Congressional Record, Volume 144 Issue 84 (Wednesday, June 24, 1998)

[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 84 (Wednesday, June 24, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H5222-H5252]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 484 and rule
XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 4103.

{time} 1820

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 4103) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 1999, and for other purposes, with Mr.
Camp in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having
been read the first time.
Under the rule, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) and the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young).
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, we are happy to present the defense appropriations bill
for fiscal year 1999. I believe we can expedite the program this
evening and be out of here before it gets too late. It is an important
piece of legislation that I think most Members will want to support.
There will be several amendments that we would anticipate, but I think
we can move rather expeditiously.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, I made all my comments on the rule, and I
am prepared to yield back at any time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I think we
will be prepared to do that very shortly. I think it would be in order
to advise the Members of some of the highlights of the bill.
Before I do that, I want to recognize two members of this
subcommittee. This will be the last time that they will serve on this
subcommittee and be part of this bill, and that is our colleagues the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. McDade) and the gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. Hefner).
Mr. Chairman, these two gentlemen have served on this subcommittee
for a long, long time, and many things have happened during their time
here. The Berlin Wall came down during the time they were here, and we
are going to give them credit for helping to make that happen.
The gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hefner) wanted to know if he
was going to get anything special in this bill. I said no; we would get
together and buy him a watch or something, but he was not going to get
anything special in the bill just because he was leaving.
Mr. Chairman, both the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hefner) and
the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. McDade) have been true patriots,
they have been very strong on national defense, they have not been
bashful in presenting their views on matters that came before the
committee, and I think the House and their country owe a lot to the
contributions they have made to the national security as members of
this important subcommittee.
All of the members on this subcommittee, Mr. Chairman, have been
extremely diligent and have worked many, many long hours, days and
weeks, to prepare this bill, to go over the issues that we have to go
over, the thousands of items that we have responsibility for.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to compliment the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), the ranking member, and I want to say that
as we present this bill, this is a bipartisan bill. It has been for
many, many years, and it is for fiscal year 1999.
I would say to the Members that the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Murtha) deserves a lot of credit as the leader on the minority side and
former chairman. We have worked together in a partnership to make sure
that the decisions that were made were in the interests of the security
of our Nation, that they had a direct defense application and that
there was a requirement for them.
So we bring a bill today that is slightly under the President's
budget, and when we adjust for inflation, we are $2.5 billion under
where we were for fiscal year 1998. But we have been able to go through
the various accounts. I would encourage Members to take a look at this
report.
Mr. Chairman, we have talked so many times about waste, fraud and
abuse in Federal agencies. In this report you will find page after
page, example after example, of where we have gone through every
contract and every program and we have found places where there was
waste that we eliminated; we have found places where we can save money
because of contract slips, and we did that. Because we did that, we
were able to provide most of the things that the President asked for in
his budget, and, at the same time, we were able to make some additions.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to tell the House what those additions
are. I would like to say that we did fund the pay raise for members of
the military and the civilian workers in the Department of Defense. We
have been able to increase substantially real property maintenance so
that we could do something about the poor living conditions that some
of our soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen have to live in. We have
provided additional money for the spare parts and flying hours so that
we do not go directly to a hollow force.
But one thing we did not do, Mr. Chairman, we did not provide enough
money to adequately provide for the security of this Nation today and
in the years to come. We are on a down slope. This will be the 14th
year in a row that our investment in our own national security has been
less than it was the year before, when inflation is considered.
We have ships at sea that are undermanned. We have men and women who
are deployed more often than they should be. The deployments are
excessive, the OPTEMPO is excessive, and you just cannot continue to do
more with less.
The worst part about this bill is it does not meet the requirements
of the services. The services themselves and the Reserve components
have identified approximately $12 billion in unbudgeted requirements
for this year alone that they need to just maintain the infrastructure,
not create some new weapons system, not to create something new and
glamorous and dramatic, but just to do the day-to-day things that are
required to keep the military functioning and to keep readiness up. So
that is a major problem in this bill. It just does not have enough to
take care of those problems.
Mr. Chairman, we will debate many of these issues as we go through
some of the amendments. At this point, however, I would like to insert
in the Record a table which summarizes the overall funding in this bill
as it currently stands before the House.

[[Page H5223]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH24JN98.007

[[Page H5224]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH24JN98.008

[[Page H5225]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH24JN98.009

[[Page H5226]]

Mr. Chairman, I yield two minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Gilman), the distinguished 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 me time
for the purpose in engaging in a colloquy relating to a provision in
this bill on naval vessel transfers.
Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman from Florida knows, I appeared before
the Committee on Rules yesterday to oppose making in order section 8102
of this bill. Section 8102 authorizes the transfer of naval vessels to
certain foreign nations. It directly concerns the Foreign Assistance
Act and the Arms Export Control Act, and thus falls squarely within the
jurisdiction of the Committee on International Relations. In addition,
it constitutes an item of authorization that directly violates clause 2
of rule XXI of the House.
This section should be subject to a point of order on this bill, but
it is not, because the Committee on Rules and the leadership of this
house chose to protect the provision.
Section 8102 also establishes a new military foreign aid program for
two countries that we graduated from foreign aid just last year, and
also uses a budget maneuver to fund this new foreign aid program, while
providing another $500 million in spending in this bill.
I would ask the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) if it would be his
intention to work with the Committee on International Relations and
keep us fully informed during his conference with the Senate on the
status of this provision?
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GILMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I would be happy to respond to
the gentleman that I would be pleased to keep the chairman of the
Committee on International Relations fully informed about the status of
this provision during our conference committee. The gentleman from New
York (Mr. Gilman) and I have discussed this, and we have an
understanding with each other that we will certainly do that.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I want to thank the
gentleman from Florida. Let me ask the gentleman, would he further
agree that he would support a modification to this provision in the
conference committee to make certain that subsections 8102(f) and
8102(g) are deleted?
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would yield
further, I would assure the gentleman that I will work with my House
and Senate colleagues in conference to develop the appropriate
modifications to these subsections, and will continue to work with the
gentleman from New York to reach a mutually satisfactory outcome on
this matter.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I want to thank the
gentleman from Florida for his assurance, and for yielding me time to
engage in this colloquy.

{time} 1830

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I share the concern of my committee
chairman. What we are doing is selling 48 ships for only $13 million
apiece.
About 3 years ago in a hearing in the Committee on International
Relations, which has original jurisdiction over the sale of surplus
ships, there was a move to give away 10 ships, to which I objected, and
Senator Brownback from Kansas and I passed legislation, subsequently
called the Manzullo amendment. Those 10 ships were then sold for $495
million.
Subsequent to that, every year that amendment has come up, and that
money is kept back in the coffers in IR towards that bill. But this
takes jurisdiction away from the Committee on International Relations.
I do not know if this is a bargain sale or not, but I would like some
type of assurance from whoever set this price at $637 million that the
United States is not giving away billions of dollars worth of ships for
which we should be fully compensated.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MANZULLO. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I would respond to the gentleman
by saying first that I have given my assurance to the chairman of his
committee; second, we do not set the price for these ships; third,
without these transfers, these ships are going to be mothballed or cut
up into scraps. Finally, who they are going to would primarily be to
NATO allies for their own defense.
Mr. MANZULLO. I would like whoever set the price to furnish that.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I do not set the price. We do not set the
price.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Oregon, Mr. DeFazio.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I would like to engage the chairman for a
moment in two very important programs in which I know the chairman has
a great interest.
The first is the DOD-VA medical research account. Last year the
chairman graciously accepted my amendment on the floor to lift the
amount of money invested in this program, a tremendous program dealing
with Gulf War syndrome, traumatic nervous system injury, and other
combat readiness and combat-related injuries to $15 million. Eleven
million dollars is in the House bill.
I would like to know the chairman's intention, if we can be assured
that in the conference the chairman will strive to make the program
whole so we at least can maintain current services.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I hope the gentleman knows that
we do support this program, despite the fact that it was not included
in the President's budget. We did provide some $11 million for the
program. We intend to support this program in conference.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, there is a second program, and this is a
little bit personal to my district. There is a program which the
gentleman is familiar with, the National Guard Youth Challenge Program.
It actually operates in Oregon in the district of the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Bob Smith).
But if the gentleman is aware of the tragic shooting that took place
in the high school near my home in Springfield, rather sadly, the
father of that youth was attempting on the day that he was killed to
enroll the youth into the National Guard Youth Challenge Program,
because it has such an incredible reputation in our State. They have
put more than 500 at-risk youth through that program, and Major General
Reese told me that only 4 of those youths out of 500 have committed
crimes after going through that program.
I realize that the administration only requested $28.5 million, and I
certainly intend to put efforts into getting the administration to ask
for more next year. I realize that the chairman has upped that by $10
million during the committee process.
It is my great hope that the chairman can strive to reach, at least
in conference, the $50 million level, which would maintain the current
services. There are States, including that of the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) on the waiting list.
I would hope, I know the chairman supports the program, I would hope
that we can strive to at least make the program whole and perhaps get
to some of the States on the waiting list in the near future.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. If the gentleman will yield, again I would
respond in the affirmative that we do support this program and we did
add money over and above the President's budget request.
We will do the best we can in conference, and I will be honest with
my colleague and say that is the best commitment I can give him now. We
will do the best we can. But understand that going into conference, we
are going to be several billion dollars apart. We will do the very best
we can to achieve what the gentleman would like to achieve.

[[Page H5227]]

Mr. DeFAZIO. I thank the gentleman. I would note that the Senate is
at 62. If we did the usual sort of split the difference, we would come
out a little over 50, which would make the program whole.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. The gentleman is correct, and that happens a
lot.
Mr. DeFAZIO. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, Lyme disease is one of the
Nation's fastest growing infectious diseases. This is an issue of great
concern to military personnel and their families who serve and train in
areas endemic for Lyme disease.
In New Jersey both Fort Dicks and Naval Weapons Station Earle have
been indicated as having high levels of risk of Lyme disease during
their latest known Lyme disease risk assessment.
As the chairman knows, as a result of an amendment that I had offered
in 1994, the Department of Defense Lyme disease research programs ran
out in February of 1997. According to the Army Surgeon General's
office, a mere $600,000 would be needed each year to optimally maintain
the tick-borne disease program and the Molecular Biology Laboratory.
Can the chairman assure me that the conference report on this bill
will contain the $600,000 in funding that the U.S. Army needs to
continue with this important work in the fight against Lyme disease,
and tick-borne diseases?
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I agree with the gentleman from
New Jersey that this important funding should and will be renewed. To
that end, I will try to work during the conference and negotiations on
this to ensure that it will contain the necessary resources to enable
the Department of Defense, as well as the United States Army Center for
Health Promotion and Preventative Medicine, to continue their work in
the area of Lyme disease.
I also want to commend the gentleman for raising this issue with me
and with the committee. The gentleman is correct that Lyme disease and
tick-borne illnesses are a significant problem for our troops in many
areas of our country. I want to make sure that we do everything we can
to make sure American military personnel are protected against the
risks of Lyme disease when they are deployed or training in endemic
areas.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank the distinguished chairman.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham), a member of the
subcommittee.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
the time.
What a good committee to serve on, Mr. Chairman. The gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Jack Murtha) has done nothing but been supportive and
fought for the national security of this country. I would say that of
every single subcommittee member on both sides of the aisle. There is
no partisanship, it is for the national security of this country.
However, I would tell the Members, Mr. Chairman, that national
defense, and I was a professional for 20 years, is at the lowest I have
seen it in 30 years, the worst shape I have seen it in 30 years. We
could survive with a low budget and a balanced budget amount that we
put in, but what is killing national security are the deployments and
the national security policy of the White House, 300 percent OP TEMPO
deployments away from home above what we were in the Cold War. That
money from Haiti and Somalia and Bosnia and all the other deployments
comes out of defense budgets. It is killing us.
The effect is, it is driving our military out of the service. The
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) will agree. We only have 24
percent retention of our enlisted. That means our experience is going
away. We are dealing with 1970s technologies in our F-14s, F-15s, F-
16s.
There are only four up jets in Oceana today. They normally have 45
for training. Why is this? Because they are cannibalizing off the
airplanes we have up and sending them to the front. Used parts on an
old airplane with maintenance troops that are less and less qualified
means that we are going to lose airplanes and air crew in massive
numbers in the next 5 years, starting this year, Mr. Chairman. We have
to do something about that.
Look at what the threat is. In my first chart, those that will come
before this body and say the Cold War is over, this is what the threat
is. All over the world, this is where the Fulcrum, the Flankers, and
the enemy missiles are stationed. Our own President sent missile
technology to China, and China has been shipping chemical and
biological weapons and nuclear components to Iran, Iraq, Syria, and
Pakistan; real threats to this country. The Cold War is not over.
I look at the next chart. This is just general equipment where the
technology is above U.S. technology. I am alive today in combat because
I had better training and better equipment. This edge is gone, Mr.
Chairman.
This is the SA-5, this is the SA-11 surface-to-air missiles, this is
the tanks, this is the quad and radar-directed fire. I can go on and on
with how their technology--they are supposed to be broken, the Cold War
is over, but take a look.
Look at this, Mr. Chairman. This is the AA-10 and AA-12 missile, that
out-ranges our best missiles. Our pilots are going to die if they face
Russian technology.
Mr. Chairman, look at the F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, today. If they meet
an SU-27, an SU-27 they are at parity with, but an SU-35 or 37, with
their technology and these missiles on board, if we come head to head
and they can see us before we see them, their missiles out-range us and
are better, better than our American Ram. The technology of the F-22
and the F-18E/F puts the Stealth where we can close inside those
technologies, yet we do not have the procurement. This committee had to
cut 3 F-18s. We also need C130s for transportation.
I think in conference we will get all of them, but the threat is
there. The Cold War is not over. I would ask my colleagues that want to
continue to cut defense, there is a hollow force today, my colleagues.
It is in the worst shape I have ever seen it in my entire life in
service in the military.
Do not let it happen, because it is going to be our sons and our
daughters and our grandchildren that we are going to ask to serve. Do
not ask them to serve and come back in a body bag.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) for a colloquy.
Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding time to
me.
Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the chairman and the ranking member
of the Committee on National Security for their work on the defense
appropriations bill for FY 1999. I want to especially thank the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) and the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Young) for their help on the humvee and 2\1/2\ ton truck.
I am particularly grateful to the gentleman from Florida (Chairman
Young) for his sharing my concerns of the Navy's plans to procure a new
target missile system. The current supply of Vandal missiles will run
out in 2001, and the Navy must replace it with a new supersonic sea-
skimming target missile.
Over 100 of my constituents work on the Sea Snake, and I am concerned
about the potential willingness of the Navy to procure a Russian-made
target missile to meet their long-term future needs. The Navy has spent
a significant amount of foreign cooperative test program money
developing the Russian MA-31. Furthermore, the Navy, on June 8,
announced its intent to award a firm, fixed-price solo source contract
to procure the MA-31 for target shooting purposes.
In the view of the pending RFP due out later this month, I am
concerned about the Navy's procuring the MA-31 at this time, as it is a
competitor in an open and fair competition. It is difficult for me to
believe that will in fact be a truly open or truly fair competition. I
would like to ask my colleague, the distinguished chairman, if he is

[[Page H5228]]

aware of this recent announcement, and if he shares my concern over
this competition.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ROEMER. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I would respond to the gentleman
and thank the chairman for raising this issue.
As he knows because of our numerous conversations about this, I want
to assure him that we will do everything we can to guarantee that the
Navy does what it is supposed to do and what the report of this
subcommittee tells it to do, and that is to follow all the procedural
requirements for an open and fair competition.
Mr. ROEMER. I thank the distinguished chairman. I thank my ranking
member, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) for all his help,
and I think both share in my puzzlement as to why the Navy would want
to procure and rely upon a Russian-made target system at the expense of
the only American-made source of target systems.
If the Navy continues on the present course American jobs could be
lost, and the only source of target missiles will be lost as well.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Bentsen).
(Mr. BENTSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Chairman, I had intended to offer an amendment in
the general provisions section of this bill limiting the Navy from
being able to expend funds for the disposal of napalm, which is
currently stockpiled in Southern California.

{time} 1845

Earlier this week, it came to my attention that the Navy's general
contractor is very close to letting subcontracts to one or more
disposal operations in Texas, including in my district in Deer Park,
Texas, as well as San Leon, Texas, Port Arthur, Texas, and Andrews
County, Texas.
My concern, and I think the concern of the regulators in my State,
the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, and the Governor of
Texas, who was only notified yesterday, is that the Navy has not done a
very adequate job of notifying the public of what their intention is.
And this comes on the heels of their earlier intent to dispose in East
Chicago.
If lieu of offering what would be a very broad amendment, in short
order I am willing to withdraw it. But I would like to ask if the
ranking member and the chairman of the subcommittee would help in
encouraging the Navy, if they decide to go forward, to provide better
notification.
Their intent is to award the contract July 6 through July 8 and start
transporting product between July 15 and 16. This is the same time we
have an incredible bottleneck in rail with the Union Pacific/Southern
Pacific merger, more than 300,000 cars blocked in the greater Houston
area.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BENTSEN. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, let me say to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Bentsen), the Navy has really handled this badly as far as keeping
people informed and it is unfortunate. I think the gentleman has taken
a very reasonable position that they have not consulted with him or
talked to him, barely notified him as they were about to move things
through.
Mr. Chairman, I can assure the gentleman from Texas that we will
watch this carefully. Any amendment offered would make it even more
difficult to solve this problem. As a matter of fact, a couple of
people came to me with ideas about how to solve the problem and they
sent them to the Navy. Hopefully, we will be able to solve this problem
quickly.
It is a very big problem in California because it is starting to
leech out, so we have to do something about it. I assure the gentleman
we will work with him and try to do something.
Mr. PACKARD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BENTSEN. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. PACKARD. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Bentsen) yielding, and I deeply appreciate the gentleman not
introducing his amendment.
Just to give a little background, the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Murtha) has clearly outlined it, but for 25 years the napalm has
been stored in my district at an ammunition depot. No one has been
overly concerned about it until it started leaking out of the canisters
into the soil and into the air, and then it became of great concern to
the Navy and to some of the people in my district.
The Navy has carefully outlined a plan to recycle it. They have made
no decision to this point as to what company they would offer a
contract to. I know that Texas is being considered, but it is only one
of the considerations.
But, Mr. Chairman, they have got to be able to process it and recycle
it. It cannot stay the way it is. It would be a terrible hazard if it
stayed the way it was. And so the gentleman's amendment would have
really resulted in a situation that is unacceptable.
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I appreciate the
gentleman's response on that issue. The biggest concern we have, and
yes, the Navy does have to do something with this, but they need to
notify the public of this.
We are talking about, in the case of Deer Park, part of the third
largest metropolitan area in the country, and we do have a lot of
petrochemical industry. But to give us 2 weeks notification before it
is transported, or 3 weeks, is insufficient.
Mr. PACKARD. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would continue to yield,
I will do all I can to get the Navy to do a better job of communicating
and working with us, but the fact is napalm under the plan is safer to
ship than gasoline, and we ship gasoline on the streets of our
communities all across America every day. But it is much safer than
gasoline or many of the other products that they ship on a daily basis.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BENTSEN. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I have talked to the Navy and regarding
the problem of the backup of railroad cars, they would bring it as far
as Texas and then off-load it onto trucks and bring it in. So it would
not affect that kind of problem.
This was not a problem until the White House got involved with it in
East Chicago, Indiana, and stopped it right just before the elections.
Now Al Gore is going to Texas and all of a sudden it stopped because of
the environmentalists.
Mr. Chairman, we will work hand-in-hand with the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Bentsen), because there is no problem with it. As the gentleman
from California (Mr. Packard) has said, this is safer than gas to ship.
It will also be used to make cement. It is a useful product. The wood
will be chewed up and go to Oklahoma and the metal, the aluminum, will
be recycled. It is a win-win situation.
I agree the gentleman's constituents in Texas need to know what the
positives are instead of the negatives.
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Chairman, again reclaiming my time, if the Navy can
solve the rail problem, that would be a swift trick, but that is
something they need to be concerned about.
I appreciate the comments of the gentleman from California and
appreciate the help of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) on
this issue.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I was going to offer an
amendment. I will not be offering it. The lateness of the hour,
frankly, makes me think it would not get the kind of attention that I
would have hoped. But I do want to explain why I am going to vote
against this bill.
Mr. Chairman, we are in a different situation post-Cold War, and I
continue to be perplexed by those who argue that we are not safer. It
seems to me people are denigrating the whole notion that we
accomplished something significant by the dismantlement of the Soviet
Union.
Yes, there are threats in the world today that exist other than the
major

[[Page H5229]]

threat we had in the Soviet Union. Those threats, of course many of
them existed then as well. There is a quantitative difference. For 50
years, beginning with the rise of Hitler and the emergence of the
Soviet Union, the physical existence of this country was at risk. We
had evil people who hated democracy who had the ability substantially
to inflict physical damage on us.
That has been substantially changed. We do face dangers in the world
today, but they are not of the order that they were during the Hitler
and the Stalin years and their successors, yet we continue to spend at
very high levels.
Mr. Chairman, we are in a zero sum situation. Money we spend on the
military cannot be spent on keeping cops on the streets, fighting drugs
here at home, providing necessary housing for people, fighting
environmental hazards. And there is a way that we could make savings
that the administration of this Congress has failed to take advantage
of.
We continue to subsidize our wealthy allies, particularly in Western
Europe, far beyond what is logical. We continue to bear the burden of
defending Western Europe disproportionately, despite the fact that the
threat to Western Europe has decreased and our allies' ability to
defend themselves has increased.
Until and unless we end this policy, it is the greatest welfare
policy yet left and the recipients are our European allies. They
continue to drain tens of billions of dollars from us. If they were
prepared to take primary responsibility for the defense of Western
Europe, we would still have the responsibility in South Korea, in the
Middle East and elsewhere.
Mr. Chairman, we could save money with no cost to anybody's security
and free up funds for necessary purposes that are going undone at home.
For that reason, I will vote against this bill.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. Gilman was allowed to speak out of order
for 1 minute.)

