[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 58 (Thursday, May 9, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H2265-H2353]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   BOB STUMP NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 415 and rule 
XVIII, 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. 4546.

                              {time}  1331


                     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. 4546) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2003 for 
military activities of the Department of Defense, and for military 
construction, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 
2003, 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 Arizona (Mr. Stump) and the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump).
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, on May 1 the Committee on Armed Services reported H.R. 
4546 on a strong bipartisan vote of 57 to one. The bill authorizes 
appropriations for the Department of Defense and for the Department of 
Energy national security programs for a total of $383 billion in budget 
authority, consistent with the President's budget and with the House-
passed budget resolution.
  Over the next few hours, we will debate and explain the many 
initiatives contained in this bill to support and strengthen our Armed 
Forces during this critical period in our Nation's history. I am 
pleased to once again be able to report to my colleagues that this 
legislation embodies the same bipartisan spirit that has guided U.S. 
national security policy for decades.
  It provides for pay, housing, fiscal and physical well-being of our 
Armed Forces members and their families. It provides for the research 
and acquisition of our military arsenal so critical to maintaining our 
combat edge on the battlefield. It provides for the resources and tools 
to properly train our forces to be ready to defend our freedoms around 
the world at a moment's notice, and it also provides for our Nation's 
military retirees, who devoted a better time of their lives for this 
country.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a very good bill. It follows the spending 
blueprints set forth by the President to make his defense budget the 
largest since 1990. It also marks the largest single-year increase in 
defense spending since 1966.
  By marking the fifth consecutive year of real increases in defense 
spending, we are starting to dig out of the budget hole that we created 
after 13 years of budget cuts. Our Armed Forces, while still the most 
formidable fighting force on the planet, face serious and fundamental 
choices in the years ahead. This presents both an opportunity and a 
risk if the choices we make are not prudent and do not hedge on our 
bets against the inevitable surprises and challenges that may lie 
ahead.
  The bill before the House sets a prudent course. It recognizes 
today's new reality and accelerates and emphasizes new tools necessary 
for the critical fight against terrorism. It makes sure that our most 
precious military commodity and resource, our men and women in uniform, 
are properly compensated and taken care of.
  It also makes sure we do not forget the basics, the unglamorous 
elements of the defense budget necessary to make sure it works when 
called upon.
  Mr. Chairman, on a personal note, this marks the last defense 
authorization bill that I will have the privilege to manage before this 
great House. It has been an honor to serve and have the trust of my 
colleagues to be able to

[[Page H2266]]

lead two great committees over the past 8 years, and I will greatly 
miss the friendship and bipartisanship, the sense of mission that 
allows the Committee on Veterans Affairs and the Committee on Armed 
Services to quietly and effectively do their important work on behalf 
of our Nation's veterans and military forces.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the Bob Stump National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. This bill, properly so, 
is named in honor of our chairman, who has stated his intention not to 
return to this body; and I thank him for the work that he has done on 
the bipartisan amendment within the committee itself.
  The committee unanimously named this bill for him. This is an 
excellent bill. It passed by a vote of 57 to one. It authorizes $393 
billion for defense programs, which includes $15.5 billion for the 
Department of Energy defense-related matters.
  The bill makes a number of vital readiness and modernization 
improvements, and it does a good job in keeping our forces the best 
trained and the best equipped in the world. The quality-of-life issues 
are excellent for our servicemembers and their families. In particular, 
there is a 4.1 percent pay raise, with targeted raises, and I am also 
pleased to state that there is an increase in the end strength for all 
services, a much, much needed improvement.
  Many missions are being performed by our men and women in uniform 
that make it clear that we need more people. There is an increase of 
some $4 million in military construction and family housing that also 
adds to the quality of life. We were able to increase funding for 
procurement, research and development, and military construction.
  My principal reservations with this bill do concern matters relating 
to the environment and nuclear weapons policy. But with that said, at 
the end of the day, Mr. Chairman, this is an excellent bill. It will 
help our readiness; it will help our troops, whether they be on the 
field or on post or on base in this country. We are very proud of what 
they do, so this is a major step in supporting them.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), chairman of our Subcommittee on 
Military Research and Development.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me.
  Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to join the other members of the 
Committee and of the House in thanking the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. 
Stump) for his great service to our country, not only in the House of 
Representatives, but also as a 16-year-old kid who joined the U.S. Navy 
in World War II. That great ethic of service to the Nation has carried 
through, and the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Stump) has put 
together a great bill which is essential to this country right now 
because we are in a war.
  I made a few comments during the rule that I think covered to some 
degree my work and the work of the Subcommittee on Military Research 
and Development and our contribution to the bill.
  Basically, we are working to try and put some money into some high-
leverage areas. We have done a pretty good job along those lines. There 
is missiles and missile defense. That is the ability to stop missiles, 
from the slow-moving SCUDS, or the Model-Ts of the offensive missiles, 
all the way up to the fast ICBMs that can be thrown all the way across 
a great ocean at a nation. Our ability to stop those missiles right now 
does not exist except in the very low-performance area, and we are 
moving aggressively with a $7.9 billion program.
  The leader of that program, General Kadish, is, I think, acknowledged 
by Democrats and Republicans to be an extraordinary steward of this 
program. We have given him some very broad funding categories in 
missile defense; and we have told him to go out and test this stuff, 
test it in very difficult situations, put a lot of stress on the 
systems, and throw out the losers and promote the winners. That means 
to spend money where it is going to be effective for American security.
  So we have given General Kadish a great deal of discretion. I think 
it is discretion well placed. We have kept that budget very well 
funded.
  Lastly, Mr. Chairman, we have put money in a couple of vulnerable 
areas. We have put money in the area that has been a real concern to 
the United States, and that is our ability to defend our ships against 
increasing performance of antiship missiles that potential adversaries 
are developing around the world.
  We have also put some money, some additional dollars, into our mine-
clearing and mine-detection capability, a very important area for us 
because now we are moving from the deep ocean Navy and deep ocean 
conflict scenarios into the so-called littorals, right up against the 
shore where minefields are going to play an increasing role. So we have 
put money there.
  Also we see some potential adversaries building now these new 
submarine classes, mainly diesel subs, but subs that are very quiet 
that can hold choke points that can cause us severe problems in 
strategic areas of the world and where our ability to detect those 
submarines is critical. So we have put more money in research and 
development against those areas.
  Our members participated fully, Mr. Chairman; and I think we have put 
together a good package. I want to again thank the chairman of the full 
committee for this opportunity.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Ortiz).
  (Mr. ORTIZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ORTIZ. I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me, Mr. 
Chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4546, the Bob Stump 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to specifically address the provisions in the 
act relating to military readiness. First, I thank the Subcommittee on 
Military Readiness leadership and my colleagues on both sides of the 
committee here for doing a great job, and at the same time to the staff 
for doing a great job, and for the manner in which they conducted the 
business of the subcommittee this session.
  I also wants to express my appreciation to my good friend, the 
gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Stump), who has now decided to retire, 
for his friendship and for his leadership these last few years that we 
have worked together. Mr. Chairman, we are going to miss you.
  Also, I say thanks to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) for 
his personal involvement and the extraordinary steps he took in getting 
us to this point in developing the readiness portion of fiscal year 
2003. Although we worked at an accelerated pace this session, we had an 
opportunity to see readiness through a different set of eyes, the eyes 
of the leaders of the soldiers, sailors, and airmen who are entrusted 
with the awesome responsibility of carrying out our responsibility at 
the forefront, in harm's way.
  We heard them talk about the charges of repair parts, the extra hours 
they spent trying to maintain old equipment, and the difficulties 
encountered in trying to conduct realistic training. While we in this 
body may differ on some policies and program objectives, we in the 
subcommittee were able to get a better appreciation of the challenges 
that they face in performing their duties. For their effort, we can all 
be proud of it.
  Mr. Chairman, the readiness provision in this bill reflects some of 
the steps I believe are necessary with the dollars available to make 
their task easier. It does not provide all that is needed. Much more 
funding could be used. At the same time, I believe that this is a good 
bill. I encourage our Members of the House to vote for a very 
responsible bill.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton), the chairman of our 
Subcommittee on Military Construction.

[[Page H2267]]

                              {time}  1345

  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4546, the 
Bob Stump Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. Last week the 
Committee on Armed Services, as has been said here a couple of times 
previously, voted on a great bipartisan vote, almost unanimously, to 
continue the committee's tradition of bipartisanship in addressing the 
defense needs of this Nation.
  As we should expect, this bill contains several initiatives that will 
aid the Armed Services in their ongoing war against terrorism on behalf 
of the American people and, indeed, on behalf of the citizens of the 
world. I have the honor of chairing two bodies involved in this effort, 
the Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism and the Subcommittee on 
Military Installations and Facilities.
  The Special Oversight Panel on Terrorism has been extremely active in 
educating Members of the clandestine ways of terrorists and seeking 
innovative ways to protect American forces. The Subcommittee on 
Military installations and Facilities has also been extremely active in 
our area of responsibility in approving a multitude of important 
projects necessary for improved force protection of military bases.
  This bill does much more than enforce protection, however, and I want 
to be sure that Members know that this need was carefully addressed by 
approving only projects that were requested by the Department of 
Defense and by making sure that these monies will be spent well.
  I want to also thank Tom Hawley, our staffer, for all of the work 
that he did in making sure that necessary measures were put in place in 
a very efficient way.
  Also, always I work closely with my counterpart and good friend the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hobson) of the Subcommittee on Military 
Construction of the Committee on Appropriations to develop the MILCON 
program for 2003. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hobson) and our ranking 
members the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie) and the gentleman 
from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver) have worked closely with all interested 
parties to build a program that supports the Department of Defense on 
addressing major facilities and quality of life shortfalls.
  Mr. Chairman, let me say in closing that this chart I have here to my 
left represents, I believe, the crux of what we did on this year's 
military installation facilities authorization bill. H.R. 4546 includes 
$10 billion for military construction and family housing accounts, 
including $2 billion for quality of life enhancement. This is extremely 
important, as all the members of the Committee on Armed Services are 
aware, because in an all-volunteer Army if we cannot attract good 
sailors, soldiers, Marines and airmen then our military capabilities 
will suffer. To that extent, we have included monies to enhance quality 
of life and to provide the necessary facilities in this regard.
  So, Mr. Chairman, I ask everyone to support this bill today. I hope 
it will be another great bipartisan vote at the conclusion of the 
debate, which will occur sometime around 8 o'clock, and let me again 
thank my friend the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) for his 
wonderful work as chairman of this committee.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Snyder) for purposes of debate.
  Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Chairman, I want to extend my thanks to the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Stump) for the great work he has done throughout his 
career in this House. He has also been my chairman on the Committee on 
Veterans' Affairs and I very much appreciate him. And to the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. McHugh), who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Personnel, of which I am ranking member.
  This bill has many, many good things in it, including a pay raise for 
our men and women in uniform. It decreases the out-of-pocket expenses 
for housing. There is an increase in end strength, recognizing the 
realities of the world that we are facing today.
  I also want to say a word about TRICARE, which has been a very good 
program, improving over the last couple of years, but we have some 
potential problems with it and this bill includes within it a mandate 
that GAO study some of the potential problems with TRICARE. 
Specifically, one is some of the paperwork problems that our providers 
are facing, like preauthorization. We had a lengthy hearing at the 
subcommittee level about the problems they are having, and this is 
leading to provider dropout. And while the overall numbers look good, 
which is 97 percent of physicians stay with the program, many of them 
are limiting the number of TRICARE patients they are seeing or are not 
seeing new patients, and this is a problem for us. So we look forward 
to those studies.
  This bill passed the committee by a vote of 57 to 1, and thanks to 
the gentleman from Arizona's (Mr. Stump) leadership and the way he 
conducts the committee, we had a very vigorous debate. It went on all 
day with multiple votes. The result was a 57 to 1 bill that came out of 
the committee.
  However, the spirit of the House Committee on Armed Services is 
inconsistent with the rule that brought this bill before us today. It 
was said this was a structured rule. It was structured to stifle debate 
and to avoid uncomfortable votes for Members. That is not consistent 
with a great democracy at this critical time in history. You look at 
some of the Members who were denied to bring amendments, some of the 
most respected Members of this House: The gentleman from Mississippi 
(Mr. Taylor), I disagree with him on base closure but he had every 
right to bring his amendment to this floor; the gentleman from 
Connecticut (Mr. Maloney) and the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen), 
both excellent members of the Committee on Armed Services; the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost), the ranking member on the Committee 
on Rules and a strong supporter of our national defense, was denied an 
amendment; the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) denied an 
amendment.
  This arrogance of power, Mr. Chairman, has to stop in this body.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Hefley), the chairman of our Subcommittee on Readiness.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I would be remiss if I did not recognize 
the contribution of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump), who leads 
our committee, and the gentleman is truly a great American. I do not 
throw that phrase around very casually. He has led the committee well. 
I think he has the respect of his entire committee. We are going to 
miss him. It is a bad decision to leave the House of Representatives 
and leave us behind. We love the gentleman, and I have appreciated the 
opportunity to serve with him and call him a friend.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4546, the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. I believe the 
committee has done a superb job in fulfilling its role in oversight of 
the Department of Defense and has done its best to provide the 
necessary funding to improve the readiness of our military forces.
  Let us not forget, however, that for many years we have seen our 
military do more and more with less and less, and now as we are engaged 
in the war on terrorism we are asking our military men and women to do 
even more. The budget requests for fiscal year 2003 contains some 
significant increases in defense spending and an effort by the 
Department of Defense to fully fund their stated requirements. We are 
all heartened that these increases make a good attempt at arresting the 
decline in military readiness and begin the process of rebuilding and 
restoring our military forces.
  To accomplish this, the administration has had to significantly 
increase critical readiness funding this year as compared to last year. 
As an example, air, ground, and sea operations as well as training and 
training range operations have increased by $2.1 billion. In addition, 
base operations accounts required for the day-to-day operation of our 
military facilities have increased by $1.2 billion. These increases are 
fully supported in this bill.
  The committee has included two provisions that I believe strike a 
needed balance between the needs of our military to adequately and 
effectively train for combat and the need to protect our environment. 
First, we have

[[Page H2268]]

included an amendment to the Endanger Species Act that will weigh the 
impact of national security along with existing obligations under 
current law not to take any action that will result in the extinction 
of or harm to an endangered or threatened species.
  Second, we have included an amendment in the Migratory Bird Treaty 
Act to permit the Fish and Wildlife Service to issue a permit to the 
Department for the accidental taking of migratory birds incidental to 
authorized military readiness activities.
  These and all segments of the Subcommittee on Readiness part of this 
bill and in fact of the bill as a whole were very bipartisan. As was 
already mentioned, the bill passed out of committee 57 to 1. It is not 
a Democratic bill. It is not a Republican bill. It is a bill for the 
defense of this Nation.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 4546 is a responsible, meaningful bill that fairly 
allocates resources for the restoration of acceptable readiness and an 
acceptable quality of life for the men and women of our military 
forces. To do anything less will allow the readiness of our military to 
slip further and could risk the lives of countless men and women in 
every branch of the military.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Tauscher) for purposes of debate.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for yielding me 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, I would also like to add my thanks to the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Stump) for his leadership, and I wish him every best 
wish.
  Mr. Chairman, I intend to vote for the defense authorization bill 
today because it does many good things. This bill will help us fight 
the war against terrorism and it gives our military men and women a 
well-deserved pay raise. But I am concerned, Mr. Chairman, about the 
direction this bill takes regarding our Nation's national nuclear 
weapons policy.
  This bill encourages the United States to develop new nuclear weapons 
for first time since 1990. It clears the way for underground nuclear 
testing in Nevada. It endorses arming ballistic missile defenses with 
nuclear warheads and encourages arbitrary caps on the number of nuclear 
weapons that could be removed from the Nation's nuclear stockpile.
  I will offer an amendment today to require the Department of Energy 
to provide Congress with options for reducing our nuclear arsenal more 
quickly than is called for in the Nuclear Posture Review.
  If President Bush reaches an agreement with President Putin to reduce 
nuclear weapons, we should be prepared to make those reductions as 
quickly as possible, not wait 10 years. But I am disappointed, Mr. 
Chairman, that the Committee on Rules refused to make in order other 
amendments relating to our nuclear weapons posture.
  I had submitted an amendment with the gentleman from Maine (Mr. 
Allen) to have a more balanced sense of Congress on nuclear policy. Our 
amendment had several common sense provisions, including restoring the 
President's ability to pursue sensible reductions in the nuclear 
stockpile, encouraging conventional ``bunker buster'' weapons rather 
than nuclear ones, and exploring all the implications of resuming 
underground testing instead of going full steam ahead with them.
  I had also prepared an amendment to extend our Nation's 
nonproliferation efforts to countries like Pakistan and India.
  Mr. Chairman, despite the limitations the Committee on Rules has 
placed on debate, I encourage Members to vote for the defense 
authorization bill today, but I also hope that Members recognize that 
there are many provisions in this bill that take our Nation down a very 
dangerous path toward a new nuclear arms race.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Thornberry) from the Department of Energy Panel.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding me 
time and for his years of service and leadership to our country in 
national security.
  Mr. Chairman, I also appreciate the work of all Members on the 
Department of Energy Panel and, particularly, the partnership of the 
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher).
  For 57 years nuclear weapons have played a central role in 
maintaining our freedom and in preventing the kind of world wars which 
plagued the early part of the 20th century. There can be no doubt that 
nuclear weapons will continue to be central to our security as long as 
any of us are around.
  Nuclear weapons exist. We cannot uninvent them. We cannot wipe them 
off the memory banks of human knowledge, and we should not try to stick 
our heads in the sand and wish them away. The facts, Mr. Chairman, are 
that 12 countries now have nuclear weapon programs, 13 countries have 
biological weapons programs, 16 countries have chemical weapons 
programs, according to the administration, and that does not count 
other groups, like al Qaeda, who are trying to acquire them.
  The United States does not have chemical and biological, so we must 
have a strong nuclear deterrent to deter use of those weapons of mass 
destruction, and our deterrent must be credible against a broader array 
of threats. Not only must we consider the Russian weapons, but we must 
consider various other kinds of weapons and threats and our deterrent 
must be credible, even against rogue states, even against terrorists, 
even against underground targets. They must even be credible to the 
kind of people we face in this war against terrorism whose aim is to 
kill as many Americans as possible.
  Now, as our nuclear weapons are aging beyond their intended design 
life, it is going to be a very difficult job to keep them safe and 
reliable and credible, to keep the people, the infrastructure, the 
scientific knowledge we have to have to make sure that that deterrent 
is credible and does work. This bill takes important steps in that 
direction and it ought to be supported.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 7 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Georgia (Ms. McKinney) for debate purposes only.
  Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I voted against this defense 
authorization bill in committee, and I plan to vote against it on the 
floor. This bill represents the largest real increase to defense 
spending since 1966. It contains over $40 billion more spending than 
last year's defense authorization, which was a huge authorization in 
itself. This year's defense budget increase alone is greater than the 
defense budget of nearly every other nation in the world.
  H.R. 4546 provides for over $383 billion in spending for the Pentagon 
and the weapons programs of the Department of Energy. Unfortunately, 
this new spending comes at the expense of valuable programs for 
America's families. Sadly, the Bush administration's tax cut for the 
wealthy has blown the Clinton surplus and reduced our ability to fully 
fund important programs like job training, prescription drug benefit, 
conservation spending and much more.

