[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 65 (Wednesday, May 20, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H3505-H3584]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION

  Mr. RILEY. Mr. Speaker, due to unavoidable circumstances, I was not 
present for rollcall vote No. 166. Had I been present, I would have 
voted ``aye'' in favor of the rule.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Petri). Pursuant to House Resolution 440 
and rule XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of 
the bill, H.R. 3616.

                              {time}  1214


                     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 further consideration of 
the bill (H.R. 3616) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1999 
for military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe 
military personnel strengths for fiscal year 1999, and for other 
purposes, with Mr. Camp in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole House rose on Tuesday, 
May 19, 1998 pursuant to House Resolution 435, all time for general 
debate had expired. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, no further 
general debate is in order.
  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 read.
  The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is 
as follows:
         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 1999''.

     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--Army Programs

Sec. 111. Multiyear procurement authority for Longbow Hellfire missile 
              program.
Sec. 112. M1A2 System Enhancement Program Step 1 Program.

                       Subtitle C--Navy Programs

Sec. 121. Multiyear procurement authority for the Department of the 
              Navy.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

Sec. 141. Funding, transfer, and management of the Assembled Chemical 
              Weapons Assessment Program.

         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.

    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

Sec. 211. Management responsibility for Navy mine countermeasures 
              programs.
Sec. 212. Future aircraft carrier transition technologies.
Sec. 213. Manufacturing technology program.

                 Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense

Sec. 231. National Missile Defense policy.
Sec. 232. Limitation on funding for the Medium Extended Air Defense 
              System.
Sec. 233. Limitation on funding for cooperative ballistic missile 
              defense programs.
Sec. 234. Limitation on funding for counterproliferation support.
Sec. 235. Ballistic Missile Defense program elements.

                  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 of M1-A1 tanks.
Sec. 306. Operation of prepositioned fleet, National Training Center, 
              Fort Irwin, California.
Sec. 307. Relocation of USS WISCONSIN.
Sec. 308. Fisher House Trust Funds.

               Subtitle B--Information Technology Issues

Sec. 311. Additional information technology responsibilities of Chief 
              Information Officers.
Sec. 312. Defense-wide electronic mall system for supply purchases.
Sec. 313. Protection of funding provided for certain information 
              technology and national security programs.
Sec. 314. Priority funding to ensure year 2000 compliance of mission 
              critical information technology and national security 
              systems.
Sec. 315. Evaluation of year 2000 compliance as part of training 
              exercises programs.

                  Subtitle C--Environmental Provisions

Sec. 321. Authorization to pay negotiated settlement for environmental 
              cleanup at former Department of Defense sites in Canada.
Sec. 322. Removal of underground storage tanks.

         Subtitle D--Defense Infrastructure Support Improvement

Sec. 331. Reporting and study requirements before change of commercial 
              and industrial type functions to contractor performance.
Sec. 332. Clarification of requirement to maintain Government-owned and 
              Government-operated core logistics capability.
Sec. 333. Oversight of development and implementation of automated 
              identification technology.
Sec. 334. Conditions on expansion of functions performed under prime 
              vendor contracts.
Sec. 335. Clarification of definition of depot-level maintenance and 
              repair.
Sec. 336. Clarification of commercial item exception to requirements 
              regarding core logistics capabilities.
Sec. 337. Development of plan for establishment of core logistics 
              capabilities for maintenance and repair of C-17 aircraft.
Sec. 338. Contractor-operated civil engineering supply stores program.
Sec. 339. Report on savings and effect of personnel reductions in Army 
              Materiel Command.

  Subtitle E--Commissaries and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities

Sec. 341. Continuation of management and funding of Defense Commissary 
              Agency through the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Sec. 342. Expansion of current eligibility of Reserves for commissary 
              benefits.
Sec. 343. Repeal of requirement for Air Force to sell tobacco products 
              to enlisted personnel.
Sec. 344. Restrictions on patron access to, and purchases in, overseas 
              commissaries and exchange stores.
Sec. 345. Extension of demonstration project for uniform funding of 
              morale, welfare, and recreation activities.
Sec. 346. Prohibition on consolidation or other organizational changes 
              of Department of Defense retail systems.
Sec. 347. Authorized use of appropriated funds for relocation of Navy 
              Exchange Service Command.
Sec. 348. Evaluation of merit of selling malt beverages and wine in 
              commissary stores as exchange system merchandise.

[[Page H3506]]

                       Subtitle F--Other Matters

Sec. 361. Eligibility requirements for attendance at Department of 
              Defense domestic dependent elementary and secondary 
              schools.
Sec. 362. Specific emphasis of program to investigate fraud, waste, and 
              abuse within Department of Defense.
Sec. 363. Revision of inspection requirements relating to Armed Forces 
              Retirement Home.
Sec. 364. Assistance to local educational agencies that benefit 
              dependents of members of the Armed Forces and Department 
              of Defense civilian employees.
Sec. 365. Strategic plan for expansion of distance learning 
              initiatives.
Sec. 366. Public availability of operating agreements between military 
              installations and financial institutions.
Sec. 367. Department of Defense readiness reporting system.
Sec. 368. Travel by Reservists on carriers under contract with General 
              Services Administration.

   Subtitle G--Demonstration of Commercial-Type Practices To Improve 
                 Quality of Personal Property Shipments

Sec. 381. Demonstration program required.
Sec. 382. Goals of demonstration program.
Sec. 383. Program participants.
Sec. 384. Test plan.
Sec. 385. Other methods of personal property shipping.
Sec. 386. Duration of demonstration program.
Sec. 387. Evaluation of demonstration program.

              TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

                       Subtitle A--Active Forces

Sec. 401. End strengths for active forces.
Sec. 402. Revision in permanent end strength levels.
Sec. 403. Date for submission of annual manpower requirements report.
Sec. 404. Extension of authority for Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
              Staff to designate up to 12 general and flag officer 
              positions to be excluded from general and flag officer 
              grade limitations.

                       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. Codification of eligibility of retired officers and former 
              officers for consideration by special selection boards.
Sec. 502. Communication to promotion boards by officers under 
              consideration.
Sec. 503. Procedures for separation of regular officers for substandard 
              performance of duty or certain other reasons.
Sec. 504. Posthumous commissions and warrants.
Sec. 505. Tenure of Chief of the Air Force Nurse Corps.

                 Subtitle B--Reserve Component Matters

Sec. 511. Composition of selective early retirement boards of Reserve 
              general and flag officers of the Navy and Marine Corps.
Sec. 512. Active status service requirement for promotion consideration 
              for Army and Air Force Reserve component brigadier 
              generals.
Sec. 513. Revision to educational requirement for promotion of Reserve 
              officers.

              Subtitle C--Military Education and Training

Sec. 521. Requirements relating to recruit basic training.
Sec. 522. After-hours privacy for recruits during basic training.
Sec. 523. Extension of reporting dates for Commission on Military 
              Training and Gender Related Issues.
Sec. 524. Improved oversight of innovative readiness training.

           Subtitle D--Decorations, Awards, and Commendations

Sec. 531. Study of new decorations for injury or death in line of duty.
Sec. 532. Waiver of time limitations for award of certain decorations 
              to specified persons.
Sec. 533. Commendation of the Navy and Marine Corps personnel who 
              served in the United States Navy Asiatic Fleet from 1910-
              1942.
Sec. 534. Appreciation for service during World War I and World War II 
              by members of the Navy assigned on board merchant ships 
              as the Naval Armed Guard Service.
Sec. 535. Sense of Congress regarding the heroism, sacrifice, and 
              service of the military forces of South Vietnam and other 
              nations in connection with the United States Armed Forces 
              during the Vietnam conflict.
Sec. 536. Sense of Congress regarding the heroism, sacrifice, and 
              service of former South Vietnamese commandos in 
              connection with United States Armed Forces during the 
              Vietnam conflict.

   Subtitle E--Administration of Agencies Responsible for Review and 
                     Correction of Military Records

Sec. 541. Personnel freeze.
Sec. 542. Professional staff.
Sec. 543. Ex parte communications.
Sec. 544. Timeliness standards.

                       Subtitle F--Other Matters

Sec. 551. One-year extension of certain force drawdown transition 
              authorities relating to personnel management and 
              benefits.
Sec. 552. Leave without pay for academy cadets and midshipmen.
Sec. 553. Provision for recovery, care, and disposition of the remains 
              of all medically retired members.
Sec. 554. Continued eligibility under Voluntary Separation Incentive 
              program for members who involuntarily lose membership in 
              a reserve component.
Sec. 555. Definition of financial institution for direct deposit of 
              pay.
Sec. 556. Increase in maximum amount for College Fund program.
Sec. 557. Central Identification Laboratory, Hawaii.
Sec. 558. Honor guard details at funerals of veterans.
Sec. 559. Applicability to all persons in chain of command of policy 
              requiring exemplary conduct by commanding officers and 
              others in authority in the Armed Forces.
Sec. 560. Report on prisoners transferred from United States 
              Disciplinary Barracks, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, to 
              Federal Bureau of Prisons.
Sec. 561. Report on process for selection of members for service on 
              courts-martial.
Sec. 562. Study of revising the term of service of members of the 
              United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.
Sec. 563. Status of cadets at the Merchant Marine Academy.

          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

                     Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances

Sec. 601. Increase in basic pay for fiscal year 1999.
Sec. 602. Basic allowance for housing outside the United States.
Sec. 603. Basic allowance for subsistence for Reserves.

           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. Aviation career incentive pay and aviation officer retention 
              bonus.
Sec. 615. Special pay for diving duty.
Sec. 616. Selective reenlistment bonus eligibility for Reserve members 
              performing active Guard and Reserve duty.
Sec. 617. Removal of ten percent restriction on selective reenlistment 
              bonuses.
Sec. 618. Increase in maximum amount of Army enlistment bonus.
Sec. 619. Equitable treatment of Reserves eligible for special pay for 
              duty subject to hostile fire or imminent danger.

            Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances

Sec. 631. Exception to maximum weight allowance for baggage and 
              household effects.
Sec. 632. Travel and transportation allowances for travel performed by 
              members in connection with rest and recuperative leave 
              from overseas stations.
Sec. 633. Storage of baggage of certain dependents.

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

Sec. 641. Effective date of former spouse survivor benefit coverage.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

Sec. 651. Deletion of Canal Zone from definition of United States 
              possessions for purposes of pay and allowances.
Sec. 652. Accounting of advance payments.
Sec. 653. Reimbursement of rental vehicle costs when motor vehicle 
              transported at Government expense is late.
Sec. 654. Education loan repayment program for certain health 
              profession officers serving in Selected Reserve.

                   TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS

                    Subtitle A--Health Care Services

Sec. 701. Expansion of dependent eligibility under retiree dental 
              program.
Sec. 702. Plan for provision of health care for military retirees and 
              their dependents comparable to health care provided under 
              TRICARE Prime.
Sec. 703. Plan for redesign of military pharmacy system.
Sec. 704. Transitional authority to provide continued health care 
              coverage for certain persons unaware of loss of CHAMPUS 
              eligibility.

[[Page H3507]]

                      Subtitle B--TRICARE Program

Sec. 711. Payment of claims for provision of health care under the 
              TRICARE program for which a third party may be liable.
Sec. 712. Procedures regarding enrollment in TRICARE Prime.

                       Subtitle C--Other Matters

Sec. 721. Inflation adjustment of premium amounts for dependents dental 
              program.
Sec. 722. System for tracking data and measuring performance in meeting 
              TRICARE access standards.
Sec. 723. Air Force research, development, training, and education on 
              exposure to chemical, biological, and radiological 
              hazards.
Sec. 724. Authorization to establish a Level 1 Trauma Training Center.
Sec. 725. Report on implementation of enrollment-based capitation for 
              funding for military medical treatment facilities.

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

Sec. 801. Limitation on procurement of ammunition and components.
Sec. 802. Acquisition Corps eligibility.
Sec. 803. Amendments relating to procurement from firms in industrial 
              base for production of small arms.

      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

Sec. 901. Further reductions in defense acquisition workforce.
Sec. 902. Limitation on operation and support funds for the Office of 
              the Secretary of Defense.
Sec. 903. Revision to defense directive relating to management 
              headquarters and headquarters support activities.
Sec. 904. Under Secretary of Defense for Policy to have responsibility 
              with respect to export control activities of the 
              Department of Defense.
Sec. 905. Independent task force on transformation and Department of 
              Defense organization.
Sec. 906. Improved accounting for defense contract services.
Sec. 907. Repeal of requirement relating to assignment of tactical 
              airlift mission to reserve components.
Sec. 908. Repeal of certain requirements relating to Inspector General 
              investigations of reprisal complaints.
Sec. 909. Consultation with Commandant of the Marine Corps regarding 
              Marine Corps aviation.

                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                     Subtitle A--Financial Matters

Sec. 1001. Transfer authority.
Sec. 1002. Incorporation of classified annex.
Sec. 1003. Outlay limitations.

                Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards

Sec. 1011. Revision to requirement for continued listing of two Iowa-
              class battleships on the Naval Vessel Register.
Sec. 1012. Transfer of USS NEW JERSEY.
Sec. 1013. Long-term charter of three vessels in support of submarine 
              rescue, escort, and towing.
Sec. 1014. Transfer of obsolete Army tugboat.
Sec. 1015. Long-term charter contracts for acquisition of auxiliary 
              vessels for the Department of Defense.

        Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Counter Drug Activities

Sec. 1021. Department of Defense support for counter-drug activities.
Sec. 1022. Support for counter-drug operation Caper Focus.

       Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Report Requirements and Repeals

Sec. 1031. Annual report on resources allocated to support and mission 
              activities.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

Sec. 1041. Clarification of land conveyance authority, Armed Forces 
              Retirement Home, District of Columbia.
Sec. 1042. Content of notice required to be provided garnishees before 
              garnishment of pay or benefits.
Sec. 1043. Training of special operations forces with friendly foreign 
              forces.

           TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL

Sec. 1101. Authority for release to Coast Guard of drug test results of 
              civil service mariners of the Military Sealift Command.
Sec. 1102. Limitations on back pay awards.
Sec. 1103. Restoration of annual leave accumulated by civilian 
              employees at installations in the Republic of Panama to 
              be closed pursuant to the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977.
Sec. 1104. Repeal of program providing preference for employment of 
              military spouses in military child care facilities.
Sec. 1105. Elimination of retained pay as basis for determining 
              locality-based adjustments.
Sec. 1106. Observance of certain holidays at duty posts outside the 
              United States.

              TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS

Sec. 1201. Limitation on funds for peacekeeping in the Republic of 
              Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Sec. 1202. Reports on the mission of United States forces in Republic 
              of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Sec. 1203. Report on military capabilities of an expanded NATO 
              alliance.
Sec. 1204. One-year extension of counterproliferation authorities for 
              support of United Nations Special Commission on Iraq.
Sec. 1205. Repeal of landmine moratorium.

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

Sec. 1301. Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs and 
              funds.
Sec. 1302. Funding allocations.
Sec. 1303. Prohibition on use of funds for specified purposes.
Sec. 1304. Limitation on use of funds for chemical weapons destruction 
              facility.
Sec. 1305. Limitation on obligation of funds for a specified period.
Sec. 1306. Requirement to submit breakdown of amounts requested by 
              project category.
Sec. 1307. Limitation on use of funds until completion of fiscal year 
              1998 requirements.
Sec. 1308. Report on biological weapons programs in Russia.
Sec. 1309. Limitation on use of funds for biological weapons 
              proliferation prevention activities in Russia.
Sec. 1310. Limitation on use of certain funds for strategic arms 
              elimination in Russia or Ukraine.
Sec. 1311. Availability of funds.

            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. Increase in fiscal year 1998 authorization for military 
              construction projects at Fort Drum, New York, and Fort 
              Sill, Oklahoma.

                            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 to accept road construction project, Marine 
              Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina.

                         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.

                      TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES

Sec. 2401. Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land 
              acquisition projects.
Sec. 2402. Improvements to military family housing units.
Sec. 2403. Energy conservation projects.
Sec. 2404. Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies.
Sec. 2405. Increase in fiscal year 1995 authorization for military 
              construction projects at Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas, 
              and Umatilla Army Depot, Oregon.
Sec. 2406. Increase in fiscal year 1990 authorization for military 
              construction project at Portsmouth Naval Hospital, 
              Virginia.

   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. 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 1996 
              projects.
Sec. 2703. Extension of authorization of fiscal year 1995 project.
Sec. 2704. Effective date.

                    TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

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

Sec. 2801. Definition of ancillary supporting facilities under the 
              alternative authority for acquisition and improvement of 
              military housing.

        Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration

Sec. 2811. Restoration of Department of Defense lands used by another 
              Federal agency.

[[Page H3508]]

Sec. 2812. Outdoor recreation development on military installations for 
              disabled veterans, military dependents with disabilities, 
              and other persons with disabilities.
Sec. 2813. Report on use of utility system conveyance authority.

            Subtitle C--Defense Base Closure and Realignment

Sec. 2821. Payment of stipulated penalties assessed under the 
              Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
              Liability Act of 1980 in connection with McClellan Air 
              Force Base, California.
Sec. 2822. Elimination of waiver authority regarding prohibition 
              against certain conveyances of property at Naval Station, 
              Long Beach, California.

                      Subtitle D--Land Conveyances

                        Part I--Army Conveyances

Sec. 2831. Land conveyance, Army Reserve Center, Massena, New York.
Sec. 2832. Land conveyance, Army Reserve Center, Ogdensburg, New York.
Sec. 2833. Land conveyance, Army Reserve Center, Jamestown, Ohio.
Sec. 2834. Land conveyance, Stewart Army Sub-Post, New Windsor, New 
              York.
Sec. 2835. Land conveyance, Indiana Army Ammunition Plant, Charlestown, 
              Indiana.
Sec. 2836. Land conveyance, Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant, 
              Chattanooga, Tennessee.
Sec. 2837. Release of reversionary interest of United States in former 
              Redstone Army Arsenal property conveyed to Alabama Space 
              Science Exhibit Commission.

                       Part II--Navy Conveyances

Sec. 2841. Easement, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, California.
Sec. 2842. Land conveyance, Naval Reserve Readiness Center, Portland, 
              Maine.

                    Part III--Air Force Conveyances

Sec. 2851. Land conveyance, Lake Charles Air Force Station, Louisiana.
Sec. 2852. Land conveyance, Air Force housing facility, La Junta, 
              Colorado.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

Sec. 2861. Repeal of prohibition on joint use of Gray Army Airfield, 
              Fort Hood, Texas, with civil aviation.
Sec. 2862. Designation of building containing Navy and Marine Corps 
              Reserve Center, Augusta, Georgia.
Sec. 2863. Expansion of Arlington National Cemetery.
Sec. 2864. Reporting requirements under demonstration project for 
              purchase of fire, security, police, public works, and 
              utility services from local government agencies.

 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. Defense 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. Availability of funds.
Sec. 3129. Transfers of defense environmental management funds.

   Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations

Sec. 3131. Prohibition on Federal loan guarantees for defense 
              environmental management privatization projects.
Sec. 3132. Extension of funding prohibition relating to international 
              cooperative stockpile stewardship.
Sec. 3133. Use of certain funds for missile defense technology 
              development.
Sec. 3134. Selection of technology for tritium production.
Sec. 3135. Limitation on use of certain funds at Hanford Site.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

Sec. 3151. Termination of worker and community transition assistance. 
Sec. 3152. Requirement for plan to modify employment system used by 
              Department of Energy in defense environmental management 
              programs.
Sec. 3153. Report on stockpile stewardship criteria.

          TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

Sec. 3201. Authorization.

                TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE

Sec. 3301. Definitions.
Sec. 3302. Authorized uses of stockpile funds.

                 TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

Sec. 3401. Definitions.
Sec. 3402. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 3403. Price requirement on sale of certain petroleum during fiscal 
              year 1999.
Sec. 3404. Disposal of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2.
Sec. 3405. Disposal of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 3.
Sec. 3406. Disposal of Oil Shale Reserve Numbered 2.
Sec. 3407. Administration.

                  TITLE XXXV--PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION

Sec. 3501. Short title; references to Panama Canal Act of 1979.
Sec. 3502. Authorization of expenditures.
Sec. 3503. Purchase of vehicles.
Sec. 3504. Expenditures only in accordance with treaties.
Sec. 3505. Donations to the Commission.
Sec. 3506. Sunset of United States overseas benefits just before 
              transfer.
Sec. 3507. Central Examining Office.
Sec. 3508. Liability for vessel accidents.
Sec. 3509. Panama Canal Board of Contract Appeals.
Sec. 3510. Technical amendments.

                  TITLE XXXVI--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

Sec. 3601. Authorization of appropriations for fiscal year 1999.
Sec. 3602. Conveyance of NDRF vessel M/V BAYAMON.
Sec. 3603. Conveyance of NDRF vessels BENJAMIN ISHERWOOD and HENRY 
              ECKFORD.
Sec. 3604. Clearinghouse for maritime information.
Sec. 3605. Conveyance of NDRF vessel ex-USS LORAIN COUNTY.

     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 1999 for procurement for the Army as follows:
       (1) For aircraft, $1,420,759,000.
       (2) For missiles, $1,232,285,000.
       (3) For weapons and tracked combat vehicles, 
     $1,507,638,000.
       (4) For ammunition, $1,053,455,000.
       (5) For other procurement, $3,136,918,000.

     SEC. 102. NAVY AND MARINE CORPS.

       (a) Navy.--Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated 
     for fiscal year 1999 for procurement for the Navy as follows:
       (1) For aircraft, $7,420,847,000.
       (2) For weapons, including missiles and torpedoes, 
     $1,192,195,000.
       (3) For shipbuilding and conversion, $5,992,361,000.
       (4) For other procurement, $3,969,507,000.
       (b) Marine Corps.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal year 1999 for procurement for the 
     Marine Corps in the amount of $691,868,000.
       (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 
     $451,968,000.

     SEC. 103. AIR FORCE.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1999 for procurement for the Air Force as follows:
       (1) For aircraft, $8,219,077,000.
       (2) For missiles, $2,234,668,000.
       (3) For ammunition, $383,627,000.
       (4) For other procurement, $7,046,372,000.

     SEC. 104. DEFENSE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1999 for Defense-wide procurement in the amount of 
     $1,962,866,000.

     SEC. 105. RESERVE COMPONENTS.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1999 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, $50,000,000.
       (2) For the Air National Guard, $50,000,000.
       (3) For the Army Reserve, $50,000,000.
       (4) For the Naval Reserve, $50,000,000.
       (5) For the Air Force Reserve, $50,000,000.
       (6) For the Marine Corps Reserve, $50,000,000.

     SEC. 106. DEFENSE INSPECTOR GENERAL.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1999 for procurement for the Inspector General of the 
     Department of Defense in the amount of $1,300,000.

     SEC. 107. CHEMICAL DEMILITARIZATION PROGRAM.

       There is hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1999 the amount of $834,000,000 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 1999 for the Department

[[Page H3509]]

     of Defense for procurement for carrying out health care 
     programs, projects, and activities of the Department of 
     Defense in the total amount of $402,387,000.

     SEC. 109. DEFENSE EXPORT LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1999 for the Department of Defense for carrying out the 
     Defense Export Loan Guarantee Program under section 2540 of 
     title 10, United States Code, in the total amount of 
     $1,250,000.
                       Subtitle B--Army Programs

     SEC. 111. MULTIYEAR PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY FOR LONGBOW 
                   HELLFIRE MISSILE PROGRAM.

       Beginning with the fiscal year 1999 program year, the 
     Secretary of the Army may, in accordance with section 2306b 
     of title 10, United States Code, enter into a multiyear 
     procurement contract for procurement of the AGM-114 Longbow 
     Hellfire missile.

     SEC. 112. M1A2 SYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM STEP 1 PROGRAM.

       Of the funds authorized to be appropriated for the Army in 
     section 101 for weapons and tracked combat vehicles, 
     $20,300,000 shall be available only for the Step 1 program 
     for the M1A2 System Enhancement Program.

                       Subtitle C--Navy Programs

     SEC. 121. MULTIYEAR PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY FOR THE DEPARTMENT 
                   OF THE NAVY.

       (a) Authority for Specified Navy Aircraft Programs.--
     Beginning with the fiscal year 1999 program year, the 
     Secretary of the Navy may, in accordance with section 2306b 
     of title 10, United States Code, enter into a multiyear 
     procurement contract for procurement for the following 
     programs:
       (1) The AV-8B aircraft program.
       (2) The T-45TS aircraft program.
       (3) The E-2C aircraft program.
       (b) Authority for Marine Corps Medium Tactical Vehicle 
     Replacement.--Beginning with the fiscal year 1999 program 
     year, the Secretary of the Navy may, in accordance with 
     section 2306b of title 10, United States Code, enter into a 
     multiyear procurement contract to procure the Marine Corps 
     Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement.
                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

     SEC. 141. FUNDING, TRANSFER, AND MANAGEMENT OF THE ASSEMBLED 
                   CHEMICAL WEAPONS ASSESSMENT PROGRAM.

       (a) Funding.--Of the amount authorized to be appropriated 
     in section 107, $12,600,000 shall be available for the 
     Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment Program (in this 
     section referred to as the ``Program'').
       (b) Transfer of Program Responsibility.--(1) The Under 
     Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology and the 
     Secretary of the Army shall jointly submit to Congress, not 
     later than December 1, 1998, a plan for the transfer of 
     oversight of the Program from the Under Secretary to the 
     Secretary.
       (2) Oversight of the Program shall be transferred pursuant 
     to the plan submitted under paragraph (1) not later than 60 
     days after the date of the submission of the notice required 
     under section 152(f)(2) of the National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 214; 
     50 U.S.C. 1521(f)(2)).
       (c) Plan For Pilot Program.--If the Secretary of Defense 
     proceeds with a pilot program under section 152(f) of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 
     (Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 214; 50 U.S.C. 1521(f)), the 
     Secretary shall prepare a plan for the pilot program and 
     shall submit to Congress a report on such plan (including 
     information on the cost of, and schedule for, implementing 
     the pilot program).
       (d) Management of Program.--The Program shall be managed 
     independently of the baseline incineration program until the 
     pilot program is completed.
       (e) Definition.--In this section, the term ``Assembled 
     Chemical Weapons Assessment Program'' means the program 
     established in section 152(e) of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 
     110 Stat. 214; 50 U.S.C. 1521), and section 8065 of the 
     Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1997 (as contained 
     in section 101 of Public Law 104-208; 110 Stat. 3009-101), 
     for identifying and demonstrating alternatives to the 
     baseline incineration process for the demilitarization of 
     assembled chemical munitions.
         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 1999 for the use of the Department of Defense for 
     research, development, test, and evaluation as follows:
       (1) For the Army, $4,791,997,000.
       (2) For the Navy, $8,377,059,000.
       (3) For the Air Force, $13,785,401,000.
       (4) For Defense-wide activities, $9,283,515,000, of which--
       (A) $251,106,000 is authorized for the activities of the 
     Director, Test and Evaluation; and
       (B) $29,245,000 is authorized for the Director of 
     Operational Test and Evaluation.

     SEC. 202. AMOUNT FOR BASIC AND APPLIED RESEARCH.

       (a) Fiscal Year 1999.--Of the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated by section 201, $3,078,251,000 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.
    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

     SEC. 211. MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITY FOR NAVY MINE 
                   COUNTERMEASURES PROGRAMS.

       Section 216(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993 (Public Law 102-190; 105 Stat. 
     1317, as amended) is amended by striking out ``through 1999'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``through 2003''.

     SEC. 212. FUTURE AIRCRAFT CARRIER TRANSITION TECHNOLOGIES.

       Of the funds authorized to be appropriated under section 
     201(2) for Carrier System Development (program element 
     0603512N), $50,000,000 shall be available for research, 
     development, test, evaluation, and insertion into the CVN-77 
     nuclear aircraft carrier program of technologies designed to 
     transition to, demonstrate enhanced capabilities for, or 
     mitigate cost and technical risks of, the CV(X) aircraft 
     carrier program.

     SEC. 213. MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.

       (a) Requirements Relating to Competition.--Section 
     2525(d)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(A)'' after ``(1)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) For each grant awarded and each contract, cooperative 
     agreement, or other transaction entered into on a cost-share 
     basis under the program, the ratio of contract recipient cost 
     to Government cost shall be determined by competitive 
     procedures. For a project for which the Government receives 
     an offer from only one offeror, the contracting officer shall 
     negotiate the ratio of contract recipient cost to Government 
     cost that represents the best value to the Government.''.
       (b) Requirements Relating to Cost Share Waivers.--Section 
     2525(d)(2) of such title is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) as 
     clauses (i), (ii), and (iii), respectively;
       (2) by inserting ``(A)'' after ``(2)''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraphs:
       ``(B) For any grant awarded or contract, cooperative 
     agreement, or other transaction entered into on a basis other 
     than a cost-sharing basis because of a determination made 
     under subparagraph (A), the transaction file for the project 
     concerned must document the rationale for the determination.
       ``(C) The Secretary of Defense may delegate the authority 
     to make determinations under subparagraph (A) only to the 
     Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology or 
     a service acquisition executive, as appropriate.''.
       (c) Cost Share Goal.--Section 2525(d) of such title is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking out paragraph (4); and
       (2) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by striking out ``At least'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``As a goal, at least'';
       (B) by striking out ``shall'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``should''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following: ``The Secretary of 
     Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military 
     departments and upon recommendation of the Under Secretary of 
     Defense for Acquisition and Technology, shall establish 
     annual objectives to meet such goal.''.
       (d) Additional Information To Be Included in Five-Year 
     Plan.--Section 2525(e)(1) of such title is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by inserting at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) the extent of cost sharing in the manufacturing 
     technology program by companies in the private sector, 
     weapons system program offices and other defense program 
     offices, Federal agencies other than the Department of 
     Defense, nonprofit institutions and universities, and other 
     sources.''.

                 Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense

     SEC. 231. NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE POLICY.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Threats posed by ballistic missiles and weapons of mass 
     destruction to the national territory of the United States 
     continue to grow as the trend in ballistic missile 
     proliferation and development is toward longer range and 
     increasingly sophisticated missiles.
       (2) Russian and Chinese sources continue to proliferate 
     missile and other advanced technologies.
       (3) North Korea is developing the Taepo-Dong 2 missile, 
     which would have a range sufficient to strike Alaska and 
     Hawaii, and other countries hostile to the United States, 
     including Iran, Libya, and Iraq, have demonstrated an 
     interest in acquiring or developing ballistic missiles 
     capable of reaching the United States.
       (4) Russia's increased reliance on nuclear forces to 
     compensate for the decline of its conventional forces and 
     uncertainty regarding command and control of those nuclear 
     forces increase the possibility of an accidental or 
     unauthorized launch of Russian ballistic missiles.
       (5) The United States could be deterred from effectively 
     promoting or protecting its national interests around the 
     world if any State or territory of the United States is 
     vulnerable to long-range ballistic missiles deployed by 
     nations hostile to the United States.
       (b) Sense of Congress Concerning National Missile Defense 
     Policy.--It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) any national missile defense system deployed by the 
     United States must provide effective defense against limited, 
     accidental, or unauthorized ballistic missile attack for all 
     50 States; and

[[Page H3510]]

       (2) the territories of the United States should be afforded 
     effective protection against ballistic missile attack.

     SEC. 232. LIMITATION ON FUNDING FOR THE MEDIUM EXTENDED AIR 
                   DEFENSE SYSTEM.

       None of the funds appropriated for fiscal year 1999 for the 
     Ballistic Missile Defense Organization may be obligated for 
     the Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) until the 
     Secretary of Defense certifies to Congress that the future-
     years defense plan includes sufficient programmed funding for 
     that system to complete the design and development phase. If 
     the Secretary does not submit such a certification by January 
     1, 1999, then (effective as of that date) the funds 
     appropriated for fiscal year 1999 for the Ballistic Missile 
     Defense Organization that are allocated for the MEADS program 
     shall be available to support modification of the Patriot 
     Advanced Capability-3, Configuration 3, so as to support the 
     requirement for mobile theater missile defense to be met by 
     the MEADS system.

     SEC. 233. LIMITATION ON FUNDING FOR COOPERATIVE BALLISTIC 
                   MISSILE DEFENSE PROGRAMS.

       Of the funds appropriated for fiscal year 1999 for the 
     Russian-American Observational Satellite (RAMOS) program, 
     $5,000,000 may not be obligated until the Secretary of 
     Defense certifies to Congress that the Department of Defense 
     has received detailed information concerning the nature, 
     extent, and military implications of the transfer of 
     ballistic missile technology from Russian sources to Iran.

     SEC. 234. LIMITATION ON FUNDING FOR COUNTERPROLIFERATION 
                   SUPPORT.

       None of the funds appropriated for fiscal year 1999 for 
     counterproliferation support in Program Element 63160BR may 
     be obligated until the Secretary of Defense submits to 
     Congress the report required by section 234 of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 
     105-85; 111 Stat. 1664; 50 U.S.C. 2367) to be submitted not 
     later than January 30, 1998.

     SEC. 235. BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE PROGRAM ELEMENTS.

       (a) BMD Program Elements.--(1) Chapter 9 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 222 
     the following new section:

     ``Sec. 223. Ballistic missile defense programs

       ``(a) Program Elements Specified.--In the budget 
     justification materials submitted to Congress in support of 
     the Department of Defense budget for any fiscal year (as 
     submitted with the budget of the President under section 
     1105(a) of title 31), the amount requested for activities of 
     the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization shall be set forth 
     in accordance with the following program elements:
       ``(1) The Patriot system.
       ``(2) The Navy Area system.
       ``(3) The Theater High-Altitude Area Defense system.
       ``(4) The Navy Theater Wide system.
       ``(5) The Medium Extended Air Defense System.
       ``(6) Joint Theater Missile Defense.
       ``(7) National Missile Defense.
       ``(8) Support Technologies.
       ``(9) Family of Systems Engineering and Integration.
       ``(10) Ballistic Missile Defense Technical Operations.
       ``(11) Threat and Countermeasures.
       ``(12) International Cooperative Programs.
       ``(b) Treatment of Major Defense Acquisition Programs.--
     Amounts requested for Theater Missile Defense and National 
     Missile Defense major defense acquisition programs shall be 
     specified in individual, dedicated program elements, and 
     amounts appropriated for those programs shall be available 
     only for Ballistic Missile Defense activities.
       ``(c) Management and Support.--The amount requested for 
     each program element specified in subsection (a) shall 
     include requests for the amounts necessary for the management 
     and support of the programs, projects, and activities 
     contained in that program element.''.
       (2) 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:

``223. Ballistic missile defense programs.''.

       (b) Repeal of Superseded Provision.--Section 251 of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 
     (Public Law 104-106; 10 U.S.C. 221 note) is repealed.

                  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 1999 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, $16,339,700,000.
       (2) For the Navy, $21,839,328,000.
       (3) For the Marine Corps, $2,539,703,000.
       (4) For the Air Force, $18,816,108,000.
       (5) For Defense-wide activities, $10,354,216,000.
       (6) For the Army Reserve, $1,197,622,000.
       (7) For the Naval Reserve, $948,639,000.
       (8) For the Marine Corps Reserve, $116,993,000.
       (9) For the Air Force Reserve, $1,747,696,000.
       (10) For the Army National Guard, $2,464,815,000.
       (11) For the Air National Guard, $3,096,933,000.
       (12) For the Defense Inspector General, $130,764,000.
       (13) For the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed 
     Forces, $7,324,000.
       (14) For Environmental Restoration, Army, $377,640,000.
       (15) For Environmental Restoration, Navy, $281,600,000.
       (16) For Environmental Restoration, Air Force, 
     $379,100,000.
       (17) For Environmental Restoration, Defense-wide, 
     $26,091,000.
       (18) For Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense 
     Sites, $195,000,000.
       (19) For Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid 
     programs, $47,311,000.
       (20) For Drug Interdiction and Counter-drug Activities, 
     Defense-wide, $727,582,000.
       (21) For the Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation, and 
     Environmental Restoration Trust Fund, $15,000,000.
       (22) For Defense Health Program, $9,663,035,000.
       (23) Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction programs, 
     $417,400,000.
       (24) For Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund, 
     $746,900,000.

     SEC. 302. WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1999 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, $1,076,571,000.
       (2) For the National Defense Sealift Fund, $669,566,000.

     SEC. 303. ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME.

       There is hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1999 from the Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund 
     the sum of $70,745,000 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 1999 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 OF M1-A1 TANKS.

       Of the amount authorized to be appropriated pursuant to 
     section 301(1) for operation and maintenance for the Army, 
     $31,000,000 shall be available only for the refurbishment of 
     up to 70 M1-A1 tanks under the AIM-XXI program.

     SEC. 306. 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. 307. RELOCATION OF USS WISCONSIN.

       Of the amount authorized to be appropriated pursuant to 
     section 301(2) for operation and maintenance for the Navy, 
     $6,000,000 may be available for the purpose of relocating the 
     USS WISCONSIN, which is currently in a reserve status at the 
     Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Virginia, to a suitable location in 
     order to increase available berthing space at the shipyard.

     SEC. 308. FISHER HOUSE TRUST FUNDS.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1999, out of funds in Fisher House Trust Funds not 
     otherwise appropriated, for the operation of Fisher houses 
     described in section 2221(d) of title 10, United States Code, 
     as follows:
       (1) From the Fisher House Trust Fund, Department of the 
     Army, $250,000 for Fisher houses that are located in 
     proximity to medical treatment facilities of the Army.
       (2) From the Fisher House Trust Fund, Department of the 
     Navy, $150,000 for Fisher houses that are located in 
     proximity to medical treatment facilities of the Navy.
       (3) From the Fisher House Trust Fund, Department of the Air 
     Force, $150,000 for Fisher houses that are located in 
     proximity to medical treatment facilities of the Air Force.
               Subtitle B--Information Technology Issues

     SEC. 311. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESPONSIBILITIES 
                   OF CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICERS.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 131 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 2223. Information technology: additional 
       responsibilities of Chief Information Officers

       ``(b) Additional Responsibilities.--In addition to the 
     responsibilities provided for in chapter 35 of title 44 and 
     in section 5125 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (40 U.S.C. 
     1425)--
       ``(1) the Chief Information Officer of the Department of 
     Defense, with respect to the elements of the Department of 
     Defense other than the military departments, shall--
       ``(A) review and provide recommendations to the Secretary 
     of Defense on Department of Defense budget requests for 
     information technology and national security systems;

[[Page H3511]]

       ``(B) ensure the interoperability of information technology 
     and national security systems throughout the Department of 
     Defense; and
       ``(C) ensure that information technology and national 
     security systems standards that will apply throughout the 
     Department of Defense are prescribed; and
       ``(2) the Chief Information Officer of each military 
     department, with respect to the military department 
     concerned, shall--
       ``(A) review budget requests for all information technology 
     and national security systems;
       ``(B) ensure that information technology and national 
     security systems are in compliance with standards of the 
     Government and the Department of Defense;
       ``(C) ensure that information technology and national 
     security systems are interoperable with other relevant 
     information technology and national security systems of the 
     Government and the Department of Defense;
       ``(D) provide for the elimination of duplicate information 
     technology and national security systems within and between 
     the military departments and Defense Agencies; and
       ``(E) coordinate with the Joint Staff with respect to 
     information technology and national security systems.
       ``(b) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) The term `Chief Information Officer' means the senior 
     official designated by the Secretary of Defense or a 
     Secretary of a military department pursuant to section 3506 
     of title 44.
       ``(2) The term `information technology' has the meaning 
     given that term by section 5002 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 
     1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401).
       ``(3) The term `national security system' has the meaning 
     given that term by section 5142 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 
     1996 (40 U.S.C. 1452).''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``2223. Information technology: additional responsibilities of Chief 
              Information Officers.''.

       (b) Effective Date.--Section 2223 of title 10, United 
     States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall take effect on 
     October 1, 1998.

     SEC. 312. DEFENSE-WIDE ELECTRONIC MALL SYSTEM FOR SUPPLY 
                   PURCHASES.

       (a) Electronic Mall System.--In this section, the term 
     ``electronic mall system'' means an electronic system for 
     displaying, ordering, and purchasing supplies and materiel 
     available from sources within the Department of Defense and 
     from the private sector.
       (b) Development and Management.--Using existing systems and 
     technology available in the Department of Defense, the 
     Defense Logistics Agency shall develop a single, defense-wide 
     electronic mall system. The Defense Logistics Agency shall be 
     responsible for the management of the resulting electronic 
     mall system. The Secretary of each military department and 
     the head of each Defense Agency shall provide to the Defense 
     Logistics Agency the necessary and requested data to support 
     the development and operation of the electronic mall system.
       (c) Implementation Date.--The electronic mall system shall 
     be operational and available throughout the Department of 
     Defense not later than June 1, 1999. After that date, a 
     military department or Defense Agency (other than the Defense 
     Logistics Agency) may not develop or operate an electronic 
     mall system.

     SEC. 313. PROTECTION OF FUNDING PROVIDED FOR CERTAIN 
                   INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND NATIONAL SECURITY 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) Use for Specified Purposes.--Of the amounts authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Department of Defense for fiscal 
     years 1999, 2000, and 2001 for information technology and 
     national security programs of the Department of Defense, not 
     less than the amount specified in subsection (b) shall be 
     available for each such fiscal year for the purposes of the 
     information technology and national security programs 
     described in such subsection, unless an alternative use of 
     the funds is specifically approved by a law enacted after the 
     date of the enactment of the law originally authorizing the 
     funds.
       (b) Covered Programs and Amounts.--The information 
     technology and national security programs referred to in 
     subsection (a), and the amounts to be available for each 
     program, are the following:
       (1) The Force XXI program of the Army, $360,000,000.
       (2) The Information Technology for the 21st Century 
     programs of the Navy, $472,000,000.
       (3) The Communications Infrastructure programs of the Air 
     Force, $228,500,000.
       (4) The Telecom and Computing Infrastructure programs of 
     the Marine Corps, $93,000,000.
       (c) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) The term ``information technology'' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 5002 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 
     1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401).
       (2) The term ``national security system'' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 5142 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 
     1996 (40 U.S.C. 1452).

     SEC. 314. PRIORITY FUNDING TO ENSURE YEAR 2000 COMPLIANCE OF 
                   MISSION CRITICAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND 
                   NATIONAL SECURITY SYSTEMS.

       (a) Funds for Completion of Year 2000 Conversion.--(1) Of 
     the amounts authorized to be appropriated pursuant to this 
     Act for information technology and national security systems 
     of the Department of Defense designated as mission critical, 
     not more than 25 percent may be used to fund activities 
     unrelated to ensuring that the awareness, assessment, and 
     renovation phases of year 2000 conversion for such 
     information technology and national security systems are 
     completed.
       (2) Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated pursuant 
     to this Act for information technology and national security 
     systems of the Department of Defense (other than information 
     technology and national security systems covered by paragraph 
     (1)), not less than $1,000,000,000 shall be available only 
     for transfer to support activities to ensure that the 
     awareness, assessment, renovation, and validation phases of 
     year 2000 conversion for information technology and national 
     security systems covered by paragraph (1) are completed.
       (b) Exceptions.--(1) This section does not apply to or 
     affect funding for information technology and national 
     security programs identified in section 313(b).
       (2) The Secretary of Defense may authorize expenditures in 
     excess of the 25 percent limitation specified in subsection 
     (a)(1) if the Secretary determines that additional 
     expenditures are required to prevent the failure of the 
     information technology or national security system and 
     provides prior notice to Congress of the reasons for the 
     additional expenditures.
       (c) Termination.--(1) On the date on which the Secretary of 
     Defense determines that the year 2000 renovation phase has 
     been completed for a particular information technology or 
     national security system covered by paragraph (1) of 
     subsection (a), such paragraph shall cease to apply to that 
     information technology or national security system.
       (2) Paragraph (2) of such subsection shall cease to apply 
     on the date on which the Secretary of Defense determines that 
     all of the information technology and national security 
     systems covered by paragraph (1) of such subsection are fully 
     funded through the validation phase of year 2000 conversion, 
     have an established contingency plan, and have completed a 
     point of origin to point of execution evaluation.
       (d) Comptroller General Review.--Not later than January 30, 
     1999, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a 
     briefing containing the following:
       (1) Separate lists of each information technology and 
     national security system of the Department of Defense covered 
     by subsection (a)(1) for which the renovation phase of year 
     2000 conversion is not completed by December 30, 1998.
       (2) A evaluation of the effect of subsection (a) on the 
     year 2000 conversion success rate.
       (3) A list of each information technology and national 
     security system covered by subsection (a)(1) that will not 
     achieve year 2000 compliance by September 30, 1999.
       (4) An explanation of how the military departments, the 
     Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Defense Agencies are applying the 
     definition of mission critical.
       (5) Recommendations regarding the manner in which funding 
     could best be allocated to achieve year 2000 compliance for 
     the greatest number of information technology and national 
     security systems covered by subsection (a)(1).
       (e) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) The term ``information technology'' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 5002 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 
     1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401).
       (2) The term ``national security system'' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 5142 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 
     1996 (40 U.S.C. 1452).
       (3) The term ``mission critical'' means an information 
     technology or national security system of the Department of 
     Defense identified as mission critical in the table prepared 
     by the Joint Chiefs of Staff entitled ``Mission Critical 
     Systems (All Services/Agencies)'', dated March 20, 1998, or 
     in the table printed by the Defense Integrated Support Tool 
     entitled ``Year 2000 Information on Mission Critical 
     Systems'', dated March 19, 1998.
       (4) The terms ``awareness'', ``assessment'', 
     ``renovation'', and ``validation'' have the meanings given 
     the terms in the Department of Defense ``Year 2000 Management 
     Plan'', version 1.0, released in April 1997.

     SEC. 315. EVALUATION OF YEAR 2000 COMPLIANCE AS PART OF 
                   TRAINING EXERCISES PROGRAMS.

       (a) Report on Evaluation Plan.--Not later than December 15, 
     1998, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a 
     report containing a plan to include a simulated year 2000 as 
     part of the military exercises described in subsection (b) in 
     order to evaluate, in an operational environment, the extent 
     to which information technology and national security systems 
     involved in the exercises will successfully operate, 
     including the ability of the systems to access and transmit 
     information from point of origin to point of termination, 
     during the actual year 2000.
       (b) Covered Military Exercises.--A military exercise 
     referred to in subsection (a) is a military exercise 
     conducted by the Department of Defense, during the period 
     beginning on January 1, 1999, and ending on September 30, 
     1999--
       (1) under the training exercises program known as the 
     ``CJCS Exercise Program'';
       (2) at the Naval Strike and Air Warfare Center, the Army 
     National Training Center, or the Air Force Air Warfare 
     Center; or
       (3) as part of Naval Carrier Group fleet training or Marine 
     Corps Expeditionary Unit training.
       (c) Elements of Report.--The report under subsection (a) 
     shall include the following:
       (1) A list of all military exercises described in 
     subsection (b) to be conducted during the period specified in 
     such subsection.
       (2) A description of the manner in which the year 2000 will 
     be simulated for information technology and national security 
     systems involved in each military exercise.
       (3) The duration of the year 2000 simulation in each 
     military exercise.
       (4) The methodology to be used in turning over the 
     information technology and national security systems to the 
     year 2000 in order to best identify those systems that fail 
     to operate reliably during the military exercise.
       (5) A list of the information technology and national 
     security systems excluded from the plan under subsection 
     (d)(1), including how the

[[Page H3512]]

     military exercise will utilize an excluded system's year 2000 
     contingency plan.
       (6) A list of the exercises and information technology and 
     national security systems excluded from the plan under 
     subsection (d)(2), and a description of the effect that 
     continued year 2000 noncompliance of the systems would have 
     on military readiness.
       (d) Exclusions.--(1) Subsection (a) shall not apply to an 
     information technology or national security system if the 
     Secretary of Defense determines that the system will be 
     incapable of performing reliably during the year 2000 
     simulation portion of the military exercise. In the case of 
     each excluded system, the system may not be used during the 
     period of the year 2000 simulation. Instead, the excluded 
     system shall be replaced by the year 2000 contingency plan 
     for the system.
       (2) If the mission of a military exercise will be seriously 
     hampered by the number of information technology and national 
     security systems covered by paragraph (1), the Secretary of 
     Defense may exclude the entire exercise from the requirements 
     of subsection (a).
       (3) Subsection (a) shall not apply to an information 
     technology or national security system with cryptological 
     applications.
       (4) If the decision to exclude a military exercise or 
     information technology or national security system is made 
     under paragraph (1) or (2) after the date of the submission 
     of the report required by subsection (a), the Secretary of 
     Defense shall notify Congress of the exclusion not later than 
     two weeks before commencing the military exercise. The 
     notification shall include the information required under 
     paragraph (5) or (6) of subsection (c), depending on whether 
     the exclusion covers the entire exercise or particular 
     information technology and national security systems.
       (e) Comptroller General Review.--Not later than January 30, 
     1999, the Comptroller General shall review the report and 
     plan submitted under subsection (a) and submit to Congress a 
     briefing evaluating the methodology to be used under the plan 
     to simulate the year 2000, describing the potential 
     information that will be collected as a result of 
     implementation of the plan, and describing the impact that 
     the plan will have on military readiness.
       (f) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) The term ``information technology'' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 5002 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 
     1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401).
       (2) The term ``national security system'' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 5142 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 
     1996 (40 U.S.C. 1452).
                  Subtitle C--Environmental Provisions

     SEC. 321. 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 from amounts appropriated for 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) of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 
     105-85; 111 Stat. 1669).
       (d) Fiscal Year 1999 Payment.--The payment under this 
     section for fiscal year 1999 shall be made from amounts 
     appropriated pursuant to section 301(5).
       (e) Limitation.--The authorization provided in this section 
     shall not be construed as setting a precedent for payment 
     under a treaty of an environmental claim made by another 
     nation, unless the Senate has given its consent to the 
     ratification of the treaty.

     SEC. 322. REMOVAL OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS.

       Of the amount authorized to be appropriated pursuant to 
     section 301(18) (relating to environmental restoration of 
     formerly used defense sites), the Secretary of the Army may 
     use not more than $150,000 for the removal of underground 
     storage tanks at the Authorities Allied Industrial Park, 
     Macon, Georgia.

         Subtitle D--Defense Infrastructure Support Improvement

     SEC. 331. REPORTING AND STUDY REQUIREMENTS BEFORE CHANGE OF 
                   COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL TYPE FUNCTIONS TO 
                   CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE.

       (a) In General.--Section 2461 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (h) and 
     transferring such subsection to appear after subsection (g); 
     and
       (2) by striking out subsections (a) and (b) and inserting 
     in lieu thereof the following new subsections:
       ``(a) Reporting and Study Requirements as Precondition to 
     Change in Performance.--A commercial or industrial type 
     function of the Department of Defense that, as of October 1, 
     1980, was being performed by Department of Defense civilian 
     employees may not be changed to performance by a private 
     contractor or changed to procurement through a private 
     contractor until the Secretary of Defense fully complies with 
     the reporting and study requirements specified in subsections 
     (b) and (c).
       ``(b) Notification and Elements of Study.--(1) Before 
     commencing to study a commercial or industrial type function 
     described in subsection (a) for possible change to 
     performance by a private contractor or possible change to 
     procurement through a private contractor, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to Congress a report containing the 
     following:
       ``(A) The function to be studied for possible change.
       ``(B) The location at which the function is performed by 
     Department of Defense civilian employees.
       ``(C) The number of civilian employee positions potentially 
     affected.
       ``(D) The anticipated length and cost of the study.
       ``(E) A certification that the performance of the 
     commercial or industrial type function by civilian employees 
     of the Department of Defense is not precluded due to any 
     constraint or limitation in terms of man years, end 
     strengths, full-time equivalent positions, or maximum number 
     of employees.
       ``(2) The responsibility of the Secretary of Defense to 
     submit the report required under paragraph (1) may be 
     delegated only to senior acquisition executives or higher 
     officials for the military departments and the Defense 
     Agencies.
       ``(3) The study of a commercial or industrial type function 
     for possible change in performance shall include the 
     following:
       ``(A) A comparison of the cost of performance of the 
     function by Department of Defense civilian employees and by 
     private contractor to demonstrate whether change to 
     performance by a private contractor or change to procurement 
     through a private contractor will result in savings to the 
     Government over the life of the contract, including in the 
     comparison--
       ``(i) the amount estimated by the Secretary of Defense 
     (based on bids received) to be the amount of a contract for 
     performance of the function by a private contractor;
       ``(ii) the cost to the Government of Department of Defense 
     civilian employees performing the function; and
       ``(iii) the costs and expenditures which the Government 
     would incur (in addition to the amount of the contract) 
     because of the award of such a contract.
       ``(B) An examination of the potential economic effect of 
     performance of the function by a private contractor--
       ``(i) on employees who would be affected by such a change 
     in performance; and
       ``(ii) on the local community and the Government, if more 
     than 75 employees perform the function.
       ``(C) An examination of the effect of performance of the 
     function by a private contractor on the military mission of 
     the function.
       ``(4) If the commercial or industrial type function at 
     issue involves a working-capital fund in the Department of 
     Defense and the study concerns the possible procurement by a 
     requisitioning agency of services or supplies from a private 
     contractor instead of the working-capital fund, in lieu of 
     the comparison required by paragraph (3), the study shall 
     include a comparison of the sources of the services or 
     supplies to determine which source is more cost-effective for 
     the requisitioning agency.
       ``(5) An individual or entity at a facility where a 
     commercial or industrial type function is studied for 
     possible change in performance may raise an objection to the 
     study on the grounds that the report required under paragraph 
     (1) as a precondition for the study does not contain the 
     certification required by subparagraph (E) of such paragraph. 
     The objection may be raised at any time during the course of 
     the study, shall be in writing, and shall be submitted to the 
     Secretary of Defense. If the Secretary determines that the 
     certification was omitted, the commercial or industrial type 
     function covered by the study may not be the subject of 
     request for proposal or award of a contract until a 
     certification is made that fully complies with paragraph 
     (1)(E) and the other requirements of this section are 
     satisfied.
       ``(c) Notification of Decision.--(1) If, as a result of the 
     completion of a study under subsection (b)(3), a decision is 
     made to change the commercial or industrial type function 
     that was the subject of the study to performance by a private 
     contractor or to procurement through a private contractor, 
     the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report 
     describing that decision. The report shall--
       ``(A) indicate that the study under subsection (b)(3) has 
     been completed;
       ``(B) certify that the Government calculation for the cost 
     of performance of the function by Department of Defense 
     civilian employees is based on an estimate of the most 
     efficient and cost effective organization for performance of 
     the function by Department of Defense civilian employees;
       ``(C) certify that the comparison required by subsection 
     (b)(3)(A) (or alternatively by subsection (b)(4)) as part of 
     the study demonstrates that the performance of the function 
     by a private contractor or procurement of the function 
     through a private contractor will result in savings to the 
     Government over the life of the contract;
       ``(D) certify that the entire comparison is available for 
     examination; and
       ``(E) contain a timetable for completing change of the 
     function to contractor performance.
       ``(2) The actual change of the function to contractor 
     performance may not begin until after the submission of the 
     report required by this subsection.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Subsections (e)(2) and 
     (f)(1) of such section are amended by striking out 
     ``converted'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``changed''.
       (2) Subsection (f)(2) of such section is amended by 
     striking out ``conversion'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``change''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of

[[Page H3513]]

     the enactment of this Act but shall not apply with respect to 
     conversion of a function of the Department of Defense to 
     performance by a private contractor concerning which the 
     Secretary of Defense provided to Congress, before the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, a notification under paragraph (1) 
     of section 2461(a) of title 10, United States Code, as in 
     effect on the day before the date of the enactment of this 
     Act.

     SEC. 332. CLARIFICATION OF REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN 
                   GOVERNMENT-OWNED AND GOVERNMENT-OPERATED CORE 
                   LOGISTICS CAPABILITY.

       Section 2464 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Rule of Construction.--The requirement under 
     subsection (a) that the Department of Defense maintain a core 
     logistics capability that is Government-owned and Government-
     operated is not satisfied when a core logistics workload is 
     converted to contractor performance even though the actual 
     performance of the workload will be carried out in a 
     Government-owned, Government-operated facility of the 
     Department of Defense as a subcontractor of the private 
     contractor. Nothing in section 2474 of this title or section 
     337 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1995 (Public Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 2717) authorizes the use 
     of subcontracts as a means to provide workloads to 
     Government-owned, Government-operated facilities of the 
     Department of Defense in order to satisfy paragraph (4) of 
     subsection (a).''.

     SEC. 333. OVERSIGHT OF DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF 
                   AUTOMATED IDENTIFICATION TECHNOLOGY.

       (a) Smartcard Program Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``smartcard program'' means an automated identification 
     technology program, including any pilot program, employing 
     one or more of the following technologies:
       (1) Magnetic stripe.
       (2) Bar codes, both linear and two-dimensional (including 
     matrix symbologies).
       (3) Smartcard.
       (4) Optical memory.
       (5) Personal computer memory card international association 
     carriers.
       (6) Other established or emerging automated identification 
     technologies, including biometrics and radio frequency 
     identification.
       (b) Oversight Responsibility.--(1) The Smartcard Technology 
     Office established in the Defense Human Resources Field 
     Activity of the Department of Defense shall be responsible 
     for--
       (A) overseeing the development and implementation of all 
     smartcard programs in the Department; and
       (B) coordinating smartcard programs with the Joint Staff, 
     the Secretaries of the military departments, and the 
     directors of the Defense Agencies.
       (2) After the date of the enactment of this Act, funds 
     appropriated for the Department of Defense may not be 
     obligated for a smartcard program unless the program is 
     reviewed and approved by the Smartcard Technology Office. The 
     review and approval before that date of a smartcard program 
     by the Office is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of 
     this paragraph.
       (c) Types of Oversight.--As part of its oversight 
     responsibilities, the Smartcard Technology Office shall 
     establish standards designed--
       (1) to ensure the compatibility and interoperability of 
     smartcard programs in the Department of Defense; and
       (2) to identify and terminate redundant, unfeasible, or 
     uneconomical smartcard programs.

     SEC. 334. CONDITIONS ON EXPANSION OF FUNCTIONS PERFORMED 
                   UNDER PRIME VENDOR CONTRACTS.

       (a) Prime Vendor Contract Defined.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term ``prime vendor contract'' means an 
     innovative contract that gives a defense contractor the 
     responsibility to manage, store, and distribute inventory, 
     manage and provide services, or manage and perform research, 
     on behalf of the Department of Defense on a frequent, regular 
     basis, for users within the Department on request. The term 
     includes contracts commonly referred to as prime vendor 
     support contracts, flexible sustainment contracts, and direct 
     vendor delivery contracts.
       (b) Conditions on Expanded Use.--If the Secretary of 
     Defense or the Secretary of a military department proposes to 
     enter into a prime vendor contract for a hardware system, 
     including the performance or management of depot-level 
     maintenance and repair (as defined in section 2460 of title 
     10, United States Code) or logistics management 
     responsibilities, the Secretary may not enter into the prime 
     vendor contract until the end of the 60-day period beginning 
     on the date on which the Secretary submits to Congress a 
     report, specific to that proposal, that--
       (1) describes the competitive procedures to be used to 
     award the prime vendor contract;
       (2) evaluates the effect of the prime vendor contract on 
     working-capital funds in the Department of Defense; and
       (3) contains a cost/benefit analysis that demonstrates that 
     use of the prime vendor contract will result in savings to 
     the Government over the life of the contract.
       (c) Comptroller General Review.--During the waiting period 
     provided in subsection (b) for a proposed prime vendor 
     contract, the Comptroller General shall review the report 
     submitted under subsection (b) with respect to that contract 
     and submit to Congress a report regarding--
       (1) whether the cost savings to the Government identified 
     in the report submitted under subsection (b) are achievable; 
     and
       (2) whether use of a prime vendor contract will comply with 
     the requirements of chapter 146 of title 10, United States 
     Code, applicable to depot-level maintenance and repair.
       (d) Relationship to Other Laws.--Nothing in this section 
     shall be construed to exempt a prime vendor contract from the 
     requirements of section 2461 of title 10, United States 
     Code, or any other provision of chapter 146 of such title.

     SEC. 335. CLARIFICATION OF DEFINITION OF DEPOT-LEVEL 
                   MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR.

       Section 2460(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by inserting before the period at the end of the first 
     sentence the following: ``or the location at which the 
     maintenance or repair is performed''.

     SEC. 336. CLARIFICATION OF COMMERCIAL ITEM EXCEPTION TO 
                   REQUIREMENTS REGARDING CORE LOGISTICS 
                   CAPABILITIES.

       Section 2464(a)(5) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(A)'' after ``(5)'';
       (2) by adding at the end of subparagraph (A), as so 
     designated, the following: ``The determination of whether a 
     modification is minor shall be based on a comparison of only 
     the critical systems of the version sold in the commercial 
     marketplace and the version purchased by the Government, and 
     a modification may not be considered to be minor unless at 
     least 90 percent of the total content by component value 
     remains identical.''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) In this paragraph, the term `substantial quantities' 
     means, with respect to determining whether an item is a 
     commercial item, that purchases and leases of the item to the 
     general public constitute the majority of all transactions 
     involving the item at the time the exception under paragraph 
     (3) is proposed to be exercised.''.

     SEC. 337. DEVELOPMENT OF PLAN FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF CORE 
                   LOGISTICS CAPABILITIES FOR MAINTENANCE AND 
                   REPAIR OF C-17 AIRCRAFT.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The C-17 aircraft, which is replacing the C-141 
     aircraft, will serve as the cornerstone of heavy airlift 
     capability of the Armed Forces.
       (2) The C-17 aircraft achieved initial operational 
     capability in January 1995 and will complete the significant 
     fourth year of its operational capability in January 1999.
       (3) As provided in section 2464(a)(3) of title 10, United 
     States Code, the C-17 aircraft is a weapon system that is 
     ``necessary to enable the armed forces to fulfill the 
     strategic and contingency plans prepared by the Chairman of 
     the Joint Chiefs of Staff''.
       (4) The depot-level maintenance and repair of such a weapon 
     system must be performed at Government-owned, Government-
     operated facilities of the Department of Defense in order to 
     maintain the core logistics capabilities of the Department of 
     Defense, as required under such section 2464.
       (5) The sole-source contract entered into in January 1998 
     regarding the depot-level maintenance and repair of C-17 
     aircraft and related tasks, known as the Interim Contract for 
     the C-17 Flexible Sustainment Program, does not meet the 
     requirements of law.
       (b) Plan Required.--Not later than March 1, 1999, the 
     Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to Congress a plan 
     for the establishment of the core logistics capabilities for 
     the C-17 aircraft consistent with the requirements of section 
     2464 of title 10, United States Code.
       (c) Effect on Existing Contract.--After March 1, 1999, the 
     Secretary of the Air Force may not extend the Interim 
     Contract for the C-17 Flexible Sustainment Program until 
     after the end of the 60-day period beginning on the date the 
     plan required by subsection (b) is received by Congress.
       (d) Comptroller General Review.--During the period 
     specified in subsection (c), the Comptroller General shall 
     review the plan required under subsection (b) and submit to 
     Congress a report evaluating the merits of the plan.

     SEC. 338. CONTRACTOR-OPERATED CIVIL ENGINEERING SUPPLY STORES 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) The term ``contractor-operated civil engineering supply 
     store'' means a Government-owned facility that, as of the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, is operated by a 
     contractor under the contractor-operated civil engineering 
     supply store (COCESS) program of the Department of the Air 
     Force for the purpose of--
       (A) maintaining inventories of civil engineering supplies 
     on behalf of a military department; and
       (B) furnishing such supplies to the department as needed.
       (2) The term ``civil engineering supplies'' means parts and 
     supplies needed for the repair and maintenance of military 
     installations.
       (b) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) In 1970, the Strategic Air Command of the Air Force 
     began to use contractor-operated civil engineering supply 
     stores to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of 
     materials management and relieve the Air Force from having to 
     maintain large inventories of civil engineering supplies.
       (2) Contractor-operated civil engineering supply stores are 
     designed to support the civil engineering and public works 
     efforts of the Armed Forces through the provision of quality 
     civil engineering supplies at competitive prices and within a 
     reasonable period of time.
       (3) Through the use of a contractor-operated civil 
     engineering supply store, a guaranteed inventory level of 
     civil engineering supplies is maintained at a military 
     installation, which ensures that urgently needed civil 
     engineering supplies are available on site.
       (4) The contractor operating the contractor-operated civil 
     engineering supply store is an independent business 
     organization whose customer is a military department and the 
     Armed Forces and who is subject to all the rules of private 
     business and the regulations of the Government.