Announcement of the Death of Paul O'Dwyer

Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Chairman, it is my sad duty to report to this body
the passing of an outstanding constituent who is one of the most
respected elder statesmen in New York State.
Paul O'Dwyer passed away this morning at the great age of 90. A
native of County Mayo, Ireland, he came to America in search of a new
life in the wake of the ``troubles'' in Ireland earlier in this
century.
He worked on the docks while working his way through St. John's Law
School. He became a champion of civil rights and justice in his
homeland, and of independence for Israel.
Paul O'Dwyer sought election to this Chamber in 1946, but was
defeated by Jacob Javits. Ironically, 22 years later Paul was the
Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate in opposition to Senator Javits.
In between, Paul O'Dwyer served as Manhattan Councilman at Large and
subsequently as President of the New York City Council. And in later
years, Paul O'Dwyer remained a champion of peace and justice in the
North of Ireland.
Although Paul and I were on opposite sides of the political aisle, I
came to rely on his sage advice, his insightful knowledge and his
distinguished concern for the future of our Nation.
Mr. Chairman, we extend our sympathies to Paul's widow, Pat, to his
three sons, his daughter, his eight grandchildren and five great-
grandchildren, and the many New Yorkers who for many years considered
Paul O'Dwyer a hero.
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend my colleague
from Florida, the distinguished Chairman of the National Security
Appropriations Subcommittee, for drafting a bill that maintains careful
balance between our modernization priorities, our requirement for a
trained and ready force, and the needs of our men and women in uniform
and their families. This is no easy task. With each new crisis around
the world, we ask for more and more from our fighting forces while the
amount of money that we provide continues to shrink. So again, I
applaud the Chairman of the National Security Appropriations
Subcommittee for working hard to ensure that our military is prepared
to meet ongoing and new challenges around the globe.
I would also like to commend the Department of Defense for working
hard to put into place best business practices wherever possible to
squeeze every penny out of its operations. Every penny saved by running
the Defense Department better is a penny returned to much needed and
underfunded modernization and readiness programs. In particular, I want
to commend the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) for its efforts to
procure commercial-like launch services for the GeoLITE and NRO-1
satellite programs. By using existing commercial launch vehicles and
commercial payload processing services, NRO can take advantage of cost
savings and streamlined procurement schedules that are inherent to
commercial purchases and operations.
I strongly encourage the NRO to continue and expand its outsourcing
of commercial payload processing services. By lowering the costs while
at the same time maintaining flexibility to implement its mission, the
NRO is ensuring that it is ready to meet the great demands placed on it
by our national security decision makers and our war fighting
commanders in chief.
For several decades, even the initials N-R-O were classified and
could not be used publicly. Now, with the end of the Cold War, not only
can we talk about the once super secret NRO, we can give the agency
credit for its activities, including its push to contract for services
like commercial payload processing.
Mrs. FOWLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to strongly support this amendment.
Yesterday, in a joint hearing by the National Security and
International Relations Committees, we learned still more about efforts
by China's People's Liberation Army to secure advanced military
technology from the United States. This information included
revelations that Chinese officials apparently stole circuit boards
containing safeguarded technology from a crashed U.S.-built satellite,
as well as reports I brought forward that the administration has
approved the sale of equipment to help the PLA encrypt military
messages sent via U.S.-built satellites.
Now we hear that the Defense Department is purchasing critical parts
for some of our most advanced weapons from the U.S. subsidiary of a
Chinese state-owned firm. This is intolerable.
This amendment complements legislation I sponsored last year which
passed the House 405-10, requiring the Defense Department to maintain
an active list of PLA-owned firms doing business here. I commend the
gentleman and strongly urge passage of this measure.
Mr. NETHERCUTT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 4103. I am
proud to serve on the National Security Subcommittee on Appropriations
and would like to first acknowledge the outstanding work of Chairman
Young and Mr. Murtha in putting together this legislation that meets so
many needs while still falling under our budget limitations. The
subcommittee staff also deserves recognition, having worked long hours
scrubbing this bill to maximize every defense dollar.
This bill devotes substantial resources to improving the working
conditions for our men and women in uniform. Increased funding for
maintenance and spare parts has been a priority for our subcommittee
and this year was no different. The Administration consistently
underfunds these accounts and the Services always identify requirements
that exceed the request. I was pleased that we were able to add more
than $200 million over the President's request for aviation spares,
$300 million for real property maintenance, and $500 million for base
operations and support.
This bill provides substantial funds for research and development
which will rapidly move next generation technology into the field. Our
combat forces will have a substantial edge over opponents in the future
because of the investments this bill provides for weapons research as
well as for medical research. Enhancing the survivability of those who
serve should be our first priority, and I strongly support research
which benefits this end. I am pleased that the Committee supported
funding for promising ultrasound research, which may revolutionize
trauma care by stopping battlefield hemorrhaging with ultrasound waves.
The Committee also funded substantial research to address the growing
threat posed by chemical and biological weapons. One innovative
approach that is funded in this bill would utilize photoacoustic
signatures to detect harmful toxins. I am proud that both of these
projects will be conducted at the Spokane Intercollegiate Research and
Technology Institute, an emerging regional leader in science and
technology research.
Medical research also benefits military readiness and morale by
ensuring that soldiers in the field stay healthy, while their families
are taken care of at home. As the Co-Chair of the Congressional
Diabetes Caucus, I support a research project in this bill which will
contribute substantially to our understanding of diabetes. The
legislation provides a $6.4 million for the second year of a 2-year
pilot demonstration project [PE# 630002] with the Joslin

[[Page H5230]]

Diabetes Center, a world leader in diabetes research. This joint
project with the Army is pursuing critical research, and soldiers and
their families will realize substantial benefits.
This Subcommittee has devoted significant attention to the issues of
information security and the Year 2000 problem. The Administration has
told the Services to take care of this problem out of hide and didn't
request any additional funding, even though January 1, 2000 is only 17
months away. Despite optimistic projections from the services and
reassurances from the Administration, reports from GAO, the Defense
Science Board and Congressman Steven Horn have unanimously proclaimed
that current progress is inadequate. Failure of defense systems could
be catastrophic and I do believe that identifying funding for this
situation is an emergency. But this bill also contains strong language
which will contribute to a Y2K solution. No new funds can be spent on
developing or modernizing any information technology system unless it
is certified as Y2K compliant. The bill also requires the Department to
develop contingency plans for Y2K failure and directs aggressive
testing and simulation to ensure that we are ready in time.
This is an excellent bill, Mr. Chairman. While there are still many
unfunded requirements facing our armed forces, this legislation does an
outstanding job of addressing the highest priorities within the
constraints of the Balanced Budget Agreement. I strongly urge my
colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this year's defense
appropriations bill. It continues the trend of declining defense
spending since the end of the Cold War, forcing the committee to make a
lot of tough choices. As a member of the National Security Committee, I
know that many of the choices in this bill reflect directions set in
the authorization bill.
When I came to this House nearly 6 years ago, my district was reeling
from defense cuts. Yet today it is thriving, and has recovered by using
its expertise in commercial fields. California's 36th Congressional
District demonstrates that there is life after defense downsizing.
Mr. Chairman, I fought to establish the Dual Use Science and
Technology program so that we could build skills that would protect
defense workers when defense spending shrinks. This is not just
important for the defense industry and the workers in my district, but
for the country and its defense industrial base. Commercial
applications allow us to maintain critical technological expertise in
the industrial base, so that we can call upon it in times of need. I
was disappointed to see cuts made in dual-use programs in this bill.
For the reasons I've just described, it's exactly the wrong thing to
cut in a shrinking defense budget.
As defense spending ebbs, inefficiencies in the DoD also become more
visible, and more harmful. Serious problems are emerging in
modernization and readiness, but we still maintain excessive
infrastructure. This House must tenaciously pursue cost-savings and
eliminate bloated bureaucracies. We cannot afford to support waste when
we have such urgent modernization and readiness needs.
Finally, let me raise one more efficiency issue. As our forces
shrink, we must fully embrace women in the military--we need to fully
utilize all military talent in order to field a ready force. Secretary
Cohen and the Service Chiefs feel it is crucial to ``train the way we
fight'' and strongly advocate gender-integrated training. I'd urge
Members not to substitute Congressional judgment for their expertise.
As we learned many years ago, separate but equal is anything but equal.
I urge support of the bill.
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my strong support
for the inclusion of full funding for the Disaster Relief and Emergency
Medical Services (DREAMS) telemedicine project in H.R. 4103, the
Department of Defense Appropriations legislation. I wish to thank
Chairman Young and Ranking Member Murtha for their support of this
project. This project is a cooperative effort of the U.S. Army Medical
Research and Materiel Command, the University of Texas-Houston Health
Science Center, and Texas A&M University. As the Representative for the
University of Texas-Houston Health Science Center, I am pleased that
this legislation includes sufficient funding for this critical medical
research project.
DREAMS is an advanced telecommunications project designed to improve
and speed emergency treatment for injured patients, especially in
military battlefield and civilian disaster settings. The project aims
to utilize computer, telemedicine, and satellite navigation technology
(Global Positioning System) to improve patient transport, as well as
on-site and in-transit diagnosis and treatment. It also aims to improve
detection, diagnosis, decontamination, and treatment for chemical and
biological warfare agents, and to develop new diagnostic methods and
therapies for shock and injuries. DREAMS originated in Houston because
Houston has a high incidence rate for penetrating and blunt trauma,
industrial accidents, floods, and hurricanes.
The DREAMS project will demonstrate, in both military and civilian
sectors, how to save lives and reduce costs. This project includes
three interrelated components: (1) emergency medical services; (2)
chemical and biological warfare defense; and (3) diagnostic methods and
therapies for shock injuries. The emergency medical services will test
interactive telemedicine technologies and treat patients in both urban
and rural settings. DREAMS will also do extensive research to develop
chemical senors for on-site diagnosis of toxic substances and
biological decontamination of chemical warfare agents. The third part
of this project will research new treatments for patients who cannot
get advanced care quickly and determine mechanisms to extend life
beyond the ``golden hour.''
Congress provided $8 million for this cutting-edge research in Fiscal
Year 1997. I am pleased that this bill, H.R. 4103, would provide an
additional $9.985 million for this project. It is also important to
note that the Senate Defense Appropriations legislation includes $10
million for this project.
This project will also increase the survivability of America's
soldiers wounded on the battlefield, as well as civilians injured in
industrial and natural disasters. I strongly urge my colleagues to
support the DREAMS project as part of Fiscal Year 1999 Defense
Appropriations legislation.
Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman I rise in support of the fiscal year 1999
Defense Appropriations bill. This legislation provides essential
funding for our military. Chairman Young has done a remarkable job
addressing the most significant shortfalls confronting the armed
services.
Today we are hearing criticism of this legislation from two quarters,
the bean counters and the dreamers. The dreamers believe we live in an
age when the lion lays down with the lamb and we should be the lamb. It
is a beautiful vision, one we all wish was true. Unfortunately, the
reality is that it is not. If we follow this path we will soon become
the lamb chop and put our liberties at grave risk.
The bean counters keep telling us we can't afford to maintain our
military. The bean counters tell us we can't afford weapons
modernization, we can't afford to give our troops decent pay, we can't
afford to maintain our bases. They couldn't be more wrong.
We can't afford not to provide for our defense. America's history
tells us that the cost in lives of not being prepared is just too
great. We are failing in our duty as congressmen if we fail to provide
adequately for our military.
If there is any fault in this bill it is that we should do more. I
hope some of you will work with me to fix our budget and insure the
future security of our nation. The fact is we do not have sufficient
resources to maintain short term and long term readiness. Please join
me in supporting this excellent legislation and let's work together to
increase the resources available to our military in the future.
Ms. GRANGER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of this
Defense Appropriations package. And let me publicly and personally
thank Chairman Bill Young for his hard work on this important National
Defense bill.
It has been said that America will only remain the land of the free
if it remains the home of the brave.
Mr. Chairman, a few weeks ago I saw some of our brave young soldiers
who are defending American interests in faraway places like Bosnia.
After talking to them, I am reaffirmed in my conviction that our
soldiers and sailors are the best and the brightest in the world.
However, I believe that if we have the best troops, we should also
have the best training, equipment, and benefits. After all, no first
class nation can have a second class military.
Mr. Chairman, I do not believe that the budgetary constraints of last
year's balanced budget provide the kind of support that our troops
deserve and our interests demand.
When John F. Kennedy was President, 52 cents out of every Federal
dollar spent was devoted to National Defense. Today, that number is 16
cents out of every dollar.
Now before I go any further, let me be perfectly clear--I support
this bill even though I believe we must do much more to invest in our
National Security. But at least this bill stops the ten year decrease
in defense spending. And it does so in large part because of the
outstanding leadership of Chairman Young.
In particular, I am pleased that this bill funds important priorities
that are manufactured in my home district in Texas. Products like the
F-16, the V-22, and the Kiowa Warrior are indispensable to our national
security.
Mr. Chairman, these projects are important for my district. But they
are vital for our country.
Once, again, I want to thank the Chairman for his hard work on this
issue. And I look forward to working with all of my colleagues to

[[Page H5231]]

do even more in the coming years for our national defense.
And I would close by responding to a perennial question that we hear
so often during national security debates. We hear the question, ``can
we afford to pass this bill.'' Mr. Chairman, I would simply respond by
saying, ``we can't afford not to pass this bill.''
Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, the Republican led Appropriations Committee
has once again produced a substantially increased military spending
bill that reneges on the Balanced Budget Agreement of 1997. When all
the accounting schemes are pushed aside, we find that it spends $4.4
billion more for fiscal year 1999 then called for under the carefully
crafted budget outlay cap enacted by Congress less than a year ago.
This bill illustrates that the House Republican Leadership has chosen
to ignore the professional judgement of the CBO on how to account for
the spending in this bill. The result is to simply not count billions
in military spending that the CBO determined should be counted. I will
remind my Colleagues that just two-and-a-half years ago this same
Republican leadership went so far as to shut down the government over
its insistence that the President and the Congress use no other
spending blueprints than those made by the CBO.
Furthermore, this bill is filled with projects selected more based on
the district in which the money will be spent, rather than how the
product will be used by our fighting forces.
One pet project is $432 million added in this bill for seven C-130J
aircraft that were not even requested by the Pentagon. This continues
past practices of adding substantial sums for these planes that are
built in Georgia.
The unit cost of the C-130J is an alarming $60 million per plane.
This is higher than the $48 million cost for a modern, state of the art
F-15E fighter plane that is essential for our national security. Of the
reported 28 C-130J aircraft on order by the U.S. military, not one has
been delivered due to development and mechanical problems. I ask my
Colleagues how this program evolved from what was supposed to be a
routine upgrade to a major budget busting development effort. At a time
when it is incumbent upon Congress to deal responsibly with the budget
for our national defense, the addition of seven C-130J aircraft is a
frustrating and fiscally irresponsible maneuver to add pork to specific
congressional districts.
The recommended rule outlined for this year's Defense Appropriations
strikes a provision which provides $1.6 billion in emergency funding
for the Defense Department and the Intelligence Communities to handle
the Year 2000 (Y2K) date change. The Y2K issue is a national security
priority and should be addressed in this bill.
Similarly, the Department of Defense Appropriation measure provides
no funding for the U.S. military role in Bosnia and ignores the
Administration's request of $1.9 billion.
In this bill, the Republican Leadership has reneged on its own budget
policies and has increased defense spending nearly $4.4 billion more
than the total specified for 1999 under the Balanced Budget Act.
Proponents of this bill apparently believe that our military is
underfunded and unprepared to meet the challenges of the 21st Century.
However, they should know that the President's defense budget is capped
by the Balanced Budget Act most of them voted for less than a year ago.
Members knew voting for the agreement meant there would be a continued
reduction in defense spending through 2002.
In addition to the $4.4 billion, the $1.6 billion for the Y2K
computer problem and the $1.9 billion for Bosnia, this total translates
into a measure that is nearly $8 billion over the 1997 Balanced Budget
Agreement.
Proponents of this bill argue that a quarter of a trillion dollars of
defense spending is just not enough, I disagree. This military budget
is already much too high. The current level is approximately 82 percent
of what was spent during the Cold War. Now it is appropriate to have a
significantly lower budget with the global threat so much smaller. I
will point out that Iran's military budget is less than $5 billion. The
new government in India recently raised its military budget 14
percent--to all of $9.9 billion. Moreover, the United States spends
more than twice as much on the military as the next six or eight likely
adversaries (China, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, North Korea and
Cuba combined).
Even though the Cold War is over, there are still massive amounts of
wasteful, inefficient and totally unnecessary military spending that
should be eliminated first before consideration is given to additional
funding. We still see reports of the Pentagon's wasteful inefficient
spending. For instance: the Pentagon is still paying $75 for 57-cent
screws and $38,000 for $1,500 worth of aircraft springs and the
military has far more infrastructure than it needs. Even after
completion of several rounds of base closures, the Pentagon calculates
that it still has a 23 percent excess base capacity, draining off
billions in unnecessary expenditures.
Beyond the dramatic waste on common sense items is the loss of funds
down the drain on the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO)
programs. Such programs are proven failures that are pegged for
billions of dollars more than requested in this bill. Furthermore, four
more New Generation Nuclear Attack Submarines that carry the D-5
missiles are appropriated. This represents yet another $10 billion
expenditure towards no justified positive purpose.
The numerous programs in this bill raise many questions. The problem
is that the Department of Defense is not being held accountable by the
Congress or the Administration. Every new mission explodes into
programs that cost billions of dollars. Instead of inventing new
missions, we should focus on the basics.
As our economy is booming and democracy spreads globally, Congress
should look to advance resources in people's programs. I support a
strong, efficient and prepared military force, but there is still much
work to be done in cutting wasteful and unnecessary defense spending.
We should invest in our children through adequate health care and
education, prepare for the baby boomers retirement by protecting the
solvency of the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds, provide
affordable housing for low-income persons and the elderly and protect
our earth's natural resources. I urge my Colleagues to oppose this
bill.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R.
4103, the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year
1999. I want to commend my colleague, the gentleman from Florida,
Chairman Bill Young, for all his hard work on this bill. He has made
tough decisions in order to provide funding for our armed forces and
for the equipment they need to protect our Nation. I also want commend
the staff of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee who assisted
Chairman Young in putting this legislation together.
According to both the Defense authorizing and appropriations
committees, spending on defense has decreased for the 14th straight
year, in real terms. Despite the end of the cold war earlier this
decade, we still find American troops deployed across the globe, from
Eastern Europe to Asia to Africa. In fact, I was recently told by one
Army officer that there has been a 300 percent increase in deployments
at the same time there has been a 40 percent shrinkage in the size of
the Army. As a result, troops are deployed longer, maintenance and
repair work is delayed, and research and development initiatives are
taking a substantial hit.
American companies are learning to do more with less, and our
military has become more cost-efficient as well. However, there is a
point at which we can only do less with less. If the President keeps
committing our troops to peacekeeping missions overseas, and continues
to freeze funding for the Department of Defense, we could begin to
compromise the safety and readiness of our armed forces.
When the President sends our military overseas, money is diverted
from other important initiatives, including research and development.
As we try to prepare and equip our troops for the battlefields of the
future, countless engineers are working in government labs and research
facilities to develop the weapons, the ammunition, the vehicles and the
technology our armed forces need to defend the United States. The
military's research and development is critical to keeping our men and
women in uniform safe and well-equipped wherever they serve, whether
home or abroad.
Further compromising the military's, and especially the Army's,
ability to provide our troops with the tools they need on the
battlefield are the cuts proposed under the Quadrennial Defense Review,
or QDR. These QDR cuts threaten the very fabric of our research and
defense infrastructure. Not only will they decimate the current corps
of engineers working on sensitive mission-critical projects, they also
hamper the Army's ability to recruit and train the future engineering
``brain trust'' needed to help develop the next generations of military
hardware and equipment.

If these QDR cuts are implemented, it would have a detrimental effect
on mission-critical projects such as the Crusader field Artillery
System. This reach and development effort will provide the Army of the
future with much-needed heavy artillery support. I am pleased that the
Committee has provided full funding for this program which is located
at Picatinny Arsenal in my district.
The Crusader system, which will consist of both a self-propelled,
fully automated 155m Howitzer and a resupply vehicle, will provide
efficient, accurate and reliable fire support to our troops on the
battlefield. Unlike the existing Paladin tank, the Crusader will have a
fully-automated loading capability. The Crusader will be faster than
the Paladin, and its guns are more accurate at a much farther distance.
In recent tests, the Crusader's gun was

[[Page H5232]]

able to fire an impressive 10 rounds per minute for three to six
minutes, without malfunctioning. And, furthermore, less military
personnel are needed to man the Crusader.
I am especially pleased because much of the research and development
work on the Crusader project is being done in the laboratories of
Picatinny Arsenal in the 11th Congressional District. Since the
Revolutionary War, Picatinny has been providing our armed forces with
ammunition. Today, they may no longer manufacture conventional
ammunition, but the dedicated and innovative workforce at Picatinny are
developing other tools to meet the munition and firepower needs for
both Army XXI and the Army After Next. From ``smart ammunitions'' to
the soldiers' hand-held weapon of the future, Picatinny has been
recognized and awarded for their research and development efforts and
contributions to our military capabilities. I was recently told that
Picatinny is responsible for 1400 of the 3400 weapons systems developed
under TACOM, the Tank Automotive And Armaments Command which oversees
much of the Army's research and development initiatives.
Another important research and development project funded in this
bill is the soldiers' weapon of the future, the Objective Individual
Combat Weapon, or OICW. The lightweight OICW can, in the near future,
replace three existing, divergent weapons currently in use by the
military: M16A2 rifles, M4 carbines and M203 grenade launchers. It will
have the ability to accurately shoot both hidden and moving targets.
With the flip of a switch, soldiers will be able to change from the
munitions-firing weapon to a conventional rifle. The two weapons can be
separated, and the lower barrel can be used as a stand-alone gun. This
work is done at Picatinny using the most advanced techniques and
technologies, hence these dollars will continue this development.
Mr. Chairman, every day our men and women in uniform put their lives
on the line to defend us. They deserve to have the tools they need to
protect us, and should be compensated for their work. We cannot forget
our debt to them, and we must work to provide them with the supply they
need to do their jobs. We owe them nothing less.
Those in the civilian work force at Picatinny, likewise, do their
part to keep our young men and women safe wherever they are stationed,
where wars may be fought, with the best equipment and technology
possible.
Today we vote to provide funds, support our soldiers and all those
who prepare and equip them. An affirmative vote assures that this
critical work continues.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule and the amendments printed in House Report 105-
996 are adopted.
During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chair may accord
priority in recognition to a Member offering an amendment that he has
printed in the designated place in the Congressional Record. Those
amendments will be considered read.
Consideration of Section 8106 shall not exceed 1 hour. 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 Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That
the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 1999, for military functions
administered by the Department of Defense, and for other
purposes, namely:

TITLE I

MILITARY PERSONNEL

Military Personnel, Army

For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence,
interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station
travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational
movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between
permanent duty stations, for members of the Army on active
duty (except members of reserve components provided for
elsewhere), cadets, and aviation cadets; and for payments
pursuant to section 156 of Public Law 97-377, as amended (42
U.S.C. 402 note), to section 229(b) of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 429(b)), and to the Department of Defense
Military Retirement Fund; $20,908,851,000.