                              {time}  1400

  The one-sided priorities of this bill reflect the belief that 
national security rests in occupying foreign capitals and overthrowing 
regimes, as our Secretary of Defense told us in committee, rather than 
in domestic tranquillity and quality of life for America's people.
  In addition to the singular focus of our national security attention, 
there are problems within the Pentagon that raise questions about such 
immense spending.
  On September 10, 2001, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld stated that 
``according to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in 
transactions.'' Such a lack of financial accountability undermines the 
integrity of the Pentagon. How much more inefficiencies, financial loss 
and wasteful spending can the American people tolerate?
  In any other area of enterprise, people get more money when they 
prove that they know what they do with what they have already got, what 
they have gotten, but in the world of defense spending, the Secretary 
can acknowledge the loss of $2.3 trillion and get an almost 
unprecedented increase in funding.
  Additionally, the basis for such a large increase in spending is 
wholly unjustified.
  The events of September 11 were a tragedy to the entire Nation. 
However,

[[Page H2269]]

the attacks in New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia were not prompted by 
any failure of the United States military, but instead were the result 
of a breakdown in our intelligence community. In fact, just last week 
Yahoo News reported that CIA Deputy Director of Operation James Pavitt 
``dismissed charges the CIA was caught unaware by September 11 suicide 
attacks in the United States'' and that ``the CIA knew the network led 
by Saudi-born militant Osama bin Laden was planning a major strike.''
  Similarly, a Washington Post article dated May 3, 2002, stated, ``Two 
months before the suicide hijackings, an FBI agent in Arizona alerted 
Washington headquarters that several Middle Easterners were training at 
a U.S. aviation school and recommended contacting other schools 
nationwide.'' The article continued, stating that ``law enforcement 
officials said in retrospect the FBI believes it should have 
accelerated the suggested check of U.S. flight schools.''
  I must say that I was pleasantly surprised by Secretary Rumsfeld's 
cancellation of the Crusader program this week, and I was pleased to 
receive a phone call from the Pentagon to that effect. However, it must 
be noted that I had an amendment to cut the Crusader because, among 
other things, it experienced cost overruns and was too heavy and too 
large to get anywhere fast at any kind of rapid response.
  I would also note that the Crusader is a weapons system that has 
connections to the Carlyle Group which employs the President's father. 
$475 million is a lot of money. Sadly, the President requested half a 
billion dollars for the Crusader weapons system but cancelled our 
commitment to pay high deployment overtime pay to our troops.
  However, the fight to kill the Crusader is not over. Despite the 
cancellation, language in this bill will seek to keep Crusader alive. 
The Committee on Armed Services and the House should not allow that to 
happen. The Crusader has been rightly cut. It should remain that way, 
and the half billion dollars it has freed up should go to reinstating 
the high deployment per diem that the President cancelled in October.
  As by now my colleagues also know, this bill creates exemptions for 
the Pentagon in the Endangered Species Act and the Migratory Bird 
Treaty Act, removes protections from public lands, and creates 
horrendous precedent for wilderness areas. The Committee on Armed 
Services is not where our country's environmental policy should be 
made.
  With regard to missile defense, H.R. 4546 continues development of 
this dangerous, destabilizing and unreliable system. The authorization 
provides $7.8 billion for missile defense following on the nearly $8 
billion that was authorized last year. Yet the CIA's own national 
intelligence estimate states that attacks are much more likely using 
weapons of mass destruction via untraditional methods such as trucks, 
ships or airplanes.
  Rather than spending billions on a missile defense system, diplomacy 
through arms control and disarmament agreements will be much more 
effective in advancing peace and security in the days and years ahead 
and will cost far less than a Star Wars system.
  Though it deeply troubles me that one of the first acts of our 
President after declaring this war on terrorism was to sign an 
executive order denying previously promised high deployment overtime 
pay to our servicemen and women, the personnel and compensation section 
of this bill takes important steps for our servicemen and women. Though 
I am opposed to this act, I greatly respect the individual members of 
our armed services for their service and sacrifice in the name of our 
Nation.
  However, Mr. Chairman, despite whatever good this bill does for our 
servicemen and women and our veterans, it is still entirely too large 
and takes us down the wrong policy track.
  Additionally, as our defense spending increases year after year, 
sacrifices made in domestic spending never seem to be corrected. From 
resuming nuclear testing to advancing nuclear-tipped missile defense, 
from the rollback of environmental laws, to pork-barreling weapons 
systems, this bill is big, and it could have been a lot better.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), the chairman of our 
Subcommittee on Military Procurement of the Committee on Armed 
Services.
  (Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I thank our distinguished 
chairman, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) for yielding me the 
time, and I want to start off again by thanking our chairman and our 
ranking member, two of the great patriots of this institution, this 
country, for their outstanding work in bringing us a defense bill that 
all of us can get behind.
  It is not a perfect bill. In fact, there are some amendments that I 
would like to have seen offered that were not made in order, and that 
is a part of the process, unfortunately, we go through. I am also not 
happy with the dollar amount. Our chairman and ranking member made the 
best possible good faith effort to increase funding, but it is woefully 
underfunding our modernization.
  Other Members who have spoken here have talked about too much for 
defense. Our soldiers today are fighting in tactical fighters that are 
17 years old on average. Our Navy that at one time was 555 ships is now 
314 ships. Our shipbuilding account is taking us down to a 235-ship 
Navy. The B-52 bomber will be 70 years old before it is retired. Our 
Chinook helicopters will be 60 years old.
  We have underfunded the military consistently in both Democrat and 
Republican administrations for the past 10 years. This bill begins to 
correct that, but it does not solve all of those problems. We are 
asking for some relief in this bill. Nothing out of the ordinary.
  We want to stop the encroachment that costs us more money that stops 
our troops from training. This is in no way, shape, or form a rollback 
of environmental laws. I would not support that, as a Republican proud 
of my environmental voting record. It does say that when we take 85 
percent of Red Beach at Camp Pendleton where our Marines have to train 
and say 85 percent of that base or that training area, that beach 
cannot be used because of an endangered species, is a little bit 
ridiculous, especially when we consider if we look at the numbers of 
all the Federal agencies that have land, the Pentagon controls the 
smallest amount of land, yet has the largest number of endangered 
species of any other Federal agency and, in my opinion, does the most 
effective job possible in protecting wildlife and protecting endangered 
species.
  All we ask for is some limited relief to allow our military personnel 
to be properly trained; nothing more. This is not an attempt to roll 
back environmental laws in any way, shape, or form.
  In the other areas of the bill, I think we make a good faith effort 
in missile defense, in systems and programs. Again, it is not perfect, 
but we do provide some great increases in assistance for our troops in 
the personnel area, and I think we make a good down payment on 
modernization and research for the future.
  So I encourage my colleagues to work with us through this process. We 
will be offering, I think, a very innovative series of amendments on 
the nuclear posture of this country that will revolutionize our 
relationship with Russia. I look forward to voting in a positive way on 
this bill, and I ask our colleagues to vote yes on the final passage 
and to work with us to get the largest vote possible in showing that 
our military has the support of Democrats and Republicans.
  In closing, I want to thank my colleague and ranking member, the 
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor). He is one of the most tireless 
advocates for the Navy in this Congress. He has fought hard and his 
work has paid off in an additional ship being funded in this bill. I 
thank my colleagues for their leadership.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague 
and friend, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), for his kind 
words and for his good work on the procurement portion of this bill.
  Along with every other Member of this body, I want to compliment the

[[Page H2270]]

gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) for being a great human being and a 
great American and a phenomenal chairman to our committee.
  My colleagues have noticed a lot of anger on the floor today, which 
is completely contrary to just one week ago in the Committee on Armed 
Services where every single Member who wanted to offer an amendment to 
that bill was allowed to do so. Today, there are a number of us who 
felt like we could make a good bill a heck of a lot better and save 
some American lives by offering amendments.
  The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) actually went to the Committee 
on Rules and told them he wanted most of those amendments put in order. 
I thank the chairman for that, and I deeply regret that the Committee 
on Rules chose not to make many of these amendments in order.
  I thank the gentleman for his efforts, particularly from the day he 
was 16 years old, serving in the United States Navy till now serving 
us, and I also wish he would change his mind and stick around for a 
while.
  The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) talked on many of the 
needs of our Nation, and we have incredible pressing needs, about 940 
Huey helicopters in inventory, the newest of which was built in 1972, 
that need to be replaced.
  As the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) pointed out, the 
fleet has now shrunk to 314 ships which is the smallest it has been 
since 1933. That is unacceptable. The President only asked for 5 ships 
this year which, incidentally, is 2 ships fewer than the Clinton 
administration asked for. I am pleased Chairman Weldon chose to add an 
additional destroyer to that. That will take a step towards keeping the 
fleet at the bare minimum size, and hopefully, the Senate will do even 
better.
  I want to point out that the bill does contain almost a billion 
dollars for the development of the next generation of destroyers, the 
DDX. I want to point out the new attack submarine at $1.6 billion was 
partially funded.
  The committee, I think, wisely chose to fund the Crusader program at 
about $475 million, and I do agree with General Shinseki, who is the 
chief of staff of the United States Army, on the important need for 
this program, and I have to take issue with the Secretary of Defense. I 
think it is necessary. I hope the committee will stick by its guns.
  I want to take this opportunity to thank the gentleman from Missouri 
(Mr. Skelton) and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) for the way 
they have handled this committee and put this bill together.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Bartlett).
  (Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Stump) for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4546, the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. While I support the 
bill in its entirety and commend it to this body as must-pass 
legislation, I want to especially emphasize the provisions in the bill 
relating to morale, welfare and recreation activities of the Department 
of Defense and the military services.
  I have the honor to chair the Special Oversight Panel of Morale, 
Welfare and Recreation which keeps a careful eye on some very important 
quality-of-life benefits for our military families, such as 
commissaries and child care centers. The MWR portion of H.R. 4546 is 
truly nonpartisan and was approved unanimously by both the panel and 
the full committee without any amendments.
  I have found the defense programs that are not nourished by the 
Congress or the Pentagon quickly die away. MWR programs are no 
different. While I agree with most of what this administration is 
doing, I believe the continued pressure to privatize commissaries is 
misguided. The budget for the Defense Commissary Agency contained in 
this bill is about as low as I am prepared to support without 
persuasive evidence that customer savings and service will not suffer.
  That said, I believe the budget before my colleagues is adequate. To 
ensure the quality of customer service and continued savings, H.R. 4546 
requires a GAO study of DECA's budget proposals as well as other 
measures to protect the commissary benefit.
  In addition, the package before the House will allow our deserving 
National Guard soldiers called to State duty in time of national 
emergency, like the present, to use commissary stores. We had provided 
this privilege some years ago to guardsmen called to duty for natural 
disasters and found that we should have added national emergencies as 
well.
  Of course, I thank our ranking Democrat, the gentleman from Guam (Mr. 
Underwood), for his wise counsel and support in our shared 
responsibilities to manage MWR matters for the committee, and I join 
him in urging all Members to vote for H.R. 4546.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Sanchez).
  Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to voice my support for the 
Bob Stump Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003.
  I want to commend the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) and the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for the job they have done on 
this, and everybody on the committee.
  We did have a good discussion last week with this bill. This bill 
will help solders and their families put more money in their pockets by 
reducing the average amount of housing expenses paid by service members 
from the current 11.3 percent to 7\1/2\ percent in fiscal year 2003.

                              {time}  1415

  Now, that might not mean much to us, but to people who are forced to 
move every few years, it is a very important issue, this issue of the 
cost of housing for them. So that puts us on the track to eliminate 
some of this heavy burden for our families that have men and women in 
uniform.
  The bill, for the first time, fully funds Concurrent Receipt, and 
establishes a program through which military retirees will receive 
increasing compensation. And by the year 2007, retirees who are 60 
percent or more disabled will receive their full retirement pay and 
their disability. This is something that our military retirees 
desperately need.
  Unfortunately, this bill also contains provisions that undermine some 
of our basic commitments to our Nation, including to try to reduce the 
proliferation of nuclear weapons. The bill gives credence to the fact 
that the United States should develop nuclear weapons capable of 
destroying hard and buried targets and use nuclear-tipped missiles to 
intercept nuclear warheads.
  I do not need to remind anyone that nuclear weapons have only been 
used twice in the history of warfare, and the United States has not 
designed or built a new nuclear weapon since the Cold War. Mutually 
Assured Destruction, or MAD, is a policy relic of the Cold War; and it 
should not be resurrected. It should not be resurrected by us.
  Furthermore, this bill furthers the development of national missile 
defense with little congressional oversight. We may need a missile 
defense; but we need a structured one, one where we as a Congress look 
at it and take full responsibility for what is happening with its 
development.
  No bill is perfect. This one has a lack of acknowledgment by the 
Department of Defense to the members of our Committee on Resources with 
respect to environmental issues, and this is very shortsighted.
  Aside from that, I will be voting for the recommit and for this bill.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Everett), a member of the committee.
  (Mr. EVERETT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. EVERETT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman, the chairman, and 
my good friend, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump), for yielding me 
this time. I have served under him while he has been chairman of the 
Committee on Armed Services and also when he was chairman of the 
Committee on Veterans' Affairs. This House will miss him.
  Let me speak about Army aviation training. The Army continues to 
short fund the training budget of its helicopter pilots. To address 
this shortfall,

[[Page H2271]]

the committee took steps last year to begin funding the Army Aviation 
Institute Training Simulator program to enhance pilot training at the 
Aviation War-fighting Center. Unfortunately, the committee did not add 
funds for the program in this year's authorization bill due to the lack 
of resources.
  The Army is concerned with the crash rate of the OH-58C/D. It is four 
times greater than all other helicopters in the fleet. The Army has an 
immediate need for high-fidelity OH-58C/D simulators to improve the 
crew training of emergency procedures and other techniques on the 
aircraft. The Army has identified the AAITS program as the best way to 
provide this training. It is my hope that the defense appropriators in 
both Houses will give strong consideration to a $15 million add for six 
high-definition OH-58C/D simulators.

  Mr. Chairman, I can't think of a more important responsibility than 
to train Army Aviators in the best way possible, with the latest 
technologies available. The AAITS program meets this challenge by using 
commercially available technologies that are cost effective and ready 
to be deployed today.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Hinchey).
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, in spite of the best attempts of the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Skelton), this bill has become a political grab bag of extraneous 
material that has nothing to do with defense authorization and has no 
place in this bill.
  I have time to cite just one example. Article 14 is a provision which 
contains language that is destructive to our efforts to protect the 
environment in this country, particularly issues that are destructive 
to the 1964 Wilderness Act. That language undermines the issue of 
wilderness as it is practiced by the Federal Government in areas all 
across the country. It is a special provision. It is even a personal 
provision. It has no business in this bill.
  Furthermore, we were not given the opportunities to present 
amendments which could give the House the opportunity to debate this 
issue and to strike these unwarranted and destructive provisions from 
the bill. That makes this bill unworthy of the House. It ought to be 
withdrawn. We ought to have an opportunity to debate this issue and 
those things ought to be brought before us.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), a member of the committee.
  (Mr. CHAMBLISS asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the fiscal year 2003 
Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act, which will provide 
critical resources for our military to ensure that they have the 
adequate training, modern equipment, and sufficient resources to do 
their job in protecting our Nation.
  I am proud of the work of the House Committee on Armed Services and 
our chairman, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump), who has done an 
excellent job in crafting a bill that will support our warfighters. 
Chairman Stump is a hero of mine, and we will miss his great service in 
this body.
  This bill is important for our Nation. Our troops deserve a pay raise 
and we provide that to them. We provide our troops and their families 
quality health care and benefits which they have earned because of 
their service and sacrifice for our Nation. We provide significant 
funds for the development of technologies that are needed for our 
missile defense systems so that we are better prepared to meet the 
future threats this country faces.
  We increase the resources available to combat terrorism, which is an 
immediate threat to the people of the United States of America. We 
increase key readiness accounts so that we continue to increase our 
capabilities to support our warfighters who are actively engaged in 
protecting American interests around the globe.
  Let me say that this bill is also important for Georgia. We fund 
critical military construction projects at Robins Air Force Base, Fort 
Benning, Fort Stewart, and Kings Bay Navy submarine base. We fully 
funded the President's budget request for vital modern aircraft for our 
Air Force's F-22 Raptor advanced tactical fighter, the C-17, the C-130, 
and JSTARS, all of which are important to my home State as well as our 
long-term national defense priorities.
  Mr. Chairman, terrorism and our national security are not fleeting 
problems. This bill addresses our needs on terrorism from a force-
protection standpoint, and I urge the passage of this bill.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maine (Mr. Allen).
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I rise in support of the defense authorization bill.
  I commend the chairman, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump), and 
the ranking minority member, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), 
for putting together a good bill. It will enable today's troops to 
succeed in the war in Afghanistan and makes investments in the future 
to assure the U.S. military retains its edge.
  I commend the bill's shipbuilding initiative to fix the Pentagon's 
paltry request in this area, and it sets an important marker for 
restoring funding for a third DDG-51 destroyer. The Merchant Marine 
panel, of which I am ranking member, does quiet but important work to 
assure a healthy and viable U.S. maritime fleet. I thank the panel 
chairman, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), for his 
leadership in restoring funding for the title XI loan guarantee 
program, which gives life to our vital shipbuilding industrial base.
  I also welcome the creative provision on ship scrapping, which helps 
States acquire obsolete vessels for artificial reefs. There are, 
however, parts of this bill that I do not support. First, it contains 
three environmental provisions not under the jurisdiction of the 
Committee on Armed Services. They belong to the Committee on Resources, 
which was denied the opportunity to consider them. These provisions are 
a part of a last-minute stealth attempt by DOD to exempt itself from a 
variety of landmark environmental laws.
  The package was submitted just 4 days before committee markup, 
denying time for proper review. In the only hearing, the majority 
refused to invite State or local governments, environmental groups, or 
any other nonadministration witnesses to testify.
  Second, I disagree with the aggressive nuclear policy language in the 
bill and report which endorses new nuclear weapons or new uses for such 
weapons. I am afraid that money spent to revitalize and legitimize 
nuclear weapons will divert funds from weapons our warfighters actually 
need for combat. I believe it will be destabilizing and lead to new 
arms races.
  Finally, I am disappointed the committee did not make in order my 
amendment to previous nuclear-tipped interceptors. The U.S. rejected 
that idea decades ago.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Calvert), a member of the committee.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I too want to thank the chairman, the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump), for all his years of service. We 
will miss him very much, but I know he will always be in our hearts.
  Mr. Chairman, in my home State of California, environmental 
litigation may force the Fish and Wildlife Service to designate 
critical habitat for endangered species on over 50 percent of the 
125,000-acre Camp Pendleton in Southern California. Even though there 
are 17 miles of coastline in Camp Pendleton, environmental restrictions 
allow the Marines to use less than 1 mile of that coast, as designated 
on this drawing. One mile. That is it. That small space.
  And once they get ashore, Marines have to align everything and 
everyone up single file to weed through the land that has been 
designated critical habitat and cross Interstate 5 to another location 
on the base to begin their maneuvers.
  Mr. Chairman, our Marines should be training as they fight, not as if 
they are going out on some field trip. Our military is one of the best 
environmental stewards America has. They should not be forced to give 
up realistic training on their own property to satisfy a few 
environmental extremists.

