, and I strongly urge my 
colleagues, let us not roll the clock back. Support the language in the 
law, oppose the Harman amendment.
  Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support for the 
Harman amendment and thank my colleague for her leadership in the fight 
to repeal the ban on privately funded abortions for servicewomen and 
their dependents at overseas military hospitals.
  Our servicewomen have volunteered to defend our country, which is a 
patriotic calling to be admired and, for which, we should be grateful. 
So how do we thank them? By denying them basic rights that are extended 
to all other American women--reproductive rights.
  This amendment is an access to health care amendment to repeal a 
harmful public policy for women who deserve our utmost protection. We 
are talking about women who are serving in countries that do not share 
America's standards of quality in health care. Furthermore, some of the 
countries in which they serve do not share America's affection for 
human rights--especially women's rights.
  Some members of this body claim to not want American tax dollars 
going to abortion, and that claim in this matter would be fine if it 
were accurate. But we are talking about privately funded abortions.
  In addition, no medical provider in the military will be forced to 
perform an abortion, for all branches of government have a conscience 
clause permitting medical personnel who have moral, religious or 
ethical objections to abortion not to participate in the procedure.
  How dare we claim not to be a discriminating country and then 
continue this ban that clearly singles out patriotic women serving the 
United States of America overseas. We should be ashamed of ourselves. 
Support the Harman amendment and repeal this misguided and injurious 
public policy.
  Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my strong 
opposition to the Harman amendment.

[[Page H4063]]

  In 1996, the people of the United States assured us that they are 
firmly opposed to having tax dollars which are allocated for the 
defense of our country, used to perform abortions.
  Currently, Federal law prohibits abortions in military facilities, 
except when the life of the mother would be endangered if the unborn 
child were carried to term, or in cases of rape or incest. I could 
stand up here and speak to all of you about how this is a matter of 
preserving the law, the reason the law was enacted and the amount of 
times abortion amendments have been voted down in the past few years. 
None of that matters however, if the folks in our country feel as 
though their safety is at issue because we spent funding to allow 
abortions to be performed at the expense of protecting our country.
  Military hospitals are important to the health and life of our 
military. As a result, they are important for the health and well-being 
of our national security. If individuals feel less protected based upon 
the funding of our defense dollars, then our military could be less 
prepared and ready to defend our Nation.
  Just as we need to preserve the strength of human life, it is equally 
important to preserve the security that people have in our Nation's 
defensive capabilities. Today in Congress, we have the opportunity to 
assure the people that we will spend their dollars in a responsible and 
meaningful way. This is the matter before Congress, and this is why we 
must make certain to continue to enforce that no Federal taxpayer 
dollars will be used to finance abortions in Department of Defense 
funding.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Harman 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time has expired.
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
California [Ms. Harman].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 169, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California [Ms. 
Harman] will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 printed in part 1 of 
House Report 105-137.


                  Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Shays

  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

  Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Shays:
       At the end of title XII (page 379, after line 19), insert 
     the following new section:

     SEC.   . DEFENSE BURDENSHARING.