[[Page H3514]]

       (5) The use of contractor-operated civil engineering supply 
     stores ensures the best price and best buy for the 
     Government.
       (6) Ninety-five percent of the cost savings realized 
     through the use of contractor-operated civil engineering 
     supply stores is due to savings in the cost of actually 
     procuring supplies.
       (7) In the past 30 years, private contractors have never 
     lost a cost comparison conducted pursuant to the criteria set 
     forth in Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 for 
     the provision of civil engineering supplies to the 
     Government.
       (c) Conditions on Multi-Function Contracts.--A civil 
     engineering supplies function that is performed, as of the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, by a contractor-operated 
     civil engineering supply store may not be combined with 
     another supply function or any service function, including 
     any base operating support function, for purposes of 
     competition or contracting, until--
       (1) the Secretary of Defense submits to Congress a report--
       (A) notifying Congress of the proposed combined competition 
     or contract; and
       (B) explaining why a combined competition or contract is 
     the best method by which to achieve cost savings and 
     efficiencies to the Government; and
       (2) the Comptroller General reviews the report and submits 
     to Congress a briefing regarding whether the cost savings and 
     efficiencies identified in the report are achievable.
       (d) Relationship to Other Laws.--If a civil engineering 
     supplies function covered by subsection (c) is proposed for 
     combination with a supply or service function that is subject 
     to the study and reporting requirements of section 2461 of 
     title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense may 
     include the report required under subsection (c) as part of 
     the report under such section.

     SEC. 339. REPORT ON SAVINGS AND EFFECT OF PERSONNEL 
                   REDUCTIONS IN ARMY MATERIEL COMMAND.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than March 31, 1999, the 
     Comptroller General shall submit to the congressional defense 
     committees a report concerning--
       (1) the effect that the proposed personnel reductions in 
     the Army Materiel Command will have on workload and readiness 
     if implemented; and
       (2) the likelihood that the cost savings projected to occur 
     from such reductions will actually be achieved.
       (b) Delay in Implementation of Reductions Pending Report.--
     During the period specified in subsection (c), the Secretary 
     of Defense and the Secretary of the Army may not commence 
     personnel reductions based on the guidelines contained in the 
     May 1997 report of the Quadrennial Defense Review (including 
     the National Defense Panel) prepared pursuant to subtitle B 
     of title IX of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 10 U.S.C. 111 note) at 
     any Army Material Command facility that provides depot-level 
     maintenance and repair or at any Army Arsenal.
       (c) Duration of Delay.--Subsection (b) applies only during 
     the period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act 
     and ending on the earlier of the following:
       (1) March 31, 1999.
       (2) The date on which the report required by subsection (a) 
     is submitted.
  Subtitle E--Commissaries and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities

     SEC. 341. CONTINUATION OF MANAGEMENT AND FUNDING OF DEFENSE 
                   COMMISSARY AGENCY THROUGH THE OFFICE OF THE 
                   SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.

       Section 192 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Special Rule for Defense Commissary Agency.--
     Notwithstanding the results of the periodic review required 
     under subsection (c) with regard to the Defense Commissary 
     Agency, the Secretary of Defense may not transfer to the 
     Secretary of a military department the responsibility to 
     manage and fund the provision of services and supplies 
     provided by the Defense Commissary Agency unless the transfer 
     of the management and funding responsibility is specifically 
     authorized by a law enacted after the date of the enactment 
     of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1999.''.

     SEC. 342. EXPANSION OF CURRENT ELIGIBILITY OF RESERVES FOR 
                   COMMISSARY BENEFITS.

       (a) Days of Eligibility for Ready Reserve Members With 50 
     Creditable Points.--Section 1063 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out subsection (b); and
       (2) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking out ``(1)'';
       (B) by striking out ``12 days of eligibility'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``24 days of eligibility''; and
       (C) by striking out ``(2) Paragraph (1)'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``(b) Effect of Compensation or Type of Duty.--
     Subsection (a)''.
       (b) Days of Eligibility for Reserve Retirees Under Age 
     60.--Section 1064 of such title is amended by striking out 
     ``for 12 days each calendar year'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``for 24 days each calendar year''.
       (c) Eligibility of Members of National Guard Serving in 
     Federally Declared Disaster.--Chapter 54 of such title is 
     amended by inserting after section 1063 the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 1063a. Use of commissary stores and MWR retail 
       facilities: members of National Guard serving in federally 
       declared disaster

       ``(a) Eligibility of Members.--A member of the National 
     Guard who, although not in Federal service, is called or 
     ordered to duty in response to a federally declared disaster 
     shall be permitted to use commissary stores and MWR retail 
     facilities during the period of such duty on the same basis 
     as members of the armed forces on active duty.
       ``(b) Eligibility of Dependents.--A dependent of a member 
     of the National Guard who is permitted under subsection (a) 
     to use commissary stores and MWR retail facilities shall be 
     permitted to use such stores and facilities, during the same 
     period as the member, on the same basis as dependents of 
     members of the armed forces on active duty.
       ``(c) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Federally declared disaster.--The term `federally 
     declared disaster' means a disaster or other situation for 
     which a Presidential declaration of major disaster is issued 
     under section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 
     and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170).
       ``(2) MWR retail facilities.--The term `MWR retail 
     facilities' means exchange stores and other revenue-
     generating facilities operated by nonappropriated fund 
     activities of the Department of Defense for the morale, 
     welfare, and recreation of members of the armed forces.''.
       (d) Section Headings.--(1) The heading of section 1063 of 
     such title is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 1063. Use of commissary stores: members of Ready 
       Reserve with at least 50 creditable points''.

       (2) The heading of section 1064 of such title is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``Sec. 1064. Use of commissary stores: persons qualified for 
       retired pay under chapter 1223 but under age 60''.

       (e) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 54 of such title is amended by striking 
     out the items relating to sections 1063 and 1064 and 
     inserting in lieu thereof the following items:

``1063. Use of commissary stores: members of Ready Reserve with at 
              least 50 creditable points.
``1063a. Use of commissary stores and MWR retail facilities: members of 
              National Guard serving in federally declared disaster.
``1064. Use of commissary stores: persons qualified for retired pay 
              under chapter 1223 but under age 60.''.

     SEC. 343. REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT FOR AIR FORCE TO SELL TOBACCO 
                   PRODUCTS TO ENLISTED PERSONNEL.

       (a) Repeal.--Section 9623 of title 10, United States Code, 
     is repealed.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 939 of such title is amended by striking 
     out the item relating to section 9623.

     SEC. 344. RESTRICTIONS ON PATRON ACCESS TO, AND PURCHASES IN, 
                   OVERSEAS COMMISSARIES AND EXCHANGE STORES.

       (a) Authority to Impose Restrictions; Limitations on 
     Authority.--Chapter 147 of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2491. Overseas commissary and exchange stores: access 
       and purchase restrictions

       ``(a) General Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may 
     establish restrictions on the ability of eligible patrons of 
     commissary and exchange stores located outside of the United 
     States to purchase certain merchandise items (or the quantity 
     of certain merchandise items) otherwise included within an 
     authorized merchandise category if the Secretary determines 
     that such restrictions are necessary to prevent the resale of 
     such merchandise in violation of host nation laws or treaty 
     obligations of the United States. In establishing a quantity 
     or other restriction, the Secretary shall ensure that the 
     restriction is consistent with the purpose of the overseas 
     commissary and exchange system to provide reasonable access 
     for eligible patrons to purchase merchandise items made in 
     the United States.
       ``(b) Controlled Item Lists.--For each location outside the 
     United States that is served by the commissary system or the 
     exchange system, the Secretary of Defense may maintain a list 
     of controlled merchandise items, except that, after the date 
     of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1999, the Secretary may not change the list 
     to add a merchandise item unless, before making the change, 
     the Secretary submits to Congress a notice of the proposed 
     addition and the reasons for the addition of the item.
       ``(c) Special Rules for Korea.--(1) The Secretary of 
     Defense may not prohibit a dependent who resides in Korea, is 
     at least 21 years of age, and is otherwise eligible to use 
     the commissary and exchange system, from purchasing alcoholic 
     beverages through the commissary and exchange system. 
     Quantity restrictions on the purchase of alcoholic beverages 
     may be imposed, and any such restriction may be enforced 
     through the use of an issued ration control device, but a 
     dependent may not be required to sign for any purchase. A 
     quantity restriction on malt beverages may not restrict 
     purchases to fewer than eight cases, of 24-units per case, 
     per month. Daily or weekly restrictions on malt beverage 
     purchases may not be imposed. The purchase of malt 
     beverages may be recorded on a ration control device, but 
     eligible patrons may not be required to sign for any 
     purchase.
       ``(2) A dependent residing in Korea who is at least 18 
     years of age and otherwise eligible to use the commissary and 
     exchange system may purchase tobacco products on the same 
     basis as other eligible patrons of the commissary and 
     exchange system.
       ``(3) Eligible patrons of the commissary and exchange 
     system who are traveling through a military air terminal in 
     Korea shall be authorized to the purchase sundry items, 
     including tobacco products, on a temporary basis during the

[[Page H3515]]

     normal operating hours of commissary and exchange stores 
     operated in connection with the terminal.
       ``(4) In applying restrictions to dependents of members of 
     the armed forces, the Secretary of Defense may not 
     differentiate between a dependent whose movement to Korea was 
     authorized at the expense of the United States under section 
     406 of title 37 and other dependents residing in Korea.
       ``(d) Reporting Requirements.--The Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to Congress an annual report describing the host 
     nation laws and the treaty obligations of the United States, 
     and the conditions within host nations, that necessitate the 
     use of quantity or other restrictions on purchases in 
     commissary and exchange stores located outside the United 
     States.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``2491. Overseas commissary and exchange stores: access and purchase 
              restrictions.''.

     SEC. 345. EXTENSION OF DEMONSTRATION PROJECT FOR UNIFORM 
                   FUNDING OF MORALE, WELFARE, AND RECREATION 
                   ACTIVITIES.

       Section 335 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 10 U.S.C. 2241 note) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (c), by striking out ``not later than 
     September 30, 1998'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``on 
     September 30, 1999''; and
       (2) in subsection (e)(2), by striking out ``a final report 
     on the results'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``an 
     additional report on the progress''.

     SEC. 346. PROHIBITION ON CONSOLIDATION OR OTHER 
                   ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
                   RETAIL SYSTEMS.

       (a) Defense Retail Systems Defined.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term ``defense retail systems'' means the 
     defense commissary system and exchange stores and other 
     revenue-generating facilities operated by nonappropriated 
     fund activities of the Department of Defense for the morale, 
     welfare, and recreation of members of the Armed Forces.
       (b) Prohibition.--The operation and administration of the 
     defense retail systems may not be consolidated or otherwise 
     changed, and a study or review may not be commenced regarding 
     the need for or merits of such a consolidation or change, 
     unless the consolidation, change, study, or review is 
     specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.
       (c) Effect on Existing Study.--Nothing in this section 
     shall be construed to prohibit the study of defense retail 
     systems, known as the ``Joint Exchange Due Diligence Study'', 
     which is underway on the date of the enactment of this Act 
     pursuant to a contract awarded by the Department of the Navy 
     on April 21, 1998, except that any recommendation contained 
     in the completed study regarding the operation or 
     administration of the defense retail systems may not be 
     implemented unless implementation of the recommendation is 
     specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 347. 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.

     SEC. 348. EVALUATION OF MERIT OF SELLING MALT BEVERAGES AND 
                   WINE IN COMMISSARY STORES AS EXCHANGE SYSTEM 
                   MERCHANDISE.

       (a) Patron Survey.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
     enter into a contract with a commercial survey firm to 
     conduct a survey of eligible patrons of the commissary store 
     system to determine patron interest in having commissary 
     stores sell malt beverages and wine as exchange store 
     merchandise.
       (2) The survey shall be conducted at not less than three 
     military installations in the United States of each of the 
     Armed Forces (other than the Coast Guard).
       (3) The survey shall be completed, and the results 
     submitted to the Secretary of Defense, not later than 
     November 30, 1998.
       (b) Demonstration Project.--(1) After consideration of the 
     survey results, the Secretary of Defense may conduct a 
     demonstration project at seven military installations in the 
     United States (two Army installations, two Air Force 
     installations, two Navy installations, and one Marine Corps 
     installation) to evaluate the merit of selling malt beverages 
     and wine in commissary stores as exchange store merchandise. 
     Under the demonstration project, the Secretary may sell malt 
     beverages and wine in commissary stores as exchange store 
     merchandise notwithstanding the general requirement that 
     merchandise sold in, at, or by commissary stores be 
     commissary store inventory.
       (2) The demonstration project may only be conducted in 
     States where it is legal to sell malt beverages and wine in 
     grocery stores.
       (3) Not later than February 1, 1999, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall determine whether to conduct the demonstration 
     project. Any such demonstration project shall be completed 
     not later than September 30, 2000.
       (c) Report.--(1) If the Secretary of Defense conducts a 
     demonstration project under subsection (b), the Secretary 
     shall submit to Congress a report describing the results of 
     the demonstration project. The report shall include a 
     description of patron views, the impact on commissary sales, 
     the impact on exchange sales, and the impact, if any, on 
     dividends for morale, welfare, and recreation activities.
       (2) The report shall be submitted not later than March 1, 
     2000.
       (d) Limitation.--Nothing in this section shall be construed 
     to authorize the sale of malt beverages and wine in 
     commissary stores as commissary store inventory.
                       Subtitle F--Other Matters

     SEC. 361. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR ATTENDANCE AT 
                   DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DOMESTIC DEPENDENT 
                   ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS.

       (a) Dependents of Members Residing in Certain Areas.--
     Subsection (a) of section 2164 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``If'';
       (2) by designating the second sentence as paragraph (2); 
     and
       (3) by adding at the end of paragraph (2) (as so 
     designated) the following new sentence: ``If a member of the 
     armed forces is assigned to a remote location or is assigned 
     to an unaccompanied tour of duty, a dependent of the member 
     who resides, on or off a military installation, in a 
     territory, commonwealth, or possession of the United States, 
     as authorized by the member's orders, may be enrolled in an 
     educational program provided by the Secretary under this 
     subsection.''.
       (b) Waiver of Five-Year Attendance Limitation.--Subsection 
     (c)(2) of such section is amended by striking out 
     subparagraph (B) and inserting in lieu thereof the following 
     new subparagraph:
       ``(B) At the discretion of the Secretary, a dependent 
     referred to in subparagraph (A) may be enrolled in the 
     program for more than five consecutive school years if the 
     dependent is otherwise qualified for enrollment, space is 
     available in the program, and the Secretary will be 
     reimbursed for the services provided. Any such extension 
     shall cover only one school year at a time.''.

     SEC. 362. SPECIFIC EMPHASIS OF PROGRAM TO INVESTIGATE FRAUD, 
                   WASTE, AND ABUSE WITHIN DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

       Section 392 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 10 U.S.C. 113 note) is 
     amended by inserting before the period the following: ``and 
     any fraud, waste, and abuse occurring in connection with 
     overpayments made to vendors by the Department of Defense, 
     including overpayments identified under section 354 of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 
     (Public Law 104-106; 10 U.S.C. 2461 note)''.

     SEC. 363. REVISION OF INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO 
                   ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME.

       Section 1518 of the Armed Forces Retirement Home Act of 
     1991 (24 U.S.C. 418) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 1518. INSPECTION OF RETIREMENT HOME.

       ``(a) Periodic Inspection.--The Inspector Generals of the 
     military departments shall conduct, at three-year intervals, 
     an inspection of the Retirement Home and the records of the 
     Retirement Home. Each inspection under this subsection shall 
     be performed by a single Inspector General on an alternating 
     basis.
       ``(b) Report.--The Inspector General of a military 
     department who performs an inspection of the Retirement Home 
     under subsection (a) shall submit to the Retirement Home 
     Board, the Secretary of Defense, and Congress a report 
     describing the results of the inspection and containing such 
     recommendations as the Inspector General considers 
     appropriate.''.

     SEC. 364. 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 1999.--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 only for the purpose of 
     providing educational agencies assistance (as defined in 
     subsection (d)(1)) to local educational agencies; and
       (2) $5,000,000 shall be available only for the purpose of 
     making educational agencies payments (as defined in 
     subsection (d)(2)) to local educational agencies.
       (b) Notification.--Not later than June 30, 1999, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall--
       (1) notify each local educational agency that is eligible 
     for educational agencies assistance for fiscal year 1999 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 1999 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)).

[[Page H3516]]

     SEC. 365. STRATEGIC PLAN FOR EXPANSION OF DISTANCE LEARNING 
                   INITIATIVES.

       (a) Development of Plan.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     develop a strategic plan for guiding and expanding distance 
     learning initiatives in the Department of Defense. The 
     strategic plan shall cover the five-year period beginning on 
     October 1, 1999.
       (b) Elements of Plan.--The strategic plan required by this 
     section shall contain at a minimum the following elements:
       (1) Measurable goals and objectives, including outcome-
     related performance indicators, for developing distance 
     learning initiatives in the Department that would be 
     consistent with the principles of the Government Performance 
     and Results Act of 1993 (section 306 of title 5 and sections 
     1115 through 1119, 9703, and 9704 of title 31).
       (2) A description of the manner in which distance learning 
     initiatives will be developed and managed in the Department.
       (3) An estimate of the costs and benefits associated with 
     developing and maintaining an infrastructure in the 
     Department to support distance learning initiatives and a 
     statement of planned expenditures for investments necessary 
     to build and maintain the infrastructure.
       (4) A description of mechanisms that will be used to 
     oversee the development and coordination of distance learning 
     initiatives in the Department.
       (c) Consideration of Current Effort.--In developing the 
     strategic plan required by this section, the Secretary of 
     Defense may recognize the collaborative distance learning 
     effort of the Department of Defense and other Federal 
     agencies and private industry (known as the Advanced 
     Distribution Learning initiative), but the strategic plan 
     shall be specific to the goals and objectives of the 
     Department.
       (d) Submission of Plan.--Not later than March 1, 1999, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress the completed 
     strategic plan required by this section.

     SEC. 366. PUBLIC AVAILABILITY OF OPERATING AGREEMENTS BETWEEN 
                   MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AND FINANCIAL 
                   INSTITUTIONS.

       With respect to an agreement between the commander of a 
     military installation in the United States (or the designee 
     of an installation commander) and a financial institution 
     that permits, allows, or otherwise authorizes the provision 
     of financial services by the financial institution on the 
     military installation, nothing in the terms or nature of such 
     an agreement shall be construed to exempt the agreement from 
     the provisions of sections 552 and 552a of title 5, United 
     States Code.

     SEC. 367. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE READINESS REPORTING SYSTEM.

       (a) Establishment of System.--(1) Chapter 2 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 116 
     the following new section:

     ``Sec. 117. Readiness reporting system: establishment; 
       reporting to congressional committees

       ``(a) Required Readiness Reporting System.--The Secretary 
     of Defense shall establish a comprehensive readiness 
     reporting system for the Department of Defense. The readiness 
     reporting system shall measure in an objective, accurate, and 
     timely manner the capability of the armed forces to carry 
     out--
       ``(1) the National Security Strategy prescribed by the 
     President in the most recent annual national security 
     strategy report under section 108 of the National Security 
     Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 404a);
       ``(2) the defense planning guidance provided by the 
     Secretary of Defense pursuant to section 113(g) of this 
     title; and
       ``(3) the National Military Strategy prescribed by the 
     Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
       ``(b) Readiness Reporting System Characteristics.--In 
     establishing the readiness reporting system, the Secretary 
     shall ensure--
       ``(1) that the readiness reporting system is applied 
     uniformly throughout the Department of Defense;
       ``(2) that information in the readiness reporting system is 
     continually updated, with any change in the overall readiness 
     status of a unit, of an element of the training 
     establishment, or an element of defense infrastructure that 
     is required to be reported as part of the readiness reporting 
     system shall be reported within 24 hours of the event 
     necessitating the change in readiness status; and
       ``(3) that sufficient resources are provided to establish 
     and maintain the system so as to allow reporting of changes 
     in readiness status as required by this section.
       ``(c) Capabilities.--The readiness reporting system shall 
     have the capability to do the following:
       ``(1) Measure the capability of units (both as elements of 
     their respective armed force and as elements of joint forces) 
     to conduct their assigned wartime missions.
       ``(2) Measure the capability of training establishments to 
     provide trained and ready forces for wartime missions.
       ``(3) Measure the capability of defense installations and 
     facilities and other elements of Department of Defense 
     infrastructure, both in the United States and abroad, to 
     provide appropriate support to forces in the conduct of their 
     wartime missions.
       ``(4) Measure critical warfighting deficiencies in unit 
     capability, training establishments, and defense 
     infrastructure.
       ``(5) Measure the level of current risk based upon the 
     readiness reporting system relative to the capability of 
     forces to carry out their wartime missions.
       ``(6) Measure such other factors relating to readiness as 
     the Secretary prescribes.
       ``(d) Periodic Joint Readiness Review.--The Chairman of the 
     Joint Chiefs of Staff shall periodically, and not less 
     frequently than monthly, conduct a joint readiness review. 
     The Chairman shall incorporate into each such review the 
     current information derived from the readiness reporting 
     system and shall assess the capability of the armed forces to 
     execute their wartime missions based upon their posture at 
     the time of the review. The Chairman shall submit to the 
     Secretary of Defense the results of each review, including 
     the deficiencies in readiness identified during that review.
       ``(e) Submission to Congressional Committees.--The 
     Secretary shall each month 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 in 
     writing containing the complete results of each review under 
     subsection (d) during the preceding month, including the 
     current information derived from the readiness reporting 
     system. Each such report shall be submitted in unclassified 
     form and may, as the Secretary determines necessary, also be 
     submitted in classified form.
       ``(f) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe 
     regulations to carry out this section. In those regulations, 
     the Secretary shall prescribe the units that are subject to 
     reporting in the readiness reporting system, what type of 
     equipment is subject to such reporting, and the elements of 
     the training establishment and of defense infrastructure that 
     are subject to such reporting.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     116 the following new item:

``117. Readiness reporting system: establishment; reporting to 
              congressional committees.''.
       (b) Implementation.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     establish and implement the readiness reporting system 
     required by section 117 of title 10, United States Code, as 
     added by subsection (a), so as to ensure that the 
     capabilities required by subsection (c) of that section are 
     attained not later than July 1, 1999.
       (c) Implementation Plan.--Not later than March 1, 1999, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report 
     setting forth the Secretary's plan for implementation of 
     section 117 of title 10, United States Code, as added by 
     subsection (a).
       (d) Repeal of Quarterly Readiness Report Requirement.--
     Effective July 1, 1999, or the date on which the first report 
     of the Secretary of Defense is submitted under section 117(d) 
     of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), 
     whichever is later--
       (1) section 482 of title 10, United States Code, is 
     repealed; and
       (2) the table of sections at the beginning of chapter 23 of 
     such title is amended by striking out the item relating to 
     that section.

     SEC. 368. TRAVEL BY RESERVISTS ON CARRIERS UNDER CONTRACT 
                   WITH GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) Reserve Use of Federal Supply Transportation.--Chapter 
     1217 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 12603. Travel: use of carriers under contract with 
       General Services Administration

       ``A member of a reserve component who requires 
     transportation in order to perform inactive duty training may 
     use a carrier under contract with the General Services 
     Administration to provide the transportation. The 
     transportation shall be provided by the carrier in the same 
     manner as transportation is provided to members of the armed 
     forces and civilian employees who are traveling at Government 
     expense, except that the Reserve is responsible for the cost 
     of the travel at the contract rate. The Secretary concerned 
     may require the Reserve to use a Government approved travel 
     card to ensure that the transportation is procured for the 
     purpose of performing inactive duty training.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for such 
     chapter is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     item:

``12603. Travel: use of carriers under contract with General Services 
              Administration.''.
   Subtitle G--Demonstration of Commercial-Type Practices To Improve 
                 Quality of Personal Property Shipments

     SEC. 381. DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM REQUIRED.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a 
     demonstration program, to be known as the ``Commercial-Like 
     Activities for Superior Quality Demonstration Program'', 
     pursuant to this subtitle to test commercial-style practices 
     to improve the quality of personal property shipments within 
     the Department of Defense.
       (b) Definitions.--In this subtitle:
       (1) The term ``CLASS Demonstration Program'' means the 
     Commercial-Like Activities for Superior Quality Demonstration 
     Program required by subsection (a).
       (2) The term ``affiliated'' means an entity that is owned 
     and controlled by another entity or an independently owned 
     entity whose day-to-day business operations are controlled by 
     another entity.
       (3) The term ``best value CLASS score'' means a weighted 
     score that reflects an eligible provider's past performance 
     rating score and the schedules of charges for services 
     provided.
       (4) The term ``broker'' means an entity, described in 
     section 13102(2) of title 49, United States Code, that 
     conducts operations on behalf of the Military Traffic 
     Management Command and possesses appropriate authority from 
     the Department of Transportation or an appropriate State 
     regulatory agency to arrange for the transportation of 
     personal property in interstate, intrastate, or foreign 
     commerce.

[[Page H3517]]

       (5) The term ``freight forwarder'' means an entity that 
     provides the services described in section 13102(8) of title 
     49, United States Code, in interstate, intrastate, or foreign 
     commerce and possesses the authority to provide such services 
     from the Department of Transportation or an appropriate State 
     regulatory agency.
       (6) The term ``motor carrier'' means an entity that uses 
     motor vehicles to transport personal property in interstate, 
     intrastate, or foreign commerce and possesses the authority 
     to provide such services from the Department of 
     Transportation or an appropriate State regulatory agency.
       (7) The term ``motor vehicles'' has the meaning given such 
     term in section 13102(14) of title 49, United States Code.
       (8) The term ``move management services provider'' means an 
     entity that provides certain services in connection with the 
     shipment of the household goods of a member of the Armed 
     Forces, such as arranging, coordinating, and monitoring the 
     shipment.
       (9) The term ``test plan'' means the plan prepared under 
     section 384 for the conduct of the CLASS Demonstration 
     Program.

     SEC. 382. GOALS OF DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

       The goals of the CLASS Demonstration Program are to--
       (1) adopt commercial-style practices to improve the quality 
     of Department of Defense personal property shipments within 
     the United States and to foreign locations;
       (2) adopt simplified acquisition procedures for the 
     selection of contractors qualified to provide various types 
     of personal property shipping services and for the award of 
     individual orders to such contractors;
       (3) assure ready access of the Department of Defense to a 
     sufficient number of qualified providers of personal property 
     shipping to permit timely shipments during periods of high 
     demand for such services;
       (4) assure maximum practicable opportunities for small 
     business concerns to participate as prime contractors rather 
     than subcontractors;
       (5) empower Installation Transportation Officers to assure 
     that the personal property shipping needs of individual 
     members of the Armed Forces are met in a timely manner by 
     quality contractors who minimize opportunities for damage; 
     and
       (6) provide for the expedited resolution of claims for 
     damaged or lost property through direct settlement 
     negotiations between the service provider and the member of 
     the Armed Forces who sustains the loss, with commercial-like 
     arbitration available to the member with the assistance of 
     the military department concerned.

     SEC. 383. PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS.

       (a) Eligible Service Providers.--(1) Any motor carrier, 
     freight forwarder, or broker regularly providing personal 
     property shipping services that is approved by the Military 
     Traffic Management Command to provide such services to the 
     Department of Defense is eligible to participate in the CLASS 
     Demonstration Program. A motor carrier providing domestic 
     personal property shipping services shall not be precluded 
     from providing such services to international destinations 
     through an affiliated freight forwarder.
       (2) If a motor carrier is affiliated with another motor 
     carrier or freight forwarder that also seeks qualification to 
     participate in the CLASS Demonstration Program, the affiliate 
     must demonstrate that it also conducts independent regular 
     motor carrier operations using motor vehicles or independent 
     freight forwarding services described in subparagraph (A), 
     (B), or (C) of section 13102(8) of title 49, United States 
     Code. If a freight forwarder is affiliated with another 
     freight forwarder or motor carrier that also seeks 
     qualification to participate in the program, the affiliate 
     must demonstrate that it also conducts regular independent 
     operations.
       (b) Move Management Services Providers.--The test plan may 
     provide for the participation of a broker providing move 
     management services. A move management service provider shall 
     be compensated for providing such services solely by the 
     Department of Defense. The test plan shall prohibit a move 
     management services provider from obtaining a commission (or 
     similar type of payment however denominated) from a motor 
     carrier or freight forwarder providing the personal property 
     shipping services.
       (c) Demonstration Program Participants.--Eligible service 
     providers shall be offered participation in the CLASS 
     Demonstration Program on the basis of their best value CLASS 
     score. Each eligible service provider's best value CLASS 
     score shall be computed in a manner that assigns 70 percent 
     of the weighted average to the provider's past performance 
     rating and 30 percent to the provider's offered prices.

     SEC. 384. TEST PLAN.

       (a) In General.--The CLASS Demonstration Program shall be 
     conducted pursuant to a test plan.
       (b) Components of the Test Plan.--In addition to such other 
     matters as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate, 
     the test plan shall include the following components:
       (1) Rating past performance.--A past performance rating 
     score shall be developed for each eligible service provider 
     based on--
       (A) evaluations from service members who have received 
     personal property shipping services during a specified six-
     month rating period prior to the commencement of the CLASS 
     Demonstration Program; or
       (B) a rating of comparable personal property shipping 
     services provided to non-Department of Defense customers 
     during the same rating period, if an eligible provider did 
     not make a sufficient number of military personal property 
     shipments during the rating period to be assigned a rating 
     pursuant to subparagraph (A).
       (2) Participation by quality service providers.--A minimum 
     best value CLASS score shall be established for participation 
     in the CLASS Demonstration Program. In establishing the 
     minimum score for participation, consideration shall be given 
     to assuring access to sufficient numbers of service providers 
     to meet the needs of members of the Armed Forces during 
     periods of high demand for such personal property shipping 
     services.
       (3) Simplified acquisition procedures.--The CLASS 
     Demonstration Program shall make use of simplified 
     acquisition procedures similar to those provided in section 
     2304(g)(1)(A) of title 10, United States Code.
       (4) Pricing.--The test plan shall specify pricing policies 
     to be met by the CLASS Demonstration Program participants. 
     The pricing policies shall reflect the following:
       (A) Domestic pricing shall be based on the contemporary 
     Household Goods Carriers Commercial Tariff 400-M, or 
     subsequent reissues thereof, applicable to commercial 
     domestic shipments with discounts and adjustments for States 
     outside the continental United States.
       (B) So-called single factor rates for international 
     shipments.
       (C) Full value protection for a shipment based on the 
     actual cash value of the contents of the shipment with 
     liability limited on a per pound basis as well as a total-
     value basis.
       (5) Allocation of orders.--Orders to provide personal 
     property shipping services shall be allocated by the 
     appropriate Installation Transportation Officer taking into 
     consideration--
       (A) the service provider's best value CLASS score;
       (B) maximum practicable utilization of small business 
     service providers;
       (C) exceptional performance of a CLASS Demonstration 
     Program participant; and
       (D) other criteria necessary to advance the goals of the 
     CLASS Demonstration Program, except that carrier selection by 
     a member of the Armed Forces using the CLASS Demonstration 
     Program shall be honored if the selection does not conflict 
     with subparagraph (A) or (B) and the need to maintain 
     adequate capacity.
       (6) Performance evaluation during the term of the 
     demonstration program.--The CLASS Demonstration Program shall 
     provide for procedures for evaluation of the Demonstration 
     Program participants by the members of the Armed Forces 
     furnished personal property shipping services and by 
     Installation Transportation Officers. To the maximum extent 
     practicable, such evaluations shall be objective and 
     quantifiable. The program participant shall be accorded the 
     opportunity to review and make comment on a performance 
     evaluation provided by an individual in a manner that will 
     not deter candid evaluations by the individual. The results 
     of this evaluation may be used in developing future best 
     value CLASS scores.
       (7) Modern customer service techniques.--The CLASS 
     Demonstration Program shall maximize the testing of modern 
     customer service techniques, such as in-transit tracking of 
     shipments and service member communication with the service 
     provider by means of toll-free telephone numbers.
       (8) Direct claims settlement techniques.--The CLASS 
     Demonstration Program shall provide for settlement of claims 
     for personal property lost or damaged directly with the firm 
     providing the services. The procedures shall provide for--
       (A) acknowledgment of a claim by the service provider 
     within 30 days of receipt;
       (B) provision of a settlement offer within 120 days;
       (C) filing of a claim within nine months, with appropriate 
     extensions for extenuating circumstances relating to war or 
     national emergency that impair the ability of a member of the 
     Armed Forces to file a timely claim; and
       (D) referring of an unsettled claim by the member of the 
     Armed Forces to a designated claims officer for assistance in 
     resolving the claim or seeking commercial-like arbitration of 
     the claim, or both, if considered appropriate by the claims 
     officer.
       (9) Criteria for evaluation of the overall demonstration 
     program.--The CLASS Demonstration Program shall include the 
     development of criteria to evaluate the overall performance 
     and effectiveness of the CLASS demonstration program.
       (c) Development in Collaboration With Industry.--In 
     developing the test plan, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     maximize collaboration with representatives of associations 
     that represent all segments of the affected industries. 
     Special efforts shall be made to actively involve those 
     associations that represent small business providers of 
     personal property shipping services.
       (d) Opportunity for Public Comment on Proposed Test Plan.--
     Notice of the availability of the test plan shall be 
     published in the Federal Register and given by other means 
     likely to result in the notification of eligible service 
     providers and associations that represent them. Copies of the 
     proposed test plan may be made available in a printable 
     electronic format. The public shall be afforded 60 days to 
     comment on the proposed test plan.

     SEC. 385. OTHER METHODS OF PERSONAL PROPERTY SHIPPING.

       The CLASS Demonstration Program shall not impair the access 
     of a member of the Armed Forces to the shipment of personal 
     property through the programs known as the Do-It-Yourself 
     Program or the Direct Procurement Method Program.

     SEC. 386. DURATION OF DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

       The CLASS Demonstration Program shall commence on the first 
     day of the fiscal year quarter after the issuance of the test 
     plan in final form and terminate on the last day of the 
     fiscal year quarter after eight fiscal year quarters of 
     operation. The CLASS Demonstration Program shall take the 
     place of the re-engineering pilot solicitation of the 
     Military Traffic

[[Page H3518]]

     Management Command identified as DAMTO1-97-R-3001.

     SEC. 387. EVALUATION OF DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall provide for 
     the evaluation the CLASS Demonstration Program throughout the 
     term of the program pursuant to the evaluation criteria 
     included in the test plan.
       (b) Interim Reports.--The Secretary of Defense shall issue 
     such interim reports relating to the implementation of the 
     CLASS Demonstration Program as may be appropriate.
       (c) Final Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall issue a 
     final report on the CLASS Demonstration Program within 180 
     days before the termination date of the program. The report 
     may include recommendations for further implementation of the 
     CLASS Demonstration Program.
       (d) Congressional Recipients.--The reports required by this 
     section shall be furnished to the congressional defense 
     committees and the Committee on Small Business of the Senate 
     and the House of Representatives.
       (e) Public Availability.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     provide public notice of the availability of copies of the 
     reports submitted to the congressional recipients through a 
     notice in the Federal Register and such other means as may be 
     appropriate. Copies of the reports may be made available in a 
     printable electronic format or in a printed form.

     TITLE IV--MILITARY 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, 1999, as follows:
       (1) The Army, 484,800.
       (2) The Navy, 376,423.
       (3) The Marine Corps, 173,922.
       (4) The Air Force, 371,577.

     SEC. 402. REVISION IN PERMANENT END STRENGTH LEVELS.

       (a) Revised End Strength Floors.--Subsection (b) of section 
     691 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``495,000'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``484,800'';
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``390,802'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``376,423''; and
       (2) in paragraph (3), by striking out ``174,000'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``173,922''.
       (b) Revision to Flexibility Authority for the Army.--
     Subsection (e) of such section is amended by striking out 
     ``or, in the case of the Army, by not more than 1.5 
     percent''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on October 1, 1998.

     SEC. 403. DATE FOR SUBMISSION OF ANNUAL MANPOWER REQUIREMENTS 
                   REPORT.

       Section 115a(a) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking out ``, not later than February 15 of each 
     fiscal year,'' in the first sentence; and
       (2) by striking out ``The report shall be in writing and'' 
     in the second sentence and inserting in lieu thereof ``The 
     report shall be submitted each year not later than 30 days 
     after the date on which the budget for the next fiscal year 
     is transmitted to Congress pursuant to section 1105 of title 
     31, shall be in writing, and''.

     SEC. 404. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT 
                   CHIEFS OF STAFF TO DESIGNATE UP TO 12 GENERAL 
                   AND FLAG OFFICER POSITIONS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM 
                   GENERAL AND FLAG OFFICER GRADE LIMITATIONS.

       Section 526(b)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking out ``October 1, 1998'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``October 1, 2001''.
                       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, 1999, as follows:
       (1) The Army National Guard of the United States, 357,000.
       (2) The Army Reserve, 209,000.
       (3) The Naval Reserve, 90,843.
       (4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 40,018.
       (5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 106,991.
       (6) The Air Force Reserve, 74,242.
       (7) The Coast Guard Reserve, 8,000.
       (b) 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, 1999, 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, 21,763.
       (2) The Army Reserve, 12,804.
       (3) The Naval Reserve, 15,590.
       (4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 2,362.
       (5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 10,930.
       (6) The Air Force Reserve, 991.

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

       The minimum number of military technicians (dual status) as 
     of the last day of fiscal year 1999 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, 5,395.
       (2) For the Army National Guard of the United States, 
     23,125.
       (3) For the Air Force Reserve, 9,761.
       (4) For the Air National Guard of the United States, 
     22,408.

     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     776      140  
Lieutenant Colonel or Commander.....    1,524     520     672       90  
Colonel or Navy Captain.............      438     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.................................     623     202      388       20  
E-8.................................   2,585     429      979     94''. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take efffect on October 1, 1998.
              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 
     1999 a total of $70,697,086,000. The authorization in the 
     preceding sentence supersedes any other authorization of 
     appropriations (definite or indefinite) for such purpose for 
     fiscal year 1999.
                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
                  Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy

     SEC. 501. CODIFICATION OF ELIGIBILITY OF RETIRED OFFICERS AND 
                   FORMER OFFICERS FOR CONSIDERATION BY SPECIAL 
                   SELECTION BOARDS.

       (a) Persons Not Considered by Promotion Boards Due to 
     Administrative Error.--Subsection (a) of section 628 of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out paragraph (1) and inserting in lieu 
     thereof the following:
       ``(a) Persons Not Considered by Promotion Boards Due to 
     Administrative Error.--(1) If the Secretary of the military 
     department concerned determines that because of 
     administrative error a person who should have been considered 
     for selection for promotion by a promotion board was not so 
     considered, the Secretary shall convene a special selection 
     board under this subsection to determine whether that person 
     (whether or not then on active duty) should be recommended 
     for promotion.'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``the officer as his 
     record'' in the first sentence and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``the person whose name was referred to it for consideration 
     as that record''; and
       (3) in paragraph (3), by striking out ``an officer in a 
     grade'' and all that follows through ``the officer'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``a person whose name was referred 
     to it for consideration for selection for appointment to a 
     grade other than a general officer or flag officer grade, the 
     person''.

[[Page H3519]]

       (b) Persons Considered by Promotion Boards in Unfair 
     Manner.--Subsection (b) of such section is amended--
       (1) by striking out paragraph (1) and inserting in lieu 
     thereof the following:
       ``(b) Persons Considered by Promotion Boards in Unfair 
     Manner.--(1) If the Secretary of the military department 
     concerned determines, in the case of a person who was 
     considered for selection for promotion by a promotion board 
     but was not selected, that there was material unfairness with 
     respect to that person, the Secretary may convene a special 
     selection board under this subsection to determine whether 
     that person (whether or not then on active duty) should be 
     recommended for promotion. In order to determine that there 
     was material unfairness, the Secretary must determine that--
       ``(A) the action of the promotion board that considered the 
     person was contrary to law or involved material error of fact 
     or material administrative error; or
       ``(B) the board did not have before it for its 
     consideration material information.'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``the officer as his 
     record'' in the first sentence and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``the person whose name was referred to it for consideration 
     as that record''; and
       (3) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by striking out ``an officer'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``a person''; and
       (B) by striking out ``the officer'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``the person''.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Subsection (c) of such 
     section is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``Reports of Boards.--'' after ``(c)'';
       (B) by striking out ``officer'' both places it appears in 
     paragraph (1) and inserting in lieu thereof ``person''; and
       (C) in paragraph (2), by adding the following new sentence 
     at the end: ``However, in the case of a board convened under 
     this section to consider a warrant officer or former warrant 
     officer, the provisions of sections 576(d) and 576(f) of this 
     title (rather than the provisions of section 617(b) and 618 
     of this title) apply to the report and proceedings of the 
     board in the same manner as they apply to the report and 
     proceedings of a selection board convened under section 
     573 of this title.''.
       (2) Subsection (d)(1) of such section is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``Appointment of Persons Selected by 
     Boards.--'' after ``(d)'';
       (B) by striking out ``an officer'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``a person'';
       (C) by striking out ``such officer'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``that person'';
       (D) by striking out ``the next higher grade'' the second 
     place it appears and inserting in lieu thereof ``that 
     grade'';
       (E) by adding at the end the following: ``However, in the 
     case of a board convened under this section to consider a 
     warrant officer or former warrant officer, if the report of 
     that board, as approved by the Secretary concerned, 
     recommends that warrant officer or former warrant officer for 
     promotion to the next higher grade, that person shall, as 
     soon as practicable, be appointed to the next higher grade in 
     accordance with provisions of section 578(c) of this title 
     (rather than subsections (b), (c), and (d) of section 624 of 
     this title).''.
       (3) Subsection (d)(2) of such section is amended--
       (A) by striking out ``An officer who is promoted'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``A person who is appointed'';
       (B) by striking out ``such promotion'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``that appointment''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``In 
     the case of a person who is not on the active-duty list when 
     appointed to the next higher grade, placement of that person 
     on the active-duty list pursuant to the preceding sentence 
     shall be only for purposes of determination of eligibility of 
     that person for consideration for promotion by any subsequent 
     special selection board under this section.''.
       (d) Applicability to Deceased Persons.--Subsection (e) of 
     such section is amended to read as follows:
       ``(e) Deceased Persons.--If a person whose name is being 
     considered for referral to a special selection board under 
     this section dies before the completion of proceedings under 
     this section with respect to that person, this section shall 
     be applied to that person posthumously.''.
       (e) Recodification of Administrative Matters.--Such section 
     is further amended by adding at the end the following::
       ``(f) Convening of Boards.--A board convened under this 
     section--
       ``(1) shall be convened under regulations prescribed by the 
     Secretary of Defense;
       ``(2) shall be composed in accordance with section 612 of 
     this title or, in the case of board to consider a warrant 
     officer or former warrant officer, in accordance with section 
     573 of this title and regulations prescribed by the Secretary 
     of the military department concerned; and
       ``(3) shall be subject to the provisions of section 613 of 
     this title.
       ``(g) Promotion Board Defined.--In this section, the term 
     `promotion board' means a selection board convened by the 
     Secretary of a military department under section 573(a) or 
     611(a) of this title.''.
       (f) Ratification of Codified Practice.--The consideration 
     by a special selection board convened under section 628 of 
     title 10, United States Code, before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act of a person who, at the time of 
     consideration, was a retired officer or former officer of the 
     Armed Forces (including a deceased retired or former officer) 
     is hereby ratified.

     SEC. 502. COMMUNICATION TO PROMOTION BOARDS BY OFFICERS UNDER 
                   CONSIDERATION.

       Section 614(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking out ``his case'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``enhancing his case for selection for promotion''.

     SEC. 503. PROCEDURES FOR SEPARATION OF REGULAR OFFICERS FOR 
                   SUBSTANDARD PERFORMANCE OF DUTY OR CERTAIN 
                   OTHER REASONS.

       (a) Elimination of Requirement for a Board of Review.--
     Section 1182(c) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking out ``it shall send the record of its proceedings 
     to a board of review convened under section 1183 of this 
     title'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``it shall report that 
     determination to the Secretary concerned'';
       (b) Repeal of Board of Review.--(1) Section 1183 of such 
     title is repealed.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 60 of 
     such title is amended by striking out the item relating to 
     section 1183.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Section 1184 of such title 
     is amended by striking out ``board of review convened under 
     section 1183 of this title'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``board of inquiry convened under section 1182 of this 
     title''.
       (2) The heading of such section and the item relating to 
     such section in the table of sections at the beginning of 
     chapter 60 of such title are amended by striking out the last 
     two words.
       (d) Elimination of 30-Day Notice Requirement.--Section 
     1185(a)(1) of such title is amended by striking out ``, at 
     least 30 days before the hearing of his case by a board of 
     inquiry,''.

     SEC. 504. POSTHUMOUS COMMISSIONS AND WARRANTS.

       Section 1521 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(whether before or after the member's 
     death)'' in subsection (a)(3) after ``approved by the 
     Secretary concerned''; and
       (2) by adding at the end of subsection (b) the following 
     new sentence: ``In the case of a member to whom subsection 
     (a)(3) applies who dies before approval by the Secretary 
     concerned of the appointment or promotion, the commission 
     shall issue as of the date of death.''.

     SEC. 505. TENURE OF CHIEF OF THE AIR FORCE NURSE CORPS.

       Section 8069(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking out ``, but not for more than three years, and 
     may not be reappointed to the same position'' in the last 
     sentence.
                 Subtitle B--Reserve Component Matters

     SEC. 511. COMPOSITION OF SELECTIVE EARLY RETIREMENT BOARDS OF 
                   RESERVE GENERAL AND FLAG OFFICERS OF THE NAVY 
                   AND MARINE CORPS.

       Section 14705(b) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(b) Boards.--(1) If the Secretary of the Navy determines 
     that consideration of officers for early retirement under 
     this section is necessary, the Secretary shall convene a 
     continuation board under section 14101(b) of this title to 
     recommend an appropriate number of officers for early 
     retirement.
       ``(2) In the case of such a board convened to consider 
     officers in the grade of rear admiral or major general--
       ``(A) the Secretary may appoint the board without regard to 
     section 14102(b) of this title; and
       ``(B) each member of the board must be serving in a grade 
     higher than the grade of rear admiral or major general.''.

     SEC. 512. ACTIVE STATUS SERVICE REQUIREMENT FOR PROMOTION 
                   CONSIDERATION FOR ARMY AND AIR FORCE RESERVE 
                   COMPONENT BRIGADIER GENERALS.

       Section 14301 of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(g) A reserve component brigadier general of the Army or 
     the Air Force who is in an inactive status is eligible 
     (notwithstanding subsection (a)) for consideration for 
     promotion to major general by a promotion board convened 
     under section 14101(a) of this title if the officer--
       ``(1) has been in an inactive status for less than one year 
     as of the date of the convening of the promotion board; and
       ``(2) had continuously served for at least one year on the 
     reserve active status list or the active duty list (or a 
     combination of both) immediately before the officer's most 
     recent transfer to an inactive status.''.

     SEC. 513. REVISION TO EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENT FOR PROMOTION 
                   OF RESERVE OFFICERS.

       (a) Extension for Army OCS Graduates.--Section 12205(b)(4) 
     of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
     after ``October 1, 1995'' the following: ``, or in the case 
     of an officer commissioned through the Army Officer Candidate 
     School, October 1, 2000''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect as of October 1, 1995.
              Subtitle C--Military Education and Training

     SEC. 521. REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO RECRUIT BASIC TRAINING.

       (a) Army.--(1) Chapter 401 of title 10, United States Code, 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 4319. Recruit basic training: separate platoons and 
       separate housing for male and female recruits

       ``(a) Separate Platoons.--The Secretary of the Army shall 
     require that during basic training--
       ``(1) male recruits shall be assigned to platoons 
     consisting only of male recruits; and
       ``(2) female recruits shall be assigned to platoons 
     consisting only of female recruits.
       ``(b) Separate Housing Facilities.--The Secretary of the 
     Army shall require that during basic training male and 
     female recruits be housed in separate barracks or other 
     troop housing facilities.

[[Page H3520]]

       ``(c) Interim Authority for Housing Recruits on Separate 
     Floors.--(1) If the Secretary of the Army determines that it 
     is not feasible, during some or all of the period beginning 
     on April 15, 1999, and ending on October 1, 2001, to comply 
     with subsection (b) at any particular installation at which 
     basic training is conducted because facilities at that 
     installation are insufficient for such purpose, the Secretary 
     may grant a waiver of subsection (b) with respect to that 
     installation. Any such waiver may not be in effect after 
     October 1, 2001, and may only be in effect while the 
     facilities at that installation are insufficient for the 
     purposes of compliance with subsection (b).
       ``(2) If the Secretary grants a waiver under paragraph (1) 
     with respect to an installation, the Secretary shall require 
     that male and female recruits in basic training at that 
     installation during any period that the waiver is in effect 
     not be housed on the same floor of a barracks or other troop 
     housing facility.
       ``(d) Basic Training Defined.--In this section, the term 
     `basic training' means the initial entry training program of 
     the Army that constitutes the basic training of new 
     recruits.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``4319. Recruit basic training: separate platoons and separate housing 
              for male and female recruits.''.

       (3) The Secretary of the Army shall implement section 4319 
     of title 10, United States Code, as added by paragraph (1), 
     as rapidly as feasible and shall ensure that the provisions 
     of that section are applied to all recruit basic training 
     classes beginning not later than the first such class that 
     enters basic training on or after April 15, 1999.
       (b) Navy and Marine Corps.--(1) Part III of subtitle C of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after 
     chapter 601 the following new chapter:

                   ``CHAPTER 602--TRAINING GENERALLY

``Sec.
``6931. Recruit basic training: separate small units and separate 
              housing for male and female recruits.

     ``Sec. 6931. Recruit basic training: separate small units and 
       separate housing for male and female recruits

       ``(a) Separate Small Unit Organization.--The Secretary of 
     the Navy shall require that during basic training--
       ``(1) male recruits in the Navy shall be assigned to 
     divisions, and male recruits in the Marine Corps shall be 
     assigned to platoons, consisting only of male recruits; and
       ``(2) female recruits in the Navy shall be assigned to 
     divisions, and female recruits in the Marine Corps shall be 
     assigned to platoons, consisting only of female recruits.
       ``(b) Separate Housing.--The Secretary of the Navy shall 
     require that during basic training male and female recruits 
     be housed in separate barracks or other troop housing 
     facilities.
       ``(c) Interim Authority for Housing Recruits on Separate 
     Floors.--(1) If the Secretary of the Navy determines that it 
     is not feasible, during some or all of the period beginning 
     on April 15, 1999, and ending on October 1, 2001, to comply 
     with subsection (b) at any particular installation at which 
     basic training is conducted because facilities at that 
     installation are insufficient for that purpose, the Secretary 
     may grant a waiver of subsection (b) with respect to that 
     installation. Any such waiver may not be in effect after 
     October 1, 2001, and may only be in effect while the 
     facilities at that installation are insufficient for the 
     purposes of compliance with subsection (b).
       ``(2) If the Secretary grants a waiver under paragraph (1) 
     with respect to an installation, the Secretary shall require 
     that male and female recruits in basic training at that 
     installation during any period that the waiver is in effect 
     not be housed on the same floor of a barracks or other troop 
     housing facility.
       ``(d) Basic Training Defined.--In this section, the term 
     `basic training' means the initial entry training programs of 
     the Navy and Marine Corps that constitute the basic training 
     of new recruits.''.
       (2) The tables of chapters at the beginning of subtitle C, 
     and at the beginning of part III of subtitle C, of such title 
     are amended by inserting after the item relating to chapter 
     601 the following new item:

``602. Training Generally...................................6931''.....

       (3) The Secretary of the Navy shall implement section 6931 
     of title 10, United States Code, as added by paragraph (1), 
     as rapidly as feasible and shall ensure that the provisions 
     of that section are applied to all recruit basic training 
     classes beginning not later than the first such class that 
     enters basic training on or after April 15, 1999.
       (c) Air Force.--(1) Chapter 901 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 9319. Recruit basic training: separate flights and 
       separate housing for male and female recruits

       ``(a) Separate Flights.--The Secretary of the Air Force 
     shall require that during basic training--
       ``(1) male recruits shall be assigned to flights consisting 
     only of male recruits; and
       ``(2) female recruits shall be assigned to flights 
     consisting only of female recruits.
       ``(b) Separate Housing.--The Secretary of the Air Force 
     shall require that during basic training male and female 
     recruits be housed in separate dormitories or other troop 
     housing facilities.
       ``(c) Interim Authority for Housing Recruits on Separate 
     Floors.--(1) If the Secretary of the Air Force determines 
     that it is not feasible, during some or all of the period 
     beginning on April 15, 1999, and ending on October 1, 2001, 
     to comply with subsection (b) at any particular installation 
     at which basic training is conducted because facilities at 
     that installation are insufficient for such purpose, the 
     Secretary may grant a waiver of subsection (b) with respect 
     to that installation. Any such waiver may not be in effect 
     after October 1, 2001, and may only be in effect while the 
     facilities at that installation are insufficient for the 
     purposes of compliance with subsection (b).
       ``(2) If the Secretary grants a waiver under paragraph (1) 
     with respect to an installation, the Secretary shall require 
     that male and female recruits in basic training at that 
     installation during any period that the waiver is in effect 
     not be housed on the same floor of a dormitory or other troop 
     housing facility.
       ``(d) Basic Training Defined.--In this section, the term 
     `basic training' means the initial entry training program of 
     the Air Force that constitutes the basic training of new 
     recruits.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``9319. Recruit basic training: separate flights and separate housing 
              for male and female recruits.''.
       (3) The Secretary of the Air Force shall implement section 
     9319 of title 10, United States Code, as added by paragraph 
     (1), as rapidly as feasible and shall ensure that the 
     provisions of that section are applied to all recruit basic 
     training classes beginning not later than the first such 
     class that enters basic training on or after April 15, 1999.

     SEC. 522. AFTER-HOURS PRIVACY FOR RECRUITS DURING BASIC 
                   TRAINING.

       (a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to ensure that 
     military recruits are provided some degree of privacy during 
     basic training when in their barracks after completion of the 
     normal training day.
       (b) Army.--(1) Chapter 401 of title 10, United States Code, 
     is amended by adding after section 4319, as added by section 
     521(a)(1), the following new section:

     ``Sec. 4320. Recruit basic training: privacy

       ``The Secretary of the Army shall require that access by 
     drill sergeants and other training personnel to a barracks 
     floor on which recruits are housed during basic training 
     shall be limited after the end of the training day, other 
     than in the case of an emergency or other exigent 
     circumstance, to drill sergeants and other training personnel 
     who are of the same sex as the recruits housed on that 
     floor.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding after the item relating to section 4319, 
     as added by section 521(a)(2), the following new item:

``4320. Recruit basic training: privacy.''.
       (3) The Secretary of the Army shall implement section 4320 
     of title 10, United States Code, as added by paragraph (1), 
     as rapidly as feasible and shall ensure that the provisions 
     of that section are applied to all recruit basic training 
     classes beginning not later than the first such class that 
     enters basic training on or after April 15, 1999.
       (c) Navy.--(1) Chapter 602 of title 10, United States Code, 
     as added by section 521(b)(1), is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 6932. Recruit basic training: privacy

       ``The Secretary of the Navy shall require that access by 
     recruit division commanders and other training personnel to a 
     barracks floor on which Navy recruits are housed during basic 
     training shall be limited after the end of the training day, 
     other than in the case of an emergency or other exigent 
     circumstance, to recruit division commanders and other 
     training personnel who are of the same sex as the recruits 
     housed on that floor.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``6932. Recruit basic training: privacy.''.

       (3) The Secretary of the Navy shall implement section 6932 
     of title 10, United States Code, as added by paragraph (1), 
     as rapidly as feasible and shall ensure that the provisions 
     of that section are applied to all recruit basic training 
     classes beginning not later than the first such class that 
     enters basic training on or after April 15, 1999.
       (d) Air Force.--(1) Chapter 901 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding after section 9319, as added by 
     section 521(c)(1), the following new section:

     ``Sec. 9320. Recruit basic training: privacy

       ``The Secretary of the Air Force shall require that access 
     by drill sergeants and other training personnel to a 
     dormitory floor on which recruits are housed during basic 
     training shall be limited after the end of the training day, 
     other than in the case of an emergency or other exigent 
     circumstance, to drill sergeants and other training personnel 
     who are of the same sex as the recruits housed on that 
     floor.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding after the item relating to section 9312, 
     as added by section 521(c)(2), the following new item:

``9320. Recruit basic training: privacy.''.
       (3) The Secretary of the Air Force shall implement section 
     9320 of title 10, United States Code, as added by paragraph 
     (1), as rapidly as feasible and shall ensure that the 
     provisions of that section are applied to all recruit basic 
     training classes beginning not later than the first such 
     class that enters basic training on or after April 15, 1999.

     SEC. 523. EXTENSION OF REPORTING DATES FOR COMMISSION ON 
                   MILITARY TRAINING AND GENDER-RELATED ISSUES.

       (a) First Report.--Subsection (e)(1) of section 562 of the 
     National Defense Authorization

[[Page H3521]]

     Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 1754) 
     is amended by striking out ``April 15, 1998'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``October 15, 1998''.
       (b) Final Report.--Subsection (e)(2) of such section is 
     amended by striking out ``September 16, 1998'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``March 15, 1999''.

     SEC. 524. IMPROVED OVERSIGHT OF INNOVATIVE READINESS 
                   TRAINING.

       (a) In General.--Section 2012 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(j) Oversight and Cost Accounting.--The Secretary of 
     Defense shall establish a program to improve the oversight 
     and cost accounting of training projects conducted in 
     accordance with this section. The program shall include 
     measures to accomplish the following:
       ``(1) Ensure that each project that is proposed to be 
     conducted in accordance with this section (regardless of 
     whether additional funding from the Secretary of Defense is 
     sought) is requested in writing, reviewed for full compliance 
     with this section, and approved in advance of initiation by 
     the Secretary of the military department concerned and, in 
     the case of a project that seeks additional funding from the 
     Secretary of Defense, by the Secretary of Defense.
       ``(2) Ensure that each project that is conducted in 
     accordance with this section is required to provide, within a 
     specified period following completion of the project, an 
     after-action report to the Secretary of Defense.
       ``(3) Require that each application for a project to be 
     conducted in accordance with this section include an analysis 
     and certification that the proposed project would not result 
     in a significant increase in the cost of training (as 
     determined in accordance with procedures prescribed by the 
     Secretary of Defense).
       ``(4) Determine the total program cost for each project, 
     including both those costs that are borne by the military 
     departments from their own accounts and those costs that are 
     borne by defense-wide accounts.
       ``(5) Provide for oversight of project execution to ensure 
     that a training project under this section is carried out in 
     accordance with the proposal for that project as approved.''.
       (b) Implementation.--The Secretary of Defense may not 
     initiate any project under section 2012 of title 10, United 
     States Code, after October 1, 1998, until the program 
     required by subsection (i) of that section (as added by 
     subsection (a)) has been established.
           Subtitle D--Decorations, Awards, and Commendations

     SEC. 531. 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, 
     1999, 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. 532. 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 subsection (b), 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) 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.

     SEC. 533. COMMENDATION OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS PERSONNEL 
                   WHO SERVED IN THE UNITED STATES NAVY ASIATIC 
                   FLEET FROM 1910-1942.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The United States established the Asiatic Fleet of the 
     Navy in 1910 to protect American nationals, policies, and 
     possessions in the Far East.
       (2) The sailors and Marines of the Asiatic Fleet ensured 
     the safety of United States citizens and foreign nationals, 
     and provided humanitarian assistance in that region during 
     the Chinese civil war, the Yangtze Flood of 1931, and the 
     outbreak of Sino-Japanese hostilities.
       (3) In 1940, due to deteriorating political relations and 
     increasing tensions between the United States and Japan, a 
     reinforced Asiatic Fleet began concentrating on the defense 
     of the Philippines and engaged in extensive training to 
     ensure maximum operational readiness for any eventuality.
       (4) Following the declaration of war against Japan in 
     December 1941, the warships, submarines, and aircraft of the 
     Asiatic Fleet singly or in task forces courageously fought 
     many battles against a superior Japanese armada.
       (5) The Asiatic Fleet directly suffered the loss of 22 
     vessels, 1,826 men killed or missing in action, and 518 men 
     captured and imprisoned under the worst of conditions, with 
     many of them dying while held as prisoners of war.
       (b) Congressional Commendation.--Congress--
       (1) commends the Navy and Marine Corps personnel who served 
     in the Asiatic Fleet of the United States Navy between 1910 
     and 1942; and
       (2) honors those who gave their lives in the line of duty 
     while serving in the Asiatic Fleet.

     SEC. 534. APPRECIATION FOR SERVICE DURING WORLD WAR I AND 
                   WORLD WAR II BY MEMBERS OF THE NAVY ASSIGNED ON 
                   BOARD MERCHANT SHIPS AS THE NAVAL ARMED GUARD 
                   SERVICE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The Navy established a special force during both World 
     War I and World War II, known as the Naval Armed Guard 
     Service, to protect merchant ships of the United States from 
     enemy attack by stationing members of the Navy and weapons on 
     board those ships.
       (2) Members of the Naval Armed Guard Service served on 
     6,236 merchant ships during World War II, of which 710 were 
     sunk by enemy action.
       (3) Over 144,900 members of the Navy served in the Naval 
     Armed Guard Service during World War II as officers, gun 
     crewmen, signalmen, and radiomen, of whom 1,810 were killed 
     in action.
       (4) The efforts of the members of the Naval Armed Guard 
     Service played a significant role in the safe passage of 
     United States merchant ships to their destinations in the 
     Soviet Union and various locations in western Europe and the 
     Pacific Theater.
       (5) The efforts of the members of the Navy who served in 
     the Naval Armed Guard Service have been largely overlooked 
     due to the rapid disbanding of the service after World War II 
     and lack of adequate records.
       (6) Recognition of the service of the naval personnel who 
     served in the Naval Armed Guard Service is highly warranted 
     and long overdue.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--Congress expresses its 
     appreciation, and the appreciation of the American people, 
     for the dedicated service performed during World War I and 
     World War II by members of the Navy assigned as gun crews on 
     board merchant ships as part of the Naval Armed Guard 
     Service.

     SEC. 535. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE HEROISM, SACRIFICE, 
                   AND SERVICE OF THE MILITARY FORCES OF SOUTH 
                   VIETNAM AND OTHER NATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH 
                   THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES DURING THE 
                   VIETNAM CONFLICT.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) South Vietnam, Australia, South Korea, Thailand, New 
     Zealand, and the Philippines contributed military forces, 
     together with the United States, during military operations 
     conducted in Southeast Asia during the Vietnam conflict.
       (2) The contributions of the combat forces from these 
     nations continued through long years of armed conflict.
       (3) As a result, in addition to the United States 
     casualties exceeding 210,000, this willingness to participate 
     in the Vietnam conflict resulted in the death, and wounding 
     of more than 1,000,000 military personnel from South Vietnam 
     and 16,000 from other allied nations.
       (4) The service of the Vietnamese and other allied nations 
     was repeatedly marked by exceptional heroism and sacrifice, 
     with particularly noteworthy contributions being made by the 
     Vietnamese airborne, commando, infantry and ranger units, the 
     Republic of Korea marines, the Capital and White Horse 
     divisions, the Royal Thai Army Black Panther Division, the 
     Royal Australian Regiment, the New Zealand ``V'' force, and 
     the 1st Philippine Civic Action Group.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--Congress recognizes and honors the 
     members and former members of the military forces of South 
     Vietnam, the Republic of Korea, Thailand, Australia, New 
     Zealand, and the Philippines for their heroism, sacrifice and 
     service in connection with United States Armed Forces during 
     the Vietnam conflict.