[[Page H2272]]

  Proper training saves lives. We must not sacrifice the safety of our 
sons and daughters so that a gnatcatcher or a fairy shrimp can have an 
undisturbed life.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Guam (Mr. Underwood).
  (Mr. UNDERWOOD asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to join my colleagues in 
support of H.R. 4546, the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act 
for fiscal year 2003. It will go a long way towards ensuring that our 
troops get the support they need to win the war against terrorism as it 
meets many of our military's modernization needs and provides every 
servicemember with a pay raise they so richly deserve.
  In particular, I want to address the provisions in the bill relating 
to the morale, welfare and recreation activities of DOD. I want to 
acknowledge the outstanding leadership of our panel chair, the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Bartlett), and the active participation of 
all the panel members. I am pleased that we were able to address many 
of the urgent MWR issues that will sustain this important benefit, 
including the bill's acknowledgment of our concern and expression of 
our appreciation for the contributions of the National Guard during 
this period of national crisis by making it possible for them to use 
the commissary, even though they are under State control.
  In addition to the MWR provisions, I am also pleased to note that a 
number of measures included within the bill will support Guam in its 
strategic role to U.S. national security. Guam's military installations 
and facilities stand to benefit from over $75 million of military 
construction and improvements. Most notable are the projects for a new 
on-base water system at Andersen Air Force Base and the continued 
construction of the Guam Army Guard Readiness Center. The people of 
Guam welcome this significant boost in military construction and 
appreciate the recognition this bill provides to our people in uniform.
  Further, the bill before us today restores a balance between 
protecting the environment and sustaining military readiness, 
particularly in the case of the Farallon de Medinlla, FDM, bombing 
range north of Guam in the Northern Marianas. Last month, a Federal 
Court here in Washington, D.C. ruled that the Navy was in violation of 
the Migratory Bird Treaty because of the incidental taking of 
nonendangered birds while conducting critical training activities. This 
bill narrowly fixes this. We are in support of this provision.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Missouri for yielding me 
this time, and I want to acknowledge the excellent and noble work that 
our chairman, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump), has done over the 
years.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Bilirakis).
  (Mr. BILIRAKIS asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, the 106th Congress took the first steps 
toward addressing the inequity that provides for an offset between 
military retired pay and VA disability, which unfairly penalizes more 
than 500,000 disabled military retirees nationwide by authorizing a 
monthly allowance to certain severely disabled military retirees. Last 
year, Congress took an additional step towards eliminating the offset 
by authorizing my Concurrent Receipt legislation, H.R. 303.
  The bill we are considering today follows the fiscal year 2003 budget 
and includes a provision to authorize military retirees who are 60 
percent or greater disabled to receive their full retired pay and VA 
disability compensation benefit on a transitional basis by fiscal year 
2007.
  So I say to all my colleagues, Mr. Chairman, support America and its 
veterans, vote for H.R. 4546. And I would also offer in closing my 
compliments to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) for being a great 
patriot and a great chairman.
  Some military retirees--individuals who are eligible for military 
retirement benefits as a result of a full service career--are also 
eligible for disability compensation from the VA based on a medical 
problem they incurred while in the service. Under present law, these 
service-disabled retirees must surrender a portion of their retired pay 
if they want to receive the disability compensation to which they are 
entitled. Congress enacted this unjust law in 1891. Nationwide, more 
than 500,000 disabled military retirees must give up their retired pay 
in order to receive their VA disability compensation. In effect, they 
must pay for their VA disability our of their military retirement--
something no other federal retiree must do
  I have been trying to repeal this unfair offset for more than 17 
years. My legislation, H.R. 303, has received strong bipartisan support 
with more than 390 cosponsors in the House. More than 80 members have 
cosponsored similar legislation in the Senate. Moreover, every major 
veterans and military organization strongly support the concurrent 
receipt of military retired pay and VA disability compensation. The 
106th Congress took the first steps toward addressing this inequity by 
authorizing the military to pay a monthly allowance to military 
retirees with severe service-connected disabilities rated by the 
Department of Veterans' Affairs at 70 percent or greater. These 
provisions were recently expanded to include retirees with ratings of 
60 percent.
  Last year, Congress took an additional step towards repealing the 
offset by authorizing H.R. 303. However, under the provisions of the 
Fiscal Year 2002 National Defense Authorization Act, this authorization 
requires the President to submit legislation in his annual budget 
request and Congress to enact this legislation to offset the cost of 
this initiative. Since the enactment of last year's defense 
authorization act, I have been working to secure the money needed to 
fund ``concurrent receipt.'' I was very pleased that the Budget 
Committee included almost $6 billion in the FY 2002 Budget Resolution 
for a partial repeal of the dollar-for-dollar offset between retired 
pay and VA disability compensation.
  I am also pleased that the bill we are considering today follows the 
FY 2002 budget resolution and includes a provision to authorize 
military retirees who are 60 percent or greater disabled to receive 
their full retired pay and VA disability compensation benefit by Fiscal 
Year 2007. Until the program is fully implemented, the bill establishes 
a transition program through which retirees will receive increasing 
amounts of their retired pay. I want to thank Chairman Bob Stump, 
Ranking Member Ike Skelton, Military Personnel Subcommittee Chairman 
John McHugh and Ranking Member Vic Snyder for their continued support 
and interest in this issue.
  While H.R. 4546 does not allow for the complete elimination of the 
current offset, it does provide for a substantial concurrent receipt 
benefit and it is a tremendous step forward in our fight to repeal the 
current inequitable offset. I urge my colleagues to support the Bob 
Stump National Defense Authorization Act.

                              {time}  1430

  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. McNulty).
  (Mr. McNULTY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. McNULTY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Bob Stump 
National Defense Authorization Act, which will support all of our men 
and women in uniform and also the Crusader program.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Turner).
  Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Skelton) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill today is one of the most important pieces of 
legislation that this Congress will consider, and I want to recognize 
the leadership of the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Stump), for his 
leadership, as well as the leadership of our ranking member, the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton). The bipartisan approach that 
this committee has utilized to craft this bill exemplifies our 
bipartisan and our unwavering commitment to winning our Nation's war 
against terrorists.

[[Page H2273]]

  We also in this bill take major steps forward in providing our Armed 
Forces with the tools and the resources they need to protect our 
national security interests around the world. Earlier this year our 
military chiefs testified before our committee and identified over $25 
billion in unfunded requirements for the upcoming fiscal year. Our 
committee was not able to address every need on the chiefs' list, but I 
am pleased that we addressed many of the issues, particularly in the 
areas of quality of life, readiness and modernization, as well as the 
deficiencies that the Department identified necessary to wage our war 
on terrorism.
  Over the last few years, one area of particular concern to me has 
been the continued reduction in troop end strength. In the post-Vietnam 
War era, the active duty military peaked at 2.2 million personnel. 
Today it is less than 1.5 million. Last year, each of our military 
services entered the war on terrorism with personnel shortages, a 
situation that has only worsened due to the heightened operational 
tempo required around the globe.
  I commend the ranking member, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Skelton), for his leadership in advocating an increase in troop 
strength; and I am pleased that this bill contains an increase of 
13,000 in troop authorization above last year's level.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe this is an important piece of legislation 
that deserves the support of the entire Congress. I urge adoption of 
this legislation.
  Lastly, this legislation strengthens our national security interests 
both at home and abroad by authorizing $7.8 billion for ballistic 
missile defense programs. The development of medium and long range 
ballistic missiles by North Korea, Iran, Iraq, and other rogue 
countries underscores the importance of developing a fielding theater 
missile defenses capable of defeating these threats as soon as 
possible. Protecting our country and troops deployed in theater from a 
ballistic missile attack should continue to be a priority, and I 
applaud the commitment that is being shown to field this technology in 
the near term. Mr. Chairman, I especially want to emphasize the 
importance of fielding the Department of Defense's highest theater 
missile defense system, the PAC-3. When you look at spectrum of known 
threats around the world, and focus on those areas where we either have 
personnel or could likely have troops deployed, it's hard to ignore the 
fact that most credible ballistic missile threats would be thwarted by 
the PAC-3 system. Consequently, amendments will be offered by Mr. 
Spratt and Mr. Hunter a little later that seek to add money to this 
program. I am hopeful that you will support this effort and join with 
us in ensuring that our troops are adequately protected against these 
emerging threats.
  Mr. Chairman, we are at an important juncture with respect to funding 
our military and providing them with the resources necessary to 
effectively wage our war on terrorism. This bill acknowledges the 
challenges we face and seeks to respond. I urge my colleagues to 
support this bipartisan bill.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. McHugh), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Personnel.
  Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Chairman, May marks National Military Appreciation 
Month, and I can think of no appropriate way to recognize it than to 
rise in strong support of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2003. I especially commend for my colleagues' consideration 
and support the military personnel provisions of the bill that address 
continuing realities and challenges by making improvements in the end 
strength, compensation, personnel and health care systems of the 
Department of Defense.
  Let me highlight three of those most important areas. First, while 
fully supporting the efforts of the Secretary of Defense to reduce 
operational and mission requirements, this bill reflects the view that 
the war on terrorism will be a long-term effort and that some growth in 
military manpower is prudent at this time.
  Therefore, the bill represents the bipartisan views of all of us, 
including the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), who was a leader 
on this, and recommends an increase in active duty end strength of 
nearly 1 percent, or 12,650, above fiscal year 2002 levels. That is the 
largest single year growth in active end strength since 1985 and 1986. 
To support the added strength, the bill provides an additional $550 
million as well as increasing National Guard and Reserve component 
full-time manning by some 2,400 personnel.
  Secondly, the bill provides a military pay raise, as proposed by the 
President, of 4.1 percent across-the-board for all personnel, one-half 
of 1 percent more than the average pay increase for private sector 
employees.
  In addition, it recommends targeted raises of 6.5 percent to critical 
mid-grade and senior noncommissioned officers and mid-grade officers, 
as well as housing rates that will reduce the out-of-pocket housing 
expenses from the current level of 11.3 percent to 7.5 percent in 
fiscal year 2003.
  Finally, as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) said moments 
ago, the third major provision I want to highlight would ensure that by 
2007 all retirees rated by the Veterans Administration with 60 percent 
disabled or above will receive both their full military retired pay and 
their full VA disability pay. This initiative, known widely as 
concurrent receipts, represents the culmination of a multi-year, 
bipartisan effort to restore justice in veterans' compensation using 
the $5.8 billion provided by the House budget resolution for fiscal 
year 2003.
  In closing, Mr. Chairman, let me thank the ranking member of the 
subcommittee, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Snyder), for his 
leadership, for his very active involvement, as well as all members of 
both sides of the aisle of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel who 
have a good deal to be proud of in this fine mark and in this great 
bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge all Members to join us in support of this very 
fine measure.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time. It is a personal privilege to stand in support of the piece of 
legislation named in honor of a patriot, the gentleman from Arizona 
(Mr. Stump), who has served our country so very well. I am honored to 
support this bill in his name, and thank the gentleman from Missouri 
(Mr. Skelton) for his contribution.
  America stands today as perhaps the greatest military power in global 
history; but as we have learned in the last 7 months, even great powers 
are faced with great challenges. I support this bill because I believe 
it affirms two of our greatest strengths, and it begins to deal with 
two of our greatest challenges.
  First of all, it affirms the strength that is the most premium 
strength of the American military structure, the men and women who 
serve their country. By raising the pay of those men and women by 4.1 
percent, by supplementing their medical and other benefits 
considerably, although not enough, this bill is a good step in the 
right direction.
  Second, as a member of the Subcommittee on Research and Development, 
I am particularly pleased that we have before us today a bill that will 
make the greatest investment in research and development in our 
Nation's history. In particular, I am pleased with the 20 percent 
increase in the DARPA funding accounts, which I think bring out the 
very best of America's university sector, private sector and government 
sector.
  With respect to challenges, I believe that the new Northern Command 
structure that is implemented in this bill is a positive step toward 
meaningful homeland security. I look forward to working with the 
Pentagon and my fellow members of the committee in making that command 
structure effective in homeland security.
  Finally, the bill begins to grapple with the very real problem with 
missile defense. There are those of us who believe that missile defense 
is necessary and appropriate, but there are some disagreements over how 
to implement it. Because of the bipartisan leadership of this 
committee, I believe that we have a constructive approach to bridging 
those differences and managing this challenge.
  In short, I believe this is a bill that every Member of both 
political parties can support with pride that will help us carry 
forward in meeting the very great challenges our country faces today. I 
urge support of the bill.

[[Page H2274]]

  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, it was the Roman orator Cicero who once said that the 
greatest of all virtues is gratitude, and let me again express 
gratitude to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) for his tireless 
and skillful efforts in leading our committee, and in his contributions 
to the United States Congress through the years. We are very proud of 
him and thank him for what he has done for us, and the role model he 
has been for the rest of the Members, both Democrat and Republican.
  Let me also say a word of thanks and gratitude to the Committee on 
Armed Services, which I believe is the most bipartisan committee in 
this body. There are times we have partisan disagreements, but we do 
attack the various issues as professionals and as representatives of 
different parts of our country.
  But most of all, I think we as a body need to express thanks and 
gratitude to the young men and young women in uniform. That is the 
purpose of our being here today. It is the United States Constitution 
that charges us here in Congress to raise and maintain the military of 
the United States. The military of the United States is reflected by 
young people in various colors of uniform all wearing the American flag 
on their sleeve. So we thank them, we thank their families, and we hope 
that the piece of legislation that we pass today will be a benefit to 
them, encouraging them to keep doing a good job and staying the course, 
and just a word of thanks to them for their determination, dedication 
and patriotism.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, again a special thanks to the gentleman from 
Arizona (Chairman Stump).
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
  (Mr. KIRK asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, I want to also thank the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Stump) and our other defense leader, the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Skelton), for this legislation. This bill supports 
President Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld, who commands our troops 
currently in battle. It supports our Naval training at the Navy's only 
boot camp at Great Lakes, Illinois.
  It advances our efforts to combine Naval Hospital Great Lakes with 
North Chicago VA to help out veterans and active duty health care.
  It protects our air crews over Afghanistan and Iraq with improved 
tactical Navy electronic warfare aircraft, and it supports our fellow 
allies to meet the missile threat, especially giving early warning eyes 
in the sky to Israel and Arrow anti-missiles to shoot down SCUDs. It is 
a good piece of legislation; it deserves our support for the 
fundamental mission of the Federal Government to defend our country.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Bob Stump National 
Defense Authorization Act. This bill supports the efforts of President 
Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld to modernize and strengthen our military. 
The bill supports the needs of our men and women in uniform, ensuring 
that they receive better pay, have better equipment at their disposal, 
have a better quality of life, and are provided with all the tools 
necessary to complete their missions. The effects of these initiatives 
will be appreciated by servicemembers around the world, from the 
recruits currently in my district at the Great Lakes Naval Training 
Center to the Special Forces troops operating in the mountains of 
Afghanistan.
  Additionally, this bill strongly supports electronic warfare and the 
EA-6B Prowler, our Nation's lone remaining electronic jamming aircraft. 
The Prowler is integral to successful airborne strike operations and is 
often the first aircraft in theater and the last aircraft to leave. 
Without the Prowler, our aircrews would be vulnerable to a wide variety 
of threats from integrated air defenses and advanced surface-to-air 
missiles. In support of the aging Prowler fleet, this bill authorizes 
$85.8 million to procure and install wing center sections and outer 
wing panels, both of which have suffered from fatigue and forced the 
grounding of eight aircraft.
  $35 million is included to procure advanced USQ-113 jammers, which 
will enhance that ability of the Prowler to cut off enemy 
communications. I am also encouraged that $29 million are included to 
procure band 9/10 transmitters, which will enhance Prowler 
capabilities.
  Perhaps most importantly, H.R. 4546 includes an increase of $10 
million to continue efforts to develop a successor to the Prowler.
  Mr. Chairman, I strongly support our men and women in uniform, our 
national defense, and this bill. I encourage my colleagues to do the 
same.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Jeff Miller).
  (Mr. JEFF MILLER of Florida asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. JEFF MILLER of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the 
Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, H.R. 
4546.
  The legislation remedies a long-committed wrong that has been used 
against our retired military veterans for many years. By providing 
$5.58 billion over 5 years towards retiree benefits, H.R. 4546 begins 
full concurrent receipt for veterans suffering from a disabled rating 
60 percent or greater. These individuals have given decades of their 
life and service to this great country, and they will begin to receive 
their earned retired pay along with their earned disability payment.
  This agreement builds upon the work of the Committee on Veterans 
Affairs and the Committee on Armed Services over the last couple years, 
and finishes the work done last year that made the policy change.
  Due to the meticulous work by the Committee on the Budget, the 
requirement to have a full budget offset is no longer needed, and that 
section has now been removed as a stipulation that claims must be made 
within 4 years of military separation.
  Mr. Chairman, I am proud to be a member of the Committee on Armed 
Services and proud to support this fiscal year 2003 defense 
authorization, H.R. 4546.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Buyer).
  (Mr. BUYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. 
Stump) for all his hard work. I served with the gentleman when he 
chaired the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and I think it is 
appropriate that this defense bill is named after him. And I would say 
to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), you two together have put 
before this Congress another quality product on behalf of the men and 
women who serve our Nation.
  I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), as chairman of 
the Subcommittee on Procurement. The gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. 
Taylor) and I co-chaired the Guard and Reserve Caucus for many years, 
and serve in that caucus, and a big part of our mark was accepted, just 
like the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) used to do for us, and 
there are so many Guard and Reserve. There are so many things for the 
active force.
  So it is not only the procurement mark, but also military 
construction, and what the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh) did 
with regard to end strength, I thank the gentlemen. It is a very good 
mark. I ask all Members to support the product of the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Stump) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton). It 
is quality work.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4546; the Bob Stump 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003.
  America is at war, our military personnel are in harm's way, and our 
Nation is facing dangerous and difficult threats.
  September 11, 2001, now marks the most lethal single attack on the 
United States in our Nation's history.
  The Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act demonstrates strong 
bipartisan commitment to America's soldiers, sailors, airmen, and 
Marines who are fighting the global war against terrorism.
  President George W. Bush stated and I quote,

  Nothing is more important than the national security of our country, 
nothing is more important. So nothing is more important than our 
defense budget.