       (a) Efforts To Increase Allied Burdensharing.--The 
     President shall seek to have each nation that has cooperative 
     military relations with the United States (including security 
     agreements, basing arrangements, or mutual participation in 
     multinational military organizations or operations) take one 
     or more of the following actions:
       (1) For any nation in which United States military 
     personnel are assigned to permanent duty ashore, increase its 
     financial contributions to the payment of the nonpersonnel 
     costs incurred by the United States Government for stationing 
     United States military personnel in that nation, with a goal 
     of achieving by September 30, 2000, 75 percent of such costs. 
     An increase in financial contributions by any nation under 
     this paragraph may include the elimination of taxes, fees, or 
     other charges levied on United States military personnel, 
     equipment, or facilities stationed in that nation.
       (2) Increase its annual budgetary outlays for national 
     defense as a percentage of its gross domestic product by 10 
     percent or at least to a level commensurate to that of the 
     United States by September 30, 1998.
       (3) Increase its annual budgetary outlays for foreign 
     assistance (to promote democratization, economic 
     stabilization, transparency arrangements, defense economic 
     conversion, respect for the rule of law, and internationally 
     recognized human rights) by 10 percent or at least to a level 
     commensurate to that of the United States by September 30, 
     1998.
       (4) Increase the amount of military assets (including 
     personnel, equipment, logistics, support and other resources) 
     that it contributes, or would be prepared to contribute, to 
     multinational military activities worldwide.
       (b) Authorities To Encourage Actions by United States 
     Allies.--In seeking the actions described in subsection (a) 
     with respect to any nation, or in response to a failure by 
     any nation to undertake one or more of such actions, the 
     President may take any of the following measures to the 
     extent otherwise authorized by law:
       (1) Reduce the end strength level of members of the Armed 
     Forces assigned to permanent duty ashore in that nation.
       (2) Impose on that nation fees or other charges similar to 
     those that such nation imposes on United States forces 
     stationed in that nation.
       (3) Reduce (through rescission, impoundment, or other 
     appropriate procedures as authorized by law) the amount the 
     United States contributes to the NATO Civil Budget, Military 
     Budget, or Security Investment Program.
       (4) Suspend, modify, or terminate any bilateral security 
     agreement the United States has with that nation, consistent 
     with the terms of such agreement.
       (5) Reduce (through rescission, impoundment or other 
     appropriate procedures as authorized by law) any United 
     States bilateral assistance appropriated for that nation.
       (6) Take any other action the President determines to be 
     appropriate as authorized by law.
       (c) Report on Progress in Increasing Allied 
     Burdensharing.--Not later than March 1, 1998, the Secretary 
     of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on--
       (1) steps taken by other nations to complete the actions 
     described in subsection (a);
       (2) all measures taken by the President, including those 
     authorized in subsection (b), to achieve the actions 
     described in subsection (a);
       (3) the difference between the amount allocated by other 
     nations for each of the actions described in subsection (a) 
     during the period beginning on March 1, 1996, and ending on 
     February 28, 1997, and during the period beginning on March 
     1, 1997, and ending on February 28, 1998; and
       (4) the budgetary savings to the United States that are 
     expected to accrue as a result of the steps described under 
     paragraph (1).
       (d) Report on National Security Bases for Forward 
     Deployment and Burdensharing Relationships.--(1) In order to 
     ensure the best allocation of budgetary resources, the 
     President shall undertake a review of the status of elements 
     of the United States Armed Forces that are permanently 
     stationed outside the United States. The review shall include 
     an assessment of the following:
       (A) The alliance requirements that are to be found in 
     agreements between the United States and other countries.
       (B) The national security interests that support 
     permanently stationing elements of the United States Armed 
     Forces outside the United States.
       (C) The stationing costs associated with the forward 
     deployment of elements of the United States Armed Forces.
       (D) The alternatives available to forward deployment (such 
     as material prepositioning, enhanced airlift and sealift, or 
     joint training operations) to meet such alliance requirements 
     or national security interests, with such alternatives 
     identified and described in detail.
       (E) The costs and force structure configurations associated 
     with such alternatives to forward deployment.
       (F) The financial contributions that allies of the United 
     States make to common defense efforts (to promote 
     democratization, economic stabilization, transparency 
     arrangements, defense economic conversion, respect for the 
     rule of law, and internationally recognized human rights).
       (G) The contributions that allies of the United States make 
     to meeting the stationing costs associated with the forward 
     deployment of elements of the United States Armed Forces.
       (H) The annual expenditures of the United States and its 
     allies on national defense, and the relative percentages of 
     each nation's gross domestic product constituted by those 
     expenditures.
       (2) The President shall submit to Congress a report on the 
     review under paragraph (1). The report shall be submitted not 
     later than March 1, 1998, in classified and unclassified 
     form.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Connecticut 
[Mr. Shays] and a Member opposed each will control 15 minutes.
  Who seeks time in opposition to the amendment?
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I do.
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman 
from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank], who is an equal partner in this 
amendment, control half of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Connecticut?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Shays] and the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank] each will control 7\1/2\ 
minutes. The gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence] will control 15 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Shays].
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, at this time we bring forth an amendment 
that seeks to have our allies pay more of the share of supporting 
troops that we have stationed overseas. Presently Japan spends over 
$3.7 billion a year in direct contributions to the United States to pay 
for the nonsalaried costs of our troops in the Japanese theater.