Military Personnel, Navy

For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence,
interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station
travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational
movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between
permanent duty stations, for members of the Navy on active
duty (except members of the Reserve provided for elsewhere),
midshipmen, and aviation cadets; and for payments pursuant to
section 156 of Public Law 97-377, as amended (42 U.S.C. 402
note), to section 229(b) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 429(b)), and to the Department of Defense Military
Retirement Fund; $16,560,253,000.

Military Personnel, Marine Corps

For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence,
interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station
travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational
movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between
permanent duty stations, for members of the Marine Corps on
active duty (except members of the Reserve provided for
elsewhere); and for payments pursuant to section 156 of
Public Law 97-377, as amended (42 U.S.C. 402 note), to
section 229(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 429(b)),
and to the Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund;
$6,241,189,000.

Military Personnel, Air Force

For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence,
interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station
travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational
movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between
permanent duty stations, for members of the Air Force on
active duty (except members of reserve components provided
for elsewhere), cadets, and aviation cadets; and for payments
pursuant to section 156 of Public Law 97-377, as amended (42
U.S.C. 402 note), to section 229(b) of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 429(b)), and to the Department of Defense
Military Retirement Fund; $17,201,583,000.

Reserve Personnel, Army

For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Army
Reserve on active duty under sections 10211, 10302, and 3038
of title 10, United States Code, or while serving on active
duty under section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code,
in connection with performing duty specified in section
12310(a) of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing
reserve training, or while performing drills or equivalent
duty or other duty, and for members of the Reserve Officers'
Training Corps, and expenses authorized by section 16131 of
title 10, United States Code; and for payments to the
Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund;
$2,171,675,000.

Reserve Personnel, Navy

For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Navy
Reserve on active duty under section 10211 of title 10,
United States Code, or while serving on active duty under
section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code, in
connection with performing duty specified in section 12310(a)
of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing reserve
training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty, and
for members of the Reserve Officers' Training Corps, and
expenses authorized by section 16131 of title 10, United
States Code; and for payments to the Department of Defense
Military Retirement Fund; $1,427,979,000.

Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps

For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Marine
Corps Reserve on active duty under section 10211 of title 10,
United States Code, or while serving on active duty under
section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code, in
connection with performing duty specified in section 12310(a)
of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing reserve
training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty, and
for members of the Marine Corps platoon leaders class, and
expenses authorized by section 16131 of title 10, United
States Code; and for payments to the Department of Defense
Military Retirement Fund; $403,513,000.

Reserve Personnel, Air Force

For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Air Force
Reserve on active duty under sections 10211, 10305, and 8038
of title 10, United States Code, or while serving on active
duty under section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code,
in connection with performing duty specified in section
12310(a) of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing
reserve training, or while performing drills or equivalent
duty or other duty, and for members of the Air Reserve
Officers' Training Corps, and expenses authorized by section
16131 of title 10, United States Code; and for payments to
the Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund;
$850,576,000.

National Guard Personnel, Army

For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Army
National Guard while on duty under section 10211, 10302, or
12402 of title 10 or section 708 of title 32, United States
Code, or while serving on duty under section 12301(d) of
title 10 or section 502(f) of title 32, United States Code,
in connection with performing duty specified in section
12310(a) of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing
training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty or
other duty, and expenses authorized by section 16131 of title
10, United States Code; and for

[[Page H5233]]

payments to the Department of Defense Military Retirement
Fund; $3,413,195,000.

National Guard Personnel, Air Force

For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Air
National Guard on duty under section 10211, 10305, or 12402
of title 10 or section 708 of title 32, United States Code,
or while serving on duty under section 12301(d) of title 10
or section 502(f) of title 32, United States Code, in
connection with performing duty specified in section 12310(a)
of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing
training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty or
other duty, and expenses authorized by section 16131 of title
10, United States Code; and for payments to the Department of
Defense Military Retirement Fund; $1,372,997,000.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that the remainder of title I be considered as read,
printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Florida?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to title I?
There being no amendments, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

TITLE II

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

Operation and Maintenance, Army

(including transfer of funds)

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of the Army, as authorized by law;
and not to exceed $11,437,000 can be used for emergencies and
extraordinary expenses, to be expended on the approval or
authority of the Secretary of the Army, and payments may be
made on his certificate of necessity for confidential
military purposes; $16,936,503,000 and, in addition,
$50,000,000 shall be derived by transfer from the National
Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund: Provided, That of the
funds appropriated in this paragraph, $596,803,000 shall not
be obligated or expended until authorized by law.

Operation and Maintenance, Navy

(including transfer of funds)

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of the Navy and the Marine Corps,
as authorized by law; and not to exceed $5,360,000 can be
used for emergencies and extraordinary expenses, to be
expended on the approval or authority of the Secretary of the
Navy, and payments may be made on his certificate of
necessity for confidential military purposes; $21,638,999,000
and, in addition, $50,000,000 shall be derived by transfer
from the National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund.

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of the Marine Corps, as authorized
by law; $2,585,118,000: Provided, That of the funds
appropriated in this paragraph, $45,415,000 shall not be
obligated or expended until authorized by law.

Operation and Maintenance, Air Force

(including transfer of funds)

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of the Air Force, as authorized by
law; and not to exceed $7,968,000 can be used for emergencies
and extraordinary expenses, to be expended on the approval or
authority of the Secretary of the Air Force, and payments may
be made on his certificate of necessity for confidential
military purposes; $19,024,233,000 and, in addition,
$50,000,000 shall be derived by transfer from the National
Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund: Provided, That of the
funds appropriated in this paragraph, $208,125,000 shall not
be obligated or expended until authorized by law.

Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of activities and agencies of the
Department of Defense (other than the military departments),
as authorized by law; $10,804,542,000, of which not to exceed
$25,000,000 may be available for the CINC initiative fund
account; and of which not to exceed $29,000,000 can be used
for emergencies and extraordinary expenses, to be expended on
the approval or authority of the Secretary of Defense, and
payments may be made on his certificate of necessity for
confidential military purposes: Provided, That of the funds
appropriated in this paragraph, $450,326,000 shall not be
obligated or expended until authorized by law.

Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance, including training, organization,
and administration, of the Army Reserve; repair of facilities
and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles; travel and
transportation; care of the dead; recruiting; procurement of
services, supplies, and equipment; and communications;
$1,201,222,000: Provided, That of the funds appropriated in
this paragraph, $3,600,000 shall not be obligated or expended
until authorized by law.

Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance, including training, organization,
and administration, of the Navy Reserve; repair of facilities
and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles; travel and
transportation; care of the dead; recruiting; procurement of
services, supplies, and equipment; and communications;
$949,039,000: Provided, That of the funds appropriated in
this paragraph, $400,000 shall not be obligated or expended
until authorized by law.

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance, including training, organization,
and administration, of the Marine Corps Reserve; repair of
facilities and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles;
travel and transportation; care of the dead; recruiting;
procurement of services, supplies, and equipment; and
communications; $119,093,000: Provided, That of the funds
appropriated in this paragraph, $2,100,000 shall not be
obligated or expended until authorized by law.

Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance, including training, organization,
and administration, of the Air Force Reserve; repair of
facilities and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles;
travel and transportation; care of the dead; recruiting;
procurement of services, supplies, and equipment; and
communications; $1,735,996,000.

Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard

For expenses of training, organizing, and administering the
Army National Guard, including medical and hospital treatment
and related expenses in non-Federal hospitals; maintenance,
operation, and repairs to structures and facilities; hire of
passenger motor vehicles; personnel services in the National
Guard Bureau; travel expenses (other than mileage), as
authorized by law for Army personnel on active duty, for Army
National Guard division, regimental, and battalion commanders
while inspecting units in compliance with National Guard
Bureau regulations when specifically authorized by the Chief,
National Guard Bureau; supplying and equipping the Army
National Guard as authorized by law; and expenses of repair,
modification, maintenance, and issue of supplies and
equipment (including aircraft); $2,570,315,000: Provided,
That not later than March 15, 1999, the Director of the Army
National Guard shall provide a report to the congressional
defense committees identifying the allocation, by
installation and activity, of all base operations funds
appropriated under this heading: Provided further, That of
the funds appropriated in this paragraph, $105,500,000 shall
not be obligated or expended until authorized by law.

Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard

For operation and maintenance of the Air National Guard,
including medical and hospital treatment and related expenses
in non-Federal hospitals; maintenance, operation, repair, and
other necessary expenses of facilities for the training and
administration of the Air National Guard, including repair of
facilities, maintenance, operation, and modification of
aircraft; transportation of things, hire of passenger motor
vehicles; supplies, materials, and equipment, as authorized
by law for the Air National Guard; and expenses incident to
the maintenance and use of supplies, materials, and
equipment, including such as may be furnished from stocks
under the control of agencies of the Department of Defense;
travel expenses (other than mileage) on the same basis as
authorized by law for Air National Guard personnel on active
Federal duty, for Air National Guard commanders while
inspecting units in compliance with National Guard Bureau
regulations when specifically authorized by the Chief,
National Guard Bureau; $3,075,233,000.

Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund

(including transfer of funds)

For expenses directly relating to Overseas Contingency
Operations by United States military forces; $746,900,000:
Provided, That the Secretary of Defense may transfer these
funds only to operation and maintenance accounts within this
title, to the Defense Health Program, to procurement
accounts, and to working capital funds: Provided further,
That the funds transferred shall be merged with and shall be
available for the same purposes and for the same time period,
as the appropriation to which transferred: Provided further,
That the transfer authority provided in this paragraph is in
addition to any other transfer authority contained elsewhere
in this Act.

United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

For salaries and expenses necessary for the United States
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces; $7,324,000, of which
not to exceed $2,500 can be used for official representation
purposes.

Environmental Restoration, Army

(including transfer of funds)

For the Department of the Army, $342,640,000, to remain
available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of
the Army shall, upon determining that such

[[Page H5234]]

funds are required for environmental restoration, reduction
and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings
and debris of the Department of the Army, or for similar
purposes, transfer the funds made available by this
appropriation to other appropriations made available to the
Department of the Army, to be merged with and to be available
for the same purposes and for the same time period as the
appropriations to which transferred: Provided further, That
upon a determination that all or part of the funds
transferred from this appropriation are not necessary for the
purposes provided herein, such amounts may be transferred
back to this appropriation.

Environmental Restoration, Navy

(including transfer of funds)

For the Department of the Navy, $281,600,000, to remain
available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of
the Navy shall, upon determining that such funds are required
for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of
hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris of
the Department of the Navy, or for similar purposes, transfer
the funds made available by this appropriation to other
appropriations made available to the Department of the Navy,
to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes
and for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that
all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation.

Environmental Restoration, Air Force

(including transfer of funds)

For the Department of the Air Force, $379,100,000, to
remain available until transferred: Provided, That the
Secretary of the Air Force shall, upon determining that such
funds are required for environmental restoration, reduction
and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings
and debris of the Department of the Air Force, or for similar
purposes, transfer the funds made available by this
appropriation to other appropriations made available to the
Department of the Air Force, to be merged with and to be
available for the same purposes and for the same time period
as the appropriations to which transferred: Provided further,
That upon a determination that all or part of the funds
transferred from this appropriation are not necessary for the
purposes provided herein, such amounts may be transferred
back to this appropriation.

Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide

(including transfer of funds)

For the Department of Defense, $26,091,000, to remain
available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of
Defense shall, upon determining that such funds are required
for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of
hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris of
the Department of Defense, or for similar purposes, transfer
the funds made available by this appropriation to other
appropriations made available to the Department of Defense,
to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes
and for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that
all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation.

Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites

(including transfer of funds)

For the Department of the Army, $195,000,000, to remain
available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of
the Army shall, upon determining that such funds are required
for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of
hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris at
sites formerly used by the Department of Defense, transfer
the funds made available by this appropriation to other
appropriations made available to the Department of the Army,
to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes
and for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that
all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation.

Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid

For expenses relating to the Overseas Humanitarian,
Disaster, and Civic Aid programs of the Department of Defense
(consisting of the programs provided under sections 401, 402,
404, 2547, and 2551 of title 10, United States Code);
$56,111,000, to remain available until September 30, 2000:
Provided, That of the funds appropriated in this paragraph,
$8,800,000 shall not be obligated or expended until
authorized by law.

Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction

For assistance to the republics of the former Soviet Union,
including assistance provided by contract or by grants, for
facilitating the elimination and the safe and secure
transportation and storage of nuclear, chemical and other
weapons; for establishing programs to prevent the
proliferation of weapons, weapons components, and weapon-
related technology and expertise; for programs relating to
the training and support of defense and military personnel
for demilitarization and protection of weapons, weapons
components and weapons technology and expertise;
$417,400,000, to remain available until September 30, 2001.

Quality of Life Enhancements, Defense

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, resulting from
unfunded shortfalls in the repair and maintenance of real
property of the Department of Defense (including military
housing and barracks); $850,000,000, for the maintenance of
real property of the Department of Defense (including minor
construction and major maintenance and repair), which shall
remain available for obligation until September 30, 2000, as
follows:
Army, $219,688,000;
Navy, $244,507,000;
Marine Corps, $48,901,000;
Air Force, $194,926,000;
Army Reserve, $47,579,000;
Navy Reserve, $21,055,000;
Marine Corps Reserve, $7,600,000;
Air Force Reserve, $9,871,000;
Army National Guard, $37,535,000; and
Air National Guard, $18,338,000:
Provided, That none of the funds appropriated in this
paragraph shall be obligated or expended until authorized by
law.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that the remainder of title II be considered as read,
printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Florida?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to title II?
There being no amendments, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

TITLE III

PROCUREMENT

Aircraft Procurement, Army

For construction, procurement, production, modification,
and modernization of aircraft, equipment, including ordnance,
ground handling equipment, spare parts, and accessories
therefor; specialized equipment and training devices;
expansion of public and private plants, including the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes;
$1,400,338,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2001.

Missile Procurement, Army

For construction, procurement, production, modification,
and modernization of missiles, equipment, including ordnance,
ground handling equipment, spare parts, and accessories
therefor; specialized equipment and training devices;
expansion of public and private plants, including the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes;
$1,140,623,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2001.

Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army

For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of weapons and tracked combat vehicles, equipment, including
ordnance, spare parts, and accessories therefor; specialized
equipment and training devices; expansion of public and
private plants, including the land necessary therefor, for
the foregoing purposes, and such lands and interests therein,
may be acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to
approval of title; and procurement and installation of
equipment, appliances, and machine tools in public and
private plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-
owned equipment layaway; and other expenses necessary for the
foregoing purposes; $1,513,540,000, to remain available for
obligation until September 30, 2001: Provided, That of the
funds appropriated in this paragraph, $5,902,000 shall not be
obligated or expended until authorized by law.

Procurement of Ammunition, Army

For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of ammunition, and accessories therefor; specialized
equipment and training devices; expansion of public and
private plants, including ammunition facilities authorized by
section 2854 of title 10, United States Code, and the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes;
$1,099,155,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2001: Provided, That of the funds appropriated
in this paragraph, $45,700,000 shall not be obligated or
expended until authorized by law.

[[Page H5235]]

Other Procurement, Army

For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of vehicles, including tactical, support, and non-tracked
combat vehicles; the purchase of not to exceed 37 passenger
motor vehicles for replacement only; and the purchase of 54
vehicles required for physical security of personnel,
notwithstanding price limitations applicable to passenger
vehicles but not to exceed $230,000 per vehicle;
communications and electronic equipment; other support
equipment; spare parts, ordnance, and accessories therefor;
specialized equipment and training devices; expansion of
public and private plants, including the land necessary
therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such lands and
interests therein, may be acquired, and construction
prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; and
procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, and
machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant and
Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and other
expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes;
$3,101,130,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2001.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill through page 23, line
7, be considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment
at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Florida?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Aircraft Procurement, Navy

For construction, procurement, production, modification,
and modernization of aircraft, equipment, including ordnance,
spare parts, and accessories therefor; specialized equipment;
expansion of public and private plants, including the land
necessary therefor, and such lands and interests therein, may
be acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to
approval of title; and procurement and installation of
equipment, appliances, and machine tools in public and
private plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-
owned equipment layaway; $7,599,968,000, to remain available
for obligation until September 30, 2001: Provided, That of
the funds appropriated in this paragraph, $179,121,000 shall
not be obligated or expended until authorized by law.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I rise at this point to discuss a ludicrous priority
which I find in this bill, and let me put it in context.
Last year, even though the Speaker described our intelligence budget
as being inadequate, nonetheless, a Republican-controlled Congress cut
the intelligence budget further, to a lower point than the level that
the Speaker described as being inadequate.
The Congress did that for a number of reasons. One of those reasons
was to pay for an additional destroyer that the majority leader in the
Senate wanted built in his State. And another reason was to fund a
number of C-130s built in the State of Georgia, a matter of some
interest to the Speaker.
This year, the top priority request of the Navy was to replace its
aging F-14 airplanes with the next generation F-18A, E and F aircraft.
Instead, this bill cut three of those aircraft in order to provide room
for seven new C-130Js which the Pentagon did not ask for. Those C-130s
happen to be built in the State of Georgia.
Mr. Chairman, the issue is not whether the C-130s, which would be
going to various National Guard units by and large all around the
country, the issue is not whether those planes are good planes. They
are. The issue is not whether or not they would be used for good
missions. They would be. The issue is whether or not giving the
National Guard those seven additional planes, which were built by the
contractor before anybody even asked them to build them, the issue is
whether those planes are the best use of scarce taxpayers' dollars when
we have an obligation to try to make certain that we spend those
dollars in a way which will provide the greatest personal security for
our military fighting personnel.

{time} 1900

If this bill were responsible, it would use $35 million of the money
that was used for those 7 C-130s, it would use $35 million to modernize
some existing C-130s and give those to the National Guard units around
the country, and then it would use the remaining dollars to provide the
purchase of the replacements for the F-14s that the Pentagon asked for
in the first place.
Now, replacing the F-14A is the Navy's number one priority for a very
good reason. The F-14 has been involved in 138 class A flight problems
in the last decade. Since 1991, 32 F-14s have gone down.
In my judgment, our front line flyers who use those planes are at
risk. Even if we provided all of the funds that the Navy asked for for
this plane, the first of these planes would not actually show up on
carrier decks until the year 2002. So even with those funds, the Navy
will need to live with their old F-14As for another 4 to 10 years
minimum.
As the Navy said in its presentation, denying these three planes
will, ``have a direct negative impact on the warfighters in the fleet,
hurting the fleet's operational capability, safety, readiness and
maintainability.''
Now, I had intended to offer an amendment today which would have
eliminated these additional C-130s and moved that money back where it
ought to be so that we can replace these aged F-14s.
The problem is that, under the rules, for technical reasons, that
amendment would not be in order. And so I am not, under the rules of
the House, in a position where I can offer that amendment and still
respect the rules of the House. I am not going to offer it. But I would
hope that the committee, when they go to conference, will recognize
that this is a mistake, this is not where our dollars ought to go if we
are going to do the best job possible of defending the physical
security of our military personnel.
We do not need more pork. We need more teeth. And it seems to me that
the committee has made a major mistake in putting the money where they
have. I would hope that the committee would change its judgment when it
goes to conference. I think that is the least that the Congress can do.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Wisconsin, distinguished ranking
member of the Committee on Appropriations, has raised an interesting
point about abuse in this process. And I want to talk about an abuse to
the American taxpayer that is a part of this bill.
When I do this, I absolve the chairman, distinguished Member from
Florida, and the ranking member, distinguished Member from
Pennsylvania, for the problem in this bill, because it is not of their
doing.
I had an opportunity to vote against the rule, and I did that because
it protects this provision that ought to be stricken here from a point
of order. I am referring to the transfer of 50 Navy ships, 50 Navy
ships. It is an opportunity to raise $637 million for the Defense
Department, and I am in favor of that additional expenditure.
However, ordinarily when those ships are transferred, sold, leased,
sold for a small amount of money, we are talking about 50 ships, $637
million, so my colleagues know we are not getting much money for those
ships, that money goes back to the Treasury.
What has happened in this instance, well, that is not happening. It
is, for example, going directly to DOD, not only bypassing the
authorizing committee, where we looked last year at some very
inappropriate transfers, inappropriate in that we were not getting the
money back for the Treasury that we ought to get, but we will not have
that opportunity unless the chairman has worked out something in a
colloquy which took place, I know, a few minutes ago between the
chairman of the Committee on International Relations and the chairman
of the Appropriations subcommittee. For anything that is worked out
there, I express my appreciation to the gentleman.
Let me tell you where these ships are going. One to Argentina, 3 to
Brazil, 2 to Chile, 2 to Mexico, 1 to the Philippines, 1 to Portugal, 2
to Spain, 10 to Taiwan, 1 to Venezuela. I will come back to a couple
more. Interestingly, one that is going to Spain is the Harlan County.
The Harlan County was that ship that went down to Port-au-Prince. It
ought to be bronzed as a recognition of the Clinton administration's
policy with respect to national security, because Members may remember
a few thugs on the docks in Port-au-Prince turned back the American
forces, not because of lack of courage of those forces, because they
were pulled back by the Pentagon at the direction of the
administration. That one ought to be bronzed.