  I strong agree.
  This National Defense Authorization Act goes beyond the President's 
request to improve homeland security, support U.S. service members, and 
increase military readiness and modernization.
  It is fitting that this Defense Authorization Act; the largest real 
increase to defense

[[Page H2275]]

spending since 1966; be named after my good friend, Chairman Bob Stump.
  I have had the privilege of working along side Bob, and the 
opportunity to witness his steadfast support of our Nation's military. 
We share the same values and beliefs; duty, honor, courage, and 
commitment to God, country, family, and our fellow man. His leadership 
will be missed.
  Equally fitting is the support H.R. 4546 provides to addressing the 
needs of the National Guard and Reserves.
  Today, there are over 80,000 Reservists and National Guard personnel 
on active duty from 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto 
Rico supporting the global war on terrorism. They are a critical 
component of the total force and vital for our homeland's security.
  On behalf of Congressman Taylor and myself as cochairs of the 
National Guard & Reserve Components Caucus, we extend our thanks to the 
subcommittee chairman and ranking members for their support to the 
National Guard and Reserves.
  The National Guard and Reserve Components Caucus, representing 158 
Members of Congress, has organized member support for legislative 
initiatives dealing with Reserve Components, operations, programs, and 
policies.
  Now in its seventh year, the Reserve Components Caucus, has a proven 
history of working with and assisting the House Armed Services 
Committee.
  H.R. 4546 goes a long way to support National Guard and Reserve 
personnel, readiness, modernization, and military construction.
  National Guard and Reserve Force personnel strength is increased by 
adding more than 2,450 full-time military personnel to support the Army 
National Guard, Army Reserve, Air National Guard, and Air Force 
Reserve. Additionally, it increases Naval Reserve unit strength by 800 
part-time military personnel.
  H.R. 4546 also addresses significant personnel, compensation and 
benefits improvements including a minimum 4.1 percent pay raise for all 
active, National Guard, and Reserve personnel.
  It extends the eligibility period for Selected Reservists' use of the 
Montgomery GI bill an additional 4 years.
  H.R. 4546 also directs a comprehensive study of the rights, benefits 
and entitlements of Reservists and their dependents.
  National Guard and Reserve quality of life improvements in this 
Defense Authorization Act also include over $510 million for military 
construction.
  National Guard and Reserve Equipment requirements still reflect a $9 
billion shortfall, however, H.R. 4546 provides over $470 million for 
Guard and Reserve equipment procurement above the President's Budget 
submission.
  On behalf of the Reserve Components Caucus, I thank Chairman Weldon 
for his support in improving Guard and Reserve modernization.
  This bill sends a strong signal to the world and recognizes the 
sacrifice and unselfish commitment of our service men and women in 
protecting America's cherished freedoms and liberties.
  In short, this bill says to the American people that military 
service; active and reserve service, is critical for our Nation's 
security.
  It is clearly another giant step in our continued efforts to improve 
quality of life, modernize the force, and improve readiness.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

                              {time}  1445

  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Putnam).
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Stump) on the outstanding work that he has done to make 
America secure, but some of the rhetoric that I hear from the other 
side gives me pause and what comes to mind is how quickly we forget.
  Some of the environmental concerns that have been raised are 
completely bogus, Mr. Chairman. When we have a situation where 16 or 17 
miles of coastline cannot be used at Camp Pendleton, when we have a 
situation where soldiers have to draw a circle in the sand and stand 
there and pretend that it is a foxhole, we are not training our 
soldiers realistically. The success that we have seen in Afghanistan is 
the direct result of investment in training and personnel and in troops 
and in equipment. But that training cannot continue under the current 
environmental restrictions that we have.
  This bill makes some commonsense reforms that allow our soldiers, 
sailors and airmen to prepare to wage and win war. I commend him for 
his leadership on this and his striking the delicate balance that 
recognizes the stewardship of the Department of Defense and the 
overarching mission that they have, which is to keep America secure.
  For the past year, the Government Reform Committee has been 
investigating the growing number of restrictions, or encroachments, 
placed on training at military training ranges by environmental 
regulations, urban sprawl, international treaties and competition for 
limited airspace and frequency spectrum.
  In May of last year the Government Reform Committee held it's first 
hearing on this issue titled ``Challenges to National Security: 
Constraints on Military Training''. In August of last year the 
Government Reform Committee on National Security, Veterans Affairs and 
International Relations, of which I am vice chairman, held a field 
hearing in my district at the Avon Park, Fl, Air Force Bombing Range to 
address the issue of military training range sustainability.
  Our hearings have demonstrated that environmental regulations are 
among the most pervasive and burdensome constraints on military 
training. At a hearing last spring, for instance, the committee learned 
that 16 of 17 miles of coastland at Camp Pendleton, California, are 
off-limits for amphibious training due to a growing list of wildlife 
protections. Witnesses also testified that soldiers are not allowed to 
dig foxholes on some ranges, and instead must practice jumping onto 
circles marked with tape.
  As the Defense Department has been forced to expand the amount of 
land set aside for protected species such as the fairy shrimp, the 
gnat-catcher, and the checker-spot butterfly, training lanes have 
become artificially narrow, Environmental laws and regulations have 
inhibited training at bases across the country and on the waters 
offshore. Fewer and fewer training areas are now available for 
realistic combat live-fire training.
  When combat drills become predictable and repetitive, readiness 
declines. Our experience in Afghanistan has demonstrated that our 
success on the battlefield is directly related to the quality of our 
military training. We must ensure that well-intentioned environmental 
regulations do not lead to shortfalls on the proving ground that later 
become disasters on the battlefield. The changes proposed in H.R. 4546 
are intended to save lives in real combat.
  The issue is not readiness versus the environment. The issue is our 
commitment to our military men and women and their families. When we 
send our constituents or their sons, daughters, spouses, or parents 
into harm's way, we should do so only in the complete confidence that 
they are ready. They will only be ready if they are thoroughly and 
realistically trained. Our military men and women,and their families, 
have a right to expect that training, and we as a nation have an 
obligation to provide it.
  H.R 4546 provides a common-sense change to laws that have 
overburdened the military and restricted training efforts. These are 
not broad waivers. There are no exemptions and no rolling back of 
decades of environmental law.
  The committee mark is a good start, but more may need to be done. The 
current hair-trigger application of broadly defined environmental 
regulations has profoundly affected vital military research and 
development efforts as well. For example, a scientific study funded by 
the Pentagon showed that a new long-range, lower-frequency sonar 
designed to detect ultra-quiet enemy submarines would ``harass'' marine 
mammals under the existing definition. The Navy is now waiting for a 
letter of authorization from the Fisheries Service to allow use of the 
sonar. If the definition of harassment were changed, the Navy likely 
would have greater leeway in using the sonar without seeking permits or 
exposure to lawsuits.
  The Navy should not need to get permits every time an aircraft 
carrier changes position and the military should not be exposed to 
lawsuits for allegedly ``annoying'' a marine mammal.
  More than anything else, military readiness depends on realistic 
training. Constraints on military training and research are a growing 
challenge to our national security. To perform a constantly expanding 
range of missions--from peacekeeping to assaulting and holding a 
hostile beachhead--the men and women of our armed forces must train as 
they fight. They must train under conditions as much like the real 
thing as possible.
  The issue is not readiness versus the environment. Our military men 
and women have all volunteered to go into harm's way--we owe it to 
them, and their families, to send them there trained to win. Training 
saves lives. In this time of war I urge my colleagues to make 
protecting the lives of our military men and women our highest 
priority. Supporting this legislation will do that. I urge passage of 
the bill.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I want to add my voice to the 
choir of opposition the National Defense Authorization Act of FY 2003. 
This bill provides appropriations for an increase in pay for our armed

[[Page H2276]]

services personnel, which I believe is very important for the security 
of our great Nation. However, I rise to oppose this legislation because 
it provides appropriations for an unproven ballistic missile defense. 
This is a flawed policy. If the United States was attacked by a long 
range nuclear missile, any feasible ballistic missile defense system 
would have less than 15 minutes to detect, track, and attempt to 
intercept the missile. Thus, this is a technologically daunting task. A 
top defense official has said that a successful U.S. missile defense 
system test, which was completed recently, did not realistically 
duplicate conditions of an actual attack. If our top military leaders 
think that this is a flawed policy, then we as elected officials should 
follow their recommendation.
  The Defense Department has tested and retested this ballistic missile 
defense system, and each time the desired results have not been 
achieved. But yet, The President wants to continue funding this flawed 
policy. Therefore, I want to strongly support the Tierney amendment, 
which states that no funds for FY 2003 for the Department of Defense 
may be used for space-based national missile defense programs.
  Additionally, I also strongly support Congressman Markey's amendment, 
which prohibits the use of funds to develop and test a nuclear earth 
penetrator weapon and also prohibits the use of funds in fiscal year 
2003 for a feasibility study of a nuclear earth penetrator weapon.
  In almost every case, post-test doubts regarding missile defense have 
been raised. Critics have charged that test results over the past two 
decades have been exaggerated by false claims of success and promises 
of performance that later proved false. Many tests were proven to have 
had their targets significantly enhanced to ensure the likelihood of 
success.
  Furthermore, kinetic kill as a concept for destroying long-range 
ballistic missiles is even more problematic at this stage. There is no 
empirical evidence to support the contention that kinetic kill for ICBM 
defense will work. Despite the prowess of American technology, there 
are no quick, cheap or easy solutions in missile defense. Therefore, we 
should allocate funds for more pressing defense needs and spend our 
funds on systems that work and will enhance real security for all 
Americans.
  Mr. STARK. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this Defense 
authorization bill. With the President's war on terrorism continuing 
and with budget deficits rising, why are we spending money on so many 
unnecessary programs? Just yesterday the administration admitted that 
some of these programs are no longer necessary, yet the Republican 
leadership would rather waste billions of dollars on defense projects 
that keep defense contractors swimming in money.
  Earlier this week, I submitted an amendment to this bill that would 
have cut the $475 million to further research and develop the Crusader 
mobile howitzer project. Unfortunately, the Republicans refused to 
allow this amendment to be considered on the House floor. These 
Republicans are more interested in looking like they are strong on 
defense than they are in funding projects that can actually be used to 
defend our country. Even the Department of Defense has said it doesn't 
want the Crusader. If you don't believe me, look at the front page of 
today's Washington Post: Defense Secretary Rumsfeld says, ``We are 
going to cancel the Crusader.'' Rather than falling in line behind 
President Bush, as they have on virtually every other initiative 
proposed by this administration, the Republican leadership wouldn't 
even allow a debate about this program.
  Why do I agree with the administration on a defense project? Let's 
look at some details. To date, we have spent $3.5 billion on an 
artillery system that doesn't have a prototype, fails to meet the 
operability requirements of the army, and would cost another $11 
billion if we decided to purchase the system. Fully loaded, the 
Crusader weighs over 80 tons, so heavy that only the largest cargo 
plane we have could carry it, and just one at a time! Finally, 
howitzers like the Crusader are outdated weapons of warfare that are 
really only effective against large massed armies, such as those that 
were maintained by the former Soviet Union. There are few armies left 
in the world who use such WWII era tactics, and if in the future we 
happen to need these weapons again, the GAO has found that we can 
either upgrade the existing Paladin howitzer or purchase a German made 
system that fits the operational requirements of the Crusader.
  But the Crusader is not the only program that shouldn't be funded in 
this bill. This bill also authorizes continued funding of the F-22, the 
Joint Strike Fighter, and an upgraded version of the F/A 18. With the 
upgrades of our existing F-15s and F-16s, our Air Force has air-
superiority over any existing air force. While some argue that we need 
upgraded fighter aircraft to counteract improvements in surface to air 
defense systems, do we really need three different planes? The cost 
savings of just going with one of these systems instead of three would 
be astronomical. Not only would we stop throwing billions more dollars 
at defense contractors, we would save billions more by not having to 
purchase parts for three different planes and to hire three different 
sets of mechanics to service them. Finally, cutting these extraneous 
programs will further integrate our armed forces, a goal specifically 
mentioned by Secretary Rumsfeld in his speech at the Pentagon 
yesterday.
  This bill spends too much money on programs that will do nothing to 
protect our citizens. Instead, it lines the pockets of defense 
contractors and sends our nation's financial health into further 
disarray. In the interest of national defense and fiscal security, I am 
voting against this bill and urge my colleagues to do the same.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, there is no function of our national 
government more fundamental than defense of the Nation. Today, our 
national defense is more important than ever, and with this 
authorization bill, we are spending more on national defense than ever. 
In fact, the $393 billion this bill authorizes means the United States 
will be spending more on our military than do the next 25 nations 
combined.
  There is no question this bill spends enough to do the job. The 
question is whether the money is being spent in ways that will do the 
right job. There is a great debate abroad in the land about the nature 
of the threats our Nation faces, and the best approaches to dealing 
with those threats. There is a robust discussion about honoring our 
responsibilities to those who have served this country; about the 
responsibility of the military, like the rest of the Federal 
Government, to play by the rules this Congress has established; and 
about the military's duty to clean up after itself by returning the 
lands it no longer needs to productive use for America.
  However, that discussion and debate is not occurring in this House. 
The leadership has so tightly managed the rule for debate on this 
measure that the House will authorize the largest increase in defense 
spending since 1966.
  We have failed our duty to the people to ask and answer the most 
fundamental questions: what unnecessary, wasteful systems and programs 
should be eliminated from this bill because they do nothing to enhance 
the security of the United States? What should be added in their place, 
to ensure that we uphold our duty to those who have served and ensure 
that we strengthen America with our defense investments?
  On the first question, the answer is clear. We need to right-size the 
military for the security needs of the United States today. 
Unfortunately, in this $393 billion, there is too much money being 
spent on the wrong stuff.
  Three examples, of many, should suffice to make the point. First, we 
should not be continuing to fund three tactical aircraft programs 
concurrently at a time when we have the pre-eminent fighter jet in the 
world--the F-15.
  Second, the bill contains $7.8 billion for missile defense, including 
funding for initial deployment of a national missile defense system 
based in Alaska. We should be alarmed that we are not taking the time 
as a nation to have a thoughtful dialogue on all the potential 
ramifications of a national missile defense system before rushing ahead 
with deployment. Since President Ronald Reagan's famous 1983 ``Star 
Wars'' speech, the United States has spent roughly $100 billion on 
ballistic missile defenses. We should not be throwing good money after 
bad. September 11 showed us that there are many threats that are more 
realistic than that of a ballistic missile streaking across the ocean 
to land on our shores.

  The third is perhaps the most outrageous example. Yesterday, 
Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld informed members of Congress of his 
decision to cancel the $11 billion Crusader program. This is a weapons 
system that Napolean would have loved that was designed for a war from 
an age long past.
  The Army plans to create a mobile force capable of being deployed 
anywhere in the world in 96 hours, but the Crusader Mobile Howitzer is 
still too heavy to be lifted by any transport aircraft in our fleet. 
Neither of the two largest military cargo transports in operation--the 
C-5 and the C-17--is capable of carrying a complete Crusader. The 
weapon's designers say they have reduced the total weight of the system 
from 90 tons to ``only'' 73, but that was accomplished by removing the 
fuel and ammunition.
  The Congressional Budget Office recommends killing the Crusader and 
purchasing a suitable alternative. The General Accounting Office has 
identified a German-made howitzer as a viable alternative to the 
Crusader. According to CBO, acquiring this off-the-shelf weapon would 
save $6.7 billion over 10 years.
  The Crusader is more suitable for fighting Adolf Hitler than meeting 
the challenges of today. As one Bush adviser remarked, ``Why would you 
buy the same artillery pieces that

[[Page H2277]]

Napoleon would understand? It's all Industrial Age equipment.''
  I submitted amendments to the Rules Committee to transfer funds from 
the Crusader to the cleanup of unexploded ordnance (UXO). These 
amendments would have supported Secretary Rumsfeld's decision on the 
Crusader and addressed a serious problem for the military, UXO, which 
is both a long-term liability and a short-term operational and public 
relations nightmare.
  In addition to these examples of unwise and wasteful expenditure, 
this bill authorizes unnecessary and destructive waivers of important 
environmental protections essential to Americans' health and the health 
of America's land and water. During my time in Congress, I have worked 
to compel the Federal Government to lead by example. This bill goes 
against everything I have been working toward. If we exempt the largest 
landowner in the country from environmental regulations, how can we 
expect anyone else to follow our laws?
  The Department of Defense wants to exempt itself from many 
environmental laws. This is an important decision, and should involve 
debate and consideration by all stakeholders. Unfortunately, the 
Department and their congressional supporters have circumvented the 
committee process to give us the provisions in this bill.
  This bill contains sweeping new exemptions for activities under the 
Endangered Species Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the 
Wilderness Act, important environmental protections that took years and 
much debate to put in place. This action should at least warrant a 
debate in the relevant committees. I am also disappointed that the rule 
on this bill does not even allow for discussion of these significant 
environmental exemptions.
  No one will argue that the U.S. military does not provide an 
important service, and that its ability to operate is imperative. 
However, in preparing itself to protect this country, the Department of 
Defense should not be allowed to destroy the environment that American 
public cherishes and the clean and healthy communities that it demands.
  The second question we should have more productively discussed in 
this House is what we could better have done with the enormous 
resources committed by this legislation. One answer is to better 
provide for the needs of those who have served our country. Our 
priorities should include funding concurrent receipts, which enable 
retirees who were injured in the line of duty to receive both their 
deserved retirement pay and disability payments. That is the number one 
issue I hear about from military retirees in my district. I am pleased 
that this bill starts that process by compensating retirees who are 60 
percent or greater disabled, but I firmly believe we could have done 
more.
  A second example, a special area of interest to me and one that has 
been neglected by all of us for too long, is unexploded ordance. For 2 
years now, I have been pursuing remedies to the problem of unexploded 
ordnance--the bombs and other munitions that didn't go off as intended 
and are subsequently buried or litter the landscape. There are some 
2,000 former military properties in every state and nearly every 
congressional district where these hidden dangers lurk. This is a prime 
example of the need for the Federal Government to be a better partner 
and clean up after itself.
  Last year, we succeeded in requiring a prioritized nationwide 
inventory of UXO-contaminated sites. This year's directs the Department 
of Defense to designate a single point of contact for UXO. That 
authority may be delegated no further than the Under Secretary of one 
of the military departments. In addition, this bill contains language 
calling for an independent advisory and review panel for UXO matters. 
All of these provisions are part of the legislation Representative 
Riley and I introduced last year, the Ordnance and Explosive Risk 
Management Act (H.R. 2605).
  The Defense Department has put forward a preliminary estimated cost-
to-complete of $15 billion for munitions response at Formerly Used 
Defense Sites. Neutral observers say this cost could in fact run into 
the hundreds of billions of dollars. At the FY03 proposed funding level 
of $70 million, it will take 200 years to complete the job, even 
accepting the low DOD cost estimate. It is more realistic to assume 
costs over a hundred billion dollars and more than a thousand years to 
finish the job. The delay is absolutely unacceptable for the 
environment and the American people.
  Those 2,000 sites are at locations nationwide, including Spring 
Valley right here in the District of Columbia which has munitions 
remnants left over from World War I weapons testing, and Five Points 
Outlying Field in Arlington, TX, where people in a new housing 
development are finding live ordnance in their gardens.
  These sites are a legacy of past military activities; it is our 
nation's responsibility to clean them up. They not only constitute an 
environmental hazard; documentation has been found detailing at least 
65 deaths in this country by accidents with UXO.
  We are all profoundly aware of the broader implications of UXO across 
the globe. As we address the problem at home, we have the potential of 
sharing our technology and helping to solve UXO problems around the 
world. Placing greater emphasis on the problem of UXO and focusing a 
small portion of federal defense spending on it can truly have a 
transformational effect on the cleanup of tens of millions of acres in 
the United States. Such action can also impact the development and 
deployment of new technologies that will save millions of innocent 
civilians from death and dismemberment in some of the most distressed 
areas of the world.
  There is much that we could do to strengthen and better protect 
America with the enormous resources authorized in this bill. There are 
many things authorized in this bill that threaten Americans' health and 
safety or waste tax dollars with no benefit to our country. We must do 
better in shaping our Nation's defense policy.
  I vote ``no.''
  Mr. JEFF MILLER of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of 
the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, 
H.R. 4546.
  Mr. Chairman, yesterday, in Pensacola, FL, the Navy suffered an air 
training accident whereby seven military and civilian contractor 
personnel are missing at sea. And while the search continues, and we 
pray for a successful recovery, this event is a reminder of the risks 
our uniformed men and women endure--either at home or away. I believe 
this legislation does much to honor and reward military service and I 
am proud to be a member of the House Armed Services Committee and proud 
to have contributed to the work before us.
  Mr. Chairman, this legislation remedies a wrong, long committed 
against our retired military veterans. By providing $5.58 billion, over 
5 years, toward retiree benefits, H.R. 4546 begins full concurrent 
receipt for veterans suffering from a disabled rating 60 percent or 
greater. These individuals, who have given decades of their life, 
serving this great country, will begin to receive their earned retired 
pay along with their earned disability pay.
  This agreement builds upon the work of many people, the least not the 
veterans who walk these halls, write letters or otherwise make the 
effort to contact their Member of Congress. Due to the meticulous work 
of the budget committee, the requirement to have a full budget offset 
is no longer needed. Additionally, this legislation eliminates a 
stipulation that disability claims must be made within four years of 
military separation, effectively enacting my bill, H.R. 3620.
  Navy training, an important function in my district, is supported in 
this bill by the authorization of 10 additional Joint Primary Air 
Training Systems, also known as JPATS. The Navy and Air Force will sue 
this system, consisting of both the T-6A aircraft and a ground-based 
training system, for primary pilot training. The T-6A will replace both 
the Navy's T-34 and Air Force's T-37B fleets, providing safer, more 
economical and more effective training for future student pilots.
  Mr. Chairman, in closing I would like to thank Chairman Stump for his 
service to this committee, to the men and women in uniform and to his 
country. It is my honor to have had the opportunity to serve under his 
leadership.
  Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 4546, the Bob 
Stump National Defense Act of Fiscal Year 2003 and I ask my colleagues 
to support this important legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, September 11 highlighted the fact that our military 
must remain the best trained and best equipped in the world. Our 
ability to stage Operation Enduring Freedom in South Asia is not the 
result of anything that happened since the attacks but are a result of 
years of training and management, tens of thousands of man-hours of 
research and development, and billions of dollars in testing and 
manufacturing. The defense budget pays not only for the fuel, 
munitions, and soldiers' salaries, but it pays for the investment in 
the weapons needed to fight and win the wars of the future, against any 
potential enemy in any part of the world.
  For over 13 years, we have downsized our military because of cuts in 
our defense budget. We have decommissioned vessels rather than upgrade 
them and retired aircraft rather than build new ones. Our military was 
asked to do more with less. Our servicemen and women were asked to do 
more with less. We closed bases and gave up training areas, both 
irreversible and in many cases at great cost. It is no wonder that 
several years ago our soldiers and airmen began to leave the services 
in record numbers.
  This strong and bipartisan legislation addresses many of these issues 
and reverses the trend of years past. It looks forward to the 
challenges of the future. this bill contains a 4.1 percent increase in 
basic pay with additional increases for mid-grade and senior 
noncommissioned officers and mid-grade officers.