[[Page H4064]]

 The total amount, Mr. Chairman, is almost $4.7 billion when we combine 
it with in-kind contributions.
  Korea pays 63 percent of our nonpersonnel costs, our nonsalaried 
costs. They contribute a total of $1.8 billion, and in direct 
contributions, $359 million for 37,000 troops. In Japan, we have 45,000 
troops.
  Europe, on the other hand, contributes 24 percent of the nonpersonnel 
costs, $2 billion; but that is quite misleading, because for the 
116,000 troops, only $46 million of the amount is in direct cash 
contribution.
  Here we have Japan that contributes in direct payment $3.7 billion, 
Korea $359 million, and all the European nations $46 million. Our 
amendment seeks to have the President of the United States negotiate 
with our European allies and have them pay a greater amount of the 
nonsalaried costs of our maintaining troops in Europe.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, while I am personally opposed to this 
amendment in its present form, I am prepared to accept it and continue 
to work with the sponsors as we move toward the conference with the 
other body.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, that is the toughest argument to counter I have ever 
been presented with, and I will confess to my friend from South 
Carolina, I have no answer for him, but I will work on one.
  I do want to talk about why this is so important, and I appreciate 
his spirit of cooperation. The gentleman from Connecticut and I have 
been working on this. We kind of inherited this from the former Member, 
the gentleman from Colorado, and others. What we are saying is very 
important, and we want to get this into the Record.
  We have signed a budget deal. The budget deal includes some difficult 
choices. Some of us have rejected it, a great majority have accepted 
it, but obviously, among those who have accepted it, they are aware, in 
fact, they are proud of the fact that it will cause some difficulty, it 
will impose some restraints.
  One big set of constraints comes in discretionary spending. Military 
spending is half of that. Many of those who support a strong military 
think we are allocating too little to the military. Some of us feel 
that the military is getting too much and that is constraining other 
programs. We ought to have virtual unanimity on this point.
  If we could get our wealthy allies who are now doing so little in 
comparison to the American taxpayer to provide for the common defense, 
we could make funds available that we could use for defense, we could 
use for domestic discretionary, we could use for foreign economic 
cooperation; we could use those funds.
  I sent out over the weekend, or I sent out on Monday an article from 
the Washington Post which reported the trend of our European allies, 
our wealthy and powerful European allies, to cut their military budget. 
And Klaus Naumann, the Chairman of the NATO military committee, pointed 
out that the disparity in military spending, both in dollars and as a 
percentage of gross domestic product between the United States and the 
Western Europeans, is so great that a little disconnect has grown up.

                              {time}  2015

  We spend so much greater a percentage of our gross domestic product 
on the military than Germany and France and England and Norway and 
Denmark and Belgium, et cetera, that we no longer have a genuinely 
integrated military. We have gone too far ahead of them.
  Obviously, there are places in this world where the United States 
must bear the burden: In the Middle East; we must stand by South Korea 
facing that terrible regime in North Korea. But there is no good reason 
for the American taxpayer to subsidize Western Europe.
  This amendment repeats an amendment that was adopted overwhelmingly 
by the House in the last budget, with one very important change. We, 
after conference, for the first time got into law some legislation 
requiring the administration to try burden-sharing. Let me say, one of 
the problems we have had, Mr. Chairman, is this administration, as all 
of its predecessors, has failed to do its job in trying to get an 
adequate share from the allies.
  Mr. Chairman, we set up some criteria to measure what our allies are 
doing. The administration was told to report, and guess what, Mr. 
Chairman? This administration, like every previous administration, 
reported that the allies were doing terrific. They are just wonderful 
people.
  They note that the best is Japan, and by the way, it is not an 
accident that Japan gives us the most. As my friend, the gentleman from 
Connecticut [Mr. Shays] points out, Japan gives us significantly more 
than any other country because this Congress singled out Japan and 
insisted that it does. The time has come now to make sure others do.
  The point I want to make is on page 3 of this amendment there is a 
critical new section beginning on line 21. It now sets up a series of 
comparisons. We have this year's report. What we hope to do is to now 
get a series by which we can measure the extent to which 
administrations have successfully pressed our allies to contribute 
more.
  Mr. Chairman, it is important for us to continue this, to let the 
administration know and our allies know that especially now that we 
have so constrained spending here, we do not think it appropriate for 
the American taxpayers to carry a disproportionate share of the burden.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland [Mr. Hoyer].
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend, the gentleman from 
Connecticut [Mr. Shays] for yielding time to me.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of