[[Page H5236]]

But that is not really the point I want to make. What really is, I
think, very dangerous about this provision is that 14 ships are going
to Turkey and 11 are going to Greece. If you have not followed what is
going on in Cyprus lately, with both sides bringing high performance
aircraft, with the Greek Cypriots apparently about to bring in missiles
from Russia with Russian technicians, you would wonder why our two NATO
allies are behaving this way, and you certainly would wonder about
providing them more firepower.
Now, I noticed that one of those ships and perhaps as many as three
or four are Kidd class guided missile destroyers. This is not an
ancient piece of equipment. This is a very sophisticated set of
weaponry, very expensive. And I really do not think that the conduct of
Greece and Turkey, our two good NATO allies, justifies sending that
kind of firepower to them at this moment.
You can blame one side or the other and undoubtedly blame goes on
both sides, but for us to make this transfer at this time, bypassing
all the normal procedures, is not only bad for the taxpayer, it is a
reflection of the archaic and convoluted budget process we have around
here that is forcing us to do these end runs to put the resources where
we need to put them, but you are actually building a dangerous arms
race between Greece and Turkey. And that ought not happen.
If I had an opportunity to raise a point of order, if the rule did
not prevent me from doing that, I would do that.
I hope that the American news media and the American people are
looking at this situation and saying this is not only disgraceful, this
is not only abuse of the taxpayers funds, this is not only abuse of the
process around here, this is feeding a dangerous arms race between
Greece and Turkey.
I thank my colleagues for listening. I regret the fact that we are
doing this. It is outrageous.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BEREUTER. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that I absolutely,
totally agree with what the gentleman has just said. That is why I
listed this as one of my concerns in the supplemental views that I
filed with this bill.
Under the normal budget process, proceeds from the sale of an asset
are not allowed to be spent again by an agency. They are credited to
the general fund of the Treasury under normal circumstances to buy down
the national debt. I think it is an incredibly ill-advised action to
provide these ships to Turkey and Greece, given what is happening in
the Aegean. I think it sends exactly the wrong signal to both sides.
I thank the gentleman for raising the point.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
I take the floor to say that more often than not I agree with my good
friend, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter). But when the
gentleman stands up and talks about this outrageous action, I just have
to question him on that.
We are in a period of time in our government when things are
changing. Our military budget today is underfunded by probably $30 or
$40 billion a year. Not over 5 years or 10 years, $30 or $40 billion a
year. And there are those of us in this Chamber right now that are
doing everything we can to find every nickel we can to try to keep our
military preparedness such that we can defend the strategic interests
of this country around the world.
Now I heard my good friend, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr.
Bereuter) saying this is an outrageous situation. But he is criticizing
this because the Treasury is not going to get the money. The DOD is
going to get the money, the defense, the Pentagon.
That is the whole idea behind this thing, Mr. Chairman. Yes, they are
going to get it. And we are going to keep it that way. We are going to
keep trying to build it up so that we can, when we are sending young
men and women into harm's way, God forbid that that should happen, that
they have the best state-of-the-art equipment that money can buy.
Let me tell my colleagues something else. It seems to me the list of
countries that Mr. Bereuter just read off, seems to me they are all
friends of ours. They are all NATO allies or other friends in the
Western Hemisphere or in the Asian-Pacific area.
Now, what is wrong with selling our friends this kind of military
equipment? Would he rather have them buy it from China or would he
rather have them buy it from Russia? We have enough problems now with
people buying them from Russia. This is expendable equipment that we do
not need, and we need to sell it to our friends and we need to maintain
that money in the defense budget.
Now, I do not know what all this argument is about. I know we have
had a colloquy with my good friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Gilman) and with others, but the point is that time is of the essence
here. And maybe there will be a colloquy with the chairman of the
Committee on International Relations, who is an outstanding leader in
this body, and maybe we will get some kind of understanding. But let us
not try to scuttle this. We need this right now.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SOLOMON. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I do not know if the gentleman heard this
when I first started my remarks, but I said I am perfectly willing to
put an additional $600- to $700 million in the Defense Department
appropriations. I am for that. I admitted that right up front.
Mr. SOLOMON. Reclaiming my time, we tried and we could not get it. A
number of us who were going to vote against the budget because the caps
are so low on defense spending now, we were going to do something that
we never do. We were going to go against our party. We could not get
it.
Finally we got a commitment from the Speaker that when we do go to
conference that the Speaker will stick up for us and will get us money
beyond the scope, beyond what we are talking in the Senate version,
beyond what was offered in the House version. We cannot even get $200
million more, much less $600 million more.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield,
I referred to the arcane and unfortunate procedures we have to go
through with the budget process around here, I would say to the
gentleman. But the gentleman remembers, as a former member of the
Committee on International Relations, we have an opportunity to look at
those sales ordinarily. And last year we had an opportunity to look at
some proposed transfers, and we dramatically increased the funds coming
to our Treasury as a result of our review. The Navy was underpricing
them. That was good for the taxpayers.
I would ask the gentleman, does he think it is good to send either to
Greece or Turkey Kidd class guided missile destroyers at this stage?
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Chairman, yes, I do. I think we need a strong
foreign policy that will say to two of the strongest allies that we
have had over the history of this Nation, and that includes Turkey and
that includes Greece, although Greece has sometimes been under some
kind of Communist leadership with a leader that had some very nasty
things to say about America, but by and large they are good allies. If
we have a foreign policy, if we have a strong foreign policy, we have
nothing to worry about with those two allies.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman recalls how I stand side by
side with him in the North Atlantic Assembly and support Greece and
Turkey, and sometimes we protect Turkey alone among some of those
charges, the gentleman and I.
Mr. SOLOMON. That is correct.
Mr. BEREUTER. And I think they are tremendous allies. Unfortunately,
they seem to be at each other's necks too much. That is not good for
the alliance. So my concerns are what we are doing at the immediate
point, when we have this high degree of intense concern in the Aegean,
particularly centered around Cyprus.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Chairman, I respect the gentleman.
Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
I first of all I want to commend the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Solomon) for his rigorous and correct defense of an underfunded defense
bill.

[[Page H5237]]

What bothers me more than anything is the manner in which this
occurred. The Committee on International Relations, every year since I
have been here, which has been going on 6 years, will be presented with
a petition from the Department of the Navy in the form of a bill for
the sale or exchange or gift of ships. And about four years ago there
was a hearing going on and somebody came from the Department of the
Navy with a list of 10 ships that they were going to give away. And I
asked the Navy, I said, have you ever thought about selling or leasing
these ships? And they said, well, you know, that is a pretty good idea.

{time} 1915

So the Navy pulled the bill. A couple months later, they were back
before the Committee on International Relations, this time with a bill
that would sell or lease 10 ships with a net to the American people of
$485 million. That provision that occurred every year, I believe, in
either the State Department authorization or the foreign ops bill
became known as the Manzullo amendment.
The committee members would get together. They would take a look at
these excess ships. Affix a value to them and show that as an
accounting function in State Department authorization.
Though it is laudable that money be used to enhance our military,
what bothers me is our committee was not allowed to have two hearings.
The first hearing was on the advisability and the actual accounting
methods and appraisal methods of the ships. The second hearing was on
the advisability of the countries to whom they were sold under the
present circumstances.
The government is selling 48 ships at an average price of $13
million. That seems to be an awful, terrible bargain. I do not know
what procedure can be done at this point, but if the Navy is listening,
I am going to be demanding in some way or the other tomorrow a full and
complete accounting and an appraisal as to each and every ship so we
can demonstrate to the American people whether or not these ships are
being appraised.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MANZULLO. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I recently returned from Greece. And I
met with the Prime Minister from Greece, and I also met with the
Defense Minister. They bought German tanks. They have an alliance with
Germany. It goes beyond what I think the gentleman is talking about,
because, for us to sell U.S. product, for us to sell F-15s and the
Strike Eagles to Greece and even F-18s, we had to throw into the
package not only kits, but Corvettes as well, or they are going to buy
other product.
So when you are talking about taxpayers, we are going to have people
in St. Louis working because we are going to sell extra aircraft. Those
aircraft that we can buy cheaper, the U.S. military is going to benefit
from that.
I am not sure about the process with the gentleman's committee, but I
am just letting him know that the reasons for it is, if we can have
cheaper airplanes for our services and provide, I am a little different
on the issue, I want the Turks out of Northern Cyprus. They invaded in
1974, and they ought to get their rear ends out, and the Greeks ought
to kick them out if they do not move.
Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, if I can reclaim my time, the gentleman
may be very well correct and probably is as to the reason these ships
were thrown in; but at the minimum, the Committee on International
Relations deserve notice and opportunity to have, at the minimum, a
joint hearing on this issue.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

Weapons Procurement, Navy

For construction, procurement, production, modification,
and modernization of missiles, torpedoes, other weapons, and
related support equipment including spare parts, and
accessories therefor; expansion of public and private plants,
including the land necessary therefor, and such lands and
interests therein, may be acquired, and construction
prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; and
procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, and
machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant and
Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway;
$1,191,219,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2001.

Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps

For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of ammunition, and accessories therefor; specialized
equipment and training devices; expansion of public and
private plants, including ammunition facilities authorized by
section 2854 of title 10, United States Code, and the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes;
$473,803,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2001: Provided, That of the funds appropriated
in this paragraph, $21,835,000 shall not be obligated or
expended until authorized by law.

Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy

For expenses necessary for the construction, acquisition,
or conversion of vessels as authorized by law, including
armor and armament thereof, plant equipment, appliances, and
machine tools and installation thereof in public and private
plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned
equipment layaway; procurement of critical, long leadtime
components and designs for vessels to be constructed or
converted in the future; and expansion of public and private
plants, including land necessary therefor, and such lands and
interests therein, may be acquired, and construction
prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
$5,973,452,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2003: Provided, That additional obligations may
be incurred after September 30, 2003, for engineering
services, tests, evaluations, and other such budgeted work
that must be performed in the final stage of ship
construction: Provided further, That none of the funds
provided under this heading for the construction or
conversion of any naval vessel to be constructed in shipyards
in the United States shall be expended in foreign facilities
for the construction of major components of such vessel:
Provided further, That none of the funds provided under this
heading shall be used for the construction of any naval
vessel in foreign shipyards.

Other Procurement, Navy

For procurement, production, and modernization of support
equipment and materials not otherwise provided for, Navy
ordnance (except ordnance for new aircraft, new ships, and
ships authorized for conversion); the purchase of not to
exceed 246 passenger motor vehicles for replacement only; and
the purchase of one vehicle required for physical security of
personnel, notwithstanding price limitations applicable to
passenger vehicles but not to exceed $225,000 per vehicle;
expansion of public and private plants, including the land
necessary therefor, and such lands and interests therein, may
be acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to
approval of title; and procurement and installation of
equipment, appliances, and machine tools in public and
private plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-
owned equipment layaway; $3,990,553,000, to remain available
for obligation until September 30, 2001: Provided, That of
the funds appropriated in this paragraph, $21,046,000 shall
not be obligated or expended until authorized by law.

Procurement, Marine Corps

For expenses necessary for the procurement, manufacture,
and modification of missiles, armament, military equipment,
spare parts, and accessories therefor; plant equipment,
appliances, and machine tools, and installation thereof in
public and private plants; reserve plant and Government and
contractor-owned equipment layaway; vehicles for the Marine
Corps, including the purchase of not to exceed 37 passenger
motor vehicles for replacement only; and expansion of public
and private plants, including land necessary therefor, and
such lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
$812,618,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2001: Provided, That of the funds appropriated
in this paragraph, $120,750,000 shall not be obligated or
expended until authorized by law.

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force

For construction, procurement, and modification of aircraft
and equipment, including armor and armament, specialized
ground handling equipment, and training devices, spare parts,
and accessories therefor; specialized equipment; expansion of
public and private plants, Government-owned equipment and
installation thereof in such plants, erection of structures,
and acquisition of land, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned equipment
layaway; and other expenses necessary for the foregoing
purposes including rents and transportation of things;
$8,384,735,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2001: Provided, That of the funds appropriated
in this paragraph, $165,658,000 shall not be obligated or
expended until authorized by law.

Missile Procurement, Air Force

For construction, procurement, and modification of
missiles, spacecraft, rockets, and

[[Page H5238]]

related equipment, including spare parts and accessories
therefor, ground handling equipment, and training devices;
expansion of public and private plants, Government-owned
equipment and installation thereof in such plants, erection
of structures, and acquisition of land, for the foregoing
purposes, and such lands and interests therein, may be
acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to
approval of title; reserve plant and Government and
contractor-owned equipment layaway; and other expenses
necessary for the foregoing purposes including rents and
transportation of things; $2,191,527,000, to remain available
for obligation until September 30, 2001.

Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force

For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of ammunition, and accessories therefor; specialized
equipment and training devices; expansion of public and
private plants, including ammunition facilities authorized by
section 2854 of title 10, United States Code, and the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes;
$388,925,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2001: Provided, That of the funds appropriated
in this paragraph, $5,298,000 shall not be obligated or
expended until authorized by law.

Other Procurement, Air Force

For procurement and modification of equipment (including
ground guidance and electronic control equipment, and ground
electronic and communication equipment), and supplies,
materials, and spare parts therefor, not otherwise provided
for; the purchase of not to exceed 267 passenger motor
vehicles for replacement only; the purchase of one vehicle
required for physical security of personnel, notwithstanding
price limitations applicable to passenger vehicles but not to
exceed $240,000 per vehicle; and expansion of public and
private plants, Government-owned equipment and installation
thereof in such plants, erection of structures, and
acquisition of land, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon, prior to approval of title;
reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned equipment
layaway; $7,034,217,000, to remain available for obligation
until September 30, 2001.

Procurement, Defense-Wide

For expenses of activities and agencies of the Department
of Defense (other than the military departments) necessary
for procurement, production, and modification of equipment,
supplies, materials, and spare parts therefor, not otherwise
provided for; the purchase of not to exceed 346 passenger
motor vehicles for replacement only; the purchase of 4
vehicles required for physical security of personnel,
notwithstanding price limitations applicable to passenger
vehicles but not to exceed $165,000 per vehicle; expansion of
public and private plants, equipment, and installation
thereof in such plants, erection of structures, and
acquisition of land for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned equipment
layaway; $2,055,432,000, to remain available for obligation
until September 30, 2001: Provided, That not less than
$109,455,000 of the funds appropriated in this paragraph
shall be made available only for the procurement of high
performance computing hardware: Provided further, That of the
funds appropriated in this paragraph, $92,566,000 shall not
be obligated or expended until authorized by law.

National Guard and Reserve Equipment

For procurement of aircraft, missiles, tracked combat
vehicles, ammunition, other weapons, and other procurement
for the reserve components of the Armed Forces; $120,000,000,
to remain available for obligation until September 30, 2001:
Provided, That the Chiefs of the Reserve and National Guard
components shall, not later than 30 days after the enactment
of this Act, individually submit to the congressional defense
committees the modernization priority assessment for their
respective Reserve or National Guard component.

TITLE IV

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army

For expenses necessary for basic and applied scientific
research, development, test and evaluation, including
maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and operation of
facilities and equipment; $4,967,446,000, to remain available
for obligation until September 30, 2000: Provided, That of
the funds appropriated in this paragraph, $175,449,000 shall
not be obligated or expended until authorized by law:
Provided further, That of the funds made available under this
heading, $10,000,000 shall be available only to commence a
live fire, side-by-side operational test and evaluation of
the air-to-air Starstreak and air-to-air Stinger missiles
fired from the AH-64D Apache helicopter: Provided further,
That none of the funds specified in the preceding proviso may
be obligated until the Secretary of the Army certifies the
following, in writing, to the congressional defense
committees:
(1) Engagement tests can be safely conducted with both
Starstreak and Stinger missiles from the AH-64D helicopter at
air speeds consistent with the normal operating limits of
that aircraft;
(2) The Starstreak missiles utilized in the test will be
provided at no cost to the United States Government;
(3) None of the $10,000,000 provided will be used to
develop modifications to the Starstreak or the Stinger
missiles; and
(4) Both the Starstreak and Stinger missiles can be fired
from the AH-64D aircraft consistent with the survivability of
the aircraft and missile performance standards contained in
the Army's Air-to-Air Missile Capability Need Statement
approved by the Department of the Army in January 1997.

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy

For expenses necessary for basic and applied scientific
research, development, test and evaluation, including
maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and operation of
facilities and equipment; $8,297,986,000, to remain available
for obligation until September 30, 2000: Provided, That funds
appropriated in this paragraph which are available for the V-
22 may be used to meet unique requirements of the Special
Operation Forces: Provided further, That notwithstanding 10
U.S.C. 2366, none of the funds made available under this
heading may be used to conduct system-level live-fire shock
tests on the SSN-21 class of submarines unless the Commander-
in-Chief of the United States Atlantic Command certifies in
writing to the congressional defense committees that such
testing must be conducted to meet operational requirements
for those submarines: Provided further, That not more than
$50,000,000 of the funds made available under this heading
for feasibility studies and component research and
development for future aircraft carriers may be obligated
until the Secretary of the Navy certifies in writing to the
congressional defense committees that the Navy has a program
in place to develop and install an infrared search and track
device on CVN-77 upon its acceptance by the government:
Provided further, That the restriction in the preceding
proviso does not apply to funds requested in the fiscal year
1999 President's budget and provided in this Act for design
of CVN-77: Provided further, That of the funds appropriated
in title IV of Public Law 105-56 (Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 1998), $213,229,000 is only for research,
development, test and evaluation of cooperative engagement
capability.

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide

For expenses of activities and agencies of the Department
of Defense (other than the military departments), necessary
for basic and applied scientific research, development, test
and evaluation; advanced research projects as may be
designated and determined by the Secretary of Defense,
pursuant to law; maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and
operation of facilities and equipment; $8,776,318,000, to
remain available for obligation until September 30, 2000:
Provided, That not less than $340,446,000 of the funds made
available under this heading shall be made available only for
the Sea-Based Wide Area Defense (Navy Upper-Tier) program:
Provided further, That funding for the Sea-Based Wide Area
Defense (Navy Upper-Tier) program in this or any other Act
shall be used for research, development and deployment
including, but not limited to, continuing ongoing risk
reduction activities, initiating system engineering for an
initial Block I capability, and deployment at the earliest
feasible time following Aegis Lightweight Exoatmospheric
Projectile (LEAP) intercept flight tests.

Developmental Test and Evaluation, Defense

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, of independent
activities of the Director, Test and Evaluation in the
direction and supervision of developmental test and
evaluation, including performance and joint developmental
testing and evaluation; and administrative expenses in
connection therewith; $263,606,000, to remain available for
obligation until September 30, 2000: Provided, That of the
funds appropriated in this paragraph, $12,500,000 shall not
be obligated or expended until authorized by law.

Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
independent activities of the Director, Operational Test and
Evaluation in the direction and supervision of operational
test and evaluation, including initial operational test and
evaluation which is conducted prior to, and in support of,
production decisions; joint operational testing and
evaluation; and administrative expenses in connection
therewith; $35,245,000, to remain available for obligation
until September 30, 2000: Provided, That of the funds
appropriated in this paragraph, $6,000,000 shall not be
obligated or expended until authorized by law.

[[Page H5239]]

TITLE V

REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS

Defense Working Capital Funds

(including transfer of funds)

For the Defense Working Capital Funds; $94,500,000:
Provided, That during the fiscal year 1999, in order to
maintain adequate cash balances in the Defense Working
Capital Funds, the Secretary of Defense may transfer up to
$350,000,000 from the National Defense Stockpile Transaction
Fund to the Defense Working Capital Funds: Provided further,
That the total of amounts so transferred during the fiscal
year shall be transferred back to the National Defense
Stockpile Transaction Fund not later than September 30, 1999.

National Defense Sealift Fund

(including transfer of funds)

For National Defense Sealift Fund programs, projects, and
activities, and for expenses of the National Defense Reserve
Fleet, as established by section 11 of the Merchant Ship
Sales Act of 1946 (50 U.S.C. App. 1744); $673,366,000, to
remain available until expended: Provided, That none of the
funds provided in this paragraph shall be used to award a new
contract that provides for the acquisition of any of the
following major components unless such components are
manufactured in the United States: auxiliary equipment,
including pumps, for all shipboard services; propulsion
system components (that is; engines, reduction gears, and
propellers); shipboard cranes; and spreaders for shipboard
cranes: Provided further, That the exercise of an option in a
contract awarded through the obligation of previously
appropriated funds shall not be considered to be the award of
a new contract: Provided further, That notwithstanding any
other provision of law, of the funds available under this
heading, $28,800,000 shall be transferred to ``Alteration of
Bridges'': Provided further, That the Secretary of the
military department responsible for such procurement may
waive the restrictions in the first proviso on a case-by-case
basis by certifying in writing to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate
that adequate domestic supplies are not available to meet
Department of Defense requirements on a timely basis and that
such an acquisition must be made in order to acquire
capability for national security purposes: Provided further,
That of the funds appropriated in this paragraph, $3,800,000
shall not be obligated or expended until authorized by law.

TITLE VI

OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS

Defense Health Program

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, for medical and
health care programs of the Department of Defense, as
authorized by law; $10,127,622,000, of which $9,725,235,000
shall be for Operation and maintenance, of which not to
exceed two per centum shall remain available until September
30, 2000, and of which $402,387,000, to remain available for
obligation until September 30, 2001, shall be for
Procurement: Provided, That of the funds appropriated in this
paragraph, $62,200,000 shall not be obligated or expended
until authorized by law.

Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
destruction of the United States stockpile of lethal chemical
agents and munitions in accordance with the provisions of
section 1412 of the Department of Defense Authorization Act,
1986 (50 U.S.C. 1521), and for the destruction of other
chemical warfare materials that are not in the chemical
weapon stockpile; $796,100,000, of which $508,650,000 shall
be for Operation and maintenance, $124,670,000 shall be for
Procurement to remain available until September 30, 2001, and
$162,780,000 shall be for Research, development, test and
evaluation to remain available until September 30, 2000.

Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense

(including transfer of funds)

For drug interdiction and counter-drug activities of the
Department of Defense, for transfer to appropriations
available to the Department of Defense for military personnel
of the reserve components serving under the provisions of
title 10 and title 32, United States Code; for Operation and
maintenance; for Procurement; and for Research, development,
test and evaluation; $764,595,000: Provided, That the funds
appropriated under this head shall be available for
obligation for the same time period and for the same purpose
as the appropriation to which transferred: Provided further,
That the transfer authority provided in this paragraph is in
addition to any transfer authority contained elsewhere in
this Act: Provided further, That of the funds appropriated in
this paragraph, $37,013,000 shall not be obligated or
expended until authorized by law.

Office of the Inspector General

For expenses and activities of the Office of the Inspector
General in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector
General Act of 1978, as amended; $132,064,000, of which
$130,764,000 shall be for Operation and maintenance, of which
not to exceed $600,000 is available for emergencies and
extraordinary expenses to be expended on the approval or
authority of the Inspector General, and payments may be made
on his certificate of necessity for confidential military
purposes; and of which $1,300,000, to remain available until
September 30, 2001, shall be for Procurement.

TITLE VII

RELATED AGENCIES

Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System Fund

For payment to the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement
and Disability System Fund, to maintain proper funding level
for continuing the operation of the Central Intelligence
Agency Retirement and Disability System; $201,500,000.

Intelligence Community Management Account

(including transfer of funds)

For necessary expenses of the Intelligence Community
Management Account; $136,123,000, of which $30,290,000 for
the Advanced Research and Development Committee shall remain
available until September 30, 2000: Provided, That of the
funds appropriated under this heading, $27,000,000 shall be
transferred to the Department of Justice for the National
Drug Intelligence Center to support the Department of
Defense's counter-drug intelligence responsibilities, and of
the said amount, $1,500,000 for Procurement shall remain
available until September 30, 2001, and $3,000,000 for
Research, development, test and evaluation shall remain
available until September 30, 2000.

Payment to Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation, and Environmental
Restoration Fund

For payment to Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation,
and Environmental Restoration Fund, as authorized by law;
$15,000,000, to remain available until expended.