[[Page H2278]]

It also works to honor the commitment our nation has to its veterans by 
eliminating current law provisions that cause military retirees who are 
eligible for veteran's disability compensation to have their retirement 
pay reduced. Veterans who are 60 percent or greater disabled will begin 
to receive concurrent pay phased in fully by 2007. As a veteran and 
having spent 30 years as an Army Reservist, I know that investments in 
our people are as important as any other aspect of our national 
defense.
  This bill also addresses security and quality of life issues. It 
conveys almost $8.0 million to the Naval Submarine Base in Groton for 
base security; and $24 million for a 100 units of Navy housing for 
personnel and their families. This is a wise investment for the future.
  Mr. Chairman, I have the privilege of representing the Second 
District of Connecticut here in Congress. The ``Submarine Capital of 
the World,'' Groton, is in my district. For over a century, designers 
and manufacturers in Groton have built submarines. Our nuclear ``silent 
service'' is made up of the most sophisticated and complex systems ever 
created by man. In the 1980s, workers in my district built on average 
over 5 submarines a year, establishing American dominance of the seas 
around the world and providing the backbone of our strategic nuclear 
deterrence with the Trident-class ballistic missile submarines. My 
district also is home to an assembly plant for military aircraft 
engines that power the aircraft that make our air force second to none 
in the world. Just as important are hundreds of competitive small 
businesses and high-tech firms that keep our military on the cutting 
edge.

  While I worked for a higher level of procurement funding, I am 
satisfied with what this bill does for our military and what it does 
for the State of Connecticut. Connecticut fares especially well with 
the procurement provisions authorizing funds for another Virginia class 
submarine, the Trident Class to SSGN conversion program, additional 
engine modifications of F-15s, and F-16 fighter aircraft, and the 
acquisition of thirty-nine H-60 variant helicopters for the National 
Guard and Navy. Important research programs at University of 
Connecticut will continue to bring new technology to the warfighter, 
and better equipment and medicine to assist and protect our troops in 
the field.
  I am also pleased with the language in the bill that authorizes the 
Department of Defense, pending settlement of an outstanding legal case, 
to enter into a multiyear contract for the procurement of Virginia 
Class nuclear attack submarines. Using modern and innovative design and 
manufacturing techniques, the Virginia Class submarine program is using 
methods and processes that are likely to make it a model for future 
large-system acquisition programs. Multiyear procurement promises to 
save both jobs and taxpayer dollars.
  Mr. Chairman, testimony received by the House Armed Services 
committee by both the Secretary of the Navy, the Chief of Naval 
Operations, other DOD officials and respected defense analysts have 
warned us of the impending force structure problem we are heading as 
our submarines begin to reach the end of their service lives or require 
refueling overhauls. Without increasing the procurement rate to two per 
year, our submarine force will not meet the mission and operational 
requirements determined as necessary by our military. Carrier and 
amphibious groups will not have the required protection and firepower 
of our submarine fleet. The smartest and most cost-effective way to 
rebuild our submarine force is multiyear contracting. It is good for 
the workforce, it is good for the taxpayer, and it is good for our men 
and women in the military.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill is a well-crafted bill to meet many of the 
needs of our military. I urge my colleagues to support the bill.
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this legislation and 
wanted to briefly comment as one of the Chairs of the Speaker's Task 
Force on a Drug Free America and chairman of the Drug Policy 
Subcommittee on the counterdrug provisions of the bill.
  First, I want to commend the Armed Services Committee for its work on 
the bill and support for counterdrug programs. The Department of 
Defense plays a critical role in our nation's efforts to keep drugs off 
our streets, particularly with respect to interdiction programs in 
narcotics source and transit zones in the Caribbean and South America 
and in providing training and resources to our allies. There has been 
concern that the Department intended to substantially reduce its 
support for these programs, and I very much want to thank the committee 
for its continued careful attention to ensure that the Defense 
Department continues its important involvement. My subcommittee and the 
Speaker's Task Force will continue to follow this carefully, and we 
look forward to continuing to work with the Department and the 
Committee.
  Second, I wanted to emphasize and associate myself with the guidance 
contained in the committee's report on this bill with respect to 
narcotics in Afghanistan. John Walters, the Director of the Office of 
National Drug Control Policy, recently stated in an interview that our 
military involvement in Afghanistan has given us the first meaningful 
opportunity to address the global heroin trade. Ninety percent of the 
world supply of heroin is grown in Afghanistan, and this huge supply 
inevitably affects the entire world market. I am concerned at public 
reports and briefings obtained by my staff which suggest that the 
Defense Department and the Central Command have been unwilling to 
participate vigorously in drug interdiction and eradication efforts.
  While I agree that the protection of our forces must be the paramount 
concern, it also seems apparent that the Defense Department can make 
some important contributions not only to drug eradication, but also to 
the military goal of cutting off the source of economic support for 
potential enemies. As we know, the Taliban received substantial 
financial support from the drug trade. It makes no sense to leave as 
potentially lucrative a source of funding for future terrorists as the 
poppy crop in Afghanistan.
  I also want to support the committee's report language on this issue 
with respect to targeting. It expressed concern with the lack of 
targeting of opium storage facilities in Afghanistan that were 
identified early in the conduct of Operation Enduring Freedom. The 
committee shared our understanding that U.S. Central Command had deemed 
that opium in any form did not constitute a credible military target. I 
agree strongly with its conclusion that the Department of Defense 
should review and revise its policy in this regard to ensure that such 
targets are properly prosecuted in Afghanistan and any future 
conflicts.
  Mr. Chairman, the Department of Defense must continue to play an 
active role in our drug control efforts, particularly in Afghanistan, 
and I hope that this bill will encourage it to do so.
  Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the FY03 
Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act and appreciate all the 
hard work my colleagues and my chairman did to produce a bill in 
support of our national defense.
  One area of particular concern for me is the Maritime 
Administration's Title XI Vessel Loan Guarantee Program. I am pleased 
to see that we have decided to authorize $50 million to continue this 
valuable program, which sustains our national shipbuilding industrial 
base by supporting commercial shipbuilding. This is necessary in the 
face of foreign competition and subsidies and is good for all U.S. 
shipyards, large and small. In addition, this will also serve to 
maintain a skilled labor force critical to our defense industrial base.
  I note that the committee expects that the Maritime Administration 
will place a priority on providing loan guarantees under the Title XI 
Ship Loan Guarantee Program for the construction of commercially viable 
vessels that are militarily useful, such as for highspeed sealift, or 
that meet specific requirements of Federal law, such as the requirement 
for double-hull tankers. These types of commercial projects would be 
the highest priority for continuing this program. There are many 
laudable projects, including the FastShip project in my congressional 
district, which should be supported by the Department of Defense and 
the Department of Transportation. Military useful projects, like 
FastShip, have always been a key element of the Title XI program. High-
speed sealift vessels are particularly important in light of the modern 
military's need for rapid logistical support.
  I urge the Maritime Administration to fairly consider these projects 
for which applications have been filed so that these shipbuilding 
projects can go forward in our U.S. shipyards and built by our skilled 
American labor force. The Maritime Administration must consider all 
both the commercial and the military benefits of these projects by 
fairly and fully reviewing all available documents on current and 
future applications. The Maritime Administration is obligated to ensure 
the strength of our national security through the support of a strong 
merchant marine.
  Finally, I would like to thank Chairman Bob Stump for all his years 
of service to our country and for his hard work on this important bill. 
It has been an honor to serve with him and I am proud to call him my 
chairman. I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill 
and the Title XI vessel loan guarantee authorization.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this bill.
  Now more than ever, it is clear that cold war era thinking will not 
meet the security needs of today. But it is cold war thinking that 
continues to fuel our defense budget.
  It is misguided thinking that seeks to put the United States back on 
the path toward renewed nuclear testing, when instead we would all be 
made safer if we would work toward nuclear nonproliferation.
  It is misguided thinking that seeks to spend billions on the 
Crusader, a weapons system that the Secretary of State himself does not 
want, when we have so many profound needs here at home.

[[Page H2279]]

  It is misguided thinking that seeks to allow the Department of 
Defense to ignore our existing environmental laws. The American public 
doesn't want fewer environmental protections. They want more.
  It is misguided thinking to underfund important programs to destroy 
chemical weapons in Russia.
  And, it is misguided thinking that pours billions into a missile 
defense system that we are rushing to deploy without fully considering 
either the enormous technical problems or the serious international 
repercussions.
  As we abandon treaties and international agreements, we work against 
our own best interests by spurring on nuclear arms races and 
undermining proliferation and cooperation efforts.
  I urge you, then, to oppose another $7.8 billion for missile defense 
and to oppose this bill.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I support this bill, but I think an 
admonition about the budget is in order. We actually have one bill 
before us, while holding another in abeyance. The President requested a 
total of $396 billion for national security, primarily for the 
Department of Defense (DoD) and the nuclear weapons program run by the 
Department of Energy (DoE). The President asked us to set aside $10 
billion of the DoD budget as a ``war reserve'' for actions in 
Afghanistan and elsewhere in the war on terrorism. For DoD, he 
requested a total of $379 billion, of which $10 billion is for the war 
reserve and $369 billion is the regular request.
  There are two reasons for keeping separate the $10 billion request. 
One is to earmark funds for the war on terrorism, the other is not to 
merge into the base budget funding that may be non-recurring.
  One of the bills approved by the House Armed Services Committee 
authorizes $3.8 billion, which is to be drawn from the $10 billion war 
reserve. But the $3.8 billion we are authorizing is actually part of 
the regular $369 billion request. In the main bill, we are authorizing 
DoD activities at the $369 billion level, but since $3.8 billion of the 
regular request is now being provided for in the other bill, we have 
$3.8 billion more in the main bill to be used for ships and other 
procurement needs, research and development, and member-interest items.
  Here are the problems with this approach. One, we are actually 
authorizing $3.8 billion more than the President requested for regular 
DoD appropriations, and DoD will eventually need that money for the war 
on terrorism. I met with the DoD Comptroller, Secretary Zakheim, and he 
acknowledged that while the $10 billion war reserve was a good faith 
effort to account for the likely budgetary effect of the war, it is a 
low-ball estimate. So, if we use $3.8 billion of the $10 billion 
reserve for regular items, we will have to make up the $3.8 billion by 
adding that amount to the supplementals that are likely to come later 
to fully fund the war on terrorism. If the appropriators follow our 
lead, we will spend $3.8 billion more on defense than the President has 
requested, and add $3.8 billion more to the deficit and national debt.
  Second, what happens if the appropriators do not follow suit, or if 
they are not allowed to do so by the House leadership? Then, we will 
have $3.8 billion in hollow BA (Budget Authority). We will authorize 
$3.8 billion worth of items that never get appropriated. This is not an 
idle concern because the White House and the Speaker are both resisting 
efforts by the Appropriations Committee to take up this $3.8 billion 
shift.
  Another shift of funds comes in the military personnel account. This 
account is reduced by $810 million, and the money is shifted to other 
purposes. The DoD actuaries are likely in the next month to conclude 
that the military personnel budget overestimates the accrual payment 
for the Tricare-for-Life program. This is a program this committee 
established, and along with it, we instituted the accrual system to 
make sure the costs of this program are accounted for over the long 
term. If the actuaries do reduce it by that amount, the effect is 
minimal. But what if they reduce it by only $400 million? Then we will 
be shorting the military personnel accounts by $410 million, unless we 
shift the money back from the items to which it is transferred.
  Committee staff asked DoD for a likely estimate of this adjustment 
and took the high end of the range indicated by DoD. If the actuaries 
come in lower, the adjustments will have to be made. Certain items now 
funded will have to be de-funded or cut. Congress should not get in the 
habit of trying to jump ahead of actuarial estimates in order to find 
savings to be used for other items.
  There is a widespread sentiment that DoD needs more funding, even 
though the President's request for next year is the largest increase in 
twenty years. I share the sentiment, but question quite a few of the 
allocations in this bill. For example, if we took $70,000,000 out of 
projects like the space-based kinetic interceptor (on which we have 
spent millions already, to no avail), we could buy 24 PAC-3s and lower 
the purchase cost from $6.5 to $5.6 million per missile. The PAC-3 is 
the only missile defense system that we will deploy in the next five 
years, and it is a theater system, where the threat is clear and 
present. With only 20 PAC-3s deployed, and 72 in process of being 
procured, 24 additional PAC-3's could make a major difference to the 
defense of our troops in some conceivable scenarios in the very near 
future. Moving from the tactical to the strategic. I have long been 
concerned that we are under-funding the DOE's nuclear complex both for 
stockpile stewardship and environmental cleanup. The bill we are 
reporting does little to address these important areas.
  I have always supported a strong defense, but we should bear in mind 
that our economy is the first instrument of our national defense. The 
federal budget constitutes 20 percent of our economy and has a great 
impact on it, as we saw during the 1990s. Each year for eight years, we 
reduced the budget deficit and then moved the budget into surplus; and 
every year for 120 straight months, the economy grew. In passing this 
bill, we take the first step in a defense budget that will cost $557 
billion more than inflation over the next ten years. I recognize the 
need and the primacy we must give the defense of our country, and I do 
not think that we can be stinting about the cost of our war against 
terrorism. But I am concerned as to whether we can sustain over the 
long run all that we are supporting in this bill.
  As we pass the bill authorizing a $48 billion increase in defense, 
the budget overall is moving toward a unified deficit of $150 billion 
this year. In other words, the federal budget in fiscal year 2002 will 
borrow and spend all of the Medicare surplus, all of the Social 
Security surplus, and still need to borrow $150 billion more. Revenue 
collections this year are lagging last year by $130 billion. For the 
first time since 1995, the Treasury must borrow money to make it 
through the first calendar quarter of 2002. These signs are all the 
more ominous when we remember that the first of 77 million baby boomers 
will retire in 2008; and when all are retired, the number of 
beneficiaries on Social Security and Medicare will double.
  I agree that the defense budget takes precedence for now, but the 
federal budget has a rendez-vous with destiny that we cannot dodge. By 
shifting regular DoD funds to the war reserve and second-guessing 
actuarial payments, the bill we report sets precedents that I am not 
eager to establish, and it begs a big question: for how long can we 
sustain what we have started?
  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman today, the House is considering 
H.R. 4546, the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. At a 
time when the men and women of our armed forces are spread across the 
globe defending our nation and helping to combat terrorism, this is a 
critically important piece of legislation that deserves to have a full 
debate on a wide range of issues that affect our fighting men and women 
and will determine how we defend America in the 21st Century.
  Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, the majority has once again rigged the 
system to prevent the minority from offering the American people a real 
debate on these critically important issues. Even more unfortunately, 
Mr. Chairman, is the sad fact that I'm not really surprised any more 
when the majority presents us with so few choices. This isn't the first 
time we've had sham rules on the floor, and most certainly, it won't be 
the last. Repeatedly, we are given fewer opportunities to offer 
amendments on the important legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, today, once again I am saddened that the majority has 
prevented us from offering important amendments to improve this bill on 
a wide range of issues.
  We won't have a real debate on whether or not we should change our 
national nuclear policy. I find it amazing that the Administration 
seems to be steering our nation towards expanding nuclear weapons, and 
we seem to be allowing this without any debate.
  We also don't have a chance to debate the impact this legislation 
will have on the environment. We won't debate the Administration's 
attempt to gut our national environmental protection laws by exempting 
the Department of Defense from the Migratory Bird and Endangered 
Species Acts and by waiving protections found in the Wilderness Act.
  As many of my colleagues have stated, these issues and many others 
are of such national significance, it's unconscionable that we aren't 
having an open and fair debate on them. This sorry excuse for a Rule 
provided for by the majority is patently unfair. And it's patently 
undemocratic.
  These issues are too important to allow the majority to gag us once 
again.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak briefly on 
section 312 which says that an approved Integrated Natural Resource 
Management Plan (INRMP) that addresses the conservation needs of listed 
threatened or endangered species obviates the need to designate 
critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act. I would like to 
remind my colleagues of congressional intent