[[Page H3522]]

     SEC. 536. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE HEROISM, SACRIFICE, 
                   AND SERVICE OF FORMER SOUTH VIETNAMESE 
                   COMMANDOS IN CONNECTION WITH UNITED STATES 
                   ARMED FORCES DURING THE VIETNAM CONFLICT.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) South Vietnamese commandos were recruited by the United 
     States as part of OPLAN 34A or its predecessor or OPLAN 35 
     from 1961 to 1970.
       (2) The commandos conducted covert operations in North 
     Vietnam during the Vietnam conflict.
       (3) Many of the commandos were captured and imprisoned by 
     North Vietnamese forces, some for as long as 20 years.
       (4) The commandos served and fought proudly during the 
     Vietnam conflict.
       (5) Many of the commandos lost their lives serving in 
     operations conducted by the United States during the Vietnam 
     conflict.
       (6) Many of the Vietnamese commandos now reside in the 
     United States.
       (b) Sense of Congress--Congress recognizes and honors the 
     former South Vietnamese commandos for their heroism, 
     sacrifice, and service in connection with United States armed 
     forces during the Vietnam conflict.
   Subtitle E--Administration of Agencies Responsible for Review and 
                     Correction of Military Records

     SEC. 541. PERSONNEL FREEZE.

       (a) Limitation.--During fiscal years 1999, 2000, and 2001, 
     the Secretary of a military department may not carry out any 
     reduction in the number of military and civilian personnel 
     assigned to duty with the service review agency for that 
     military department below the baseline number for that agency 
     until--
       (1) the Secretary submits to Congress a report that 
     describes the reduction proposed to be made, provides the 
     Secretary's rationale for that reduction, and specifies the 
     number of such personnel that would be assigned to duty with 
     that agency after the reduction; and
       (2) a period of 90 days has elapsed after the date on which 
     such report is submitted.
       (b) Baseline Number.--The baseline number for a service 
     review agency under this section is--
       (1) for purposes of the first report with respect to a 
     service review agency under this section, the number of 
     military and civilian personnel assigned to duty with that 
     agency as of October 1, 1997; and
       (2) for purposes of any subsequent report with respect to a 
     service review agency under this section, the number of such 
     personnel specified in the most recent report with respect to 
     that agency under this section.
       (c) Service Review Agency Defined.--In this section, the 
     term `service review agency' means--
       (1) with respect to the Department of the Army, the Army 
     Review Boards Agency;
       (2) with respect to the Department of the Navy, the Board 
     for Correction of Naval Records; and
       (3) with respect to the Department of the Air Force, the 
     Air Force Review Boards Agency.

     SEC. 542. PROFESSIONAL STAFF.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 79 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 1555. Professional staff

       ``(a) The Secretary of each military department 
     shall assign to the staff of the service review agency of 
     that military department at least one attorney and at least 
     one physician. Such assignments shall be made on a permanent, 
     full-time basis and may be made from members of the armed 
     forces or civilian employees.
       ``(b) Personnel assigned pursuant to subsection (a)--
       ``(1) shall work under the supervision of the director or 
     executive director (as the case may be) of the service review 
     agency; and
       ``(2) shall be assigned duties as advisers to the director 
     or executive director or other staff members on legal and 
     medical matters, respectively, that are being considered by 
     the agency.
       ``(c) In this section, the term `service review agency' 
     means--
       ``(1) with respect to the Department of the Army, the Army 
     Review Boards Agency;
       ``(2) with respect to the Department of the Navy, the Board 
     for Correction of Naval Records; and
       ``(3) with respect to the Department of the Air Force, the 
     Air Force Review Boards Agency.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``1555. Professional staff.''.

       (b) Effective Date.--Section 1555 of title 10, United 
     States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall take effect 
     180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 543. EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 79 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding after section 1555, as added by 
     section 542(a)(1), the following new section:

     ``Sec. 1556. Ex parte communications prohibited

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary of each military 
     department shall ensure that an applicant seeking corrective 
     action by the Army Review Boards Agency, the Air Force Review 
     Boards Agency, or the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 
     as the case may be, is provided a copy of all correspondence 
     and communications (including summaries of verbal 
     communications) to or from the agency or board, or a member 
     of the staff of the agency or board, with an entity or person 
     outside the agency or board that pertain directly to the 
     applicant's case or have a material effect on the applicant's 
     case.
       ``(b) Exceptions.--Subsection (a) does not apply to the 
     following:
       ``(1) Classified information.
       ``(2) Information the release of which is otherwise 
     prohibited by law or regulation.
       ``(3) Any record previously provided to the applicant or 
     known to be possessed by the applicant.
       ``(4) Any correspondence that is purely administrative in 
     nature.
       ``(5) Any military record that is (or may be) provided to 
     the applicant by the Secretary of the military department or 
     other source.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding after the item relating to 1555, as 
     added by section 542(a)(2), the following new item:

``1556. Ex parte communications prohibited.''.

       (b) Effective Date.--Section 1556 of title 10, United 
     States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with 
     respect to correspondence and communications made 60 days or 
     more after the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 544. TIMELINESS STANDARDS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 79 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding after section 1556, as added by 
     section 543(a)(1), the following new section:

     ``Sec. 1557. Timeliness standards for disposition of cases 
       before Corrections Boards

       ``(a) Ten-Month Clearance Percentage.--Of the cases 
     accepted for consideration by a Corrections Board during a 
     period specified in the following table, the percentage on 
     which final action must be completed within 10 months of 
     receipt (other than for those cases considered suitable for 
     administrative correction) is as follows:

The percentage on which final action must be completed within 10 months 
                                                        of receipt is--
  the period of fiscal years 2001 and 2002.....................50  ....

  the period of fiscal years 2003 and 2004.....................60  ....

  the period of fiscal years 2005, 2006, and 2007..............70  ....

  the period of fiscal years 2008, 2009, and 2010..............80  ....

  the period of any fiscal year after fiscal year 2010........90.  ....

       ``(b) Clearance Deadline for All Cases.--Effective October 
     1, 2002, final action on all cases accepted for consideration 
     by a Corrections Board (other than those cases considered 
     suitable for administrative correction) shall be completed 
     within 18 months of receipt.
       ``(c) Waiver Authority.--The Secretary of the military 
     department concerned may exclude an individual case from the 
     timeliness standards prescribed in subsections (a) and (b) if 
     the Secretary determines that the case warrants a longer 
     period of consideration. The authority of the Secretary of a 
     military department under this subsection may not be 
     delegated.
       ``(d) Reports on Failure To Meet Timeliness Standards.--The 
     Secretary of the military department concerned shall submit 
     to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the 
     Committee on National Security of the House of 
     Representatives a report not later than June 1 following any 
     fiscal year during which the Corrections Board of that 
     Secretary's military department was unable to meet the 
     timeliness standards in subsections (a) and (b). The report 
     shall specify the reasons why the standard could not be met 
     and the corrective actions initiated to ensure compliance in 
     the future. The report shall also specify the number of 
     waivers granted under subsection (c) during that fiscal year.
       ``(e) Corrections Board Defined.--In this section, the term 
     `Corrections Board' means--
       ``(1) with respect to the Department of the Army, the Army 
     Board for Correction of Military Records;
       ``(2) with respect to the Department of the Navy, the Board 
     for Correction of Naval Records; and
       ``(3) with respect to the Department of the Air Force, the 
     Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding after the item 
     relating to section 1556, as added by section 543(a)(2), 
     the following new item:

``1557. Timeliness standards for disposition of cases before 
              Corrections Boards.''.

                       Subtitle F--Other Matters

     SEC. 551. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF CERTAIN FORCE DRAWDOWN 
                   TRANSITION AUTHORITIES RELATING TO PERSONNEL 
                   MANAGEMENT AND BENEFITS.

       (a) Early Retirement Authority for Active Duty Members.--
     Section 4403(i) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484; 10 U.S.C. 1293 note) is 
     amended by striking out ``October 1, 1999'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``October 1, 2000''.
       (b) SSB and VSI.--Sections 1174a(h) and 1175(d)(3) of title 
     10, United States Code, are amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 2000''.
       (c) Selective Early Retirement Boards.--Section 638a(a) of 
     such title is amended by striking out ``during the nine-year 
     period beginning on October 1, 1990'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and 
     ending on September 30, 2000''.
       (d) Time-in-Grade Requirement for Retention of Grade Upon 
     Voluntary Retirement.--Section 1370(a)(2)(A) of such title is

[[Page H3523]]

     amended by striking out ``during the nine-year period 
     beginning on October 1, 1990'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending 
     on September 30, 2000''.
       (e) Length of Commissioned Service for Voluntary Retirement 
     as an Officer.--Sections 3911(b), 6323(a)(2), and 8911(b) of 
     such title are amended by striking out ``during the nine-year 
     period beginning on October 1, 1990'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and 
     ending on September 30, 2000''.
       (f) Retirement of Certain Limited Duty Officers of the Navy 
     and Marine Corps.--(1) Sections 633 and 634 of such title are 
     amended by striking out ``October 1, 1999'' in the last 
     sentence and inserting in lieu thereof ``October 1, 2000''.
       (2) Section 6383 of such title is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a)(5), by striking out ``October 1, 
     1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``October 1, 2000''; and
       (B) in subsection (k), by striking out ``October 1, 1999'' 
     in the last sentence and inserting in lieu thereof ``October 
     1, 2000''.
       (g) Travel and Transportation Allowances and Storage of 
     Baggage and Household Effects for Certain Members Being 
     Involuntarily Separated.--Sections 404(c)(1)(C), 
     404(f)(2)(B)(v), 406(a)(2)(B)(v), and 406(g)(1)(C) of title 
     37, United States Code, and section 503(c) of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 
     101-510; 37 U.S.C. 406 note) are amended by striking out 
     ``during the nine-year period beginning on October 1, 1990'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``during the period beginning 
     on October 1, 1990, and ending on September 30, 2000''.
       (h) Educational Leave Relating to Continuing Public and 
     Community Service.--Section 4463(f) of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484; 
     10 U.S.C. 1143a note) is amended by striking out ``September 
     30, 1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``September 30, 
     2000''.
       (i) Transitional Health, Commissary, and Family Housing 
     Benefits.--
       (1) Health care.--Section 1145 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (A) in subsections (a)(1) and (c)(1), by striking out 
     ``during the nine-year period beginning on October 1, 1990'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``during the period beginning 
     on October 1, 1990, and ending on September 30, 2000''; and
       (B) in subsection (e), by striking out ``during the five-
     year period beginning on October 1, 1994'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``during the period beginning on October 1, 
     1994, and ending on September 30, 2000''.
       (2) Commissary and exchange benefits.--Section 1146 of such 
     title is amended--
       (A) by striking out ``during the nine-year period beginning 
     on October 1, 1990'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``during 
     the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on 
     September 30, 2000''; and
       (B) by striking out ``during the five-year period beginning 
     on October 1, 1994'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``during 
     the period beginning on October 1, 1994, and ending on 
     September 30, 2000''.
       (3) Use of military housing.--Section 1147(a) of such title 
     is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``during the nine-
     year period beginning on October 1, 1990'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``during the period beginning on October 1, 
     1990, and ending on September 30, 2000''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``during the five-
     year period beginning on October 1, 1994'' and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``during the period beginning on October 1, 
     1994, and ending on September 30, 2000''.
       (j) Enrollment of Dependents in Defense Dependents' 
     Education System.--Section 1407(c)(1) of the Defense 
     Dependents' Education Act of 1978 (20 U.S.C. 926(c)(1)) is 
     amended by striking out ``during the nine-year period 
     beginning on October 1, 1990'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending 
     on September 30, 2000''.
       (k) Force Reduction Transition Period Definition.--Section 
     4411 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1993 (10 U.S.C. 12681 note) is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 2000''.
       (l) Temporary Special Authority for Force Reduction Period 
     Retirements.--Section 4416(b)(1) of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (10 U.S.C. 12681 note) 
     is amended by striking out ``October 1, 1999'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``October 1, 2000''.
       (m) Retired Pay for Non-Regular Service.--(1) Section 
     12731(f) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking out ``September 30, 1999'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``September 30, 2000''.
       (2) Section 12731a of such title is amended in subsections 
     (a)(1)(B) and (b), by striking out ``October 1, 1999'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``October 1, 2000''.
       (n) Affiliation With Guard and Reserve Units; Waiver of 
     Certain Limitations.--Section 1150(a) of such title is 
     amended by striking out ``during the nine-year period 
     beginning on October 1, 1990'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending 
     on September 30, 2000''.
       (o) Reserve Montgomery GI Bill.--Section 16133(b)(1)(B) of 
     such title is amended by striking out ``September 30, 1999'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``September 30, 2000''.

     SEC. 552. LEAVE WITHOUT PAY FOR ACADEMY CADETS AND 
                   MIDSHIPMEN.

       (a) Authority for Leave Without Pay.--Section 702 of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(c)(1) The Secretary concerned may place an academy cadet 
     or midshipman on involuntary leave without pay if, under 
     regulations prescribed by the Secretary concerned, the 
     Superintendent of the Academy at which the cadet or 
     midshipman is admitted--
       ``(A) has recommended that the cadet or midshipman be 
     dismissed or discharged;
       ``(B) has directed the cadet or midshipman return to the 
     Academy to repeat an academic semester or year;
       ``(C) has otherwise recommended to the Secretary for good 
     cause that the cadet or midshipman be placed on involuntary 
     leave without pay.
       ``(2) In this subsection, the term `academy cadet or 
     midshipman' means--
       ``(A) a cadet of the United States Military Academy;
       ``(B) a midshipman of the United States Naval Academy;
       ``(C) a cadet of the United States Air Force Academy; or
       ``(D) a cadet of the United States Coast Guard Academy.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--Subsection (c) of section 702 of title 
     10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall 
     apply with respect to academy cadets and midshipmen (as 
     defined in that subsection) who are placed on involuntary 
     leave after the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 553. PROVISION FOR RECOVERY, CARE, AND DISPOSITION OF 
                   THE REMAINS OF ALL MEDICALLY RETIRED MEMBERS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1481(a) of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``, or member of an 
     armed force without component,''; and
       (2) in paragraph (7)--
       (A) by striking out ``United States''; and
       (B) by striking out ``for a period of more than 30 days,''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection 
     (a)(2) apply with respect to persons dying on or after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 554. CONTINUED ELIGIBILITY UNDER VOLUNTARY SEPARATION 
                   INCENTIVE PROGRAM FOR MEMBERS WHO INVOLUNTARILY 
                   LOSE MEMBERSHIP IN A RESERVE COMPONENT.

       (a) Continued Eligibility.--Section 1175(a) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting before the period 
     at the end ``, or for the period described in section 
     1175(e)(1) of this section if the member becomes ineligible 
     for retention in an active or inactive status in a reserve 
     component because of age, years of service, failure to select 
     for promotion, or medical disqualification, so long as such 
     ineligibility does not result from deliberate action on the 
     part of the member with the intent to avoid retention in an 
     active or inactive status in a reserve component.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     applies with respect to any person provided a voluntary 
     separation incentive under section 1175 of title 10, United 
     States Code (whether before, on, or after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act).

     SEC. 555. DEFINITION OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTION FOR DIRECT 
                   DEPOSIT OF PAY.

       (a) Servicemembers Reimbursement for Expenses Due to 
     Government Error.--Paragraph (1) of section 1053(d) of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) The term `financial institution' means a bank, 
     savings and loan association, or similar institution or a 
     credit union chartered by the United States or a State.''.
       (b) Civilian Employees Reimbursement for Expenses Due to 
     Government Error.--Paragraph (1) of section 1594(d) of such 
     title is amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) The term `financial institution' means a bank, 
     savings and loan association, or similar institution or a 
     credit union chartered by the United States or a State.''.

     SEC. 556. INCREASE IN MAXIMUM AMOUNT FOR COLLEGE FUND 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Increase in Maximum Rate for Active Component 
     Montgomery GI Bill Kicker.--Section 3015(d) of title 38, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``, at the time the individual first 
     becomes a member of the Armed Forces,'' after ``Secretary of 
     Defense, may''; and
       (2) by striking out ``$400'' and all that follows through 
     ``that date'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``$950 per 
     month''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on October 1, 1999, and shall apply with 
     respect to individuals who first become members of the Armed 
     Forces on or after that date.

     SEC. 557. CENTRAL IDENTIFICATION LABORATORY, HAWAII.

       (a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the Central Identification Laboratory, Hawaii, of the 
     Department of the Army is an important element of the 
     Department of Defense and is critical to the full accounting 
     of members of the Armed Forces who have been classified as 
     POW/MIAs or are otherwise unaccounted for.
       (b) Required Staffing Level.--The Secretary of Defense 
     shall provide sufficient personnel to fill all authorized 
     personnel positions of the Central Identification Laboratory, 
     Hawaii, Department of the Army. Those personnel shall be 
     drawn from members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine 
     Corps and from civilian personnel, as appropriate, 
     considering the proportion of POW/MIAs from each service.
       (c) Joint Manning Plan.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     develop and implement, not later than March 31, 2000, a joint 
     manning plan to ensure the appropriate participation of the 
     four services in the staffing of the Central Identification 
     Laboratory, Hawaii, as required by subsection (b).

[[Page H3524]]

       (d) Limitation on Reductions.--The Secretary of the Army 
     may not carry out any personnel reductions (in authorized or 
     assigned personnel) at the Central Identification Laboratory, 
     Hawaii, until the joint manning plan required by subsection 
     (c) is implemented.

     SEC. 558. HONOR GUARD DETAILS AT FUNERALS OF VETERANS.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 75 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 1491. Honor guard details at funerals of veterans

       ``(a) Availability.--The Secretary of a military department 
     shall, upon request, provide an honor guard detail (or ensure 
     that an honor guard detail is provided) for the funeral of 
     any veteran.
       ``(b) Composition of Honor Guard Details.--The Secretary of 
     each military department shall ensure that an honor guard 
     detail for the funeral of a veteran consists of not less than 
     three persons and (unless a bugler is part of the detail) has 
     the capability to play a recorded version of Taps.
       ``(c) Persons Forming Honor Guards.--An honor guard detail 
     may consist of members of the armed forces or members of 
     veterans organizations or other organizations approved for 
     purposes of this section under regulations prescribed by the 
     Secretary of Defense. The Secretary of a military department 
     may provide transportation, or reimbursement for 
     transportation, and expenses for a person who participates in 
     an honor guard detail under this section and is not a member 
     of the armed forces or an employee of the United States.
       ``(d) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall by 
     regulation establish a system for selection of units of the 
     armed forces and other organizations to provide honor guard 
     details. The system shall place an emphasis on balancing the 
     funeral detail workload among the units and organizations 
     providing honor guard details in an equitable manner as they 
     are able to respond to requests for such details in terms of 
     geographic proximity and available resources. The Secretary 
     shall provide in such regulations that the armed force in 
     which a veteran served shall not be considered to be a factor 
     when selecting the military unit or other organization to 
     provide an honor guard detail for the funeral of the veteran.
       ``(e) Annual Report.--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 not later than January 31 of each 
     year beginning with 2001 and ending with 2005 on the 
     experience of the Department of Defense under this section. 
     Each such report shall provide data on the number of funerals 
     supported under this section, cost for that support, shown by 
     manpower and other cost factors, and the number and costs of 
     funerals supported by each participating organization. The 
     data in the report shall be presented in a standard format, 
     regardless of military department or other organization.
       ``(f) Veteran Defined.--In this section, the term `veteran' 
     has the meaning given that term in section 101(2) of title 
     38.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``1491. Honor guard details at funerals of veterans.''.

       (b) Treatment of Performance of Honor Guard Functions by 
     Reserves.--(1) Chapter 1215 of title 10, United States Code, 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 12552. Funeral honor guard functions: prohibition of 
       treatment as drill or training

       ``Performance by a Reserve of honor guard functions at the 
     funeral of a veteran may not be considered to be a period of 
     drill or training otherwise required.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``12552. Funeral honor guard functions: prohibition of treatment as 
              drill or training.''.

       (c) Repeal of Limitation on Availability of Funds for Honor 
     Guard Functions by National Guard.--Section 114 of title 32, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``(a)''; and
       (2) by striking out subsection (b).
       (d) Applicability.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to burials of veterans that occur on or after 
     October 1, 1999.
       (e) Study.--The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with 
     the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, shall study alternative 
     means for the provision of honor guard details at funerals of 
     veterans. Not later than March 31, 1999, 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 the results of the 
     study and the Secretary's views and recommendations.
       (f) Consultation with Veterans Service Organizations.--
     Before prescribing the initial regulations under section 1491 
     of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), 
     the Secretary of Defense shall consult with veterans service 
     organizations to determine the views of those organizations 
     regarding methods for providing honor guard details at 
     funerals for veterans, suggestions for organizing the system 
     to provide those details, and estimates of the resources that 
     those organizations could provide for honor guard details for 
     veterans.

     SEC. 559. APPLICABILITY TO ALL PERSONS IN CHAIN OF COMMAND OF 
                   POLICY REQUIRING EXEMPLARY CONDUCT BY 
                   COMMANDING OFFICERS AND OTHERS IN AUTHORITY IN 
                   THE ARMED FORCES.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 3 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 121 the following 
     new section:

     ``Sec. 121a. Requirement of exemplary conduct by civilians in 
       chain of command

       ``The President, as Commander in Chief, and the Secretary 
     of Defense are required (in the same manner that commanding 
     officers and others in authority in the Armed Forces are 
     required)--
       ``(1) to show in themselves a good example of virtue, 
     honor, and patriotism and to subordinate themselves to those 
     ideals;
       ``(2) to be vigilant in inspecting the conduct of all 
     persons who are placed under their command;
       ``(3) to guard against and to put an end to all dissolute 
     and immoral practices and to correct, according to the laws 
     and regulations of the armed forces, all persons who are 
     guilty of them; and
       ``(4) to take all necessary and proper measures, under the 
     laws, regulations, and customs of the armed forces, to 
     promote and safeguard the morale, the physical well-being, 
     and the general welfare of the officers and enlisted persons 
     under their command or charge.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 121 the following new item:

``121a. Requirement of exemplary conduct by civilians in chain of 
              command.''.

     SEC. 560. REPORT ON PRISONERS TRANSFERRED FROM UNITED STATES 
                   DISCIPLINARY BARRACKS, FORT LEAVENWORTH, 
                   KANSAS, TO FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS.

       (a) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit 
     to Congress a report, to be prepared by the General Counsel 
     of the Department of Defense, concerning the decision of the 
     Secretary of the Army in 1994 to transfer approximately 500 
     prisoners from the United States Disciplinary Barracks, Fort 
     Leavenworth, Kansas, to the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
       (b) Matters To Be Included.--The Secretary shall include in 
     the report the following:
       (1) A description of the basis for the selection of 
     prisoners to be transferred, particularly in light of the 
     fact that many of the prisoners transferred are minimum or 
     medium security prisoners, who are considered to have the 
     best chance for rehabilitation, and whether the transfer of 
     those prisoners indicates a change in Department of Defense 
     policy regarding the rehabilitation of military prisoners.
       (2) A comparison of the historical recidivism rates of 
     prisoners released from the United States Disciplinary 
     Barracks and the Federal Bureau of Prisons, together with a 
     description of any plans of the Army to track the parole and 
     recidivism rates of prisoners transferred to the Federal 
     Bureau of Prisons and whether it has tracked those factors 
     for previous transferees.
       (3) A description of the projected future flow of prisoners 
     into the new United States Disciplinary Barracks being 
     constructed at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and whether the 
     Secretary of the Army plans to automatically send new 
     prisoners to the Federal Bureau of Prisons without serving at 
     the United States Disciplinary Barracks if that Barracks is 
     at capacity and whether the Memorandum of Understanding 
     between the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the Army covers 
     that possibility.
       (4) A description of the cost of incarcerating a prisoner 
     in the Federal Bureau of Prisons compared to the United 
     States Disciplinary Barracks and the assessment of the 
     Secretary as to the extent to which the transfer of prisoners 
     to the Federal Bureau of Prisons by the Secretary of the Army 
     is made in order to shift a budgetary burden.
       (c) Monitoring.--During fiscal years 1999 through 2003, the 
     Secretary of the Army shall track the parole and recidivism 
     rates of prisoners transferred from the United States 
     Disciplinary Barracks, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, to the 
     Federal Bureau of Prisons.

     SEC. 561. REPORT ON PROCESS FOR SELECTION OF MEMBERS FOR 
                   SERVICE ON COURTS-MARTIAL.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than April 15, 1999, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on the 
     method of selection of members of the Armed Forces to serve 
     on courts-martial.
       (b) Matters To Be Considered.--In preparing the report, the 
     Secretary shall--
       (1) direct the Secretaries of the military departments to 
     develop a plan for random selection of members of courts-
     martial , subject to the provisions relating to service on 
     courts-martial specified in section 825(d)(2) of title 10, 
     United States Code (article 25(d)(2) of the Uniform Code of 
     Military Justice), as a possible replacement for the current 
     system of selection by the convening authority; and
       (2) obtain the views of the members of the committee 
     referred to in section 946 of such title (known as the ``Code 
     Committee'').

     SEC. 562. STUDY OF REVISING THE TERM OF SERVICE OF MEMBERS OF 
                   THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 
                   ARMED FORCES.

       Not later than April 15, 1999, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to Congress a report on the desirability of 
     revising the term of appointment of judges of the United 
     States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces so that the term 
     of a judge on that court is for a period of 15 years or until 
     the judge attains the age of 65, whichever is later. In 
     preparing the report, the Secretary shall obtain the view of 
     the members of the committee referred to in section 946 of 
     title 10, United States Code, (known as the ``Code 
     Committee'').

[[Page H3525]]

     SEC. 563. STATUS OF CADETS AT THE MERCHANT MARINE ACADEMY.

       (a) Status of Cadets.--Any citizen of the United States 
     appointed as a cadet at the United States Merchant Marine 
     Academy shall be considered to be a member of the United 
     States Naval Reserve.
       (b) Eligibility.--The Secretary of Defense shall provide 
     that cadets of the United States Merchant Marine Academy 
     shall be issued an identification card (referred to as a 
     ``military ID card'') and shall be entitled to all rights and 
     privileges in accordance with the same eligibility criteria 
     as apply to other members of the Ready Reserve of the reserve 
     components of the Armed Forces.
       (c) Coordination With Secretary of Transportation.--The 
     Secretary of Defense shall carry out this section in 
     coordination with the Secretary of Transportation.

          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

                     Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances

     SEC. 601. INCREASE IN BASIC PAY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999.

       (a) Waiver of Section 1009 Adjustment.--Except as provided 
     in subsection (b), the adjustment, to become effective during 
     fiscal year 1999, required by section 1009 of title 37, 
     United States Code, 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, 1999, 
     the rates of basic pay of members of the uniformed services 
     shall be increased by the greater of--
       (1) 3.6 percent; or
       (2) the percentage increase determined under subsection (c) 
     of section 1009 of title 37, United States Code, by which the 
     monthly basic pay of members would be adjusted under 
     subsection (a) of that section on that date in the absence of 
     subsection (a) of this section.

     SEC. 602. BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR HOUSING OUTSIDE THE UNITED 
                   STATES.

       (a) Payment of Certain Expenses Related to Overseas 
     Housing.--Section 403(c) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3)(A) In the case of a member of the uniformed services 
     authorized to receive an allowance under paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary concerned may make a lump-sum payment to the member 
     for required deposits and advance rent, and for expenses 
     relating thereto, that are--
       ``(i) incurred by the member in occupying private housing 
     outside of the United States; and
       ``(ii) authorized or approved under regulations prescribed 
     by the Secretary concerned.
       ``(B) Expenses for which a member may be reimbursed under 
     this paragraph may include losses relating to housing that 
     are sustained by the member as a result of fluctuations in 
     the relative value of the currencies of the United States and 
     the foreign country in which the housing is located.
       ``(C) The Secretary concerned shall recoup the full amount 
     of any deposit or advance rent payments made by the Secretary 
     under subparagraph (A), including any gain resulting from 
     currency fluctuations between the time of payment and the 
     time of recoupment.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 405 of title 37, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking out subsection (c).
       (c) Retroactive Application.--The reimbursement authority 
     provided by section 403(c)(3)(B) of title 37, United States 
     Code, as added by subsection (a), applies with respect to 
     losses relating to housing that are sustained, on or after 
     July 1, 1997, by a member of the uniformed services as a 
     result of fluctuations in the relative value of the 
     currencies of the United States and the foreign country in 
     which the housing is located.

     SEC. 603. BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR SUBSISTENCE FOR RESERVES.

       (a) In General.--Section 402 of title 37, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (e) and (f) as subsections 
     (f) and (g), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(e) Special Rule for Certain Enlisted Reserve Members.--
     Unless entitled to basic pay under section 204 of this title, 
     an enlisted member of a reserve component may receive, at the 
     discretion of the Secretary concerned, rations in kind, or a 
     part thereof, when the member's instruction or duty periods, 
     as described in section 206(a) of this title, total at least 
     eight hours in a calendar day. The Secretary concerned may 
     provide an enlisted member who could be provided rations in 
     kind under the preceding sentence with a commutation when 
     rations in kind are not available.''.
       (b) Application During Transitional Period.--Section 
     602(d)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 37 U.S.C. 402 note) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(D) Special rule for certain enlisted reserve members.--
     Unless entitled to basic pay under section 204 of title 37, 
     United States Code, an enlisted member of a reserve component 
     (as defined in section 101(24) of such title) may receive, at 
     the discretion of the Secretary concerned (as defined in 
     section 101(5) of such title), rations in kind, or a part 
     thereof, when the member's instruction or duty periods (as 
     described in section 206(a) of such title) total at least 
     eight hours in a calendar day. The Secretary concerned may 
     provide an enlisted member who could be provided rations in 
     kind under the preceding sentence with a commutation when 
     rations in kind are not available.''.
           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, 1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``September 30, 
     2000''.
       (b) Selected Reserve Reenlistment Bonus.--Section 308b(f) 
     of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 2000''.
       (c) Selected Reserve Enlistment Bonus.--Section 308c(e) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 2000''.
       (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, 
     1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``September 30, 2000''.
       (e) Selected Reserve Affiliation Bonus.--Section 308e(e) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 2000''.
       (f) Ready Reserve Enlistment and Reenlistment Bonus.--
     Section 308h(g) of title 37, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking out ``September 30, 1999'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``September 30, 2000''.
       (g) Prior Service Enlistment Bonus.--Section 308i(f) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 2000''.
       (h) 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, 1999'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``October 1, 2000''.

     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, 1999'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``September 30, 2000''.
       (b) Accession Bonus for Registered Nurses.--Section 
     302d(a)(1) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking out ``September 30, 1999'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``September 30, 2000''.
       (c) Incentive Special Pay for Nurse Anesthetists.--Section 
     302e(a)(1) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking out ``September 30, 1999'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``September 30, 2000''.

     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, 1999,'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 2000,''.
       (b) Reenlistment Bonus for Active Members.--Section 308(g) 
     of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 2000''.
       (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, 1999'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``September 30, 2000''.
       (d) Special Pay for Nuclear Qualified Officers Extending 
     Period of Active Service.--Section 312(e) of title 37, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking out ``September 30, 
     1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``September 30, 2000''.
       (e) Nuclear Career Accession Bonus.--Section 312b(c) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``September 30, 1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``September 30, 2000''.
       (f) Nuclear Career Annual Incentive Bonus.--Section 312c(d) 
     of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking out 
     ``October 1, 1999'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``October 
     1, 2000''.

     SEC. 614. AVIATION CAREER INCENTIVE PAY AND AVIATION OFFICER 
                   RETENTION BONUS.

       (a) Definition of Aviation Service.--(1) Section 301a(a)(6) 
     of title 37, United States Code, is amended--
       (A) by redesignating subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) as 
     subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D), respectively; and
       (B) by inserting before subparagraph (B) (as so 
     redesignated) the following new subparagraph:
       ``(A) The term `aviation service' means service performed 
     by an officer (except a flight surgeon or other medical 
     officer) while holding an aeronautical rating or designation 
     or while in training to receive an aeronautical rating or 
     designation.''.
       (2) Section 301b(j) of such title is amended by striking 
     out paragraph (1) and inserting in lieu thereof the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(1) The term `aviation service' means service performed 
     by an officer (except a flight surgeon or other medical 
     officer) while holding an aeronautical rating or designation 
     or while in training to receive an aeronautical rating or 
     designation.''.
       (b) Amount of Incentive Pay.--Subsection (b) of section 
     301a of such title is amended to read as follows:
       ``(b)(1) A member who satisfies the requirements described 
     in subsection (a) is entitled to monthly incentive pay as 
     follows:

[[Page H3526]]

``Years of aviation service (including flight training) as Monthly rate
  2 or less........................................................$125
  Over 2...........................................................$156
  Over 3...........................................................$188
  Over 4...........................................................$206
  Over 6...........................................................$650
  Over 14..........................................................$840
  Over 22..........................................................$585
  Over 23..........................................................$495
  Over 24..........................................................$385
  Over 25..........................................................$250

       ``(2) An officer in a pay grade above O-6 is entitled, 
     until the officer completes 25 years of aviation service, to 
     be paid at the rates set forth in the table in paragraph (1), 
     except that--
       ``(A) an officer in pay grade O-7 may not be paid at a rate 
     greater than $200 a month; and
       ``(B) an officer in pay grade O-8 or above may not be paid 
     at a rate greater than $206 a month.
       ``(3) For a warrant officer with over 22, 23, 24, or 25 
     years of aviation service who is qualified under subsection 
     (a), the rate prescribed in the table in paragraph (1) for 
     officers with over 14 years of aviation service shall 
     continue to apply to the warrant officer.''.
       (c) References to Aviation Service.--(1) Section 301a of 
     such title is further amended--
       (A) in subsection (a)(4)--
       (i) by striking out ``22 years of the officer's service as 
     an officer'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``22 years of 
     aviation service of the officer''; and
       (ii) by striking out ``25 years of service as an officer 
     (as computed under section 205 of this title)'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``25 years of aviation service''; and
       (B) in subsection (d), by striking out ``subsection (b)(1) 
     or (2), as the case may be, for the performance of that duty 
     by a member of corresponding years of aviation or officer 
     service, as appropriate,'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``subsection (b) for the performance of that duty by a member 
     with corresponding years of aviation service''.
       (2) Section 301b(b)(5) of such title is amended by striking 
     out ``active duty'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``aviation 
     service''.
       (d) Conforming Amendment.--Section 615 of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 
     105-85; 111 Stat. 1787) is repealed.

     SEC. 615. SPECIAL PAY FOR DIVING DUTY.

       Section 304(a) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``or'' at the end of paragraph (1);
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``by frequent and 
     regular dives; and'' and inserting in lieu thereof a period; 
     and
       (3) by striking out paragraph (3).

     SEC. 616. SELECTIVE REENLISTMENT BONUS ELIGIBILITY FOR 
                   RESERVE MEMBERS PERFORMING ACTIVE GUARD AND 
                   RESERVE DUTY.

       Section 308(a)(1)(D) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(D) reenlists or voluntarily extends the member's 
     enlistment for a period of at least three years in a regular 
     component, or in a reserve component if the member is 
     performing active Guard and Reserve duty (as defined in 
     section 101(d)(6) of title 10), of the service concerned;''.

     SEC. 617. REMOVAL OF TEN PERCENT RESTRICTION ON SELECTIVE 
                   REENLISTMENT BONUSES.

       Section 308(b) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking out ``(1)'' after ``(b)''; and
       (2) by striking out paragraph (2).

     SEC. 618. INCREASE IN MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF ARMY ENLISTMENT 
                   BONUS.

       Section 308f(a) of title 37, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking out ``$4,000'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``$6,000''.

     SEC. 619. EQUITABLE TREATMENT OF RESERVES ELIGIBLE FOR 
                   SPECIAL PAY FOR DUTY SUBJECT TO HOSTILE FIRE OR 
                   IMMINENT DANGER.

       Section 310(b) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(b)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) A member of a reserve component who is eligible for 
     special pay under this section for a month shall receive the 
     full amount authorized in subsection (a) for that month 
     regardless of the number of days during that month on which 
     the member satisfies the eligibility criteria specified in 
     such subsection.''.
            Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances

     SEC. 631. EXCEPTION TO MAXIMUM WEIGHT ALLOWANCE FOR BAGGAGE 
                   AND HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS.

       Section 406(b)(1)(D) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended in the second sentence by inserting before the period 
     the following: ``, unless the additional weight allowance in 
     excess of such maximum is intended to permit the shipping of 
     consumables that cannot be reasonably obtained at the new 
     station of the member''.

     SEC. 632. TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES FOR TRAVEL 
                   PERFORMED BY MEMBERS IN CONNECTION WITH REST 
                   AND RECUPERATIVE LEAVE FROM OVERSEAS STATIONS.

       (a) Provision of Transportation.--Section 411c of title 37, 
     United States Code, is amended by striking out subsection (b) 
     and inserting in lieu thereof the following new subsection:
       ``(b) When the transportation authorized by subsection (a) 
     is provided by the Secretary concerned, the Secretary may use 
     Government or commercial carriers. The Secretary concerned 
     may limit the amount of payments made to members under 
     subsection (a).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading of such section 
     is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 411c. Travel and transportation allowances: travel 
       performed in connection with rest and recuperative leave 
       from certain stations in foreign countries''.

       (2) The item relating to such section in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 7 of such title is 
     amended to read as follows:

``411c. Travel and transportation allowances: travel performed in 
              connection with rest and recuperative leave from certain 
              stations in foreign countries.''.

     SEC. 633. STORAGE OF BAGGAGE OF CERTAIN DEPENDENTS.

       Section 430(b) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(b)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) At the option of the member, in lieu of the 
     transportation of baggage of a dependent child under 
     paragraph (1) from the dependent's school in the continental 
     United States, the Secretary concerned may pay or reimburse 
     the member for costs incurred to store the baggage at or in 
     the vicinity of the school during the dependent's annual trip 
     between the school and the member's duty station. The amount 
     of the payment or reimbursement may not exceed the cost that 
     the Government would incur to transport the baggage.''.

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

     SEC. 641. EFFECTIVE DATE OF FORMER SPOUSE SURVIVOR BENEFIT 
                   COVERAGE.

       (a) Coordination of Provisions.--Section 1448(b)(3)(C) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after 
     ``the Secretary concerned'' in the second sentence the 
     following: ``, except that, in the case of an election made 
     by a person described in section 1450(f)(3)(B) of this title, 
     such an election is effective on the first day of the first 
     month which begins after the date of the court order or 
     filing involved (in the same manner as provided under section 
     1450(f)(3)(D) of this title)''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to elections under section 1448(b)(3) of title 
     10, United States Code, that are received by the Secretary 
     concerned on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

     SEC. 651. DELETION OF CANAL ZONE FROM DEFINITION OF UNITED 
                   STATES POSSESSIONS FOR PURPOSES OF PAY AND 
                   ALLOWANCES.

       Section 101(2) of title 37, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking ``the Canal Zone,''.

     SEC. 652. ACCOUNTING OF ADVANCE PAYMENTS.

       Section 1006(e) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(e)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Obligations and expenditures incurred for an advance 
     payment under this section may not be included in any 
     determination of amounts available for obligation or 
     expenditure except in the fiscal year in which the advance 
     payment is ultimately earned and such obligations and 
     expenditures shall be accounted for only in such fiscal 
     year.''.

     SEC. 653. REIMBURSEMENT OF RENTAL VEHICLE COSTS WHEN MOTOR 
                   VEHICLE TRANSPORTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE IS 
                   LATE.

       (a) Transportation in Connection With Change of Permanent 
     Station.--Section 2634 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) If a motor vehicle of a member (or a dependent of the 
     member) that is transported at the expense of the United 
     States under this section does not arrive at the authorized 
     destination of the vehicle by the designated delivery date, 
     the Secretary concerned shall reimburse the member for 
     expenses incurred after that date to rent a motor vehicle for 
     the member's use, or for the use of the dependent for whom 
     the delayed vehicle was transported. However, the amount 
     reimbursed shall not exceed $30 per day, and the rental 
     period for which reimbursement may be provided shall expire 
     after seven days or on the date on which the delayed vehicle 
     finally arrives at the authorized destination (whichever 
     occurs first).''.
       (b) Transportation in Connection With Other Moves.--Section 
     406(h) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) If a motor vehicle of a member (or a dependent of the 
     member) that is transported at the expense of the United 
     States under this subsection does not arrive at the 
     authorized destination of the vehicle by the designated 
     delivery date, the Secretary concerned shall reimburse the 
     member for expenses incurred after that date to rent a motor 
     vehicle for the dependent's use. However, the amount 
     reimbursed shall not exceed $30 per day, and the rental 
     period for which reimbursement may be provided shall expire 
     after seven days or on the date on which the delayed vehicle 
     finally arrives at the authorized destination (whichever 
     occurs first).''.
       (c) Transportation in Connection With Departure Allowances 
     for Dependents.--Section 405a(b) of title 37, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(b)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) If a motor vehicle of a member (or a dependent of the 
     member) that is transported at

[[Page H3527]]

     the expense of the United States under paragraph (1) does not 
     arrive at the authorized destination of the vehicle by the 
     designated delivery date, the Secretary concerned shall 
     reimburse the member for expenses incurred after that date to 
     rent a motor vehicle for the dependent's use. However, the 
     amount reimbursed shall not exceed $30 per day, and the 
     rental period for which reimbursement may be provided shall 
     expire after seven days or on the date on which the delayed 
     vehicle finally arrives at the authorized destination 
     (whichever occurs first).''.
       (d) Transportation in Connection With Effects of Missing 
     Persons.--Section 554 of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (i) as subsection (j); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (h) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(i) If a motor vehicle of a member (or a dependent of the 
     member) that is transported at the expense of the United 
     States under this section does not arrive at the authorized 
     destination of the vehicle by the designated delivery date, 
     the Secretary concerned shall reimburse the dependent for 
     expenses incurred after that date to rent a motor vehicle for 
     the dependent's use. However, the amount reimbursed shall not 
     exceed $30 per day, and the rental period for which 
     reimbursement may be provided shall expire after seven days 
     or on the date on which the delayed vehicle finally arrives 
     at the authorized destination (whichever occurs first).''.
       (e) Application of Amendments.--Reimbursement for motor 
     vehicle rental expenses may not be provided under the 
     amendments made by this section until after the date on which 
     the Secretary of Defense submits to Congress a report 
     certifying that the Department of Defense has in place and 
     operational a system to recover the cost to the Department of 
     providing such reimbursement from commercial carriers that 
     are responsible for the delay in the delivery of the motor 
     vehicles of members of the Armed Forces and their dependents. 
     The amendments shall apply with respect to rental expenses 
     described in such amendments that are incurred on or after 
     the date of the submission of the report.

     SEC. 654. EDUCATION LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN HEALTH 
                   PROFESSION OFFICERS SERVING IN SELECTED 
                   RESERVE.

       (a) Loan Repayment Amounts.--Section 16302(c) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking out ``$3,000'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$10,000''; and
       (2) in paragraph (3), by striking out ``$20,000'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$50,000''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on October 1, 1998.

                   TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS

                    Subtitle A--Health Care Services

     SEC. 701. EXPANSION OF DEPENDENT ELIGIBILITY UNDER RETIREE 
                   DENTAL PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Subsection (b) of section 1076c of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) Eligible dependents of a member described in 
     paragraph (1) or (2) who is not enrolled in the plan and 
     who--
       ``(A) is enrolled under section 1705 of title 38 to receive 
     dental care from the Secretary of Veterans Affairs;
       ``(B) is enrolled in a dental plan that--
       ``(i) is available to the member as a result of employment 
     by the member that is separate from the military service of 
     the member; and
       ``(ii) is not available to dependents of the member as a 
     result of such separate employment by the member; or
       ``(C) is prevented by a medical or dental condition from 
     being able to obtain benefits under the plan.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Subsection (f)(3) of such 
     section is amended by striking out ``(b)(4)'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``(b)(5)''.

     SEC. 702. PLAN FOR PROVISION OF HEALTH CARE FOR MILITARY 
                   RETIREES AND THEIR DEPENDENTS COMPARABLE TO 
                   HEALTH CARE PROVIDED UNDER TRICARE PRIME.

       (a) Requirement To Submit Plan.--(1) The Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to Congress--
       (A) a plan under which the Secretary would guarantee 
     access, for covered beneficiaries described in subsection 
     (b), to health care that is comparable to the health care 
     provided to covered beneficiaries under chapter 55 of title 
     10, United States Code, under TRICARE Prime (as defined in 
     subsection (d) of section 1097a of such title (as added by 
     section 712)); and
       (B) a legislative proposal and cost estimate for 
     implementing the plan.
       (2) The plan required under paragraph (1)(A) shall provide 
     for guaranteed access to such health care for such covered 
     beneficiaries by October 1, 2001.
       (b) Covered Beneficiaries.--A covered beneficiary under 
     this subsection is an individual who is a covered beneficiary 
     under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, who--
       (1) is a member or former member of the Armed Forces 
     entitled to retired pay under such title; or
       (2) is a dependent (as that term is defined in section 
     1072(2) of such chapter) of such a member.
       (c) Deadline for Submission.--The Secretary shall submit 
     the plan required by subsection (a) not later than March 1, 
     1999.

     SEC. 703. PLAN FOR REDESIGN OF MILITARY PHARMACY SYSTEM.

       (a) Plan Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit 
     to Congress a plan that would provide for a system-wide 
     redesign of the military and contractor retail and mail-order 
     pharmacy system of the Department of Defense by incorporating 
     ``best business practices'' of the private sector. The 
     Secretary shall work with contractors of TRICARE retail 
     pharmacy and national mail-order pharmacy programs to develop 
     a plan for the redesign of the pharmacy system that--
       (1) may include a plan for an incentive-based formulary for 
     military medical treatment facilities and contractors of 
     TRICARE retail pharmacies and the national mail-order 
     pharmacy; and
       (2) shall include a plan for each of the following:
       (A) A uniform formulary for such facilities and 
     contractors.
       (B) A centralized database that integrates the patient 
     databases of pharmacies of military medical treatment 
     facilities and contractor retail and mail-order programs to 
     implement automated prospective drug utilization review 
     systems.
       (C) A system-wide drug benefit for covered beneficiaries 
     under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, who are 
     entitled to hospital insurance benefits under part A of title 
     XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395c et seq.).
       (b) Submission of Plan.--The Secretary shall submit the 
     plan required under subsection (a) not later than March 1, 
     1999.
       (c) Suspension of Implementation of Program.--The Secretary 
     shall suspend any plan to establish a national retail 
     pharmacy program for the Department of Defense until--
       (1) the plan required under subsection (a) is submitted; 
     and
       (2) the Secretary implements cost-saving reforms with 
     respect to the military and contractor retail and mail order 
     pharmacy system.

     SEC. 704. TRANSITIONAL AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE CONTINUED HEALTH 
                   CARE COVERAGE FOR CERTAIN PERSONS UNAWARE OF 
                   LOSS OF CHAMPUS ELIGIBILITY.

       (a) Transitional Coverage.--The administering Secretaries 
     may continue eligibility of a person described in subsection 
     (b) for health care coverage under the Civilian Health and 
     Medical Program of the Uniformed Services based on a 
     determination that such continuation is appropriate to assure 
     health care coverage for any such person who may have been 
     unaware of the loss of eligibility to receive health benefits 
     under that program.
       (b) Persons Eligible.--A person shall be eligible for 
     transitional health care coverage under subsection (a) if the 
     person--
       (1) is a person described in paragraph (1) of subsection 
     (d) of section 1086 of title 10, United States Code;
       (2) in the absence of such paragraph, would be eligible for 
     health benefits under such section; and
       (3) satisfies the criteria specified in subparagraphs (A) 
     and (B) of paragraph (2) of such subsection.
       (c) Extent of Transitional Authority.--The authority to 
     continue eligibility under this section shall apply with 
     respect to health care services provided between October 1, 
     1998, and July 1, 1999.
       (d) Definition.--In this section, the term ``administering 
     Secretaries'' has the meaning given that term in section 
     1072(3) of title 10, United States Code.

                      Subtitle B--TRICARE Program

     SEC. 711. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS FOR PROVISION OF HEALTH CARE 
                   UNDER THE TRICARE PROGRAM FOR WHICH A THIRD 
                   PARTY MAY BE LIABLE.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 55 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 1095a the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 1095b. TRICARE program: contractor payment of certain 
       claims

       ``(a) Payment of Claims.--(1) The Secretary of Defense may 
     authorize a contractor under the TRICARE program to pay a 
     claim described in paragraph (2) before seeking to recover 
     from a third-party payer the costs incurred by the contractor 
     to provide health care services that are the basis of the 
     claim to a beneficiary under such program.
       ``(2) A claim under this paragraph is a claim--
       ``(A) that is submitted to the contractor by a provider 
     under the TRICARE program for payment for services for health 
     care provided to a covered beneficiary; and
       ``(B) that is identified by the contractor as a claim for 
     which a third-party payer may be liable.
       ``(b) Recovery From Third-Party Payers.--A contractor for 
     the provision of health care services under the TRICARE 
     program that pays a claim described in subsection (a)(2) 
     shall have the right to collect from the third-party payer 
     the costs incurred by such contractor on behalf of the 
     covered beneficiary. The contractor shall have the same right 
     to collect such costs under this subsection as the right of 
     the United States to collect costs under section 1095 of this 
     title.
       ``(c) Definition of Third-Party Payer.--In this section, 
     the term `third-party payer' has the meaning given that term 
     in section 1095(h) of this title, except that such term 
     excludes primary medical insurers.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 1095a the following new item:

``1095b. TRICARE program: contractor payment of certain claims.''.

     SEC. 712. PROCEDURES REGARDING ENROLLMENT IN TRICARE PRIME.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 55 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 1097 the 
     following new section:


[[Page H3528]]



     ``Sec. 1097a. Enrollment in TRICARE Prime: procedures

       ``(a) Automatic Enrollment of Certain Dependents.--The 
     Secretary of Defense shall establish procedures under which 
     dependents of members of the armed forces on active duty who 
     reside in the catchment area of a military medical treatment 
     facility shall be automatically enrolled in TRICARE Prime at 
     the military medical treatment facility. The Secretary shall 
     provide notice in writing to the member regarding such 
     enrollment.
       ``(b) Automatic Continuation of Enrollment.--The Secretary 
     of Defense shall establish procedures under which enrollment 
     of covered beneficiaries in TRICARE Prime shall automatically 
     continue until such time as the covered beneficiary elects to 
     disenroll or is no longer eligible for enrollment.
       ``(c) Option for Retirees To Deduct Fee From Pay.--The 
     Secretary of Defense shall establish procedures under which a 
     retired member of the armed forces may elect to have any fees 
     payable by the member for enrollment in TRICARE Prime 
     withheld from the retired pay of the member (if pay is 
     available to the member).
       ``(d) Definition of TRICARE Prime.--In this section, the 
     term `TRICARE Prime' means the managed care option of the 
     TRICARE program known as TRICARE Prime.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     1097 the following new item:

``1097a. Enrollment in TRICARE Prime: procedures.''.

       (b) Deadline for Implementation.--The Secretary of Defense 
     shall establish the procedures required under section 1097a 
     of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), 
     not later than April 1, 1999.
                       Subtitle C--Other Matters

     SEC. 721. INFLATION ADJUSTMENT OF PREMIUM AMOUNTS FOR 
                   DEPENDENTS DENTAL PROGRAM.

       Section 1076a(b)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting after ``$20 per month'' the following: 
     ``(in 1993 dollars, as adjusted for inflation in each year 
     thereafter)''.

     SEC. 722. SYSTEM FOR TRACKING DATA AND MEASURING PERFORMANCE 
                   IN MEETING TRICARE ACCESS STANDARDS.

       (a) Requirement To Establish System.--(1) The Secretary of 
     Defense shall establish a system--
       (A) to track data regarding access of covered beneficiaries 
     under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, to primary 
     health care under the TRICARE program; and
       (B) to measure performance in increasing such access 
     against the primary care access standards established by the 
     Secretary under the TRICARE program.
       (2) In implementing the system described in paragraph (1), 
     the Secretary shall collect data on the timeliness of 
     appointments and precise waiting times for appointments in 
     order to measure performance in meeting the primary care 
     access standards established under the TRICARE program.
       (b) Deadline for Establishment.--The Secretary shall 
     establish the system described in subsection (a) not later 
     than April 1, 1999.

     SEC. 723. AIR FORCE RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, AND 
                   EDUCATION ON EXPOSURE TO CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, 
                   AND RADIOLOGICAL HAZARDS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Air Force is hereby 
     authorized to--
       (1) conduct research on the health-related, environmental, 
     and ecological effects of exposure to chemical, biological, 
     and radiological hazards;
       (2) develop new risk-assessment methods and instruments 
     with respect to exposure to such hazards, including more 
     accurate risk assessment tools to support the Air Force 
     Enhanced Site Specific Risk Assessment; and
       (3) educate and train researchers with respect to exposure 
     to such hazards.
       (b) Activities To Be Conducted.--Research and development 
     conducted under subsection (a) includes--
       (1) development of equipment to monitor soil and ground 
     water contamination and the impact of such contamination on 
     the biosystem chain;
       (2) implementation of a cross-sectional epidemiological 
     study of exposure to jet fuel; and
       (3) implementation of a health-risk assessment regarding 
     exposure to jet fuel.

     SEC. 724. AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH A LEVEL 1 TRAUMA 
                   TRAINING CENTER.

       The Secretary of the Army is hereby authorized to establish 
     a Level 1 Trauma Training Center (as designated by the 
     American College of Surgeons) in order to provide the Army 
     with a trauma center capable of training forward surgical 
     teams.

     SEC. 725. REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ENROLLMENT-BASED 
                   CAPITATION FOR FUNDING FOR MILITARY MEDICAL 
                   TREATMENT FACILITIES.

       (a) Report Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit 
     to Congress a report on the potential impact of using an 
     enrollment-based capitation methodology to allocate funds for 
     military medical treatment facilities. The report shall 
     address the following:
       (1) A description of the plans of the Secretary to 
     implement an enrollment-based capitation methodology for 
     military medical treatment facilities and with respect to 
     contracts for the delivery of health care under the TRICARE 
     program.
       (2) The justifications for implementing an enrollment-based 
     capitation methodology without first conducting a 
     demonstration project for implementation of such methodology.
       (3) The impact that implementation of an enrollment based 
     capitation methodology would have on the provision of space-
     available care at military medical treatment facilities, 
     particularly in the case of care for--
       (A) military retirees entitled who are entitled to hospital 
     insurance benefits under part A of title XVIII of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395c et seq.); and
       (B) covered beneficiaries under chapter 55 of title 10, 
     United States Code, who reside outside the catchment area of 
     a military medical treatment facility.
       (4) The impact that implementation of an enrollment-based 
     capitation methodology would have with respect to the 
     pharmacy benefits provided at military medical treatment 
     facilities, given that the enrollment-based capitation 
     methodology would fund military medical treatment facilities 
     based on the number of members at such facilities enrolled in 
     TRICARE Prime, but all covered beneficiaries may fill 
     prescriptions at military medical treatment facility 
     pharmacies.
       (5) An explanation of how additional funding will be 
     provided for a military medical treatment facility if an 
     enrollment-based capitation methodology is implemented to 
     ensure that space-available care and pharmacy coverage can be 
     provided to covered beneficiaries who are not enrolled at the 
     military medical treatment facility, and the amount of 
     funding that will be available.
       (6) An explanation of how implementation of an enrollment-
     based capitation methodology would impact the provision of 
     uniform benefits under TRICARE Prime, and how the Secretary 
     would ensure, if such methodology were implemented, that the 
     provision of health care under TRICARE Prime would not be 
     bifurcated between the provision of such care at military 
     medical treatment facilities and the provision of such care 
     from civilian providers.
       (b) Deadline for Submission.--The Secretary shall submit 
     the report required by subsection (a) not later than March 1, 
     1999.

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

     SEC. 801. LIMITATION ON PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION AND 
                   COMPONENTS.

       (a) Limitation.--Section 2534(a) of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(6) Ammunition.--Ammunition or ammunition components.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--Paragraph (6) of section 2534(a) of 
     title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), 
     shall apply with respect to contracts entered into after 
     September 30, 1998.

     SEC. 802. ACQUISITION CORPS ELIGIBILITY.

       Section 1732(c) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) The requirement of subsection (b)(1)(A) shall not 
     apply to an employee who served in an Acquisition Corps in a 
     position within grade GS-13 or above of the General Schedule 
     and who is placed in another position which is in a grade 
     lower than GS-13 of the General Schedule, or whose position 
     is reduced in grade to a grade lower than GS-13 of the 
     General Schedule, as a result of reduction-in-force 
     procedures, the realignment or closure of a military 
     installation, or another reason other than for cause.''.

     SEC. 803. AMENDMENTS RELATING TO PROCUREMENT FROM FIRMS IN 
                   INDUSTRIAL BASE FOR PRODUCTION OF SMALL ARMS.

       (a) Requirement To Limit Procurements to Certain Sources.--
     Subsection (a) of section 2473 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in the heading, by striking out the first word and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``Requirement''; and
       (2) by striking out ``To the extent that the Secretary of 
     Defense determines necessary to preserve the small arms 
     production industrial base, the Secretary may'' and inserting 
     in lieu thereof ``In order to preserve the small arms 
     production industrial base, the Secretary of Defense shall''.
       (b) Additional Covered Property and Services.--Subsection 
     (b) of such section is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as paragraphs 
     (2) and (3), respectively;
       (2) by inserting before paragraph (2), as so redesignated, 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(1) Small arms end items.'';
       (3) in paragraph (2), as so redesignated, by inserting 
     before the period the following: ``, if those parts are 
     manufactured under a contract with the Department of Defense 
     to produce the end item''; and
       (4) by adding after paragraph (3) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) Repair parts consisting of barrels, receivers, and 
     bolts for small arms, whether or not the small arms are in 
     production under a contract with the Department of Defense at 
     the time of production of such repair parts.''.
       (c) Relationship to Other Provisions of Law.--Such section 
     is further amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(d) Relationship to Other Provisions.--(1) If a 
     procurement under subsection (a) is a procurement of a 
     commercial item, the Secretary may, notwithstanding section 
     2306(b)(1)(B) of this title, require the submission of 
     certified cost or pricing data under section 2306(a) of this 
     title.
       ``(2) Subsection (a) is a requirement for purposes of 
     section 2304(c)(5) of this title.''.
      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

     SEC. 901. FURTHER REDUCTIONS IN DEFENSE ACQUISITION 
                   WORKFORCE.

       (a) Reduction in Defense Acquisition Workforce.--Chapter 87 
     of title 10, United

[[Page H3529]]

     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new section:

     ``Sec. 1765. Limitation on number of personnel

       ``(a) Limitation.--Effective October 1, 2001, the number of 
     defense acquisition personnel may not exceed the baseline 
     number reduced by 70,000.
       ``(b) Phased Reduction.--The number of defense acquisition 
     personnel--
       ``(1) as of October 1, 1999, may not exceed the baseline 
     number reduced by 25,000; and
       ``(2) as of October 1, 2000, may not exceed the baseline 
     number reduced by 50,000.
       ``(c) Baseline Number.--For purposes of this section, the 
     baseline number is the total number of defense acquisition 
     personnel as of October 1, 1998.
       ``(d) Defense Acquisition Personnel Defined.--In this 
     section, the term `defense acquisition personnel' means 
     military and civilian personnel (other than civilian 
     personnel who are employed at a maintenance depot) 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).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of subchapter V of such chapter is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new item:

``1765. Limitation on number of personnel.''.

     SEC. 902. LIMITATION ON OPERATION AND SUPPORT FUNDS FOR THE 
                   OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.

       Of the amount available for fiscal year 1999 for operation 
     and support activities of the Office of the Secretary of 
     Defense, not more than 90 percent may be obligated until each 
     of the following reports has been submitted:
       (1) The report required to be submitted to the 
     congressional defense committees by section 904(b) of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 
     (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2619).
       (2) The reports required to be submitted to Congress by 
     sections 911(b) and 911(c) of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 
     111 Stat. 1858, 1859).

     SEC. 903. REVISION TO DEFENSE DIRECTIVE RELATING TO 
                   MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS AND HEADQUARTERS 
                   SUPPORT ACTIVITIES.

       Not later than October 1, 1999, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall issue a revision to Department of Defense Directive 
     5100.73, entitled ``Department of Defense Management 
     Headquarters and Headquarters Support Activities'', so as to 
     incorporate in that directive the following:
       (1) A threshold specified by command (or other 
     organizational element) such that any headquarters activity 
     below the threshold is not considered for the purpose of the 
     directive to be a management headquarters or headquarters 
     support activity.
       (2) A definition of the term ``management headquarters and 
     headquarters support activities'' that (A) is based upon 
     function (rather than organization), and (B) includes any 
     activity (other than an operational activity) that reports 
     directly to such an activity.
       (3) Uniform application of those definitions throughout the 
     Department of Defense.

     SEC. 904. UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR POLICY TO HAVE 
       RESPONSIBILITY WITH RESPECT TO EXPORT CONTROL ACTIVITIES OF 
       THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

       (a) Functions of the Under Secretary.--Section 134(b)(1) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new sentence: ``The Under Secretary shall have 
     responsibility for overall supervision of activities of the 
     Department of Defense relating to export controls.''.
       (b) Implementation Report.--Not later than 30 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, 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 plans of the 
     Secretary for the implementation of the amendment made by 
     subsection (a). The report shall include--
       (1) a description of any organizational changes within the 
     Department of Defense to be made in order to implement that 
     amendment; and
       (2) a description of the role of the Chairman of the Joint 
     Chiefs of Staff with respect to export control activities of 
     the Department following the implementation of the amendment 
     made by subsection (a) and how that role compares to the 
     practice in effect before such implementation.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall be implemented not later than 45 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 905. INDEPENDENT TASK FORCE ON TRANSFORMATION AND 
                   DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The post-Cold War era is marked by geopolitical 
     uncertainty and by accelerating technological change, 
     particularly with regard to information technologies.
       (2) The combination of that geopolitical uncertainty and 
     accelerating technological change portends a transformation 
     in the conduct of war, particularly in ways that are likely 
     to increase the effectiveness of joint force operations.
       (3) The Department of Defense must be organized 
     appropriately in order to fully exploit the opportunities 
     offered by, and to meet the challenges posed by, this 
     anticipated transformation in the conduct of war.
       (4) The basic organization of the Department of Defense was 
     established by the National Security Act of 1947 and the 1949 
     amendments to that Act.
       (5) The Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense 
     Reorganization Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-433) dramatically 
     improved the capability of the Department of Defense to carry 
     out operations involving joint forces, but did not address 
     adequately issues pertaining to the development of joint 
     forces.
       (6) In the future, the ability to achieve improved 
     operations of joint forces, particularly under rapidly 
     changing technological conditions, will depend on improved 
     force development for joint forces.
       (b) Independent Task Force on Transformation and Department 
     of Defense Organization.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     establish a task force of the Defense Science Board to 
     examine the current organization of the Department of Defense 
     with regard to the appropriateness of that organization for 
     preparing for a transformation in the conduct of war. The 
     task force shall be established not later than November 1, 
     1998.
       (c) Duties of the Task Force.--The task force shall assess, 
     and shall make recommendations for the appropriate 
     organization of, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the 
     Joint Chiefs of Staff, the individual Armed Forces, and the 
     executive parts of the military departments for the purpose 
     of preparing the Department of Defense for a transformation 
     in the conduct of war. In making those assessments and 
     developing those recommendations, the task force shall review 
     the following:
       (1) The general organization of the Department of Defense, 
     including whether responsibility and authority for issues 
     relating to a transformation in the conduct of war are 
     appropriately allocated, especially among the Office of the 
     Secretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the 
     individual Armed Forces.
       (2) The joint requirements process and the requirements 
     processes for each of the Armed Forces, including the 
     establishment of measures of effectiveness and methods for 
     resource allocation.
       (3) The process and organizations responsible for doctrinal 
     development, including the appropriate relationship between 
     joint force and service doctrine and doctrinal development 
     organizations.
       (4) The current programs and organizations under the Office 
     of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and 
     the Armed Forces devoted to innovation and experimentation 
     related to a transformation in the conduct of war, including 
     the appropriateness of--
       (A) conducting joint field tests;
       (B) establishing a separate unified command as a joint 
     forces command to serve, as its sole function, as the 
     trainer, provider, and developer of forces for joint 
     operations;
       (C) establishing a Joint Concept Development Center to 
     monitor exercises and develop measures of effectiveness, 
     analytical concepts, models, and simulations appropriate for 
     understanding the transformation in the conduct of war;
       (D) establishing a Joint Battle Laboratory headquarters to 
     conduct joint experimentation and to integrate the similar 
     efforts of the Armed Forces; and
       (E) establishing an Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
     transformation in the conduct of war.
       (5) Joint training establishments and training 
     establishments of the Armed Forces, including those devoted 
     to professional military education, and the appropriateness 
     of establishing national training centers.
       (6) Other issues relating to a transformation in the 
     conduct of war that the Secretary considers appropriate.
       (d) Report.--The task force shall submit to the Secretary 
     of Defense a report containing its assessments 
     and recommendations not later than February 1, 1999. The 
     Secretary shall submit the report to the Committee on 
     National Security of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Armed Services of the Senate not later than 
     March 1, 1999, together with the recommendations and 
     comments of the Secretary of Defense.