National Security Education Trust Fund

For the purposes of title VIII of Public Law 102-183,
$3,000,000, to be derived from the National Security
Education Trust Fund, to remain available until expended.

TITLE VIII

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 8001. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not
authorized by the Congress.
Sec. 8002. During the current fiscal year, provisions of
law prohibiting the payment of compensation to, or employment
of, any person not a citizen of the United States shall not
apply to personnel of the Department of Defense: Provided,
That salary increases granted to direct and indirect hire
foreign national employees of the Department of Defense
funded by this Act shall not be at a rate in excess of the
percentage increase authorized by law for civilian employees
of the Department of Defense whose pay is computed under the
provisions of section 5332 of title 5, United States Code, or
at a rate in excess of the percentage increase provided by
the appropriate host nation to its own employees, whichever
is higher: Provided further, That this section shall not
apply to Department of Defense foreign service national
employees serving at United States diplomatic missions whose
pay is set by the Department of State under the Foreign
Service Act of 1980: Provided further, That the limitations
of this provision shall not apply to foreign national
employees of the Department of Defense in the Republic of
Turkey.
Sec. 8003. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current
fiscal year, unless expressly so provided herein.
Sec. 8004. No more than 20 per centum of the appropriations
in this Act which are limited for obligation during the
current fiscal year shall be obligated during the last two
months of the fiscal year: Provided, That this section shall
not apply to obligations for support of active duty training
of reserve components or summer camp training of the Reserve
Officers' Training Corps.

(transfer of funds)

Sec. 8005. Upon determination by the Secretary of Defense
that such action is necessary in the national interest, he
may, with the approval of the Office of Management and
Budget, transfer not to exceed $2,000,000,000 of working
capital funds of the Department of Defense or funds made
available in this Act to the Department of Defense for
military functions (except military construction) between
such appropriations or funds or any subdivision thereof, to
be merged with and to be available for the same purposes, and
for the same time period, as the appropriation or fund to
which transferred: Provided, That such authority to transfer
may not be used unless for higher priority items, based on
unforeseen military requirements, than those for which
originally appropriated and in no case where the item for
which funds are requested has been denied by Congress:
Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense shall notify
the Congress promptly of all transfers made pursuant to this
authority or any other authority in this Act: Provided
further, That no part of the funds in this Act shall be
available to prepare or present a request to the Committees
on Appropriations for reprogramming of funds, unless for
higher priority items, based on unforeseen military
requirements, than those for which originally appropriated
and in no case where the item for which reprogramming is
requested has been denied by the Congress.

(transfer of funds)

Sec. 8006. During the current fiscal year, cash balances in
working capital funds of the

[[Page H5240]]

Department of Defense established pursuant to section 2208 of
title 10, United States Code, may be maintained in only such
amounts as are necessary at any time for cash disbursements
to be made from such funds: Provided, That transfers may be
made between such funds: Provided further, That transfers may
be made between working capital funds and the ``Foreign
Currency Fluctuations, Defense'' appropriation and the
``Operation and Maintenance'' appropriation accounts in such
amounts as may be determined by the Secretary of Defense,
with the approval of the Office of Management and Budget,
except that such transfers may not be made unless the
Secretary of Defense has notified the Congress of the
proposed transfer. Except in amounts equal to the amounts
appropriated to working capital funds in this Act, no
obligations may be made against a working capital fund to
procure or increase the value of war reserve material
inventory, unless the Secretary of Defense has notified the
Congress prior to any such obligation.
Sec. 8007. Funds appropriated by this Act may not be used
to initiate a special access program without prior
notification 30 calendar days in session in advance to the
congressional defense committees.
Sec. 8008. None of the funds provided in this Act shall be
available to initiate: (1) a multiyear contract that employs
economic order quantity procurement in excess of $20,000,000
in any one year of the contract or that includes an unfunded
contingent liability in excess of $20,000,000; or (2) a
contract for advance procurement leading to a multiyear
contract that employs economic order quantity procurement in
excess of $20,000,000 in any one year, unless the
congressional defense committees have been notified at least
30 days in advance of the proposed contract award: Provided,
That no part of any appropriation contained in this Act shall
be available to initiate a multiyear contract for which the
economic order quantity advance procurement is not funded at
least to the limits of the Government's liability: Provided
further, That no part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall be available to initiate multiyear procurement
contracts for any systems or component thereof if the value
of the multiyear contract would exceed $500,000,000 unless
specifically provided in this Act: Provided further, That no
multiyear procurement contract can be terminated without 10-
day prior notification to the congressional defense
committees: Provided further, That the execution of multiyear
authority shall require the use of a present value analysis
to determine lowest cost compared to an annual procurement.
Funds appropriated in title III of this Act may be used for
multiyear procurement contracts as follows:
AV-8B aircraft;
E-2C aircraft;
T-45 aircraft; and
Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement (MTVR) vehicle.
Sec. 8009. Within the funds appropriated for the operation
and maintenance of the Armed Forces, funds are hereby
appropriated pursuant to section 401 of title 10, United
States Code, for humanitarian and civic assistance costs
under chapter 20 of title 10, United States Code. Such funds
may also be obligated for humanitarian and civic assistance
costs incidental to authorized operations and pursuant to
authority granted in section 401 of chapter 20 of title 10,
United States Code, and these obligations shall be reported
to Congress on September 30 of each year: Provided, That
funds available for operation and maintenance shall be
available for providing humanitarian and similar assistance
by using Civic Action Teams in the Trust Territories of the
Pacific Islands and freely associated states of Micronesia,
pursuant to the Compact of Free Association as authorized by
Public Law 99-239: Provided further, That upon a
determination by the Secretary of the Army that such action
is beneficial for graduate medical education programs
conducted at Army medical facilities located in Hawaii, the
Secretary of the Army may authorize the provision of medical
services at such facilities and transportation to such
facilities, on a nonreimbursable basis, for civilian patients
from American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of
Micronesia, Palau, and Guam.
Sec. 8010. (a) During fiscal year 1999, the civilian
personnel of the Department of Defense may not be managed on
the basis of any end-strength, and the management of such
personnel during that fiscal year shall not be subject to any
constraint or limitation (known as an end-strength) on the
number of such personnel who may be employed on the last day
of such fiscal year.
(b) The fiscal year 2000 budget request for the Department
of Defense as well as all justification material and other
documentation supporting the fiscal year 2000 Department of
Defense budget request shall be prepared and submitted to the
Congress as if subsections (a) and (b) of this provision were
effective with regard to fiscal year 2000.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to apply to
military (civilian) technicians.
Sec. 8011. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none
of the funds made available by this Act shall be used by the
Department of Defense to exceed, outside the 50 United
States, its territories, and the District of Columbia,
125,000 civilian workyears: Provided, That workyears shall be
applied as defined in the Federal Personnel Manual: Provided
further, That workyears expended in dependent student hiring
programs for disadvantaged youths shall not be included in
this workyear limitation.
Sec. 8012. None of the funds made available by this Act
shall be used in any way, directly or indirectly, to
influence congressional action on any legislation or
appropriation matters pending before the Congress.
Sec. 8013. (a) None of the funds appropriated by this Act
shall be used to make contributions to the Department of
Defense Education Benefits Fund pursuant to section 2006(g)
of title 10, United States Code, representing the normal cost
for future benefits under section 3015(c) of title 38, United
States Code, for any member of the armed services who, on or
after the date of enactment of this Act--
(1) enlists in the armed services for a period of active
duty of less than three years; or
(2) receives an enlistment bonus under section 308a or 308f
of title 37, United States Code,

nor shall any amounts representing the normal cost of such
future benefits be transferred from the Fund by the Secretary
of the Treasury to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs pursuant
to section 2006(d) of title 10, United States Code; nor shall
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs pay such benefits to any
such member: Provided, That in the case of a member covered
by clause (1), these limitations shall not apply to members
in combat arms skills or to members who enlist in the armed
services on or after July 1, 1989, under a program continued
or established by the Secretary of Defense in fiscal year
1991 to test the cost-effective use of special recruiting
incentives involving not more than nineteen noncombat arms
skills approved in advance by the Secretary of Defense:
Provided further, That this subsection applies only to active
components of the Army.
(b) None of the funds appropriated by this Act shall be
available for the basic pay and allowances of any member of
the Army participating as a full-time student and receiving
benefits paid by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs from the
Department of Defense Education Benefits Fund when time spent
as a full-time student is credited toward completion of a
service commitment: Provided, That this subsection shall not
apply to those members who have reenlisted with this option
prior to October 1, 1987: Provided further, That this
subsection applies only to active components of the Army.
Sec. 8014. None of the funds appropriated by this Act shall
be available to convert to contractor performance an activity
or function of the Department of Defense that, on or after
the date of enactment of this Act, is performed by more than
ten Department of Defense civilian employees until a most
efficient and cost-effective organization analysis is
completed on such activity or function and certification of
the analysis is made to the Committees on Appropriations of
the House of Representatives and the Senate: Provided, That
this section shall not apply to a commercial or industrial
type function of the Department of Defense that: (1) is
included on the procurement list established pursuant to
section 2 of the Act of June 25, 1938 (41 U.S.C. 47),
popularly referred to as the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act; (2) is
planned to be converted to performance by a qualified
nonprofit agency for the blind or by a qualified nonprofit
agency for other severely handicapped individuals in
accordance with that Act; or (3) is planned to be converted
to performance by a qualified firm under 51 per centum Native
American ownership.

(transfer of funds)

Sec. 8015. Funds appropriated in title III of this Act for
the Department of Defense Pilot Mentor-Protege Program may be
transferred to any other appropriation contained in this Act
solely for the purpose of implementing a Mentor-Protege
Program developmental assistance agreement pursuant to
section 831 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2301 note),
as amended, under the authority of this provision or any
other transfer authority contained in this Act.
Sec. 8016. None of the funds in this Act may be available
for the purchase by the Department of Defense (and its
departments and agencies) of welded shipboard anchor and
mooring chain 4 inches in diameter and under unless the
anchor and mooring chain are manufactured in the United
States from components which are substantially manufactured
in the United States: Provided, That for the purpose of this
section manufactured will include cutting, heat treating,
quality control, testing of chain and welding (including the
forging and shot blasting process): Provided further, That
for the purpose of this section substantially all of the
components of anchor and mooring chain shall be considered to
be produced or manufactured in the United States if the
aggregate cost of the components produced or manufactured in
the United States exceeds the aggregate cost of the
components produced or manufactured outside the United
States: Provided further, That when adequate domestic
supplies are not available to meet Department of Defense
requirements on a timely basis, the Secretary of the service
responsible for the procurement may waive this restriction on
a case-by-case basis by certifying in writing to the
Committees on Appropriations that such an acquisition must be
made in order to acquire capability for national security
purposes.

[[Page H5241]]

Sec. 8017. None of the funds appropriated by this Act
available for the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the
Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS) shall be available for the
reimbursement of any health care provider for inpatient
mental health service for care received when a patient is
referred to a provider of inpatient mental health care or
residential treatment care by a medical or health care
professional having an economic interest in the facility to
which the patient is referred: Provided, That this limitation
does not apply in the case of inpatient mental health
services provided under the program for persons with
disabilities under subsection (d) of section 1079 of title
10, United States Code, provided as partial hospital care, or
provided pursuant to a waiver authorized by the Secretary of
Defense because of medical or psychological circumstances of
the patient that are confirmed by a health professional who
is not a Federal employee after a review, pursuant to rules
prescribed by the Secretary, which takes into account the
appropriate level of care for the patient, the intensity of
services required by the patient, and the availability of
that care.
Sec. 8018. Funds available in this Act may be used to
provide transportation for the next-of-kin of individuals who
have been prisoners of war or missing in action from the
Vietnam era to an annual meeting in the United States, under
such regulations as the Secretary of Defense may prescribe.
Sec. 8019. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
during the current fiscal year, the Secretary of Defense may,
by executive agreement, establish with host nation
governments in NATO member states a separate account into
which such residual value amounts negotiated in the return of
United States military installations in NATO member states
may be deposited, in the currency of the host nation, in lieu
of direct monetary transfers to the United States Treasury:
Provided, That such credits may be utilized only for the
construction of facilities to support United States military
forces in that host nation, or such real property maintenance
and base operating costs that are currently executed through
monetary transfers to such host nations: Provided further,
That the Department of Defense's budget submission for fiscal
year 2000 shall identify such sums anticipated in residual
value settlements, and identify such construction, real
property maintenance or base operating costs that shall be
funded by the host nation through such credits: Provided
further, That all military construction projects to be
executed from such accounts must be previously approved in a
prior Act of Congress: Provided further, That each such
executive agreement with a NATO member host nation shall be
reported to the congressional defense committees, the
Committee on International Relations of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
Senate 30 days prior to the conclusion and endorsement of any
such agreement established under this provision.
Sec. 8020. None of the funds available to the Department of
Defense may be used to demilitarize or dispose of M-1
Carbines, M-1 Garand rifles, M-14 rifles, .22 caliber rifles,
.30 caliber rifles, or M-1911 pistols.
Sec. 8021. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none
of the funds appropriated by this Act shall be available to
pay more than 50 per centum of an amount paid to any person
under section 308 of title 37, United States Code, in a lump
sum.
Sec. 8022. No more than $500,000 of the funds appropriated
or made available in this Act shall be used during a single
fiscal year for any single relocation of an organization,
unit, activity or function of the Department of Defense into
or within the National Capital Region: Provided, That the
Secretary of Defense may waive this restriction on a case-by-
case basis by certifying in writing to the congressional
defense committees that such a relocation is required in the
best interest of the Government.
Sec. 8023. A member of a reserve component whose unit or
whose residence is located in a State which is not contiguous
with another State is authorized to travel in a space
required status on aircraft of the Armed Forces between home
and place of inactive duty training, or place of duty in lieu
of unit training assembly, when there is no road or railroad
transportation (or combination of road and railroad
transportation between those locations): Provided, That a
member traveling in that status on a military aircraft
pursuant to the authority provided in this section is not
authorized to receive travel, transportation, or per diem
allowances in connection with that travel.
Sec. 8024. The unobligated balance of the amounts
appropriated by section 8024 of the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 1998 (Public Law 105-56), shall remain
available until September 30, 1999 for incentive payments
authorized by section 504 of the Indian Financing Act of 1974
(25 U.S.C. 1544): Provided, That contractors participating in
the test program established by section 834 of Public Law
101-189 (15 U.S.C. 637 note) shall be eligible for the
program established by section 504 of the Indian Financing
Act.
Sec. 8025. During the current fiscal year, funds
appropriated or otherwise available for any Federal agency,
the Congress, the judicial branch, or the District of
Columbia may be used for the pay, allowances, and benefits of
an employee as defined by section 2105 of title 5, United
States Code, or an individual employed by the government of
the District of Columbia, permanent or temporary indefinite,
who--
(1) is a member of a Reserve component of the Armed Forces,
as described in section 10101 of title 10, United States
Code, or the National Guard, as described in section 101 of
title 32;
(2) performs, for the purpose of providing military aid to
enforce the law or providing assistance to civil authorities
in the protection or saving of life or property or prevention
of injury--
(A) Federal service under sections 331, 332, 333, or 12406
of title 10, or other provision of law, as applicable; or
(B) full-time military service for his or her State, the
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or a
territory of the United States; and
(3) requests and is granted--
(A) leave under the authority of this section; or
(B) annual leave, which may be granted without regard to
the provisions of sections 5519 and 6323(b) of title 5, if
such employee is otherwise entitled to such annual leave:
Provided, That any employee who requests leave under
subsection (3)(A) for service described in subsection (2) of
this section is entitled to such leave, subject to the
provisions of this section and of the last sentence of
section 6323(b) of title 5, and such leave shall be
considered leave under section 6323(b) of title 5.
Sec. 8026. None of the funds appropriated by this Act shall
be available to perform any cost study pursuant to the
provisions of OMB Circular A-76 if the study being performed
exceeds a period of 24 months after initiation of such study
with respect to a single function activity or 48 months after
initiation of such study for a multi-function activity.
Sec. 8027. Funds appropriated by this Act for the American
Forces Information Service shall not be used for any national
or international political or psychological activities.
Sec. 8028. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or
regulation, the Secretary of Defense may adjust wage rates
for civilian employees hired for certain health care
occupations as authorized for the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs by section 7455 of title 38, United States Code.
Sec. 8029. None of the funds appropriated or made available
in this Act shall be used to reduce or disestablish the
operation of the 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron of the
Air Force Reserve, if such action would reduce the WC-130
Weather Reconnaissance mission below the levels funded in
this Act.
Sec. 8030. (a) Of the funds for the procurement of supplies
or services appropriated by this Act, qualified nonprofit
agencies for the blind or other severely handicapped shall be
afforded the maximum practicable opportunity to participate
as subcontractors and suppliers in the performance of
contracts let by the Department of Defense.
(b) During the current fiscal year, a business concern
which has negotiated with a military service or defense
agency a subcontracting plan for the participation by small
business concerns pursuant to section 8(d) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(d)) shall be given credit toward
meeting that subcontracting goal for any purchases made from
qualified nonprofit agencies for the blind or other severely
handicapped.
(c) For the purpose of this section, the phrase ``qualified
nonprofit agency for the blind or other severely
handicapped'' means a nonprofit agency for the blind or other
severely handicapped that has been approved by the Committee
for the Purchase from the Blind and Other Severely
Handicapped under the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-
48).
Sec. 8031. During the current fiscal year, net receipts
pursuant to collections from third party payers pursuant to
section 1095 of title 10, United States Code, shall be made
available to the local facility of the uniformed services
responsible for the collections and shall be over and above
the facility's direct budget amount.
Sec. 8032. During the current fiscal year, the Department
of Defense is authorized to incur obligations of not to
exceed $350,000,000 for purposes specified in section
2350j(c) of title 10, United States Code, in anticipation of
receipt of contributions, only from the Government of Kuwait,
under that section: Provided, That upon receipt, such
contributions from the Government of Kuwait shall be credited
to the appropriations or fund which incurred such
obligations.
Sec. 8033. Of the funds made available in this Act, not
less than $28,300,000 shall be available for the Civil Air
Patrol Corporation, of which $23,500,000 shall be available
for Civil Air Patrol Corporation operation and maintenance to
support readiness activities which includes $3,800,000 for
the Civil Air Patrol counterdrug program: Provided, That
funds identified for ``Civil Air Patrol'' under this section
are intended for and shall be for the exclusive use of the
Civil Air Patrol Corporation and not for the Air Force or any
unit thereof.
Sec. 8034. (a) None of the funds appropriated in this Act
are available to establish a new Department of Defense
(department) federally funded research and development center
(FFRDC), either as a new entity, or as a separate entity
administrated by an organization managing another FFRDC, or
as a nonprofit membership corporation consisting of a
consortium of other FFRDCs and other non-profit entities.
(b) Limitation on Compensation-Federally Funded Research
and Development Center (FFRDC).--No member of a Board of
Directors, Trustees, Overseers, Advisory Group, Special
Issues Panel, Visiting Committee, or any similar entity of a
defense FFRDC, and no paid consultant to any defense FFRDC,

[[Page H5242]]

may be compensated for his or her services as a member of
such entity, or as a paid consultant, except under the same
conditions, and to the same extent, as members of the Defense
Science Board: Provided, That a member of any such entity
referred to previously in this subsection shall be allowed
travel expenses and per diem as authorized under the Federal
Joint Travel Regulations, when engaged in the performance of
membership duties.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the
funds available to the department from any source during
fiscal year 1999 may be used by a defense FFRDC, through a
fee or other payment mechanism, for charitable contributions,
for construction of new buildings, for payment of cost
sharing for projects funded by Government grants, or for
absorption of contract overruns.
(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, of the
funds available to the department during fiscal year 1999,
not more than 6,206 staff years of technical effort (staff
years) may be funded for defense FFRDCs: Provided, That of
the specific amount referred to previously in this
subsection, not more than 1,105 staff years may be funded for
the defense studies and analysis FFRDCs.
(e) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary of Defense shall control the total number of staff
years to be performed by defense FFRDCs during fiscal year
1999 so as to reduce the total amounts appropriated in titles
II, III, and IV of this Act by $62,000,000: Provided, That
the total amounts appropriated in titles II, III, and IV of
this Act are hereby reduced by $62,000,000 to reflect savings
from the use of defense FFRDCs by the department.
(f) Within 60 days after enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report presenting the specific amounts
of staff years of technical effort to be allocated by the
department for each defense FFRDC during fiscal year 1999:
Provided, That after the submission of the report required by
this subsection, the department may not reallocate more than
five per centum of an FFRDC's staff years among other defense
FFRDCs until 30 days after a detailed justification for any
such reallocation is submitted to the congressional defense
committees.
(g) The Secretary of Defense shall, with the submission of
the department's fiscal year 2000 budget request, submit a
report presenting the specific amounts of staff years of
technical effort to be allocated for each defense FFRDC
during that fiscal year.
(h) No part of the reductions contained in subsection (e)
of this section may be applied against any budget activity,
activity group, subactivity group, line item, program
element, program, project, subproject or activity which does
not fund defense FFRDC activities within each appropriation
account, and the reductions in subsection (e) shall be
allocated on a proportional basis.
(i) Not later than 90 days after enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report listing the specific funding
reductions allocated to each category listed in subsection
(h) above pursuant to this section.
Sec. 8035. None of the funds appropriated or made available
in this Act shall be used to procure carbon, alloy or armor
steel plate for use in any Government-owned facility or
property under the control of the Department of Defense which
were not melted and rolled in the United States or Canada:
Provided, That these procurement restrictions shall apply to
any and all Federal Supply Class 9515, American Society of
Testing and Materials (ASTM) or American Iron and Steel
Institute (AISI) specifications of carbon, alloy or armor
steel plate: Provided further, That the Secretary of the
military department responsible for the procurement may waive
this restriction on a case-by-case basis by certifying in
writing to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and the Senate that adequate domestic
supplies are not available to meet Department of Defense
requirements on a timely basis and that such an acquisition
must be made in order to acquire capability for national
security purposes: Provided further, That these restrictions
shall not apply to contracts which are in being as of the
date of enactment of this Act.
Sec. 8036. For the purposes of this Act, the term
``congressional defense committees'' means the National
Security Committee of the House of Representatives, the Armed
Services Committee of the Senate, the Subcommittee on Defense
of the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, and the
Subcommittee on National Security of the Committee on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives.
Sec. 8037. During the current fiscal year, the Department
of Defense may acquire the modification, depot maintenance
and repair of aircraft, vehicles and vessels as well as the
production of components and other Defense-related articles,
through competition between Department of Defense depot
maintenance activities and private firms: Provided, That the
Senior Acquisition Executive of the military department or
defense agency concerned, with power of delegation, shall
certify that successful bids include comparable estimates of
all direct and indirect costs for both public and private
bids: Provided further, That Office of Management and Budget
Circular A-76 shall not apply to competitions conducted under
this section.
Sec. 8038. (a)(1) If the Secretary of Defense, after
consultation with the United States Trade Representative,
determines that a foreign country which is party to an
agreement described in paragraph (2) has violated the terms
of the agreement by discriminating against certain types of
products produced in the United States that are covered by
the agreement, the Secretary of Defense shall rescind the
Secretary's blanket waiver of the Buy American Act with
respect to such types of products produced in that foreign
country.
(2) An agreement referred to in paragraph (1) is any
reciprocal defense procurement memorandum of understanding,
between the United States and a foreign country pursuant to
which the Secretary of Defense has prospectively waived the
Buy American Act for certain products in that country.
(b) The Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a
report on the amount of Department of Defense purchases from
foreign entities in fiscal year 1999. Such report shall
separately indicate the dollar value of items for which the
Buy American Act was waived pursuant to any agreement
described in subsection (a)(2), the Trade Agreement Act of
1979 (19 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.), or any international agreement
to which the United States is a party.
(c) For purposes of this section, the term ``Buy American
Act'' means title III of the Act entitled ``An Act making
appropriations for the Treasury and Post Office Departments
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1934, and for other
purposes'', approved March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a et seq.).
Sec. 8039. Appropriations contained in this Act that remain
available at the end of the current fiscal year as a result
of energy cost savings realized by the Department of Defense
shall remain available for obligation for the next fiscal
year to the extent, and for the purposes, provided in section
2865 of title 10, United States Code.