[[Page H2280]]

and statutory direction when we established INRMPs in the 1997 
Amendments to the Sikes Act.
  I strongly believe that we need to provide our men and women being 
sent ``in harm's way'' the most thorough and realistic readiness 
training as possible on our military installations. Let me also express 
my firm belief that military preparedness and sound stewardship of our 
natural resources, is not mutually exclusive, they are mutually 
beneficial. Appropriate land and natural resource management of our 
installations provides not only for sustainable use for military 
readiness, but for conservation of our natural resources on public 
lands under military department jurisdiction. This is the underlying 
philosophy of the amendments I sponsored to the Sikes Act in 1997 that 
directed the Secretary of Defense to prepare and implement INRMP's in 
cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and respective 
State fish and wildlife agencies.
  Specifically, the Sikes Act directs the Secretary of each military 
department to prepare and implement an INRMP for each military 
installation in the United States under the jurisdiction of the 
Secretary of Defense unless the Secretary determines that the absence 
of significant natural resources on a particular installation makes 
preparation of such a plan inappropriate. Section 670a(a)(2) directs 
that each INRMP shall be prepared ``in cooperation'' with the Secretary 
of the Interior, acting through the Director of the Fish and Wildlife 
Service, and with the head of each appropriate State fish and wildlife 
agency for the State in which the military installation is located. 
This section further provides that the resulting INRMP for the military 
installation ``shall reflect the mutual agreement of the parties 
concerning conservation, protection and management of fish and wildlife 
resources.''
  I understand that DOD has, in practice, not always involved the other 
statutory parties in development of an INRMP at an early stage, but 
instead sought their concurrence to a completed draft. While such a 
policy might comport with the statutory direction as to ``mutual 
agreement of the parties,'' it does not comport with the ``preparation 
in cooperation with'' directive. Cooperation of the statutory parties, 
begun at the earliest stages of development of an INRMP, is the 
contemplation of the statute. Such cooperation should go far to 
reconcile potential differences, and I would like to remind the 
Department of Defense that we expect the process explicitly 
contemplated in the Sikes Act to be undertaken by the Department. While 
there are exemplary INRMPs reflecting this sincere level of 
involvement, the Department needs to re-commit itself to Congress' 
direction in the 1997 amendments to the Sikes Act by involving all 
three parties at the beginning, during development, and during 
implementation of INRMPs. Consensus building and problem solving 
throughout the process will most likely facilitate the ``mutual 
agreement'' required by the statute of the three parties.
  Finally, I would like to express my strong concerns about the 
evolution of environmental management practices. I'm strongly against 
INRMPs becoming something like the environmental impact studies that 
are required today. Today, EIS documents have become a black hole of 
time, money and bureaucracy. EIS documents were once two-page documents 
of environmental consequences. Now EIS documents are thousands of pages 
long, cost millions of dollars and take years to prepare. Even when 
good faith efforts have been made to address the minutiae of endless 
environmental issues in the EIS process, the documents are often 
subject to litigation, being overturned or disregarded. I want to make 
it very clear that the creation of the INRMPs where not intended to 
become a continual EIS process, or as a justification for endless 
studies on environmental stewardship and management.

           Proposal for Western Alaska Workforce Development

       1. Contact Information--a. Alaska Contact: Wendy Redman, 
     University of Alaska, Box 755000, Fairbanks, Alaska 99775.
       b. Congressional Office Contact: Ann Gibson, Congressman 
     Don Young's Office, 2111 Rayburn, Washington, DC 20515, 225-
     5765.
       2. Describe the organization's main activities and whether 
     it is a public, private or non-profit entity. The University 
     of Alaska is Alaska's land grant postsecondary institution 
     and the largest public post-secondary institution in the 
     state.
       3. A brief description of the proposal: This is a proposal 
     to continue workforce training in an area of Alaska 
     economically devastated by the failure of the salmon 
     industry. The training effort is to re-train former fisheries 
     workers in other fields where there is employment available. 
     The training areas are office occupations, construction, 
     computer repair and nursing assistants.
       The primary private economic base in Western Alaska was the 
     salmon fishery. Beginning several years ago, the salmon runs 
     have failed to materialize leaving a dire economic situation. 
     This program is to train workers in new areas and lift their 
     dependence from public assistance.
       4. Project costs: The request is for $2.5 million which is 
     all for training equipment, instructors and student stipends.
       5. Other funding sources: The University of Alaska 
     contributes approximately $500,000 to the existing training.
       6. Federal funding sources: The program did not receive 
     federal funding in FY02.
       7. National significance: This program addresses the 
     federal responsibilities when a disaster occurs to assist in 
     economic recovery. It accomplishes this by training workers 
     in new fields where there is employment. The program could be 
     a model for other areas of the nation experiencing similar 
     economic devastation, particularly rural areas.
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, although I am disappointed in the rule 
before this body, I rise in strong support of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, and urge my colleagues to 
support this important measure. I deeply regret the decision of the 
Rules Committee to prohibit several critical amendments from being 
considered here today.
  I would first like to recognize our committee leadership, Chairman 
Stump and Ranking Member Skelton, for the bipartisan bill they have 
crafted to address the immediate needs of our Armed Forces. Our 
committee has a long tradition of working across party lines to ensure 
the readiness and well-being of our Armed Forces, and I am greatly 
pleased to have participated in yet another cooperative effort with my 
Armed Services colleagues.
  We all know that Chairman Stump has announced this intention to 
retire at the end of this Congress. His steadfast leadership, 
acknowledged in the title of this bill, will be missed, and I know that 
the entire House wishes him the best of luck in the future.
  I would also like to commend my very good friend, Jim Saxton, 
Chairman of the Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee, 
whom I have been so fortunate to work closely with, both on Armed 
Services and the Resources Committees. His sincere concern for the 
quality of life of our troops, as well as his truly bipartisan, 
cooperative leadership, have guaranteed an equitable bill that directly 
answers the pressing needs for our military infrastructure.
  I would like to thank the committee staff for their tireless work and 
invaluable expertise. These professionals have been working day in and 
day out, weekends included, for the past two months, to put together 
the best bill possible. I would especially like to thank the Military 
Installations and Facilities Subcommittee professional staff, George 
Withers and Tom Hawley. No subcommittee is better served than ours with 
dedicated, smart, and consummate staff.
  As ranking member of the Military Installations and Facilities 
Subcommittee, I am especially concerned about the effect this bill will 
have on our military housing and infrastructure. Our Subcommittee 
labored hard to compensate for an anemic construction budget proposed 
by the President--a budget $1.7 billion lower than that put forward 
last year. From this highly unsatisfactory starting point, our 
Subcommittee added $425 million to fund projects vital to the Services. 
An ongoing campaign against global terrorism is not an excuse to 
abandon our campaign against substandard facilities and housing. 
Funding for military construction must match the rhetoric; otherwise, 
we will lose the battle for quality people willing to serve. Our 
people, and their living and working conditions, must continue to be 
our number one priority.
  Given the military's current operational tempo, it is imperative that 
we show our appreciation for those who volunteer to go in harm's way. 
These men and women pledge to support and defend American democracy, 
both at home and abroad, often at great personal sacrifice and for 
significant periods of time. We owe it to them, and to their families, 
to keep our promise of increased safety and morale in the home and in 
the workplace.
  In pursuit of such a goal, this bill authorizes $678.4 million--$17.7 
million more than the President's request--for construction and 
improvement of 3,447 family housing units and the privatization of over 
30,000 units. Privatization authorities, extended in last year's 
defense bill, provide our military accelerated opportunities to 
renovate and build vastly improved family housing developments with 
private sector capital and I applaud the continuation of this important 
program. Our committee also included $1.2 billion for construction of 
49 new barracks and dormitories in the FY03 authorization and $8.6 
million in H.R. 4547, the Cost of War Against Terrorism Authorization 
Act, for unaccompanied personnel housing in Qatar. Once again, 
attention to the living conditions of our single soldiers, sailors, 
airmen, and Marines has been a high priority for our committee, and I 
sincerely hope that we can bring all of our barracks up to the same 
excellent standard set by the Army's Whole Barracks Renewal at 
Schofield Barracks, Hawaii. I am especially pleased to note the $17.6 
million provided to build Child Development Centers. This represents 
funding for four such

[[Page H2281]]

centers, $6.9 million and one more than recommended by the President's 
budget, and acknowledges the emphasis this Congress and the military 
places on the needs of service members with children. Military couples 
and single parents alike benefit when the military recognizes their 
specific needs and eases their child-care burdens.
  Our achievements in military construction will be an ongoing effort 
aimed at providing quality living and working facilities for our entire 
military family, stationed at home and overseas. I know that under Mr. 
Saxton's excellent stewardship, the Subcommittee on Military 
Installations and Facilities will continue to focus on raising the 
living and working standards for our Armed Forces. They have 
volunteered to protect our freedom. Now we must protect them by 
building safe, modern facilities for the 21st century military.
  Again, I urge my colleagues to support this measure.
  Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 4546, the 
Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. This 
important piece of legislation is consistent with the levels 
established in H. Con. Res. 353, the House-passed budget resolution. On 
March 20, this body passed a budget resolution that made available the 
budgetary resources for the largest increase in defense spending in two 
decades. We provided $393.8 billion in budget authority for national 
defense, including $10 billion for the expected war costs.
  The principal reason for that increase, of course, was our unwavering 
commitment to win the war against terrorism. But in addition to 
combating terrorism, we provided a blueprint in the resolution to give 
every service member a 4.1-percent pay rise, increased housing 
allowances, and increased incentive pay. Also, and I believe this 
deserves particularly to be noted, under Republican leadership we kept 
our promises to America' veterans: For the first time in decades we 
broke the legislative logjam over concurrent receipt of military 
retirement pay and veterans disability compensation. The budget 
resolution provided the resources to phase in full concurrent receipt 
for retirees with 60 percent or greater VA disabilities. I am happy to 
say that the defense authorization bill under consideration today is 
completely consistent with the approach we took on concurrent receipt 
in the budget resolution.
  Finally, section 201 of the budget resolution provided for a $10-
billion reserve fund to continue military operations in fiscal year 
2003. I am advised that the Armed Services Committee has opted to deal 
with that subject matter later in a separate bill, H.R. 4547, when the 
Pentagon provides more budgetary detail about how it plans to spend the 
$10 billion.
  I close in noting that the House Budget Committee completed its work 
on schedule and provided a framework for timely consideration of the 
vital bill on the floor today. But as we all know, the other body still 
has not passed a budget resolution for fiscal year 2003. Given the 
other body's glacial slowness in doing the public's business, it is all 
the more important that the House show leadership and pass a resolution 
deeming the provisions of H. Con. Res. 353 to be in force.
  I express my support for H.R. 4546.
  Mr. FORBES. Mr. Chairman, as many people are now aware, the largest 
increase in defense spending in two decades, is not really an 
`increase' so much as it is a `payment past due' on a defense budget 
that was significantly under-funded in the 1990s. This outstanding debt 
is most easily seen in the Navy. It was the Navy that brought the 
Marine Expeditionary Units to the Afghanistan theater of operations, 
and it is the Navy that conducted 75% of the strike sorties flown in 
Afghanistan. As we speak, Navy assets are not just in the Indian Ocean, 
but also off the coasts of Somalia, Yemen, and the Philippines. The 
Carrier Battle Group was the force enabler in Afghanistan--and it will 
be the force enabler in the next theater of operations in the war on 
terror.
  America's defense requires a combat credible expeditionary force. 
America's aircraft carriers with 2.5 acres of sovereign territory are 
just that. In the early part of the last century, President Theodore 
Roosevelt sent his `Big Stick' fleet around the world to deter other 
nations from developing an aggressive stance towards the U.S. In the 
year 2002, we have sent our `Big Stick' around the world to keep those 
that would terrorize America on the run. Now is the time for a `Big 
Stick' budget and investments in carrier battle groups are crucial to 
maintaining our superiority over America's enemies--conventional, and 
unconventional.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, this could be such a better bill if the 
committee had made many more amendments in order. There are major 
changes in defense policy in this bill that may become law without 
debate. The rule to stifle debate is not just a procedural outrage, it 
is contrary to our national security. I offered an amendment to the 
Rules Committee that was not made in order that would have eliminated 
funding for a program in the bill that does not merit the support of 
this Congress. My amendment would remove $7.5 million added to this 
bill for the Kinetic Energy Anti-Satellite--also known as the KE-ASAT--
program. Like a giant fly swatter in space, this weapon would knock out 
enemy satellites.
  The Department of Defense does not support KE-ASAT. President Bush 
requested no money for it. Former President Clinton line item vetoed 
funding for it in 1998. Defense Secretaries, Pentagon weapons advisory 
boards and independent defense analysts have all called KE-ASAT a 
horrendous waste. The GAO, in its examination of this program called 
KE-ASAT a program ``in disarray.''
  Yet we continue to fund it. This money was added to the bill without 
debate, and, unfortunately, we will not have the opportunity to debate 
it today. I ask my colleagues: How many other meritorious defense needs 
could benefit from that $7.5 million? Any one of us could write a 
laundry list of other, better uses for this money, both in and out of 
the defense budget.
  At this time, when our nation's military is facing so many 
challenges, it is simply unconscionable to waste money on systems like 
this. I respectfully urge my colleagues to make my amendment in order 
and give the Members of the House the opportunity to work their will on 
this subject.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, this bill is one of the most 
important measures that the House will consider this year. It is 
intended to set out our vision for the defense of our country in the 
years ahead--both in terms of policy direction and spending priorities. 
Unfortunately, the vision this bill puts forth is not one I can 
endorse, and so I cannot vote for it.
  There is no doubt that September 11th changed the way we view our 
national defense. There is no doubt that more than ever, we must focus 
on defending our homeland against terrorism, we must support our 
military personnel, and we must give our military the training, 
equipment, and weapons it needs to beat terrorism around the world.
  Like all of my colleagues, I remain steadfastly committed to our 
fight against terrorism. And yet, as this nation faces the most 
difficult threat it has faced in decades, I believe it is essential 
that we understand how our defense capabilities need to change to 
reflect new 21st century threats. I believe Secretary Rumsfeld is 
trying to refocus and reprioritize our defense programs along those 
lines, but clearly he isn't being assisted by some of our colleagues 
here in the House, who seem content to address new threats with Cold 
War-era technologies.
  So my first objection to this bill is that although it funds defense 
programs at their highest levels since 1966, it doesn't present a 
coherent vision of how to realign our defense priorities. We need to 
make clear decisions about our defense spending, and this bill doesn't 
begin to consider the choices that must be made.
  I have other objections to the bill. It includes provisions 
concerning the Endangered Species Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty 
Act, matters within the jurisdiction of other Committees, including the 
Resources Committee, but which that Committee had no opportunity to 
consider. There is broad-based support for existing environmental 
laws--as there should be--and these laws already allow case-by-case 
flexibility to protect national security. I find it simply unacceptable 
that neither our Committee nor the full House will have the opportunity 
to consider whether the changes that would be made by this bill are 
necessary or appropriate.
  The bill also includes an entire title--Title XIV--that not only 
includes provisions dealt with in a bill referred to the Resources 
Committee, but also goes further to include matters within our 
Committee's exclusive jurisdiction. Many Armed Services Committee 
members themselves have said this was ``a procedural foul,'' but once 
again the Rules Committee has made it impossible for the House to 
consider changes. That is another reason I must oppose the bill.
  I am also concerned that the bill endorses the President's recent 
review of the U.S. nuclear posture. That review includes some troubling 
provisions, such as the one to increase the speed at which nuclear 
testing could resume if needed. Another provision would reduce the U.S. 
nuclear arsenal to 1,700-2,200 weapons, but without destroying the 
weapons removed. I worry that simply storing weapons would encourage a 
similar move in Russia, where the government's control over its nuclear 
stockpile is considered less than secure. I also worry that the bill 
includes a minimum requirement of operationally deployed weapons at 
1,700, which would not give the president flexibility in his current 
negotiations with Russia.
  The bill would also urge the Administration to develop nuclear earth-
penetrating weapons and nuclear-tipped ballistic missile interceptors. 
I believe we must be extremely cautious before we consider expanding 
applications of nuclear use. We all agree on the need to maintain the 
deterrent capability of our nuclear forces, but I fear the language in 
this bill could

[[Page H2282]]

begin to blur the distinction between conventional and nuclear weapons 
and thus increase the likelihood of nuclear use.
  Finally, I am concerned that this bill would give the Pentagon's 
National Missile Agency exemptions from regulations for controlling and 
monitoring new weapons programs. Giving the Pentagon this exemption 
effectively eliminates the checks and balances that are so necessary in 
weapons development, and especially given the past technical failures 
and cost overruns in missile defense programs to date, I can't support 
a bill that includes this provision.
  In short, Mr. Chairman, I don't question the urgent need to provide 
for this country's defense--I just think we need to do it right. This 
bill doesn't do it right, and so I can't support it.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute printed in the bill is considered as an original bill for 
the purpose of amendment and is considered read.
  The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is 
as follows:

                               H.R. 4546

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; FINDINGS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Bob Stump 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003''.
       (b) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Representative Bob Stump of Arizona was elected to the 
     House of Representatives in 1976 for service in the 95th 
     Congress, after serving in the Arizona legislature for 18 
     years and serving as President of the Arizona State Senate 
     from 1975 to 1976, and he has been reelected to each 
     subsequent Congress.
       (2) A World War II combat veteran, Representative Stump 
     entered service in the United States Navy in 1943, just after 
     his 16th birthday, and served aboard the USS LUNGA POINT and 
     the USS TULAGI, which participated in the invasions of Luzon, 
     Iwo Jima, and Okinawa.
       (3) Representative Stump was elected to the Committee on 
     Armed Services in 1978 and has served on nearly all of its 
     subcommittees and panels during 25 years of distinguished 
     service on the committee. He has served as chairman of the 
     committee during the 107th Congress and has championed United 
     States national security as the paramount function of the 
     Federal Government.
       (4) Also serving on the Committee on Veterans' Affairs of 
     the House of Representatives, chairing that committee from 
     1995 to 2000, and serving on the Permanent Select Committee 
     on Intelligence of the House of Representatives, including 
     service as the ranking minority member in 1985 and 1986, 
     Representative Stump has dedicated his entire congressional 
     career to steadfastly supporting America's courageous men and 
     women in uniform both on and off the battlefield.
       (5) Representative Stump's tireless efforts on behalf of 
     those in the military and veterans have been recognized with 
     numerous awards for outstanding service from active duty and 
     reserve military, veterans' service, military retiree, and 
     industry organizations.
       (6) During his tenure as chairman of the Committee on Armed 
     Services of the House of Representatives, Representative 
     Stump has--
       (A) overseen the largest sustained increase to defense 
     spending since the Reagan administration;
       (B) led efforts to improve the quality of military life, 
     including passage of the largest military pay raise since 
     1982;
       (C) supported military retirees, including efforts to 
     reverse concurrent receipt law and to save the Armed Forces 
     Retirement Homes;
       (D) championed military readiness by defending military 
     access to critical training facilities such Vieques, Puerto 
     Rico, expanding the National Training Center at Ft. Irwin, 
     California, and working to restore balance between 
     environmental concerns and military readiness requirements;
       (E) reinvigorated efforts to defend America against 
     ballistic missiles by supporting an increase in fiscal year 
     2002 of nearly 50 percent above the fiscal year 2001 level 
     for missile defense programs; and
       (F) honored America's war heroes by expanding Arlington 
     National Cemetery, establishing a site for the Air Force 
     Memorial, and assuring construction of the World War II 
     Memorial.
       (7) In recognition of his long record of accomplishments in 
     enhancing the national security of the United States and his 
     legislative victories on behalf of active duty service 
     members, reservists, guardsmen, and veterans, it is 
     altogether fitting and proper that this Act be named in honor 
     of Representative Bob Stump of Arizona, as provided in 
     subsection (a).