     SEC. 906. IMPROVED ACCOUNTING FOR DEFENSE CONTRACT SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 131 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 2211 the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 2212. Obligations for contract services: reporting in 
       budget object classes

       ``(a) Limitation on Reporting in Miscellaneous Services 
     Object Class.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that, in 
     reporting to the Office of Management and Budget (pursuant to 
     OMB Circular A-11 (relating to preparation and submission of 
     budget estimates)) obligations of the Department of Defense 
     for any period of time for contract services, no more than 15 
     percent of the total amount of obligations so reported is 
     reported in the miscellaneous services object class.
       ``(b) Definition of Reporting Categories for Advisory and 
     Assistance Services.--In carrying out section 1105(g) of 
     title 31 for the Department of Defense (and in determining 
     what services are to be reported to the Office of Management 
     and Budget in the advisory and assistance services object 
     class), the Secretary of Defense shall apply to the terms 
     used for the definition of `advisory and assistance services' 
     in paragraph (2)(A) of that section the following meanings:
       ``(1) Management and professional support services.--The 
     term `management and professional support services' (used in 
     clause (i) of section 1105(g)(2)(A) of title 31) means 
     services that provide engineering or technical support, 
     assistance, advice, or training for the efficient and 
     effective management and operation of organizations, 
     activities, or systems. Those services--
       ``(A) are closely related to the basic responsibilities and 
     mission of the using organization; and
       ``(B) include efforts that support or contribute to 
     improved organization or program management, logistics 
     management, project monitoring

[[Page H3530]]

     and reporting, data collection, budgeting, accounting, 
     auditing, and administrative or technical support for 
     conferences and training programs.
       ``(2) Studies, analyses, and evaluations.--The term 
     `studies, analyses, and evaluations' (used in clause (ii) of 
     section 1105(g)(2)(A) of title 31) means services that 
     provide organized, analytic assessments to understand or 
     evaluate complex issues to improve policy development, 
     decisionmaking, management, or administration and that result 
     in documents containing data or leading to conclusions or 
     recommendations. Those services may include databases, 
     models, methodologies, and related software created in 
     support of a study, analysis, or evaluation.
       ``(3) Engineering and technical services.--The term 
     `engineering and technical services' (used in clause (iii) of 
     section 1105(g)(2)(A) of title 31) means services that take 
     the form of advice, assistance, training, or hands-on 
     training necessary to maintain and operate fielded weapon 
     systems, equipment, and components (including software when 
     applicable) at design or required levels of effectiveness.
       ``(c) Proper Classification of Advisory and Assistance 
     Services.--Before the submission to the Office of Management 
     and Budget of the proposed Department of Defense budget for 
     inclusion in the President's budget for a fiscal year 
     pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, the Secretary of 
     Defense, acting through the Under Secretary of Defense 
     (Comptroller), shall review all Department of Defense 
     services expected to be performed as contract services during 
     the fiscal year for which that budget is to be submitted in 
     order to ensure that those services that are advisory and 
     assistance services (as defined in accordance with subsection 
     (b)) are in fact properly classified, in accordance with that 
     subsection, in the advisory and assistance services object 
     class.
       ``(d) Information on Service Contracts.--In carrying out 
     the annual review under subsection (c) of Department of 
     Defense services expected to be performed as contract 
     services during the next fiscal year, the Secretary (acting 
     through the Under Secretary (Comptroller)) shall conduct an 
     assessment of the total non-Federal effort that resulted from 
     the performance of all contracts for such services during the 
     preceding fiscal year and the total non-Federal effort that 
     resulted, or that is expected to result, from the performance 
     of all contracts for such services during the current fiscal 
     year and the next fiscal year. The assessment shall include 
     determination of the following for each such year:
       ``(1) The amount expended or expected to be expended for 
     non-Federal contract services, shown for the Department of 
     Defense as a whole and displayed by contract services object 
     class for each DOD organization.
       ``(2) The amount expended or expected to be expended for 
     contract services competed under OMB Circular A-76 or a 
     similar process, shown for the Department of Defense as a 
     whole and displayed by contract services object class for 
     each DOD organization.
       ``(3) The number of private sector workyears performed or 
     expected to be performed in connection with the performance 
     of non-Federal contract services, shown for the Department of 
     Defense as a whole and displayed by contract services object 
     class for each DOD organization.
       ``(4) Any other information that the Secretary (acting 
     through the Under Secretary) determines to be relevant and of 
     value.
       ``(e) Report to Congress.--The Secretary shall submit to 
     Congress each year, not later than 30 days after the date on 
     which the budget for the next fiscal year is submitted 
     pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, a report containing the 
     information derived from the assessment under subsection (d).
       ``(f) Assessment by Comptroller General.--(1) The 
     Comptroller General shall conduct a review of the report of 
     the Secretary of Defense under subsection (e) each year and 
     shall--
       ``(A) assess the methodology used by the Secretary in 
     obtaining the information submitted to Congress in that 
     report; and
       ``(B) assess the information submitted to Congress in that 
     report.
       ``(2) Not later than 120 days after the date on which the 
     Secretary submits to Congress the report required under 
     subsection (e) for any year, the Comptroller General shall 
     submit to Congress the Comptroller General's report 
     containing the results of the review for that year under 
     paragraph (1).
       ``(g) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) The term `contract services' means all services that 
     are reported to the Office of Management and Budget pursuant 
     to OMB Circular A-11 (relating to preparation and submission 
     of budget estimates) in budget object classes that are 
     designated in the Object Class 25 series.
       ``(2) The term `advisory and assistance services object 
     class' means those contract services constituting the budget 
     object class that is denominated `Advisory and Assistance 
     Service and designated (as the date of the enactment of this 
     section) as Object Class 25.1 (or any similar object class 
     established after the date of the enactment of this section 
     for the reporting of obligations for advisory and assistance 
     contract services).
       ``(3) The term `miscellaneous services object class' means 
     those contract services constituting the budget object class 
     that is denominated `Other Services (services not otherwise 
     specified in the 25 series)' and designated (as the date of 
     the enactment of this section) as Object Class 25.2 (or any 
     similar object class established after the date of the 
     enactment of this section for the reporting of obligations 
     for miscellaneous or unspecified contract services).
       ``(4) The term `DOD organization' means--
       ``(A) the Office of the Secretary of Defense;
       ``(B) each military department;
       ``(C) the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the unified and 
     specified commands;
       ``(D) each Defense Agency; and
       ``(E) each Department of Defense Field Activity.
       ``(5) The term `private sector workyear' means an amount of 
     labor equivalent to the total number of hours of labor that 
     an individual employed on a full-time equivalent basis by the 
     Federal Government performs in a given year.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     2211 the following new item:

``2212. Obligations for contract services: reporting in budget object 
              classes.''.

       (b) Transition.--For the budget for fiscal year 2000, and 
     the reporting of information to the Office of Management and 
     Budget in connection with the preparation of that budget, 
     section 2212 of title 10, United States Code, as added by 
     subsection (a), shall be applied by substituting ``30 
     percent'' in subsection (a) for ``15 percent''.
       (c) Initial Classification of Advisory and Assistance 
     Services.--Not later than February 1, 1999, the Secretary of 
     Defense, acting through the Under Secretary of Defense 
     (Comptroller), shall review all Department of Defense 
     services performed or expected to be performed as contract 
     services during fiscal year 1999 in order to ensure that 
     those services that are advisory and assistance services (as 
     defined in accordance with subsection (b) of section 2212 of 
     title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a)) are 
     in fact properly classified, in accordance with that 
     subsection, in the advisory and assistance services object 
     class (as defined in subsection (g)(2) of that section).
       (d) Fiscal Year 1999 Reduction.--The total amount that may 
     be obligated by the Secretary of Defense for contracted 
     advisory and assistance services from amounts appropriated 
     for fiscal year 1999 is the amount programmed for those 
     services resulting from the review referred to in subsection 
     (c) reduced by $500,000,000.

     SEC. 907. REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT RELATING TO ASSIGNMENT OF 
                   TACTICAL AIRLIFT MISSION TO RESERVE COMPONENTS.

       Section 1438 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510; 104 Stat. 1689), as 
     amended by section 1023 of the National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993 (Public Law 102-190; 105 
     Stat. 1460), is repealed.

     SEC. 908. REPEAL OF CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO 
                   INSPECTOR GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS OF REPRISAL 
                   COMPLAINTS.

       (a) Repeal of Requirement of Notice That Investigation Will 
     Take More Than 90 Days.--Subsection (e) of section 1034 of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out paragraph (3);
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (3).
       (b) Repeal of Requirement for Post-Disposition Interview 
     With Complainant.--Such section is further amended by 
     striking out subsection (h).

     SEC. 909. CONSULTATION WITH COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS 
                   REGARDING MARINE CORPS AVIATION.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 503 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 5026. Consultation with Commandant of the Marine Corps 
       regarding Marine Corps aviation

       ``The Secretary of the Navy shall require that the views of 
     the Commandant of the Marine Corps be obtained before a 
     milestone decision or other major decision is made by an 
     element of the Department of the Navy outside the Marine 
     Corps in a procurement matter, a research, development, test, 
     and evaluation matter, or a depot-level maintenance matter 
     that concerns Marine Corps aviation.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``5026. Consultation with Commandant of the Marine Corps regarding 
              Marine Corps aviation.''.
                      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 1999 
     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).

[[Page H3531]]

     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 H.R. 3616 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. OUTLAY LIMITATIONS.

       (a) Department of Defense.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     ensure that outlays of the Department of Defense during 
     fiscal year 1999 from amounts appropriated or otherwise 
     available to the Department of Defense for military functions 
     of the Department of Defense (including military construction 
     and military family housing) do not exceed $252,650,000,000.
       (b) Department of Energy.--The Secretary of Energy shall 
     ensure that outlays of the Department of Energy during fiscal 
     year 1999 from amounts appropriated or otherwise made 
     available to the Department of Energy for national security 
     programs of that Department do not exceed $11,772,000,000.
                Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards

     SEC. 1011. REVISION TO REQUIREMENT FOR CONTINUED LISTING OF 
                   TWO IOWA-CLASS BATTLESHIPS ON THE NAVAL VESSEL 
                   REGISTER.

       In carrying out section 1011 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 
     110 Stat. 421), the Secretary of the Navy shall list on the 
     Naval Vessel Register, and maintain on that register, the 
     following two Iowa-class battleships: the USS IOWA (BB-61) 
     and the USS WISCONSIN (BB-64).

     SEC. 1012. TRANSFER OF USS NEW JERSEY.

       The Secretary of the Navy shall strike the USS NEW JERSEY 
     (BB-62) from the Naval Vessel Register and shall transfer 
     that vessel to a non-for-profit entity in accordance with 
     section 7306 of title 10, United States Code. The Secretary 
     shall require as a condition of the transfer of that vessel 
     that the transferee locate the vessel in the State of New 
     Jersey.

     SEC. 1013. LONG-TERM CHARTER OF THREE VESSELS IN SUPPORT OF 
                   SUBMARINE RESCUE, ESCORT, AND TOWING.

       The Secretary of the Navy may enter into contracts in 
     accordance with section 2401 of title 10, United States Code, 
     for the charter through September 30, 2003, of the following 
     vessels:
       (1) The CAROLYN CHOUEST (United States official number 
     D102057).
       (2) The KELLIE CHOUEST (United States official number 
     D1038519).
       (3) The DOLORES CHOUEST (United States official number 
     D600288).

     SEC. 1014. TRANSFER OF OBSOLETE ARMY TUGBOAT.

       In carrying out section 1023 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 
     111 Stat. 1876), the Secretary of the Army may substitute the 
     obsolete, decommissioned tugboat Attleboro (LT-1977) for the 
     tugboat Normandy (LT-1971) as one of the two obsolete 
     tugboats authorized to be transferred by the Secretary under 
     that section.

     SEC. 1015. 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) 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.
       ``(e) 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.
       ``(f) 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.
       ``(g) 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.
       ``(h) Domestic Construction Requirement for Certain Leases 
     of Vessels.--(1) Notwithstanding section 2400 or 2401a of 
     this title or any other provision of law, the Secretary of 
     Defense may not enter into a contract for the lease or 
     charter of a vessel described in paragraph (2) for a contract 
     period in excess of 17 months (inclusive of any option 
     periods) unless the vessel is constructed in a shipyard in 
     the United States.
       ``(2) Paragraph (1) applies to vessels of the following 
     types:
       ``(A) Auxiliary support vessel.
       ``(B) Strategic sealift vessel.
       ``(C) Tank vessel.
       ``(D) Combat logistics force vessel.
       ``(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.''.
        Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Counter Drug Activities

     SEC. 1021. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SUPPORT FOR COUNTER-DRUG 
                   ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Continuation of Authority.--Subsection (a) of section 
     1004 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 374 note) is amended 
     by striking out ``through 1999'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``through 2000''.
       (b) Types of Support.--Subsection (b)(4) of such section is 
     amended by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``conducted by the Department of Defense or a 
     Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency, or a foreign 
     law enforcement agency in the case of counter-drug activities 
     outside the United States''.
       (c) Unspecified Minor Military Construction Projects.--Such 
     section is further amended by adding at the end the following 
     new section:
       ``(h) Unspecified Minor Military Construction Projects.--
     Section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, shall apply 
     with respect to any unspecified minor military construction 
     project carried out using the authority provided under this 
     section.''.

     SEC. 1022. SUPPORT FOR COUNTER-DRUG OPERATION CAPER FOCUS.

       (a) Support Required.--During fiscal year 1999, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall make available such surface 
     vessels of the Navy and maritime patrol aircraft and crews of 
     the Navy as may be necessary to conduct the final phase of 
     the counter-drug operation known as Caper Focus, which 
     targets the maritime movement of cocaine on vessels in the 
     eastern Pacific Ocean.
       (b) Fiscal Year 1999 Funding.--Of the amount authorized to 
     be appropriated pursuant to section 301(20) for drug 
     interdiction and counter-drug activities, $24,400,000 shall 
     be available only for the purpose of conducting the counter-
     drug operation known as Caper Focus.
       Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Report Requirements and Repeals

     SEC. 1031. ANNUAL REPORT ON RESOURCES ALLOCATED TO SUPPORT 
                   AND MISSION ACTIVITIES.

       Section 113 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(l) The Secretary shall include in the annual report to 
     Congress under subsection (c) the following:

[[Page H3532]]

       ``(1) A comparison of the amounts provided in the defense 
     budget for support and for mission activities for each of the 
     preceding five years.
       ``(2) A comparison of the number of military and civilian 
     personnel, shown by major occupational category, assigned to 
     support positions and to mission positions for each of the 
     preceding five years.
       ``(3) An accounting, shown by service and by major 
     occupational category, of the number of military and civilian 
     personnel assigned to support positions during each of the 
     preceding five years.
       ``(4) A listing of the number of military and civilian 
     personnel assigned to management headquarters and 
     headquarters support activities as a percentage of military 
     end-strength for each of the preceding 10 years.''.
                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

     SEC. 1041. CLARIFICATION OF LAND CONVEYANCE AUTHORITY, ARMED 
                   FORCES RETIREMENT HOME, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

       (a) Sale Required.--Subsection (a) of section 1053 of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 
     (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2650) is amended--
       (1) by striking out ``, by sale or otherwise,''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``The 
     conveyance of the real property shall be made by sale to the 
     highest bidder, except that the purchase price may not be 
     less than the fair market value of the parcel.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Subsection (b)(1) of such 
     section is amended by striking out ``the disposal'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``the sale''.

     SEC. 1042. CONTENT OF NOTICE REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED 
                   GARNISHEES BEFORE GARNISHMENT OF PAY OR 
                   BENEFITS.

       (a) Authorization of Alternative To Providing Copy of 
     Notice or Service Received by the Secretary.--(1) Whenever 
     the Secretary of Defense (acting through the DOD section 459 
     agent) provides a section 459 notice to an individual, the 
     Secretary may include as part of that notice the information 
     specified in subsection (c) in lieu of sending with that 
     notice a copy (otherwise required pursuant to the 
     parenthetical phrase in section 459(c)(2)(A) of the Social 
     Security Act) of the notice or service received by the DOD 
     section 459 agent with respect to that individual's child 
     support or alimony payment obligations.
       (2) Whenever the Secretary of Defense (acting through the 
     DOD section 5520a agent) provides a section 5520a notice to 
     an individual, the Secretary may include as part of that 
     notice the information specified in subsection (c) in lieu of 
     sending with that notice a copy (otherwise required pursuant 
     to the second parenthetical phrase in section 5520a(c) of the 
     title 5, United States Code) of the legal process received 
     by the DOD section 5520a agent with respect to that 
     individual.
       (b) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
       (1) DOD section 459 agent.--The term ``DOD section 459 
     agent'' means the agent or agents designated by the Secretary 
     of Defense under subsection (c)(1)(A) of section 459 of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 659) to receive orders and 
     accept service of process in matters related to child support 
     or alimony.
       (2) Section 459 notice.--The term ``section 459 notice'' 
     means, with respect to the Department of Defense, the notice 
     required by subsection (c)(2)(A) of section 459 of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 659) to be sent to an individual in 
     writing upon the receipt by the DOD section 459 agent of 
     notice or service with respect to the individual's child 
     support or alimony payment obligations.
       (3) DOD section 5520a agent.--The term ``DOD section 5520a 
     agent'' means a person who is designated by law or regulation 
     to accept service of process to which the Department of 
     Defense is subject under section 5520a of title 5, United 
     States Code (including the regulations promulgated under 
     subsection (k) of that section).
       (4) Section 5520a notice.--The term ``section 5520a 
     notice'' means, with respect to the Department of Defense, 
     the notice required by subsection (c) of section 5520a of 
     title 5, United States Code, to be sent in writing to an 
     employee (or, pursuant to the regulations promulgated under 
     subsection (k) of that section, to a member of the Armed 
     Forces) upon the receipt by the DOD section 5520a agent of 
     legal process covered by that section.
       (c) Alternative Requirements.--The information referred to 
     in subsection (a) that is to be included as part of a section 
     459 notice or section 5520a notice sent to an individual (in 
     lieu of sending with that notice a copy of the notice or 
     service received by the DOD section 459 agent or the DOD 
     section 5520a agent) is the following:
       (1) A description of the pertinent court order, notice to 
     withhold, or other order, process, or interrogatory received 
     by the DOD section 459 agent or the DOD section 5520a agent.
       (2) The identity of the court or judicial forum involved 
     and (in the case of a notice or process concerning the 
     ordering of a support or alimony obligation) the case number, 
     the amount of the obligation, and the name of the 
     beneficiary.
       (3) Information on how the individual may obtain from the 
     Department of Defense a copy of the notice, service, or legal 
     process, including an address and telephone number that the 
     individual may be contact for the purpose of obtaining such a 
     copy.
       (d) Report.--Not later than April 1, 2001, the Secretary 
     shall submit to Congress a report describing the experience 
     of the Department of Defense under the authority provided by 
     this section. The report shall include the following:
       (1) The number of section 459 notices provided by the DOD 
     section 459 agent during the period the authority provided by 
     this section was in effect.
       (2) The number of individuals who requested the DOD section 
     459 agent to provide to them a copy of the actual notice or 
     service.
       (3) Any complaint the Secretary received by reason of not 
     having provided the actual notice or service in the section 
     459 notice.
       (4) The number of section 5520a notices provided by the DOD 
     section 5520a agent during the period the authority provided 
     by this section was in effect.
       (5) The number of individuals who requested the DOD section 
     5520a agent to provide to them a copy of the actual legal 
     process.
       (6) Any complaint the Secretary received by reason of not 
     having provided the actual legal process in the section 5520a 
     notice.

     SEC. 1043. TRAINING OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES WITH 
                   FRIENDLY FOREIGN FORCES.

       (a) Training Expenses for Which Payment May Be Made.--
     Subsection (a)(1) of section 2011 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by striking out ``and other security 
     forces''.
       (b) Purpose of Training.--Subsection (b) of such section is 
     amended by striking out ``primary''.
       (c) Regulations.--Subsection (c) of such section is amended 
     by inserting after the first sentence the following new 
     sentence: ``The regulations shall require that training 
     activities may be carried out under this section only with 
     the prior approval of the Secretary of Defense.''.
       (d) Elements of Annual Report.--Subsection (e) of such 
     section is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraphs:
       ``(5) A summary of the expenditures under this section 
     resulting from the training for which expenses were paid 
     under this section.
       ``(6) A discussion of the unique military training benefit 
     to United States special operations forces derived from the 
     training activities for which expenses were paid under this 
     section.''.
           TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL

     SEC. 1101. AUTHORITY FOR RELEASE TO COAST GUARD OF DRUG TEST 
                   RESULTS OF CIVIL SERVICE MARINERS OF THE 
                   MILITARY SEALIFT COMMAND.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 643 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 7479. Civil service mariners of Military Sealift 
       Command: release of drug test results to Coast Guard

       ``(a) Release of Drug Test Results to Coast Guard.--The 
     Secretary of the Navy may release to the Commandant of the 
     Coast Guard the results of a drug test of any employee of the 
     Department of the Navy who is employed in any capacity on 
     board a vessel of the Military Sealift Command. Any such 
     release shall be in accordance with the standards and 
     procedures applicable to the disclosure and reporting to the 
     Coast Guard of drug tests results and drug test records of 
     individuals employed on vessels documented under the laws of 
     the United States.
       ``(b) Waiver.--The results of a drug test of an employee 
     may be released under subsection (a) without the prior 
     written consent of the employee that is otherwise required 
     under section 503(e) of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 
     1987 (5 U.S.C. 7301 note).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``7479. Civil service mariners of Military Sealift Command: release of 
              drug test results to Coast Guard.''.

     SEC. 1102. LIMITATIONS ON BACK PAY AWARDS.

       (a) In General.--Section 5596(b) of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) The pay, allowances, or differentials granted under 
     this section for the period for which an unjustified or 
     unwarranted personnel action was in effect shall not exceed 
     that authorized by the applicable law, rule, regulations, or 
     collective bargaining agreement under which the unjustified 
     or unwarranted personnel action is found, except that in no 
     case may pay, allowances, or differentials be granted under 
     this section for a period beginning more than 6 years before 
     the date of the filing of a timely appeal or, absent such 
     filing, the date of the administrative determination.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 7121 of title 5, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(h) Settlements and awards under this chapter shall be 
     subject to the limitations in section 5596(b)(4) of this 
     title.''.

     SEC. 1103. RESTORATION OF ANNUAL LEAVE ACCUMULATED BY 
                   CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES AT INSTALLATIONS IN THE 
                   REPUBLIC OF PANAMA TO BE CLOSED PURSUANT TO THE 
                   PANAMA CANAL TREATY OF 1977.

       Section 6304(d)(3)(A) of title 5, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting ``the closure of an installation of the 
     Department of Defense in the Republic of Panama in accordance 
     with the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977,'' after ``2687 note) 
     during any period,''.

     SEC. 1104. REPEAL OF PROGRAM PROVIDING PREFERENCE FOR 
                   EMPLOYMENT OF MILITARY SPOUSES IN MILITARY 
                   CHILD CARE FACILITIES.

       Section 1792 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking out subsection (d); and
       (2) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (d).

     SEC. 1105. ELIMINATION OF RETAINED PAY AS BASIS FOR 
                   DETERMINING LOCALITY-BASED ADJUSTMENTS.

       Section 5302(8)(B) of title 5, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting ``(except a rate

[[Page H3533]]

     retained under subsection (a)(2) of that section)'' after 
     ``section 5363''.

     SEC. 1106. OBSERVANCE OF CERTAIN HOLIDAYS AT DUTY POSTS 
                   OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES.

       Section 6103(b) of title 5, United States Code, is amended 
     by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Instead of a holiday that is designated under 
     subsection (a) to occur on a Monday, for an employee at a 
     duty post outside the United States whose basic workweek is 
     other than Monday through Friday, and for whom Monday is a 
     regularly scheduled workday, the legal public holiday is the 
     first workday of the workweek in which the Monday designated 
     for the observance of such holiday under subsection (a) 
     occurs.''.
              TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS

     SEC. 1201. LIMITATION ON FUNDS FOR PEACEKEEPING IN THE 
                   REPUBLIC OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA.

       (a) Limitation.--The Secretary of Defense may not expend 
     from funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for 
     fiscal year 1999 more than $1,858,600,000 for the purpose of 
     providing for United States participation in Bosnia 
     peacekeeping operations.
       (b) Emergency Exception.--The Secretary may increase the 
     amount under subsection (a) by not more than $100,000,000 for 
     the sole purpose of safeguarding United States forces in the 
     event of hostilities, imminent hostilities, or other grave 
     danger to their well-being. Such an increase may become 
     effective only upon submission by the Secretary to Congress 
     of a certification that such grave danger exists and that 
     such additional funds are required to meet immediate security 
     threats.
       (c) Report.--Not later than April 1, 1999, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to Congress a report with respect to 
     United States participation in Bosnia peacekeeping 
     operations. The report shall provide a detailed projection of 
     any additional funding that will be required by the 
     Department of Defense to meet mission requirements for such 
     operations for the remainder of fiscal year 1999.
       (d) Presidential Authority.--Nothing in this section shall 
     be deemed to restrict the authority of the President under 
     the Constitution to protect the lives of United States 
     citizens.
       (e) Bosnia Peacekeeping Operations.--For purposes of 
     subsection (a), the term ``Bosnia peacekeeping operations'' 
     means the operation designated as Operation Joint Force, the 
     operation designated as Operation Joint Endeavor, and any 
     other operation under which United States military forces 
     participate in peacekeeping or peace enforcement activities 
     in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and any activity 
     that is directly related to the support of any such 
     operation.

     SEC. 1202. REPORTS ON THE MISSION OF UNITED STATES FORCES IN 
                   REPUBLIC OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) In section 1202(1) of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 
     111 Stat. 1929; approved November 18, 1997), it was stated to 
     be the sense of Congress that United States ground combat 
     forces should not participate in a follow-on force in the 
     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina after June 1998.
       (2) On December 16, 1997, the President announced his 
     support for the continued deployment of United States ground 
     combat forces in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina after 
     June 30, 1998, as part of a multinational peacekeeping force 
     led by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
       (3) The President's decision to extend the presence of 
     United States ground combat forces in the Republic of Bosnia 
     and Herzegovina has changed the mission of those forces in a 
     fundamental manner.
       (4) The President has in effect committed United States 
     ground combat forces in the Republic of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina to providing a secure environment for complete 
     implementation of the civilian provisions of the Dayton 
     Accords.
       (5) The Administration has not specified how long such an 
     achievement will take and, therefore, the mission of United 
     States ground combat forces in the Republic of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina is of indefinite duration.
       (b) Annual Presidential Report.--(1) The President shall 
     submit to Congress an annual report on the presence of United 
     States ground combat forces in the Republic of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina. Each such report shall include the following:
       (A) The President's assessment of progress toward the full 
     implementation of the civilian goals of the Dayton Accord, as 
     specified in subsection (c).
       (B) The expected duration of the deployment of United 
     States ground combat forces in the Republic of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina in support of implementation of those goals.
       (C) The percentage of those goals that have been completed 
     as of the date of the report, the percentage that are 
     expected to be completed within the next reporting period, 
     and the expected time for completion of the remaining tasks.
       (2) The first report under this subsection shall be 
     submitted not later than 90 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, and subsequent reports shall be 
     submitted at yearly intervals thereafter. The requirement to 
     submit an annual report under this subsection terminates upon 
     the withdrawal of all United States ground combat forces from 
     the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
       (c) Basis for Assessment of Progress.--For purposes of 
     subsection (b)(1)(A), the President shall assess whether 
     progress is being made toward implementation of the civilian 
     goals of the Dayton Accords based upon assessment of the 
     following goals and associated matters:
       (1) Accomplishment of military stability, as measured by--
       (A) the maintenance of the cease-fire between the former 
     warring parties;
       (B) the continued cantonment of heavy weapons and the 
     observance of arms limitations;
       (C) the disbanding of special police;
       (D) the termination of covert support to the Srpska 
     Demokratska Stranka party by the Federal Republic of 
     Yugoslavia; and
       (E) similar measures.
       (2) Police and judicial reform, as measured by--
       (A) the restructuring and ethnic integration of local 
     police;
       (B) completion of human rights training by local police 
     forces;
       (C) the demonstrated ability of local police to deal 
     effectively and impartially with civil disturbances and 
     disorder;
       (D) the implementation of an effective judicial reform 
     program; and
       (E) similar measures.
       (3) Creation and implementation of effective national 
     institutions untainted by ethnic separatism, as measured by--
       (A) the dissolution of previously outlawed institutions;
       (B) a functioning customs service with national control 
     over customs revenues;
       (C) transparency in national budgets and disbursements; and
       (D) similar measures.
       (4) Media reform, as measured by--
       (A) the divestiture of control of broadcast networks from 
     the control of political parties;
       (B) opposition party access to media;
       (C) the availability of alternative and independent media 
     throughout the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina; and
       (D) similar measures.
       (5) Democratization and reform of the electoral process, as 
     measured by--
       (A) transparent functioning of local, entity, and national 
     governments;
       (B) acceptance of binding arbitration for the 
     implementation of results in contested local elections;
       (C) modification of electoral laws to meet international 
     and Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe 
     (OSCE) standards;
       (D) the free and fair conduct of the September 1998 
     national elections and subsequent elections; and
       (E) similar measures.
       (6) Return of refugees, as measured by--
       (A) compliance of entity property laws with the Dayton 
     Accords;
       (B) participation by entity governments in orderly cross-
     ethnic returns;
       (C) protection by local police of returnees;
       (D) acceptance of substantial numbers of returned refugees 
     in major cities; and
       (E) similar measures.
       (7) Resolution of the status of Brcko, as measured by--
       (A) the implementation of local election results;
       (B) the functioning of an ethnically integrated police 
     force;
       (C) ethnic reintegration of Brcko and the surrounding 
     region; and
       (D) similar measures.
       (8) Compliance of persons indicted for war crimes by the 
     International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, as measured 
     by--
       (A) the termination of political, military, and media 
     control by war criminals;
       (B) the assistance of local authorities in apprehension of 
     indictees;
       (C) the cooperation of entity justice establishments in 
     cooperating with the Tribunal; and
       (D) similar measures.
       (9) The ability of international organizations to carry out 
     their functions within the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina 
     without military support, as measured by--
       (A) the ability of local authorities to carry out demining 
     programs;
       (B) the ability of the Office of the High Representative to 
     enforce inter-entity agreements without accompanying military 
     shows of force; and
       (C) similar measures.
       (10) Economic reconstruction and recovery, as measured by--
       (A) local currency circulating freely and its use in 
     official transactions;
       (B) an agreement reached on a permanent national currency 
     in use in all entities;
       (C) the creation of privatization laws consistent with the 
     Dayton Accords;
       (D) government control over sources of revenue;
       (E) substantial repair and functioning of major 
     infrastructure elements;
       (F) an in-place International Monetary Fund program; and
       (G) similar measures.
       (d) Secretary of Defense Report.--(1) Not later than 
     December 15, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
     the congressional defense committees a report on the effects 
     of military operations in the Republic of Bosnia and 
     Herzegovina and the Balkans region on the capabilities of 
     United States military forces and, in particular, on the 
     capability of United States military forces to conduct 
     successfully two nearly simultaneous major theater wars as 
     specified in current Defense Planning Guidance and in 
     accordance with the deployment timelines called for in the 
     war plans of the commanders of unified combatant commands.
       (2) Whenever the number of United States ground combat 
     forces in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina increases or 
     decreases by 10 percent or more compared to the number of 
     such forces as of the most recent previous report under this 
     subsection, the Secretary shall submit an additional report 
     as specified in paragraph (1). Any such additional report 
     shall be submitted within 30 days of the date on which the 
     requirement to submit the report becomes effective under the 
     preceding sentence.

[[Page H3534]]

       (3) The Secretary shall include in each report under this 
     subsection information with respect to the effects of 
     military operations in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina 
     and the Balkans region on the capabilities of United States 
     military forces to conduct successfully two nearly 
     simultaneous major theater wars as specified in current 
     Defense Planning Guidance and in accordance with the 
     deployment timelines called for in the war plans of the 
     commanders of unified combatant commands. Such information 
     shall include information on the effects of those operations 
     upon anticipated deployment plans for major theater wars in 
     Southwest Asia or on the Korean peninsula including the 
     following:
       (A) Deficiencies or delays in deployment of strategic lift, 
     logistics support and infrastructure, ammunition (including 
     precision guided munitions) support forces, intelligence 
     assets, follow-on forces used for planned counteroffensives, 
     and similar forces.
       (B) Additional planned reserve component mobilization, 
     including specific units to be ordered to active duty and 
     required dates for activation of presidential call-up 
     authority.
       (C) Specific plans and timelines for redeployment of United 
     States forces from the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 
     the Balkans region, or supporting forces in the region, to 
     both the first and second major theater war.
       (D) Preventative actions or deployments involving United 
     States forces in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and 
     the Balkans region that would be taken in the event of a 
     single theater war to deter the outbreak of a second theater 
     war.
       (E) Specific plans and timelines to replace forces deployed 
     to the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Balkans 
     region, or the surrounding region to maintain United States 
     military presence.
       (F) An assessment, undertaken in consultation with the 
     Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the commanders of 
     the unified combatant commands, of the level of increased 
     risk to successful conduct of the major theater wars and the 
     maintenance of security and stability in the Republic of 
     Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Balkans region, by the 
     requirement to redeploy forces from Bosnia and the Balkans in 
     the event of a major theater war.
       (e) Definition of Dayton Accords.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term ``Dayton Accords'' means the General 
     Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 
     initialed by the parties in Dayton, Ohio, on November 21, 
     1995, and signed in Paris on December 14, 1995.

     SEC. 1203. REPORT ON MILITARY CAPABILITIES OF AN EXPANDED 
                   NATO ALLIANCE.

       (a) Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall prepare a 
     report, in both classified and unclassified form, on the 
     planned future military capabilities of the North Atlantic 
     Treaty Organization (NATO) in light of the proposed inclusion 
     of Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary in the NATO 
     alliance. The report shall set forth--
       (1) the tactical, operational, and strategic issues that 
     would be raised by the inclusion of Poland, the Czech 
     Republic, and Hungary in the NATO alliance;
       (2) the required improvements to common alliance military 
     assets that would result from the inclusion of those nations 
     in the alliance;
       (3) the planned improvements to national capabilities of 
     current NATO members that would be required by reason of the 
     inclusion of those nations in the alliance;
       (4) the planned improvements to national capabilities of 
     the military forces of those candidate member nations; and
       (5) the additional requirements that would be imposed on 
     the United States by NATO expansion.
       (b) Matters To Be Included.--The report shall include the 
     following:
       (1) An assessment of the tactical and operational 
     capabilities of the military forces of each of the candidate 
     member nations.
       (2) An assessment of the capability of each candidate 
     member nation to provide logistical, command and control, and 
     other vital infrastructure required for alliance defense (as 
     specified in Article V of the NATO Charter), including a 
     description in general terms of alliance plans for 
     reinforcing each candidate member nation during a crisis or 
     war and detailing means for deploying both United States and 
     other NATO forces from current member states and from the 
     continental United States or other United States bases 
     worldwide and, in particular, describing plans for ground 
     reinforcement of Hungary.
       (3) An assessment of the ability of current and candidate 
     alliance members to deploy and sustain combat forces in 
     alliance defense missions conducted in the territory of any 
     of the candidate member nations, as specified in Article V of 
     the NATO Charter.
       (4) A description of projected defense programs through 
     2009 (shown on an annual basis and cumulatively) of each 
     current and candidate alliance member nation, including 
     planned investments in capabilities relevant to Article V 
     alliance defense and potential alliance contingency 
     operations and showing both planned national efforts as well 
     as planned alliance common efforts and describing any 
     disparities in investments by current or candidate alliance 
     member nations.
       (5) A detailed comparison and description of any 
     disparities in scope, methodology, assessments of common 
     alliance or national responsibilities, or any other factor 
     related to alliance capabilities between (A) the report on 
     alliance expansion costs prepared by the Department of 
     Defense (in the report submitted to Congress in February 1998 
     entitled ``Report to the Congress on the Military 
     Requirements and Costs of NATO Enlargement''), and (B) the 
     report on alliance expansion costs prepared by NATO 
     collectively and referred to as the ``NATO estimate'', issued 
     at Brussels in November 1997.
       (6) Any other factor that, in the judgment of the Secretary 
     of Defense, bears upon the strategic, operational, or 
     tactical military capabilities of an expanded NATO alliance.
       (c) Submission of Report.--The report shall be submitted to 
     Congress not later than March 15, 1999.

     SEC. 1204. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF COUNTERPROLIFERATION 
                   AUTHORITIES FOR SUPPORT OF UNITED NATIONS 
                   SPECIAL COMMISSION ON IRAQ.

       (a) Amount Authorized for Fiscal Year 1999.--The total 
     amount of assistance for fiscal year 1999 provided by the 
     Secretary of Defense under section 1505 of the Weapons of 
     Mass Destruction Control Act of 1992 (22 U.S.C. 5859a) that 
     is provided in the form of funds, including funds used for 
     activities of the Department of Defense in support of the 
     United Nations Special Commission on Iraq, may not exceed 
     $15,000,000.
       (b) Extension of Authority To Provide Assistance.--
     Subsection (f) of section 1505 of the Weapons of Mass 
     Destruction Control Act of 1992 (22 U.S.C. 5859a) is amended 
     by striking out ``1998'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``1999''.

     SEC. 1205. REPEAL OF LANDMINE MORATORIUM.

       Section 580 of the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act, 
     1996 (Public Law 104-107; 110 Sat 751), is repealed.

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

     SEC. 1301. SPECIFICATION OF COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION 
                   PROGRAMS AND FUNDS.

       (a) Specification of CTR Programs.--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 1305).
       (b) Fiscal Year 1999 Cooperative Threat Reduction Funds 
     Defined.--As used in this title, the term ``fiscal year 1999 
     Cooperative Threat Reduction funds'' means the funds 
     appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations 
     in section 301 for Cooperative Threat Reduction programs.

     SEC. 1302. FUNDING ALLOCATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Of the fiscal year 1999 Cooperative Threat 
     Reduction funds, not more than the following amounts may be 
     obligated for the purposes specified:
       (1) Except as provided in paragraph (11), for strategic 
     offensive arms elimination in Russia, $142,400,000.
       (2) Except as provided in paragraph (11), for strategic 
     nuclear arms elimination in Ukraine, $47,500,000.
       (3) For activities to support warhead dismantlement 
     processing in Russia, $9,400,000.
       (4) For activities associated with chemical weapons 
     destruction in Russia, $35,000,000.
       (5) For weapons transportation security in Russia, 
     $10,300,000.
       (6) For planning, design, and construction of a storage 
     facility for Russian fissile material, $60,900,000.
       (7) For weapons storage security in Russia, $41,700,000.
       (8) For development of a cooperative program with the 
     Government of Russia to eliminate the production of weapons 
     grade plutonium at Russian reactors, $29,800,000.
       (9) For biological weapons proliferation prevention 
     activities in Russia, $2,000,000.
       (10) For activities designated as Other Assessments/
     Administrative Support $7,000,000.
       (11) For strategic arms elimination in Russia or Ukraine, 
     $31,400,000.
       (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 
     paragraphs (2) and (3), 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. 
     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.
       (3) The Secretary may not, under the authority provided in 
     paragraph (1), obligate amounts appropriated for the purposes 
     stated in any of paragraphs (3) through (10) of subsection 
     (a) in excess of 115 percent of the amount stated in those 
     paragraphs.

     SEC. 1303. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR SPECIFIED 
                   PURPOSES.

       (a) In General.--No fiscal year 1999 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.
       (5) Programs other than the programs specified in 
     subsection (b) of section 406 of title 10, United States Code 
     (as added by section 1305).

[[Page H3535]]

       (b) Limitation With Respect to Defense Conversion 
     Assistance.--None of the funds appropriated pursuant to this 
     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. 1304. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR CHEMICAL WEAPONS 
                   DESTRUCTION FACILITY.

       No fiscal year 1999 Cooperative Threat Reduction funds 
     authorized to be obligated in section 1302(a)(4) for 
     activities associated with chemical weapons destruction in 
     Russia, and no funds appropriated for Cooperative Threat 
     Reduction programs for any prior fiscal year and remaining 
     available for obligation, may be used for construction of a 
     chemical weapons destruction facility.

     SEC. 1305. 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 2 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 of mass destruction 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 of 
     mass destruction, components, and technology and expertise 
     related to such weapons.
       ``(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.--The limitation described in section 
     406 of title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection 
     (a), shall apply with respect to fiscal years beginning with 
     fiscal year 1999.

     SEC. 1306. REQUIREMENT TO SUBMIT BREAKDOWN OF AMOUNTS 
                   REQUESTED BY PROJECT CATEGORY.

       The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress on an 
     annual basis, not later than 30 days after the date that the 
     President submits to Congress the budget of the United States 
     Government for the following fiscal year--
       (1) a breakdown, with respect to the appropriations 
     requested for Cooperative Threat Reduction programs for the 
     fiscal year after the fiscal year in which the breakdown is 
     submitted, of the amounts requested for each project category 
     under each Cooperative Threat Reduction program element; and
       (2) a breakdown, with respect to appropriations for 
     Cooperative Threat Reduction programs for the fiscal year in 
     which the breakdown is submitted, of the amounts obligated or 
     expended, or planned to be obligated or expended, for each 
     project category under each Cooperative Threat Reduction 
     program element.

     SEC. 1307. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS UNTIL COMPLETION OF 
                   FISCAL YEAR 1998 REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Use of Funds for Programs Related to Start II Treaty.--
     No fiscal year 1999 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(f) of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 
     111 Stat. 1948)) until 30 days after the date on which the 
     Secretary of Defense submits to Congress the certification 
     described in section 1404 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 
     111 Stat. 1960).
       (b) Use of Funds for Chemical Weapons Destruction 
     Facility.--No fiscal year 1999 Cooperative Threat Reduction 
     funds may be obligated or expended for activities relating to 
     a chemical weapons destruction facility until 15 days after 
     the date that is the later of the dates described in section 
     1405 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 1960).
       (c) Use of Funds for Destruction of Chemical Weapons.--No 
     funds authorized to be appropriated under this or any other 
     Act for fiscal year 1999 for Cooperative Threat Reduction 
     programs may be obligated or expended for chemical weapons 
     destruction activities until the President submits to 
     Congress the written certification described in section 
     1406(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 1961).
       (d) Use of Funds for Storage Facility for Russian Fissile 
     Material.--No fiscal year 1999 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 dates described in section 1407 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 
     111 Stat. 1962).
       (e) Use of Funds for Weapons Storage Security.--No fiscal 
     year 1999 Cooperative Threat Reduction funds intended for 
     weapons storage security activities in Russia may be 
     obligated or expended until 15 days after the date that the 
     Secretary of Defense submits to Congress the report on the 
     status of negotiations between the United States and Russia 
     described in section 1408 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 
     111 Stat. 1962).

     SEC. 1308. REPORT ON BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS PROGRAMS IN RUSSIA.

       (a) Report.--Not later than December 31, 1998, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional 
     defense committees a report, in classified and unclassified 
     forms, containing--
       (1) an assessment of the extent of compliance by Russia 
     with international agreements relating to the control of 
     biological weapons; and
       (2) a detailed evaluation of the potential political and 
     military costs and benefits of collaborative biological 
     pathogen research efforts by the United States and Russia.
       (b) Content of Report.--The report required under 
     subsection (a) shall include the following:
       (1) An evaluation of the extent of the control and 
     oversight by the Government of Russia over the military and 
     civilian-military biological warfare programs formerly 
     controlled or overseen by states of the former Soviet Union.
       (2) The extent and scope of continued biological warfare 
     research, development, testing, and production in Russia, 
     including the sites where such activity is occurring and the 
     types of activity being conducted.
       (3) An assessment of compliance by Russia with the terms of 
     the Biological Weapons Convention.
       (4) An identification and assessment of the measures taken 
     by Russia to comply with the obligations assumed under the 
     Joint Statement on Biological Weapons, agreed to by the 
     United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia on September 
     14, 1992.
       (5) A description of the extent to which Russia has 
     permitted individuals from the United States or other 
     countries to visit military and nonmilitary biological 
     research, development, testing, and production sites in order 
     to resolve ambiguities regarding activities at such sites.
       (6) A description of the information provided by Russia 
     about its biological weapons dismantlement efforts to date.
       (7) An assessment of the accuracy and comprehensiveness of 
     declarations by Russia regarding its biological weapons 
     activities.
       (8) An identification of collaborative biological research 
     projects carried out by the United States and Russia for 
     which Cooperative Threat Reduction funds have been used.
       (9) An evaluation of the political and military utility of 
     prior, existing, and prospective cooperative biological 
     pathogen research programs carried out between the United 
     States and Russia, and an assessment of the impact of such 
     programs on increasing Russian military transparency with 
     respect to biological weapons activities.
       (10) An assessment of the political and military utility of 
     the long-term collaborative program advocated by the National 
     Academy of Sciences in its October 27, 1997 report, 
     ``Controlling Dangerous Pathogens: A Blueprint for U.S.-
     Russian Cooperation''.

     SEC. 1309. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS 
                   PROLIFERATION PREVENTION ACTIVITIES IN RUSSIA.

       No fiscal year 1999 Cooperative Threat Reduction funds may 
     be obligated or expended for biological weapons proliferation 
     prevention activities in Russia 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 a certification that no Cooperative Threat Reduction 
     funds provided for cooperative research activities at 
     biological research institutes in Russia have been used--
       (A) to support activities that have resulted in the 
     development of a new strain of anthrax; or
       (B) for any purpose inconsistent with the objectives of 
     providing such assistance.
       (2) The date on which the Secretary submits to the 
     congressional defense committees notification that the United 
     States has examined and tested the new strain of anthrax 
     reportedly developed at the State Research Center for Applied 
     Microbiology in Obolensk, Russia.

     SEC. 1310. LIMITATION ON USE OF CERTAIN FUNDS FOR STRATEGIC 
                   ARMS ELIMINATION IN RUSSIA OR UKRAINE.

       No fiscal year 1999 Cooperative Threat Reduction funds 
     authorized to be obligated in section 1302(a)(11) for 
     strategic arms elimination in Russia or Ukraine may be 
     obligated or expended until 30 days after the date that 
     the Secretary of Defense submits to the congressional 
     defense committees notification on how the Secretary plans 
     to use such funds.

     SEC. 1311. 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.

            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

     SEC. 2001. SHORT TITLE.

       This division may be cited as the ``Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999''.

                            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:
       

[[Page H3536]]



                     Army: Inside the United States                     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            State               Installation or location      Amount    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama......................  Anniston Army Depot......      $3,550,000
                               Fort Rucker..............      $4,300,000
                               Redstone Arsenal.........      $1,550,000
California...................  Fort Irwin...............     $14,800,000
Georgia......................  Fort Benning.............     $28,600,000
Hawaii.......................  Schofield Barracks.......     $67,500,000
Illinois.....................  Rock Island Arsenal......      $5,300,000
Indiana......................  Crane Army Ammunition                    
                                Activity................      $7,100,000
Kansas.......................  Fort Riley...............      $3,600,000
Kentucky.....................  Blue Grass Army Depot....      $5,300,000
                               Fort Campbell............     $41,000,000
                               Fort Knox................     $23,000,000
Louisiana....................  Fort Polk................      $8,300,000
Maryland.....................  Fort Detrick.............      $3,550,000
Missouri.....................  Fort Leonard Wood........     $28,200,000
New Jersey...................  Fort Monmouth............      $7,600,000
                               Picatinny Arsenal........      $8,400,000
New York.....................  Fort Drum................      $4,650,000
                               United States Military                   
                                Academy, West Point.....     $85,000,000
North Carolina...............  Fort Bragg...............     $95,900,000
Oklahoma.....................  Fort Sill................     $13,800,000
                               McAlester Army Ammunition                
                                Plant...................     $10,800,000
Texas........................  Fort Bliss...............      $4,100,000
                               Fort Hood................     $32,500,000
                               Fort Sam Houston.........     $21,800,000
Utah.........................  Tooele Army Depot........      $3,900,000
Virginia.....................  National Ground                          
                                Intelligence Center,                    
                                Charlottesville.........     $46,200,000
                               Fort Eustis..............     $36,531,000
Washington...................  Fort Lewis...............     $18,200,000
CONUS Classified.............  Classified Location......      $4,600,000
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................    $639,631,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (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    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Belgium........................  80th Area Support Group      $6,300,000
Germany........................  Schweinfurt............     $18,000,000
                                 Wurzburg...............      $4,250,000
Korea..........................  Camp Casey.............     $13,400,000
                                 Camp Castle............     $18,226,000
                                 Camp Humphreys.........      $8,500,000
                                 Camp Stanley...........      $5,800,000
Kwajalein......................  Kwajalein Atoll........     $48,600,000
                                                         ---------------
                                     Total..............    $123,076,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2102. FAMILY HOUSING.

       (a) Construction and Acquisition.--Using amounts 
     appropriated pursuant to the 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    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama...............................  Redstone Arsenal.........  118 Units....................     $14,000,000
Hawaii................................  Schofield Barracks.......  64 Units.....................     $14,700,000
North Carolina........................  Fort Bragg...............  170 Units....................     $19,800,000
Texas.................................  Fort Hood................  154 Units....................     $21,600,000
Virginia..............................  Fort Lee.................  80 Units.....................     $13,000,000
                                                                                                 ---------------
                                                                   Total........................     $83,100,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (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 $6,350,000.

     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 section 2104(a)(5)(A), the Secretary of 
     the Army may improve existing military family housing units 
     in an amount not to exceed $37,429,000.

     SEC. 2104. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, ARMY.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     1998, for military construction, land acquisition, and 
     military family housing functions of the Department of the 
     Army in the total amount of $2,010,036,000 as follows:

[[Page H3537]]

       (1) For military construction projects inside the United 
     States authorized by section 2101(a), $535,631,000.
       (2) For military construction projects outside the United 
     States authorized by section 2101(b), $87,076,000.
       (3) For unspecified minor construction projects authorized 
     by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, $5,000,000.
       (4) For architectural and engineering services and 
     construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United 
     States Code, $63,792,000.
       (5) For military family housing functions:
       (A) For construction and acquisition, planning and design, 
     and improvement of military family housing and facilities, 
     $126,879,000.
       (B) For support of military family housing (including the 
     functions described in section 2833 of title 10, United 
     States Code), $1,097,697,000.
       (6) For the Homeowners Assistance Program as authorized by 
     section 2832 of title 10, United States Code, $7,500,000.
       (7) For the construction of the missile software 
     engineering annex, phase II, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, 
     authorized by section 2101(a) of the Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (division B of Public 
     Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 1966), $13,600,000.
       (8) For the construction of a disciplinary barracks, phase 
     II, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, authorized by section 2101(a) 
     of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1998, $29,000,000.
       (9) For the construction of the whole barracks complex 
     renewal, Fort Sill, Oklahoma, authorized by section 2101(a) 
     of the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1998, $20,500,000.
       (10) For rail yard expansion at Fort Carson, Colorado, 
     authorized by section 2101(a) of the Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, $23,000,000.
       (11) For the construction of an aerial gunnery range at 
     Fort Drum, New York, authorized by section 2101(a) of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, 
     $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 2101 of this Act may not exceed--
       (1) the total amount authorized to be appropriated under 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a);
       (2) $16,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2101(a) for the construction of a multipurpose 
     digital training range at Fort Knox, Kentucky);
       (3) $15,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2101(a) for the construction of a railhead facility 
     at Fort Hood, Texas);
       (4) $73,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2101(a) for the construction of a cadet development 
     center at the United States Military Academy, West Point, New 
     York); and
       (5) $36,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2101(b) for the construction of a powerplant on Roi 
     Namur Island at Kwajalein Atoll, Kwajalein).
       (c) Adjustments.--The total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to paragraphs (1) through (11) of 
     subsection (a) is the sum of the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated in such paragraphs, reduced by--
       (1) $2,639,000, which represents the combination of project 
     savings in military family housing construction resulting 
     from favorable bids, reduced overhead costs, and 
     cancellations due to force structure changes; and
       (2) $6,000,000, which represents the combination of project 
     savings in military construction resulting from favorable 
     bids, reduced overhead costs, and cancellations due to force 
     structure changes.

     SEC. 2105. INCREASE IN FISCAL YEAR 1998 AUTHORIZATION FOR 
                   MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AT FORT DRUM, 
                   NEW YORK, AND FORT SILL, OKLAHOMA.

       (a) Increase.--The table in section 2101(a) of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (division 
     B of Public Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 1967) is amended--
       (1) in the item relating to Fort Drum, New York, by 
     striking out ``$24,400,000'' in the amount column and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$24,900,000'';
       (2) in the item relating to Fort Sill, Oklahoma, by 
     striking out ``$25,000,000'' in the amount column and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$28,500,000''; and
       (3) by striking out the amount identified as the total in 
     the amount column and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``$602,750,000''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2104 of that Act (111 
     Stat. 1968) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking out 
     ``$2,010,466,000'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``$2,013,966,000''; and
       (B) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``$435,350,000'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$438,850,000''; and
       (2) in subsection (b)(8), by striking out ``$8,500,000'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``$9,000,000''.
                            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            $11,010,000
                                  Station, Yuma.                        
                                 Naval Observatory                      
                                  Detachment, Flagstaff.        $990,000
California.....................  Marine Corps Air                       
                                  Station, Miramar......     $29,570,000
                                 Marine Corps Base, Camp                
                                  Pendleton.............     $40,430,000
                                 Naval Air Station,          $20,640,000
                                  Lemoore.                              
                                 Naval Air Warfare           $10,140,000
                                  Center Weapons                        
                                  Division, China Lake.                 
                                 Naval Facility, San                    
                                  Clemente Island.......      $8,350,000
                                 Naval Submarine Base,       $11,400,000
                                  San Diego.                            
District of Columbia...........  Naval District,                $790,000
                                  Washington.                           
Florida........................  Naval Air Station, Key       $3,730,000
                                  West.                                 
                                 Naval Air Station,           $1,500,000
                                  Jacksonville.                         
                                 Naval Air Station,           $1,400,000
                                  Whiting Field.                        
                                 Naval Station, Mayport.      $6,163,000
Georgia........................  Marine Corps Logistics                 
                                  Base, Albany..........      $2,800,000
                                 Naval Submarine Base,                  
                                  Kings Bay.............      $2,550,000
Hawaii.........................  Fleet and Industrial                   
                                  Supply Center, Pearl                  
                                  Harbor................      $9,730,000
                                 Marine Corps Air                       
                                  Station, Kaneohe Bay..     $27,410,000
                                 Naval Communications &                 
                                  Telecommunications                    
                                  Area Master Station                   
                                  Eastern Pacific,                      
                                  Wahiawa...............      $1,970,000
                                 Naval Shipyard, Pearl       $11,400,000
                                  Harbor.                               
                                 Naval Station, Pearl        $18,180,000
                                  Harbor.                               
                                 Naval Submarine Base,                  
                                  Pearl Harbor..........      $8,060,000
                                 Navy Public Works                      
                                  Center, Pearl Harbor..     $28,967,000
Illinois.......................  Naval Training Center,                 
                                  Great Lakes...........     $20,280,000
Indiana........................  Naval Surface Warfare                  
                                  Center, Crane.........     $11,110,000
Maryland.......................  Naval Surface Warfare                  
                                  Center, Indian Head                   
                                  Division, Indian Head.     $13,270,000
Mississippi....................  Naval Air Station,           $3,280,000
                                  Meridian.                             
                                 Naval Construction                     
                                  Battalion Center                      
                                  Gulfport..............     $10,670,000
North Carolina.................  Marine Corps Air                       
                                  Station, Cherry Point.      $6,040,000
                                 Marine Corps Base, Camp                
                                  LeJeune...............     $14,600,000
Pennsylvania...................  Naval Surface Warfare                  
                                  Center Ship Systems                   
                                  Engineering Station,                  
                                  Philadelphia..........      $2,410,000
Rhode Island...................  Naval Education and                    
                                  Training Center,                      
                                  Newport...............      $5,630,000
                                 Naval Undersea Warfare                 
                                  Center Division,                      
                                  Newport...............      $9,140,000
South Carolina.................  Marine Corps Air                       
                                  Station, Beaufort.....      $1,770,000
                                 Marine Corps Reserve                   
                                  Detachment Parris                     
                                  Island................     $15,990,000
                                 Naval Weapons Station,                 
                                  Charleston............      $9,737,000
Texas..........................  Naval Station,              $12,200,000
                                  Ingleside.                            
Virginia.......................  Fleet and Industrial                   
                                  Supply Center, Norfolk                
                                  (Craney Island).......      $1,770,000
                                 Fleet Training Center,       $5,700,000
                                  Norfolk.                              

[[Page H3538]]

                                                                        
                                 Naval Air Station,           $6,400,000
                                  Oceana.                               
                                 Naval Shipyard,                        
                                  Norfolk, Portsmouth...      $6,180,000
                                 Naval Station, Norfolk.     $45,530,000
                                 Naval Surface Warfare                  
                                  Center, Dahlgren......     $15,680,000
                                 Tactical Training Group                
                                  Atlantic, Dam Neck....      $2,430,000
Washington.....................  Naval Shipyard, Puget        $4,300,000
                                  Sound.                                
                                 Strategic Weapons                      
                                  Facility Pacific,                     
                                  Bremerton.............      $2,750,000
                                                         ---------------
                                     Total..............    $484,047,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (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    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greece.........................  Naval Support Activity,                
                                  Souda Bay.............      $5,260,000
Guam...........................  Naval Activities, Guam.     $10,310,000
Italy..........................  Naval Support Activity,     $18,270,000
                                  Naples.                               
United Kingdom.................  Joint Maritime                         
                                  Communications Center,                
                                  St. Mawgan............      $2,010,000
                                                         ---------------
                                     Total..............     $35,850,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     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..............................  Naval Air Station, Lemoore  162 Units.................     $30,379,000
Hawaii..................................  Navy Public Works Center,                                             
                                           Pearl Harbor.............  150 Units.................     $29,125,000
                                                                                                 ---------------
                                                                      Total.....................     $59,504,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (b) Planning and Design.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations 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 $15,618,000.

     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 $221,991,000.

     SEC. 2204. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, NAVY.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     1998, for military construction, land acquisition, and 
     military family housing functions of the Department of the 
     Navy in the total amount of $1,776,726,000 as follows:
       (1) For military construction projects inside the United 
     States authorized by section 2201(a), $470,547,000.
       (2) For military construction projects outside the United 
     States authorized by section 2201(b), $35,850,000.
       (3) For unspecified minor construction projects authorized 
     by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, $8,900,000.
       (4) For architectural and engineering services and 
     construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United 
     States Code, $60,346,000.
       (5) For military family housing functions:
       (A) For construction and acquisition, planning and design, 
     and improvement of military family housing and facilities, 
     $297,113,000.
       (B) For support of military housing (including functions 
     described in section 2833 of title 10, United States Code), 
     $915,293,000.
       (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--
       (1) the total amount authorized to be appropriated under 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a); and
       (2) $13,500,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2202(a) for the construction of a berthing pier at 
     Naval Station, Norfolk, Virginia.
       (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--
       (1) $6,323,000 which represents the combination of project 
     savings in military family housing construction resulting 
     from favorable bids, reduced overhead costs, and 
     cancellations due to force structure changes; and
       (2) $5,000,000 which represents the combination of project 
     savings in military construction resulting from favorable 
     bids, reduced overhead costs, and cancellations due to force 
     structure changes.

     SEC. 2205. AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT ROAD CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, 
                   MARINE CORPS BASE, CAMP LEJEUNE, NORTH 
                   CAROLINA.

       The Secretary of the Navy may accept from the State of 
     North Carolina, a road construction project valued at 
     approximately $2,000,000, which is to be constructed at 
     Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, in 
     accordance with plans and specifications acceptable to the 
     Secretary of the Navy.

                         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.     $19,398,000
Alaska.........................  Eielson Air Force Base.      $4,352,000
Arizona........................  Luke Air Force Base....      $3,400,000
California.....................  Edwards Air Force Base.     $10,361,000
                                 Travis Air Force Base..      $4,250,000

[[Page H3539]]

                                                                        
                                 Vandenberg Air Force        $18,709,000
                                  Base.                                 
Colorado.......................  Falcon Air Force             $9,601,000
                                  Station.                              
                                 United States Air Force                
                                  Academy...............      $4,413,000
District of Columbia...........  Bolling Air Force Base.      $2,948,000
Florida........................  Eglin Air Force Base...     $20,437,000
                                 Eglin Auxiliary Field 9      $3,837,000
                                 MacDill Air Force Base.      $9,808,000
                                 Tyndall Air Force Base.      $3,600,000
Georgia........................  Robins Air Force Base..     $11,894,000
Hawaii.........................  Hickam Air Force Base..      $5,890,000
Idaho..........................  Mountain Home Air Force                
                                  Base..................     $16,397,000
Kansas.........................  McConnell Air Force          $4,450,000
                                  Base.                                 
Maryland.......................  Andrews Air Force Base.      $4,448,000
Mississippi....................  Keesler Air Force Base.     $35,526,000
Nevada.........................  Indian Springs Air                     
                                  Force Auxiliary Air                   
                                  Field.................     $15,013,000
                                 Nellis Air Force Base..      $6,378,000
New Jersey.....................  McGuire Air Force Base.      $6,044,000
New Mexico.....................  Holloman Air Force Base     $11,100,000
                                 Kirtland Air Force Base      $1,774,000
North Carolina.................  Seymour Johnson Air                    
                                  Force Base............      $6,100,000
North Dakota...................  Grand Forks Air Force        $2,686,000
                                  Base.                                 
Ohio...........................  Wright-Patterson Air                   
                                  Force Base............     $22,000,000
Oklahoma.......................  Altus Air Force Base...      $5,300,000
                                 Tinker Air Force Base..     $25,385,000
                                 Vance Air Force Base...      $6,223,000
South Carolina.................  Charleston Air Force        $24,330,000
                                  Base.                                 
South Dakota...................  Ellsworth Air Force          $6,500,000
                                  Base.                                 
Tennessee......................  Arnold Air Force Base..     $11,600,000
Texas..........................  Brooks Air Force Base..      $7,000,000
                                 Dyess Air Force Base...      $3,350,000
                                 Lackland Air Force Base     $14,930,000
                                 Laughlin Air Force Base      $7,315,000
                                 Randolph Air Force Base      $3,166,000
Washington.....................  Fairchild Air Force         $13,820,000
                                  Base.                                 
                                 McChord Air Force Base.     $51,847,000
                                                         ---------------
                                     Total..............    $445,580,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (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...     $13,967,000
Korea..........................  Kunsan Air Base........      $5,958,000
                                 Osan Air Base..........      $7,496,000
Turkey.........................  Incirlik Air Base......      $2,949,000
United Kingdom.................  Royal Air Force,            $15,838,000
                                  Lakenheath.                           
                                 Royal Air Force,            $24,960,000
                                  Mildenhall.                           
                                                         ---------------
                                     Total..............     $71,168,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     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    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama...............................  Maxwell Air Force Base...  143 Units....................     $16,300,000
Alaska................................  Eielson Air Force Base...  46 Units.....................     $12,932,000
California............................  Edwards Air Force Base...  48 Units.....................     $12,580,000
                                        Vandenberg Air Force Base  95 Units.....................     $18,499,000
Delaware..............................  Dover Air Force Base.....  55 Units.....................      $8,998,000
Florida...............................  MacDill Air Force Base...  48 Units.....................      $7,609,000
                                        Patrick Air Force Base...  46 Units.....................      $9,692,000
                                        Tyndall Air Force Base...  122 Units....................     $14,500,000
Nebraska..............................  Offutt Air Force Base....  Ancillary Facility...........        $870,000
                                        Offutt Air Force Base....  Ancillary Facility...........        $900,000
                                        Offutt Air Force Base....  90 Units.....................     $12,212,000
Nevada................................  Nellis Air Force Base....  60 Units.....................     $10,550,000
New Mexico............................  Kirtland Air Force Base..  37 Units.....................      $6,400,000
Ohio..................................  Wright-Patterson Air                                                    
                                         Force Base..............  40 Units.....................      $5,600,000
Texas.................................  Dyess Air Force Base.....  64 Units.....................      $9,415,000
                                        Sheppard Air Force Base..  65 Units.....................      $7,000,000

[[Page H3540]]

                                                                                                                
Washington............................  Fairchild Air Force Base.  Ancillary Facility...........      $1,692,000
                                        Fairchild Air Force Base.  14 Units.....................      $2,300,000
                                                                                                 ---------------
                                                                     Total......................    $158,049,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (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 $11,342,000.