(including transfer of funds)

Sec. 8040. Amounts deposited during the current fiscal year
to the special account established under 40 U.S.C. 485(h)(2)
and to the special account established under 10 U.S.C.
2667(d)(1) are appropriated and shall be available until
transferred by the Secretary of Defense to current applicable
appropriations or funds of the Department of Defense under
the terms and conditions specified by 40 U.S.C. 485(h)(2)(A)
and (B) and 10 U.S.C. 2667(d)(1)(B), to be merged with and to
be available for the same time period and the same purposes
as the appropriation to which transferred.
Sec. 8041. During the current fiscal year, appropriations
available to the Department of Defense may be used to
reimburse a member of a reserve component of the Armed Forces
who is not otherwise entitled to travel and transportation
allowances and who occupies transient government housing
while performing active duty for training or inactive duty
training: Provided, That such members may be provided lodging
in kind if transient government quarters are unavailable as
if the member was entitled to such allowances under
subsection (a) of section 404 of title 37, United States
Code: Provided further, That if lodging in kind is provided,
any authorized service charge or cost of such lodging may be
paid directly from funds appropriated for operation and
maintenance of the reserve component of the member concerned.
Sec. 8042. The President shall include with each budget for
a fiscal year submitted to the Congress under section 1105 of
title 31, United States Code, materials that shall identify
clearly and separately the amounts requested in the budget
for appropriation for that fiscal year for salaries and
expenses related to administrative activities of the
Department of Defense, the military departments, and the
Defense Agencies.
Sec. 8043. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds available for ``Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug
Activities, Defense'' may be obligated for the Young Marines
program.
Sec. 8044. During the current fiscal year, amounts
contained in the Department of Defense Overseas Military
Facility Investment Recovery Account established by section
2921(c)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act of 1991
(Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) shall be available
until expended for the payments specified by section
2921(c)(2) of that Act.
Sec. 8045. Of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act, not more than $119,200,000 shall be
available for payment of the operating costs of NATO
Headquarters: Provided, That the Secretary of Defense may
waive this section for Department of Defense support provided
to NATO forces in and around the former Yugoslavia.
Sec. 8046. During the current fiscal year, appropriations
which are available to the Department of Defense for
operation and maintenance may be used to purchase items
having an investment item unit cost of not more than
$100,000.
Sec. 8047. (a) During the current fiscal year, none of the
appropriations or funds available to the Department of
Defense Working Capital Funds shall be used for the purchase
of an investment item for the purpose of acquiring a new
inventory item for sale or anticipated sale during the
current fiscal year or a subsequent fiscal year to customers
of the Department of Defense Working Capital Funds if such an
item would not have been chargeable to the Department of
Defense Business Operations Fund during fiscal year 1994 and
if the purchase of such an

[[Page H5243]]

investment item would be chargeable during the current fiscal
year to appropriations made to the Department of Defense for
procurement.
(b) The fiscal year 2000 budget request for the Department
of Defense as well as all justification material and other
documentation supporting the fiscal year 2000 Department of
Defense budget shall be prepared and submitted to the
Congress on the basis that any equipment which was classified
as an end item and funded in a procurement appropriation
contained in this Act shall be budgeted for in a proposed
fiscal year 2000 procurement appropriation and not in the
supply management business area or any other area or category
of the Department of Defense Working Capital Funds.
Sec. 8048. None of the funds appropriated by this Act for
programs of the Central Intelligence Agency shall remain
available for obligation beyond the current fiscal year,
except for funds appropriated for the Reserve for
Contingencies, which shall remain available until September
30, 2000: Provided, That funds appropriated, transferred, or
otherwise credited to the Central Intelligence Agency Central
Services Working Capital Fund during this or any prior or
subsequent fiscal year shall remain available until expended.
Sec. 8049. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds made available in this Act for the Defense Intelligence
Agency may be used for the design, development, and
deployment of General Defense Intelligence Program
intelligence communications and intelligence information
systems for the Services, the Unified and Specified Commands,
and the component commands.
Sec. 8050. Amounts collected for the use of the facilities
of the National Science Center for Communications and
Electronics during the current fiscal year pursuant to
section 1459(g) of the Department of Defense Authorization
Act, 1986, and deposited to the special account established
under subsection 1459(g)(2) of that Act are appropriated and
shall be available until expended for the operation and
maintenance of the Center as provided for in subsection
1459(g)(2).
Sec. 8051. None of the funds appropriated in this Act may
be used to fill the commander's position at any military
medical facility with a health care professional unless the
prospective candidate can demonstrate professional
administrative skills.
Sec. 8052. (a) None of the funds appropriated in this Act
may be expended by an entity of the Department of Defense
unless the entity, in expending the funds, complies with the
Buy American Act. For purposes of this subsection, the term
``Buy American Act'' means title III of the Act entitled ``An
Act making appropriations for the Treasury and Post Office
Departments for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1934, and for
other purposes'', approved March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a et
seq.).
(b) If the Secretary of Defense determines that a person
has been convicted of intentionally affixing a label bearing
a ``Made in America'' inscription to any product sold in or
shipped to the United States that is not made in America, the
Secretary shall determine, in accordance with section 2410f
of title 10, United States Code, whether the person should be
debarred from contracting with the Department of Defense.
(c) In the case of any equipment or products purchased with
appropriations provided under this Act, it is the sense of
the Congress that any entity of the Department of Defense, in
expending the appropriation, purchase only American-made
equipment and products, provided that American-made equipment
and products are cost-competitive, quality-competitive, and
available in a timely fashion.
Sec. 8053. None of the funds appropriated by this Act shall
be available for a contract for studies, analysis, or
consulting services entered into without competition on the
basis of an unsolicited proposal unless the head of the
activity responsible for the procurement determines--
(1) as a result of thorough technical evaluation, only one
source is found fully qualified to perform the proposed work;
or
(2) the purpose of the contract is to explore an
unsolicited proposal which offers significant scientific or
technological promise, represents the product of original
thinking, and was submitted in confidence by one source; or
(3) the purpose of the contract is to take advantage of
unique and significant industrial accomplishment by a
specific concern, or to insure that a new product or idea of
a specific concern is given financial support: Provided, That
this limitation shall not apply to contracts in an amount of
less than $25,000, contracts related to improvements of
equipment that is in development or production, or contracts
as to which a civilian official of the Department of Defense,
who has been confirmed by the Senate, determines that the
award of such contract is in the interest of the national
defense.
Sec. 8054. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and
(c), none of the funds made available by this Act may be
used--
(1) to establish a field operating agency; or
(2) to pay the basic pay of a member of the Armed Forces or
civilian employee of the department who is transferred or
reassigned from a headquarters activity if the member or
employee's place of duty remains at the location of that
headquarters.
(b) The Secretary of Defense or Secretary of a military
department may waive the limitations in subsection (a), on a
case-by-case basis, if the Secretary determines, and
certifies to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and Senate that the granting of the waiver
will reduce the personnel requirements or the financial
requirements of the department.
(c) This section does not apply to field operating agencies
funded within the National Foreign Intelligence Program.
Sec. 8055. Notwithstanding section 303 of Public Law 96-487
or any other provision of law, the Secretary of the Navy is
authorized to lease real and personal property at Naval Air
Facility, Adak, Alaska, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 2667(f), for
commercial, industrial or other purposes.

(rescissions)

Sec. 8056. Of the funds provided in Department of Defense
Appropriations Acts, the following funds are hereby rescinded
from the following accounts in the specified amounts:
``Missile Procurement, Army, 1998/2000'', $13,300,000;
``Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army,
1998/2000'', $6,700,000;
``Other Procurement, Army, 1998/2000'', $24,000,000;
``Weapons Procurement, Navy, 1998/2000'', $2,000,000;
``Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps, 1998/
2000'', $12,000,000;
``Other Procurement, Navy, 1998/2000'', $28,500,000;
``Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 1998/2000'',
$15,000,000;
``Missile Procurement, Air Force, 1998/2000'', $19,840,000;
``Other Procurement, Air Force, 1998/2000'', $4,160,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, 1998/
1999'', $18,000,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy, 1998/
1999'', $17,500,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force,
1998/1999'', $34,370,000; and
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide,
1998/1999'', $73,000,000.
Sec. 8057. None of the funds available in this Act may be
used to reduce the authorized positions for military
(civilian) technicians of the Army National Guard, the Air
National Guard, Army Reserve and Air Force Reserve for the
purpose of applying any administratively imposed civilian
personnel ceiling, freeze, or reduction on military
(civilian) technicians, unless such reductions are a direct
result of a reduction in military force structure.
Sec. 8058. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available in this Act may be obligated or expended for
assistance to the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea
unless specifically appropriated for that purpose.
Sec. 8059. During the current fiscal year, funds
appropriated in this Act are available to compensate members
of the National Guard for duty performed pursuant to a plan
submitted by a Governor of a State and approved by the
Secretary of Defense under section 112 of title 32, United
States Code: Provided, That during the performance of such
duty, the members of the National Guard shall be under State
command and control: Provided further, That such duty shall
be treated as full-time National Guard duty for purposes of
sections 12602(a)(2) and (b)(2) of title 10, United States
Code.
Sec. 8060. Funds appropriated in this Act for operation and
maintenance of the Military Departments, Unified and
Specified Commands and Defense Agencies shall be available
for reimbursement of pay, allowances and other expenses which
would otherwise be incurred against appropriations for the
National Guard and Reserve when members of the National Guard
and Reserve provide intelligence or counterintelligence
support to Unified Commands, Defense Agencies and Joint
Intelligence Activities, including the activities and
programs included within the National Foreign Intelligence
Program (NFIP), the Joint Military Intelligence Program
(JMIP), and the Tactical Intelligence and Related Activities
(TIARA) aggregate: Provided, That nothing in this section
authorizes deviation from established Reserve and National
Guard personnel and training procedures.
Sec. 8061. During the current fiscal year, none of the
funds appropriated in this Act may be used to reduce the
civilian medical and medical support personnel assigned to
military treatment facilities below the September 30, 1998
level: Provided, That the Service Surgeons General may waive
this section by certifying to the congressional defense
committees that the beneficiary population is declining in
some catchment areas and civilian strength reductions may be
consistent with responsible resource stewardship and
capitation-based budgeting.

(including transfer of funds)

Sec. 8062. None of the funds appropriated in this Act may
be transferred to or obligated from the Pentagon Reservation
Maintenance Revolving Fund, unless the Secretary of Defense
certifies that the total cost for the planning, design,
construction and installation of equipment for the renovation
of the Pentagon Reservation will not exceed $1,118,000,000.
Sec. 8063. (a) None of the funds available to the
Department of Defense for any fiscal year for drug
interdiction or counter-drug activities may be transferred to
any other department or agency of the United States except as
specifically provided in an appropriations law.
(b) None of the funds available to the Central Intelligence
Agency for any fiscal year

[[Page H5244]]

for drug interdiction and counter-drug activities may be
transferred to any other department or agency of the United
States except as specifically provided in an appropriations
law.

(transfer of funds)

Sec. 8064. Appropriations available in this Act under the
heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' for
increasing energy and water efficiency in Federal buildings
may, during their period of availability, be transferred to
other appropriations or funds of the Department of Defense
for projects related to increasing energy and water
efficiency, to be merged with and to be available for the
same general purposes, and for the same time period, as the
appropriation or fund to which transferred.
Sec. 8065. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may
be used for the procurement of ball and roller bearings other
than those produced by a domestic source and of domestic
origin: Provided, That the Secretary of the military
department responsible for such procurement may waive this
restriction on a case-by-case basis by certifying in writing
to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and the Senate, that adequate domestic
supplies are not available to meet Department of Defense
requirements on a timely basis and that such an acquisition
must be made in order to acquire capability for national
security purposes.
Sec. 8066. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds available to the Department of Defense shall be made
available to provide transportation of medical supplies and
equipment, on a nonreimbursable basis, to American Samoa:
Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds available to the Department of Defense shall be made
available to provide transportation of medical supplies and
equipment, on a nonreimbursable basis, to the Indian Health
Service when it is in conjunction with a civil-military
project.
Sec. 8067. None of the funds in this Act may be used to
purchase any supercomputer which is not manufactured in the
United States, unless the Secretary of Defense certifies to
the congressional defense committees that such an acquisition
must be made in order to acquire capability for national
security purposes that is not available from United States
manufacturers.
Sec. 8068. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Naval shipyards of the United States shall be eligible to
participate in any manufacturing extension program financed
by funds appropriated in this or any other Act.
Sec. 8069. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, each
contract awarded by the Department of Defense during the
current fiscal year for construction or service performed in
whole or in part in a State which is not contiguous with
another State and has an unemployment rate in excess of the
national average rate of unemployment as determined by the
Secretary of Labor, shall include a provision requiring the
contractor to employ, for the purpose of performing that
portion of the contract in such State that is not contiguous
with another State, individuals who are residents of such
State and who, in the case of any craft or trade, possess or
would be able to acquire promptly the necessary skills:
Provided, That the Secretary of Defense may waive the
requirements of this section, on a case-by-case basis, in the
interest of national security.
Sec. 8070. During the current fiscal year, the Army shall
use the former George Air Force Base as the airhead for the
National Training Center at Fort Irwin: Provided, That none
of the funds in this Act shall be obligated or expended to
transport Army personnel into Edwards Air Force Base for
training rotations at the National Training Center.
Sec. 8071. (a) The Secretary of Defense shall submit, on a
quarterly basis, a report to the congressional defense
committees, the Committee on International Relations of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate setting forth all costs (including
incremental costs) incurred by the Department of Defense
during the preceding quarter in implementing or supporting
resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, including
any such resolution calling for international sanctions,
international peacekeeping operations, and humanitarian
missions undertaken by the Department of Defense. The
quarterly report shall include an aggregate of all such
Department of Defense costs by operation or mission.
(b) The Secretary of Defense shall detail in the quarterly
reports all efforts made to seek credit against past United
Nations expenditures and all efforts made to seek
compensation from the United Nations for costs incurred by
the Department of Defense in implementing and supporting
United Nations activities.
Sec. 8072. (a) Limitation on Transfer of Defense Articles
and Services.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
none of the funds available to the Department of Defense for
the current fiscal year may be obligated or expended to
transfer to another nation or an international organization
any defense articles or services (other than intelligence
services) for use in the activities described in subsection
(b) unless the congressional defense committees, the
Committee on International Relations of the House of
Representatives, and the Committee on Foreign Relations of
the Senate are notified 15 days in advance of such transfer.
(b) Covered Activities.--This section applies to--
(1) any international peacekeeping or peace-enforcement
operation under the authority of chapter VI or chapter VII of
the United Nations Charter under the authority of a United
Nations Security Council resolution; and
(2) any other international peacekeeping, peace-
enforcement, or humanitarian assistance operation.
(c) Required Notice.--A notice under subsection (a) shall
include the following:
(1) A description of the equipment, supplies, or services
to be transferred.
(2) A statement of the value of the equipment, supplies, or
services to be transferred.
(3) In the case of a proposed transfer of equipment or
supplies--
(A) a statement of whether the inventory requirements of
all elements of the Armed Forces (including the reserve
components) for the type of equipment or supplies to be
transferred have been met; and
(B) a statement of whether the items proposed to be
transferred will have to be replaced and, if so, how the
President proposes to provide funds for such replacement.
Sec. 8073. None of the funds available to the Department of
Defense shall be obligated or expended to make a financial
contribution to the United Nations for the cost of an United
Nations peacekeeping activity (whether pursuant to assessment
or a voluntary contribution) or for payment of any United
States arrearage to the United Nations.
Sec. 8074. None of the funds available to the Department of
Defense under this Act shall be obligated or expended to pay
a contractor under a contract with the Department of Defense
for costs of any amount paid by the contractor to an employee
when--
(1) such costs are for a bonus or otherwise in excess of
the normal salary paid by the contractor to the employee; and
(2) such bonus is part of restructuring costs associated
with a business combination.
Sec. 8075. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available in this Act may be used to transport or
provide for the transportation of chemical munitions or
agents to the Johnston Atoll for the purpose of storing or
demilitarizing such munitions or agents.
(b) The prohibition in subsection (a) shall not apply to
any obsolete World War II chemical munition or agent of the
United States found in the World War II Pacific Theater of
Operations.
(c) The President may suspend the application of subsection
(a) during a period of war in which the United States is a
party.
Sec. 8076. None of the funds provided in title II of this
Act for ``Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction'' may be
obligated or expended to finance housing for any individual
who was a member of the military forces of the Soviet Union
or for any individual who is or was a member of the military
forces of the Russian Federation.

(including transfer of funds)

Sec. 8077. During the current fiscal year, no more than
$7,000,000 of appropriations made in this Act under the
heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' may be
transferred to appropriations available for the pay of
military personnel, to be merged with, and to be available
for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred, to be used in support of such personnel in
connection with support and services for eligible
organizations and activities outside the Department of
Defense pursuant to section 2012 of title 10, United States
Code.
Sec. 8078. For purposes of section 1553(b) of title 31,
United States Code, any subdivision of appropriations made in
this Act under the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion,
Navy'' shall be considered to be for the same purpose as any
subdivision under the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion,
Navy'' appropriations in any prior year, and the 1 percent
limitation shall apply to the total amount of the
appropriation.
Sec. 8079. During the current fiscal year, in the case of
an appropriation account of the Department of Defense for
which the period of availability for obligation has expired
or which has closed under the provisions of section 1552 of
title 31, United States Code, and which has a negative
unliquidated or unexpended balance, an obligation or an
adjustment of an obligation may be charged to any current
appropriation account for the same purpose as the expired or
closed account if--
(1) the obligation would have been properly chargeable
(except as to amount) to the expired or closed account before
the end of the period of availability or closing of that
account;
(2) the obligation is not otherwise properly chargeable to
any current appropriation account of the Department of
Defense; and
(3) in the case of an expired account, the obligation is
not chargeable to a current appropriation of the Department
of Defense under the provisions of section 1405(b)(8) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991,
Public Law 101-510, as amended (31 U.S.C. 1551 note):
Provided, That in the case of an expired account, if
subsequent review or investigation discloses that there was
not in fact a negative unliquidated or unexpended balance in
the account, any charge to a current account under the
authority of this section shall be reversed and recorded
against the expired account: Provided further, That the total
amount charged to a current appropriation under this section