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

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

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

            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Sec. 101. Army.
Sec. 102. Navy and Marine Corps.
Sec. 103. Air Force.
Sec. 104. Defense-wide activities.
Sec. 105. Defense Inspector General.
Sec. 106. Chemical demilitarization program.
Sec. 107. Defense health programs.

                       Subtitle B--Navy Programs

Sec. 111. Shipbuilding initiative.

                     Subtitle C--Air Force Programs

Sec. 121. Multiyear procurement authority for C-130J aircraft program.

                       Subtitle D--Other Programs

Sec. 141. Revisions to multiyear contracting authority.
Sec. 142. Transfer of technology items and equipment in support of 
              homeland security.
Sec. 143. Destruction of existing stockpile of lethal chemical agents 
              and munitions.
Sec. 144. Report on unmanned aerial vehicle systems.
Sec. 145. Report on impact of Army Aviation Modernization Plan on the 
              Army National Guard.

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

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Sec. 201. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 202. Amount for defense science and technology.

    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

Sec. 211. RAH-66 Comanche aircraft program.
Sec. 212. Extension of requirement relating to management 
              responsibility for naval mine countermeasures programs.
Sec. 213. Extension of authority to carry out pilot program for 
              revitalizing the laboratories and test and evaluation 
              centers of the Department of Defense.
Sec. 214. Revised requirements for plan for Manufacturing Technology 
              Program.
Sec. 215. Technology Transition Initiative.
Sec. 216. Defense Acquisition Challenge Program.

                 Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense

Sec. 231. Limitation on obligation of funds for procurement of Patriot 
              (PAC-3) missiles pending submission of required 
              certification.
Sec. 232. Responsibility of Missile Defense Agency for research, 
              development, test, and evaluation related to system 
              improvements of programs transferred to military 
              departments.
Sec. 233. Amendments to reflect change in name of Ballistic Missile 
              Defense Organization to Missile Defense Agency.

                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

Sec. 301. Operation and maintenance funding.
Sec. 302. Working capital funds.
Sec. 303. Armed Forces Retirement Home.

                  Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions

Sec. 311. Incidental taking of migratory birds during military 
              readiness activity.
Sec. 312. Military readiness and the conservation of protected species.
Sec. 313. Single point of contact for policy and budgeting issues 
              regarding unexploded ordnance, discarded military 
              munitions, and munitions constituents.

  Subtitle C--Commissaries and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities

Sec. 321. Authority for each military department to provide base 
              operating support to fisher houses.
Sec. 322. Use of commissary stores and MWR retail facilities by members 
              of National Guard serving in national emergency.
Sec. 323. Uniform funding and management of morale, welfare, and 
              recreation programs.

                 Subtitle D--Workplace and Depot Issues

Sec. 331. Notification requirements in connection with required studies 
              for conversion of commercial or industrial type functions 
              to contractor performance.
Sec. 332. Waiver authority regarding prohibition on contracts for 
              performance of security-guard functions.
Sec. 333. Exclusion of certain expenditures from percentage limitation 
              on contracting for performance of depot-level maintenance 
              and repair workloads.
Sec. 334. Repeal of obsolete provision regarding depot-level 
              maintenance and repair workloads that were performed at 
              closed or realigned military installations.
Sec. 335. Clarification of required core logistics capabilities.

[[Page H2283]]

                Subtitle E--Defense Dependents Education

Sec. 341. Assistance to local educational agencies that benefit 
              dependents of members of the Armed Forces and Department 
              of Defense civilian employees.
Sec. 342. Availability of quarters allowance for unaccompanied defense 
              department teacher required to reside on overseas 
              military installation.
Sec. 343. Provision of summer school programs for students who attend 
              defense dependents' education system.

                   Subtitle F--Information Technology

Sec. 351. Navy-Marine Corps Intranet contract.
Sec. 352. Annual submission of information on national security and 
              information technology capital assets.
Sec. 353. Implementation of policy regarding certain commercial off-
              the-shelf information technology products.
Sec. 354. Installation and connection policy and procedures regarding 
              Defense Switch Network.

                       Subtitle G--Other Matters

Sec. 361. Distribution of monthly reports on allocation of funds within 
              operation and maintenance budget subactivities.
Sec. 362. Minimum deduction from pay of certain members of the Armed 
              Forces to support Armed Forces Retirement Home.
Sec. 363. Condition on conversion of Defense Security Service to a 
              working capital funded entity.
Sec. 364. Continuation of Arsenal support program initiative.
Sec. 365. Training range sustainment plan, Global Status of Resources 
              and Training System, and training range inventory.
Sec. 366. Amendments to certain education and nutrition laws relating 
              to acquisition and improvement of military housing.

              TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

                       Subtitle A--Active Forces

Sec. 401. End strengths for active forces.
Sec. 402. Revision in permanent end strength minimum levels.
Sec. 403. Authority for military department Secretaries to increase 
              active-duty end strengths by up to 1 percent.
Sec. 404. General and flag officer management.
Sec. 405. Extension of certain authorities relating to management of 
              numbers of general and flag officers in certain grades.

                       Subtitle B--Reserve Forces

Sec. 411. End strengths for Selected Reserve.
Sec. 412. End strengths for reserves on active duty in support of the 
              Reserves.
Sec. 413. End strengths for military technicians (dual status).
Sec. 414. Fiscal year 2003 limitation on non-dual status technicians.

              Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations

Sec. 421. Authorization of appropriations for military personnel.

                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

          Subtitle A--General Personnel Management Authorities

Sec. 501. Increase in number of Deputy Commandants of the Marine Corps.
Sec. 502. Extension of good-of-the-service waiver authority for 
              officers appointed to a Reserve Chief or Guard Director 
              position.

                Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management

Sec. 511. Reviews of National Guard strength accounting and management 
              and other issues.
Sec. 512. Courts-martial for the National Guard when not in Federal 
              service.
Sec. 513. Matching funds requirements under National Guard Youth 
              Challenge Program.

         Subtitle C--Reserve Component Officer Personnel Policy

Sec. 521. Exemption from active status strength limitation for reserve 
              component general and flag officers serving on active 
              duty in certain joint duty assignments designated by the 
              Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Sec. 522. Eligibility for consideration for promotion to grade of major 
              general for certain reserve component brigadier generals 
              who do not otherwise qualify for consideration for 
              promotion under the one-year rule.
Sec. 523. Retention of promotion eligibility for reserve component 
              general and flag officers transferred to an inactive 
              status.
Sec. 524. Authority for limited extension of medical deferment of 
              mandatory retirement or separation for reserve officers.

                   Subtitle D--Education and Training

Sec. 531. Authority for phased increase to 4,400 in authorized 
              strengths for the service academies.
Sec. 532. Enhancement of reserve component delayed training program.

                   Subtitle E--Decorations and Awards

Sec. 541. Waiver of time limitations for award of certain decorations 
              to certain persons.
Sec. 542. Option to convert award of Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal 
              awarded for Operation Frequent Wind to Vietnam Service 
              Medal.

                   Subtitle F--Administrative Matters

Sec. 551. Staffing and funding for Defense Prisoner of War/Missing 
              Personnel Office.
Sec. 552. Three-year freeze on reductions of personnel of agencies 
              responsible for review and correction of military 
              records.
Sec. 553. Department of Defense support for persons participating in 
              military funeral honors details.
Sec. 554. Authority for use of volunteers as proctors for 
              administration of Armed Services Vocational Aptitude 
              Battery test.
Sec. 555. Annual report on status of female members of the Armed 
              Forces.

                          Subtitle G--Benefits

Sec. 561. Voluntary leave sharing program for members of the Armed 
              Forces.
Sec. 562. Enhanced flexibility in medical loan repayment program.
Sec. 563. Expansion of overseas tour extension benefits.
Sec. 564. Vehicle storage in lieu of transportation when member is 
              ordered to a nonforeign duty station outside continental 
              United States.

                  Subtitle H--Military Justice Matters

Sec. 571. Right of convicted accused to request sentencing by military 
              judge.
Sec. 572. Report on desirability and feasibility of consolidating 
              separate courses of basic instruction for judge 
              advocates.

          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

                     Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances

Sec. 601. Increase in basic pay for fiscal year 2003.
Sec. 602. Expansion of basic allowance for housing low-cost or no-cost 
              moves authority to members assigned to duty outside 
              United States.

           Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays

Sec. 611. One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay 
              authorities for reserve forces.
Sec. 612. One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay 
              authorities for certain health care professionals.
Sec. 613. One-year extension of special pay and bonus authorities for 
              nuclear officers.
Sec. 614. One-year extension of other bonus and special pay 
              authorities.
Sec. 615. Minimum levels of hardship duty pay for duty on the ground in 
              Antarctica or on Arctic icepack.
Sec. 616. Increase in maximum rates for prior service enlistment bonus.
Sec. 617. Retention incentives for health care providers qualified in a 
              critical military skill.

            Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances

Sec. 631. Extension of leave travel deferral period for members 
              performing consecutive overseas tours of duty.

             Subtitle D--Retired Pay and Survivors Benefits

Sec. 641. Phase-in of full concurrent receipt of military retired pay 
              and veterans disability compensation for military 
              retirees with disabilities rated at 60 percent or higher.
Sec. 642. Change in service requirements for eligibility for retired 
              pay for non-regular service.
Sec. 643. Elimination of possible inversion in retired pay cost-of-
              living adjustment for initial COLA computation.
Sec. 644. Technical revisions to so-called ``forgotten widows'' annuity 
              program.

            Subtitle E--Reserve Component Montgomery GI Bill

Sec. 651. Extension of Montgomery GI Bill-Selected Reserve eligibility 
              period.

                       Subtitle F--Other Matters

Sec. 661. Addition of definition of continental United States in title 
              37.

                     TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE MATTERS

              Subtitle A--Health Care Program Improvements

Sec. 701. Elimination of requirement for TRICARE preauthorization of 
              inpatient mental health care for medicare-eligible 
              beneficiaries.
Sec. 702. Expansion of TRICARE Prime Remote for certain dependents.
Sec. 703. Enabling dependents of certain members who died while on 
              active duty to enroll in the TRICARE dental program.
Sec. 704. Improvements regarding the Department of Defense Medicare-
              Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund.
Sec. 705. Certification of institutional and non-institutional 
              providers under the TRICARE program.
Sec. 706. Technical correction regarding transitional health care.

                          Subtitle B--Reports

Sec. 711. Comptroller General report on TRICARE claims processing.
Sec. 712. Comptroller General report on provision of care under the 
              TRICARE program.
Sec. 713. Repeal of report requirement.

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

Sec. 801. Plan for acquisition management professional exchange pilot 
              program.

[[Page H2284]]

Sec. 802. Evaluation of training, knowledge, and resources regarding 
              negotiation of intellectual property arrangements.
Sec. 803. Limitation period for task and delivery order contracts.
Sec. 804. One-year extension of program applying simplified procedures 
              to certain commercial items; report.
Sec. 805. Authority to make inflation adjustments to simplified 
              acquisition threshold.
Sec. 806. Improvement of personnel management policies and procedures 
              applicable to the civilian acquisition workforce.
Sec. 807. Modification of scope of ball and roller bearings covered for 
              purposes of procurement limitation.
Sec. 808. Rapid acquisition and deployment procedures.
Sec. 809. Quick-reaction special projects acquisition team.
Sec. 810. Report on development of anti-cyberterrorism technology.
Sec. 811. Contracting with Federal Prison Industries.

      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

Sec. 901. Change in title of Secretary of the Navy to Secretary of the 
              Navy and Marine Corps.
Sec. 902. Report on implementation of United States Northern Command.
Sec. 903. National defense mission of Coast Guard to be included in 
              future Quadrennial Defense Reviews.
Sec. 904. Change in year for submission of Quadrennial Defense Review.
Sec. 905. Report on effect of noncombat operations on combat readiness 
              of the Armed Forces.
Sec. 906. Conforming amendment to reflect disestablishment of 
              Department of Defense Consequence Management Program 
              Integration Office.

                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                     Subtitle A--Financial Matters

Sec. 1001. Transfer authority.
Sec. 1002. Authorization of supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 
              2002.
Sec. 1003. Uniform standards throughout Department of Defense for 
              exposure of personnel to pecuniary liability for loss of 
              Government property.
Sec. 1004. Accountable officials in the Department of Defense.
Sec. 1005. Improvements in purchase card management.
Sec. 1006. Authority to transfer funds within a major acquisition 
              program from procurement to RDT&E.
Sec. 1007. Development and procurement of financial and nonfinancial 
              management systems.

                          Subtitle B--Reports

Sec. 1011. After-action reports on the conduct of military operations 
              conducted as part of Operation Enduring Freedom.
Sec. 1012. Report on biological weapons defense and counter-
              proliferation. 
Sec. 1013. Requirement that Department of Defense reports to Congress 
              be accompanied by electronic version.
Sec. 1014. Strategic force structure plan for nuclear weapons and 
              delivery systems.
Sec. 1015. Report on establishment of a joint national training complex 
              and joint opposing forces.
Sec. 1016. Repeal of various reports required of the Department of 
              Defense.
Sec. 1017. Report on the role of the Department of Defense in 
              supporting homeland security.
Sec. 1018. Study of short-term and long-term effects of nuclear earth 
              penetrator weapon.
Sec. 1019. Study of short-term and long-term effects of nuclear-tipped 
              ballistic missile interceptor.

                       Subtitle C--Other Matters

Sec. 1021. Sense of Congress on maintenance of a reliable, flexible, 
              and robust strategic deterrent.
Sec. 1022. Time for transmittal of annual defense authorization 
              legislative proposal.
Sec. 1023. Technical and clerical amendments.
Sec. 1024. War risk insurance for vessels in support of NATO-approved 
              operations.
Sec. 1025. Conveyance, Navy drydock, Portland, Oregon.
Sec. 1026. Additional Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams.

                  TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS

Sec. 1101. Eligibility of Department of Defense nonappropriated fund 
              employees for long-term care insurance.
Sec. 1102. Extension of Department of Defense authority to make lump-
              sum severance payments.
Sec. 1103. Common occupational and health standards for differential 
              payments as a consequence of exposure to asbestos.
Sec. 1104. Continuation of Federal Employee Health Benefits program 
              eligibility.
Sec. 1105. Triennial full-scale Federal wage system wage surveys.

              TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS

Sec. 1201. Support of United Nations-sponsored efforts to inspect and 
              monitor Iraqi weapons activities.
Sec. 1202. Strengthening the defense of Taiwan.
Sec. 1203. Administrative services and support for foreign liaison 
              officers.
Sec. 1204. Additional countries covered by loan guarantee program.
Sec. 1205. Limitation on funding for Joint Data Exchange Center in 
              Moscow.
Sec. 1206. Limitation on number of military personnel in Colombia.

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

Sec. 1301. Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs and 
              funds.
Sec. 1302. Funding allocations.
Sec. 1303. Prohibition against use of funds until submission of 
              reports.
Sec. 1304. Report on use of revenue generated by activities carried out 
              under Cooperative Threat Reduction programs.
Sec. 1305. Prohibition against use of funds for second wing of fissile 
              material storage facility.
Sec. 1306. Sense of Congress and report requirement regarding Russian 
              proliferation to Iran.
Sec. 1307. Prohibition against use of Cooperative Threat Reduction 
              funds outside the States of the former Soviet Union.
Sec. 1308. Limited waiver of restriction on use of funds.
Sec. 1309. Limitation on use of funds until submission of report on 
              defense and military contacts activities.

                TITLE XIV--UTAH TEST AND TRAINING RANGE

Sec. 1401. Definition of Utah Test and Training Range.
Sec. 1402. Military operations and overflights at Utah Test and 
              Training Range.
Sec. 1403. Designation and management of lands in Utah Test and 
              Training Range.
Sec. 1404. Designation of Pilot Range Wilderness.
Sec. 1405. Designation of Cedar Mountain Wilderness.

            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

Sec. 2001. Short title; definition.

                            TITLE XXI--ARMY

Sec. 2101. Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects.
Sec. 2102. Family housing.
Sec. 2103. Improvements to military family housing units.
Sec. 2104. Authorization of appropriations, Army.
Sec. 2105. Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 
              2002 projects.

                            TITLE XXII--NAVY

Sec. 2201. Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects.
Sec. 2202. Family housing.
Sec. 2203. Improvements to military family housing units.
Sec. 2204. Authorization of appropriations, Navy.
Sec. 2205. Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 
              2002 project.

                         TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE

Sec. 2301. Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition 
              projects.
Sec. 2302. Family housing.
Sec. 2303. Improvements to military family housing units.
Sec. 2304. Authorization of appropriations, Air Force.

                      TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES

Sec. 2401. Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land 
              acquisition projects.
Sec. 2402. Improvements to military family housing units.
Sec. 2403. Energy conservation projects.
Sec. 2404. Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies.
Sec. 2405. Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 
              2000 project.
Sec. 2406. Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 
              1999 project.
Sec. 2407. Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 
              1997 project.

   TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT 
                                PROGRAM

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

            TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

Sec. 2601. Authorized guard and reserve construction and land 
              acquisition projects.

        TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS

Sec. 2701. Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be 
              specified by law.
Sec. 2702. Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2000 
              projects.
Sec. 2703. Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1999 
              projects.
Sec. 2704. Effective date.

                    TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

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

Sec. 2801. Changes to alternative authority for acquisition and 
              improvement of military housing.

[[Page H2285]]

Sec. 2802. Modification of authority to carry out construction projects 
              as part of environmental response action.
Sec. 2803. Leasing of military family housing in Korea.

        Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration

Sec. 2811. Agreements with private entities to limit encroachments and 
              other constraints on military training, testing, and 
              operations.
Sec. 2812. Conveyance of surplus real property for natural resource 
              conservation purposes.
Sec. 2813. National emergency exemption from screening and other 
              requirements of McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act 
              for property used in support of response activities.
Sec. 2814. Demonstration program on reduction in long-term facility 
              maintenance costs.
Sec. 2815. Expanded authority to transfer property at military 
              installations to be closed to persons who construct or 
              provide military family housing.

                      Subtitle C--Land Conveyances

                        Part I--Army Conveyances

Sec. 2821. Land conveyances, lands in Alaska no longer required for 
              National Guard purposes.
Sec. 2822. Land conveyance, Fort Campbell, Kentucky.
Sec. 2823. Land conveyance, Army Reserve Training Center, Buffalo, 
              Minnesota.
Sec. 2824. Land conveyance, Fort Bliss, Texas
Sec. 2825. Land conveyance, Fort Hood, Texas.