     SEC. 2303. 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 2304(a)(5)(A), the Secretary of 
     the Air Force may improve existing military family housing 
     units in an amount not to exceed $81,778,000.

     SEC. 2304. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, AIR FORCE.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     1998, for military construction, land acquisition, and 
     military family housing functions of the Department of the 
     Air Force in the total amount of $1,577,264,000 as follows:
       (1) For military construction projects inside the United 
     States authorized by section 2301(a), $445,580,000.
       (2) For military construction projects outside the United 
     States authorized by section 2301(b), $71,168,000.
       (3) For unspecified minor construction projects authorized 
     by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, $7,135,000.
       (4) For architectural and engineering services and 
     construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United 
     States Code, $37,592,000.
       (5) For military housing functions:
       (A) For construction and acquisition, planning and design, 
     and improvement of military family housing and facilities, 
     $251,169,000.
       (B) For support of military family housing (including the 
     functions described in section 2833 of title 10, United 
     States Code), $785,204,000.
       (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 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 (5) of 
     subsection (a) is the sum of the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated in such paragraphs, reduced by--
       (1) $9,584,000 which represents the combination of project 
     savings in military family housing construction resulting 
     from favorable bids, reduced overhead costs, and 
     cancellations due to force structure changes; and
       (2) $11,000,000 which represents the combination of project 
     savings in military construction resulting from favorable 
     bids, reduced overhead costs, and cancellations due to force 
     structure changes.

                      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 
     2404(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    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical Demilitarization......  Aberdeen Proving                       
                                  Ground, Maryland......    $186,350,000
                                 Newport Army Depot,                    
                                  Indiana...............    $191,550,000
Defense Logistics Agency.......  Defense Fuel Support                   
                                  Point, Fort Sill,                     
                                  Oklahoma..............      $3,500,000
                                 Defense Fuel Support                   
                                  Point, Jacksonville                   
                                  Annex, Mayport,                       
                                  Florida...............     $11,020,000
                                 Defense Fuel Support                   
                                  Point, Jacksonville,                  
                                  Florida...............     $11,000,000
                                 Defense General Supply                 
                                  Center, Richmond                      
                                  (DLA), Virginia.......     $10,500,000
                                 Defense Fuels Supply                   
                                  Center, Camp Shelby,                  
                                  Mississippi...........      $5,300,000
                                 Defense Fuels Supply                   
                                  Center, Elmendorf Air                 
                                  Force Base, Alaska....     $19,500,000
                                 Defense Fuels Supply                   
                                  Center, Pope Air Force                
                                  Base, North Carolina..      $4,100,000
                                 Various Locations......      $1,300,000
Defense Medical Facilities                                              
 Office........................  Barksdale Air Force                    
                                  Base, Louisiana.......      $3,450,000
                                 Beale Air Force Base,                  
                                  California............      $3,500,000
                                 Carlisle Barracks,                     
                                  Pennsylvania..........      $4,678,000
                                 Cheatham Annex,             $11,300,000
                                  Virginia.                             
                                 Edwards Air Force Base,                
                                  California............      $6,000,000
                                 Elgin Air Force Base,        $9,200,000
                                  Florida.                              
                                 Fort Bragg, North            $6,500,000
                                  Carolina.                             
                                 Fort Hood, Texas.......     $14,100,000
                                 Fort Stewart/Hunter                    
                                  Army Air Field,                       
                                  Georgia...............     $10,400,000
                                 Grand Forks Air Force                  
                                  Base, North Dakota....      $5,600,000
                                 Holloman Air Force                     
                                  Base, New Mexico......      $1,300,000
                                 Keesler Air Force Base,                
                                  Mississippi...........        $700,000
                                 Marine Corps Air                       
                                  Station, Camp                         
                                  Pendleton,                            
                                  California............      $6,300,000
                                 McChord Air Force Base,                
                                  Washington............     $20,000,000
                                 Moody Air Force Base,                  
                                  Georgia...............     $11,000,000
                                 Naval Air Station,                     
                                  Pensacola, Florida....     $25,400,000
                                 Naval Hospital,                        
                                  Bremerton, Washington.     $28,000,000
                                 Naval Hospital, Great                  
                                  Lakes, Illinois.......      $7,100,000
                                 Naval Station, San                     
                                  Diego, California.....      $1,350,000
                                 Naval Submarine Base,                  
                                  Bangor, Washington....      $5,700,000
                                 Travis Air Force Base,                 
                                  California............      $1,700,000
Defense Education Activity.....  Marine Corps Base, Camp                
                                  LeJeune, North                        
                                  Carolina..............     $16,900,000
                                 United States Military                 
                                  Academy, West Point,                  
                                  New York..............      $2,840,000
National Security Agency.......  Fort Meade, Maryland...        $668,000
Special Operations Command.....  Elgin Auxiliary Field                  
                                  3, Florida............      $7,310,000
                                 Elgin Auxiliary Field                  
                                  9, Florida............      $2,400,000
                                 Fort Campbell, Kentucky     $15,000,000
                                 MacDill Air Force Base,                
                                  Florida...............      $8,400,000
                                 Naval Amphibious Base,                 
                                  Coronado, California..      $3,600,000
                                 Stennis Space Center,                  
                                  Mississippi...........      $5,500,000
                                                         ---------------
                                     Total..............    $690,016,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page H3541]]

       (b) Outside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2404(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                                               
 Organization..................  Kwajalein Atoll,                       
                                  Kwajalein.............      $4,600,000
Defense Logistics Agency.......  Lajes Field, Azores,                   
                                  Portugal..............      $7,700,000
Defense Medical Facilities                                              
 Office........................  Naval Air Station,                     
                                  Sigonella, Italy......      $5,300,000
                                 Royal Air Force,                       
                                  Lakenheath, United                    
                                  Kingdom...............     $10,800,000
Defense Education Activity.....  Fort Buchanan, Puerto                  
                                  Rico..................      $8,805,000
                                 Naval Activities, Guam.     $13,100,000
Special Operations Command.....  Naval Station,                         
                                  Roosevelt Roads,                      
                                  Puerto Rico...........      $9,600,000
                                                         ---------------
                                     Total..............     $59,905,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2402. 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 2404(a)(11)(A), the Secretary of 
     Defense may improve existing military family housing units in 
     an amount not to exceed $345,000.

     SEC. 2403. ENERGY CONSERVATION PROJECTS.

       Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of 
     appropriations in section 2404(a)(9), the Secretary of 
     Defense may carry out energy conservation projects under 
     section 2865 of title 10, United States Code.

     SEC. 2404. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, DEFENSE AGENCIES.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     1998, 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 $2,386,023,000 as follows:
       (1) For military construction projects inside the United 
     States authorized by section 2401(a), $369,966,000.
       (2) For military construction projects outside the United 
     States authorized by section 2401(a), $59,905,000.
       (3) For construction of the Ammunition Demilitarization 
     Facility, Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas authorized by 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), section 2408 of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 
     (division B of Public Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 1982), and 
     section 2405 of this Act, $16,500,000.
       (4) For construction of the Ammunition Demilitarization 
     Facility, Umatilla Army Depot, Oregon, authorized by section 
     2401 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1995, as amended by section 2407 of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, section 
     2408 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1998, and section 2405 of this Act, $50,950,000.
       (5) For military construction projects at Portsmouth Naval 
     Hospital, Virginia, hospital replacement, authorized by 
     section 2401(a) of the Military Construction Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 (division B of Public Law 
     101-189; 106 Stat. 1640), as amended by section 2406 of this 
     Act, $17,954,000.
       (6) For unspecified minor construction projects under 
     section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, $16,094,000.
       (7) For contingency construction projects of the Secretary 
     of Defense under section 2804 of title 10, United States 
     Code, $4,890,000.
       (8) For architectural and engineering services and 
     construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United 
     States Code, $39,866,000.
       (9) For energy conservation projects authorized by section 
     2404, $46,950,000.
       (10) 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), $1,730,704,000.
       (11) For military family housing functions:
       (A) For improvement of military family housing and 
     facilities, $345,000.
       (B) For support of military housing (including functions 
     described in section 2833 of title 10, United States Code), 
     $36,899,000 of which not more than $31,139,000 may be 
     obligated or expended for the leasing of military family 
     housing units worldwide.
       (C) For credit to the Department of Defense Family Housing 
     Improvement Fund established by section 2883(a)(1) of title 
     10, United States Code, $7,000,000.
       (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--
       (1) the total amount authorized to be appropriated under 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a);
       (2) $162,050,000 (the balance of the amount authorized 
     under section 2401(a) for the construction of the Ammunition 
     Demilitarization Facility at Newport Army Depot, Indiana); 
     and
       (3) $158,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized 
     under section 2401(a) for the construction of the Ammunition 
     Demilitarization Facility at Aberdeen Proving Ground, 
     Maryland).
       (c) Adjustment.--The total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to paragraphs (1) through (11) of 
     subsection (a) is the sum of the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated in such paragraphs, reduced by $12,000,000, 
     which represents the combination of project savings in 
     military construction resulting from favorable bids, reduced 
     overhead costs, and cancellations due to force structure 
     changes.

     SEC. 2405. INCREASE IN FISCAL YEAR 1995 AUTHORIZATION FOR 
                   MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AT PINE BLUFF 
                   ARSENAL, ARKANSAS, AND UMATILLA ARMY DEPOT, 
                   OREGON.

       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) and 
     section 2408 of the Military Construction Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1998 (division B of Public Law 105-85; 111 
     Stat. 1982), under the agency heading relating to Chemical 
     Weapons and Munitions Destruction, is amended--
       (1) in the item relating to Pine Bluff Arsenal, Arkansas, 
     by striking out $134,000,000'' in the amount column and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$154,400,000''; and
       (2) in the item relating to Umatilla Army Depot, Oregon, by 
     striking out ``$187,000,000'' in the amount column and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``$193,377,000''.

     SEC. 2406. INCREASE IN FISCAL YEAR 1990 AUTHORIZATION FOR 
                   MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROJECT AT PORTSMOUTH 
                   NAVAL HOSPITAL, VIRGINIA.

       (a) Increase.--The table in section 2401(a) of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 
     (division B of Public Law 100-189; 103 Stat. 1640) is amended 
     in the item relating to Portsmouth Naval Hospital, Virginia, 
     by striking out ``$330,000,000'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``$351,354,000''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2405(b)(2) of that Act 
     (103 Stat. 1642) is amended by striking out ``$321,500,000'' 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``$342,854,000''.
   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, 1998, 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 $169,000,000.
            TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

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

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 
     30, 1998, 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, 
     $70,338,000; and
       (B) for the Army Reserve, $84,608,000.
       (2) For the Department of the Navy, for the Naval and 
     Marine Corps Reserve, $33,721,000.
       (3) For the Department of the Air Force--
       (A) for the Air National Guard of the United States, 
     $97,701,000; and
       (B) for the Air Force Reserve, $35,371,000.
       (b) Adjustment.--(1) The amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to subsection (a)(1)(A) is reduced by 
     $2,000,000, which represents the combination of project 
     savings in

[[Page H3542]]

     military construction resulting from favorable bids, reduced 
     overhead costs, and cancellations due to force structure 
     changes.
       (2) The amount authorized to be appropriated pursuant to 
     subsection (a)(3)(A) is reduced by $4,000,000, which 
     represents the combination of project savings in military 
     construction resulting from favorable bids, reduced overhead 
     costs, and cancellations due to force structure changes.

     SEC. 2602. ARMY RESERVE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, SALT LAKE CITY, 
                   UTAH.

       (a) Cost Share Requirement.--With regard to the military 
     construction project for the Army Reserve concerning 
     construction of a reserve center and organizational 
     maintenance shop at an appropriate site in, or in the 
     vicinity of, Salt Lake City, Utah, to be carried out using 
     funds appropriated pursuant to the authorization of 
     appropriations in section 2601(a)(1)(B), the Secretary of the 
     Army shall enter into an agreement with the State of Utah 
     under which the State agrees to provide financial or in-kind 
     contributions in connection with the project.
       (b) Repeal of Superseded Authority.--(1) Section 2603 of 
     the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1998 (division B of Public Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 1983) is 
     repealed.
       (2) Section 2601(a)(1)(B) of such Act is amended by 
     striking out ``$66,267,000'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     ``$53,553,000''.
        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, 2001; or
       (2) the date of enactment of an Act authorizing funds for 
     military construction for fiscal year 2002.
       (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, 2001; or
       (2) the date of enactment of an Act authorizing funds for 
     fiscal year 2002 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 
                   1996 PROJECTS.

       (a) Extensions.--Notwithstanding section 2701 of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 
     (division B of Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 541), 
     authorizations for the projects set forth in the tables in 
     subsection (b), as provided in sections 2201, 2302, or 2601 
     of that Act, shall remain in effect until October 1, 1999, or 
     the date of enactment of an Act authorizing funds for 
     military construction for fiscal year 2000, whichever is 
     later.
       (b) Tables.--The tables referred to in subsection (a) are 
     as follows:
       

                                  Navy: Extension of 1996 Project Authorization                                 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or location             Project                 Amount    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Puerto Rico...........................  Naval Station Roosevelt                                                 
                                         Roads...................  Housing Office...............        $710,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       

                               Air Force: Extension of 1996 Project Authorization                               
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or location             Project                 Amount    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Texas.................................  Lackland Air Force Base..  Family Housing (67 units)....      $6,200,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       

                          Army National Guard: Extension of 1996 Project Authorization                          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or location             Project                 Amount    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mississippi...........................  Camp Shelby..............  Multipurpose Range Complex                   
                                                                    (Phase I)...................      $5,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   SEC. 2703. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF FISCAL YEAR 1995 PROJECT.

       (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), the 
     authorization for the project 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 1998 (division B of Public 
     Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 1985), shall remain in effect until 
     October 1, 1999, or the date of enactment of an Act 
     authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
     2000, whichever is later.
       (b) Table.--The table referred to in subsection (a) is as 
     follows:
       

                                  Navy: Extension of 1995 Project Authorization                                 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or location             Project                 Amount    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maryland..............................  Indian Head Naval Surface                                               
                                         Warfare Center..........  Denitrification/Acid Mixing                  
                                                                    Facility....................      $6,400,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2704. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Titles XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV, and XXVI shall take 
     effect on the later of--
       (1) October 1, 1998; or
       (2) the date of enactment of this Act.

                    TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

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

     SEC. 2801. DEFINITION OF ANCILLARY SUPPORTING FACILITIES 
                   UNDER THE ALTERNATIVE AUTHORITY FOR ACQUISITION 
                   AND IMPROVEMENT OF MILITARY HOUSING.

       Section 2871(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by inserting after ``including'' the following: ``facilities 
     to provide or support elementary or secondary education,''.
        Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration

     SEC. 2811. RESTORATION OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE LANDS USED BY 
                   ANOTHER FEDERAL AGENCY.

       (a) Inclusion of Restoration as Contract Term.--Section 
     2691 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) As a condition of any lease, permit, license, or 
     other grant of access entered into by the Secretary of a 
     military department with another Federal agency authorizing 
     the other agency to use lands under the control of the 
     Secretary, the Secretary may require the other agency to 
     agree to remove any improvements and to take any other action 
     necessary in the judgment of the Secretary to restore the 
     land used by the agency to the condition the land was in 
     before its use by the agency. In lieu of performing the work 
     itself, the Federal agency may elect, with the consent of the 
     Secretary, to reimburse the Secretary for the costs incurred 
     by the military department to perform the removal and 
     restoration work.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading of such section 
     is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 2691. Restoration of land used by permit or lease''.

       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 159 
     of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking the 
     item relating to section 2691 and inserting in lieu thereof 
     the following new item:


[[Page H3543]]


``2691. Restoration of land used by permit or lease.''.

     SEC. 2812. OUTDOOR RECREATION DEVELOPMENT ON MILITARY 
                   INSTALLATIONS FOR DISABLED VETERANS, MILITARY 
                   DEPENDENTS WITH DISABILITIES, AND OTHER PERSONS 
                   WITH DISABILITIES.

       (a) Access Enhancement.--Section 103 of the Sikes Act (16 
     U.S.C. 670c) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsections:
       ``(b) Access for Disabled Veterans, Military Dependents 
     With Disabilities, and Other Persons With Disabilities.--(1) 
     In developing facilities and conducting programs for public 
     outdoor recreation at military installations, consistent with 
     the primary military mission of the installations, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall ensure, to the maximum extent 
     practicable, that outdoor recreation opportunities (including 
     fishing, hunting, trapping, wildlife viewing, boating, and 
     camping) made available to the public also provide equal 
     access for persons described in paragraph (2) when 
     topographic, vegetative, and water resources allow equal 
     access without substantial modification to the natural 
     environment.
       ``(2) Persons referred to in paragraph (1) are disabled 
     veterans, military dependents with disabilities, and other 
     persons with disabilities.
       ``(3) The Secretary of Defense shall carry out this 
     subsection in consultation with the Secretary of Veterans 
     Affairs, national service, military, and veterans 
     organizations, and sporting organizations in the private 
     sector that participate in outdoor recreation projects for 
     persons described in paragraph (2).
       ``(c) Acceptance of Donations.--In connection with the 
     facilities and programs for public outdoor recreation at 
     military installations, in particular the requirement under 
     subsection (b) to provide equal access for persons described 
     in paragraph (2) of such subsection, the Secretary of Defense 
     may accept--
       ``(1) the voluntary services of individuals and 
     organizations; and
       ``(2) donations of money or property, whether real, 
     personal, mixed, tangible, or intangible.
       ``(d) Treatment of Volunteers.--A volunteer under 
     subsection (c) shall not be considered to be a Federal 
     employee and shall not be subject to the provisions of law 
     relating to Federal employment, including those relating to 
     hours of work, rates of compensation, leave, unemployment 
     compensation, and Federal employee benefits, except that--
       ``(1) for the purposes of the tort claims provisions of 
     chapter 171 of title 28, United States Code, the volunteer 
     shall be considered to be a Federal employee; and
       ``(2) for the purposes of subchapter I of chapter 81 of 
     title 5, United States Code, relating to compensation to 
     Federal employees for work injuries, the volunteer shall be 
     considered to be an employee, as defined in section 
     8101(1)(B) of title 5, United States Code, and the provisions 
     of such subchapter shall apply.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Such section is further amended 
     by striking out ``Sec. 103.'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
     the following:

     ``SEC. 103. PROGRAM FOR PUBLIC OUTDOOR RECREATION.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--''.

     SEC. 2813. REPORT ON USE OF UTILITY SYSTEM CONVEYANCE 
                   AUTHORITY.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than March 1, 1999, the 
     Secretary of each military department shall submit to 
     Congress a report containing--
       (1) the criteria to be used by the Secretary to select 
     utility systems, and related real property, under the 
     jurisdiction of the Secretary for conveyance to a municipal, 
     private, regional, district, or cooperative utility company 
     or other entity under the authority of section 2688 of title 
     10, United States Code; and
       (2) a description of the manner in which the Secretary will 
     ensure that any such conveyance does not adversely affect the 
     national security of the United States.
       (b) List of Likely Systems for Conveyance.--The report 
     submitted by the Secretary of a military department under 
     subsection (a) shall also contain a list of the utility 
     systems, including the locations of the utility systems, 
     that, as of the date of the submission of the report, the 
     Secretary considers are likely to be conveyed under the 
     authority of section 2688 of title 10, United States Code.

            Subtitle C--Defense Base Closure and Realignment

     SEC. 2821. PAYMENT OF STIPULATED PENALTIES ASSESSED UNDER THE 
                   COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, 
                   COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT OF 1980 IN 
                   CONNECTION WITH MCCLELLAN AIR FORCE BASE, 
                   CALIFORNIA.

       (a) Source of Payment.--Notwithstanding subsection (b) of 
     section 2906(a) of 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 use amounts 
     in the Department of Defense Base Closure Account 1990 
     established under subsection (a) of such section to pay 
     stipulated penalties assessed under the Comprehensive 
     Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (42 
     U.S.C. 9601 et seq.) against McClellan Air Force Base, 
     California.
       (b) Amount of Payment.--The amount expended under the 
     authority of subsection (a) may not exceed $15,000.

     SEC. 2822. ELIMINATION OF WAIVER AUTHORITY REGARDING 
                   PROHIBITION AGAINST CERTAIN CONVEYANCES OF 
                   PROPERTY AT NAVAL STATION, LONG BEACH, 
                   CALIFORNIA.

       Section 2826 of the Military Construction Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1998 (division B of Public Law 105-85; 111 
     Stat. 2001) is amended by striking out subsection (e).

                      Subtitle D--Land Conveyances

                        PART I--ARMY CONVEYANCES

     SEC. 2831. LAND CONVEYANCE, ARMY RESERVE CENTER, MASSENA, NEW 
                   YORK.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey, without consideration, to the Village of Massena, New 
     York (in this section referred to as the ``Village''), all 
     right, title, and interest of the United States in and to a 
     parcel of real property (including improvements thereon) 
     consisting of the Army Reserve Center in Massena, New York, 
     for the purpose of permitting the Village to develop the 
     parcel for public benefit, including the development of 
     municipal office space.
       (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 Village.
       (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. 2832. LAND CONVEYANCE, ARMY RESERVE CENTER, OGDENSBURG, 
                   NEW YORK.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey, without consideration, to the City of Ogdensburg, New 
     York (in this section referred to as the ``City''), all 
     right, title, and interest of the United States in and to a 
     parcel of real property (including improvements thereon) 
     consisting of the Army Reserve Center in Ogdensburg, New 
     York, for the purpose of permitting the City to develop the 
     parcel for public benefit, including the development of 
     municipal office space.
       (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 City.
       (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. 2833. LAND CONVEYANCE, ARMY RESERVE CENTER, JAMESTOWN, 
                   OHIO.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey, without consideration, to the Greeneview Local School 
     District of Jamestown, Ohio, all right, title, and interest 
     of the United States in and to a parcel of excess Federal 
     real property, including improvements thereon, that is 
     located at 5693 Plymouth Road in Jamestown, Ohio, and 
     contains an Army Reserve Center.
       (b) Purpose of Conveyance.--The purpose of the conveyance 
     under subsection (a) is to permit the Greeneview Local School 
     District to retain and use the conveyed property for the 
     benefit of the students of Greeneview schools.
       (c) 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 Greeneview Local School District.
       (d) 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. 2834. LAND CONVEYANCE, STEWART ARMY SUB-POST, NEW 
                   WINDSOR, NEW YORK.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey, without consideration, to the Town of New Windsor, 
     New York (in this section referred to as the ``Town''), all 
     right, title, and interest of the United States in and to a 
     parcel of real property, including any improvements thereon, 
     consisting of approximately 291 acres at the Stewart Army 
     Sub-Post in New Windsor, New York.
       (b) Exclusion.--The real property to be conveyed under 
     subsection (a) does not include any portion of the 
     approximately 89.2-acre parcel at Stewart Army Sub-Post that 
     is proposed for transfer to the jurisdiction and control of 
     the Marine Corps or the approximately 22-acre parcel at 
     Stewart Army Sub-Post that is proposed for transfer to the 
     jurisdiction and control of the Army Reserve.
       (c) 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.
       (d) 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. 2835. LAND CONVEYANCE, INDIANA ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT, 
                   CHARLESTOWN, INDIANA.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey to the Indiana Army Ammunition Plant Reuse Authority 
     (in this section referred to as the ``Reuse Authority'') all 
     right, title, and interest of the United States in and to a 
     parcel of real property, including improvements thereon, 
     consisting of approximately 4660 acres located at the Indiana 
     Army Ammunition Plant, Charlestown, Indiana, for the purpose 
     of developing the parcel as an industrial park to replace all 
     or part of the economic activity lost at the inactivated 
     plant.
       (b) Consideration.--Except as provided in subsection (d), 
     as consideration for the conveyance under subsection (a), the 
     Reuse Authority

[[Page H3544]]

     shall pay to the Secretary an amount equal to the fair market 
     value of the conveyed property as of the time of the 
     conveyance, determined by the Secretary in accordance with 
     Federal appraisal standards and procedures.
       (c) Time for Payment.--The consideration required under 
     subsection (b) shall be paid by the Reuse Authority at the 
     end of the 10-year period beginning on the date on which the 
     conveyance under subsection (a) is completed.
       (d) Effect of Reconveyance or Lease.--(1) If, during the 
     10-year period specified in subsection (c), the Reuse 
     Authority reconveys all or any part of the property conveyed 
     under subsection (a), the Reuse Authority shall pay to the 
     United States an amount equal to the fair market value of the 
     reconveyed property as of the time of the reconveyance, 
     excluding the value of any improvements made to the property 
     by the Reuse Authority, determined by the Secretary in 
     accordance with Federal appraisal standards and procedures.
       (2) The Secretary may treat a lease of the property within 
     such 10-year period as a reconveyance if the Secretary 
     determines that the lease is being used to avoid application 
     of paragraph (1).
       (e) Deposit of Proceeds.--The Secretary shall deposit any 
     proceeds received under subsection (b) or (d) in the special 
     account established pursuant to section 204(h)(2) of the 
     Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 
     U.S.C. 485(h)(2)).
       (f) Administrative Expenses.--In connection with the 
     conveyance under subsection (a), the Secretary may accept 
     amounts provided by the Reuse Authority or other persons to 
     cover administrative expenses incurred by the Secretary in 
     making the conveyance. Amounts received under this subsection 
     for administrative expenses shall be credited to the 
     appropriation, fund, or account from which the expenses were 
     paid and shall be available, to the extent provided in 
     appropriation Acts, for the same purposes and subject to the 
     same limitations as other funds in such appropriation, fund, 
     or account.
       (g) Description of Property.--The property to be conveyed 
     under subsection (a) includes the administrative area of the 
     Indiana Army Ammunition Plant as well as open space in the 
     southern end of the plant. The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the property to be conveyed shall be 
     determined by a survey satisfactory to the Secretary. The 
     cost of the survey shall be borne by the Reuse Authority.
       (h) 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.
       (i) Additional Conveyance for Recreational Purposes.--
     Section 2858(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 571), as 
     amended by section 2838 of the National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 2006), 
     is further amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(3) The Secretary may also convey to the State, without 
     consideration, another parcel of real property at the Indiana 
     Army Ammunition Plant consisting of approximately 2,000 acres 
     of additional riverfront property in order to connect the 
     parcel conveyed under paragraph (2) with the parcels of 
     Charlestown State Park conveyed to the State under paragraph 
     (1) and title II of the Defense Authorization Amendments and 
     Base Closure and Realignment Act (Public Law 100-526; 10 
     U.S.C. 2687 note).''.

     SEC. 2836. LAND CONVEYANCE, VOLUNTEER ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT, 
                   CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey to Hamilton County, Tennessee (in this section 
     referred to as the ``County''), all right, title, and 
     interest of the United States in and to a parcel of real 
     property, including improvements thereon, consisting of 
     approximately 1033 acres located at the Volunteer Army 
     Ammunition Plant, Chattanooga, Tennessee, for the purpose 
     of developing the parcel as an industrial park to replace 
     all or part of the economic activity lost at the 
     inactivated plant.
       (b) Consideration.--Except as provided in subsection (d), 
     as consideration for the conveyance under subsection (a), the 
     County shall pay to the Secretary an amount equal to the fair 
     market value of the conveyed property as of the time of the 
     conveyance, determined by the Secretary in accordance with 
     Federal appraisal standards and procedures.
       (c) Time for Payment.--The consideration required under 
     subsection (b) shall be paid by the County at the end of the 
     10-year period beginning on the date on which the conveyance 
     under subsection (a) is completed.
       (d) Effect of Reconveyance or Lease.--(1) If, during the 
     10-year period specified in subsection (c), the County 
     reconveys all or any part of the property conveyed under 
     subsection (a), the County shall pay to the United States an 
     amount equal to the fair market value of the reconveyed 
     property as of the time of the reconveyance, excluding the 
     value of any improvements made to the property by the County, 
     determined by the Secretary in accordance with Federal 
     appraisal standards and procedures.
       (2) The Secretary may treat a lease of the property within 
     such 10-year period as a reconveyance if the Secretary 
     determines that the lease is being used to avoid application 
     of paragraph (1).
       (e) Deposit of Proceeds.--The Secretary shall deposit any 
     proceeds received under subsection (b) or (d) in the special 
     account established pursuant to section 204(h)(2) of the 
     Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 
     U.S.C. 485(h)(2)).
       (f) Effect on Existing Leases.--The conveyance of the real 
     property under subsection (a) shall not affect the terms or 
     length of any contract entered into by the Secretary before 
     the date of the enactment of this Act with regard to the 
     property to be conveyed.
       (g) Administrative Expenses.--In connection with the 
     conveyance under subsection (a), the Secretary may accept 
     amounts provided by the County or other persons to cover 
     administrative expenses incurred by the Secretary in making 
     the conveyance. Amounts received under this subsection for 
     administrative expenses shall be credited to the 
     appropriation, fund, or account from which the expenses were 
     paid and shall be available, to the extent provided in 
     appropriation Acts, for the same purposes and subject to the 
     same limitations as other funds in such appropriation, fund, 
     or account.
       (h) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the 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 
     County.
       (i) 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. 2837. RELEASE OF REVERSIONARY INTEREST OF UNITED STATES 
                   IN FORMER REDSTONE ARMY ARSENAL PROPERTY 
                   CONVEYED TO ALABAMA SPACE SCIENCE EXHIBIT 
                   COMMISSION.

       (a) Release Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     release, without consideration and to such extent as the 
     Secretary considers appropriate to protect the interests of 
     the United States, the reversionary interests of the United 
     States in the real property described in subsection (b), 
     which were retained by the United States when the property 
     was conveyed to the Alabama Space Science Exhibit Commission, 
     an agency of the State of Alabama. The release shall be 
     executed in the manner provided in this section.
       (b) Description of Property.--The real property referred to 
     in this section is the real property conveyed to the Alabama 
     Space Science Exhibit Commission under the authority of the 
     following provisions of law:
       (1) The first section of Public Law 90-276 (82 Stat. 68).
       (2) Section 813 of the Military Construction Authorization 
     Act, 1980 (Public Law 96-125; 93 Stat. 952).
       (3) Section 813 of the Military Construction Authorization 
     Act, 1984 (Public Law 98-115; 97 Stat. 790).
       (c) Release, Waiver, or Conveyance of Other Rights, Terms, 
     and Conditions.--As part of the release under subsection (a), 
     the Secretary may release, waive, or convey, without 
     consideration and to such extent as the Secretary considers 
     appropriate to protect the interests of the United States--
       (1) any and all other rights retained by the United States 
     in and to the real property described in subsection (b) when 
     the property was conveyed to the Alabama Space Science 
     Exhibit Commission; and
       (2) any and all terms and conditions and restrictions on 
     the use of the real property imposed as part of the 
     conveyances described in subsection (b).
       (d) Conditions on Release, Waiver, or Conveyance.--(1) The 
     Secretary may execute the release under subsection (a) or a 
     release, waiver, or conveyance under subsection (c) only 
     after--
       (A) the Secretary approves of the master plan prepared by 
     the Alabama Space Science Exhibit Commission, as such plan 
     may exist or be revised from time to time, for development of 
     the real property described in subsection (b); and
       (2) the installation commander at Redstone Arsenal, 
     Alabama, certifies to the Secretary that the release, waiver, 
     or conveyance is consistent with the master plan.
       (2) A new facility or structure may not be constructed on 
     the real property described in subsection (b) unless the 
     facility or structure is included in the master plan, which 
     has been approved and certified as provided in paragraph (1).
       (e) Instrument of Release, Waiver, or Conveyance.--In 
     making a release, waiver, or conveyance authorized by this 
     section, the Secretary shall execute and file in the 
     appropriate office or offices a deed of release, amended 
     deed, or other appropriate instrument effectuating the 
     release, waiver, or conveyance.
       (f) Effect of Release.--Except as provided in subsection 
     (g), upon release of any reversionary interest under this 
     section, the right, title and interest of the Alabama Space 
     Science Exhibit Commission in and to the real property 
     described in subsection (b) shall, to the extent of the 
     release, no longer be subject to the conditions prescribed in 
     the provisions of law specified in such subsection. Except as 
     provided in subsection (g), the Alabama Space Science Exhibit 
     Commission may use the real property for any such purpose or 
     purposes as it considers appropriate consistent with the 
     master plan approved and certified as provided in subsection 
     (d), and the real property may be conveyed by the Alabama 
     Space Science Exhibit Commission without restriction and 
     unencumbered by any claims or rights of the United States 
     with respect to the property, subject to such rights, terms, 
     and conditions of the United States previously imposed on the 
     real property and not conveyed or released by the Secretary 
     under subsection (c).
       (g) Exceptions.--(1) Conveyance of the drainage and utility 
     easement reserved to the United States pursuant to section 
     813(b)(3) of the Military Construction Authorization Act, 
     1984 (Public Law 98-115; 97 Stat. 791), is not authorized 
     under this section.

[[Page H3545]]

       (2) In no event may title to any portion of the real 
     property described in subsection (b) be conveyed by the 
     Alabama Space Science Exhibit Commission or any future deed 
     holder of the real property to any person other than an 
     agency, instrumentality, political subdivision, municipal 
     corporation, or public corporation of the State of Alabama, 
     and the land use of such conveyed property may not be changed 
     without the approval of the Secretary.

                       PART II--NAVY CONVEYANCES

     SEC. 2841. EASEMENT, MARINE CORPS BASE, CAMP PENDLETON, 
                   CALIFORNIA.

       (a) Easement Authorized.--The Secretary of the Navy may 
     grant an easement, in perpetuity, to the Foothill/Eastern 
     Transportation Corridor Agency (in this section referred to 
     as the ``Agency'') over a parcel of real property at Marine 
     Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, California, consisting of 
     approximately 340 acres to permit the Recipient of the 
     easement to construct, operate, and maintain a restricted 
     access highway. The area covered by the easement shall 
     include slopes and all necessary incidents thereto.
       (b) Consideration.--As consideration for the conveyance of 
     the easement under subsection (a), the Agency shall pay to 
     the United States an amount equal to the fair market value of 
     the easement, as determined by an independent appraisal 
     satisfactory to the Secretary and paid for by the Agency.
       (c) Use of Proceeds.--In such amounts as are provided in 
     advance in appropriation Acts, the Secretary shall use the 
     funds paid by the Agency under subsection (b) to carry out 
     one or more of the following programs at Camp Pendleton:
       (1) Enhancement of access from Red, White, and Green Beach 
     under the I-5 interstate highway and railroad crossings to 
     inland areas.
       (2) Improvement of roads and bridge structures in the range 
     and training area.
       (3) Realignment of Basilone Road.
       (d) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the easement 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 
     Agency.
       (e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the easement under subsection (a) as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.

     SEC. 2842. LAND CONVEYANCE, NAVAL RESERVE READINESS CENTER, 
                   PORTLAND, MAINE.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Navy may 
     convey to the Gulf of Maine Aquarium Development Corporation, 
     Portland, Maine (in this section referred to as the 
     ``Corporation''), all right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in and to a parcel of real property, including 
     improvements thereon and any appurtenant interest in 
     submerged lands thereon, consisting of approximately 3.72 
     acres in Portland, Maine, which is the site of the Naval 
     Reserve Readiness Center, Portland, Maine.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of the conveyance under 
     subsection (a) is to facilitate economic development in 
     accordance with the plan of the Corporation for the 
     construction of an aquarium and marine research facility in 
     Portland, Maine.
       (c) Consideration.--(1) As consideration for the conveyance 
     authorized by subsection (a), the Corporation shall provide 
     for such facilities as the Secretary determines appropriate 
     for the Naval Reserve to replace the facilities conveyed 
     under that subsection.
       (2) To provide the replacement facilities, the Corporation 
     may--
       (A) convey to the United States a parcel of real property 
     determined by the Secretary to be an appropriate location for 
     the facilities and design and construct the facilities on the 
     conveyed parcel; or
       (B) design and construct the facilities on such parcel of 
     real property under the jurisdiction of the Secretary as the 
     Secretary shall specify.
       (3) The Secretary shall select the form in which the 
     consideration under paragraph (2) will be provided.
       (d) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the real property to be conveyed under 
     subsection (a), and of the real property, if any, to be 
     conveyed under subsection (c), shall be determined by surveys 
     satisfactory to the Secretary. The cost of the surveys shall 
     be borne by the Corporation.
       (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 interest of the United 
     States.

                    PART III--AIR FORCE CONVEYANCES

     SEC. 2851. LAND CONVEYANCE, LAKE CHARLES AIR FORCE STATION, 
                   LOUISIANA.

       (a) Conveyances Authorized.--The Secretary of the Air Force 
     may convey, without consideration, to McNeese State 
     University of Louisiana (in this section referred to as the 
     ``University'') all right, title, and interest of the United 
     States in and to a parcel of real property (including 
     improvements thereon) consisting of approximately 4.38 at 
     Lake Charles Air Force Station, Louisiana, for the purpose of 
     permitting the University to use the parcel for educational 
     purposes and agricultural research.
       (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 University.
       (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. 2852. LAND CONVEYANCE, AIR FORCE HOUSING FACILITY, LA 
                   JUNTA, COLORADO.

       (a) Conveyance Required.--The Secretary of the Air Force 
     may convey, without consideration, to the City of La Junta, 
     Colorado (in this section referred to as the ``City''), all 
     right, title, and interest of the United States in and to the 
     unused Air Force housing facility, consisting of 
     approximately 28 acres and improvements thereon, located 
     within the southern most boundary of the City.
       (b) Purpose of Conveyance.--The purpose of the conveyance 
     under subsection (a) is to permit the city to develop the 
     conveyed property for housing and educational purposes.
       (c) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the 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 City.
       (d) 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.
                       Subtitle E--Other Matters

     SEC. 2861. REPEAL OF PROHIBITION ON JOINT USE OF GRAY ARMY 
                   AIRFIELD, FORT HOOD, TEXAS, WITH CIVIL 
                   AVIATION.

       Section 319 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1987 (Public Law 99-661; 100 Stat. 3855) is 
     repealed.

     SEC. 2862. DESIGNATION OF BUILDING CONTAINING NAVY AND MARINE 
                   CORPS RESERVE CENTER, AUGUSTA, GEORGIA.

       The building containing the Navy and Marine Corps Reserve 
     Center located at 2869 Central Avenue in Augusta, Georgia, 
     shall be known and designated as the ``A. James Dyess 
     Building''.

     SEC. 2863. EXPANSION OF ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY.

       (a) Land Transfer, Navy Annex, Arlington, Virginia.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall provide for 
     the transfer to the Secretary of the Army of administrative 
     jurisdiction over the following parcels of land situated in 
     Arlington, Virginia:
       (A) Certain lands which comprise approximately 26 acres 
     bounded by Columbia Pike to the south and east, Oak Street to 
     the west, and the boundary wall of Arlington National 
     Cemetery to the north including Southgate Road.
       (B) Certain lands which comprise approximately 8 acres 
     bounded by Shirley Memorial Boulevard (Interstate 395) to the 
     south, property of the Virginia Department of Transportation 
     to the west, Columbia Pike to the north, and Joyce Street to 
     the east.
       (C) Certain lands which comprise approximately 2.5 acres 
     bounded by Shirley Memorial Boulevard (Interstate 395) to the 
     south, Joyce Street to the west, Columbia Pike to the north, 
     and the cloverleaf interchange of Route 100 and Columbia Pike 
     to the east.
       (2) Use of land.--The Secretary of the Army shall 
     incorporate the parcels of land transferred under paragraph 
     (1) into Arlington National Cemetery.
       (3) Remediation of land for cemetery use.--Before the 
     transfer of administrative jurisdiction over the parcels of 
     land under paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense shall 
     provide for the removal of any improvements on the parcels of 
     land and, in consultation with the Superintendent of 
     Arlington National Cemetery, the preparation of the land for 
     use for interment of remains of individuals in Arlington 
     National Cemetery.
       (4) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit 
     to Congress a report explaining in detail the measures 
     required to prepare the land for use as a part of Arlington 
     National Cemetery.
       (5) Deadline.--The Secretary of Defense shall complete the 
     transfer of administrative jurisdiction over the parcels of 
     land under this subsection not later than the earlier of--
       (A) January 1, 2010; or
       (B) the date when those parcels are no longer required (as 
     determined by the Secretary) for use as temporary office 
     space due to the renovation of the Pentagon.
       (b) Modification of Boundary of Arlington National 
     Cemetery.--.
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of the Army shall modify the 
     boundary of Arlington National Cemetery to include the 
     following parcels of land situated in Fort Myer, Arlington, 
     Virginia:
       (A) Certain lands which comprise approximately 5 acres 
     bounded by the Fort Myer Post Traditional Chapel to the 
     southwest, McNair Road to the northwest, the Vehicle 
     Maintenance Complex to the northeast, and the masonry wall of 
     Arlington National Cemetery to the southeast.
       (B) Certain lands which comprise approximately 3 acres 
     bounded by the Vehicle Maintenance Complex to the southwest, 
     Jackson Avenue to the northwest, the water pumping station to 
     the northeast, and the masonry wall of Arlington National 
     Cemetery to the southeast.
       (2) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Army shall submit 
     to Congress a report describing additional parcels of land 
     located in Fort Myer, Arlington, Virginia, that may be 
     suitable for use to expand Arlington National Cemetery.
       (3) Survey.--The Secretary of the Army may determine the 
     exact acreage and legal description of the parcels of land 
     described in paragraph (1) by a survey.

[[Page H3546]]

     SEC. 2864. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS UNDER DEMONSTRATION PROJECT 
                   FOR PURCHASE OF FIRE, SECURITY, POLICE, PUBLIC 
                   WORKS, AND UTILITY SERVICES FROM LOCAL 
                   GOVERNMENT AGENCIES.

       Section 816(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 2820) is 
     amended by striking out ``and 1998'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``through 2000''.

 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) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 1999 
     for weapons activities in carrying out programs necessary for 
     national security in the amount of $4,142,100,000, to be 
     allocated as follows:
       (1) Stockpile stewardship.--Funds are hereby authorized to 
     be appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
     1999 for stockpile stewardship in carrying out weapons 
     activities necessary for national security programs in the 
     amount of $2,138,375,000, to be allocated as follows:
       (A) For core stockpile stewardship, $1,591,375,000, to be 
     allocated as follows:
       (i) For operation and maintenance, $1,475,832,000.
       (ii) 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), $115,543,000, to be allocated as follows:

       Project 99-D-102, rehabilitation of maintenance facility, 
     Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, 
     California, $6,500,000.
       Project 99-D-103, isotope sciences facility, Lawrence 
     Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California, 
     $4,000,000.

       Project 99-D-104, protection of real property (roof 
     reconstruction, Phase II), Lawrence Livermore National 
     Laboratory, Livermore, California, $7,300,000.
       Project 99-D-105, central health physics calibration 
     facility, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New 
     Mexico, $3,900,000.
       Project 99-D-106, model validation and system certification 
     test center, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New 
     Mexico, $1,600,000.
       Project 99-D-107, joint computational engineering 
     laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New 
     Mexico, $1,800,000.
       Project 99-D-108, renovate existing roadways, Nevada Test 
     Site, Nevada, $2,000,000.
       Project 97-D-102, dual-axis radiographic hydrotest 
     facility, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New 
     Mexico, $36,000,000.
       Project 96-D-102, stockpile stewardship facilities 
     revitalization, Phase VI, various locations, $20,423,000.
       Project 96-D-103, ATLAS, Los Alamos National Laboratory, 
     Los Alamos, New Mexico, $6,400,000.
       Project 96-D-104, processing and environmental technology 
     laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New 
     Mexico, $18,920,000.
       Project 96-D-105, contained firing facility addition, 
     Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, 
     California, $6,700,000.

       (B) For inertial fusion, $498,000,000, to be allocated as 
     follows:
       (i) For operation and maintenance, $213,800,000.
       (ii) For the following plant project (including 
     maintenance, restoration, planning, construction, 
     acquisition, and modification of facilities, and land 
     acquisition related thereto), $284,200,000, to be allocated 
     as follows:

       Project 96-D-111, national ignition facility, Lawrence 
     Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California, 
     $284,200,000.

       (C) For technology partnership and education, $49,000,000, 
     to be allocated as follows:
       (i) For technology partnership, $40,000,000.
       (ii) For education, $9,000,000.
       (2) Stockpile management.--Funds are hereby authorized to 
     be appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
     1999 for stockpile management in carrying out weapons 
     activities necessary for national security programs in the 
     amount of $2,134,625,000, to be allocated as follows:
       (A) For operation and maintenance, $2,019,303,000.
       (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), 
     $115,322,000, to be allocated as follows:
       Project 99-D-122, rapid reactivation, various locations, 
     $11,200,000.
       Project 99-D-123, replace mechanical utility systems Y-12, 
     Oak Ridge, Tennessee, $1,900,000.
       Project 99-D-125, replace boilers and controls, Kansas City 
     Plant, Kansas City, Missouri, $1,000,000.
       Project 99-D-127, stockpile management restructuring 
     initiative, Kansas City Plant, Kansas City, Missouri, 
     $13,700,000.
       Project 99-D-128, stockpile management restructuring 
     initiative, Pantex consolidation, Amarillo, Texas, 
     $1,108,000.
       Project 99-D-132, stockpile management restructuring 
     initiative, nuclear material safeguards and security upgrades 
     project, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New 
     Mexico, $9,700,000.
       Project 98-D-123, stockpile management restructuring 
     initiative, tritium factory modernization and consolidation, 
     Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $27,500,000.
       Project 98-D-124, stockpile management restructuring 
     initiative, Y-12 Plant consolidation, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 
     $10,700,000.
       Project 97-D-122, nuclear materials storage facility 
     renovation, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New 
     Mexico, $9,164,000.
       Project 97-D-123, structural upgrades, Kansas City Plant, 
     Kansas City, Missouri, $6,400,000.
       Project 96-D-122, sewage treatment quality upgrade (STQU), 
     Pantex Plant, Amarillo, Texas, $3,700,000.
       Project 95-D-102, chemistry and metallurgy research (CMR) 
     upgrades project, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, 
     New Mexico, $16,000,000.
       Project 93-D-122, life safety upgrades, Y-12 Plant, Oak 
     Ridge, Tennessee, $3,250,000.
       (3) Program direction.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 1999 
     for program direction in carrying out weapons activities 
     necessary for national security programs in the amount of 
     $240,000,000.
       (b) Adjustments.--
       (1) Construction.--The total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to paragraphs (1)(A)(ii), (1)(B)(ii), 
     and (2)(B) of subsection (a) is the sum of the amounts 
     authorized to be appropriated in those paragraphs, reduced by 
     the sum of $30,000,000.
       (2) Non-construction.--The total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to paragraphs (1)(A)(i), (1)(B)(i), 
     (1)(C), (2)(A), and (3) of subsection (a) is the sum of the 
     amounts authorized to be appropriated in those paragraphs, 
     reduced by the sum of $340,900,000, to be derived from use of 
     prior year balances.

     SEC. 3102. DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND WASTE 
                   MANAGEMENT.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 1999 
     for environmental restoration and waste management in 
     carrying out programs necessary for national security in the 
     amount of $5,706,650,000, to be allocated as follows:
       (1) Closure projects.--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 
     $1,046,240,000.
       (2) Privatization.--For privatization projects in carrying 
     out environmental restoration and waste management activities 
     necessary for national security programs in the amount of 
     $286,857,000.
       (3) Site project and completion.--For site project and 
     completion in carrying out environmental restoration and 
     waste management activities necessary for national security 
     programs in the amount of $1,085,253,000, to be allocated as 
     follows:
       (A) For operation and maintenance, $886,090,000.
       (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), 
     $199,163,000, to be allocated as follows:
       Project 99-D-402, tank farm support services, F&H areas, 
     Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $2,745,000.
       Project 99-D-404, health physics instrumentation 
     laboratory, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Idaho, 
     $950,000.
       Project 98-D-401, H-tank farm storm water systems upgrade, 
     Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $3,120,000.
       Project 98-D-453, plutonium stabilization and handling 
     system for plutonium finishing plant, Richland, Washington, 
     $26,814,000.
       Project 98-D-700, road rehabilitation, Idaho National 
     Engineering Laboratory, Idaho, $7,710,000.
       Project 97-D-450, Actinide packaging and storage facility, 
     Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $79,184,000.
       Project 97-D-470, environmental monitoring laboratory, 
     Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $7,000,000.
       Project 96-D-406, spent nuclear fuels canister storage and 
     stabilization facility, Richland, Washington, $38,680,000.
       Project 96-D-408, waste management upgrades, Kansas City 
     Plant, Kansas City, Missouri, and Savannah River Site, Aiken, 
     South Carolina, $4,512,000.
       Project 96-D-464, electrical and utility systems upgrade, 
     Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, Idaho National Engineering 
     Laboratory, Idaho, $11,544,000.
       Project 96-D-471, chlorofluorocarbon heating, ventilation, 
     and air conditioning and chiller retrofit, Savannah River 
     Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $8,000,000.
       Project 95-D-456, security facilities consolidation, Idaho 
     Chemical Processing Plant, Idaho National Engineering 
     Laboratory, Idaho, $485,000.
       Project 92-D-140, F&H canyon exhaust upgrades, Savannah 
     River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, $3,667,000.
       Project 86-D-103, decontamination and waste treatment 
     facility, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, 
     California, $4,752,000.
       (4) Post-2006 completion.--For post-2006 project completion 
     in carrying out environmental restoration and waste 
     management activities necessary for national security 
     programs in the amount of $2,765,451,000, to be allocated as 
     follows:
       (A) For operation and maintenance, $2,684,195,000.
       (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), 
     $81,256,000, to be allocated as follows:
       Project 99-D-403, privatization phase I infrastructure 
     support, Richland, Washington, $14,800,000.

[[Page H3547]]

       Project 97-D-402, tank farm restoration and safe 
     operations, Richland, Washington, $22,723,000.
       Project 96-D-408, waste management upgrades, Richland, 
     Washington, $171,000.
       Project 94-D-407, initial tank retrieval systems, Richland, 
     Washington, $32,860,000.
       Project 93-D-187, high-level waste removal from filled 
     waste tanks, Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina, 
     $10,702,000.
       (5) Science and technology.--For science and technology in 
     carrying out environmental restoration and waste management 
     activities necessary for national security programs in the 
     amount of $270,750,000.
       (6) Program direction.--For program direction in carrying 
     out environmental restoration and waste management activities 
     necessary for national security programs in the amount of 
     $346,199,000.
       (b) Adjustment.--The total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to paragraphs (1), (3)(A), (4)(A), (5), 
     and (6) of subsection (a) is the sum of the amounts 
     authorized to be appropriated in those paragraphs, reduced by 
     the sum of $94,100,000, to be derived from use of prior year 
     balances.

     SEC. 3103. OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 1999 
     for other defense activities in carrying out programs 
     necessary for national security in the amount of 
     $1,720,760,000, to be allocated as follows:
       (1) Nonproliferation and national security.--For 
     nonproliferation and national security, $693,900,000, to be 
     allocated as follows:
       (A) For verification and control technology, $500,500,000, 
     to be allocated as follows:
       (i) For nonproliferation and verification research and 
     development, $210,000,000.
       (ii) For arms control, $256,900,000.
       (iii) For intelligence, $33,600,000.
       (B) For nuclear safeguards and security, $53,200,000.
       (C) For security investigations, $30,000,000.
       (D) For emergency management, $21,300,000.
       (E) For program direction, $88,900,000.
       (2) Worker and community transition assistance.--For worker 
     and community transition assistance, $45,000,000, to be 
     allocated as follows:
       (A) For worker and community transition, $41,000,000.
       (B) For program direction, $4,000,000.
       (3) Fissile materials control and disposition.--For fissile 
     materials control and disposition, $168,960,000, to be 
     allocated as follows:
       (A) For operation and maintenance, $111,372,000.
       (B) For program direction, $4,588,000.
       (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), 
     $53,000,000, to be allocated as follows:
       Project 99-D-141, pit disassembly and conversion facility, 
     various locations, $25,000,000.
       Project 99-D-143, mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility, 
     various locations, $28,000,000.
       (4) Environment, safety, and health.--For environment, 
     safety, and health, defense, $94,000,000, to be allocated as 
     follows:
       (A) For the Office of Environment, Safety, and Health 
     (Defense), $89,231,000.
       (B) For program direction, $4,769,000.
       (5) Office of hearings and appeals.--For the Office of 
     Hearings and Appeals, $2,400,000.
       (6) International nuclear safety.--For international 
     nuclear safety, $35,000,000.
       (7) Naval reactors.--For naval reactors, $681,500,000, to 
     be allocated as follows:
       (A) For naval reactors development, $661,400,000, to be 
     allocated as follows:
       (i) For operation and maintenance, $639,600,000.
       (ii) 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), $21,800,000, to be allocated as follows:

       GPN-101 general plant projects, various locations, 
     $9,000,000.
       Project 98-D-200, site laboratory/facility upgrade, various 
     locations, $7,000,000.
       Project 90-N-102, expended core facility dry cell project, 
     Naval Reactors Facility, Idaho, $5,800,000.

       (B) For program direction, $20,100,000.
       (b) Adjustment.--The total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to this section is the sum of the 
     amounts authorized to be appropriated in paragraphs (1) 
     through (7) of subsection (a) reduced by the sum of 
     $20,000,000.

     SEC. 3104. DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Department of Energy for fiscal year 1999 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 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 $5,000,000.
       (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 $5,000,000, 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.--(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.
       (c) Limitation.--The authority provided by this section to 
     transfer authorizations--
       (1) may only be used to provide funds for items relating to 
     activities necessary for national security programs that have 
     a higher priority than the items from which the funds are 
     transferred; and
       (2) may not be used to provide funds for an item for which 
     Congress has specifically denied funds.
       (d) 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.
       (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 $5,000,000; 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,

[[Page H3548]]

     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. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), when 
     so specified in an appropriations Act, amounts appropriated 
     for operation and maintenance or for plant projects may 
     remain available until expended.
       (b) Exception for Program Direction Funds.--Amounts 
     appropriated for program direction pursuant to an 
     authorization of appropriations in subtitle A shall remain 
     available to be expended only until the end of fiscal year 
     2000.

     SEC. 3129. 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.
       (b) Limitations.--(1) Only one transfer may be made to or 
     from any program or project under subsection (a) in a fiscal 
     year.
       (2) The amount transferred to or from a program or project 
     under subsection (a) may not exceed $5,000,000 in a fiscal 
     year.
       (3) A transfer may not be carried out by a manager of a 
     field office under subsection (a) unless the manager 
     determines that the 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 
     the field office.
       (4) 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.
       (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, 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 transfer 
     occurs.
       (e) 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 paragraph (3) or (4) of section 
     3102.
       (B) A program referred to in paragraph (3), (4), or (5) of 
     section 3102.
       (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, that is being carried out by the 
     office, and for which defense environmental management funds 
     have been authorized and appropriated before the date of 
     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.
       (f) Duration of Authority.--The managers of the field 
     offices of the Department may exercise the authority provided 
     under subsection (a) during the period beginning on October 
     1, 1998, and ending on September 30, 1999.
   Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations

     SEC. 3131. PROHIBITION ON FEDERAL LOAN GUARANTEES FOR DEFENSE 
                   ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PRIVATIZATION 
                   PROJECTS.

       Section 3132 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 2034) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(g) Prohibition on Loan Guarantees.--The Secretary of 
     Energy may not guarantee any loan made by a private sector 
     entity to a contractor to pay for any costs (including costs 
     described in subsection (a)(3)) borne by the contractor to 
     carry out a contract entered into under this section.''.

     SEC. 3132. EXTENSION OF FUNDING PROHIBITION RELATING TO 
                   INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE STOCKPILE 
                   STEWARDSHIP.

       Section 3133(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 2036) is 
     amended by striking out ``for fiscal year 1998'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``for any fiscal year''.

     SEC. 3133. USE OF CERTAIN FUNDS FOR MISSILE DEFENSE 
                   TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.

       Of the funds authorized to be appropriated pursuant to 
     section 3101, the Secretary of Energy shall make available 
     not less than $60,000,000 for the purpose of developing, 
     demonstrating, and testing hit-to-kill interceptor vehicles 
     for theater missile defense systems. The Secretary shall 
     carry out this section in cooperation with the Ballistic 
     Missile Defense Organization of the Department of Defense.

     SEC. 3134. SELECTION OF TECHNOLOGY FOR TRITIUM PRODUCTION.

       (a) Selection of Technology.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2), 
     the Secretary of Energy shall select a primary technology for 
     the production of tritium not later than December 31, 1999.
       (2) The Secretary may not select a primary technology for 
     the production of tritium until the date that is the later of 
     the following:
       (A) The date occurring 30 days after the completion of the 
     test program at the Watts Bar Nuclear Station, Tennessee.
       (B) The date on which the report required by subsection (b) 
     is submitted.
       (b) Report.--The Secretary of Energy shall submit to 
     Congress a report on the results of the test program at the 
     Watts Bar Nuclear Station. The report shall include--
       (1) data on any leakage of tritium from the test rods;
       (2) the amount of tritium produced during the test; and
       (3) any other technical findings resulting from the test.

     SEC. 3135. LIMITATION ON USE OF CERTAIN FUNDS AT HANFORD 
                   SITE.

       (a) Limitation.--(1) None of the funds described in 
     subsection (b) may be used unless the Secretary of Energy 
     certifies to Congress not later than 90 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act that the Department of Energy 
     does not intend to pay overhead costs that exceed more than 
     33 percent of total contract costs during fiscal year 1999 
     for the Project Hanford Management Contractors (at the 
     Hanford Site, Richland, Washington), including the prime 
     contractor and subcontractors at any tier (including 
     Enterprise Company contractors).
       (2) For purposes of paragraph (1), overhead costs include--
       (A) indirect overhead costs, which include all activities 
     whose costs are spread across other accounts of the 
     contractor or site;
       (B) support service overhead costs, which include 
     activities or services for which programs pay per unit used;
       (C) all fee, awards, and other profit on indirect and 
     support service overhead costs, or fees that are not 
     attributable to performance on a single project;
       (D) any portion of Enterprise Company costs for which there 
     is no competitive bid and which, under the prior contract, 
     had been an indirect or service function; and
       (E) all computer service and information management costs 
     that had previously been reported in indirect overhead or 
     service center pool accounts.
       (b) Funds.--The funds referred to in subsection (a) are the 
     following:
       (1) $12,000,000 for reactor decontamination and 
     decommissioning, as authorized to be appropriated by section 
     3102 and allocated under subsection (a)(4)(A).
       (2) $18,000,000 for single-shell tank drainage, as 
     authorized to be appropriated by section 3102 and allocated 
     under subsection (a)(4)(A).
       (c) Use of Savings.--The expected savings during fiscal 
     year 1999 from compliance with subsection (a) shall be used 
     at the Hanford Site for ensuring full compliance with the 
     Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order and 
     recommendations of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety 
     Board.
       (d) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) overhead costs for contractors performing environmental 
     cleanup work at defense nuclear facilities are out of 
     control;
       (2) some of the increase in overhead costs can be 
     attributed to unnecessary regulation by the Department of 
     Energy; and
       (3) the Department of Energy should take whatever actions 
     possible to minimize any increased costs of contractor 
     overhead that are attributable to unnecessary regulation by 
     the Department.
                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

     SEC. 3151. TERMINATION OF WORKER AND COMMUNITY TRANSITION 
                   ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Prohibition.--No funds may be used by the Secretary of 
     Energy after September 30, 2000, to provide worker or 
     community transition assistance with respect to defense 
     nuclear facilities, including assistance provided under 
     section 3161 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1993 (42 U.S.C. 7274h).
       (b) Repeal.--Effective October 1, 2000, section 3161 of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act

[[Page H3549]]

     for Fiscal Year 1993 (42 U.S.C. 7274h) is repealed.
       (c) Study by the General Accounting Office.--
       (1) Study requirement.--The Comptroller General shall 
     conduct a study on the effects of workforce restructuring 
     plans for defense nuclear facilities developed pursuant to 
     section 3161 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1993 (42 U.S.C. 7274h).
       (2) Matters covered by study.--The study shall cover the 
     four-year period preceding the date of the enactment of this 
     Act and shall include the following:
       (A) An analysis of the number of jobs created by any 
     employee retraining, education, and reemployment assistance 
     and any community impact assistance provided in each 
     workforce restructuring plan developed pursuant to section 
     3161 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1993.
       (B) An analysis of other benefits provided pursuant to such 
     plans, including any assistance provided to community reuse 
     organizations.
       (C) A description of the funds expended, and the funds 
     obligated but not expended, pursuant to such plans as of the 
     date of the report.
       (D) A description of the criteria used since October 23, 
     1992, in providing assistance pursuant to such plans.
       (E) A comparison of any similar benefits provided--
       (i) pursuant to such a plan to employees whose employment 
     at the defense nuclear facility covered by the plan is 
     terminated; and
       (ii) to employees whose employment at a facility where more 
     than 50 percent of the revenues are derived from contracts 
     with the Department of Defense has been terminated as a 
     result of cancellation, termination, or completion of 
     contracts with the Department of Defense and the employees 
     whose employment is terminated constitute more than 15 
     percent of the employees at that facility.
       (F) A comparison of--
       (i) involuntary separation benefits provided to employees 
     of Department of Energy contractors and subcontractors under 
     such plans; and
       (ii) involuntary separation benefits provided to employees 
     of the Federal Government.
       (G) A comparison of costs to the Federal Government 
     (including costs of involuntary separation benefits) for--
       (i) involuntary separations of employees of Department of 
     Energy contractors and subcontractors; and
       (ii) involuntary separations of employees of contractors 
     and subcontractors of other Federal Government departments 
     and agencies.
       (H) A description of the length of service and hiring dates 
     of employees of Department of Energy contractors and 
     subcontractors provided benefits under such plans in the two-
     year period preceding the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (3) Report on study.--The Comptroller General shall submit 
     a report to Congress on the results of the study not later 
     than March 31, 1999.
       (4) Definition.--In this section, the term ``defense 
     nuclear facility'' has the meaning provided the term 
     ``Department of Energy defense nuclear facility'' in section 
     3163 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484; 42 U.S.C. 7274j).
       (d) Effect on USEC Privatization Act.--(1) 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)) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following: ``With respect to such 
     section 3161, the Secretary shall, on and after the effective 
     date of the repeal of such section, provide assistance to any 
     such employee in accordance with the terms of such section as 
     in effect on the day before the effective date of its 
     repeal.''.
       (2) After the effective date of the repeal of section 3161 
     of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1993 (42 U.S.C. 7274h), no funds appropriated to the 
     Department of Energy for atomic energy defense activities may 
     be used to provide assistance under that section (by reason 
     of the amendment made by paragraph (1)) to the adversely 
     affected employees described in 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)).

     SEC. 3152. REQUIREMENT FOR PLAN TO MODIFY EMPLOYMENT SYSTEM 
                   USED BY DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY IN DEFENSE 
                   ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS.

       (a) Plan Requirement.--(1) The Secretary of Energy shall 
     develop a plan to modify the Federal employment system used 
     within the defense environmental management programs of the 
     Department of Energy to allow for workforce restructuring in 
     those programs.
       (2) The plan shall address strategies to recruit and hire--
       (A) individuals with a high degree of scientific and 
     technical competence in the areas of nuclear and toxic waste 
     remediation and environmental restoration; and
       (B) individuals with the necessary skills to manage large 
     construction and environmental remediation projects.
       (3) The plan shall include an identification of the 
     provisions of Federal law that would need to be changed to 
     allow the Secretary of Energy to restructure the Department 
     of Energy defense environmental management workforce to hire 
     individuals described in paragraph (2), while staying within 
     any numerical limitations required by law (including section 
     3161 of Public Law 103-337 (42 U.S.C. 7231 note)) on 
     employment of such individuals.
       (b) Report.--The Secretary shall submit to Congress a 
     report on the plan developed under subsection (a).
       (c) Limitation on Use of Certain Funds.--The Secretary of 
     Energy may not use more than 75 percent of the funds 
     available to the Secretary pursuant to the authorization of 
     appropriations in section 3102(a)(6) (relating to program 
     direction) until the Secretary submits the report required by 
     subsection (b).