the Shays-Frank-Upton-Gephardt-Foley-Dellums and I suppose almost 
everybody, now, amendment.
  Clearly, Mr. Chairman, Americans benefit from having our troops 
strategically stationed around the globe. These men and women protect 
U.S. interests even as they protect world peace. But these troops also 
provide enormous benefits to their host countries, not only economic 
benefits but obviously security benefits. There is no reason why those 
allies should not pay a greater share, a proportionate share, of the 
costs.
  Mr. Chairman, honestly, I have opposed this amendment sometimes, and 
I am now supporting it because I believe it is an important statement 
to the rest of the world as we continue to bear a burden here. And we 
talk about our taxpayers' burden. This amendment directs the President 
to ensure that our allies meet at least one of four criteria for 
sufficient burden-sharing.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak about one country, and the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank] mentioned South Korea. I 
believe that it is important that we have a presence in South Korea. 
But I also believe that it is important that South Korea bear its 
burden.
  Frankly, we are not universally popular in South Korea, interestingly 
enough. However, meetings between President Clinton and President Kim 
Yong-sam in other negotiations, mutual agreement has been reached to 
increase their support for our troops. Support has already risen, Mr. 
Chairman, from $150 million in 1991 to $300 million in 1995. That 
amount is scheduled to increase by 10 percent in each of the next few 
years.
  Mr. Chairman, this is movement in the right direction, but in my 
opinion it is not enough. Even while troop deployments in other parts 
of the world are being cut back, we have continued, appropriately, a 
strong presence in South Korea because of the threat from North Korea.
  With United States support, South Korea joined the United Nations in 
1992, and in 1995 was added as a nonpermanent member of the United 
States Security Council. Many South Koreans, nevertheless, still resent 
the American presence, especially at the base near Seoul. While this 
makes it tough for the Government to pay its

[[Page H4065]]