[[Page H5245]]

may not exceed an amount equal to 1 percent of the total
appropriation for that account.
Sec. 8080. The Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)
shall submit to the congressional defense committees by
February 1, 1999 a detailed report identifying, by amount and
by separate budget activity, activity group, subactivity
group, line item, program element, program, project,
subproject, and activity, any activity for which the fiscal
year 2000 budget request was reduced because Congress
appropriated funds above the President's budget request for
that specific activity for fiscal year 1999.
Sec. 8081. Funds appropriated in title II of this Act for
supervision and administration costs for facilities
maintenance and repair, minor construction, or design
projects may be obligated at the time the reimbursable order
is accepted by the performing activity: Provided, That for
the purpose of this section, supervision and administration
costs includes all in-house Government cost.
Sec. 8082. The Secretary of Defense may waive reimbursement
of the cost of conferences, seminars, courses of instruction,
or similar educational activities of the Asia-Pacific Center
for Security Studies for military officers and civilian
officials of foreign nations if the Secretary determines that
attendance by such personnel, without reimbursement, is in
the national security interest of the United States:
Provided, That costs for which reimbursement is waived
pursuant to this subsection shall be paid from appropriations
available for the Asia-Pacific Center.
Sec. 8083. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
the Chief of the National Guard Bureau may permit the use of
equipment of the National Guard Distance Learning Project by
any person or entity on a space-available, reimbursable
basis. The Chief of the National Guard Bureau shall establish
the amount of reimbursement for such use on a case-by-case
basis.
(b) Amounts collected under subsection (a) shall be
credited to funds available for the National Guard Distance
Learning Project and be available to defray the costs
associated with the use of equipment of the project under
that subsection. Such funds shall be available for such
purposes without fiscal year limitation.
Sec. 8084. Using funds available by this Act or any other
Act, the Secretary of the Air Force, pursuant to a
determination under section 2690 of title 10, United States
Code, may implement cost-effective agreements for required
heating facility modernization in the Kaiserslautern Military
Community in the Federal Republic of Germany: Provided, That
in the City of Kaiserslautern such agreements will include
the use of United States anthracite as the base load energy
for municipal district heat to the United States Defense
installations: Provided further, That at Landstuhl Army
Regional Medical Center and Ramstein Air Base, furnished heat
may be obtained from private, regional or municipal services,
if provisions are included for the consideration of United
States coal as an energy source.
Sec. 8085. During the current fiscal year, the amounts
which are necessary for the operation and maintenance of the
Fisher Houses administered by the Departments of the Army,
the Navy, and the Air Force are hereby appropriated, to be
derived from amounts which are available in the applicable
Fisher House trust fund established under 10 U.S.C. 2221 for
the Fisher Houses of each such department.
Sec. 8086. During the current fiscal year and hereafter,
refunds attributable to the use of the Government travel card
by military personnel and civilian employees of the
Department of Defense and refunds attributable to official
Government travel arranged by Government Contracted Travel
Management Centers may be credited to operation and
maintenance accounts of the Department of Defense which are
current when the refunds are received.
Sec. 8087. During the current fiscal year, not more than a
total of $60,000,000 in withdrawal credits may be made by the
Marine Corps Supply Management activity group of the Navy
Working Capital Fund, Department of Defense Working Capital
Funds, to the credit of current applicable appropriations of
a Department of Defense activity in connection with the
acquisition of critical low density repairables that are
capitalized into the Navy Working Capital Fund.
Sec. 8088. Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3902, during the
current fiscal year interest penalties may be paid by the
Department of Defense from funds financing the operation of
the military department or defense agency with which the
invoice or contract payment is associated.
Sec. 8089. At the time the President submits his budget for
fiscal year 2000 and any fiscal year thereafter, the
Department of Defense shall transmit to the congressional
defense committees a budget justification document for the
active and reserve Military Personnel accounts, to be known
as the ``M-1'', which shall identify, at the budget activity,
activity group, and subactivity group level, the amounts
requested by the President to be appropriated to the
Department of Defense for military personnel in any budget
request, or amended budget request, for that fiscal year.
Sec. 8090. None of the funds appropriated in title IV of
this Act may be used to procure end-items for delivery to
military forces for operational training, operational use or
inventory requirements: Provided, That this restriction does
not apply to end-items used in development, prototyping, and
test activities preceding and leading to acceptance for
operational use: Provided further, That this restriction does
not apply to programs funded within the National Foreign
Intelligence Program: Provided further, That the Secretary of
Defense may waive this restriction on a case-by-case basis by
certifying in writing to the Committees on Appropriations of
the House of Representatives and the Senate that it is in the
national security interest to do so.
Sec. 8091. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be obligated or expended to enter into or renew a contract
with a contractor that is subject to the reporting
requirement set forth in subsection (d) of section 4212 of
title 38, United States Code, but has not submitted the most
recent report required by such subsection for 1998 or a
subsequent year.
Sec. 8092. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to approve or license the sale of the F-22 advanced
tactical fighter to any foreign government.
Sec. 8093. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be made available for the United
States Man and the Biosphere Program, or related projects.
Sec. 8094. Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1552(a), of the funds
provided in Department of Defense Appropriations Acts, not
more than the specified amounts from the following accounts
shall remain available for the payment of satellite on-orbit
incentive fees until the fees are paid:
``Missile Procurement, Air Force, 1995/1997'', $20,978,000;
``Missile Procurement, Air Force, 1996/1998'', $16,782,400.
Sec. 8095. None of the funds in this or any other Act may
be used by the National Imagery and Mapping Agency for any
mapping, charting, and geodesy activities unless contracts
for such services are awarded in accordance with the
qualifications based selection process in 40 U.S.C. 541 et
seq. and 10 U.S.C. 2855: Provided, That an exception shall be
provided for such services that are critical to national
security after a written notification has been submitted by
the Deputy Secretary of Defense to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the
Senate.
Sec. 8096. Funds made available to the Civil Air Patrol in
this Act under the heading ``Drug Interdiction and Counter-
Drug Activities, Defense'' may be used for the Civil Air
Patrol Corporation's counterdrug program, including its
demand reduction program involving youth programs, as well as
operational and training drug reconnaissance missions for
federal, state and local government agencies; for
administrative costs, including the hiring of Civil Air
Patrol Corporation employees; for travel and per diem
expenses of Civil Air Patrol Corporation personnel in support
of those missions; and for equipment needed for mission
support or performance: Provided, That of these funds,
$300,000 shall be made available to establish and operate a
distance learning program: Provided further, That the
Department of the Air Force should waive reimbursement from
the Federal, State and local government agencies for the use
of these funds.
Sec. 8097. The Secretary of Defense shall undertake a
review of all distributed learning education and training
programs in the Department of Defense and shall issue a plan
to implement a department-wide, standardized, cost-effective
Advanced Distributed Learning framework to achieve the goals
of commonality, interoperability, and reuse: Provided, That
the Secretary shall report to Congress on the results of this
review and present a detailed implementation and budget plan
no later than July 30, 1999.
Sec. 8098. None of the funds in this Act may be available
for the purchase by the Department of Defense of cross deck
pendants for arresting aircraft on U.S. Navy aircraft
carriers unless such cross deck pendants are manufactured in
the United States from components which are substantially
manufactured in the United States: Provided, That when
adequate domestic supplies are not available to meet
Department of Defense requirements on a timely basis, the
Secretary of the military department responsible for the
procurement may waive this restriction on a case-by-case
basis by certifying in writing to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate
that such an acquisition must be made in order to acquire
capability for national security purposes.
Sec. 8099. None of the funds in this or any other Act shall
be available to any Reserve Component to establish new
activities to perform depot level maintenance and
remanufacture of any equipment in the Department of Defense
inventory unless the Secretary of Defense first certifies to
the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and the Senate, on a case-by-case basis, that
(a) insufficient workload capacity is available at existing
government or private sector depot maintenance facilities
currently used by the Reserve Components for similar work;
and (b) an in-depth analysis has been performed comparing the
cost of any proposed expansion of depot facilities versus the
cost of performing the same work at existing depot facilities
or by the private sector.
Sec. 8100. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
TRICARE managed care support contracts in effect, or in final
stages of acquisition as of September 30, 1998, may be
extended for two years: Provided, That

[[Page H5246]]

any such extension may only take place if the Secretary of
Defense determines that it is in the best interest of the
government: Provided further, That any contract extension
shall be based on the price in the final best and final offer
for the last year of the existing contract as adjusted for
inflation and other factors mutually agreed to by the
contractor and the government: Provided further, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, all future
TRICARE managed care support contracts replacing contracts in
effect, or in the final stages of acquisition as of September
30, 1998, may include a base contract period for transition
and up to seven one-year option periods.
Sec. 8101. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Act,
the total amount appropriated in this Act is hereby reduced
by $204,100,000 to reflect savings from revised economic
assumptions, to be distributed as follows:
``Aircraft Procurement, Army'', $4,000,000;
``Missile Procurement, Army'', $4,000,000;
``Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles,
Army'', $4,000,000;
``Procurement of Ammunition, Army'', $3,000,000;
``Other Procurement, Army'', $9,000,000;
``Aircraft Procurement, Navy'', $22,000,000;
``Weapons Procurement, Navy'', $4,000,000;
``Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps'',
$1,000,000;
``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy'', $18,000,000;
``Other Procurement, Navy'', $12,000,000;
``Procurement, Marine Corps'', $2,000,000;
``Aircraft Procurement, Air Force'', $23,000,000;
``Missile Procurement, Air Force'', $5,200,000;
``Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force'', $1,000,000;
``Other Procurement, Air Force'', $4,900,000;
``Procurement, Defense-Wide'', $5,100,000;
``Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army'',
$3,000,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army'',
$10,000,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy'',
$18,500,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force'',
$26,300,000; and
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-
Wide'', $24,100,000:

Provided, That these reductions shall be applied
proportionally to each budget activity, activity group and
sub-activity group and each program, project, and activity
within each appropriation account.
Sec. 8102. (a) Transfers of Vessels by Grant.--The
Secretary of the Navy is authorized to transfer vessels to
foreign countries on a grant basis under section 516 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j) as follows:
(1) To the Government of Argentina, the NEWPORT class tank
landing ship NEWPORT (LST 1179).
(2) To the Government of Greece--
(A) the KNOX class frigate HEPBURN (FF 1055); and
(B) the ADAMS class guided missile destroyers STRAUSS (DDG
16), SEMMS (DDG 18), and WADDELL (DDG 24).
(3) To the Government of Portugal, the STALWART class ocean
surveillance ship ASSURANCE (T-AGOS 5).
(4) To the Government of Turkey, the KNOX class frigates
PAUL (FF 1080), MILLER (FF 1091), and W.S. SIMMS (FF 1059).
(b) Transfers of Vessels by Sale.--The Secretary of the
Navy is authorized to transfer vessels to foreign countries
on a sales basis under section 21 of the Arms Export Control
Act (22 U.S.C. 2761) as follows:
(1) To the Government of Brazil, the NEWPORT class tank
landing ships CAYUGA (LST 1186) and PEORIA (LST 1183).
(2) To the Government of Chile--
(A) the NEWPORT class tank landing ship SAN BERNARDINO (LST
1189); and
(B) the auxiliary repair dry dock WATERFORD (ARD 5).
(3) To the Government of Greece--
(A) the OAK RIDGE class medium dry dock ALAMAGORDO (ARDM
2); and
(B) the KNOX class frigates VREELAND (FF 1068) and TRIPPE
(FF 1075).
(4) To the Government of Mexico--
(A) the auxiliary repair dock SAN ONOFRE (ARD 30); and
(B) the KNOX class frigate PHARRIS (FF 1094).
(5) To the Government of the Philippines, the STALWART
class ocean surveillance ship TRIUMPH (T-AGOS 4).
(6) To the Government of Spain, the NEWPORT class tank
landing ships HARLAN COUNTY (LST 1196) and BARNSTABLE COUNTY
(LST 1197).
(7) To the Taipai Economic and Cultural Representative
Office in the United States (the Taiwan instrumentality that
is designated pursuant to section 10(a) of the Taiwan
Relations Act)--
(A) the KNOX class frigates PEARY (FF 1073), JOSEPH HEWES
(FF 1078), COOK (FF 1083), BREWTON (FF 1086), KIRK (FF 1987),
and BARBEY (FF 1088);
(B) the NEWPORT class tank landing ships MANITOWOC (LST
1180) and SUMTER (LST 1181);
(C) the floating dry dock COMPETENT (AFDM 6); and
(D) the ANCHORAGE class dock landing ship PENSACOLA (LSD
38).
(8) To the Government of Turkey--
(A) the OLIVER HAZARD PERRY class guided missile frigates
MAHLON S. TISDALE (FFG 27), REID (FFG 30), and DUNCAN (FFG
10); and
(B) the KNOX class frigates REASONER (FF 1063), FANNING (FF
1076), BOWEN (FF 1079), MCCANDLESS (FF 1084), DONALD BEARY
(FF 1085), AINSWORTH (FF 1090), THOMAS C. HART (FF 1092), and
CAPODANNO (FF 1093).
(9) To the Government of Venezuela, the medium auxiliary
floating dry dock bearing hull number AFDM 2.
(c) Transfers of Vessels on a Combined Lease-Sale Basis.--
The Secretary of the Navy is authorized to transfer vessels
to foreign countries on a combined lease-sale basis under
sections 61 and 21 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C.
2796, 2761) and in accordance with subsection (d) as follows:
(1) To the Government of Brazil, the CIMARRON class oiler
MERRIMACK (AO 179).
(2) To the Government of Greece, the KIDD class guided
missile destroyers KIDD (DDG 993), CALLAGHAN (DDG 994), SCOTT
(DDG 995), and CHANDLER (DDG 996).
(d) Conditions Relating To Combined Lease-Sale Transfers.--
A transfer of a vessel on a combined lease-sale basis
authorized by subsection (c) shall be made in accordance with
the following provisions, which the Secretary shall include
in the terms of any agreement with the recipient country for
such transfer of the vessel:
(1) The Secretary may initially transfer the vessel by
lease, with lease payments suspended for the term of the
lease, while simultaneously entering into a foreign military
sales agreement for the transfer of title to the vessel.
(2) The Secretary may not deliver title to the vessel until
the purchase price of the vessel under such a sales agreement
is paid in full.
(3) Upon payment of the purchase price in full under such a
sales agreement and delivery of title to the recipient
country, the Secretary shall terminate the lease.
(4) If the purchasing country fails to make full payment of
the purchase price in accordance with the sales agreement--
(A) the sales agreement shall be immediately terminated;
(B) the suspension of lease payments under the lease shall
be vacated; and
(C) the United States shall be entitled to retain funds
received under the sales agreement in such amounts as
necessary to cover the amount of lease payments due and
payable under the lease and all other costs required by the
lease to be paid as of the date of the sales agreement
termination.
(5) If a sales agreement is terminated pursuant to
paragraph (4), the United States shall not be required to pay
any interest to the recipient country on any amount paid to
the United States by the recipient country under the sales
agreement and not retained by the United States under the
lease.
(e) Funding for Certain Costs of Transfers.--There is
established in the Treasury of the United States a special
account to be known as the Defense Vessels Transfer Program
Account. There is hereby appropriated into that account such
sums as may be necessary for the costs (as defined in section
502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 661a))
of the lease-sale transfers authorized by subsection (d).
Funds in that account are available only for the purpose of
covering those costs.
(f) Waiver of Requirements for Notification to Congress.--
Section 516(f) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22
U.S.C. 2321j(f)), section 525 of the Foreign Operations,
Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act,
1998 (Public Law 105-118; 111 Stat. 2412), and any similar,
successor provision of law do not apply with respect to the
transfers authorized by this section.
(g) Inapplicability of Aggregate Annual Limitation on Value
of Transferred Excess Defense Articles.--In the case of the
transfer of a vessel authorized by subsection (a) to be made
by grant under section 516 of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j), the value of the vessel transferred
shall not be included for purposes of subsection (g) of that
section in the aggregate value of excess defense articles
transferred to countries under that section in any fiscal
year.
(h) Costs of Transfers.--Any expense incurred by the United
States in connection with a transfer authorized by this
section shall be charged to the recipient.
(i) Repair and Refurbishment in United States Shipyards.--
To the maximum extent practicable, the Secretary of the Navy
shall require, as a condition of the transfer of a vessel
under this section, that the country to which the vessel is
transferred have such repair or refurbishment of the vessel
as is needed, before the vessel joins the naval forces of
that country, performed at a shipyard located in the United
States, including a United States Navy shipyard.
(j) Expiration of Authority.--The authority to transfer
vessels under this section shall expire at the end of the
two-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of
this Act.
Sec. 8103. None of the funds in this Act may be used to
compensate an employee of the Department of Defense who
initiates a new start program without notification to the
Office of the Secretary of Defense and the congressional
defense committees, as required by Department of Defense
financial management regulations.

(including transfer of funds)

Sec. 8104. Of the funds made available under title II of
this Act, the following

[[Page H5247]]

amounts shall be transferred to the Defense Working Capital
Funds for the purpose of funding operations of the Defense
Commissary Agency:
``Operation and Maintenance, Army'', $338,400,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'', $255,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps'', $86,600,000;
and
``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force'', $302,071,000:

Provided, That the transfer authority provided in this
section is in addition to any other transfer authority
contained elsewhere in this Act.
Sec. 8105. Of the amounts made available in title II of
this Act under the heading ``Operation and Maintenance,
Navy'', $20,000,000 is available only for emergency and
extraordinary expenses associated with the accident involving
a United States Marine Corps A-6 aircraft on February 3,
1998, near Cavalese, Italy: Provided, That these funds shall
remain available until expended: Provided further, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, the funds made
available by this section shall be available only for
payments to persons, communities, or other entities in Italy
only for reimbursement for damages resulting from the
expenses associated with the accident involving a United
States Marine Corps A-6 aircraft on February 3, 1998, near
Cavalese, Italy: Provided further, That notwithstanding any
other provision of law, funds made available under this
section may be used to rebuild or replace the funicular
system in Cavalese destroyed on February 3, 1998 by that
aircraft: Provided further, That any amount paid to any
individual or entity from the amount appropriated under this
section shall be credited against any amount subsequently
determined to be payable to that individual or entity under
chapter 163 of title 10, United States Code, section 127 of
that title, or any other authority provided by law for
administrative settlement of claims against the United States
with respect to damages arising from the accident described
in this section: Provided further, That payment of an amount
under this section shall not be considered to constitute a
statement of legal liability on the part of the United States
or otherwise to prejudge any judicial proceeding or
investigation arising from the accident described in this
section.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill through page 107, line
23, be considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment
at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Florida?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Sec. 8106. No funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be used to initiate or conduct
offensive military operations by United States Armed Forces
except in accordance with the war powers clause of the
Constitution (article 1, section 8), which vests in Congress
the power to declare and authorize war and to take certain
specified, related decisions.

The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 484, consideration of this
section under the 5-minute rule shall not exceed 1 hour.
Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, section 8106 in the bill really depends upon section 8
of Article I of the Constitution. I would just like to refer my
colleagues to that text which reads as follows:

The Congress shall have Power . . . to declare War, grant
letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make rules concerning
Captures on Land and Water.

What this amendment does is merely to say that no funds appropriated
in this bill may be used for military operations of the United States
except in accordance with that provision of the Constitution. In other
words, we are transforming, by including this language, the abstract
constitutional concept of the Congress' war powers authority and
turning it into a real and concrete requirement bearing on the way this
Nation will decide on military engagements at least during fiscal 1999.
This amendment represents the very simple proposition that we follow
the Constitution and impose the limitation that the Constitution states
and show that we really mean it. The question, of course, is: If you
are just restating a Constitution, why is this really necessary?
I made a few observations during the debate on the rule referring
back to statements by this administration and by the Bush
administration that take an extraordinarily expansive view of the
inherent authority held by the President to essentially define the
national interests of the United States and use military force to
implement that presidential definition of the national interest, which
I think should give us some real pause.
In the Constitution's provision which I quoted, I think we in
Congress, the legislative branch, have been given unequivocally and
exclusively the power to decide questions of war for this country, even
limited war. The framers put that power in Congress because they saw it
as really an essential part of our democracy, expressly rejecting the
idea, given their recent experience with the King of England, that the
President should have that kind of power.
The Constitution rightly, I think, expects us as the representatives
of the people to decide on questions of war.
There is always a lot of confusion because of that arcane phrase in
the Constitution about declaring war. Let me just say that usage and
dictionaries at the time the Constitution was drafted made it pretty
clear that ``declare'' in the understanding of the drafters also meant
``commence.''
That was clear, for instance, from Alexander Hamilton's commentary in
Federalist No. 25, noting that nations at the time went to war without
formal declaration. James Madison, the real father of the Constitution,
and Elbridge Gerry, during the Constitutional Convention, succeeded in
substituting the words ``declare'' for ``make'' to make it clear that
the President would have ``the power to repel sudden attacks.''
Very early in our republic, Chief Justice Marshall, with an
understanding of the contemporaneous thought of the drafters in a
Supreme Court decision, made the following statement, and I quote:

The whole powers of war being, by the Constitution of the
United States, vested in Congress, et cetera.

So there really should be no confusion about where this power lies.
At the time of the founding, it is also useful to understand what the
drafters were getting at by the phrase ``letters of marque and
reprisal.'' Essentially at that time, these were ways of settling
disputes short of all-out war.
Then-Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson wrote, ``The making of
reprisal on a nation is a very serious thing that is considered an act
of war.'' And he goes on, ``The right of reprisal is expressly lodged
with Congress by the Constitution and not with the executive.''
I elaborate a little bit on that because the action the President
contemplated last spring with regard to Iraq, the actions being
considered now with regard to Kosovo and Yugoslavia would best be
considered as limited war under the marque and reprisal clause.
The Constitution clearly gives the President a very powerful role as
commander in chief and as the maker of U.S. foreign policy.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Skaggs)
has expired.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. Skaggs was allowed to proceed for 5
additional minutes.)
Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Chairman, but in recent years, we have allowed the
President to usurp Congress' power in this area and far exceed, I
believe, what the Constitution contemplated.
I just wanted to offer to my colleagues' attention what I hope will
be a graphic representation to help understand what we are talking
about. That is the gray area that exists concededly between the
Constitution's grant to the President of foreign policy and Commander
in Chief powers and what the Constitution grants to this Congress under
the war-making clause.
At one end of the spectrum, we all recognize the President has the
inherent power to act to repel an attack, acts of defense of the
Nation. At the other end of the spectrum of possible military
operations, it is also pretty clear that we are given the power to
determine whether or not this country would invade another country, a
pure offensive action.
No one really knows exactly where our power ends under the
Constitution, and our exclusive power, I might add, nor where the
President's exclusive powers as Commander in Chief end. There is a gray
area. But whatever Congress' power extends, all this amendment does is
to say, to that extent, funds in the bill cannot be spent without
complying with the Constitution.
That is important, I think, because for among other reasons, the

[[Page H5248]]

antideficiency act gives real teeth, then, to this provision in
restraining and informing the decisions that would be made by the
executive, either to act on its own or more properly to come here and
deal with Congress and in the way the Constitution intended.
I hear a lot of complaints around here about our not being consulted.
Let me tell my colleagues, if they want to be consulted about these
important decisions, make sure this stays in the bill, because this has
gotten the administration's attention, as it should.
I mentioned during the debate on the rule the statement of
administration policy which includes a veto threat on this provision.
That would be, I think, comic if it were not so serious. The idea that
the President would veto a bill because Congress asserts and reclaims
its designated and exclusive constitutional responsibility under
Article I, section 8, is a little dumbfounding. I cannot believe the
President would really follow through on that, a veto because Congress
says that it and the President should follow the Constitution. Give me
a break.
I realize there is a practice that has been built up during the Cold
War years in which we are very deferential to the President, but in
reconsidering this, let me just call my colleagues' attention to one of
the compelling statements that Madison made about this, and I quote:
In no part of the Constitution is more wisdom to be found
than in the clause which confides the question of war or
peace to the legislature and not to the executive department.
The trust and the temptation would be too great for one man.

I think that serves to demonstrate, again, the need for this
provision. It underscores the wisdom of the founders, as Madison said.
My colleagues, if we do not stand up for our responsibilities and
progresses under the Constitution, nobody else is going to. I think the
American people have a right to expect us to do our job. If we are,
indeed, tired of being ignored in these very important decisions about
sending our Armed Forces into harm's way, I hope we will not only
retain this provision in this bill tonight, but that my friends, the
chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee will do their utmost to
see that it is also retained in conference.
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I was very favorably impressed at the learning shared
by our colleague, the gentleman from Colorado, emphasizing the
importance of section 8106 in the defense appropriations bill. I wish
to add my own strong endorsement of this language and emphasize an
additional reason why we should insist upon it.
The record of the President taking the authority away from Congress
is a disappointing one in this century. On one recent occasion, one of
our colleagues, joined by others, brought a lawsuit. That was former
Congressman Dellums who brought a lawsuit against former President Bush
regarding his use of force.
The Court dismissed the case saying that the Congress itself had not
spoken and that it required, in order for the case to be ripe, that the
Congress speak.
It is my interpretation of section 8106 that it provides the ripeness
for just such a challenge, should the President exercise the authority
that he claims, to go to war without having an express approval in
advance from the Congress of the United States. That, to me, is a very
important purpose achieved here.
Secondly, the language refers to the War Resolution Authority, the
authority to declare war in the Constitution. It does not in so many
terms refer to the Commander in Chief authority.