     SEC. 3153. REPORT ON STOCKPILE STEWARDSHIP CRITERIA.

       (a) Requirement for Criteria.--The Secretary of Energy 
     shall develop clear and specific criteria for judging whether 
     the science-based tools being used by the Department of 
     Energy for determining the safety and reliability of the 
     nuclear weapons stockpile are performing in a manner that 
     will provide an adequate degree of certainty that the 
     stockpile is safe and reliable.
       (b) Report.--Not later than March 1, 1999, the Secretary of 
     Energy 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 efforts by the Department of 
     Energy to develop the criteria required by subsection (a). 
     The report shall include--
       (1) a description of the information needed to determine 
     that the nuclear weapons stockpile is safe and reliable and 
     the relationship of the science-based tools to the collection 
     of that information; and
       (2) a description of the criteria required by subsection 
     (a) to the extent they have been defined as of the date of 
     the submission of the report.
          TITLE XXXII-DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

     SEC. 3201. AUTHORIZATION.

       There are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 
     1999, $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.).
                TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE

     SEC. 3301. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) The term ``National Defense Stockpile'' means the 
     stockpile provided for in section 4 of the Strategic and 
     Critical Materials Stock Piling Act (50 U.S.C. 98c).
       (2) The term ``National Defense Stockpile Transaction 
     Fund'' means the fund in the Treasury of the United States 
     established under section 9(a) of the Strategic and Critical 
     Materials Stock Piling Act (50 U.S.C. 98h(a)).

     SEC. 3302. AUTHORIZED USES OF STOCKPILE FUNDS.

       (a) Obligation of Stockpile Funds.--During fiscal year 
     1999, the National Defense Stockpile Manager may obligate up 
     to $82,647,000 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.
                 TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

     SEC. 3401. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) The term ``naval petroleum reserves'' has the meaning 
     given the term in section 7420(2) of title 10, United States 
     Code.
       (2) The term ``Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2'' means 
     the naval petroleum reserve, commonly referred to as the 
     Buena Vista unit, that is located in Kern County, California, 
     and was established by Executive order of the President, 
     dated December 13, 1912.
       (3) The term ``Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 3'' means 
     the naval petroleum reserve, commonly referred to as the 
     Teapot Dome unit, that is located in the State of Wyoming and 
     was established by Executive order of the President, dated 
     April 30, 1915.
       (4) The term ``Oil Shale Reserve Numbered 2'' means the 
     naval petroleum reserve that is located in the State of Utah 
     and was established by Executive order of the President, 
     dated December 6, 1916.
       (5) The term ``antitrust laws'' means has the meaning given 
     the term in section 1(a) of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 
     12(a)), except that the term also includes--
       (A) the Act of June 19, 1936 (15 U.S.C. 13 et seq.; 
     commonly known as the Robinson-Patman Act); and
       (B) section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 
     U.S.C. 45), to the extent that such section applies to unfair 
     methods of competition.
       (6) The term ``general land laws'' includes the Mineral 
     Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) and the Materials Act of 
     1947 (30 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), but excludes the Mining Law of 
     1872 (30 U.S.C. 22 et seq.).
       (7) The term ``petroleum'' has the meaning given the term 
     in section 7420(3) of title 10, United States Code.

     SEC. 3402. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are hereby 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Energy 
     $22,500,000 for fiscal year 1999 for the purpose of carrying 
     out--
       (1) activities under chapter 641 of title 10, United States 
     Code, relating to the naval petroleum reserves;
       (2) closeout activities at Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 
     1 upon the sale of that reserve under 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); and

[[Page H3550]]

       (3) activities under this title relating to the disposition 
     of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2, Naval Petroleum 
     Reserve Numbered 3, and Oil Shale Reserve Numbered 2.
       (b) Availability of Appropriations.--Funds appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in subsection 
     (a) shall remain available until expended.

     SEC. 3403. PRICE REQUIREMENT ON SALE OF CERTAIN PETROLEUM 
                   DURING FISCAL YEAR 1999.

       Notwithstanding section 7430(b)(2) of title 10, United 
     States Code, during fiscal year 1999, any sale of any part of 
     the United States share of petroleum produced from Naval 
     Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2 or Naval Petroleum Reserve 
     Numbered 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. 3404. DISPOSAL OF NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NUMBERED 2.

       (a) Disposal of Ford City Lots.--(1) Subject to section 
     3407, the Secretary of Energy shall dispose of that portion 
     of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2 located within the town 
     lots in Ford City, California, as generally depicted on the 
     map of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2 that accompanies 
     the report of the Secretary entitled ``Report and 
     Recommendations on the Management and Disposition of the 
     Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves (Excluding Elk 
     Hills)'', dated March 1997.
       (2) The Secretary of Energy may carry out the disposal of 
     that portion of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2 described 
     in paragraph (1) by competitive sale or lease consistent with 
     commercial practices, by transfer to another Federal agency 
     or a public or private entity, or by any other means. Any 
     competitive sale or lease under this subsection shall provide 
     for the disposal of all right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in the property to be conveyed. The Secretary 
     of Energy may use the authority provided by the Act of June 
     14, 1926 (43 U.S.C. 869 et seq.; commonly known as the 
     Recreation and Public Purposes Act), in the same manner and 
     to the same extent as the Secretary of the Interior, to 
     dispose of that portion of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2 
     described in paragraph (1).
       (3) The Secretary of Energy may extend to a purchaser or 
     other transferee of property under this subsection such 
     indemnities and warranties as the Secretary considers 
     reasonable and necessary to protect the purchaser or 
     transferee from claims arising from the ownership of the 
     property by the United States or the administration of the 
     property by the Secretary of Energy.
       (b) Eventual Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction.--(1) 
     The Secretary of Energy shall continue to administer Naval 
     Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2 (other than the portion of 
     the reserve subject to disposal under subsection (a)) in 
     accordance with chapter 641 of title 10, United States 
     Code, until such time as the Secretary makes a 
     determination to abandon oil and gas operations in Naval 
     Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2 in accordance with commercial 
     operating practices.
       (2) After oil and gas operations are abandoned in Naval 
     Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2 under paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary of Energy shall transfer to the Secretary of the 
     Interior administrative jurisdiction and control over all 
     public domain lands included within Naval Petroleum Reserve 
     Numbered 2 (other than the portion of the reserve subject to 
     disposal under subsection (a)) for management in accordance 
     with the general land laws.
       (c) Relationship to Antitrust Laws.--This section does not 
     modify, impair, or supersede the operation of the antitrust 
     laws.

     SEC. 3405. DISPOSAL OF NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NUMBERED 3.

       (a) Continued Administration Pending Termination of 
     Operations.--The Secretary of Energy shall continue to 
     administer Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 3 in accordance 
     with chapter 641 of title 10, United States Code, until such 
     time as the Secretary makes a determination to abandon oil 
     and gas operations in Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 3 in 
     accordance with commercial operating practices.
       (b) Disposal Authority.--(1) After oil and gas operations 
     are abandoned in Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 3, the 
     Secretary of Energy may dispose of, subject to section 3407, 
     the reserve by sale, lease, transfer, or other means. Any 
     sale or lease shall provide for the disposal of all right, 
     title, and interest of the United States in the property to 
     be conveyed and shall be conducted in accordance with 
     competitive procedures consistent with commercial practices, 
     as established by the Secretary of Energy.
       (2) The Secretary of Energy may extend to a purchaser or 
     other transferee of property under this subsection such 
     indemnities and warranties as the Secretary considers 
     reasonable and necessary to protect the purchaser or 
     transferee from claims arising from the ownership of the 
     property by the United States or the administration of the 
     property by the Secretary of Energy.
       (c) Relationship to Antitrust Laws.--This section does not 
     modify, impair, or supersede the operation of the antitrust 
     laws.

     SEC. 3406. DISPOSAL OF OIL SHALE RESERVE NUMBERED 2.

       (a) Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction.--Subject to 
     section 3407, effective September 30, 1999, the Secretary of 
     Energy shall transfer to the Secretary of the Interior 
     administrative jurisdiction and control over all public 
     domain lands included within Oil Shale Reserve Numbered 2 for 
     management in accordance with the general land laws.
       (b) Relationship to Indian Reservation.--The transfer of 
     administrative jurisdiction under this section does not 
     affect any interest, right, or obligation respecting the 
     Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation located in Oil Shale 
     Reserve Numbered 2.

     SEC. 3407. ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) Contract Authority.--Using the authority provided by 
     section 303(c)(7) of the Federal Property and Administrative 
     Services Act of 1949 (41 U.S.C. 253(c)(7)), the Secretary of 
     Energy and the Secretary of the Interior may separately enter 
     into contracts for the acquisition of such services as the 
     Secretary considers necessary to carry out the requirements 
     of this title, except that the notification required under 
     subparagraph (B) of such section for each such contract shall 
     be submitted to Congress not less than seven days before the 
     award of the contract.
       (b) Protection of Existing Rights.--At the discretion of 
     the Secretary of Energy, the disposal of property under this 
     title shall be subject to any contract related to the United 
     States ownership interest in the property in effect at the 
     time of disposal, including any lease agreement pertaining to 
     the United States interest in Naval Petroleum Reserve 
     Numbered 2.
       (c) Deposit of Receipts.--Notwithstanding any other law, 
     all monies received by the United States from the disposal of 
     property under this title or under section 7439 of title 10, 
     United States Code, including monies received from a lease 
     entered into under this title or such section, shall be 
     deposited in the general fund of the Treasury.
       (d) Treatment of Royalties.--Any petroleum accruing to the 
     United States as royalty from any lease of lands transferred 
     under this title or under section 7439 of title 10, United 
     States Code, shall be delivered to the United States, or 
     shall be paid for in money, as the Secretary of the Interior 
     may elect.
       (e) Elements of Lease.--A lease under this title may 
     provide for the exploration for, and development and 
     production of, petroleum, other than petroleum in the form of 
     oil shale.
       (f) Relationship to Current Law.--Except as otherwise 
     provided in this title, chapter 641 of title 10, United 
     States Code, does not apply to the disposal of property under 
     this title and ceases to apply to property in Naval Petroleum 
     Reserve Numbered 2, Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 3, and 
     Oil Shale Reserve Numbered 2, upon the final disposal of 
     the property.
                  TITLE XXXV--PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION

     SEC. 3501. SHORT TITLE; REFERENCES TO PANAMA CANAL ACT OF 
                   1979.

       (a) Short Title.--This title may be cited as the ``Panama 
     Canal Commission Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999''.
       (b) References to Panama Canal Act of 1979.--Except as 
     otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this title 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. 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 1999.
       (b) Limitations.--For fiscal year 1999, the Panama Canal 
     Commission may expend from funds in the Panama Canal 
     Revolving Fund not more than $90,000 for official reception 
     and representation expenses, of which--
       (1) not more than $28,000 may be used for official 
     reception and representation expenses of the Supervisory 
     Board of the Commission;
       (2) not more than $14,000 may be used for official 
     reception and representation expenses of the Secretary of the 
     Commission; and
       (3) not more than $48,000 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 $23,000 per vehicle.

     SEC. 3504. EXPENDITURES ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH TREATIES.

       Expenditures authorized under this title may be made only 
     in accordance with the Panama Canal Treaties of 1977 and any 
     law of the United States implementing those treaties.

     SEC. 3505. DONATIONS TO THE COMMISSION.

       Section 1102b (22 U.S.C. 3612b) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new subsection:
       ``(f)(1) The Commission may seek and accept donations of 
     funds, property, and services from individuals, foundations, 
     corporations, and other private and public entities for the 
     purpose of carrying out its promotional activities.
       ``(2) The Commission shall establish written guidelines 
     setting forth the criteria to be used in determining whether 
     the acceptance of funds, property, or services authorized by 
     paragraph (1) would reflect unfavorably upon the ability of 
     the Commission (or any employee of the Commission) to carry 
     out its responsibilities or official duties in a fair and 
     objective manner or would compromise the integrity or the 
     appearance of the integrity of its programs or of any 
     official in those programs.''.

     SEC. 3506. SUNSET OF UNITED STATES OVERSEAS BENEFITS JUST 
                   BEFORE TRANSFER.

       (a) Repeals.--Effective 11:59 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time), 
     December 30, 1999, the following provisions are repealed and 
     any right or condition of employment provided for in, or 
     arising from, those provisions is terminated: sections

[[Page H3551]]

     1206 (22 U.S.C. 3646), 1207 (22 U.S.C. 3647), 1217(a) (22 
     U.S.C. 3657(a)), and 1224(11) (22 U.S.C. 3664(11)), 
     subparagraphs (A), (B), (F), (G), and (H) of section 
     1231(a)(2) (22 U.S.C. 3671(a)(2)) and section 1321(e) (22 
     U.S.C. 3731(e)).
       (b) Savings Provision for Basic Pay.--Notwithstanding 
     subsection (a), benefits based on basic pay, as listed in 
     paragraphs (1), (2), (3), (5), and (6) of section 1218 of the 
     Panama Canal Act of 1979, shall be paid as if sections 
     1217(a) and 1231(a)(2) (A) and (B) of that Act had been 
     repealed effective 12:00 p.m., December 31, 1999. The 
     exception under the preceding sentence shall not apply to any 
     pay for hours of work performed on December 31, 1999.
       (c) Nonapplicability to Agencies in Panama Other Than 
     Panama Canal Commission.--Section 1212(b)(3) (22 U.S.C. 
     3652(b)(3)) is amended by striking out ``the Panama Canal 
     Transition Facilitation Act of 1997'' and inserting in lieu 
     thereof ``the Panama Canal Transition Facilitation Act of 
     1997 (subtitle B of title XXXV of Public Law 105-85; 110 
     Stat. 2062), or the Panama Canal Commission Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1999''.

     SEC. 3507. CENTRAL EXAMINING OFFICE.

       Section 1223 (22 U.S.C. 3663) is repealed.

     SEC. 3508. LIABILITY FOR VESSEL ACCIDENTS.

       (a) Commission Liability Subject to Claimant Insurance.--
     (1) Section 1411(a) (22 U.S.C. 3771(a)) is amended by 
     inserting ``to section 1419(b) of this Act and'' after 
     ``Subject'' in the first sentence.
       (2) Section 1412 (22 U.S.C. 3772) is amended by striking 
     out ``The Commission'' in the first sentence and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``Subject to section 1419(b) of this Act, the 
     Commission''.
       (3) Section 1416 (22 U.S.C. 3776) is amended by striking 
     out ``A claimant'' in the first sentence and inserting in 
     lieu thereof ``Subject to section 1419(b) of this Act, a 
     claimant''.
       (b) Limitation on Liability.--Section 1419 (22 U.S.C. 3779) 
     is amended by designating the text as subsection (a) and by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) The Commission may not consider or pay any claim 
     under section 1411 or 1412 of this Act, nor may an action for 
     damages lie thereon, unless the claimant is covered by one or 
     more valid policies of insurance totalling at least 
     $1,000,000 against the injuries specified in those sections. 
     The Commission's liability on any such claim shall be limited 
     to damages in excess of all amounts recovered or recoverable 
     by the claimant from its insurers. The Commission may not 
     consider or pay any claim by an insurer or subrogee of a 
     claimant under section 1411 or 1412 of this Act.''.

     SEC. 3509. PANAMA CANAL BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS.

       (a) Establishment and Pay of Board.--Section 3102(a) (22 
     U.S.C. 3862(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking out ``shall'' in the 
     first sentence and inserting in lieu thereof ``may''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Compensation for members of the Board of Contract 
     Appeals shall be established by the Commission's supervisory 
     board, except that such compensation may not be reduced 
     during a member's term of office from the level established 
     at the time of the appointment.''.
       (b) Deadline for Commencement of Board.--Section 3102(e) 
     (22 U.S.C. 3862(e)) is amended by striking out ``, but not 
     later than January 1, 1999''.

     SEC. 3510. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Panama Canal Act of 1979.--The Panama Canal Act of 1979 
     is amended as follows:
       (1) Section 1202(c) (22 U.S.C. 3642(c)) is amended--
       (A) by striking out ``the day before the date of the 
     enactment of the Panama Canal Transition Facilitation Act of 
     1997'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``November 17, 1997,'';
       (B) by striking out ``on or after that date''; and
       (C) by striking out ``the day before the date of 
     enactment'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``that date''.
       (2) Section 1212(b)(3) (22 U.S.C. 3652(b)(3)) is amended by 
     inserting ``the'' after ``by the head of''.
       (3) Section 1313 (22 U.S.C. 3723) is amended by striking 
     out ``subsection (d)'' in each of subsections (a), (b), and 
     (d) and inserting in lieu thereof ``subsection (c)''.
       (4) Sections 1411(a) and 1412 (22 U.S.C. 3771(a), 3772) are 
     amended by striking out ``the date of the enactment of the 
     Panama Canal Transition Facilitation Act of 1997'' and 
     inserting in lieu thereof ``by November 18, 1998''.
       (b) Public Law 104-201.--Effective as of September 23, 
     1996, and as if included therein as enacted, section 
     3548(b)(3) of the Panama Canal Act Amendments of 1996 
     (subtitle B of title XXXV of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 
     2869) is amended by striking out ``section'' in both items of 
     quoted matter and inserting in lieu thereof ``sections''.

                  TITLE XXXVI--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

     SEC. 3601. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 
                   1999.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 1999, 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:
       (1) For expenses necessary for operations and training 
     activities, $70,553,000.
       (2) For expenses under the loan guarantee program 
     authorized by title XI of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 
     U.S.C. App. 1271 et seq.), $20,000,000 of which--
       (A) $16,000,000 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. CONVEYANCE OF NDRF VESSEL M/V BAYAMON.

       (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 M/V BAYAMON (United 
     States official number 530007) to the Trade Fair Ship 
     Company, a corporation established under the laws of the 
     State of Deleware and having its principal offices located in 
     New York, New York (in this section referred to as the 
     ``recipient''), for use as floating trade exposition to 
     showcase United States technology, industrial products, and 
     services.
       (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) Required conditions.--The Secretary may not convey a 
     vessel under this section unless--
       (A) the recipient pays consideration equal to the domestic 
     fair market value of the vessel as determined by the 
     Secretary;
       (B) the recipient agrees that any repair, restoration, or 
     reconstruction work for the vessel will be performed in the 
     United States;
       (C) the recipient agrees to hold the Government harmless 
     for any claims arising from exposure to hazardous material, 
     including asbestos and polychlorinated biphenyls, after the 
     conveyance of the vessel, except for claims arising before 
     the date of the conveyance or from use of the vessel by the 
     Government after that date; and
       (D) the recipient provides sufficient evidence to the 
     Secretary that it has adequate financial resources in the 
     form of cash, liquid assets, or a written loan commitment to 
     complete the reconstruction of the vessel.
       (3) Additional terms.--The Secretary may require such 
     additional terms in connection with the conveyance authorized 
     by this section as the Secretary considers appropriate.
       (c) Proceeds.--Any amounts received by the United States as 
     proceeds from the sale of the M/V BAYAMON shall be deposited 
     in the Vessel Operations Revolving Fund established by the 
     Act of June 2, 1951 (chapter 121; 46 App. U.S.C. 1241a).

     SEC. 3603. CONVEYANCE OF NDRF VESSELS BENJAMIN ISHERWOOD AND 
                   HENRY ECKFORD.

       (a) Authority To Convey.--The Secretary of Transportation 
     may convey all right, title, and interest of the United 
     States Government in and to the vessels BENJAMIN ISHERWOOD 
     (TAO-191) and HENRY ECKFORD (TAO-192) to a purchaser for the 
     purpose of reconstruction of those vessels for sale or 
     charter.
       (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 
     the conveyance;
       (B) in its condition on that date; and
       (C) at no cost to the United States Government.
       (2) Required conditions.--The Secretary may not convey a 
     vessel under this section unless--
       (A) the recipient pays consideration equal to the domestic 
     fair market value of the vessel, as determined by the 
     Secretary;
       (B) the recipient agrees to sell or charter the vessel to a 
     member nation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization for 
     use as an oiler;
       (C) the recipient provides sufficient evidence to the 
     Secretary that it has adequate financial resources in the 
     form of cash, liquid assets, or a written loan commitment to 
     complete the reconstruction of the vessel;
       (D) the recipient agrees that any repair, restoration, or 
     reconstruction work for the vessel will be performed in the 
     United States; and
       (E) the recipient agrees to hold the Government harmless 
     for any claims arising from defects in the vessel or from 
     exposure to hazardous material, including asbestos and 
     polychlorinated biphenyls, after the conveyance of the 
     vessel, except for claims arising before the date of the 
     conveyance or from use of the vessel by the Government after 
     that date.
       (3) Additional terms.--The Secretary may require such 
     additional terms in connection with a conveyance authorized 
     by this section as the Secretary considers appropriate.
       (c) Proceeds.--Any amounts received by the United States as 
     proceeds from the sale of a vessel under this section shall 
     be deposited in the Vessel Operations Revolving Fund 
     established by the Act of June 2, 1951 (chapter 121; 46 App. 
     U.S.C. 1241a).
       (d) Duration of Authority.--The authority of the Secretary 
     under this section may only be exercised during the one-year 
     period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 3604. CLEARINGHOUSE FOR MARITIME INFORMATION.

       Of the amount authorized to be appropriated pursuant to 
     section 3601(1) for operations of the Maritime 
     Administration, $75,000 shall be available for the 
     establishment at a State Maritime Academy of a clearinghouse 
     for maritime information that makes that information publicly 
     available, including by use of the Internet.

     SEC. 3605. CONVEYANCE OF NDRF VESSEL EX-USS LORAIN COUNTY.

       (a) Authority To Convey.--The Secretary of Transportation 
     may convey all right, title, and interest of the Federal 
     Government in and to the

[[Page H3552]]

     vessel ex-USS LORAIN COUNTY (LST-1177) to the Ohio War 
     Memorial, Inc., located in Sandusky, Ohio (in this section 
     referred to as the ``recipient''), for use as a memorial to 
     Ohio veterans.
       (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 Federal Government.
       (2) Required conditions.--The Secretary may not convey a 
     vessel under this section unless--
       (A) the recipient agrees to hold the Government harmless 
     for any claims arising from exposure to hazardous material, 
     including asbestos and polychlorinated biphenyls, after 
     conveyance of the vessel, except for claims arising before 
     the date of the conveyance or from use of the vessel by the 
     Government after that date; and
       (B) the recipient has available, for use to restore the 
     vessel, in the form of cash, liquid assets, or a written loan 
     commitment, financial resources of at least $100,000.
       (3) 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 amendment to the committee amendment in the nature 
of a substitute is in order except amendments printed in House Report 
105-544, or considered by order of the House to have been so printed, 
and amendments en bloc described in Section 3 of the resolution.
  Except as specified in Section 5 of the resolution, each amendment 
printed in the report shall be considered only in the order specified, 
may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be 
considered 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 printed in part A of the report shall 
begin with an additional period of general debate, which shall be 
confined to the subject of the policy of the United States with respect 
to the People's Republic of China and shall not exceed 2 hours, equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member.

                              {time}  1215

  Consideration of amendments printed in part C of the report shall 
begin with an additional period of general debate, which shall be 
confined to the subject of the assignment of members of the Armed 
Forces to assist in border control and shall not exceed 30 minutes, 
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 D of the report not earlier 
disposed of or germane modifications of any such amendment. The 
amendments en bloc shall be considered 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 a request for 
a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to a minimum of 5 
minutes the time for voting on any postponed question that immediately 
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first 
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
  The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may recognize for 
consideration of amendments printed in the report 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 debate the subject of the policy of the United 
States with respect to the People's Republic of China.
  The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) and the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Skelton) each will control 1 hour.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump).
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick).
  Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Chairman, perhaps it is just a coincidence. Perhaps 
it is just a coincidence that the President turned a blind eye as one 
of his wealthiest campaign contributors harmed our national security by 
helping the Chinese improve their ballistic warheads.
  Maybe the President did not mean to accept campaign donations from 
the Chinese Red Army at the same time he changed U.S. policy to benefit 
China's missile program.
  There may be an innocent explanation for the President's decision to 
ignore his Secretary of State, the Director of the CIA and the Pentagon 
and to allow his campaign donors to help China's military.
  Finally, maybe it was just an accident when the President gutted the 
Justice Department's investigation into the matter. If there is an 
innocent explanation, though, the American people have not heard it 
yet.
  The facts, as we know them, are deeply disturbing. What frightens, 
angers, and troubles me is that we do not know all the facts yet.
  These are serious matters. China has 13 missiles aimed at U.S. 
cities, and it would be shocking if the President helped to make the 
missiles more accurate. Clearly, the American people deserve an 
explanation. Unless and until we get such an explanation, the President 
should postpone his scheduled trip to China.
  After receiving campaign donations from the People's Liberation Army, 
after associating with Chinese agents and after changing U.S. policy to 
benefit the Chinese military, the President has no business jetting off 
to Tiananmen Square to attend ceremonies with China's Communist 
leaders. To do so would be an insult to the American people and those 
Chinese who lost their lives in the fight for democracy.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Last week, the Committee on Rules received some 12 amendments dealing 
in one form or another with China. Those amendments were combined and 
fashioned into the four that we will address here today.
  As a footnote question, however, I would be interested in knowing the 
source of the information that the gentlewoman just said regarding 
missiles being targeted toward us. I would appreciate that in a timely 
fashion.
  The two broad targets of these amendments are, first, the 
administration policy of engagement with respect to China, and, second, 
the alleged improper flow of U.S. technology to China. These four 
amendments are either redundant, Mr. Chairman, or simply 
counterproductive.
  Let me first discuss the administration policy of engagement with 
China. A quarter century ago, President Richard Nixon traveled to China 
initiating a new relationship with the world's largest country. It is a 
relationship that has evolved over the past quarter century through six 
administrations, Republican and Democratic.
  Over that time, we have seen China make great strides economically as 
it adopted market reforms. The earlier policy under President Nixon 
shifted during the Bush administration as the Cold War came to an end. 
The strategic component that brought the two countries closer together 
in 1972, a mutual concern about the Soviet threat, ended upon the 
breakup of the Soviet Union.
  President Bush, the Nixon administration's first Ambassador to China,

[[Page H3553]]

understood the important role that China would play in world affairs as 
the 20th Century drew to a close and the 21st approached. He realized 
that a country with a quarter of the world's population a country, with 
nuclear weapons, a country having one of the five permanent seats at 
the United Nations, a country successfully adopting Western market 
reforms was a country that the United States had to engage.
  The aim was to help China become a cooperative power in both Asia and 
the world, to have it become a responsible world power interested in 
promoting stability, not promoting revolution.
  U.S. and China relations over the more than 25 years have had more 
than their share of controversies, over human rights, over trade 
imbalances, and over proliferation. The two countries will continue to 
have differences in the future. However, the overall effect should be 
to establish a relationship where those differences can be reduced and 
managed in such a fashion that China sees it to be in its own interest 
to promote a stable international order.
  The Clinton administration has continued the Bush administration 
policy. Two years ago, relations between the two countries were at a 
low point, as symbolized by the Straits of Taiwan incident. Since then, 
the relationship has improved, with a new generation of leaders 
adopting policies more in keeping with those of a responsible world 
power.
  Last year's October summit between President Clinton and President 
Jiang Zemin marked a turning point. Recent actions seem to bear out 
this positive development.
  Last fall, for example, during the Southeast Asia's economic crisis, 
China took measures to stabilize the situation. It provided Thailand a 
billion dollar loan and resisted the temptation to devalue its 
currency. In financial circles, China earned high marks for acting in a 
responsible fashion.
  Let us look at a more recent crisis, the Indian detonation of five 
nuclear weapons last week. Under Mao, China was unconcerned about the 
spread of nuclear weapons.
  One of the difficult issues that the Clinton administration sought to 
address over the past five years has concerned the Chinese nuclear 
technology relationship with Pakistan.
  After the Indian explosions we see a China acting with great caution, 
assuming a role of responsibility on this difficult issue. It described 
the Indian action as showing brazen contempt for international efforts 
to halt the spread of nuclear weapons.
  Recent newspaper accounts have the Chinese government trying to 
reassure the Pakistani government so that it does not feel compelled to 
meet the Indian actions with nuclear tests of its very own.
  I say all this, Mr. Chairman, because I believe that the actions that 
we take here today rather than protect U.S. security interests may 
actually tend to harm them. The effort to coax China along, to help 
those responsible figures in this government to proceed in a positive 
direction, will probably suffer if we succeed in bashing China today in 
an attempt to criticize administration policy.
  The tenor of the amendments is to make judgments about important 
policy issues before we have all the facts. We need to deal with these 
important matters with great care and great deliberation. I will listen 
to each of the amendments with great care along that line. I am afraid 
that we are not going to be doing a great deal positively through this 
debate. I hope that I am wrong.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield 10 minutes to the 
gentleman from San Diego, California (Mr. Hunter), chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Military Procurement of the Committee on National 
Security.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding the 
time. I want to say how much I appreciate the gentleman from Missouri 
(Mr. Skelton), the ranking member, for his comments in this area and 
for his stalwart support of what has been the policy of the Committee 
on National Security in that, even in times of marked partisanship in 
the House in recent years, one bipartisan effort has been the effort by 
the Committee on National Security often resulting in unanimous votes 
in the committee to halt the movement of American technology, 
militarily critical technology; that is, technology that could end up 
killing American men and women on battlefields or killing Americans in 
our cities, to keep that technology from moving to those who might use 
it against us. So, Republicans and Democrats, we have been together on 
this issue.
  We have this very troublesome issue that the committee has battled 
with and now that the American people have to battle with; and it is 
the issues that are surrounding the transfer of satellite launching 
technology to Communist China.
  It has now become clear, we all know this now, that, in fact, a 
number of Chinese missiles are aimed at American cities. Those Chinese 
missiles have nuclear tips. It is in our interest not to give those 
Chinese missiles more reliability. Because of our diplomatic efforts 
notwithstanding, we cannot predict the future, and we cannot say 
absolutely that those missiles will never be launched against the 
cities that they are presently aimed at. So we do not want those 
missiles to be reliable. We do not want them to be accurate. We would 
hope that, in a time of launch, they do not even have the capability to 
leave the ground. That would be the best thing.
  Juxtaposed against that national security concern is a commercial 
concern of some American companies, and that is that they have 
satellites to launch and they want to launch them cheap.
  The cheapest launchers in the world are the Communist Chinese; that 
is, they will send up an American satellite built by Hughes or another 
American company on a pretty inexpensive basis atop a Chinese missile. 
The so-called ``Long March'' missile is the missile of choice. That 
Chinese missile that sends up satellites also is the same missile that 
has nuclear warheads on top of it that is aimed at American cities.
  So we have a problem. We want to make sure that American companies, 
in putting their satellite packages atop these Chinese Communist ``Long 
March'' missiles, do not inadvertently show them how to make the 
missiles more reliable, more accurate, and have a number of factors 
that would allow them to destroy American cities with nuclear warheads. 
We have this major problem.
  I asked for these charts to be placed over here because I think the 
charts very effectively explain some of the things that we have 
inadvertently taught the Chinese rocket ministry; that is, the people 
in charge of destroying American cities in a time of war how to make 
their missiles more reliable.
  Let me just describe a few of those. We talk about the launch of 
April 1990, taught the Chinese why and how to build clean rooms for 
satellite launch investigation and introduced them to the need to 
protect fragile complex payloads against significant thermal dynamic 
change.

                              {time}  1230

  In 1992 we confirmed the Chinese analysis that the launch problem was 
in engine control of the launcher's first stage rather than altitude 
control. In 1992 we gave them information relating to the design of 
payload fairings. In May of 1995 we validated China's solid rocket 
satellite kick motor. This motor was still in development and had only 
been tested once before with the attitude-altitude controlled defective 
launch of a Pakistani satellite. It was a new system; we validated that 
system. In 1996, 1997 and 1998 we validated the Chinese upper stage 
separating technology, and we shared vibration and load coupling 
analysis with them.
  Now, another very troubling thing happened in 1996. That is, one of 
the Long March rockets went down. They are considered not to be the 
most dependable rockets. It went down. It was destroyed before it got 
very far off the ground, and it carried a Loral-Hughes payload, an 
American satellite payload, worth a couple hundred million dollars. So 
Loral and Hughes, to make their stockholders happier, had to figure out 
how to make these missiles that carry them up into space more reliable. 
So they then engaged with the Chinese scientists and engineers and 
showed them how to make these missiles more reliable. That is the 
information that we have right now.
  Now, the problem is, it is very difficult to get more information 
from

[[Page H3554]]

the administration. This committee, the Committee on National Security, 
under the leadership of the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), 
and the Committee on International Relations under the leadership of 
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), and I might say the ranking 
Democrats on both of those committees, has sought information as to 
exactly what happened with respect to this information sharing and this 
accuratizing of the Chinese missiles.
  We do know this: The Department of Defense has issued a statement 
after analyzing that debriefing and that information sharing, and they 
said this, which should be of interest to every American mother and 
father. They said American national security has been damaged by this 
transfer of technology.
  We are trying to find out exactly what was transferred, what 
happened, what reliability that is going to give to these nuclear 
systems that the Chinese have, and we are not getting any answers.
  Against that backdrop, we are offering four amendments today. The 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence) and the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Gilman) are offering an amendment that expresses the sense of 
the Congress that business interests must not be placed over U.S. 
national security interests, I think every American would agree with 
that, and that the United States should not agree to a variety of 
initiatives at the upcoming presidential summit in China, including, 
and these are some of the things we think our administration may be 
offering China, support for Chinese membership in the missile 
technology control regime; a blanket waiver of Tiananmen Square 
sanctions; an increase in space launches from China; agreeing to 
unverifiable arms control initiatives; increasing the level of 
military-to-military contacts; and entering any new agreements 
involving space or missile-related technology.
  That amendment is being offered by the gentleman from South Carolina 
(Mr. Spence) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman). I think 
every Member should vote for that.
  We have the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) offering an 
amendment. This amendment would prohibit U.S. participation in any 
postlaunch failure investigation involving the launch of a U.S. 
satellite from China.
  The gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) very wisely is addressing 
the very occurrence that we just talked about. We had a big American 
payload of a $200 million satellite on top of a Chinese missile. The 
missile went down, so the $200 million satellite was destroyed, did not 
get launched. So Hughes stockholders and Loral stockholders said, ``We 
need to get more money. We have just lost $200 million. We need to help 
the Chinese accuratize their missiles and make them more accurate,'' 
not thinking about the fact those were the same missiles that are aimed 
at American cities with nuclear warheads. So we debriefed the Chinese 
engineers and scientists on the problems their missile had and on how 
they could correct it. That is currently the subject of an ongoing 
investigation.
  The gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) is saying, wait a minute. 
Let us not agree to any more debriefings. We do not share technology. 
When the guillotine is over our head and sticking, we do not say we 
think we see your problem and we want to solve it for you.
  The gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) has an amendment. The 
amendment would prohibit the export or reexport of any missile 
equipment or technology to the People's Republic of China.
  This says listen, let us put the brakes on. We have made a major 
mistake. Our own Department of Defense under the Clinton Administration 
has said national security has been damaged. Let us stop everything and 
try to figure out exactly what has happened and what we can do to 
rectify it. An excellent amendment by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
Hefley).
  Finally, I have an amendment that prohibits the export or reexport of 
U.S. satellites, including commercial satellites and satellite 
components to the People's Republic of China. This says the lives of 
our children, the safety of our cities, are more important than the 
shareholders seeing their stock go up a few points because they have 
sent the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction into our own 
American cities.
  Now, the administration needs to be forthcoming. They need to send us 
information on exactly what happened when we had this Loral and Hughes 
debriefing of the Chinese engineers and scientists in 1996. They need 
to send us information on exactly what the situation is with respect to 
the new capability of the Chinese missiles as a result of that.
  I think until they do that, they do not deserve to have us allowing 
them to move forward with American companies continuing to send 
American satellites and interacting with the very people in the launch 
program in communist China who work both with domestic satellites, 
sending those satellites into space, and who work with preparing 
nuclear-tipped missiles for launch at American cities. This says, let 
us hold everything up until we shake this thing out.
  So we are offering those four amendments. I would hope that Democrats 
and Republicans all vote for those amendments. This should be a time of 
reorganization and reexamination.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Wexler).
  Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, almost a year and a half ago I received and 
began for me what was the proudest day of my professional life, being 
sworn in as a Member of the United States House of Representatives. I 
was elected as a Democrat from the State of Florida. But far more 
important than being elected as a Democrat, even far more important 
than being elected as a Floridian, I was an American, an American first 
and American only. And I came to this Congress with a devotion and a 
respect of the principles of the United States of America, for the 
basic freedoms that we enjoy in our Bill of Rights.
  Then I listened to debate after debate in this House, where I 
disagreed vehemently with the Speaker with respect to his policies on 
Medicare, or Social Security, or education or the environment, and I 
disagreed vehemently at times with the direction that the Republican 
leadership of this Congress wishes to take this Nation.
  But never would I dare, never would I dare question the patriotism 
and the devotion to this country of the Speaker or any Republican 
Member of the Congress. Never would I dare suggest that a Republican 
Member of this Congress has any less love for this country than I do, 
because I may differ with him on a policy, and I am confident that most 
Americans appreciate that those people who are elected to this 
Congress, regardless of their political beliefs, and those few 
individuals in our history that have been so privileged to lead our 
Nation as our President, have anything but a complete devotion to our 
country and our national security.
  Yet, in the last months we have seen extraordinary allegations thrown 
at this President. Not simple allegations, but allegations that rise to 
the level of being involved in a murder plot, allegations rising to the 
level of being involved in a rape, allegations involving at one time or 
another almost every crime imaginable.
  But the height was reached this week when Members of this House 
accused the President of the United States and the administration of 
acting in a treasonous fashion, of endangering the national security of 
the United States. And over what? What evidence is presented?
  Taken in its most simplistic form, the allegation is the Chinese 
Government sent some money, a significant amount of money, $100,000, to 
the national Democratic Party, and then the President made a foreign 
policy decision where he said, ``There is the money. Now we are going 
to send some missile technology to China that will endanger the United 
States, that will create a nuclear proliferation program.''
  Let us look at the specifics of the allegations. The money in 
question, the alleged money, did not wind up in the Democratic coffers 
until July and August of 1996. But what the accusers failed to say is 
the President issued the waiver in March of 1996. And what the accusers 
failed to say is that the money was then given back after it was

[[Page H3555]]

given, and then after the money was given back, another waiver was 
issued.
  If you listen to the accusers, you would think President Clinton 
dreamed up this idea of waivers. No, the first waivers were given by 
President Bush, and President Bush decided it was in our national 
interest to allow American companies to send off their communications 
satellites because there were not enough American rockets going up to 
do so.
  These were communication satellites. And if you listen to the 
allegations, you would think we just handed them to the Chinese, when 
in fact it was American companies that handed them to our Department of 
Defense. It was the American Department of Defense that transported the 
satellite, the American Department of Defense that put the satellite in 
its proper place, and it was guarded the whole way by the American 
Department of Defense.
  Let us get down right to the bottom line of the argument, that money 
was given and a political decision made. If that is in fact the case, 
then all of us in Washington need to be brave and stand up and admit 
that all of us are guilty then, because whenever there is a 
contribution given, we will act on the contribution and do what the 
contributor said. And yes, yes, then it happens every day. And then, 
yes, it would seem it would be legitimate to argue that because the 
tobacco companies have given millions to the Republican party, that is 
why they are giving them tax breaks.
  But I would not dare suggest that nexus, because I would not have the 
audacity to suggest that another Member of Congress is corrupt or is 
corrupted. And for Members of this Congress to suggest that the 
President of the United States has in some way endangered our national 
security, without a single shred of evidence, is there a single shred 
of evidence that suggests that this President took the money, knew what 
he was doing, and then said, send the missile, send the satellite to be 
on the missile because of the money? Not a single shred of evidence. It 
is treasonous, they say, without a single shred of evidence.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Hunter).
  Mr. HUNTER. I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
  Mr. Chairman, I am kind of surprised at the gentleman's tirade here, 
because this gentleman never mentioned money, never mentioned treason, 
rarely mentioned the President. And when I went over the litany or the 
chronology of missile launches, I started with the Bush Administration 
in 1990.
  This is a Committee on National Security. We are not worried about 
where the money came from or what it did or whether there was 
influence. What we are concerned about, very simply, is this statement, 
this statement made by President Clinton's Department of Defense. 
Hopefully that is not part of a right wing conspiracy, I would say to 
my friend who just spoke.
  ``In May 1997 the administration was jolted by a classified Pentagon 
report concluding that scientists from Hughes and Loral Space and 
Communications had turned over expertise that `significantly improved 
the reliability of China's nuclear missiles.' '' That is the New York 
Times, April 13, 1998. Our Department of Defense said American security 
has been damaged. That is what we are concerned about.
  I think what we are going to have to do, both Republicans and 
Democrats, is when we have colleagues that come in and start ranting 
about the money, is very firmly but quietly push them aside to get 
their part of the debate over, and then go into what really concerns 
the American people, and that is this: that we have two conflicting 
pressures here. We have the pressure of our domestic satellite 
industry, like Hughes and Loral, that wants to sell things and make 
money; and they make money by taking advantage of the cheap launch that 
the Chinese offer by putting their satellite packages on top of Chinese 
missiles. That is the one factor, the one pressure.
  The second pressure, of course, and a concern of ours, is national 
security. Because those very same missiles that carry the domestic 
satellite launches that we make money on, and Loral and Hughes, also 
carry nuclear-tipped missiles that are presently aimed at the United 
States, and conceivably in a conflict the reliability of those missiles 
to carry its nuclear payload into American cities should be something 
of great concern to us.

                              {time}  1345

  That is what we are talking about here.
  If I could have that second chart over here, let us talk about that 
for just a second. Incidentally, I have never heard of the New York 
Times being called part of a right-wing conspiracy. I hope they have 
not changed overnight. But I think this chart is pretty descriptive 
because it tells how, in working out commercial launches, in doing 
commercial launches in China, we are inadvertently increasing the 
capability of their nuclear strategic systems.
  Payload dispersal technology. Payload dispersal technology allows 
single commercial rockets to deliver more than a single satellite into 
space per each launch. The same technology can be used to develop 
Multiple Independently-targetable Reentry Vehicles. We talked about 
those in the Cold War on this floor. Those are known as MIRVs. A MIRV 
is when we send one missile up, one missile, and when it gets to a 
certain altitude when it is over American cities or over another 
military target, it disperses 3 or 4 or 5 or as many, in the case of 
the Soviet Union, as many as 10 warheads to different targets, so it 
can usher in absolutely massive destruction with as many as 10 targets 
from one single rocket.
  That MIRV capability is something that we were hoping that the 
Chinese would not obtain, because they do not have too many ICBMs, and 
we were hoping that they would not get the capability to have more than 
one nuclear warhead per missile, because it is very difficult to 
handle, if we ever do get defenses, to handle 10 warheads coming out of 
each missile. But they have gotten some of that technology from our 
commercial satellite application.
  A second area where they desperately needed capability in their 
nuclear strategic arsenal and they got that as a result, or got some 
help as a result of their interaction with our satellite people, is 
kick motor technology. Kick motors are used to propel satellites 
precisely into their described orbits. This same technology can be 
applied to warhead delivery systems to enable them to evade ballistic 
missile defense systems.
  Radiation-hardened electronics. These specialized chips are designed 
to resist electromagnetic interference in space as well as 
electromagnetic pulses in a nuclear combat environment.
  Encryption devices. In both commercial and military applications, 
encryption devices allow only authorized users to control the system. 
Launcher altitude control, another vital area. Stage separation 
systems, a very critical area for launching successful, making 
successful missile launches, whether one is launching a satellite or 
launching a nuclear payload.
  So let me just close by saying this. This committee, Democrats and 
Republicans, looked at this issue several years ago. We were asked to 
place this satellite launching technology, the licensing for this 
technology, to move it out of the control of the Department of Defense, 
the overview of the Department of Defense and the Department of State.
  Typically, the Department of Defense has always been very tough on 
allowing this technology to go overseas. A lot of the users like Hughes 
and Loral wanted to move it into the Department of Commerce, where the 
object is to sell things and make money, where they thought they would 
be given a little more liberal license to transfer this technology to 
China. This committee fought that, and we had a vote in this committee, 
Democrats and Republicans. As I recall, and I could be wrong, it was 
unanimous, except for I think either 1 or 2 votes. It was almost 
unanimous, Democrats and Republicans, and in fact, one of the leaders 
on the Democrat side was Mr. Dellums, and the gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Spence) was our leader on the Republican side.
  So this is not a partisan issue, this is not about money, this is 
about security, and we need to pass these 4 amendments, put this whole 
transfer of satellite technology on hold until we

[[Page H3556]]

have sorted this thing out, figured out how much damage has been done 
to the American people and go from there.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Let me add some facts. One can have one's own opinions, but one 
cannot have one's own facts. Let me add a few of the facts. It is my 
understanding that in response to a letter from the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Spence), the chairman, that was sent to various 
officials here in this city seeking the secret DOD report was responded 
to by 3 folks, one from DOD, one from the ACDA, and the other from 
Justice, that there is an ongoing criminal investigation by the 
District Attorney of the District of Columbia, and the turnover of any 
evidence on this matter might jeopardize the case.
  Mr. Chairman, being a former prosecuting attorney in the State of 
Missouri, I fully understand that response. I think that the facts 
should be clear on that issue.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Spence), the chairman of the Committee on National 
Security.
  (Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, later today the House will have an 
opportunity to vote on a series of amendments that address recent 
revelations concerning the possible illegal transfer of sophisticated 
American missile technology to China. I urge my colleagues to consider 
this issue carefully and to support these amendments.
  Over the past few days and weeks, the American people have witnessed 
a flood of news articles about the decisions 2 years ago and again 
earlier this year by the Clinton administration to allow the transfer 
of sophisticated American satellite technology to China, technology 
that can be used to improve Chinese ballistic missiles targeted on the 
United States.
  While many important aspects of these reports and allegations remain 
unclear, the administration is doing little to help clarify the 
situation, as repeated requests by the Congress for information 
continue to be ignored. Nevertheless, that which we do know is deeply 
troubling. Although sanctions imposed on China in 1990 at the Tiananmen 
massacre were intended to prevent the transfer of missile technology to 
China, those sanctions have repeatedly been waived to allow the export 
of United States satellites containing militarily-sensitive technology.
  In 1996, 2 American companies participated in a review of a failed 
launch of a U.S. satellite on a Chinese rocket. As a result of this 
investigation, sensitive export control information was exchanged, 
information that could be used by China to improve its long-range 
nuclear ballistic missile capability. The necessary export license for 
this information was neither sought nor obtained by the American 
companies in question. The transfer of this sensitive information 
reportedly led the Department of Defense to conclude that ``United 
States national security has been harmed,'' and resulted in the Justice 
Department initiating a criminal investigation.
  Unfortunately, this investigation was undermined when the White House 
apparently, over the objections of the Justice Department earlier this 
year, approved the export to China of similar military-related 
technology. In light of a recently reported CIA study that concludes 
that China has targeted 13 long-range nuclear missiles on the United 
States, the danger of helping China perfect its missile capability with 
technology ``Made in the USA'' is apparently obvious to just about 
everyone except the White House.
  Last month, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the chairman of 
the Committee on International Relations, and I jointly sent letters to 
the Departments of Defense, Commerce and State and the Arms Control and 
Disarmament Agency requesting documents relating to the 1996 transfer 
of technology and the White House's more recent 1998 decision to waive 
restrictions on the transfer of similar technology to China. The 
Committee on National Security is intensely interested in reviewing the 
Defense Technology Security Administration report on the 1996 transfer, 
which concluded that the transfer did harm United States' national 
security. Unfortunately, one month later, and not one document has been 
provided. The administration asserts that releasing these documents to 
Congress would compromise its ongoing criminal investigation. In 
reality, the administration appears to be hiding behind the veneer of a 
Justice Department investigation that the White House's own decision 
earlier this year is likely to have already compromised.
  Mr. Chairman, the United States satellite industry has long supported 
a relaxation on restrictions on the export of satellites and satellite-
related technology in the name of making money. Unfortunately, much of 
this technology is indistinguishable from the missile-related 
technology. The administration, nevertheless, liberalized the export of 
certain satellites in 1996 by removing them from the strictly 
controlled United States munitions list and placing them on the less 
restricted dual-use commodity control list administered by the Commerce 
Department. This decision was a fundamental reversal of the position 
articulated by Vice President Candidate Gore during the 1992 election 
campaign. He warned that allowing the launch of United States satellite 
by China would allow that country to ``gain foreign aerospace 
technology that would be otherwise unavailable to it.''
  Mr. Chairman, the transfer of satellite and missile-related 
technologies in question is only one in a series of examples of this 
administration's easing of restrictions on the export of militarily 
sensitive United States technology to China.
  Last year at this time, the House voted overwhelmingly and on a 
bipartisan basis to close a loophole in the administration's export 
control policy that allowed the transfer of supercomputers to, among 
others, Chinese institutes involved in the research and development of 
ballistic missiles. This year, Congress is once again faced with the 
need to close another loophole in current export law and we should act 
immediately.
  While I recognize that much still remains to be learned about this 
latest controversy, the urgency of the export issue itself requires the 
Congress to act decisively and quickly in an attempt to ensure that no 
further damage is done to our national security. Moreover, I believe 
that Congress should be heard loud and clear before the President 
travels to China next month.
  For this reason, I ask my colleagues to support the amendments 
offered.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire of the Chair as to how much 
time each side has remaining?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), has 48 
minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump), has 34 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Cunningham).
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham) is 
recognized for 4 minutes.
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, there is nobody in this House on the 
other side of the aisle that I respect more than my colleague, the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton). He knows that that is true.
  White House treason? No. But I would say to my colleague, I think 
that there has been some very poor decisions made, decisions that 
should concern every American family. It is not just in the China 
issue, it deals with foreign policy, it deals with national security 
that in my estimation, our defense forces are the worst off than I have 
seen them in 30 years that I have been associated with it.

                              {time}  1300

  That is both from taking money out of defense, and the deployments 
that take money like Haiti, Somalia, Bosnia, that take money out of the 
operation and maintenance, already out of a low budget. I think those 
kinds of decisions are made when you surround yourselves with very 
left-wing oriented members of your cabinet and staff, like Strobe 
Talbott. The decisions that you make, you need people there that have 
some kind of sense of what is good.
  Let us face it, China is not the same China it was 20 years ago. 
There have

[[Page H3557]]

been a lot of changes in China. I would tell the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Skelton), today China is still one of the biggest threats 
the United States faces. So is the former Soviet Union. They are not 
our friends. We have to keep working in that direction, but they are 
very, very dangerous.
  It is like a pit bull that you put inside a fence to guard you at 
night. You would not let that pit bull out to play with your children. 
That is what we are doing by this technology transfer to China. China 
shipped chemical and biological weapons to Iran and Iraq.
  That is one of the reasons we are in Iraq right now, because COSCO, 
the Chinese shipping company, is right out of China, owned by the PLA, 
the same company that the alleged allocations went forth with the 
money, but yet, we turn over Long Beach Naval Shipyard to them at the 
President's insistence. That is wrong, and that is a poor decision. 
That is letting them in our back door when they are dealing with 
chemical and biological weapons and then missile technology.
  The second thing, the nuclear triggers to Iraq, right in San Diego, 
my own city, Iraq tried to steal out nuclear components. Yet, China is 
shipping to those countries. That is dangerous. Yet, we enhance their 
ability on missile technology? That is wrong.
  I would tell my friend that both foreign policy decisions, and I 
would include the United States Marine Corps in Lebanon, I think that 
was very poor policy under a Republican President, trapping our marines 
there and not letting them fight back.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, all I want to point out is that in our 
committee there was an amendment that passed overwhelmingly against the 
COSCO Chinese company taking over Long Beach. I think that was 
important.
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I am aware of that. I thank the gentleman for that. 
That was a good decision by the committee, but I think a very poor 
decision by the White House, as I am trying to point out.
  Foreign policy, like the extension of Somalia, where we changed from 
going humanitarian to going after General Aideed, and then drawing down 
our forces, and our military asked for armor, we do not give it, and we 
lose people; Haiti could have sat there in my opinion for another 200 
years. But all of those cost billions of dollars, and we are taking 
money out of defense to pay for them. We cannot even get an FEHBP bill 
for veterans, and we pay $16 billion for Haiti and Bosnia. Those kinds 
of decisions, is what I am telling my friend, I believe are wrong.
  Russia is a threat. Under the Ural Mountains, the gentleman has seen 
the intelligence reports, they are building a first strike nuclear site 
the size of inside the beltway here. They have launched six Typhoon Red 
October class submarines. It is a very dangerous world. Yet, my 
colleagues on the other side say, well, the Cold War is over.
  The Cold War is not over, and when we are giving potential enemies 
like China and Russia technology, that should be a concern of every 
Member in this body. I know it is for the gentleman. It is not an issue 
on treason, it is an issue on national security, and one that I think 
that both sides of the aisle ought to stress, and we ought to look 
forward to it.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Burton).
  (Mr. BURTON of Indiana asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, the point of all this is, was 
our national security jeopardized because of campaign contributions 
coming from Communist China? Was a technology transfer made that 
endangered the security of the people of this country by giving MIRVing 
technology, so they can hit several cities with one rocket, for 
campaign contributions?
  Let us look at the facts. Johnny Chung has told investigators that he 
received $300,000 from Liu Chaoying. Who is Liu Chaoying? Liu Chaoying 
is a lieutenant colonel who is also an executive, an executive of China 
Aerospace. She is a lieutenant colonel in the Red Chinese army. Her 
father was the top military commander of the entire Red Chinese army. 
He is a senior member of the Communist party in China.
  She gave $300,000 to Johnny Chung to give to the Democrat National 
Committee. They do not do that for their health. You do not give money 
to a foreign government or a foreign campaign for your health. There 
was a reason behind it.
  We believe there were other contributions of this type that came into 
the Democrat National Committee, and other campaigns in the United 
States of America. In fact, I am sure of it. I am sure of it. What were 
these monies for? We know that this technology transfer took place. We 
know that the Justice Department was investigating it. We know that the 
President of the United States gave a waiver so this technology could 
go forth.
  Was there a connection? Was our national security jeopardized because 
of these campaign contributions and because of this technology 
transfer? These are things the American people have a right to know, 
because every man, every woman, and every child in the future may be 
jeopardized because of these decisions.
  Was it treason? I do not know. I hope not. I do not believe it was. I 
hope not. Was it incompetence? Maybe. Was it because of greed for 
campaign contributions? Possibly, and maybe likely. But we need to have 
the answers. That is why a full-scale investigation needs to take 
place. That is why witnesses who want to talk need to be immunized.
  My colleagues on the other side of the aisle need to be patriots 
first and politicians second, patriots first and politicians second, 
because the security of the United States is at risk and at stake. I 
urge them to vote with me for immunity, for the sake of this country.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the chairman of the Committee on 
International Relations.
  (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to rise in strong support of the 
legislation before us today, and the amendments we will shortly 
consider specifically relating to the curbs on the export of technology 
enabling China to improve the reliability of its nuclear weapons 
delivery systems.
  In 1992, when then candidate Clinton attacked President Bush for 
coddling dictators, including those who ordered the massacre of pro-
democracy demonstrators at Tiananmen Square, few could have imagined 
how President Clinton's administration would face charges of 
compromising our national security at the hands of the same Chinese 
leaders.
  Yet, in May of 1997 a highly classified Pentagon report has 
reportedly concluded that scientists from two leading American 
satellite manufacturing firms, Loral Space and Communications and 
Hughes, provided expertise that significantly improved the guidance and 
reliability of China's nuclear weapons delivery systems.
  I am concerned that in their desire to promote the commercial 
interests of key U.S. companies, that this administration might have 
compromised its own efforts to limit the spread of missile technology 
to China, which remains today as the leading exporter of the weapons of 
mass destruction around the world.
  As the President prepares to go to China and to visit the very same 
square where protesters were killed some 9 years ago, he must be 
mindful that any efforts to permanently waive these sanctions could 
further undermine our national security, and clearly give the Chinese 
the message that our policies on the spread of weapons and human rights 
abuses could be reversed by commercial considerations.
  As he prepares for his summit meeting with Chinese officials, 
President Clinton should leave the bag of carrots at home. There should 
be no concessions, no deals, no permanent waivers, no new technology or 
science agreements, and most importantly, no shoehorning of China into 
a missile technology control regime that they

[[Page H3558]]

have been busy violating over the past decade.
  In light of the fact that the President is unwilling to suspend the 
export of American satellites to China pending the outcome of the 
ongoing criminal investigation, Congress should appropriately consider 
amendments to the bill which will effectively curtail the export of 
these items. Accordingly, I urge our Members to support the amendments 
which will be before them today.
  Mr. SISISKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, it is very interesting, listening to this debate. I 
really was not going to get into it. But the previous speaker, not the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), but the previous speaker to that, 
just dropped a few words in there that kind of triggered me off to jump 
to my feet.
  He did not accuse anybody, but he said, is it not treasonous? He 
dropped that word. Is it incompetence? He dropped that word. Is it 
greed? And then had the audacity to say, I would tell that side, be 
patriots first and politicians second.
  This is what is wrong with this debate. I do not really understand. 
This is a political debate, this is not a debate about China. Everybody 
understands the investigation that is going on. It is funny, I have not 
seen anything. I have read it in the papers. Now, maybe our committee 
should be the one that investigates this, because it is national 
security.
  But please, let us bring ourselves up to a higher debate. Do not 
question the other side's patriotism. That is the wrong thing to do.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Mrs. Fowler), a member of the committee.
  (Mrs. FOWLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Mrs. FOWLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my grave concern about 
these recent revelations concerning the transfer of missile and other 
technologies to the Peoples' Republic of China, and to express my 
support for the package of amendments we will be taking up shortly.
  I have been tracking issues relating to the transfer of critical 
technologies to the Peoples' Republic for some time. I must tell my 
colleagues that allegations regarding missile technologies are only the 
latest in a long series of very questionable transfers.
  Previously, U.S. firms have transferred supercomputers, production 
hardware that would enable the Chinese to build intercontinental 
bombers and missiles, gas turbine technology, and much more. Some of 
these sales have been explicitly authorized by this administration. 
Others have occurred because of gray areas in the law which need to be 
addressed.
  Allegations that campaign contributions may have influenced policy 
raise deeply troubling questions. I believe Congress now needs to do 
two things: First, it needs to go on record in opposition to the kinds 
of technology transfers that have recently made headlines. We have that 
opportunity today. I hope all of my colleagues will support the 
amendments before us.
  Second, Congress needs to look into these questions. Allegations have 
been made that the administration acted inappropriately. The 
administration has denied wrongdoing. Mr. Chairman, the American people 
should know the truth. The administration should have the opportunity 
to explain its actions.
  I would hope, however, that any initiative to look into these issues 
will occur in an atmosphere devoid of the kind of partisan bickering 
that we have seen elsewhere in this Congress recently. There are very 
important national security issues involved here, not the least of 
which is the relationship between our Nation and the world's most 
populous state, which is also a nuclear power.
  We need to consider these matters with sobriety and a judicious 
temperament. The right time to begin to sort out these issues is today. 
I urge my colleagues to support the amendments before us.
  Mr. SISISKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
New York (Mrs. Maloney).
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, really, only in a Republican-led Congress could we have 
women serving all over the world defending our country and have back 
here this Congress rolling back their rights of equality of treatment 
in the military.
  I refer specifically to the segment of this bill that will roll back 
women to segregated training. I do not know anyone who supports this 
except the Republican leadership. Three of the four branches of the 
armed service do not want it, the trainees do not want it, all the 
experts have recommended against it, and I am honestly not sure why we 
are being forced to consider, in this legislation, legislation that 
would segregate the men and women of our Armed Forces.