fair share, there is no question that the South Korean economy is 
strong and positively advantaged by having United States troops in the 
country.
  Mr. Chairman, as I said, I support this amendment. I support it 
because I think it sends an appropriate message. It does give 
flexibility, and it does say that America is continuing and will 
continue to bear its burden, to play its role on which the world 
relies, and which advantages the United States as well.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this time to rise and I appreciate the 
gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Shays] yielding me the time in support 
of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the Shays-Frank-Upton-Gephardt-Foley-
Dellums amendment.
  Clearly, Americans benefit from having our troops strategically 
stationed around the globe. These men and women protect U.S. interests 
even as they protect world peace.
  But these troops also provide enormous benefits to their host 
countries and there is no reason why those allies should not pay a 
greater share of the costs.
  This amendment directs the President to ensure that our allies meet 
at least one of four criteria for sufficient burdensharing.
  I am especially concerned about South Korea.
  Through meetings between President Clinton and President Kim Young 
Sam and other negotiations, mutual agreement has been reached to 
increase their support for our troops.
  Support has already risen--from $150 million in 1991 to $300 million 
in 1995. That amount is scheduled to increase by 10 percent in each of 
the next few years.
  This is movement in the right direction but it is not enough. Even 
while troop deployments in other parts of the world are being cut back 
we have continued a strong presence in South Korea because of the 
threat from North Korea.
  With United States support, South Korea joined the United Nations in 
1992 and, in 1995, was added as a nonpermanent member of the U.N. 
Security Council.
  Despite all of this assistance, many South Koreans resent the 
American presence, especially at the base near Seoul.
  While this makes it tough for the Government to pay its fair share, 
there is no question that the South Korean economy is strong and 
positively advantaged by having United States troops in the country.
  I support this amendment which will continue the pressure on South 
Korea and other allies to recognize the enormous value of our highly 
trained Armed Forces.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to 
the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee].
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding time to me.
  Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. 
Shays], the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank], the gentleman 
from Michigan [Mr. Upton], the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Gephardt], 
the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums], the gentleman from Florida 
[Mr. Foley], and the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence] very 
much. This is an important discussion. It shows the mutual seriousness 
that all of us have in ensuring the safety and security of this Nation, 
but the recognition of the importance of the involvement at a more 
heightened level of our European friends.
  Let me say, having visited Europe recently, I agree that there is 
great prosperity emerging, and certainly existing in Europe today.
  In addition, along with our other sites, we can look to Europe to 
have a unified currency. Therefore, I think it is adequate that this 
particular amendment gives flexibility to the President to assess how 
we would in fact increase benefit-sharing. What that means is that a 
greater amount of moneys are contributed by our allies to this national 
and world defense.
  Let me also say if we are concerned about military personnel, 
housing, the fact that many of our enlisted men and women are on food 
stamps, the reordering of funding, taking it away from the hard nuts 
and bolts of maintaining troops overseas and focusing on military 
salaries, housing, and the ability to pay our military personnel, it 
will be a real boost for the morale of our men and women in the United 
States military, who every day by their commitment offer their lives 
for our freedom.
  So I thank the gentlemen for this very thoughtful amendment that 
allows the freedom and the expression to do several things in order to 
assure that there is a balanced perspective on the funding of our 
defense. I hope that all of my colleagues will support this amendment.
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida [Mr. Foley].
  Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I commend the gentleman from Connecticut 
[Mr. Shays] for this very fine amendment, and also the spirit that is 
being exhibited on the floor today by both sides of the aisle in 
recognizing that we do need assistance from our friends and allies in 
the payment of our expensive defense, to assist them in the defense of 
their countries.
  The gentleman from Florida [Mr. Hastings] and I traveled to Korea, to 
the DMZ, and met with our troops, our fine men and women who make up 
our military. One of the things they asked us is to come back to 
Washington and look out for them; look out for their pay; look out for 
their housing; think about their families. So we are here today to find 
a way to strengthen our budget for the military and the personnel of 
this Nation.
  I appreciate the comments of the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-
Lee], because clearly if we are able to get our allies to contribute a 
greater share of our peacekeeping mission, we will then be able to 
deploy the assets we are currently spending on our personnel, those 
that desperately deserve it.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment does not call for U.S. troop withdrawal 
from overseas. It does ask our allies to contribute more to our mutual 
defense. Although Japan contributes 77 percent of the nonpersonnel 
costs for the stationing of U.S. troops in that country, our European 
allies contribute less than 25 percent toward these costs. This 
amendment ends this discrepancy by calling on all of our allies to 
gradually bring contributions to 75 percent.
  It is in the best interests of the United States to maintain American 
troops in Europe and Asia to provide for mutual defense. No one denies 
that fact. But it is time that they step up to the plate, assist in 
their fair responsibility so we can continue our commitment to 
providing safety and security for people around the globe. That is what 
America has been known for. That is one of our greatest strengths.
  Our friendship we bring to the international community is because of 
our strength, the strength of our defense, but again, clearly, if we 
have extra dollars they should go to military personnel and allow our 
allies to pay more of the burden.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance 
of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank] is 
recognized for 2 minutes
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. No one is arguing, Mr. Chairman, that 
there is no benefit to the United States from our presence in Europe. 
What we are arguing is that there is at least as much benefit to the 
Europeans. They simply have not been doing a fair share.
  The gentleman from Florida who just spoke cited the contribution we 
get from the Japanese, but that is a direct result of this Congress, 
over the objections of the administration then in power, mandating that 
the Japanese pay us some part of the nonpersonnel costs. I believe we 
ought to be doing the same with Western Europe.
  There is an enormous disparity between the percentage of the American 
gross domestic product that goes to the military and that of our 
European allies, and it is all the more important that we do this now, 
because the Europeans are now facing pressure to cut their budgets, to 
get their deficits down to 3 percent so they can get into the common 
European currency.
  If we do not send a strong message to this administration, which has 
been as sadly reluctant as its predecessors seriously to represent the 
American taxpayers' interest in equity here, then we will see a 
continued drop in what the Europeans do, with an expectation that we 
will continue to do more.
  Members have noted that we have been promised we would be out of