{time} 1930

The power in the President vested as Commander in Chief includes the
power to repel attacks, to respond to sudden attacks, and it is often
that provision which is relied upon by Presidents when they choose to
go to war without getting the approval of Congress, if they care to
justify it at all. When we let that power slip from our fingers, we
inch by inch approach tyranny, to give that much power to the President
which our Founders wished not to see vested in a single person.
So this provision, in section 8106, does not refer to the Commander
in Chief. I interpret the draftsperson's intention to be, and all of us
who are discussing this tonight, that the President in exercising
authority under this appropriation act is to exercise authority
specifically as 8106 says, and, that is, in compliance with the
provisions of the war declaration authority. It is constitutional for
us to impose this condition. If the President does not like it he may
veto it. Indeed that is apparently what my colleague from Colorado
informs us he has threatened to do.
But I lay down this legislative marker. The President, if he chooses
to use force, must find the justification under the declaration of war
authority, or he is violating the terms of this appropriation act and
violating the antideficiency act. I would also say he is violating the
Constitution, but that is the second issue. The first, the most
immediate one, this is legislation and he would be violating the
legislation.
Lastly, I wish to speak on the Constitution. It is very important not
to forget that the Founders wanted all wars to be decided by the
people's representatives. The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr.
Sanford) said it so eloquently when we debated this question once
before. He said, ``The bodies come home to Charleston, they don't come
home to Washington.'' That is why the Founders intended to have this
authority in the People's House and in the other body. All wars.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to conclude my remarks by a quotation from
``War and Responsibility'' by Professor John Hart Ely, professor of
constitutional law at Yale, then at Harvard, then dean of the Stanford
Law School, now with the University of Miami.
``The power to declare war was constitutionally vested in Congress.
The debates, and early practice, establish that this meant that all
wars, big or small, declared in so many words or not--most weren't,
even then--had to be legislatively authorized.''
And in a footnote, Professor Ely then gives us the citations to
Supreme Court cases at the time of the Founders from Justice Bushrod
Washington:
``The early cases insisted on congressional authorization without
pausing to evaluate the size of the conflict,'' citing the 1800 opinion
in Bas v. Tingy: ``Every contention by force, between two nations, in
external matters, under the authority of their respective governments,
is not only war, but public war.'' And similarly the Supreme Court
opinions in Talbot v. Seeman, 1801, and Little v. Barreme in 1804.
Mr. Chairman, I conclude by commending the gentleman from Colorado
for his insistence throughout this appropriation process on the
constitutional prerogatives of the House and the other body, not for
the sake of any one of us but for the sake of the people whom we
represent that war not be fought without the express up-front approval
of the Congress.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
Sec. 8100. (a) Ensuring Year 2000 Compliance of Information
Technology and National Security Systems.--(1) None of the
funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act
may (except as provided in paragraph (2)) be obligated or
expended on the development or modernization of any
information technology or national security system of the
Department of Defense in use by the Department of Defense
(whether or not the system is a mission critical system) if
that system does not meet certification level 1a, 1b, or 2
(as prescribed in the April 1997 publication of the
Department of Defense entitled ``Year 2000 Management
Plan'').
(2) The limitation in paragraph (1) does not apply to an
obligation or expenditure--
(A) that is directly related to ensuring that a system
achieves year 2000 compliance;
(B) for a system that is being developed and fielded to
replace before January 1, 2000, a noncompliant system or a
system to be terminated in accordance with the May 1998
Department of Defense quarterly report on the status of year
2000 compliance; or
(C) for a particular change that is specifically required
by law or that is specifically directed by the Secretary of
Defense.
(b) Unallocated Reductions of Funds Not To Apply to Mission
Critical Systems.--Funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act for mission critical systems are not
subject to any unallocated reduction of funds made by or
otherwise applicable to funds provided in this Act.
(c) Current Services Operations Not Affected.--Subsection
(a) does not prohibit the obligation or expenditure of funds
for current services operations of information technology and
national security systems.
(d) Waiver Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may waive
subsection (a) on a case-

[[Page H5249]]

by-case basis with respect to an information technology or
national security system if the Secretary provides the
congressional defense committees with written notice of the
waiver, including the reasons for the waiver and a timeline
for the testing and certification of the system as year 2000
compliant.
(e) Required Report.--(1) Not later than December 1, 1998,
the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report describing--
(A) an executable strategy to be used throughout the
Department of Defense to test information technology and
national security systems for year 2000 compliance (to
include functional capability tests and military exercises);
(B) the plans of the Department of Defense for ensuring
that adequate resources (such as testing facilities, tools,
and personnel) are available to ensure that all mission
critical systems achieve year 2000 compliance; and
(C) the criteria and process to be used to certify a system
as year 2000 compliant.
(2) The report shall also include--
(A) an updated list of all mission critical systems; and
(B) guidelines for developing contingency plans for the
functioning of each information technology or national
security system in the event of a year 2000 problem in any
such system.
(f) Capability Contingency Plans.--Not later than December
30, 1998, the Secretary of Defense shall have in place
contingency plans to ensure continuity of operations for
every critical mission or function of the Department of
Defense that is dependent on an information technology or
national security system.
(g) Inspector General Evaluation.--The Inspector General of
the Department of Defense shall selectively audit information
technology and national security systems certified as year
2000 compliant to evaluate the ability of systems to
successfully operate during the actual year 2000, including
the ability of the systems to access and transmit information
from point of origin to point of termination.
(h) Definitions.--For purposes of 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 such Act (40 U.S.C. 1452).
(3) The term ``development or modernization'' has the
meaning given that term in paragraph E of section 180203 of
the Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation
(DOD 7000.14-R), but does not include any matter covered by
subparagraph 3 of that paragraph.
(4) The term ``current services'' has the meaning given
that term in paragraph C of section 180203 of the Department
of Defense Financial Management Regulation (DOD 7000.14-R).
(5) The term ``mission critical system'' means an
information technology or national security system that is
designated as mission critical in the May 1998 Department of
Defense quarterly report on the status of year 2000
compliance.
Sec. 8101. (a) Plan for Simulation of Year 2000 in Military
Exercises.--Not later than December 15, 1998, the Secretary
of Defense shall submit to Congress a plan for the execution
of a simulated year 2000 as part of military exercises
described in subsection (c) in order to evaluate, in an
operational environment, the extent to which information
technology and national security systems involved in those
exercises will successfully operate during the actual year
2000, including the ability of those systems to access and
transmit information from point of origin to point of
termination.
(b) Evaluation of Compliance in Selected Exercises.--In
conducting the military exercises described in subsection
(c), the Secretary of Defense shall ensure that at least 25
of those exercises (referred to in this section as ``Year
2000 simulation exercises'') are conducted so as to include a
simulated year 2000 in accordance with the plan submitted
under subsection (a). The Secretary of Defense shall ensure
that at least two of those exercises are conducted by the
commander of each unified or specified combatant command.
(c) Covered Military Exercises.--A military exercise
referred to in subsections (a) and (b) 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.
(d) Authority for Exclusion of Systems Not Capable of
Performing Reliably in Year 2000 Simulation.--(1) In carrying
out a Year 2000 simulation exercise, the Secretary of Defense
may exclude a particular information technology or national
security system from the year 2000 simulation phase of the
exercise if the Secretary determines that the system would be
incapable of performing reliably during the year 2000
simulation phase of the exercise. In such a case, the system
excluded shall be replaced in accordance with the year 2000
contingency plan for the system.
(2) If the Secretary of Defense excludes an information
technology or national security system from the year 2000
simulation phase of an exercise as provided in paragraph (1),
the Secretary shall notify Congress of that exclusion not
later than two weeks before commencing that exercise. The
notice shall include a list of each information technology or
national security system excluded from the exercise, a
description of how the exercise will use the year 2000
contingency plan for each such system, and a description of
the effect that continued year 2000 noncompliance of each
such system would have on military readiness.
(3) An information technology or national security system
with cryptological applications that is not capable of having
its internal clock adjusted forward to a simulated later time
is exempt from the year 2000 simulation phase of an exercise
under this section.
(e) Definitions.--For the purposes of 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 such Act (40 U.S.C. 1452).
Sec. . During the current fiscal year and hereafter, no
funds appropriated or otherwise available to the Department
of Defense may be used to award a contract to, extend a
contract with, or approve the award of a subcontract to any
person who within the preceding 15 years has been convicted
under section 704 of title 18, United States Code, of the
unlawful manufacture or sale of the Congressional Medal of
Honor.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida (during the reading.) Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill through page 116, line
22, be considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment
at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Florida?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to that portion of the bill?
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I had an amendment at the desk, but I am not going to
offer that. Instead, I would like to enter into a colloquy with the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), chairman of the Subcommittee on
National Security.
Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman is aware, the National Guard Starbase
program, which has reached almost 200,000 children, is a community-
based National Guard program that helps kids in grades 4 through 6
learn hands-on with Guard pilots and technicians. This public school
outreach program boosts kids' learning and test scores in math,
science, and technology applications. At the same time, Starbase
stresses the prevention of drug abuse and builds understanding of self-
esteem, goal-setting and teamwork. Unfortunately, as the gentleman is
aware, this important project did not receive funding in the Defense
appropriations bill.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SANDERS. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. I would say to the gentleman that yes, I am
aware of the program, and the gentleman from Vermont is correct that
the committee was not able to fund the Starbase program in this bill,
due to the lack of authorization.
Mr. SANDERS. This in my view is very unfortunate, but I am hopeful
that the gentleman will work to support the National Guard Starbase
program in conference and bring the funding level to the $6 million
appropriated in the other body.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. If the gentleman will yield further, again I
thank the gentleman from Vermont for his efforts to secure funding for
this program and assure the gentleman that I will do my best to match
the level appropriated in the Senate.
Mr. SANDERS. I thank the gentleman for his commitment. I see that the
gentleman from South Dakota (Mr. Thune), a strong supporter of the
Starbase program, is also on the floor.
I yield to the gentleman from South Dakota.
Mr. THUNE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Vermont for
bringing this important matter forward. I would also like to thank the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the chairman of the Subcommittee on
National Security, for the excellent leadership

[[Page H5250]]

that he and the Committee on Appropriations have taken in matters
regarding our Nation's defense. Additionally, I would like to thank the
gentleman from Florida for his willingness to work with the gentleman
from Vermont and me to ensure this important National Guard program is
funded. I would just simply ask a question of the distinguished
chairman. Am I correct in restating that the gentleman is committed to
match the level of funding found in the Senate Defense appropriations
bill for the Starbase program?
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. If the gentleman from Vermont will yield
further, I would respond to the gentleman from South Dakota and thank
him for his interest in this program and say yes, I am committed to
working with both gentlemen to secure funding for the program. I would
also like to thank the gentleman from South Dakota for his attention to
defense of our Nation and also for his efforts in working with the
gentleman from Vermont to bring this matter to the attention of the
committee.
Mr. THUNE. Again I thank the distinguished gentleman. As the
gentleman knows, the National Guard Starbase program is an important
initiative in my State of South Dakota. This program is strongly
supported by the South Dakota National Guard and teachers all across my
great State. It has impacted the lives of students and Guard personnel
alike. We all recognize the importance of encouraging students to enter
into the fields of science and math in our country. This program
bolsters those efforts by reaching over 200,000 students across this
country. The $6 million allocation would be a very small investment in
a program that has shown great returns in the education of our Nation's
youth. I am pleased that the gentleman from Florida and the gentleman
from Vermont are working with me on this matter.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from South Dakota
for his comments.
Mr. Chairman, the Starbase program is a chance for Members in the
House to support their National Guard and to fund an educational
program that represents just the kind of policy initiatives we need in
this country. It is endorsed by the National Guard Association of the
United States and cosponsored by the gentleman from South Dakota (Mr.
Thune), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Bonior) and the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Bentsen). I would just conclude by thanking the gentleman
from Florida very much and the other Members for their support for this
important initiative.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Bentsen

Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. Bentsen:
At the end of the bill (preceding the short title), insert
the following:
Sec. ____. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be used for the transportation into
the United States of polychlorinated biphenyls manufactured
outside the United States and owned by the Department of
Defense except as provided for in section 6(e) of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2605(e)).

Mr. BENTSEN (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the
Record.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Texas?
There was no objection.
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to ensure
that the Department of Defense complies with all the rules and
regulations of the Toxic Substances Control Act. This amendment
prohibits the Defense Department from using any funds appropriated by
this act to transport into the United States polychlorinated biphenyls
manufactured outside the United States and owned by the Department of
Defense, except as provided for in section 6(e) of the Toxic Substances
Control Act.
This amendment is necessary because the Department of Defense (DoD)
has had language inserted in the Senate Defense Authorization bill that
would allow for the unfettered importation of PCBs into the United
States. Similar language was initially inserted in the House version of
the bill, but it was subsequently deleted. This amendment prohibits the
DoD from turning our nation into the world's chemical wastebasket
through the transportation of foreign-produced PCB waste into the
United States for permanent disposal.
Because of serious environmental and public health hazards associated
with PCBs, Congress in 1976 banned both their manufacture and
importation under TSCA. PCBs are a dangerous class of chemicals that
collect in the body and cause a range of adverse health effects
including cancer, reproductive damage, and birth defects. When
incinerated, PCBs release dioxin--one of the most toxic chemicals
known. PCBs accumulate in the environment and move towards the top of
the food chain, contaminating fish, birds, and ultimately humans. They
are the only chemicals Congress designated for phase-out under TSCA.
The language in Section 321 of the Senate Defense Authorization bill,
S. 2060, would overturn over twenty years of sound environmental law
recently affirmed by the 9th Federal Circuit Court and jeopardize the
health and safety of Americans by allowing the importation of foreign-
produced PCBs. Further, this change has never been reviewed by the
Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over TSCA. The DoD has
demonstrated a clear lack of good environmental judgement as
underscored by several recent articles in the Baltimore Sun documenting
the hazardous and environmentally unsound techniques being used to
dismantle decommissioned U.S. Navy ships. The DoD allowed unscrupulous
salvage operators to dismantle U.S. Navy ships without proper
environmental controls or worker protections. Asbestos was removed by
workers who were not provided respirators and then disposed of by
heaving it over the side of ship into the water. I believe it is unwise
to allow the DoD to continue to make or alter environmental policy
without proper oversight from Congress.
My amendment also reaffirms the unanimous 1997 ruling by the Ninth
Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that a similar attempt by EPA to allow
the importation of PCBs had violated TSCA. Chief Judge Proctor Hug
wrote, ``EPA lacked the statutory authority to promulgate the Import
Rule, which violates the PCB manufacture ban contained in the Toxic
Substances Control Act.''
It is important to note that current law already provides an
exemption that allows the DoD to return PCB waste to the United States
if such PCBs were purchased in the United States, shipped to an
overseas military base, have been continuously under U.S. control, and
now need to be returned for disposal. This exemption ensures that any
PCBs exported from the United States to one of our military
installations abroad can be returned.
Mr. Chairman, the DoD does not have any legitimate reasons for
wanting to overturn the ban on the importation of PCBs. They are trying
to slip in this change without prior Congressional review and approval.
I urge my colleagues to support my amendment so that the House can
express its position on this issue and the United States can be
protected from becoming a toxic waste dump for the world.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BENTSEN. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, we are anxious to accept the gentleman's
amendment and appreciate his work in this area.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BENTSEN. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, we agree that the Department of
Defense should follow the law and obey the law. We appreciate the
gentleman calling this to the attention of the House. We accept the
amendment.
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairman and the
ranking member both for this and for their work on the DREAMS project
which they have funded in this bill which is in my district.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bentsen).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Sanders

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

Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Sanders:
At the end of title VIII (page ____, after line ____),
insert the following new section:
Sec. . None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be used to enter into or renew a
contract wit any company owned, or partially owned, by the
People's Republic of China or the People's Liberation Army of
the People's Republic of China.

Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Chairman, my amendment sponsored by the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey)
and the gentlewoman from

[[Page H5251]]

Florida (Mrs. Fowler) is very simple and straightforward. It bans the
Department of Defense from buying products from Chinese state-owned
companies as well as companies owned by the People's Liberation Army.
Mr. Chairman, I think that it might come as a surprise to many
Members of this body that the Defense Department now builds the B-2
bomber with parts made by a company owned by the People's Republic of
China.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SANDERS. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, I know the gentleman has discussed this
with me and a number of members of the subcommittee. We appreciate his
bringing this to our attention. We certainly accept it on our side of
the aisle.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SANDERS. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the fact that the
gentleman discussed this amendment with me several days ago. We agree
and accept the amendment.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SANDERS. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
(Mr. SMITH of New Jersey asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the
gentleman, and I am proud to be a cosponsor of the amendment. We should
have nothing to do with the oppressive PLA. Making them part of the
defense procurement process in this country is patently absurd. I thank
the gentleman for his amendment.
I would like to thank my good friend, Representative Sanders, for
taking the initiative in preparing this amendment, of which I am a
proud cosponsor. This amendment simply requires that companies owned by
the People's Republic of China and its People's Liberation Army not be
allowed to profit from contracts with the United States Department of
Defense.
Over the past several years, the Chinese dictatorship and its
military enforcer, the People's Liberation Army, have begun turning a
profit using a vast web of state-owned companies and surrogate
entities. These commercial entities are involved with everything from
arms sales to hotel management, and are an important source of
clandestine revenue for the Beijing regime.
The billions of dollars and technological know-how gained by these
commercial ventures are helping to underwrite a massive, surreptitious
modernization of the Chinese armed forces. Although the Chinese
government claims that it spent only $11 billion on its armed forces
last year, the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency estimates that
the actual figure is nearly six times that amount. Because the revenue
generated by PRC and PLA-owned enterprises is not publicly disclosed or
included in the Chinese government's declared budget, we cannot be
certain of its extent. But responsible estimates by international
experts reach into the billions of dollars.
The Sanders-Smith amendment is important to the struggle for human
rights. The People's Republic of China and the PLA still defiantly
refuse to face the truth about their massacre of hundreds of peaceful
democracy advocates in Tiananmen Square nine years ago this month. The
PLA is engaged in the brutal occupation of Tibet, the repression of
religious free exercise, and the sale of human organs from executed
prisoners. The Chinese government uses forced abortion and
sterilization as an officially sanctioned component of its population
control program. According to testimony provided by my Subcommittee on
numerous occasions, state-owned entities are also exploiting slave
labor in the Chinese loagai. Our Defense Department must not enrich and
empower the repressive forces of the Chinese government.
The Sanders-Smith amendment is also justified by strategic concerns:
Chinese state-owned companies routinely engage in destabilizing
activities, such as the sale of weapons--sometimes including weapons of
mass destruction--to countries such as Iran, Burma, Pakistan, and Saudi
Arabia. And PLA-owned companies have been caught smuggling weapons into
the United States. A 1996 FBI sting operation intercepted 2,000 AK-47
machine guns apparently intended for use by terrorists or other violent
criminals.
PLA and PRC-owned enterprises are also procuring cutting-edge
technology--such as supercomputers and advanced telecommunications
equipment--that can be put to military use. Because these companies
ostensibly use such technology for commercial purposes, they are often
not subject to the export controls that would be imposed on military
transfers. An essay by Chinese General Ding Henggao [DING heng-GOW],
translated by the Pentagon, confirms that China is actively pursuing
``possible transfers from commercial technology to defense use.''
Against this background, the Sanders-Smith amendment deserves
universal, bipartisan support. It merely states that the United States
Department of Defense must take care not to subsidize the Chinese
military by awarding contracts to PLA and PRC-owned enterprises.
American security and American ideals demand no less.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read the final lines of the bill.
The Clerk read as follows:

This Act may be cited as the ``Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 1999''.

The CHAIRMAN. If there are no further amendments, under the rule the
Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Smith of New Jersey) having assumed the chair, Mr. Camp, Chairman of
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R.
4103) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 1999, and for other purposes, pursuant
to House Resolution 484, he reported the bill, as amended pursuant to
that rule, back to the House with further sundry amendments adopted by
the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment? If not, the Chair will
put them en gros.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XV, the yeas and nays are ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 358,
nays 61, not voting 14, as follows:

[Roll No. 266]

YEAS--358

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Andrews
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baker
Baldacci
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berman
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (FL)
Bryant
Bunning
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Canady
Cannon
Capps
Cardin
Carson
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth
Christensen
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Condit
Cook
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Cramer
Crapo
Cubin
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeGette
DeLauro
DeLay
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dixon
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Ensign
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fawell
Fazio
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Fowler
Fox
Frost
Gallegly
Ganske
Gejdenson
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hansen
Harman
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Hefner
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinojosa
Hobson
Holden
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kanjorski
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy (MA)
Kennedy (RI)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kim
King (NY)
Kingston
Klink
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Lampson
Lantos
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)

[[Page H5252]]

Lewis (KY)
Linder
Livingston
LoBiondo
Lowey
Lucas
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McHale
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Menendez
Metcalf
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Mink
Moakley
Mollohan
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Myrick
Neal
Nethercutt
Neumann
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Ortiz
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Pappas
Parker
Pascrell
Pastor
Paxon
Pease
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Pickett
Pitts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Poshard
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rangel
Redmond
Regula
Reyes
Riggs
Riley
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Ryun
Sabo
Salmon
Sanchez
Sandlin
Sawyer
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaefer, Dan
Schaffer, Bob
Schumer
Scott
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Sisisky
Skaggs
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (OR)
Smith (TX)
Smith, Adam
Smith, Linda
Snowbarger
Snyder
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Spratt
Stabenow
Stearns
Stenholm
Stokes
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Talent
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thompson
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tierney
Torres
Traficant
Turner
Visclosky
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watkins
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Weygand
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wise
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NAYS--61

Barrett (WI)
Becerra
Berry
Brown (CA)
Brown (OH)
Campbell
Conyers
Coyne
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
Delahunt
Deutsch
Doggett
Ehlers
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Franks (NJ)
Furse
Gutierrez
Hinchey
Hoekstra
Hooley
Jackson (IL)
Johnson (WI)
Kind (WI)
Kleczka
Kucinich
Lee
Lofgren
Luther
McDermott
McGovern
McKinney
Meeks (NY)
Miller (CA)
Minge
Morella
Nadler
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Owens
Paul
Payne
Petri
Rahall
Ramstad
Royce
Rush
Sanders
Sanford
Sensenbrenner
Shays
Stark
Towns
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Watt (NC)
Woolsey

NOT VOTING--14

Baesler
Crane
Dingell
Frelinghuysen
Gonzalez
Hamilton
Kaptur
LaFalce
Lipinski
Manton
Markey
McDade
Wolf
Yates

{time} 2007

Mr. HOEKSTRA changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. PICKERING and Ms. RIVERS changed their vote from ``nay'' to
``yea.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________