                              {time}  1315

  Earlier today and last night in a bipartisan way, the Women's Caucus 
asked for a bipartisan amendment that would strike this language from 
the bill. Our amendment was not placed in order. I cannot understand 
why they would not even allow a floor debate on this or a vote on this 
issue. I guess they think that they know that we would win.
  Another problem with it is that we allocated last year $2.2 million 
to set up a commission to study this and other things. We have not even 
gotten the results of this commission. The Army says that it will cost 
them $159 million to implement it, when absolutely no one wants it. 
Basic training is a time to build trust and camaraderie. It is a time 
to solve problems while there is ultimate control over them. Right now 
I do not see what the problem is.
  The military is not having a woman problem. In my opinion, it is more 
of a man problem. It is no longer the men at the top of the Department 
of Defense. General Shalikashvili, Secretary Cohen, all of them have 
called for integrated training. The problem is with the men who are 
controlling this House, the Republican leadership.
  Men and women must train as they fight. You cannot solve a social 
problem with a logistical maneuver. Right now, as I am speaking, men 
and women are fighting together in Bosnia defending freedom. I do not 
believe that divide and conquer, which they are trying to do with this 
maneuver, will work here. Separating the sexes during basic training 
would be a tremendous mistake, a rollback. It creates an atmosphere of 
distrust and may affect military readiness.
  I hope that this Congress will refuse in the conference committee to 
accept this rollback to segregate women and men in the Armed Services.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes and 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of these four 
amendments. My colleague from Virginia a few moments ago asserted that 
this is, this has been turned into a debate that is a political debate 
rather than a debate about China. I hope that those who read this 
account in the Congressional Record will remember and take that remark 
and put it into perspective.
  It seems that every time that alleged wrongdoing by this Democrat 
President is challenged or investigated, it becomes political. There is 
no person so pure or so consistent enough in his past behavior to 
investigate this President of the United States in charges that he may 
have done something that endangers the national security or was in some 
way corrupt. And given that reality to the Members on the other side of 
the aisle, they feel absolutely justified in obstructing and dragging 
out and confusing any type of investigation into this President's 
activities.
  It is becoming clear to the American people that something has been 
done when it comes to our relations with China. Something terrible has 
happened. Every man, woman and child in this country may have been put 
in jeopardy because American technology could well have been 
transferred to the Communist Chinese in order to perfect their nuclear 
weapons delivery systems.
  What does that mean to the American people? It means that all of us 
are going to be put at risk if we are ever to confront the Chinese when 
they commit aggression or become belligerent

[[Page H3559]]

or do things that threaten our national security in the future. Now, 
perhaps because American technology has been transferred to these 
Communist Chinese that enable them to launch their nuclear weapons at 
us more effectively, all of us are going to be put in jeopardy. This is 
not a political issue. This is a national security issue, just as all 
of those other issues were legitimate in being investigated.
  I will say this, those other investigations, if they would not have 
been obstructed, if they would not have, if there was not intentional 
efforts being made to confuse the issues in those investigations, the 
public would have understood the importance of those issues as well. 
But this is too important to let politics get in the way, and it is not 
politics coming from this side of the aisle. It is politics which is 
preventing the American people from learning the truth when eight 
members of the Democratic Party prevent witnesses from testifying in 
our investigation in one of our own committees.
  I strongly support this and the American people deserve to know the 
truth, whether they have been betrayed or not.
  Mr. SISISKY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  It is obvious that the gentleman does not know this gentleman very 
well, and we do not. But I can tell him this, those who know me know 
that I think this is a very serious problem, if it is true, an 
extremely serious problem. The thing that bothers me is painting 
everybody, to keep referring to this side. Why? We may have some 
liberals over here, we may have some moderates, we may have some 
conservatives, but I do believe one thing, we do have patriotism over 
here. We do care about our country, and I know this gentleman cares 
about his country.
  The only reason that I mentioned those other facts are the words, the 
words out there. That is the only reason. Let us keep this debate on a 
high level. I can assure the gentleman from California that this 
gentleman would want to investigate anything that has to do with 
nuclear weapons.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Saxton).
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say to my friend the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Sisisky) that he and I and the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Rohrabacher) are on the same side. There is no 
question about it. We work closely together as members of the Committee 
on Armed Services, and I just want him to know that the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Hunter), who is sitting here by me, and the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Cunningham) want to convey to the gentleman how 
much we appreciate having been able to work with him as Americans from 
two different parties on these issues. We appreciate that very much.
  Mr. Chairman, I wanted to just address this issue of high tech 
transfer from perhaps a slightly different point of view. I offered an 
amendment or I asked that an amendment be made in order by the 
Committee on Rules which I am terribly disappointed was not. It has to 
do with Hong Kong and transfer through Hong Kong of technology to 
China. There are currently two separate sets of export laws that apply 
to China and Hong Kong. Everyone here knows that in 1997, Hong Kong 
came under the rule of China. And yet we continue to have these two 
separate sets of laws.
  So this morning in a Joint Economic Committee hearing, we asked some 
very knowledgeable witnesses, who, frankly, are associated or have been 
associated with the CIA, whether our concerns are valid on this issue. 
I would say to the well meaning Members of the Committee on Rules who 
may be listening, I think they made a mistake on this issue because 
witness after witness has said that these concerns are valid. This came 
to my attention, Mr. Chairman, because of a contractor wanting to 
transfer a weapons system which, if it had not been for some of us here 
sitting here now, would have never been a reality, a modified version 
of a weapons system transferred to Hong Kong, presumably eventually to 
be transferred to China.
  Our amendment was not made in order, and I am terribly disappointed 
by that. But we will have other days and other forums on which to make 
those points.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Hunter).
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to reiterate to my friend the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Sisisky) that one of the great things 
about the Committee on National Security over the last couple of years 
has been that despite our strong debate, especially on strategic 
systems on the House floor, and I admit I am often a partisan in that 
debate with respect to the Strategic Defense Initiative and other 
initiatives that I think have been given short shrift, we have always 
been together on technology transfer. We have been very close on that, 
and we have kind of held the line against other interests, particularly 
against commercial interests, because there is that compelling interest 
in commercial operations to press the advantage, to make that last 
sale, even though it may be militarily critical technology that is 
involved that one day could harm our troops on the battlefield. We have 
always stuck together.
  Interestingly, it has been not only Republicans and Democrats, it has 
been conservatives and liberals. Mr. Dellums was one of the foremost 
proponents of restricting technology transfer and many of the people 
who testified before us came from various political divisions of the 
left and right and center in America, experts who felt that we should 
not send military technology to potential adversaries.
  Let us work this problem on that basis. Walk through this thing, find 
out how much damage was done to American security and how we can stop 
it from further eroding.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume 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 want to thank first of 
all my good friend the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) for his 
leadership and for my good friend, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Skelton) for his leadership. This is truly a bipartisan committee, and 
this is truly a bipartisan bill. And this effort aimed at China and our 
concerns on proliferation is a bipartisan concern.
  I, like my colleagues, will attest to the fact that Members on the 
other side have been equally aggressive to Members on our side in 
focusing on the proliferation problem. There has not been a division 
that is a political division. In fact, we have been very much united 
when it comes to proliferating activities, not just by China but also 
by Russia and other entities, North Korea and so forth.
  I also rise to say that I have been one who has supported the 
President on China policy. I voted for MFN. In fact, in the last 
session of Congress, I took two delegations to China. I was the first 
policymaker from this country to be asked to address a group of mid-
level officers in the PLA at the National Defense University in 
Beijing. Twice I interacted with them. Twice I discussed with them our 
concerns about proliferation and our concerns about our security 
relationship.
  I plan to go back to China again this year. I believe in the policy 
of engagement with China. But I rise today to, in the strongest 
possible terms, relate to our colleagues in this body that we have a 
problem. The proliferation that has continually taken place by China 
and also by other nations, especially Russia, has got to be stopped.
  Mr. Chairman, the problem is over the past several years, it actually 
was not just under this administration, to some extent it was done in 
previous administrations, in looking at our arms control agreements 
that are the basis of our bilateral relationships with Russia and in 
this case China, we have not enforced those agreements when we have 
caught proliferators selling off and transferring technologies to other 
nations.
  Mr. Chairman, tomorrow there will be an op ed in the L.A. Times which 
will summarize my point in very great detail, as I did last Wednesday 
night on the floor of this body. Thirty-eight separate times in the 
past 7 years we have had documented cases of proliferating activities 
coming from two countries, coming from Russia and coming from China. 
Those proliferating activities

[[Page H3560]]

have sent technology in the area of nuclear weapons, chemical and 
biological weapons and missile technology to Iran, Iraq, India and 
Pakistan.
  Now we face the music. We face a crisis. India and Pakistan are saber 
rattling each other with technology that we could have stopped, if we 
would have taken aggressive action to stop that proliferation from 
occurring, which is a requirement of a number of arms control 
agreements, the missile technology control regime, the Arms Export 
Control Act and a whole host of other agreements. If we would have 
taken steps to impose sanctions in more than half of those 38 
occasions, let alone just the three where sanctions were imposed, I 
would argue we would not be in the position we are in today.
  It is absolutely imperative that this body and this committee support 
the leadership on both sides of the aisle, pass these four amendments 
and send a signal to China that we will not tolerate any future 
proliferation of technology, any missile technology, any nuclear 
technology to Pakistan or any other Nation.

                              {time}  1330

  Because that then causes us to have to spend more money to defeat 
that threat once it emerges in some other Nation's hands.
  So I support my chairman, I support my ranking member, the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Stump), and my ranking Democrat, the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Skelton), on their leadership, and I urge all of our 
colleagues to vote ``yes'' on each of the amendments that will be 
brought before us shortly.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider the amendments printed 
in part A of House Report 104-544, which shall be considered in the 
following order:
  Amendment No. 1 by Representative Spence or Gilman;
  Amendment No. 2 by Representative Bereuter;
  Amendment No. 3 by Representative Hefley; and
  Amendment No. 4 by Representative Hunter.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in part A of 
House Report 105-544.


                 Amendment No. 1 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:

       Part A amendment No. 1 printed in House Report 105-544 
     offered by Mr. Spence:
       At the end of title XII (page 253, after line 3), insert 
     the following new section:

     SEC. 1206. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS.

       It is the sense of the Congress that--
       (1) United States business interests must not be placed 
     above United States national security interests;
       (2) at the Presidential summit meeting to be held in the 
     People's Republic of China in June of 1998, the United States 
     should not--
       (A) support membership of the People's Republic of China in 
     the Missile Technology Control Regime;
       (B) agree to issue any blanket waiver of the suspensions 
     contained in section 902 of the Foreign Relations 
     Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 (Public Law 
     101-246), regarding the export of satellites of United States 
     origin intended for launch from a launch vehicle owned by the 
     People's Republic of China;
       (C) agree to increase the number of launches of satellites 
     to geosynchronous orbit by the People's Republic of China 
     above the number contained in Article II(B)(ii) of the 1995 
     Memorandum of Agreement Between the Government of the United 
     States of America and the Government of the People's Republic 
     of China Regarding International Trade in Commercial Launch 
     Services;
       (D) support any cooperative project with the People's 
     Republic of China to design or manufacture satellites;
       (E) enter into any new scientific, technical, or other 
     agreements, or amend any existing scientific, technical, or 
     other agreements, with the People's Republic of China 
     involving space or missile-related technology;
       (F) agree to any arms control initiative that cannot be 
     effectively verified, including any initiative relating to 
     detargeting of strategic offensive missiles; or
       (G) support any increase in the number or frequency of 
     military-to-military contacts between the United States and 
     the People's Republic of China;
       (3) the decision of the executive branch in 1998 to issue a 
     waiver allowing the export of satellite technology to the 
     People's Republic of China was not in the national interest 
     of the United States, given the ongoing criminal 
     investigation by the Justice Department of the transfer in 
     1996 of satellite technology to that country;
       (4) the executive branch should ensure that United States 
     law regarding the export of satellites to the Peoples 
     Republic of China is enforced and that the criminal 
     investigation described in paragraph (3) proceeds with all 
     due dispatch; and
       (5) the President should indefinitely suspend the export of 
     satellites of United States origin to the People's Republic 
     of China, including those satellites licensed in February 
     1998 as part of the Chinasat-8 program.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Spence) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence).
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  (Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise along with the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Gilman) to offer this amendment expressing the sense of 
Congress on the transfer of United States satellite missile technology 
to China.
  As the events surrounding the Clinton administration's decision to 
transfer sensitive military-related technology to China continue to 
unfold, it is becoming increasingly clear that United States national 
security continues to take a back seat to trade with China. Our 
amendment would place the Congress clearly on record in opposition to 
any agreements that the President might negotiate at next month's 
summit in China that would make it easier for China to acquire our 
technology that can be used to improve its military capability, in 
particular its ballistic missile capability.
  As has been reported in the press, the administration is reportedly 
considering issuing a blanket waiver of the so-called Tiananmen Square 
sanctions against China, approving the export of more United States 
satellites to China, and even allowing joint satellite production.
  This amendment would also express the sense of Congress that the 
President's decision to allow the export of satellite technology to 
China earlier this year, despite the reported DOD assessment that 
``United States national security has been harmed'' by a previous 
satellite transfer of technology, was not in the national interest.
  The administration has reportedly developed plans in recent weeks to 
increase the level of space cooperation with China and to encourage the 
sharing of missile and space technology. In a memorandum reportedly 
prepared by the National Security Council and printed in full in the 
Washington Times, and I would like to submit that for the Record, it 
was suggested that additional space- and missile-related technology 
might be transferred to China as an incentive for China to join the 
Missile Technology Control Regime.
  As a member of that regime, China would be eligible to acquire 
missile technology it cannot currently attain legally. However, while 
China has already said it would abide by the regime's restrictions, 
those pledges have repeatedly proven to be hollow. China's record of 
missile proliferation should give Members little comfort about 
Beijing's willingness to abide by its international nonproliferation 
obligation.
  In simple terms, Congress must speak loudly and clearly today to 
ensure that the United States does not take any action that helps China 
to improve its military capability, especially its ballistic missile 
capabilities.
  Mr. Chairman, China is clearly working overtime to improve its 
military might, and it views ballistic missiles as a quick and 
effective way to do so. The United States should refuse to be an 
accomplice to that effort, yet under the guise of constructive 
engagement and increasingly open trade, we are doing just that.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the Spence-Gilman 
amendment and to send a clear message to the President before he 
travels to China next month that the Congress strongly opposes any 
policy that places business interests over the national security 
interest.

[[Page H3561]]

  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today as a coauthor of the amendment 
offered by my good friend, the gentleman from South Carolina, the 
distinguished Chairman of the Committee on National Security, Mr. 
Spence.
  I hope that this amendment would be unanimously adopted by the House. 
It simply sets forth the sense of the Congress on an issue of vital 
importance to America's national security--the transfer of missile 
technology to China.
  To that end, this amendment calls on the President to indefinitely 
suspend the export of U.S. satellites to China, including those 
satellites licensed in February of 1998 as part of the CHINA-SAT-8 
program.
  This amendment also expresses the sense of the Congress that during 
the Presidential summit meeting to be held in China next month, the 
United States should not support or enter into any agreements with 
China which would further expand cooperation with China.
  I am particularly concerned about the Administration's stated intent 
to support China's membership in the Missile Technology control Regime.
  China continues to provide missile technology and components to both 
Pakistan and Iran. Since 1991 the United States has sanctioned China 
twice for violations of U.S. missile proliferation laws.
  I do not comprehend the logic, given China's record, of offering them 
MTCR membership. Perhaps it is for the reasons explicitly stated in a 
National Security Council memorandum. Regrettably these are precisely 
the wrong reasons.
  That memorandum, which is dated March 12, 1998, states that the U.S. 
should support Chinese membership because [quote] this would provide 
China with political prestige, the ability to shape future MTCR 
decisions, substantial protection from future U.S. missile sanctions 
and would expedite somewhat the consideration of U.S. exports to China. 
[unquote]
  I am concerned that in the mad rush to obtain better relations with 
the Chinese, we will enter into another deal with china to be delivered 
at the June summit, in which we throw our non-proliferation principles 
out the window.
  In order to cut the nuclear deal at last year's summit, we sacrificed 
full scope safeguards. What will we sacrifice for a missile deal?
  We all know this Administration was too eager to offer the Russian 
membership in the MTCR. The Russians have flouted every precept of the 
MTCR by transferring missile components and technology to Iran.
  Moreover, let me point out that this amendment calls upon the 
Administration to ensure that U.S. laws regarding the export of 
satellites to China are enforced and that the criminal investigation of 
U.S. companies proceed with all due dispatch. This is a critical 
consideration which we must not overlook.
  Accordingly, I urge all Members to fully support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Hunter).
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I rise in strong support of this amendment that is offered by 
the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence) and the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Gilman).
  The total umbrella of American issues with the Chinese, and there are 
lots of issues, most of them commercial issues, a lot of them 
technology transfer issues, is largely governed by the administration's 
policies that are brought about in these discussions with Chinese 
leaders.
  There is going to be an upcoming presidential summit. That has been 
pointed out. A lot of the things that we are concerned about, like 
Chinese membership in the Missile Technology Control Regime, the waiver 
the gentleman from South Carolina mentioned of the Tiananmen Square 
sanctions, increases in space launches, a number of those critical 
issues are going to be discussed. I think it is very important for this 
House to lay down its marker right now and let the administration know 
that we are very concerned on a national security basis of what he is 
doing in this next meeting with Chinese leaders.
  I think this is an absolutely appropriate amendment. I hope everybody 
would vote ``yes''.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  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. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, 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. 2 printed in part A of 
House Report 105-544.


                Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Bereuter

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment made in order by the 
rule.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part A amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Bereuter:
       At the end of title XII (page 253, after line 3), insert 
     the following new section:

     SEC. 1206. INVESTIGATIONS OF SATELLITE LAUNCH FAILURES

       (a) Participation in Investigations.--In the event of the 
     failure of a launch from the People's Republic of China of a 
     satellite of United States origin, no United States person 
     may participate in any subsequent investigation of the 
     failure.
       (b) Definition.--As used in this section, the term ``United 
     States person'' has the meaning given that term in section 16 
     of the Export Administration Act of 1979, and includes any 
     officer or employee of the Federal Government or of any other 
     government.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prohibit United 
States participation in any post-launch failure investigations 
involving the launch of a U.S. satellite from the People's Republic of 
China.
  On February 15, 1996, a Chinese rocket carrying a satellite built by 
the Loral Corporation crashed on liftoff from a launch facility in 
southern China. In the aftermath of that launch failure, the PRC 
established a review commission to investigate the failure and 
determine what went wrong. American technical experts from Loral and 
Hughes electronics participated in this investigation. On May 10th of 
that year, this commission completed a preliminary report finding that 
the cause of the accident was an electrical failure in the electronic 
flight control system. The report discussed very sensitive aspects of 
the rocket's guidance system and flight control system. Copies of this 
unredacted report, including much highly sensitive material, was 
promptly shared with the Chinese prior to its presentation to U.S. 
officials!
  In the aftermath, the U.S. Air Force and the National Air 
Intelligence Center completed a damage assessment of the incident, and 
found that U.S. national security had been harmed. My colleagues will 
understand that providing technical information designed to address 
problems in Chinese rocket guidance and flight control systems also 
addressed the same problems in Chinese Intercontinental Ballistic 
Missiles (ICBMs). There is a real question as to whether Chinese ICBMs 
are more accurate and reliable because of the advise of American 
citizens, and ICBMs pose a very real risk to the United States.
  Regrettably, and amazingly, Mr. Speaker, some of those Americans who 
participated in the Chinese rocket failure investigation argued that 
they were under no obligation to return the copies of this highly 
sensitive report.
  Now, the background on this amendment is that it seeks to prevent the 
transfer of sensitive military-related information to China. In 1996, 
two companies, Loral and Hughes, participated in a launch failure 
investigation involving the failed launch from China of a U.S. 
satellite on a Chinese launch vehicle.
  As a result of that investigation, information was passed to China 
that quite apparently could be used to improve the guidance accuracy 
and warhead delivery capability of China's missiles. The information 
was reportedly transferred illegally, without a license from the State 
Department, that is, and the incident is now the subject of a Justice 
Department criminal investigation.
  Even asking questions, Mr. Chairman, of the Chinese during 
investigations can transmit technical information and assist China in 
improving its launch capabilities. Anybody that understands even a 
little bit about gaining intelligence knows this is a process for 
gaining intelligence, even though it

[[Page H3562]]

would be the intention, perhaps, and certainly would be the intention, 
I would imagine, of these firms not to transfer classified and 
sensitive information.
  Now, this amendment would make it clear that the Congress is opposed 
to assisting China in the development of its space launch and missile 
capabilities. Why? Because Chinese missiles are targeted at U.S. cities 
and, obviously, we do not want to make them more accurate and 
jeopardize American lives.
  I can tell my colleagues that as unfortunate as the Indian nuclear 
explosions are, that is a related incident, because if Chinese missiles 
are more accurate, it creates instability not only in Asia but 
certainly in South Asian countries like India. This amendment would 
help prevent the transfer of militarily sensitive U.S. technology to 
China that could be used to improve that missile capability.
  The amendment would relieve American industry from the burden of 
determining what information can and cannot be transmitted to China by 
preventing U.S. participation in launch failure investigations.
  The amendment would also discourage U.S. satellite companies from 
seeking to launch satellites on Chinese launch vehicles. That is not 
the primary intent, but that is likely to be the result. If those 
launch vehicles are likely to be a failure or prone to failure, that 
would encourage alternative, more commercially viable launch options, 
including commercial American launch services.
  The amendment, therefore, Mr. Chairman, would send what should be a 
very obvious and certainly important signal prior to President 
Clinton's upcoming summit trip to China that the United States should 
not agree to measures that would help China improve its space launch or 
missile launch capabilities. The guidance systems on these missiles are 
all-important in determining how vulnerable our population really is, 
and so it is in our best interest not to have this technology flowing 
to China or, for that matter, to any other country.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BEREUTER. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri, the 
distinguished ranking Democrat member of the Armed Services Committee, 
now called the Committee on National Security.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from Nebraska for 
yielding to me.
  I take this opportunity, however, to point out that in our research 
the amendment, in part, simply repeats well-established legal 
requirements, and we are going to hammer that nail in, I guess, twice 
today.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his comments.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Buyer), and I apologize it is not more.
  Mr. BUYER. Thirty seconds?
  Well, in 30 seconds, let me just say, let us do the right thing.
  I am a Member that is very disturbed about the transfers of 
technology. Just pause for a moment in this body. We serve a greater 
cause than corporations. Corporations serve the bottom line, called 
profit, and their responsibility is to their stockholders. Our 
responsibility is, in fact, to the taxpayers and the citizens of this 
country under the umbrella of national security.
  So for the White House to sell out for other reasons, to corporations 
for profit, by pressure, we serve a greater cause here and there better 
be a deep appreciation of this.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) 
has expired.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to 
claim the opposition's time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Indiana?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) may control the 
time otherwise reserved for the opposition.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  What was very concerning to me was to learn that in 1996 Loral and 
Hughes had exported commercial satellites to China to launch the 
Chinese missile and then, in fact, it had exploded.
  A Loral subsidiary provided technicians and a report on improving the 
reliability of the Long March Rocket without first consulting U.S. 
officials.
  And then to learn that the Chinese military officer, in fact, had 
funneled $100,000 to the Clinton campaign, allegedly through Johnny 
Chung.
  We also have Mr. Schwartz, the chairman of Loral Space 
Communications, who was the leading soft money donor for the Democrat 
Party in 1996 in the amount of $366,000. Subsequently, there was a 
Justice Department investigation.
  And then in February of 1998 the Justice Department criminal inquiry 
was dealt a very serious blow when President Clinton quietly approved 
the export to China of similar guidance technology by Loral. Basically, 
what that did was then defunct the Justice Department investigation.

                              {time}  1345

  There are so many allegations that are happening in this town with 
regard to the administration and what is going on, I cannot even keep 
up with them. But what I can say when it comes to matters of national 
security, the proliferation issues, the transfers of technology, to 
think that the United States would transfer these technologies by 
redefining what a satellite is, is no longer under the munitions 
definition, somehow being slick in getting around definitions, believe 
me, other countries out there react to it.
  So people in America, when they were surprised to learn about India's 
detonation and learning about their nuclear capacities, should not be 
surprised, because if the administration is doing such things like 
this, it will cause reactions.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BUYER. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I 
appreciate everything he has said, and I think it goes right to the 
heart of the Bereuter amendment, which prohibits the U.S. participation 
in what we call these post-launch failure investigations or debriefings 
involving the launch of a satellite from China.
  The problem is that the Long March rockets, which are used in their 
strategic systems that are nuclear tipped, some of which are aimed at 
U.S. cities, are the same rockets that we launch these satellite 
payloads on. And the way that Loral and Hughes got into trouble here 
was after a launch went down and they lost a $200 million package, they 
realized it was in their economic self-interest to show the Chinese how 
the missile worked. Once again, it was like the guy laying under the 
guillotine saying, ``I think I see your problem,'' when the guillotine 
sticks.
  So by banning these post-launching debriefings after a failure, which 
is exactly what the very wise gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) 
does here, we take away the temptation from American companies to not 
only show them how they messed up on this particular launch, but to 
give them a little more liability for future launches, because they 
know the profit margin of their stockholders are in part riding on the 
reliability of these Chinese missiles, which also carry nuclear 
warheads, which are sometimes aimed at U.S. cities.
  So we have got this conflict between commercial interests and 
national security interests, and the Bereuter amendment is right on 
point.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, this is not solely about 
rockets that may reach U.S. cities. We also have allies in the Pacific 
Rim for which we have responsibilities within that security of the 
world. And to think that China, when they had threatened Taiwan and the 
more we sophisticate their weaponry to inflict harm upon our own 
allies, how can we in fact count on them if we cannot stand with them 
in moments like this?
  Mr. HUNTER. If the gentleman would continue to yield, he is 
absolutely right. We are going to be seeing a requirement for greater 
and greater American deterrent force to go to places like Taiwan as we 
see the strategic missile capability of the Communist Chinese increase. 
He is right on point.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time has expired.

[[Page H3563]]

  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) 
will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider Amendment No. 3 printed in part A of 
House Report 105-544.


                 Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Hefley

  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part A amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Hefley:
       At the end of title XII (page 253, after line 3), insert 
     the following new section:

     SEC. 1206. PROHIBITION ON EXPORTS OF MISSILE EQUIPMENT AND 
                   TECHNOLOGY TO CHINA.

       No missile equipment or technology (as defined in section 
     74 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2797c)) may be 
     exported to the People's Republic of China.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Hefley) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley).
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, may I at this point, since no Member has 
risen in opposition, ask unanimous consent to be permitted to control 
the time normally allotted to the opposition?
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Missouri?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Missouri may control time otherwise 
reserved for opposition.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this is actually the Hefley-Ryun amendment, and I would 
like to speak just a few minutes on it. Mr. Chairman, it is a very 
simple amendment that would address what I think is a fatal flaw in the 
Administration's current policy on China. That amendment deals with not 
all the other things that have been talked about here today, this deals 
strictly and thoroughly with national security.
  The amendment would simply prohibit the export or reexport of United 
States missile technology or equipment to the People's Republic of 
China. One would think common sense tells us that we should not send 
any of our defense-related technology or equipment to the only 
remaining communist country in the world that maintains a nuclear 
capability.
  In 1996, the Clinton administration reportedly permitted the two U.S. 
firms to transfer technology which would improve the accuracy and 
capability of Chinese ballistic missile forces. Some may say trade 
involving space launch vehicles and satellite technology used for 
commercial purposes should not be impeded. But the commercial and 
military technology in this case are virtually identical, and it is a 
risk we simply cannot take.
  If we launch a rocket which has the capability of launching more than 
one satellite, then we have the same technology that we do for multiple 
warheads on an intercontinental ballistic missile, same technology.
  The Chinese had a problem. Their rockets tended to blow up and they 
tended not to get to where they were supposed to go. So we stepped in 
and we said, let us help you. Let us fix that. I think if every Member 
of this body were to ask their constituents back home if the current 
policy makes sense, they would hear a resounding ``no.''
  This is a clear vote to make it harder for potential adversaries to 
threaten the American people, and I urge all Members to support this 
amendment.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I would appreciate if the gentleman would tell me what this does that 
is not already applicable under the existing law.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, what this does is it removes the waiver 
system under which what happened did happen so no missile-related 
technology could be transferred to the Chinese.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Vermont (Mr. Sanders).
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  The main point that I want to make really has less to do with this 
amendment than my concern about the bill in general. As Members of 
Congress, all of us want to do all kinds of things. One can make an 
argument that the military today needs $270 billion. But I think, given 
the growing gap between the rich and the poor in America, given the 
fact that millions of senior citizens in this country are unable to 
afford their prescription drugs, given the fact that there is an 
enormous crisis in child care in this country, given the fact that 
there has been a growth in recent years of people using emergency food 
shelters, people sleeping out on the streets, I think the time is now 
to get our priorities right.
  I believe that this country needs a strong military, but I think that 
there are other needs out there that are not being adequately addressed 
as we put $270-some-odd billion into the military, more than is needed 
by the intelligence agencies. And we should also recognize that not 
only are we putting substantial sums of money into our military, we are 
also part of NATO, which is a major military alliance as well.
  The bottom line for me is to say that now that the Cold War is over, 
is it appropriate to continue spending so much money on the military 
when there are so many other needs in this country? Is it appropriate 
to continue to build weapons systems that we do not need when this 
country continues to have by far the highest rate of childhood poverty 
in the industrialized world? Is it appropriate that we are spending 
money on the military with the end of the Cold War when our educational 
system is lacking in so many respects, when the weakest and most 
vulnerable people in this country are hurting and not getting the 
governmental support that they need?
  So I want to just thank the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for 
yielding me this brief time to suggest that I will be voting against 
the entire bill. Because I think it does not, now that the Cold War is 
over, indicate a rationale and sensible set of priorities for this 
country.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pappas).
  (Mr. PAPPAS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PAPPAS. Mr. Chairman, I stand in strong support of these 
amendments.
  Mr. Chairman, I serve on the National Security Committee. I see where 
we are trying to keep many fires burning in all corners of the world. 
America is sending troops to Bosnia, sending carriers to places like 
the Persian Gulf, trying to prepare a missile defense system, modernize 
equipment, invent future technologies while cutting troops, stopping 
research, and extending the life of old systems.
  Now we have to add a new need to the mix. And it is an urgent need. 
Communist China. Missiles aimed at America. How do we as a Congress 
respond?
  Well, I think what we must do is to protect America first. Congress 
must provide for the national defense of our country. Business 
interests, as much as I support them in many areas, must be second to 
the protection of U.S. national security interests. We must stop the 
flow of sensitive technology that makes the Chinese Army and Navy 
stronger.
  I am concerned about the politics involved but that can not be used 
by any party to distract from defending our country or as an excuse to 
point fingers and not do anything. This is our chance to plug these 
loopholes now! Partisanship can wait for another day.
  We have seen the results of failure to stop the spread of this 
missile technology. India has recently tested nuclear devices. One of 
the reported main reasons for this test has been India's fear of 
China's ability to use nuclear technology against them. Rightly or 
wrongly, India perceives the advances in Chinese technology, with U.S. 
help as a threat. Now the world is facing a possible renewed nuclear 
arms race. Perhaps this could have been avoided if our country had the 
foresight to stop this.
  As such, I would urge this Congress to support the four amendments 
dealing with Chinese technology today. We must empower

[[Page H3564]]

this Congress and our Defense Department to make national security 
decisions, not business people solely concerned with the bottom line.
  I also would draw this Congress' attention to an amendment that was 
offered by Mr. Saxton that was not ruled in order that would close the 
loophole to China known as Hong Kong. Last time I checked, Hong Kong 
was now under Communist Chinese Control and the previous government has 
been replaced by PLA representation. However, we can send sensitive 
military technology to Hong Kong but not China. Although this amendment 
was not ruled in order, I hope this Congress will continue to pay 
attention to this loophole that will probably be the conduit to more 
threats against U.S. interests.
  I would ask that this Congress support these four amendments. Each 
should send a bipartisan measure that this Congress does not want to 
arm potential adversaries with weapon systems for nuclear capabilities.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Ryun), the cosponsor of this amendment.
  (Mr. RYUN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. RYUN. Mr. Chairman, one thing that has been truly a pleasure in 
serving our national security is that when we come to an issue such as 
this that is really a national security issue for this country, I have 
seen this committee come together in such a way that they worked on 
policy and not on politics. So I hope today that it will be unanimous 
and strong support for this amendment, the Hefley-Ryun amendment, 
because I do believe there is a threat with communist nuclear missiles.
  In 1996, after the failed launch of the Chinese Long March missile, 
engineers from the United States aerospace firms went to China to lend 
their expertise to Great Wall Industries, the manufacturer of these 
particular missiles.
  A 1997 classified Department of Defense report concluded that at 
least one U.S. company gave sensitive missile guidance technology to 
the Chinese. The DOD report then concluded that that transfer damaged 
our national security. So that is why this is beyond politics and it is 
really into policy.
  Next month, President Clinton will visit Beijing. He is expected to 
announce a new space cooperation agreement and possibly discuss lifting 
sanctions on the transfer of further military technology. As long as 
China remains a communist country and transfers technology to regimes 
such as Iran and Pakistan are possible through China, the United States 
should not share its commercial space technology that could be used 
against us for military purposes.
  China has 13 long-range missiles aimed at the United States. The CIA 
just confirmed this a couple weeks ago. It also considers the United 
States its number one security threat. No agreement increasing 
technology transfers to Communist China should be pursued. It is 
irresponsible to advance the military capabilities of a communist 
country, even more so as the U.S. lacks missile defense programs that 
are necessary to combat these.
  It is unfortunate that we need to offer this amendment today. The 
issue is clear. The United States should not provide missile technology 
to communist countries. And it is my hope that colleagues on the 
opposite side of the aisle will join us in supporting the Hefley-Ryun 
amendment.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time is remaining?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) has 30 seconds 
remaining. The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) has 2 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Buyer).

                              {time}  1400

  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding to me. I just 
wanted to do a reminder to my colleagues.
  If you recall, it was several years ago we had a debate in the 
Committee on National Security, and that was who should make these 
decisions on the transfers of these type of technologies. At the time, 
the administration wanted the Committee on Commerce to do that and to 
take the Pentagon out of that question. We made the decision in a very 
bipartisan manner in the Committee on National Security, that we felt 
matters such as this are so important to our Nation that the Pentagon 
needs to be in the loop.
  When we force the Pentagon into the loop and when the Pentagon raises 
objections, they then get squashed, that is not a good thing.
  I support the Hefley amendment to remove the waiver authority by the 
President.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Hunter).
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I just want to strongly endorse the Hefley 
amendment. This chart shows all of the aspects of missile technology 
that are manifest in a commercial satellite program. They include 
payload disbursal technology, kick motor technology, radiation hardened 
electronics, encryption devices, launcher attitude control.
  So there are a lot of aspects of technology beyond the mere 
delivering of a package that can assist the Chinese rocket program. So 
the amendment of the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) is right on 
target; I would recommend its approval.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) 
will be postponed.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed 
in part A of House Report 104-544.


                 Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Hunter

  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part A, amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Hunter:
       At the end of title XII (page 253, after line 3), insert 
     the following new section:

     SEC. 1206. PROHIBITION ON EXPORTS AND REEXPORTS OF SATELLITES 
                   TO CHINA.

       (a) In General.--No satellites of United States origin 
     (including commercial satellites and satellite components) 
     may be exported or reexported to the People's Republic of 
     China.
       (b) Prohibition With Respect to Information, Equipment, and 
     Technology.--No information, equipment, or technology that 
     could be used in the acquisition, design, development 
     (including codevelopment), or production (including 
     coproduction) of any satellite or launch vehicle may be 
     exported or reexported to the People's Republic of China.
       (c) Applicability.--Subsections (a) and (b) apply to any 
     satellite, information, equipment, or technology that as of 
     the date of the enactment of this Act has not been exported 
     or reexported to the People's Republic of China, whether or 
     not an export license for such export or reexport has been 
     approved as of such date.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Hunter) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, since no Member has risen in opposition, I 
ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to control the time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Missouri?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Hunter).
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, we have spoken about this amendment for some time now 
during this debate. I think most of the folks that are listening to the 
debate understand the problem. The problem is that there is an 
inextricable link between the satellite technology that we have been 
transferring to China pursuant to our satellite launch partnership with 
them and their nuclear missile capability.
  While we are trying to sort this problem out, Mr. Chairman, it makes 
sense for us to stop the train, to put on the brakes and say we are not 
going to make any transfers, no export or reexport of U.S. satellites, 
including commercial satellites and satellite components, to the 
People's Republic of

[[Page H3565]]

China. That is what this amendment does.
  Mr. Chairman, in this crash we saw another problem that we had not 
thought about, and that is that we have these packages which, in 
theory, are protected against Chinese scientists and engineers being 
able to examine the contents even while they are in China. I listened 
to the President of Hughes Electronics tell me very passionately how 
these packages are guarded and nobody is allowed to come close to them, 
so the engineers in this Communist country will have no ideas what is 
inside the packages.
  The problem is, if you have an aborted launch like the one that we 
had or a disastrous launch where the Chinese missile with the satellite 
package atop it goes down in China, and the damage is then recovered 
and analyzed by the People's Liberation Army of China, they then have 
access to all of the contents of that satellite package.
  Let me just say, Mr. Chairman, without having the most recent 
briefings, which the administration I think has been somewhat reluctant 
to give, on exactly what transpired after the crash, I am concerned and 
I am worried that some things were recovered by the People's Liberation 
Army that should not have been recovered.
  So this amendment bans the export and reexport of U.S. satellites, 
including commercial satellites and satellite components into the 
People's Republic of China. I think it is a timely amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I wish to point out that we are hammering the nail in 
that is already been flush to the board. Nevertheless, let me point 
this out: No controlled information relevant to ballistic missiles or 
warhead delivery technology has been authorized to be made available to 
Chinese authorities in connection with past space launches of 
commercial satellites.
  The existing procedures, including the technical safeguards agreement 
negotiated under the Bush administration, that is the previous 
Republican administration, signed in February 1993, explicitly prohibit 
transfer of technology related to launch vehicles. Warhead delivery 
technology was also prohibited.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, how much time do we have remaining?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) has 2\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Indiana (Mr. Buyer).
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  Mr. Chairman, I have a question for the author of the amendment. 
Earlier I rose and discussed that this question came up several years 
ago in the Committee on National Security with regard to the 
jurisdiction question on commodity.
  As I understand, on commodity jurisdiction, the transfer from the 
State Department with regard to satellites that used to be classified 
under the munitions has now been transferred to the Commerce 
Department, who would look at the satellite and say this is really 
dual-use technology. Am I understanding that correctly?
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield to me, that is 
right. Oversight or the primary review of the satellite transfers has 
now been taken away from the Department of Defense, who look at it from 
a national security standpoint, and given to the Department of 
Commerce, which arguably does not have the experts to understand 
exactly what is being transferred, and does not have probably the 
political will that the Department of Defense has to keep critical 
militarily strategic components from going to the hands of our 
potential adversaries. The Defense Department is tougher on these 
transfers.
  Mr. BUYER. But the sensitivity about the duality of the purposes, 
saying that this is a rocket system that could only launch a satellite, 
in essence is the same rocket system that it would take to send a 
nuclear warhead anywhere in the world.
  Mr. HUNTER. The gentleman is exactly right. In fact, it is exactly 
the same missile. The Chinese use the same missile both for the 
satellite launch and for the nuclear weapons launch. That is why it is 
so critical to really examine these packages.
  Mr. BUYER. So earlier when the House adopted an amendment that said 
no to the President on waivers of munitions, this amendment is saying 
no to the waivers on the commodities?
  Mr. HUNTER. That is right. This thing bans the export and reexport.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) has 1 minute 
remaining.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, let me just make this clear. This bans the export and 
reexport of U.S. satellites, including commercial satellites and 
satellite components, to the People's Republic of China. I think it is 
necessary at this time.
  My friend the gentleman from Missouri pointed out that we have waived 
or we have allowed these transfers in the past under the Bush 
administration. That is true. I led off my debate by saying this has 
gone back a long way.
  I think, in light of the activities that have taken place in recent 
years, 1996 through 1998, I personally have a problem in trusting the 
folks that are making the decision to go or no go on satellite 
transfer, to allow them to have the discretion at this time.
  Mr. Chairman, I think this is a prudent thing for the House to put on 
the brakes at this point and to hold up all transfers until we sort out 
how much damage has been done, and damage has been done, according to 
the Department of Defense.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) 
will be postponed.


        Sequential Votes Postponed In The Committee Of The Whole

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, proceedings will now 
resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were postponed 
in the following order: Amendment No. A-1 offered by the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Spence); amendment No. A-2 offered by the gentleman 
from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter); amendment No. A-3 offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley); and amendment No. A-4 offered by 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter).
  The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                Amendment No. A-1 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 417, 
noes 4, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 167]

                               AYES--417

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Capps
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn

[[Page H3566]]


     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Filner
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastert
     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 (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     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
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McGovern
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Parker
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Paxon
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Redmond
     Regula
     Reyes
     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
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Weygand
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--4

     Hamilton
     Hastings (FL)
     McDermott
     Wexler

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Bateman
     Cannon
     Carson
     Clay
     Ewing
     Gonzalez
     Harman
     Meeks (NY)
     Mollohan
     Stabenow
     Stark

                              {time}  1429

  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida and Mr. McDERMOTT changed their vote from 
``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                 Amendment A-2 offered by Mr. Bereuter

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) 
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 414, 
noes 7, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 168]

                               AYES--414

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Deutsch
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Filner
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastert
     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 (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     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
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McGovern
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Parker
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Paxon
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Redmond
     Regula
     Reyes
     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
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner

[[Page H3567]]


     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Weygand
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--7

     Campbell
     Hamilton
     Hastings (FL)
     McDermott
     Watt (NC)
     Wexler
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Bateman
     Carson
     Clay
     Cox
     Diaz-Balart
     Ewing
     Gonzalez
     Harman
     Meeks (NY)
     Norwood
     Stabenow

                              {time}  1439

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                          personal explanation

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 168, I was 
inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''


                  Amendment A-3 Offered By Mr. Hefley

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) 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 412, 
noes 6, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 169]

                               AYES--412

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Filner
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     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
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McGovern
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Parker
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Paxon
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Redmond
     Regula
     Reyes
     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
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Weygand
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--6

     Campbell
     Hamilton
     Hastings (FL)
     McDermott
     Moran (VA)
     Wexler

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Bateman
     Brady
     Carson
     Clay
     Cox
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Gonzalez
     Harman
     Hill
     McIntosh
     Meeks (NY)
     Stabenow
     Weldon (FL)

                              {time}  1448

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                          personal explanation

  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 169, I was 
inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''


                  Amendment A-4 Offered by Mr. Hunter

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) 
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 five-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 364, 
noes 54, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 170]

                               AYES--364

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Fawell
     Filner
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez

[[Page H3568]]


     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kim
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McGovern
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Parker
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Paxon
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     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
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryun
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Snyder
     Solomon
     Spence
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Weygand
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--54

     Ackerman
     Allen
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Berry
     Brown (CA)
     Campbell
     Clayton
     Conyers
     Crane
     Dicks
     Dixon
     Dooley
     Dreier
     Ehlers
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Furse
     Hamilton
     Hastings (FL)
     Houghton
     Johnson (CT)
     Kilpatrick
     Kolbe
     LaFalce
     Lee
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren
     Manzullo
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McDermott
     Moran (VA)
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pickett
     Reyes
     Roybal-Allard
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sawyer
     Serrano
     Skaggs
     Smith, Adam
     Tauscher
     Thomas
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Wexler
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Bass
     Bateman
     Carson
     Clay
     Cox
     Ewing
     Gonzalez
     Harman
     Kasich
     Meeks (NY)
     Owens
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stabenow

                              {time}  1457

  Mr. DOOLEY of California changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed 
in Part B of House Report 105-544.


                 Amendment No. 1 offered by Mrs. Lowey

  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows.

       Part B amendment No. 1 offered by Mrs. Lowey:
       At the end of subtitle A of title VII (page 189, after line 
     5) insert the following new section:

     SEC. 705. RESTORATION OF POLICY AFFORDING ACCESS TO CERTAIN 
                   HEALTH CARE PROCEDURES FOR FEMALE MEMBERS OF 
                   THE ARMED FORCES AND DEPENDENTS AT DEPARTMENT 
                   OF DEFENSE FACILITIES OVERSEAS.

       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 House Resolution 441, the gentlewoman from 
New York (Mrs. Lowey) and a Member opposed each will control 20 
minutes.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment and 
claim the time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) will be 
recognized for 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey).

                              {time}  1500

  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) and I are pleased to 
offer an amendment today on behalf of the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Harman), who unfortunately cannot be here. The Lowey-Harman-
Morella amendment would give military women access to the health care 
they need and deserve.
  Our amendment will repeal a provision of law which prevents 
servicewomen and female dependents of servicemen from using their own 
funds to obtain legal abortion services in military hospitals. Women 
who volunteer to serve in the Armed Forces already give up many 
freedoms and risk their lives in defending our country. They should not 
also have to sacrifice their health, their safety and their basic 
constitutional rights to a policy with no valid military purpose.
  I want to make sure that every Member of Congress knows that the 
Department of Defense itself is opposed to the current policy. Our 
amendment is first and foremost about protecting women's health. Local 
facilities and foreign nations are often not equipped to perform 
abortions safely and medical safety and medical standards are often far 
lower than those in the United States.
  A woman forced to seek an abortion at local facilities or forced to 
wait to travel to acquire safe abortion services faces tremendous 
health risks. Do we really want American servicewomen overseas seeking 
back-alley abortions on their own in a foreign country?
  This amendment does not allow taxpayer-funded abortions at military 
hospitals, nor does it compel any doctor who opposes abortion to 
perform an abortion. The amendment merely reinstates the policy that 
was in effect from 1973 to 1988, and again from 1993 to 1996, giving 
women in the military who are stationed overseas the same rights as 
military women in their own country: the right to purchase a safe and 
legal abortion with their own private money.
  Servicewomen and military dependents stationed abroad do not expect 
special treatment, only the right to receive the same services 
guaranteed to American women under Roe v. Wade. This bill penalizes 
women who have volunteered to serve their country by prohibiting them 
from exercising their constitutionally protected right to choose.
  I urge my colleagues, consider the irony of the United States 
military, the greatest and most powerful in the world, denying overseas 
servicewomen and servicemen and their families the rights and freedoms 
we are so justifiably proud of at home.
  I urge support for the Lowey-Harman-Morella amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, over the past three decades, the availability of 
abortion services at military medical facilities has been the subject 
of numerous changes and interpretations over the years. In January of 
1993, President Clinton signed an executive order directing the 
Department of Defense to permit privately funded abortions 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 
principle reasons:
  First, the United States military follows the prevailing laws and 
rules of foreign countries regarding abortions and, secondly, the 
military had a difficult time finding health care professionals in 
uniform willing to perform the abortions.
  The current law is consistent with the Hyde language. It allows 
military women and dependents to receive abortions in military 
treatment facilities in cases of rape, incest or when necessary to save 
the life of the mother.

[[Page H3569]]

 This is the same policy that has been in effect from June 1988, until 
President Clinton signed the executive order. The House has voted 
several times to ban abortions at overseas military hospitals. Last 
year this amendment was offered and defeated at full committee markup 
and during floor consideration.
  In 1996, between the defense authorization bill and the defense 
appropriations bill, this House voted 8 times in favor of the ban on 
abortions at military treatment facilities. In those overseas areas, 
where female beneficiaries do not have access to safe, legal abortions, 
beneficiaries have the option of using 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 reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson).
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman 
for yielding me the time.
  This amendment does not fund abortions with tax dollars. Let us get 
that very clear. Tax dollars under current law may not pay for 
abortions. Tax dollars under this amendment will not pay for abortions. 
This amendment merely assures that soldiers, sailors, Marines do not 
become second class citizens when they don the uniform of our great 
Nation to defend freedom.
  This amendment merely assures that our servicemen and servicewomen 
and their spouses do not have less freedom than the people they defend. 
All this amendment guarantees is that a servicewoman or a serviceman's 
wife has the same right any other American woman has to terminate a 
pregnancy in, for example, the first trimester, in a safe, clean health 
care facility. Any serviceman's wife or servicewoman who would want to 
would have to pay for the procedure themselves. This does not provide 
tax dollars for the procedure. In fact, this amendment only does three 
things:
  It provides equal rights to our military servicemen and servicewomen 
to legal medical care. It provides equal protection against care in 
substandard hospitals by substandard physicians. And thirdly, it 
provides equal protection under the law. Remember, the way the current 
policy is written, if you are a colonel, a major, and you are well 
paid, yes, you can fly back to the States to have care. If you are an 
enlisted man, frankly, you cannot. So this prevents discrimination on 
an economic basis and merely guarantees to servicemen's wives and to 
servicewomen exactly the same rights to access to medical care that all 
other Americans enjoy.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds to respond and say 
that space-available travel is at no cost to the service member so 
there is no discrimination between rank of officers and enlisted.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BUYER. I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Remember, space available, I have a lot 
of family in the military, is hard to get, and there is timeliness 
involved in this issue.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, there is no difference 
in treatment between the officer corps and the NCO corps, the enlisted 
corps on this measure.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Weldon).
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding me the time.
  I rise again in opposition to this amendment. We have debated this 
amendment now every year since I was first elected to the Congress. 
Prior to coming to the Congress, I was a practicing physician in 
Florida and, prior to going into private practice, I spent 6 years in 
the U.S. Army Medical Corps. Indeed, I was in the medical corps when 
this policy was first established under the Reagan administration. I 
can tell my colleagues that the policy was well received by the people 
within the medical corps, the men and women.
  The reason it was so well received is the same reason that it is very 
controversial here. There are lots of Members who feel that killing the 
unborn child in the womb is morally wrong and that we should not be 
doing that. To use a military treatment facility and to ask our men and 
women in uniform, many of whom have very, very strong objections to 
this procedure, they do not consider it a medical procedure, they 
consider it killing, is just wrong.
  I can tell my colleagues that when I was on active duty, when this 
ban went into effect, it was very, very well received by the nurses, by 
the physicians. They did not like doing it, and today, still, they do 
not like doing it. I would encourage all of my colleagues to vote no on 
this amendment. Those who would claim that no taxpayer dollars are 
being used, I disagree with that. They are using the facility. They are 
using the materials. They are using the infrastructure, the electricity 
that is there. I say, do not use in any way tax dollars for this kind 
of purpose.
  The reason people do not like this is the same reason they could not 
find any doctors to do it in the first place, and that is because it is 
ending a human life. People will try to dehumanize this whole procedure 
and call it something else, but in reality it is taking a living human 
being in the womb and abruptly ending its life. I think it is wrong, 
and I urge all my colleagues to vote no on this.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds just to remark to 
the gentleman that the military does have a conscience clause. No 
doctor has to perform this procedure if it is against their own views.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. 
DeGette).
  Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Lowey-
Harman-Morella amendment.
  This amendment is simply about restoring the basic rights that have 
been denied to women simply because they serve in the military. Every 
woman in America has a constitutional right to reproductive choice. Yet 
the anti-choice movement in Congress has been relentless to overturn 
this constitutional right.
  Poor women, women who live in the Nation's capital, women in the 
military are just the first victims of a deliberate attempt to outlaw 
access to comprehensive reproductive services to all American women. 
This amendment ensures that women in the military can exercise the same 
rights that all women of America were guaranteed 25 years ago.
  The amendment does not require the Department of Defense to pay for 
abortions. It simply allows military women to seek and pay for a full 
range of health care services. If that includes electricity, I am sure 
they can pay for the electricity as well.
  If this amendment fails, Congress will jeopardize the health of all 
women who serve in the military overseas. I urge my colleagues to think 
about the message they are sending and to vote aye on this amendment.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Bartlett).
  Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, for many years before it was 
law, no abortions were done in our military hospitals. The reason was 
that military doctors will not do abortions. The present policy and its 
law is that if the life of the mother is at risk, those abortions are 
permitted. As a matter of fact, they are fully funded. In cases of rape 
and incest, the abortion is permitted.
  When American people are polled, fully 80 percent of them oppose 
abortion for birth control. If you exclude life of the mother, rape and 
incest, essentially all that remains is abortion for birth control. A 
lot has been said about the health of the mother. Killing babies when 
the mother's life is not at risk is not a woman's health issue.
  Let me close by saying that you do not have a right to do what is 
wrong, and killing the preborn baby is wrong.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from 
New York for yielding me the time.
  I would simply say that, here we go again, on an argument that argues 
against the law of the land. Our military personnel deserve to be under 
the

[[Page H3570]]

law of the land. So all we are simply asking is that the laws of this 
land regarding choice and the right to an abortion be applied to the 
women in the United States military. Prohibiting women from using their 
own funds to obtain abortion services at overseas military facilities 
actually endangers the woman's health. Women stationed overseas depend 
on their base hospitals for medical care and are often situated in 
areas where local facilities are inadequate or unavailable. This policy 
may cause a woman facing a crisis pregnancy to seek out an illegal and 
potentially unsafe abortion.
  The issue of as space available, I think it is very well known that 
even in circumstances of a death at home it becomes very difficult for 
our servicemen and women sometimes to be able to get back home. 
Certainly space available is going to argue against a crisis situation 
when there is the necessity to protect the life and health of the 
mother. We need to comply with the law of the land for all of our U.S. 
military women. Let us be fair and treat them as they should be.
  I strongly support amendment No. 45 which will restore regulations 
permitting abortions for service members and their dependents at 
overseas Defense Department Medical facilities.
  Without this amendment women who have volunteered to serve their 
country will continue to be discriminated against by prohibiting them 
from exercising their legally protected right to choose abortion simply 
because they are stationed overseas.
  While the Department of Defense policy respects the laws of host 
nations regarding abortions, service women stationed overseas should be 
entitled to the same services as do women stationed in the U.S.
  Prohibiting women from using their own funds to obtain abortion 
services at overseas military facilities endangers women's health. 
Women stationed overseas depend on their base hospitals for medical 
care, and are often situated in areas where local facilities are 
inadequate or unavailable. This policy may cause a woman facing a 
crisis pregnancy to seek out an illegal and potentially unsafe 
abortion.
  Since 1985, the ban on DOD abortions was made permanent by the DOD 
authorization bill. This amendment does not require the Department of 
Defense to pay for abortions, it simply repeals the current ban on 
privately funded abortions at U.S. military facilities overseas. 
Absolutely no Federal funds will be used for abortion services.
  In addition, all three branches of the military have a ``conscience 
clause'' provision which will permit medical personnel who have moral, 
religious or ethical objections to abortion or family planning services 
not to participate in the procedure. These provisions will remain 
intact as well.
  Access to abortion is a crucial right for American women, whether or 
not they are stationed abroad. This amendment must be supported as 
women who serve our country must be able to exercise their choice 
whether or not they are on American soil.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Idaho (Mrs. Chenoweth).
  Mrs. CHENOWETH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this 
amendment. Indeed the law of the land was passed on February 10, 1996. 
It was with regard to this issue. It is entitled the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 and was signed into law by 
President Clinton.
  This act contained a provision to prevent DOD medical treatment 
facilities from being used to perform abortions except where the life 
of the mother is endangered or in the case of rape or incest. Quite 
simply, should this amendment be adopted, not only would taxpayer-
funded facilities be used to support abortion on demand, but resources 
would also be used to search for, to hire and to transport new 
personnel so that abortions could be performed.

                              {time}  1515

  Mr. Chairman, this is unacceptable and disturbing. Military treatment 
centers must remain dedicated to healing and nurturing life. As such, 
they should not be forced to facilitate the taking of the most innocent 
human life, the child in the womb.
  I urge my colleagues to protect the sanctity of life and vote ``no'' 
on this amendment.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Davis).
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the 
Lowey-Harman amendment to the defense authorization bill because it is 
fair and it is right.
  Women serving our Nation overseas should have access to 
constitutionally protected health care procedures. The United States 
military should provide for all the health needs of all its members. 
Health needs are health needs.
  Women who are proudly serving and protecting the security of our 
Nation overseas should be able to depend on their base hospitals for 
all of their medical services. Therefore, women should have access to 
reproductive health care just as they have access to treatment for the 
flu.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute to make a couple of 
observations.
  One is that, in fact, the amendment before us is striking language. 
So with regard to the last speaker, when he said we only want to 
provide constitutionally protected abortion access, then what we do is 
we set forth the scenario of having also late-term abortions. Partial-
birth abortions could also then be performed at military treatment 
facilities. I do not think that is what we want at military treatment 
facilities.
  We also have the scenario where it was argued this would not have 
anything to do with taxpayer funds. Well, if in fact our problem is we 
cannot find a military doctor willing to perform an abortion, then are 
we going to have to contract out to have that abortion performed? And 
if it is contracted out, who pays for that? So I think we are talking 
about some taxpayer funding.
  Also, I am paying attention to the language here, and I think 
everyone should. I guess what we are calling abortions here on the 
House floor, the proponents of this amendment do not want to call it 
abortion. They call it women's health and comprehensive reproductive 
health services. But let us call it what it is. This is taking the life 
of another.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Maryland (Mrs. Morella), my former co-chair of the Congressional Caucus 
on Women's Issues.
  (Mrs. MORELLA asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
this time.
  I am pleased to be a cosponsor of this amendment offered by my 
friend, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) and also the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman). As we know, this amendment is 
simply going to give our U.S. servicewomen stationed overseas access to 
the Department of Defense health facilities by repealing a provision of 
law which bars them from using their own funds, and I emphasize that, 
to obtain legal abortion services in military hospitals.
  Base hospitals are sometimes the only facilities for medical care, 
and in countries like Bosnia, usually there is no other resort because 
local health facilities are frequently inadequate. They just do not 
meet our standards of health. And so, without having the amendment that 
we offer, in order to resolve the problem of not having adequate 
medical facilities, illegal procedures perhaps might be the result of 
it, or unsafe operations.
  And abortion is a constitutional right. We ask many sacrifices of our 
service people. Let us not compel them to sacrifice basic health 
rights, the rights of privacy and the constitutional rights that others 
do have.
  Also, this amendment is about fairness. Our servicewomen and military 
dependents stationed abroad are not asking for any special treatment, 
they are only asking for the ability to have the very same rights that 
all Americans have under the Constitution.
  And, also, there is a matter of looking economically at it. Yes, 
there might be those who say, well, members can go home for those 
services. Well, maybe those who are highly paid can, but there are a 
certain group of officers who have served us so very well, where the 
expense would be prohibitive and so, therefore, they are stuck. So 
there is an economic inequity in that.
  I want to reiterate that we are not asking that every doctor perform 
the abortion, even though it is constitutional. We are not asking for 
taxpayers to fund it at military hospitals. Any doctor who opposes it 
on principle or a

[[Page H3571]]

matter of conscience would not have to perform the abortion, even if it 
is legal.
  And this does not mean that we have the expense of having to pay for 
it at another facility. The amendment merely reinstates the policy that 
was in effect from 1973 until 1988 and then it was again in effect from 
1993 to 1996.
  Let me finally just point out the strong support from health care 
providers, those groups that know and do work with health care 
organizations like the American Nurses Association, the American Public 
Health Association, the American Medical Women's Association, the 
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Planned Parenthood 
Federation of America. Those among many others have expressed their 
strong support for this amendment.
  It is also supported by the Department of Defense, I would like to 
emphasize. So I hope that Members would join us in supporting this 
amendment.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Cunningham), a member of the committee.
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I spent 20 years in the military and 
not once, not one time did I ever see a woman's right to choose denied. 
If there was a need for that individual to come back and do it and get 
the procedure, they were allowed. Whether we are for or against 
abortion, it should not be in this body, and that includes funding for 
it.
  But in the military, if a woman is overseas and they are in a unit, 
they are in a combat backup unit, they do not want somebody there that 
has gone through an abortion. They want them out of the country. They 
want them out of that unit until they can recover and then come back.
  I have heard that it denies the basic rights. It does not. The 
statute says that they have the right, especially in the case of rape, 
incest or life of the mother. And any other case, the military will 
bring them back.
  Those folks that are for this very amendment are the same folks that 
are cutting defense and cutting defense and cutting defense. In the 
case of the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), her biggest 
contributor is Loral, the one that sold the technology to the Chinese. 
If my colleagues want to worry about men and women in the military, 
then take care of the military and quit bringing these kinds of 
amendments up.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for 
yielding me this time and congratulate her on this important amendment. 
I rise in strong support of the Lowey-Harman amendment.
  Do we hear what we are saying in this debate to the women of our 
armed services? Make the choice to serve your country in the armed 
services of the United States and lose your choice over your own body. 
Join the armed services, sisters, and lose your constitutional rights.
  All the red herrings in the world will not make this palatable to 
young women in this country today. The notion about whether their own 
money or taxpayers' money is involved, for example. Women would agree 
to paying the full cost, including the electricity, for the Member who 
was concerned there. Include the full cost of the abortion. The 
gentleman wants to know about contracting out. The last time I heard, 
we contract out for the full cost of the service.
  Show some respect for women serving their country. Imagine the 
position we put them in in Haiti or in Bosnia, having to find a safe 
place for an abortion. Suppose it is a crisis pregnancy but not one 
resulting from rape or incest. Why would any Member of this body want 
to put any woman serving in the armed forces at risk? Why? Why even 
would we want to put her at any inconvenience? She has signed up to 
serve her country. I think she deserves all the respect we can muster.
  And let me be clear. The armed services today needs its women more 
than its men, because it is the women whose percentages are rising. It 
is the percentage of men that is going down. Women are indispensable in 
the armed services today. They are very young; they may have a 
different life-style from many Members of this body, but we had better 
understand this: the services will have to close up shop without them.
  This is the wrong message at the wrong time to send to the young 
women the services are trying to recruit today. The women's numbers are 
going up. They are at 14 percent. In 1990 they were at 11 percent. They 
keep rising. They are the cream of the crop. They are listening to this 
debate, and I believe I speak for them and for the women now serving 
when I say eliminate discrimination against women in the armed forces, 
stand with the women serving their country.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute to respond.
  This is not a question of those in the military versus women who 
serve in the military, and I think that is an insulting argument for 
anybody to use and it is a red herring in this argument.
  If my colleague wants to talk about respect, I have respect for the 
sanctity of human life. That is what this is about. My colleague is a 
little uncomfortable about that, is she not? That is what this is 
about. It is about human life.
  Think about our military. The purpose we have in the military is to 
protect our freedoms and our liberties, and when that is laid out in 
the Constitution, we believe, we, those of us who believe in the 
sanctity of life, believe, and I am just as happy that the 
gentlewoman's parents decided to have her, just as I am glad my parents 
decided to have me, and I am appalled that someone would come to the 
floor and say this is something about women's rights.
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BUYER. I yield to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia.
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is appalled because the 
message strikes home. The gentleman is appalled because this Member is 
calling for respect. And as the gentleman respects human life on his 
set of values, there are no set of values on which the gentleman should 
not be respectful of women in the armed forces.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I reclaim my time to say I respect human 
life, yes, on my set of values, on the set of values that is the 
proponent of life as opposed to killing a human being.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
New York (Mrs. Maloney).
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding me this time, and I rise in support of the Lowey-Harman-
Morella amendment.
  DACOWITS, the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services, 
found that women soldiers had difficulty getting access to medical care 
overseas, particularly in the Pacific. This unequal ban exacerbates 
this problem.
  Last time I checked, an American woman still had the right to choose, 
that is if she is living in the United States. When she decides to 
defend our country, she loses that constitutional right. When a female 
soldier is defending the rights and privileges of this country, she is 
denied some of the same rights and privileges.
  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, she is forced to either 
wait until she can travel to the United States, at extreme 
inconvenience and expense, or go to a foreign hospital which may be 
unsanitary and dangerous.
  This bill will cost the American taxpayer absolutely nothing. Each 
woman will pick up her own tab. All she wants is the constitutional 
right that she has in this country to also be provided when she is 
serving overseas in American bases; to be able to go to American 
hospitals and receive the same rights.

                              {time}  1530

  Women have waited long enough to receive equal treatment in the 
military. I hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will 
vote for this amendment and give these most-deserving soldiers back 
what is rightfully theirs.
  I might add, only in a Republican Congress would constitutional 
rights that are given to our citizens over here

[[Page H3572]]

be denied to them when they are overseas defending probably many men 
that did not even serve in the military.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds to respond.
  I believe the remarks of the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) 
are probably very insulting to conservative Democrats.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Lowey-
Harman amendment.
  This amendment restores, this is essentially what it does, it 
restores equal access to safe medical treatment for U.S. military 
servicewomen, military dependents who are stationed overseas. It 
reinstates a policy that would allow these women to use their own 
private funds to obtain a legal abortion or abortion services in 
military hospitals overseas. Women who joined the military to protect 
our rights should not have to check their constitutional rights at the 
border.
  Let me emphasize several points about the amendment. First, the 
amendment would not allow Federal funds to be used to pay for 
abortions. It simply allows women to use their own funds. It is worth 
repeating because we can never say it often enough, it does not get 
understood. Their own funds. Women use their own funds to pay for 
services in military hospitals overseas.
  Second, the amendment would not force doctors to perform abortions 
due to the conscience clause that exists in the military services. No 
medical personnel would be forced to participate in or perform these 
services.
  Third, this in not a new policy. Privately funded abortions were 
allowed overseas at military facilities from 1973 to 1988, including 
all but a few months of the Reagan administration. And then they were 
permitted again under an executive order between 1993 and 1996.
  The current ban is an exception. It is not the rule. The ban is a 
direct attack on the rights of American women who valiantly served 
their country. They put their lives on the line every single day.
  I urge my colleagues to please ensure that female military personnel 
and military dependents have access to safe and legal medical care that 
the men in our Armed Forces do and which they deserve. Vote ``yes'' on 
the Lowey-Harman amendment.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Pappas).
  Mr. PAPPAS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Indiana for 
yielding me the time.
  Mr. Chairman, we are again embarking on another battle to export 
America's disrespect for the value of human life. Not only do we kill 
our unborn children here, we are going to vote today to allow 
abortions, yes, even partial birth abortions in our medical facilities 
overseas.
  I do not think our defense hospitals, needed to treat our war 
fighters, should be turned into abortion clinics. When the 1993 policy 
permitting abortions was first promulgated, all military physicians, as 
well as many nurses and supporting personnel, refused to perform or 
assist in elective abortions. In response, the Clinton administration 
sought to hire a civilian doctor to conduct abortions.
  Therefore, if the Harman amendment were adopted, not only would 
taxpayer funded facilities be used to support abortion on demand, but 
resources would be used to search for, hire, and transport new 
personnel simply so that abortions could be performed.
  Rather, let us use this defense budget to make our military stronger 
and not use it to help us establish abortion clinics. Military 
treatment centers, which are dedicated to healing and nurturing human 
life, should not be forced to facilitate the taking of the most 
innocent human life, the child in the womb.
  I urge my colleagues to maintain the current law and vote against 
this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I include for the Record a copy of the letter from the 
Archbishop for Military Services, Edwin F. O'Brien, sent to Members of 
Congress:
                                               Archdiocese for the


                                       Military Services, USA,

                                     Washington, DC, May 20, 1998.
       Dear Member of Congress: As one concerned with the moral 
     well being of our Armed Services I write to urge you to 
     oppose the Harman Amendment to the FY 99 National Defense 
     Authorization Act (H.R. 3616).
       This amendment would compel taxpayer funded military 
     hospitals and personnel to provide elective abortions and 
     seeks to equate abortion with ordinary health care.
       The life-destroying act of abortion is radically different 
     from other medical procedures. Military medical personnel 
     themselves have refused to take part of this procedure or 
     even to work where it takes place. Military hospitals have an 
     outstanding record of saving life, even in the most 
     challenging times and conditions.
       Please do not place this very heavy burden upon our 
     wonderful men and women of America's Armed Services.
       Thank you for your kind consideration of this message.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Edwin F. O'Brien,
                            Archibishop for the Military Services.