[[Page H4066]]

Bosnia some time ago. We are there because the Europeans simply will 
not live up to their responsibilities. We are not asking Europe to 
replace us in the Middle East where we take on the burden. We are not 
asking them to replace us in South Korea. We are not asking them to 
replace us in many other parts of the world. We are not asking for 
European troops to come to the United States.
  What we are saying is that where we are talking about military 
presence in Western Europe, it is simply illogical for the United 
States taxpayer to be doing so much compared to the Western Europeans 
that do so little. These nations are prosperous, they face no 
overpowering enemy, they are populous.
  We started the policy of America basically picking up all the tab 45 
or 50 years ago when Europe was poor and they faced a strong enemy. 
They are no longer poor and they no longer face a strong enemy. We 
should not still be picking up so disproportionate a part of the tab.
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Shays] is 
recognized for 1 minute.
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I would say that this amendment allows for 
burden-sharing. It is similar in essence to the amendment we passed 
last year, which passed by a vote of 353 to 62. It is seeking to get 
the European nations primarily to contribute more to the nonmilitary 
costs of our troops stationed in Europe, or to provide more defense 
spending, or to increase their foreign aid, or to increase their funds 
to national military operations in the United Nations. It is an 
attempt, a very good attempt, to get the Europeans to do more for the 
defense of this world and the free world.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Buyer].
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Buyer] is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to take a step back here. One, I want to 
compliment the gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Shays] and the gentleman 
from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank]. I am not really speaking in opposition. 
What I want to talk about is a little bit about history and our foreign 
policy dollars and where we are going from here.
  When I think about the United States and our emergence upon the world 
scene, not only from World War I, and in particular World War II, and 
then how the United States, not only in the Marshall Plan and what we 
did in Europe, but also in particular what we did in the Pacific Rim 
and MacArthur and his assistance in helping draft a constitution in 
Japan, and setting forth different agreements in burden-sharing in 
Japan, much different than what we find on the Korean Peninsula.