  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Sanchez).
  Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would give U.S. 
servicewomen stationed overseas access to Department of Defense health 
facilities by repealing a provision of the law which bars these women 
from using their own funds to obtain medical treatment in military 
hospitals.
  Women serving in the military overseas depend on these base hospitals 
for medical care and they may be stationed in areas where local health 
care facilities are inadequate. The ban may cause a woman who needs 
medical care to delay treatment while she looks for a safe provider, or 
it may force a woman to seek an illegal, unsafe procedure locally.
  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, or their basic 
constitutional rights to a policy with no valid military purpose.
  This amendment is about women's health. Local facilities in foreign 
nations are often not equipped to handle a procedure, and medical 
standards may be far lower than those in the United States. We are 
putting our own defenders at risk by forcing them to seek local 
facilities from medical procedures.
  This amendment is also supported by the Department of Defense.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) for yielding and for his excellent 
work on this and other provisions in this important bill.
  Mr. Chairman, the national debate on partial birth abortion has 
proven beyond any reasonable doubt that abortion is violence against 
children. Most Americans and I believe most Members of Congress on both 
sides of the aisle, Democrats, Republican, liberals, conservatives and 
moderates, were shocked and dismayed and frankly very saddened to learn 
that partial birth abortions were routine and commonplace and that it 
was completely legal to partially deliver a baby, shove a scissors into 
the back of that baby's head, and then hook up a hose to suction out 
that baby's brain. That is the reality of what choice is all about.
  I think it is about time, Mr. Chairman, we connected the dots about 
the violence of abortion. The other methods are no less heinous. They 
kill children. They are no less violent. This is child abuse. And that 
collective denial that we as a country have engaged in for so many 
years needs to be put away.
  Mr. Chairman, abortion methods dismember children. Razor blade tipped 
suction devices 20 to 30 times more powerful than the average household 
vacuum cleaner, after the child's arms and legs and torso and head has 
been decapitated, turn on the suction machine and the baby is literally 
turned into a bloody pulp. This is the uncensored reality of what 
choice is all about. Abortion methods also include injecting various 
deadly poisons, including high concentrated salt solutions.
  I chair the Committee on International Operations on Human Rights, 
Mr. Chairman. I have had in excess of 70 hearings, many of them on 
torture in overseas prisons by dictatorships. And I can tell my 
colleagues, when I look at the badly burned, chemically burned bodies 
of unborn children who

[[Page H3573]]

have been killed with salioamniocentesis abortions, they are no 
different at all to those others who have been tortured because of 
their faith, or because of their beliefs in democracy or their human 
rights advocacy.
  They have been killed. A high concentrated salt injection usually 
takes 2 hours for the baby to die. And we know that a child feels pain. 
And when that child is born dead, if we open up the fist that is 
usually tightly collapsed, we can see that all the scalding and 
corrosive effects of that salt fails to get on the palm because the 
child is in pain. That is the reality, Mr. Chairman, of this so-called 
choice rhetoric.
  The Lowey amendment if enacted, Mr. Chairman, will turn DOD medical 
facilities into abortion mills where this kind of violence, including, 
as my good friend the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) pointed out 
earlier, where this kind of violence, including partial birth, would be 
sanctioned.
  The Lowey amendment makes a false distinction based not on what 
happens to a baby in an abortion, in other words a violent death, but 
on who provides some of the cash. It also completely overlooks the 
costs that are borne by the taxpayers to facilitate that abortion, like 
the provision of operating rooms, the hiring of abortionists.
  Thank God that when Mr. Clinton's executive order was in effect not a 
single overseas military doctor would engage in this violence against 
children. They have had to go out with Planned Parenthood's help and 
look and seek to find abortionists. Well, that takes taxpayers' 
dollars. The nominal fee that a woman might pay to procure that 
abortion would in no way cover that.
  This amendment, Mr. Chairman, says in effect, it is okay to tear up 
an unborn child, to rip that child to pieces. Mr. Chairman, I have been 
in the pro-life movement for 26 years. I am amazed at how so many good 
and decent people sanitize the unthinkable. We did it on this floor 
when we talked about partial birth, Members that I deeply respect and 
work arm in arm on human rights with.
  Let me conclude, Mr. Chairman, and let me say that good and decent 
people have defended the unthinkable, that which is not defensible, in 
terms of partial births in these other methods. And now we are being 
called upon to use overseas military facilities for abortion. It 
facilitates abortion.
  One of our colleagues said earlier that we do not want to treat women 
as second-class citizens. Nobody does. But providing the means to kill 
their babies, we would welcome the unborn being treated as second-class 
citizens.
  Unfortunately, this amendment and our zeitgeist, our law decreed by 
the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973, treats the unborn child as a throwaway, 
as garbage, as so much junk. And God did not make junk. And every child 
is precious regardless of race or color or gender. Every one of those 
kids should matter.
  Medicine, Mr. Chairman, is all about caring and curing and mitigating 
diseases. Unless my colleagues think pregnancy is a disease to be 
vanquished, those kids should be nurtured. We should be talking about 
maternal health care, how do we beef that up. Prenatal care, that is 
what it is about, not simultaneously saying, if we do not want the 
child, the child could be injected with salt or dismembered.
  Vote no on the Lowey amendment.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy).
  Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman 
for yielding to me.
  I want to say, it is really unbelievable to me that we are really on 
this floor discussing this issue. This is not an issue of Row v. Wade. 
That issue has been decided.
  Women in this country have a constitutional right to have a safe, 
legal abortion. This country made a decision to do that because it did 
not like the public health impacts of having abortion illegal. Like it 
or not, women were being killed in back-alley abortions; and the fact 
is we changed the law and the Constitution of the United States 
reflects that a woman has a right to a legal, safe abortion so her 
health is not in jeopardy. That is a public health issue.
  Now what we are talking about is, these Constitutional rights are not 
selective. We cannot just say, ``I want free speech just in Rhode 
Island and I do not want free speech in California. I want free speech 
here and not there.'' This is a constitutional right that applies to 
every single American. And for us to say it will not apply to the 
Americans, our soldiers, our women in uniform who are defending our 
rights overseas to me is unconscionable.
  The story here, Mr. Chairman, is that these are United States 
servicewomen and their lives are going to be put in jeopardy if we do 
not pass this amendment and make this bill protect a woman's right to 
have a legal and safe abortion.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds just to remind the 
Members, with regard to national security issues, the Supreme Court 
permits the Congress of the United States to establish the laws. And in 
particular, we do set out rules and policies that end up discriminating 
against people and we have rules and procedures that are unequal when 
we compare sometimes what we do compared to what happens in the 
civilian sector.
  We get to discriminate whether someone is too tall, overweight, 
whether they are diabetic. Those discriminations are permitted as we 
make many different decisions on building unit cohesions. So we get to 
make these decisions within this body, so I wanted to share that with 
everyone.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Hostettler), a member of the committee.

                              {time}  1545

  Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this 
amendment. The Supreme Court has told us that we have to allow the 
killing of preborn 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 in recent years on so many occasions and 
should again reject.
  Abortion remains a very divisive practice in America and, indeed, the 
world. Allowing abortions to be performed on military installations 
would bring that discord and dissension right onto our military bases 
complete with pickets and the like.
  The core principle at issue here is whether the government has the 
obligation to provide for 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 Federal Government have to provide a 
U.S. flag and a set of matches to anyone who wants to burn our flag 
just because the Supreme Court has said that flag burning is a right 
protected under the First Amendment.
  Does the right to distribute pornography, which also has been upheld 
by the court, obligate the military to distribute it to the troops? And 
because prostitution is legal in one State, does this obligate that 
State government to provide prostitution services to its employees? Of 
course the answer to these absurd questions is a resounding no.
  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 institutions to 
facilitate destructive behaviors such as killing innocent preborn life. 
I urge a no vote on this amendment.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, as I understand, the gentlewoman from New 
York (Mrs. Lowey) has the right to close?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) has the right to 
close.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) has \3/4\ minute 
remaining, and the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) has \3/4\ 
minute remaining.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to close by thanking my colleagues on both sides 
of the aisle who have spoken and supported the Lowey-Harman-Morella 
amendment.

[[Page H3574]]

  Let me reiterate, this amendment is not an issue of taxpayer-funded 
abortions. Under the amendment, the patient, not the government, would 
pay for the procedure. I close the debate by reminding Members that our 
American servicewomen take very seriously their duty to protect the 
constitutional rights of all United States citizens. Yet, we deny them 
time and time again the rights we extend to women on U.S. soil.
  It is time to stop the hypocrisy. The right to choose gives women the 
right to make this personal decision. Vote for the Lowey-Harman-Morella 
amendment.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I guess I would share with some of the speakers, the 
proponents of this amendment, they should bring the amendment to be the 
proponents for those who are diabetic and fight for the diabetes or 
fight for someone that is overweight or that is too tall or too short. 
There are many rules and regulations that are out there that I want to 
share with the body.
  On this issue, we also have the issue of military medical readiness. 
We train all of our nurses and doctors how to do proper triage for 
saving of life from the battlefield. One of the things that is not on 
there is the performing of an abortion service to take life. Mr. 
Chairman, I urge everyone to oppose the amendment.
  Mr. STARK. Mr. Chairman, the Lowey-Harman amendment will restore the 
ability of our female service members and female dependents stationed 
overseas to exercise their constitutional right to choose safe abortion 
services, using their own funds to obtain services in military 
hospitals.
  This is an important access-to-health-care amendment. Military women 
depend on their base hospitals for all of their medical services. This 
amendment gives them access to the same range and quality of health 
care that they could obtain in the United States.
  This amendment has the strong support of organizations like the 
American Nurses Association, the American Public Health Association, 
the American Women's Association, the American College of Obstetricians 
and Gynecologists, and the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
  This amendment also has the support of the Department of Defense. No 
surprise here, as the policy of denying women access to safe health 
care serves no military purpose.
  Still, anti-choice Members of Congress would endanger the lives of 
women in foreign countries where local health care facilities are 
inadequate--where quality care is not available. They would force women 
into the hands of untrained medical professionals, or into unsterilized 
facilities--increasing the danger and the risk to the health of these 
women.
  Make no mistake about it--their objective is the same as always: to 
make abortion services difficult to obtain, prohibitively expensive, 
and physically risky for physicians and women alike.
  True to form, the conservative majority have extended their reach to 
discriminate against women who have volunteered to serve their country 
by prohibiting them from exercising their legally protected right to 
choose.
  Women serving this country have lost a legal right. Vote for the 
Lowey-Harman amendment to end this blatant disregard for the health, 
safety and constitutional rights of women.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Lowey-
Harman amendment to repeal the provision in this bill prohibiting 
privately funded abortion services in U.S. military hospitals overseas. 
I commend my colleagues for their leadership on this important issue.
  Women stationed overseas in service to their country and female 
military dependents rely on base hospitals for medical care. Access to 
comprehensive reproductive health is essential for all women, civilian 
or military. Under the bill, as it currently stands, however, these 
women who volunteer to protect and serve their country in the military 
are denied the same protections under Roe v. Wade as the Americans they 
are serving and protecting. This is not a request for special 
treatment--it is a need for equal treatment and equal access to health 
care.
  This amendment does not permit taxpayer-funded abortions. No Federal 
funds are used for abortion--that will not change. It simply repeals 
the current ban on privately funded abortions in military hospitals and 
restores equal access to reproductive health care for military women 
stationed overseas. And it preserves the conscience clause and would 
not coerce any doctor to perform abortions. It provides military women 
the right they already have as American women--to make a safe and legal 
choice with their own funds. I urge my colleagues to repeal this unfair 
ban and vote yes on the Lowey-Harman amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) 
will be postponed.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed 
in part B of House Report 105-544.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Gilman

  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part B, amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Gilman:
       At the end of title XII (page 253, after line 3), insert 
     the following new section:

     SEC. 1206. PROHIBITION ON RESTRICTION OF ARMED FORCES UNDER 
                   KYOTO PROTOCOL TO THE UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK 
                   CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, no provision of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations 
     Framework Convention on Climate Change, or any regulation 
     issued pursuant to such protocol, shall restrict the 
     procurement, training, or operation and maintenance of the 
     United States Armed Forces.
       (b) Waiver.--A provision of law may not be construed as 
     modifying or superseding the provisions of subsection (a) 
     unless that provision of law--
       (1) specifically refers to this section; and
       (2) specifically states that such provision of law modifies 
     or supersedes the provisions of this section.

  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) and a Member 
opposed each will control 20 minutes.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, since no Member has risen in opposition to 
this amendment, I ask unanimous consent to be permitted to control the 
time on this side.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Missouri?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Gilman).
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer the Gillman-Danner-Spence-
Sensenbrenner-Rohrabacher amendment. In short, this amendment will 
exempt U.S. Armed Forces from the restrictions of the U.N. Kyoto 
Climate Change Treaty.
  Mr. Chairman, last December the Clinton administration approved a 
U.N. Climate Change Treaty that forces the United States to make 
drastic cuts in carbon emissions by the year 2010. The economic 
recesssions of the late 1970s and early 1980s caused our Nation to cut 
emissions by 2 percent of our total emission. The Kyoto treaty now 
imposes restrictions three times larger than the cuts made by the 
recessions in the 1970s.
  In sum, U.S. Government laboratories, industry, and labor groups 
estimate that the treaty is going to cost hundreds of billions of 
dollars and could throw two million Americans out of work. While the 
treaty imposes restrictions on our Nation and 38 other countries, it 
exempts China, Brazil, South Korea, Mexico, India, and 125 other 
countries from its limitations.
  Our Armed Forces are responsible for over 70 percent of the Federal 
Government's carbon emissions. The Department of Defense recently 
estimated that a 10 percent cut in its emissions could trigger the 
following cuts in the readiness of our Armed Forces. For example, armor 
training would be cut by 328,000 miles per year, naval steaming days 
could be cut by 2,000 days per year, and Air Force flying hours could 
be cut by some 210,000 hours.
  Prior to Kyoto, the Defense Department requested a blanket waiver 
from carbon emissions restrictions. During the negotiations, Vice 
President Gore overrode the Defense Department's position and exempted 
only multilateral operations consistent with the U.N. charter. That 
left unilateral U.S. operations, like Panama or Grenada, and all 
domestic operations subject to the

[[Page H3575]]

Kyoto restrictions. Over time, Mr. Chairman, the Kyoto Protocol would 
exert a strong pressure on future administrations to curtail our 
military training and readiness.
  Recently, Undersecretary of Defense Goodman claimed that Kyoto will 
not impair or adversely affect military operations and training. This 
contradicts the direct language of the treaty that only exempts 
multilateral operations that are consistent with the U.N. charter.
  Mr. Chairman, our amendment will lock into law the current 
administration's verbal promises to protect our Armed Forces from U.N. 
restrictions. This amendment is necessary because the administration 
could retract its position on DOD emissions when climate change 
negotiators meet again this November in Buenos Aires, just after our 
congressional elections.
  The amendment simply states that no provision in the Kyoto Protocol 
will restrict the procurement, the training, the operation, or 
maintenance of our U.S. Armed Forces, as just promised by the 
administration.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment was endorsed by the Veterans of Foreign 
Wars, the Navy League, and the Air Force Association. I have their 
letters here and will make them available to our colleagues. I also 
understand that, since this amendment implements current administration 
policy, the Department of Defense does not oppose its adoption.
  Accordingly, Mr. Chairman, I urge Members to support this amendment. 
Our national security is much too important to risk on the U.N. treaty 
and the bureaucracy that would oppose it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) is 
recognized.
  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to compliment the gentleman on his 
amendment. I know of no opposition to that amendment on this side, and 
we would also urge its passage.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), chairman of 
the Committee on National Security.
  (Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Gilman 
amendment that would exempt the United States Armed Forces from the 
restrictions of the United Nation Kyoto Climate Change Treaty.
  My colleagues may be wondering what possible connection an 
environmental protection treaty has to do with the defense of the 
United States, and in particular, to the operation of the United States 
forces worldwide. The Kyoto treaty, if ratified by the Senate or if 
imposed by executive order or regulation, imposes substantial 
restrictions on the amount of United States carbon emissions.
  In a highly industrialized society, these restrictions will have 
enormous economic impact. The United States Government laboratories, 
industry, and labor groups estimate that implementation of the Kyoto 
Protocol would result in hundreds of billions of dollars in lost 
economic growth and perhaps two million lost American jobs.
  The restrictions called for in the Kyoto Protocol would, if 
implemented, obviously apply to the Federal Government. Because the 
operations and training of the United States military forces account 
for more than 70 percent of the Federal Government's carbon emissions, 
the impact of the Kyoto treaty on our Armed Forces would be tremendous.
  Unless our military is given a blanket waiver from the Kyoto 
restriction, a waiver that was recommended by the Secretary of Defense, 
Mr. Cohen, everyday operations and training will be affected.
  The Pentagon estimates, as the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) 
said, that even a requirement that emissions be reduced by 10 percent 
would result in tank training being cut by 328,000 miles per year, 
Naval steaming days being cut by 2,000 days per year, Air Force flying 
hours being cut to the tune of 210,000 hours per year.
  As serious as the Kyoto treaty's restrictions would be on the 
military's peacetime training, the restrictions would dramatically 
affect the conduct of United States military operations.
  The Pentagon estimates that the Kyoto treaty's restrictions would 
degrade the readiness of Army divisions and could add an additional 6 
weeks to training and deployment in the event of war.
  As a result, strategic deployment schedules would be missed and 
operations placed at risk. Should Saddam Hussein continue to threaten 
the stability of the Persian Gulf, the ability of the United States to 
operate military forces would be governed, and limited, by the 
provisions of the United Nations environmental treaty.
  Ironically, the administration did agree to include one exemption in 
the Kyoto treaty for ``multilateral operations consistent with the U.N. 
charter.''
  In other words, the administration believes U.N. peacekeeping 
operations like Bosnia and Somalia should be exempt from environmental 
treaties while unilateral American operations like the invasion of 
Grenada in 1983 or Panama in 1989 would have to be conducted, if at 
all, in an environmentally friendly fashion, as dictated by the United 
Nations.
  As nonsensical as this may sound, it is an accurate assessment of the 
implications of the administration's posture on the Kyoto treaty. As I 
indicated, prior to the Kyoto environmental summit, the Department of 
Defense requested a blanket waiver from restrictions on carbon 
emission, but Vice President Gore apparently overrode the Department's 
request.
  Although protecting the environment is something we all strive for 
and, as a Nation, need to improve on, we cannot afford for it to be a 
primary focus of our military's combat training or of their conduct of 
operations. Their job is to protect America, its citizens, and its 
security interest by operating around the globe in peacetime and 
prevailing during war.
  War is a hard and violent business, and the effectiveness of the 
weapons is not measured by the level of carbon emissions. The 70-ton 
M1-A1 tank is the world's best, but it consumes a lot of gas. It 
measured its progress down the Euphrates River Valley in the Gulf War 
in gallons per mile, not miles per gallon. While the M1-A1 may not be 
environmentally friendly, it helped to decimate the Iraqi Republican 
Guard, shorten the war, and, in so doing, limit the loss of life.
  In conclusion, let me cite the words of former Secretary of Defense 
Frank Carlucci, who wrote recently ``Regardless of how the 
administration interprets the treaty, the Congress must demand a 
blanket exemption for all military operations.''
  That is what the Gilman amendment proposes, and I strongly urge my 
colleagues to support it. As Carlucci said ``Our national security 
deserve no less.''

                              {time}  1600

  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Missouri (Ms. Danner).
  Ms. DANNER. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to be a sponsor of the Gilman-
Danner-Spence-Sensenbrenner-Rohrabacher amendment. Numerous studies 
have shown that the Kyoto Protocol will not only harm the U.S. economy, 
but, in addition, it has the potential to threaten America's military 
preparedness.
  Defense Secretary William Cohen has been quite clear with regard to 
the devastating effects Kyoto will have on American national security, 
stating in a recent article in the Washington Times: ``We must not 
sacrifice our national security to achieve reductions in greenhouse gas 
emissions.''
  Basically, the treaty forces United States armed services to reduce 
greenhouse gas emissions while exempting ``multinational operations 
consistent with the United Nations charter.''
  Our domestic military training will be damaged by the decisions made 
in Kyoto by subjecting our military to restrictions that the treaty 
does not impose upon countries such as China, India and Mexico, 
countries that we know have high levels of emissions. I think this is 
completely inequitable. Indeed, growing military powers such as China 
will not be required to adhere to the same standards to which our 
military will be held.

[[Page H3576]]

  Reducing Army fuel use by 10 percent alone would downgrade readiness 
and require up to six additional weeks to prepare and deploy our 
troops, according to our Pentagon officials. Since the United States 
armed forces produce over 70 percent of the Federal Government's energy 
use, you may be very certain that it will be the United States military 
that will be the most seriously affected as an aspect of our government 
if subjected to the Kyoto requirements. The Kyoto Protocol must not 
stand as a barrier to necessary United States military operations.
  Furthermore, decisions that impact our armed forces should be made by 
our commanders, our generals and our admirals, and not be subject to an 
international environmental accord drafted by international 
bureaucrats.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment represents an opportunity to protect 
America's national security and hold the administration to its word, as 
it was presented to us before the Committee on International Relations 
just recently. Therefore, I urge all Members to support it.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the distinguished 
chairman of the Committee on Science who also was the Chair of our 
delegation to the Kyoto conference.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from New York 
for yielding me this time, and rise in support of this common sense 
amendment to prohibit any provision of law, any provision of the Kyoto 
Protocol, or any regulation issued pursuant to the protocol, from 
restricting the procurement, training or operation and maintenance of 
the United States armed forces.
  As chairman of the Committee on Science, I spent a great deal of time 
analyzing this protocol, the U.N. treaty on climate change, including 
chairing three full Committee on Science hearings on the outcome and 
implication of the Kyoto climate change negotiations, and this past 
December I led the congressional delegation to the Kyoto conference.
  Facts I have reviewed lead me to believe that the Kyoto Protocol is 
seriously flawed; so flawed, in fact, that it cannot be salvaged. The 
treaty is based upon science, costs too much, leaves too many 
procedural questions unanswered, is grossly unfair because developing 
nations such as China, India, Brazil and Mexico are not required to 
participate, and will do nothing to solve the speculative problem it is 
intended to solve. I have heard nothing today to persuade me otherwise.
  The amendment addresses one of the protocol's many absurdities that 
the Clinton-Gore administration agreed to in Kyoto, namely the threat 
to our national security. Under the Protocol, the administration has 
committed the United States to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 7 
percent below 1990 levels in the 2008 to 2012 time frame, or about the 
level that we were emitting 20 years ago in 1978.
  Since the Federal Government is the Nation's largest energy user and 
greenhouse gas emitter, and the Department of Defense is the 
government's largest emitter, the administration essentially agreed to 
impose restrictions upon military operations, in spite of Pentagon 
analyses that showed that such restrictions would not only 
significantly downgrade the operational readiness of our armed forces, 
but also threaten their ability to meet the requirements of our 
national military strategy.
  The text of the Kyoto Protocol is silent with respect to greenhouse 
gas emissions. However, the decision taken by the Framework Convention 
of the Climate Change's Conference of Parties exempts military 
operations ``pursuant to the United Nations charter,'' but requires 
``that all other operations shall be included in the national emissions 
totals,'' with the effect of penalizing our armed forces for 
maintaining world peace.
  The administration claims that this decision was one of its great 
triumphs in Kyoto, but I believe, however, it is one of the many 
mistakes made by Vice President Gore and his minions that guided the 
Kyoto negotiations.
  As pointed out in a January 22, 1998 letter to the President by the 
Committee to Preserve American Security and Sovereignty, a concerned 
group of former U.S. national security and foreign policy officials 
that includes three past Secretaries of Defense and two past 
Secretaries of State, ``The Kyoto treaty threatens to limit the 
exercise of military power by exempting only military exercises that 
are multinational and humanitarian. Unilateral military actions, as in 
Grenada, Panama and Libya, will become politically and diplomatically 
charged.''
  It is time too correct this Kyoto absurdity. Support this amendment 
and say ``yes'' to our national security and ``no'' to Kyoto.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I might say that I personally favor this amendment. I 
will not oppose it. It is also my understanding that the administration 
as well is in favor of it. So I compliment the gentleman from New York 
for bringing this to our attention.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I would note that this amendment prevents U.N. Climate 
Change Treaty restrictions from applying to our United States armed 
forces. It has been endorsed by our major veterans' groups, the 
Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Navy League and the Air Force 
Association. The Department of Defense does not oppose the amendment. 
It implements current administrative policy to prevent the Kyoto 
Climate Change Treaty from cutting our national defense.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.
  Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Gilman Amendment 
which insures the safety and security of Americans are not compromised 
to promote questionable scientific theories. The Kyoto Treaty may not 
succeed in combating the phantom threat of global warming, but it has 
sinister consequences for our military and our security.
  Simply put the Kyoto Treaty will restrict military fuel consumption. 
This will cut armor training by 328,000 miles per year, cut naval 
steaming by 2,000 days per year and cut Air Force training by 210,000 
hours per year while placing no restriction on the Chinese and other 
militaries. The Gilman Amendment will stop this onslaught on America's 
security. The Gilman amendment will safeguard our independence.
  My colleagues, let's defend our sovereignty from real foes not 
phantom threats. Please join me in voting to safeguard our independence 
and vote for the Gilman Amendment.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to address this amendment offered 
by Mr. Gilman (Prohibition on Restriction of Armed Forces under Kyoto 
Protocol to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change). First, I 
want to clarify whether DoD's technical changes were made to this 
amendment. Of course I support protection of our national security 
interests and want to make sure that no provisions of U.S. law enacted 
to implement U.S. obligations under the Kyoto Protocol would jeopardize 
our military readiness. However, while I support the principle behind 
this amendment, this should not be used as an opportunity to undermine 
the Kyoto Protocol nor U.S. efforts, as one of 160 nations who were 
involved in negotiating this treaty, to protect our global climate. 
Undersecretary of State Eisenstat has emphasized repeatedly that the 
U.S. will not take steps that would require mandatory action at the 
macroeconomic level or with respect to specific sectors of our economy 
in order to reach the Kyoto target before the President has obtained 
the advice and consent of the Senate. Further, Undersecretary Eisenstat 
consulted with top national security and military officials and had 
their assurances that the Kyoto Protocol does in fact meet our national 
security needs and interests. We secured exemptions for bunker fuels 
and for other activities that are covered under other existing 
agreements. If this Protocol were ever signed or ratified by the 
Senate, our domestic legislation would ensure protection of our 
national interests. Nor would we trade emissions credits with any other 
nations that with whom we would not otherwise conduct transactions. 
Thus, I do not understand the purpose of, nor the need for, this 
amendment.
  I also want to clarify that this amendment should not be interpreted 
to be able to prevent the U.S. Armed Forces from continuing to adopt 
practical energy efficient measures. More efficient heating and cooling 
systems for military buildings, energy saving engines, and other such 
technology applications would save money and could improve the 
readiness and capabilities of our Armed Forces. The Defense Department 
has stated this position, as well. To date, the Defense Department 
actually is on the forefront of implementing energy efficient measures 
that have saved substantial

[[Page H3577]]

amounts of money and energy and increased our environmental protection.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I agree with the intent of Mr. Gilman's 
amendment and support it. Indeed, the Kyoto Protocol will improve the 
national security of the United States by reducing the risk of 
catastrophic climate change, which would create upheaval and unrest 
throughout the world, including the potential for millions of 
environmental refugees.
  Furthermore, measures to implement the Kyoto Protocol can improve our 
security by reducing our dependence on imported oil through improved 
energy efficiency and increased reliance on domestic renewable energy 
resources.
  At the same time, the Administration has issued clear policy guidance 
assuring that implementation of the Kyoto Protocol will not impair or 
adversely affect the training or operation and maintenance of the 
United States Armed Forces.
  I am concerned, however, that the Amendment as drafted could be 
ambiguous. The Department of Defense was a leader in reducing the use 
of ozone depleting substances and has received awards for its efforts 
from the Environmental Protection Agency. In recent years DoD has made 
great strides in increasing energy efficiency in military housing. it 
has also invested in technologies, such as fuel cells, that could 
improve military effectiveness and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I 
am supporting the amendment because I do not believe it prevents DoD 
from pursuing these valuable goals. I urge the chairman to work with 
the Department of Defense to clarify this language in conference 
committee.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Pease). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Gilman) will be postponed.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider Amendment 
No. 3 printed in part B of House Report 105-544.


                 Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Hefley

  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part B amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Hefley:
       At the end of title X (page 234, after line 4), insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. 1044. PROHIBITION ON ASSIGNMENT OF UNITED STATES FORCES 
                   TO UNITED NATIONS RAPIDLY DEPLOYABLE MISSION 
                   HEADQUARTERS.

       No funds available to the Department of Defense may be used 
     to assign or detail any member of the Armed Forces to duty 
     with the United Nations Rapidly Deployable Mission 
     Headquarters (or any similar United Nations military 
     operations headquarters).

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) and a Member opposed each will 
control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley).
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment which would prohibit the 
Department of Defense from spending U.S. taxpayer dollars on the 
assignment or detailing of any member of the U.S. military to duty with 
the United Nations Rapidly Deployable Missions Headquarters or any 
similar U.N. organization.
  As many of you know, this proposed headquarters is intended by the 
Secretary General of the United Nations to form the core of a standing 
U.N. military force; now, let me repeat that, a standing U.N. military 
force. And the administration has already spent a limited amount of 
funds to help establish the headquarters operation.
  Now, think about this for a moment. The United Nations wants to 
create a rapidly deployable standing military force, including United 
States soldiers, and the administration seems to be willing to go 
along.
  I have a quote from the Washington Times that reads, ``The U.N. wants 
standby forces that could be called up immediately to permit U.N. 
headquarters to tailor foreign military units to suit the countries or 
regions to which they are assigned.''
  The U.N. complains that under current conditions they must develop 
each mission from scratch after a vote by the Security Council, and in 
some cases this can take too long. I think they should have to start 
from scratch on each mission to ensure nations understand their 
commitments thoroughly.
  Why should the committee support this amendment? The answer is the 
ambiguity of the current administration policy with regard to U.S. 
participation in U.N. peacekeeping and other military operations. 
Although the administration formally denies any intent to assist in the 
creation of a standing U.N. military force, and despite repeated 
congressional actions to limit or prohibit the involvement of U.S. 
forces in many U.N. operations and any such U.N. force, the U.S. State 
Department transferred $200,000 from its voluntary peacekeeping account 
in October 1997 to fund the establishment of the U.N. Rapidly 
Deployable Mission Headquarters, the standing U.N. army.
  Time and time again this administration has supported peacekeeping 
operations around the world. They can continue to still do that. But 
most of those efforts have been controversial. Indeed, the operation in 
Bosnia is still problematic, and, of course, that is not a U.N. 
operation.
  The simple fact is, Congress ought to be involved in any decision to 
commit U.S. forces to U.N. peacekeeping operations. It is these kinds 
of open-ended and at times back door operations that have led to this 
amendment, and I think all Members will agree we should cut off the 
funds for this organization until a clear statement is made that our 
troops will be accountable only to United States command and control.
  What is also disturbing to me is that it is unclear what command 
arrangements would govern any forces assigned to the U.N. Rapidly 
Deployable Mission Headquarters. The key question of whether any U.S. 
troops assigned would be under the command of the U.N. Secretary 
General or their national command authorities has not been answered.
  In addition, consider that these forces could be sent out over the 
objections of the United States Congress. Let me repeat, our forces 
could be sent into conflict that the Congress does not support or 
approve of.
  The United Nations is a forum for international policy discussion, 
and should remain so. It is also not a sovereign territory. It has no 
citizens and no constitutional authority to send U.S. troops into 
harm's way. Member states should make their contributions to 
peacekeeping and other multilateral efforts involving military forces 
consistent with their constitutional requirements in each of those 
countries. We should not be locked into a conflict or a peacekeeping 
operation simply because we happen to have U.S. personnel in a standing 
U.N. army.
  This is not an effort to undercut the U.N., and I would say to the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), I hope you believe this, that I 
am not here to bash the United Nations with what I am trying to do 
here. I am simply saying that we want to preserve this Congress' 
prerogatives in the commitment of United States military forces. In 
other words, for 50 years we have participated in U.N. operations 
around the world. We could continue to do that, even if this amendment 
passes, but we would not have a standing U.N. army under the command 
and control of the Secretary General of the United Nations.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask Members to vote for this amendment and keep U.S. 
forces under U.S. control.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1615

  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
to say that with sadness, I find that I must disagree and oppose this 
amendment. Mr. Chairman, I read it. Let me read it to the body. ``No 
funds available to the Department of Defense may be used to assign or 
detail any member of the Armed Forces to duty with the United Nations 
Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters (or any similar United Nations 
military operations headquarters).'' This amendment could lead to 
disaster.

[[Page H3578]]

  First, Mr. Chairman, let me state unequivocally that I am against a 
standing union army. I will repeat that. I am against a United Nations 
standing army. That is not right. Also, thinking of the words of my 
friend from Colorado (Mr. Hefley), who is my good friend, he speaks of 
the commitment of the United States forces being kept with Congress, 
and if he will recall, not so long ago our colleague, the gentleman 
from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) and I, made that case very well, and 
successfully, on this floor through our debate, and I think the 
gentleman from Colorado agreed with us, that the forces at that time 
should not be deployed to Bosnia.
  So on the very basics of which the gentleman from Colorado speaks, I 
agree, but that is not what we are passing into law.
  What is being passed into law is the amendment that I just read. It 
could create some real problems for American soldiers. It could create 
some real problems for American leadership. For instance, it restricts 
the flexibility of the President's ability to detail or otherwise 
deploy U.S. military personnel in his capacity as Commander in Chief 
with the advice of his military advisors. That is very, very important. 
I speak not just for this President, I speak for those future 
Presidents regardless of what political party to which they belong.
  I also mention the fact that it would undermine our efforts 
encouraging other nations to play a greater role in U.N. peacekeeping 
activities. If we are not helping plan something, and they know we are 
the best, and we are the best, whether it be at planning or in the 
field, it would undermine those nations' confidence, playing a role in 
those activities where we participate. But more than that, it concerns 
me a great deal that this amendment would prevent the best and the 
brightest of our Armed Forces to plan with other nations and to be a 
leading part of planning with those other nations in an operational 
situation.
  Mr. Chairman, this would be similar to prohibiting the United States 
of America's military forces from planning NATO operations. This does 
not prevent them from being in the field; this does not prevent or 
interfere with the Commander in Chief's prerogatives. This prevents 
good military thinking, and we are the best.
  I have spent a great deal of time, as my friend from Colorado (Mr. 
Hefley) will recall, with the military war colleges, both intermediate 
war colleges such as at Fort Leavenworth and the senior war colleges 
such as the National War College, and we put a lot of time, effort and 
money into making our captains and majors and lieutenant commanders the 
best and the brightest for planning things. We are good at it. We are 
going to say to the finest military planners, whether it be an 
operation that involves risk, or an operation that involves 
humanitarianism, or an operation that involves peacekeeping; this is 
going to say to the best and brightest planners in military uniform of 
the United States you cannot participate. You can send the troops out 
there, but you cannot participate in the planning.
  That is an invitation for disaster for some fine young Americans. One 
of the problems that we had in Somalia, if the gentleman remembers, was 
that there was no central planning for that operation.
  What this amendment will allow, for instance, it would allow the 
Bangladeshis, the Ethiopians, the Kazakhstanis, to do the planning for 
American forces to go out in the field. I am not about to let that 
happen. I am not about to let other people plan for the American 
troops. That is wrong. When American troops are involved, when their 
safety is involved, when their mission is involved, I cannot and I will 
not support that.
  I must compliment the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) in his 
attempt to stand, as I do, against a standing in our Nation's army. But 
as so often happens, this rifle shot, Mr. Chairman, sadly misses the 
mark.
  In truth and fact, the U.S. forces in Korea would be affected because 
that was and is a United Nations operation. The troops that we have, 
and I visited them, and I am so proud of them, in Macedonia on 
peacekeeping, watchful duty, no American military personnel could plan 
what they do. Do we want those other folks to tell where they are going 
to be, what they are going to be doing and how they are going to be 
doing it? No. I want Americans planning this.
  I would really hope that my friend from Colorado would take a good 
look at this and if he would like to have an amendment that would say 
that he stands against a standing by the United Nations army, I am with 
the gentleman. I think that is absolutely wrong. But let us not risk 
the lives of bright young Americans by not having bright, a little bit 
older Americans, plan what they are going to do in humanitarian or 
peacekeeping crisis situations.
  So I find myself driven to the conclusion that I must oppose this.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
before I yield to the chairman of the Committee on National Security.
  I find it unusual that the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and 
I are ever in disagreement on anything, and I think it illustrates that 
people of goodwill and with good reading ability can read the same 
thing and find very, very different meanings in it.
  What this is meant to do is exactly what the gentleman said he would 
support, and that is not to have a standing U.N. army. As to the 
gentleman's explanation, I do not want all of those things either, I 
would say to the gentleman. I do not want to undermine our efforts to 
get others to participate, but for 50 years we have gotten others to 
participate without a standing U.N. army.
  The gentleman talks about us letting others plan. That is the very 
idea. We do not want others to plan our command and control of our 
troops. They are not to be a standing army. If we are going to get 
involved with the U.N., we want it to function like it has over the 
last 50 years. We get involved. Generally we take the lead. Generally 
we do the planning. Generally the others join in with us as in the 
Persian Gulf War to accomplish a U.N. mission.
  So I think the goal is the same. The gentleman is reading into this 
amendment things that I simply do not see there.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), the chairman of the Committee on 
National Security.
  (Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Hefley amendment 
prohibiting the assignment of United States Armed Forces to the United 
Nations Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters.
  Last October, the State Department approved $200,000 from its 
voluntary peacekeeping account to create a U.N. Rapidly Deployable 
Mission Headquarters. This was the first down payment in the United 
Nations $2.3 million plan for this organization. Officially, the 
purpose of this RDMH, or whatever we call it, is to set up a command 
and control center for U.N. forces anywhere in the world. The 
headquarters is to have 8 officers, apparently permanently detailed to 
the U.N., and already has a Canadian Army Lieutenant Colonel who is 
``on loan'' to organize the headquarters and recruit other officers to 
join in.
  Mr. Chairman, I have no doubt that such an arrangement could improve 
the performance and professionalism of U.N. peacekeeping forces, and 
they certainly need it. However, it is clear that the U.N. continues to 
pursue a broader agenda, and that is the key element we are talking 
about here today.
  Choi Young-Jin, the Korean diplomat, who is the U.N.'s Assistant 
Secretary General for Peacekeeping, recently admitted that the U.N. 
remains committed to establishing a standing army. The U.N.'s official 
spokesman later tried to clarify that, and said that Rapidly Deployable 
Mission Headquarters is an interim step, an interim step. That is 
exactly what we are talking about, since a standing army is ``too 
ambitious for the time being.''
  We are looking at the long haul in this legislation today.
  There are also legitimate questions over whether Rapidly Deployable 
Mission Headquarters represents a first step toward U.N. military 
independence. It already promises to weaken

[[Page H3579]]

the ability of the Congress to influence United States military action. 
The first mission of the headquarters is reported to be in the Central 
African Republic to replace the French army as it withdraws from that 
troubled Nation. But just this March, Congress blocked the 
administration's $9.5 million request to pay the U.S. share of that 
mission. Nonetheless, the administration has supported the mission in 
the Security Council, and now apparently the Rapidly Deployable Mission 
Headquarters will lead the way into the Central African Republic.
  Confronted with the charge that this headquarters represents a first 
step toward a standing U.N. force, State Department officials do not 
simply deny the link between the two. Indeed, they go further, saying 
that they support the Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters because 
it does not support the standing army concept. That does not make 
sense. This makes no sense.
  Let me review the facts. This headquarters unit will provide the core 
capability for a U.N. standing army. The nations which support a 
standing army concept welcome this development, and U.N. officials 
describe it as an interim step toward a standing army. Think of the 
implications of a standing U.N. army. Will they defend the United 
States of America against others? What part will our own Armed Forces 
play in it in such an event?

                              {time}  1630

  The lesson learned in recent years, especially in places like Bosnia 
and Somalia, is that the United Nations military operations are more 
likely to draw U.S. forces into a mess, rather than to keep them out. I 
wonder whether the eight soldiers who are supposed to form the U.N. 
Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters in the Central African Republic 
will once again prove to be an advance party for what becomes an 
American operation?
  Time and time again the Congress has passed legislation to limit the 
participation of United States troops in U.N. missions. Only 
congressional vigilance, and where necessary, preemptive action such as 
the Hefley amendment, can prevent the further subcontracting of 
American foreign security policy to the United Nations. I strongly urge 
my colleagues to support the Hefley amendment.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, let me say that if what we are really after is the same 
thing, why do we not amend this or rewrite it and say that the United 
States shall not participate in a standing United Nations army? That is 
not what this says.
  I am very, very concerned that, after the fact, we may very well find 
some fine young Americans, as a result of not being able to plan ahead 
and not have people planning ahead who know what they are doing, and 
Americans who know what they are doing, injured or even killed. It is a 
deep concern of mine.
  I know full well, Mr. Chairman, that on the very substance of this 
issue that the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) and I agree, but 
the wording of this frankly causes me a great deal of concern. If we 
read this very carefully, we will see that it opens a door to Ukranians 
and Russians and Kazakhstanis and Bangladeshis for planning what our 
armed forces are going to do. I cannot, I cannot, stand by and let that 
happen.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Hastings).
  (Mr. HASTINGS of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I want to approach this 
subject very carefully. First, I thank the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Skelton) for yielding time to me. The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Skelton) and the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) are two people 
that I have the greatest respect for, as I do virtually all of the 
Members of this institution.
  Mr. Chairman, this particular amendment, most respectfully, is 
attempting to solve a problem that does not exist. We have all, at some 
point, been critical of the United Nations. Many have criticized the 
United Nations for its failure to respond promptly to conflict 
overseas. Our colleagues on the Committee on National Security often 
criticize the U.N. for not having professional military capabilities.
  However, this proposed U.N. Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters 
is a response to these criticisms. It would be a very small unit in New 
York, staffed by a handful of U.N. employees and personnel, on loan 
from member states which could deploy quickly to the field to establish 
communications links, make a survey of the ground situation, and other 
commonsense steps. This unit is not a stalking horse for a United 
Nations standing army.
  I remember reading something in the Washington Times to that effect, 
and I think that that article in and of itself was ill-advised, to 
suggest that the military, or those of us here in Congress who pay 
attention to the defense and foreign policy matters, would not have the 
ability to understand that a standing army had been created at the 
United Nations without our knowledge.
  If we want the United Nations to be more professional in its 
peacekeeping operations, and we do, I cannot understand why we would 
want to prohibit United States military personnel from participating in 
such a unit. We would all agree, I would hope, that the United States 
military is the finest in the world. Why would we not want, on a 
voluntary basis, to contribute, say, a communications specialist to 
this very small unit at the United Nations?
  Mr. Chairman, I urge Members to oppose this amendment. In my view, 
and in the view of several of us that serve on the Committee on 
International Relations, it is unnecessary and it is harmful to our 
interests. It is patently obvious that the administration opposes it, 
but I call on all my colleagues in this body to oppose this amendment, 
as well.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I hope the gentleman who just spoke listened to the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Chairman Spence) when he read the 
statement from the Secretary General's office which says that this is 
an interim step, that we cannot get the standing army yet, but this is 
the interim step. So this is the start of their idea of a standing 
army.
  I think most of us would agree we do not want a standing army. So 
where do we stop it? We stop it at the outset.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HEFLEY. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding to me.
  Mr. Chairman, does the gentleman think for one minute that the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) or any of the fine Members of the 
Committee on National Security or anyone else on the Committee on 
International Relations would stand idly by and allow that to develop?
  This is not a step in that direction, I say to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Hefley). I honestly think we can stop it. The gentleman 
is asking for something that is just not a problem.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I would say to the gentleman, we have 
already put $200,000 into it, and we did not stop it.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Idaho 
(Mrs. Chenoweth).
  Mrs. CHENOWETH. I thank the gentleman from Colorado for yielding time 
to me, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Hefley amendment, which 
would, very simply, prohibit President Clinton from putting our troops 
under the command of a newly created United Nations organization known 
as the Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters.
  The U.N. Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters is designed to 
function as a worldwide command and control network for U.N. forces. 
This new organization, which is here, which is being funded, would 
create a worldwide standby army for peacekeeping operations which could 
mobilize at any time.
  Most of my colleagues, most Members of Congress on both sides of the 
aisle, would be really disturbed to know that the Clinton 
administration, without authorization, has given the U.N. $200,000 as 
seed money to organize this army. That is the problem, Mr. Chairman, 
that is the problem.
  This Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters would report to an 
eight-

[[Page H3580]]

member command unit at the United Nations, which functions under the 
U.N. Security Council. In other words, this is a permanent military 
unit which functions directly under the control of the United Nations. 
It appears to be a backdoor way for creating a standing army when 
Congress has specifically prohibited U.S. support for a standing army.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to remind my colleagues of the tragedy that 
occurred in Mogadishu, Somalia. We might recall watching in horror as 
the U.S. Army helicopter was attacked and our troops were dragged 
through the streets, held hostage, tortured, and killed.
  Members might also recall that the multinational military unit 
created for the Somalia engagement functioned under the control of the 
U.N. An investigation revealed that the primary factor was not 
centralized planning, Mr. Chairman. The primary factor which led to 
this terrible incident was the inability of the various military 
commanders to communicate to one another because of the language 
barriers. They could not talk to one another.
  If we allow another military engagement to function under the control 
of the U.N., similar types of tragedies are certain to happen. In fact, 
it happens the creation of the Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters 
could be the precursor to a deployment in highly unstable and dangerous 
Central African Republic. The first mission of the headquarters was 
reported to be in the Central African Republic, to replace the French 
army as it withdraws from that troubled Nation.
  Just this March Congress blocked the administration's $9.5 million 
request to pay the U.S. share of that mission. However, by supporting 
the Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters, the Clinton administration 
has simply ignored the mandate by Congress not to get our troops 
involved in the Central African Republic. That is the problem. That is 
what this amendment is addressing, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding me the time.
  Mr. Chairman, I find myself betwixt and between two very, very good 
Members of this committee, two excellent Members of Congress.
  If I listen to both of the Members, I find them saying almost the 
same thing. They are both saying we do not want a standing U.N. army, 
and I agree with that. The difference I see is in the point that the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) makes, which is why, when there 
will be a joint operation, when there will be a joint operation, do we 
prohibit the very best from participating?
  Last October I had lunch with the head of the British forces, the 
head of the French forces, the head of the Italian forces over in 
Bosnia, very proud people who spent their whole lives getting to the 
top of their profession.
  It must have been very difficult for them to say what they said, but 
what they said was that they could not do it without the Americans; 
that when they went in without the Americans, their peacekeepers were 
chained to the lightpost, and people were raped and murdered and 
tortured in front of them, to show them how helpless they were. All 
that changed when the American troops came in.
  What I would like the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) and the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) to do is I would like to see the 
amendment of the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) move on, but I 
would hope that in the very long time we have between now and the 
conference committee, that the Members work this out so that we 
accomplish what I know to be the Members' mutual goals.
  I would simply ask the author of this amendment if he would be 
willing to try to work with the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) 
on this, because I am hearing the Members saying way too many of the 
same things for us to get involved in a fight on the floor about this.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I think the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Taylor) is absolutely right. I think the goals of the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and me are the same as the gentleman's probably 
are. If we can work out a better way to word this so it takes care of 
the concerns of the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) and the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), I will be happy to do that.
  We all do not want a standing army, that is what we are all trying to 
avoid. I would pledge to work with the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Skelton) to see if we cannot get this wording to all of our 
satisfaction.
  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Paul)
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me, and I would like to compliment the gentleman for bringing this 
amendment to the floor.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to make a couple of points. One, the other side 
of the aisle has mentioned that this is only a small amount. We are 
just introducing this idea. We are only giving a couple of dollars now. 
It reminds me of the arguments in 1913, let us have an income tax, but 
it is only going to be a fraction of 1 percent. We know what happened. 
There are plans for what they are doing. This is the time to stop it.
  I think another point that we ought to make is, how did they get any 
money already? They got it from the Defense Department. We did not even 
appropriate the money. They have already started it. They have used 
American taxpayers' money without a direct appropriation from this 
Congress, and it is about time we stopped that type of legislation. 
That is the point. Where did the money come from? The Defense 
Department. It goes over into the United Nations for meddling, meddling 
overseas. It is taken away, literally, from defense.
  We have a problem in this country for national defense. We have Air 
Force people who do not get flying time. Our men are not trained. We do 
not have the right equipment. We continuously spend all our money 
overseas, endlessly getting involved in Bosnia and Somalia, and 
wherever.
  I think it is policy that needs to be addressed. It is the policy 
that allows our administration to do this, because there is too much 
complicity in allowing the United Nations to assume our sovereignty.

                              {time}  1645

  That is the point here. The American people deserve better 
protection. They deserve better protection of their money. They deserve 
better protection of their youngsters who may get drafted and may get 
sent overseas. There is a great deal of danger in the Bosnia and Kosovo 
area, yet here we are talking about starting a new U.N. organization 
that unfortunately dwells on the term and brags about rapidly 
deployable. That is the last thing we need from the United Nations. I 
would like to slow it up, but now they want to take away our 
sovereignty to go and get involved more easily than ever and more 
quickly than ever.
  So this is absolutely the wrong direction that we are going in today. 
This is a further extension of the notion that our obligation is to 
police the world. We are supposed to make the world safe for democracy. 
Just think, since World War II, we have not had one declared war, but 
we sure have been fighting a lot. We have lost well over 100,000 men 
killed. We have lost, we have had hundreds of thousands of men injured 
because we have a policy that carelessly allows us to intervene in the 
affairs of other nations, and we allow the United Nations to assume too 
much control over our foreign policy.
  It is up to the U.S. Congress to do something about that; that is, to 
take away the funding. This is a great amendment. I cannot conceive of 
anybody voting against this amendment and pretending that this is only 
a little bit.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Bartlett).
  (Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, our President may be a

[[Page H3581]]

globalist. He may genuinely believe that if we support a U.N. army that 
is stronger than the military of any member state, that this will 
permit the United Nations to keep the peace in the world. This rapid 
response force could very easily be a first step in this direction.
  Clearly, the President means it to be a step in whatever direction he 
intends to go because he has given them $200,000.
  I have some problem understanding how he can do this because Article 
I, section 9 of the Constitution says, ``No money shall be drawn from 
the Treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law.''
  The Congress makes those appropriations. We made no such 
appropriation. I do not understand how the President can give our 
taxpayers' money to the U.N. without an act of Congress.
  The citizens of our country do not support any such idea as a 
standing army or rapid response force in the United Nations. They 
support the Constitution, which says very clearly, in Article I, 
section 8, ``The Congress shall have power to declare war.''
  The President cannot do this, and any time he sends troops in harm's 
way it is the equivalent of a declaration of war, and I submit that 
that is technically in violation of the Constitution.
  Mr. Chairman, if we vote down this amendment, Americans will think 
that we have gone mad. If we are going to be involved in military 
activities, we need to do so as Americans and under the control of 
Americans.
  The gentleman from Missouri made the argument that if we pass this 
amendment that we will limit the President's ability to send our troops 
hither and yon in the world. I should hope so. I think that when he 
uses taxpayers' money in sending our troops to faraway lands where they 
are in harm's way, that is the exact equivalent of a declaration of 
war. Except in a dire emergency, he has no right to do this. Americans 
do not want him to continue to do this. That is Congress's 
responsibility, as defined by the Constitution.
  Americans in poll after poll support the spirit of this amendment by 
at least 4 to 1. This amendment does not say we cannot participate in 
planning or in execution. It simply says, our involvement will not be 
automatic because we are a member of some rapid response force. It says 
that we will decide each time what is in our best national interest.
  The amendment does not prohibit joint operations. It simply says that 
when we are involved, we will decide and we will control.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a very common sense amendment which Americans 
overwhelmingly support. We must support it here also.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kansas (Mr. Ryun).
  Mr. RYUN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Hefley 
amendment to prohibit the assignment of U.S. Armed Forces to United 
Nations Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters.
  It is no secret that the United Nations wants to establish a standing 
army. My concern is that we may be starting down a slippery slope 
toward the goal of placing our troops under the command of the United 
Nations. U.S. troops are already deployed around the world to U.N. 
peacekeeping operations, and this is very important, which have little 
to do with U.S. security issues, this is also important, which have 
questionable success rates.
  These deployments are putting a strain on our defense budget, and 
they are also shrinking our military and they are putting our people, 
our military people in harm's way. Our defense budget continues to 
decline. Readiness shortfalls are common. No U.S. military resources 
should be made available to the U.N. Rapidly Deployable Missions 
Headquarters.
  If the administration is able to find money, and it is my prayer that 
they can find money, but we can use it on national security, as opposed 
to contributing money to a new U.N. project. I know I have plenty of 
military housing quality-of-life problems back in my district which 
should be funded before we spend additional taxpayer dollars on new 
U.N. bureaucracies.
  I urge my colleagues to protect our Armed Forces from any future U.N. 
infringements and vote yes on the Hefley amendment.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I have made my thoughts clear, and I oppose a standing United Nations 
army. I oppose the United States military forces being part of a 
standing United Nations army. What I am concerned about is the wording 
in this amendment that may cause in the long run some injuries and 
casualties to wonderful United States troops.
  I think that is our job in this body, to support the troops. And in 
my small way, in reading this amendment and the wording of this 
amendment, I am standing up for American troops.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  In summary, again, I think the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) 
and I are on the same track. We interpret the wording of this amendment 
a little differently. I think we are on the same track as to what we 
want to do. I hope that we can work this out.
  Let me just read again a brief paragraph that the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Spence) emphasized: Choi Young-Jin, the Korean 
diplomat who is the U.N.'s Assistant Secretary General for 
Peacekeeping, recently admitted that the U.N. remains committed to 
establishing a standing army. Now get that, the U.N. remains committed 
to establishing a standing army.
  The U.N.'s official spokesman later tried to clarify what Mr. Choi 
meant to say, that this rapidly deployable headquarters is an interim 
step, he said, since a standing army is too ambitious for the time 
being. In other words, one of the leading diplomats, the Assistant 
Secretary General for Peacekeeping said that the U.N. is committed to a 
standing army and, of course, he went too far and so he tried to 
explain it and then he said, well, that is too ambitious a step for 
right now.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HEFLEY. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, he is absolutely wrong. I am not for that. 
I am not for that at all.
  What bothers me is the wording of this amendment. I think this 
amendment, as worded, as I explained a few moments ago, should it 
become law, could very well invite some real disasters for our troops. 
I really think that it can be rewritten much, much better.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman may be absolutely right. It 
may be able to be worded much better, but if he and I believe the same 
thing, that we do not want a standing army, the way for us to assure 
that is to let this amendment go ahead and progress. I have committed 
to the gentleman that I will work with him as we go through this 
process and try to get the wording in a way that we can both agree on. 
But if we kill the amendment here today on the floor of the House, then 
there is no opportunity for us to do that.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Pease). The question is on the 
amendment offered by gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
Hefley) will be postponed.


          Sequential Votes Postponed in Committee of the Whole

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 441, 
proceedings will now resume on those amendments on which further 
proceedings were postponed in the following order:
  Amendment No. B-1 offered by the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. 
Lowey); amendment No. B-2 offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Gilman); amendment No. B-3 offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
Hefley).
  The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                Amendment No. B-1 Offered by Mrs. Lowey

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a

[[Page H3582]]

recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from New York 
(Mrs. Lowey) 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 pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 190, 
noes 232, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 171]

                               AYES--190

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     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
     Castle
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Cummings
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Edwards
     Ehrlich
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Filner
     Foley
     Ford
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gilchrest
     Gilman
     Gordon
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     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)
     Kleczka
     Kolbe
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Martinez
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHale
     McKinney
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Nadler
     Neal
     Obey
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pomeroy
     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
     Stark
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns
     Turner
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Wexler
     White
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates

                               NOES--232

     Aderholt
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     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
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Everett
     Forbes
     Fossella
     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
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Mascara
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Ortiz
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pappas
     Parker
     Paul
     Paxon
     Pease
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     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)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Traficant
     Upton
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Weygand
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Bateman
     Carson
     Clay
     Ewing
     Gonzalez
     Harman
     Meeks (NY)
     Murtha
     Stabenow
     Wise

                              {time}  1716

  The Clerk announced the following pair:
  On this vote:

       Ms. Stabenow for, with Mr. Ewing against.

  Mr. GEKAS and Mr. LAZIO of New York changed their vote from ``aye'' 
to ``no.''
  Mr. KIND and Mrs. CLAYTON changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                Announcement by the Chairman Pro Tempore

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Pease). Pursuant to House Resolution 
441, the Chair announces that it 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. Gilman

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Gilman) 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 pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 420, 
noes 1, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 172]

                               AYES--420

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Cardin
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Filner
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hansen
     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 (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich

[[Page H3583]]


     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     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
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Parker
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Paxon
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Redmond
     Regula
     Reyes
     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
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Torres
     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
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               PRESENT--1

       
     Frank (MA)
       

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Bateman
     Carson
     Clay
     Ewing
     Gonzalez
     Harman
     McDade
     Meeks (NY)
     Murtha
     Stabenow
     Wise

                              {time}  1725

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                  Amendment B-3 Offered by Mr. Hefley

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on amendment No. 3 offered by the gentleman from Colorado 
(Mr. Hefley) 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 pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 250, 
noes 172, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 173]

                               AYES--250

     Aderholt
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bereuter
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boswell
     Brady
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clement
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Fawell
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kim
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Maloney (CT)
     Manzullo
     Martinez
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moran (KS)
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pappas
     Parker
     Paul
     Paxon
     Pease
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Poshard
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Redmond
     Regula
     Riggs
     Riley
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryun
     Salmon
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Snyder
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--172

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Baesler
     Baldacci
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berman
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Campbell
     Cardin
     Clayton
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cummings
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Greenwood
     Hall (OH)
     Hamilton
     Hastings (FL)
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Holden
     Hooley
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hyde
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kanjorski
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Markey
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHale
     McKinney
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Menendez
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pickett
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith, Adam
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stokes
     Stupak
     Tauscher
     Thompson
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Bateman
     Carson
     Clay
     Ewing
     Gonzalez
     Harman
     Meeks (NY)
     Murtha
     Stabenow
     Wise

                              {time}  1733

  Ms. HOOLEY of Oregon changed her vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. EVERETT. Mr. Chairman, the legislation before us today represents 
our best efforts to fashion a defense authorization bill that meets the 
national security requirements of the country within a constrained 
budget. This year marks the 14th consecutive year of real decline in 
defense spending; a fact that has led to the military being slashed by 
more than one-third. As a percentage of the Gross National Product, 
this defense budget represents only 3 percent; the lowest level since 
before World War II.
  I raise these points as a warning. As a Nation who has invested 
dearly to amass the

[[Page H3584]]

greatest military in the world, we cannot continue the erosion of our 
national security capabilities without assuming greater risk in our 
ability to meet the many and varied challenges of America's security 
interests. The Joint Chiefs have all testified that we can still get 
the job done under this budget, but the associated risk factor to meet 
the national threat assessment continues to increase. The unfunded 
requirements also continue to grow, amounting to $54 billion over the 
next 5 years according to the Chiefs. These unfunded requirements range 
from the modernization of key weapon systems, to real property 
maintenance backlogs, to quality of life issues effecting the dedicated 
military personnel and their families. In addition to these massive 
unmet requirements, the Congressional Budget Office has indicated that 
Clinton's 5-year defense budget will not even keep pace with today's 
mild rate of inflation. This fact broadens the defense budget problems 
by another $54.4 billion shortfall between now and fiscal 2003.
  These sobering realities of the defense budget are important to note, 
because this administration continues to task the military with 
countless forward deployments while failing to provide the resources 
necessary to conduct these missions. The Op Tempo rate of our military 
personnel is at the breaking point. The Bosnia peacekeeping mission and 
Operation Southern Watch in Iraq continue to sap the readiness accounts 
of the services, requiring Congress to approve last-minute emergency 
supplemental appropriations bills to pay for critical training accounts 
depleted by these foreign policy forays. These trends are an indication 
of poor management of the country's national defense.
  With that said, I must commend Chairman Spence and the subcommittee 
chairman for their work in crafting this bill under these difficult 
circumstances. We have been able to provide additional funds for key 
weapon systems procurement like the UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters and 
Javelin precision guided missiles and speed up the testing and 
development of the RAH-66 Comanche, while also adding critical funds to 
help improve and maintain the infrastructure on our military 
installations. I urge all members to support the bill.
  Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I join my colleagues today in support of 
H.R. 3616, the FY 1999 Defense Authorization Bill. This bipartisan 
effort has been well received and will do much to ensure that the 
security of the United States and its territories will be preserved.
  Mr. Chairman, these are dangerous times. Today, the United States is 
faced with multifaceted threats from all corners of the globe. The list 
is enormous: illicit Ballistic Missile technology transfers from Russia 
and China, North Korean and Iranian ballistic missile development, a 
potential nuclear arms race in South Asia, continuing strife in Bosnia, 
Iraq's failure to completely comply with U.N. weapons inspectors, 
rioting, oppression, and a secession crisis in Indonesia, a seemingly 
insurmountable international narcotrafficking problem and the specter 
of global and domestic terrorism. Our military forces are being 
stretched to the limit, being forced to do more with less. These 
threats matched against our Nation's shrinking defense budget all 
create a tense security environment that our Nation must contend with.
  But, Mr. Chairman, H.R. 3616 is not just about outfitting our 
military with the best equipment and training to meet these challenges, 
it is also about doing more for our uniformed men and women. H.R. 3616 
includes several measures that I introduced that enhances the lives of 
our service personnel. I was able to obtain language that would allow 
National Guardsmen to have equal PX/BX and Commissary privileges as the 
active duty servicemen when called up for duty during a federally 
declared disaster. We learned of this inequity only too well when 
Typhoon Paka struck Guam last December. Additionally, I reintroduced an 
amendment that will authorize the reimbursement for the cost of a 
rental car, after a permanent change of station transfer to a new duty 
station overseas under the travel automobile rental allowance 
authorized to service members. This provision would apply only to 
service members whose motor vehicle has not arrived by the promised 
shipping date. This initiative, suggested to me by Colonel Adolf 
Sgambelluri of Guam, became a reality after working closely with 
Congressman Steve Buyer and Congressman Gene Taylor.
  Mr. Chairman, the House National Security Committee also manages a 
vital oversight function over the Department of Defense. My colleagues 
and I treat this responsibility very seriously. Two oversight 
initiatives that I had included in this bill are (1) to secure 
directive report language that requires the Department of Defense to 
report to Congress on the reasons that led to the establishment of 
Department of Defense Dependents School (DoDDS), their plan of 
reintegration between the DoDDS and the public school system on Guam, 
and report on the specific plans to construct any structure on Guam for 
the expressed purpose of housing DoDDS facilities on Guam; and (2) to 
require the Department of Defense to report to Congress their proposed 
plan for privatization of public (departmental and military) owned 
electric and water utilities and the real property that these utilities 
are located on. The report also requires that DoD describe the 
criterion where such a conveyance will not be made on the grounds of 
national security. I worked closely with Chairman Joel Hefley on this 
initiative and would like to thank him for his foresight in including 
this important initiative.
  Mr. Chairman, one note of dissent, I am not in support of this bill's 
provision that will mandate gender-separate training and barracks for 
all services of the armed forces during basic training. I have often 
commented on the growing rift in military/civilian relations. I believe 
that for 50 years the armed forces has been the most successful 
institution that promotes inclusion of both race and gender. To reverse 
that noble history, which this measure will certainly do, is to run the 
risk of dangerously turning our military into an organization that will 
be further separated from the society that it is charged to defend.
  Finally, Mr. Chairman, I am deeply concerned with the Department of 
Defense's continuing utilization of the A-76 process in its quest to 
mete out savings and increase productivity. While I recognize that the 
Department can no longer conduct business the way it had during the 
Cold War, it seems shortsighted and thankless to potentially lay off 
thousands of government employees who have served for so long. Despite 
that the A-76 process, at a minimum, provides a chance for Government 
employees to compete, we must recognize that this is an inglorious 
method to show our gratitude for all their years of public service. I 
believe that the Department of Defense is relying too heavily on A-76, 
privatization and other outsourcing initiatives to provide sorely 
needed savings for their programs. I remain skeptical over the 
estimates that DoD claims they will reap from these processes.
  Essentially, I am concerned that the retirement benefit packages of 
Federal employees is penalized severely for early retirement. 
Currently, there is no provision to protect the full receipt of 
benefits if the employee is displaced by a private sector worker as a 
result of A-76. The devastating inequity of A-76 is that a federal 
worker who is 2 to 3 years away from retirement will lose out on a full 
pension through no fault of their own. In conclusion, it is my hope 
that the Department will seriously review the process to protect its 
loyal employees and the retirement benefits that they were promised.
  Mrs. FOWLER. 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. 
Gibbons) having assumed the chair, Mr. Pease, Chairman pro tempore 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. 
3616) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1999 for military 
activities of Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel 
strengths for fiscal year 1999, and for other purposes, had come to no 
resolution thereon.

                          ____________________