                              {time}  2030

  So now over the last 50 years, the United States, while in the cold 
war, have been providing security and that blanket was a pretty good 
size in the Pacific, and it was a pretty good size in Europe. We 
provided their security. We grew the economies of Europe. We grew the 
economies in the Pacific to the point where they were highly 
competitive with the United States, to the point where today a lot of 
the electronic components, highly competitive coming at us from the 
Pacific Rim. A lot of the Airbus and other things happening in our 
competition from the European sector. The United States now finds 
itself the sole remaining superpower in the world.
  Now, let us talk about our foreign policy for a second, talk about 
how it ties into burden sharing. The United States is the sole 
remaining superpower. I believe, as a vision of foreign policy, the 
United States, what we should have is, the United States should not 
engage itself in every little corner of the world and every little hot 
spot. We in the United States should engage and encourage our regional 
allies to quiet, to enter regional conflicts that have no tendency to 
destabilize a region of the world. That is in difference with the 
administration. I understand that.
  But what this issue and what the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Frank] and the gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Shays] are talking about 
is asking for our allies to have an increased share of the burden. 
Increased share of the burden of what? For security. Not the United 
States carrying the big stick always swooping in. So Bosnia comes to 
the attention. We are going to debate that here in a few days. We are 
asking our European allies for a greater share.
  My good friend, the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums], is 
sitting over here. I would love to ask him, Mr. Chairman, if George 
Foreman was his bodyguard, would he lift weights? He would not have to. 
The United States, we are the George Foreman. These other countries do 
not want to have to lift weights so long as we are there providing 
their security. They do not want to increase the share of the burden.
  Let me extend some compliments. I was with the gentleman from South 
Carolina [Mr. Spence] a few years ago when we were in Norway. We signed 
new burden sharing agreements that were negotiated by the ambassador of 
burden sharing of the Clinton administration. We were there. They 
signed them. It did not make the European allies very happy. But that 
is a good thing. That is a good thing, because we want them to increase 
their share and their burdens.
  I am a little uncomfortable here about the measures and the points 
out of this bill about, if they do not, it is going to affect our 
agreements. It will affect our memorandums, our letters of 
understanding, pretty stressful measures in there. Diplomacy is not 
that easy, I would say to my colleagues.
  The gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer] brought up some points about 
Korea. What I would like to share about Korea is that next year the new 
special measures agreement with regard to Korea will be renegotiated. I 
see my good friend sitting right over here knows exactly what I am 
talking about. We went ahead and approved some measures for military 
construction based upon great needs in Korea. Korea, we find ourselves 
very juxtaposed. We are on the brink of war at the same time we are on 
the brink of peace. And we have military facilities that meet their 
tier one responsibilities under a master plan.
  Now we have to ask, if we want to sign off onto a master plan with 
Korea, do we want to spend a billion dollars on the Korean Peninsula? 
That is a pretty tough question. So what I would ask my colleagues here 
who are so strongly concerned about the issue of burden sharing, let us 
take a pretty stern look here at this new master plan about military 
construction in Korea, over a billion dollars.
  Let me jump to the issue about residual value. Think what happened, 
what we did in Europe upon the reunification of Germany. When it 
happened, do my colleagues know what the State Department did? The 
State Department went ahead and negotiated away all of these 
facilities.
  We spent millions and millions and millions of dollars on 
appropriated and nonappropriated facilities. And what did the State 
Department do? We did not have a residual value. They negotiated it 
right away. Let us not start the very same thing, move into a 
multibillion dollar construction program on the Korean Peninsula 
without addressing the residual values issues.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BUYER. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding to me. I appreciate the very thoughtful way he has addressed 
this.
  Let me say, I agree with him and the gentleman from Maryland who 
mentioned this. It is a great mistake. I would like to connect two 
dots, if I could.
  The gentleman said he was generally supportive of this but he was 
made uncomfortable by some of the measures. Let me say to him, in an 
ideal world, we would not be coming up with this amendment because the 
administration would, as a matter of course, be doing everything it 
could to get our allies to do it. The problem we have run into, as he 
alluded to with Germany, is there has been a bipartisan bias on the 
part of administrations, executive branches, State Departments not to

[[Page H4067]]

press any of our allies anywhere, any time, until we got into it. So 
the reason, it seems to me, we have to legislate and legislate with 
more specificity than would be ideal and to put more pressure on is 
precisely the kind of attitude that was evinced by the administration 
that negotiated everything away and that I do not think would protect 
our interests in South Korea sufficiently unless we intervened.
  There is just a constituency problem there, and the State Department 
and, to some extent, the Defense Department, have a constituency that 
is not concerned with the taxes here, more concerned with making nice 
overseas.
  And I think that the gentleman has stated it very clearly. I agree 
with him. That is why we need to do this.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I say to the gentleman, 
we have report language in here that is pretty stern about the issue of 
residual value, as we move into the negotiations about the special 
measures agreement on the Korean Peninsula. Let us not repeat the 
mistakes of Europe. I will work with the gentlemen to make these 
corrections as we go to conference.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Shays].
  The amendment was agreed to.


          Sequential Votes Postponed in Committee of the Whole

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 169, proceedings will now 
resume on those part 1 amendments on which further proceedings were 
postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment No. 2 offered by the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. 
Spence]; amendment No. 3 offered by the gentleman from South Carolina 
[Mr. Spence]; and amendment No. 4 offered by the gentlewoman from 
California [Ms. Harman].
  The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                 Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Spence

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. 
Spence] on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 405, 
noes 14, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 215]

                               AYES--405

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fowler
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hamilton
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kim
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McDermott
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Molinari
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Parker
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Paxon
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Redmond
     Regula
     Riggs
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryun
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Adam
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Snyder
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--14

     Bartlett
     Borski
     Davis (IL)
     Evans
     Goodling
     Hall (TX)
     Jackson (IL)
     Kennedy (MA)
     McGovern
     Moakley
     Moran (VA)
     Neal
     Reyes
     Talent

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Ackerman
     DeGette
     Dreier
     Gephardt
     Kaptur
     Lipinski
     Miller (CA)
     Oberstar
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Schiff
     Stark
     Taylor (NC)
     Torres
     Yates

                              {time}  2059

  Messrs. NEAL, TALENT, KENNEDY of Massachusetts, MORAN of Virginia, 
DAVIS of Illinois, BARTLETT of Maryland, and HALL of Texas changed 
their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

                              {time}  2100


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 169, the Chair announces 
that he will reduce to a minimum of 5 minutes the period of time within 
which a vote by electronic device will be taken on each amendment on 
which the Chair has postponed further proceedings.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Spence

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. 
Spence] on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             recorded vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 332, 
noes 88, not voting 14, as follows:

[[Page H4068]]

                             [Roll No. 216]

                               AYES--332

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (WI)
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boyd
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (IL)
     Deal
     DeLay
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doyle
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     Ensign
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Foley
     Ford
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kim
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meek
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Mink
     Molinari
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pappas
     Parker
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paxon
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Redmond
     Regula
     Reyes
     Riggs
     Riley
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryun
     Salmon
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Snyder
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wise
     Wolf
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--88

     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Blumenauer
     Boucher
     Brady
     Capps
     Chabot
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (VA)
     DeFazio
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Ehlers
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fazio
     Filner
     Forbes
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goodlatte
     Green
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hooley
     Houghton
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson (WI)
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kind (WI)
     Levin
     Lofgren
     Luther
     Manzullo
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     Meehan
     Minge
     Moakley
     Moran (VA)
     Myrick
     Neal
     Obey
     Olver
     Pallone
     Paul
     Petri
     Price (NC)
     Ramstad
     Rivers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Shays
     Sherman
     Smith (MI)
     Smith, Adam
     Stabenow
     Tauscher
     Thomas
     Tierney
     Vento
     Watt (NC)
     White
     Woolsey

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Ackerman
     DeGette
     Gephardt
     Lipinski
     Miller (CA)
     Oberstar
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Schiff
     Stark
     Taylor (NC)
     Torres
     Weygand
     Yates

                              {time}  2110

  The Clerk announced the following pair:
  On this vote:

       Mr. Yates for, with Mr. Ackerman against.

  Mr. BENTSEN and Mr. MORAN of Virginia changed their vote from ``aye'' 
to ``no.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                          personal explanation

  Mr. WEYGAND. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 216, I was unavoidably 
detained and unfortunately did not cast a vote on this issue. Had I 
been present to vote I would have voted in the negative.


                    Amendment Offered by Ms. Harman

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California [Ms. 
Harman] on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 196, 
noes 224, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 217]

                               AYES--196

     Abercrombie
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baesler
     Baldacci
     Barrett (WI)
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berman
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Bono
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Campbell
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Cummings
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehrlich
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Foley
     Ford
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gilchrest
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hooley
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Klug
     Kolbe
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Martinez
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHale
     McInnis
     McKinney
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Molinari
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Nadler
     Neal
     Obey
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pickett
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Slaughter
     Smith, Adam
     Snyder
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Wexler
     White
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wynn

                               NOES--224

     Aderholt
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Borski
     Brady
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cannon
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Everett

[[Page H4069]]


     Ewing
     Forbes
     Fox
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gillmor
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hostettler
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kildee
     Kim
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Mascara
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pappas
     Parker
     Paul
     Paxon
     Pease
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Portman
     Poshard
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Redmond
     Regula
     Riggs
     Riley
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Royce
     Ryun
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Upton
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Ackerman
     DeGette
     Gephardt
     Lipinski
     McHugh
     Miller (CA)
     Oberstar
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Schiff
     Stark
     Taylor (NC)
     Torres
     Yates

                              {time}  2119

  Mr. POSHARD and Mr. SKELTON changed their vote from ``aye'' to 
``no.''
  Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I move that the committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Cooksey) having assumed the chair, Mr. Young of Florida, Chairman of 
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported 
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 
1119) to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 1998 and 1999 for 
military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military 
personnel strengths for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and for other 
purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________