                       Part II--Navy Conveyances

Sec. 2831. Land conveyance, Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar, San 
              Diego, California.
Sec. 2832. Boundary adjustments, Marine Corps Base, Quantico, and 
              Prince William Forest Park, Virginia.

                    Part III--Air Force Conveyances

Sec. 2841. Land conveyances, Wendover Air Force Base Auxiliary Field, 
              Nevada.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

Sec. 2861. Easement for construction of roads or highways, Marine Corps 
              Base, Camp Pendleton, California.
Sec. 2862. Sale of excess treated water and wastewater treatment 
              capacity, Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, North 
              Carolina.
Sec. 2863. Ratification of agreement regarding Adak Naval Complex, 
              Alaska, and related land conveyances.
Sec. 2864. Special requirements for adding military installation to 
              closure list.

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

      TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

         Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations

Sec. 3101. National Nuclear Security Administration.
Sec. 3102. Environmental and other defense activities.

   Subtitle B--Department of Energy National Security Authorizations 
                           General Provisions

Sec. 3120. Short title; definitions.
Sec. 3121. Reprogramming.
Sec. 3122. Minor construction projects.
Sec. 3123. Limits on construction projects.
Sec. 3124. Fund transfer authority.
Sec. 3125. Authority for conceptual and construction design.
Sec. 3126. Authority for emergency planning, design, and construction 
              activities.
Sec. 3127. Funds available for all national security programs of the 
              Department of Energy.
Sec. 3128. Availability of funds.
Sec. 3129. Transfer of defense environmental management funds.
Sec. 3130. Transfer of weapons activities funds.
Sec. 3131. Scope of authority to carry out plant projects.

   Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations

Sec. 3141. One-year extension of panel to assess the reliability, 
              safety, and security of the United States nuclear 
              stockpile.
Sec. 3142. Transfer to National Nuclear Security Administration of 
              Department of Defense's Cooperative Threat Reduction 
              program relating to elimination of weapons grade 
              plutonium in Russia.
Sec. 3143. Repeal of requirement for reports on obligation of funds for 
              programs on fissile materials in Russia.
Sec. 3144. Annual certification to the President and Congress on the 
              condition of the United States nuclear weapons stockpile.
Sec. 3145. Plan for achieving one-year readiness posture for resumption 
              by the United States of underground nuclear weapons 
              tests.

                    Subtitle D--Matters Relating to

                    Defense Environmental Management

Sec. 3151. Defense environmental management cleanup reform program.
Sec. 3152. Report on status of environmental management initiatives to 
              accelerate the reduction of environmental risks and 
              challenges posed by the legacy of the Cold War.

          TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

Sec. 3201. Authorization.

                TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE

Sec. 3301. Authorized uses of National Defense Stockpile funds.

                 TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

Sec. 3401. Authorization of appropriations.

                  TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

Sec. 3501. Authorization of appropriations for fiscal year 2003.
Sec. 3502. Authority to convey vessel USS SPHINX (ARL-24).
Sec. 3503. Financial assistance to States for preparation of 
              transferred obsolete ships for use as artificial reefs.
Sec. 3504. Independent analysis of title XI insurance guarantee 
              applications.

     SEC. 3. CONGRESSIONAL DEFENSE COMMITTEES DEFINED.

       For purposes of this Act, the term ``congressional defense 
     committees'' means--
       (1) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the Senate; and
       (2) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

     SEC. 101. ARMY.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2003 for procurement for the Army as follows:
       (1) For aircraft, $2,300,327,000.
       (2) For missiles, $1,693,896,000.
       (3) For weapons and tracked combat vehicles, 
     $2,372,958,000.
       (4) For ammunition, $1,320,026,000.
       (5) For other procurement, $6,119,447,000.

     SEC. 102. NAVY AND MARINE CORPS.

       (a) Navy.--Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated 
     for fiscal year 2003 for procurement for the Navy as follows:
       (1) For aircraft, $8,971,555,000.
       (2) For weapons, including missiles and torpedoes, 
     $1,916,617,000.
       (3) For shipbuilding and conversion, $9,279,494,000.
       (4) For other procurement, $4,527,763,000.
       (b) Marine Corps.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal year 2003 for procurement for the 
     Marine Corps in the amount of $1,351,983,000.
       (c) Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition.--Funds are hereby 
     authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2003 for 
     procurement of ammunition for the Navy and the Marine Corps 
     in the amount of $1,104,453,000.

     SEC. 103. AIR FORCE.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2003 for procurement for the Air Force as follows:
       (1) For aircraft, $12,522,755,000.
       (2) For missiles, $3,482,639,000.
       (3) For ammunition, $1,176,864,000.
       (4) For other procurement, $10,907,730,000.

     SEC. 104. DEFENSE-WIDE ACTIVITIES.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2003 for Defense-wide procurement in the amount of 
     $2,621,009,000.

     SEC. 105. DEFENSE INSPECTOR GENERAL.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2003 for procurement for the Inspector General of the 
     Department of Defense in the amount of $2,000,000.

     SEC. 106. CHEMICAL DEMILITARIZATION PROGRAM.

       There is hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2003 the amount of $1,490,199,000 for--
       (1) the destruction of lethal chemical agents and munitions 
     in accordance with section 1412 of the Department of Defense 
     Authorization Act, 1986 (50 U.S.C. 1521); and
       (2) the destruction of chemical warfare materiel of the 
     United States that is not covered by section 1412 of such 
     Act.

     SEC. 107. DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAMS.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2003 for the Department of Defense for procurement for 
     carrying out health care programs, projects, and activities 
     of the Department of Defense in the total amount of 
     $278,742,000.

     SEC. 111. SHIPBUILDING INITIATIVE.

       (a) Use of Specified Shipbuilding Authorization Amount 
     Subject to Contractor Agreement.--Of the amounts authorized 
     to be appropriated by section 102(a)(3) for fiscal year 2003, 
     $810,000,000 shall be available for shipbuilding programs of 
     the Navy either in accordance with subsection (b) or in 
     accordance with subsection (c).
       (b) DDG-51 Authorization if Agreement Reached.--If as of 
     the date of the enactment of this Act the Secretary of the 
     Navy has submitted to Congress a certification described in 
     subsection (d), then the amount referred to in subsection (a) 
     shall be available for procurement of one Arleigh Burke class 
     (DDG-51) destroyer.
       (c) Authorization if Agreement Not Reached.--If as of the 
     date of the enactment of this Act the Secretary of the Navy 
     has not submitted to Congress a certification described in 
     subsection (d), then the amount referred to in subsection (a) 
     shall be available as follows:
       (1) $415,000,000 shall be available for advance procurement 
     for Virginia class submarines.
       (2) $210,000,000 shall be available for advance procurement 
     for cruiser conversion.
       (3) $185,000,000 shall be available for nuclear-powered 
     submarine (SSN) engineered refueling overhaul.

[[Page H2286]]

       (d) Certification.--A certification referred to in 
     subsections (b) and (c) is a certification by the Secretary 
     of the Navy that the prime contractor for the Virginia class 
     submarine program has entered into a binding agreement with 
     the United States to expend from its own funds an amount not 
     less than $385,000,000 for economic order quantity 
     procurement of nuclear and nonnuclear components for Virginia 
     class submarines beginning in fiscal year 2003.
       (e) Multiyear Procurement Authority.--(1) If the terms of 
     an agreement described in subsection (d) between the United 
     States and the prime contractor for the Virginia class 
     submarine program include a requirement for the Secretary of 
     the Navy to seek to acquire Virginia class submarines through 
     a multiyear procurement contract, the Secretary of the Navy 
     may, in accordance with section 2306b of title 10, United 
     States Code, enter into a multiyear contract for procurement 
     of Virginia class submarines, beginning with the fiscal year 
     2003 program year.
       (2)(A) In the case of a contract authorized by paragraph 
     (1), a certification under subsection (i)(1)(A) of section 
     2306b of title 10, United States Code, with respect to that 
     contract may only be submitted if the certification includes 
     an additional certification that each of the conditions 
     specified in subsection (a) of that section has been 
     satisfied with respect to that contract.
       (B) Upon transmission to Congress of a certification 
     referred to in subparagraph (A) with respect to a contract 
     authorized by paragraph (1), the contract may then be entered 
     into only after a period of 30 days has elapsed after the 
     date of the transmission of such certification.

                     Subtitle C--Air Force Programs

     SEC. 121. MULTIYEAR PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY FOR C-130J AIRCRAFT 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Multiyear Authority.--Beginning with the fiscal year 
     2003 program year, the Secretary of the Air Force may, in 
     accordance with section 2306b of title 10, United States 
     Code, enter into a multiyear contract for procurement of C-
     130J aircraft.
       (b) Limitation.--The Secretary of Defense may not enter 
     into a contract authorized by subsection (a) until--
       (1) the Secretary submits to the congressional defense 
     committees a certification described in subsection (c); and
       (2) a period of 30 days has expired after such 
     certification is submitted.
       (c) Required Certification as to Progress Toward Successful 
     Operational Test and Evaluation.--A certification under 
     subsection (b)(1) is a certification by the Secretary of 
     Defense that the C-130J program is making satisfactory 
     progress towards a successful operational test and 
     evaluation.
       (d) Required Certification With Respect to Multiyear 
     Contracting Conditions.--(1) In the case of a contract 
     authorized by subsection (a) of this section, a certification 
     under subsection (i)(1)(A) of section 2306b of title 10, 
     United States Code, with respect to that contract may only be 
     submitted if the certification includes an additional 
     certification that each of the conditions specified in 
     subsection (a) of that section has been satisfied with 
     respect to that contract.
       (2) Upon transmission to Congress of a certification 
     referred to in paragraph (1) with respect to a contract 
     authorized by subsection (a), the contract may then be 
     entered into only after a period of 30 days has elapsed after 
     the date of the transmission of such certification.

                       Subtitle D--Other Programs

     SEC. 141. REVISIONS TO MULTIYEAR CONTRACTING AUTHORITY.

       (a) Use of Procurement and Advance Procurement Funds.--
     Section 2306b(i) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(4)(A) Unless otherwise authorized by law, the Secretary 
     of Defense may obligate funds for procurement of an end item 
     under a multiyear contract for the purchase of property only 
     for procurement of a complete and usable end item.
       ``(B) Unless otherwise authorized by law, the Secretary of 
     Defense may obligate funds appropriated for any fiscal year 
     for advance procurement under a multiyear contract for the 
     purchase of property only for the procurement of those long-
     lead items necessary in order to meet a planned delivery 
     schedule for complete major end items that are programmed 
     under the contract to be acquired with funds appropriated for 
     a subsequent fiscal year.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--Paragraph (4) of section 2306b(i) of 
     title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), 
     shall not apply with respect to any multiyear contract 
     authorized by law before the date of the enactment of this 
     Act.

     SEC. 142. TRANSFER OF TECHNOLOGY ITEMS AND EQUIPMENT IN 
                   SUPPORT OF HOMELAND SECURITY.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter III of chapter 148 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 2520. Transfer of technology items and equipment in 
       support of homeland security

       ``The Secretary of Defense shall enter into an agreement 
     with an independent, nonprofit, technology-oriented entity 
     that has demonstrated the ability to facilitate the transfer 
     of defense technologies, developed by both the private and 
     public sectors, to aid Federal, State, and local first 
     responders. Under the agreement the entity shall develop and 
     deploy technology items and equipment, through coordination 
     between Government agencies and private sector, commercial 
     developers and suppliers of technology, that will enhance 
     public safety and shall--
       ``(1) work in coordination with the InterAgency Board for 
     Equipment Standardization and Interoperability;
       ``(2) develop technology items and equipment that meet the 
     standardization requirements established by the Board;
       ``(3) evaluate technology items and equipment that have 
     been identified using the standards developed by the Board 
     and other state-of-the-art technology items and equipment 
     that may benefit first responders;
       ``(4) identify and coordinate among the public and private 
     sectors research efforts applicable to national security and 
     homeland security;
       ``(5) facilitate the timely transfer of technology items 
     and equipment between public and private sources;
       ``(6) eliminate redundant research efforts with respect to 
     technologies to be deployed to first responders;
       ``(7) expedite the advancement of high priority projects 
     from research through implementation of initial 
     manufacturing; and
       ``(8) establish an outreach program, in coordination with 
     the Board, with first responders to facilitate awareness of 
     available technology items and equipment to support crisis 
     response.''.
       (b) Deadline for Agreement.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     enter into the agreement required by section 2520 of title 
     10, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)) not later 
     than January 15, 2003.
       (c) Strategic Plan.--The entity described in section 2520 
     of such title shall develop a strategic plan to carry out the 
     goals described in such section, which shall include 
     identification of--
       (1) the initial technology items and equipment considered 
     for development; and
       (2) the program schedule timelines for such technology 
     items and equipment.
       (d) Report Required.--Not later than March 15, 2003, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed 
     Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a 
     report on--
       (1) the actions taken to carry out such section 2520;
       (2) the relationship of the entity described in such 
     section to the InterAgency Board for Equipment 
     Standardization and Interoperability; and
       (3) the strategic plan of such entity to meet the goals 
     described in such section.
       (e) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of subchapter III of chapter 148 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``2520. Transfer of technology items and equipment in support of 
              homeland security.''.

     SEC. 143. DESTRUCTION OF EXISTING STOCKPILE OF LETHAL 
                   CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS.

       (a) Program Management.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     ensure that the program for destruction of the United States 
     stockpile of lethal chemical agents and munitions is managed 
     as a major defense acquisition program (as defined in section 
     2430 of title 10, United States Code) in accordance with the 
     essential elements of such programs as may be determined by 
     the Secretary.
       (b) Requirement for Under Secretary of Defense 
     (Comptroller) Annual Certification.--Beginning with respect 
     to the budget request for fiscal year 2004, the Under 
     Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall submit to the 
     congressional defense committees on an annual basis a 
     certification that the budget request for the chemical agents 
     and munitions destruction program has been submitted in 
     accordance with the requirements of applicable Federal laws.

     SEC. 144. REPORT ON UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE SYSTEMS.

       (a) Report.--Not later than January 1, 2003, the Secretary 
     of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on unmanned 
     aerial vehicle systems of the Department of Defense.
       (b) Matters To Be Included Concerning Unmanned Aerial 
     Vehicle Systems.--The Secretary shall include in the report 
     under subsection (a) the following, shown for each system 
     referred to in that subsection:
       (1) A description of the infrastructure that the Department 
     of Defense has (or is planning) for the system.
       (2) A description of the operational requirements document 
     (ORD) for the system.
       (3) A description of the physical infrastructure of the 
     Department for training and basing.
       (4) A description of the manner in which the Department is 
     interfacing with the industrial base.
       (5) A description of the acquisition plan for the system.
       (c) Suggestions for Changes in Law.--The Secretary shall 
     also include in the report under subsection (a) such 
     suggestions as the Secretary considers appropriate for 
     changes in law that would facilitate the way the Department 
     acquires unmanned aerial vehicle systems.

     SEC. 145. REPORT ON IMPACT OF ARMY AVIATION MODERNIZATION 
                   PLAN ON THE ARMY NATIONAL GUARD.

       (a) Report by Chief of the National Guard Bureau.--Not 
     later than February 1, 2003, the Chief of the National Guard 
     Bureau shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of 
     the Senate and the House of Representatives a report on the 
     requirements for Army National Guard aviation. The report 
     shall include the following:
       (1) An analysis of the impact of the Army Aviation 
     Modernization Plan on the ability of the Army National Guard 
     to conduct its aviation missions.
       (2) The plan under that aviation modernization plan for the 
     transfer of aircraft from the active component of the Army to 
     the Army reserve components, including a timeline for those 
     transfers.
       (3) The progress, as of January 1, 2003, in carrying out 
     the transfers under the plan referred to in paragraph (2).

[[Page H2287]]

       (4) An evaluation of the suitability of existing Commercial 
     Off The Shelf (COTS) light-twin engine helicopters for 
     performance of Army National Guard aviation missions.
       (b) Views of the Chief of Staff of the Army.--If, before 
     the report under subsection (a) is submitted, the Chief of 
     the National Guard Bureau receives from the Chief of Staff of 
     the Army the views of the Chief of Staff on the matters to be 
     covered in the report, the Chief of the Bureau shall include 
     those views with the report as submitted under subsection 
     (a).

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

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

     SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2003 for the use of the Department of Defense for 
     research, development, test, and evaluation as follows:
       (1) For the Army, $6,933,319,000.
       (2) For the Navy, $13,274,540,000.
       (3) For the Air Force, $18,803,184,000.
       (4) For Defense-wide activities, $17,413,291,000, of which 
     $222,054,000 is authorized for the Director of Operational 
     Test and Evaluation.

     SEC. 202. AMOUNT FOR DEFENSE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY.

       (a) Fiscal Year 2003.--Of the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated by section 201, $10,023,658,000 shall be 
     available for the Defense Science and Technology Program, 
     including basic research, applied research, and advanced 
     technology development projects.
       (b) Basic Research, Applied Research, and Advanced 
     Technology Development Defined.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term ``basic research, applied research, and 
     advanced technology development'' means work funded in 
     program elements for defense research and development under 
     Department of Defense category 6.1, 6.2, or 6.3.

    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations

     SEC. 211. RAH-66 COMANCHE AIRCRAFT PROGRAM.

       (a) Limitation.--None of the funds authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal year 2003 for engineering and 
     manufacturing development for the RAH-66 Comanche aircraft 
     program may be obligated until the Secretary of the Army 
     submits to the congressional defense committees a report, 
     prepared in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense 
     for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, containing an 
     accurate estimate of funds required to complete engineering 
     and manufacturing development for that aircraft and the new 
     time line and plan for bringing that aircraft to initial 
     operational capability, as called for in the joint 
     explanatory statement of the committee of conference on the 
     bill S. 1438 of the One Hundred Seventh Congress (at page 535 
     of House Report 107-333, submitted December 12, 2001).
       (b) Limitation on Total Cost of Engineering and 
     Manufacturing Development.--The total amount obligated or 
     expended for engineering and manufacturing development under 
     the RAH-66 Comanche aircraft program may not exceed 
     $6,000,000,000.
       (c) Adjustment of Limitation Amounts.--(1) Subject to 
     paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Army shall adjust the 
     amount of the limitation set forth in subsection (b) by the 
     following amounts:
       (A) The amounts of increases or decreases in costs 
     attributable to economic inflation after September 30, 2002.
       (B) The amounts of increases or decreases in costs 
     attributable to compliance with changes in Federal, State, or 
     local laws enacted after September 30, 2002.
       (2) Before making any adjustment under paragraph (1) in an 
     amount greater than $20,000,000, the Secretary of the Army 
     shall submit to the congressional defense committees notice 
     in writing of the proposed increase.
       (d) Annual DOD Inspector General Review.--(1) Not later 
     than March 1 of each year, the Department of Defense 
     Inspector General shall review the RAH-66 Comanche aircraft 
     program and submit to Congress a report on the results of the 
     review.
       (2) The report submitted on the program each year shall 
     include the following:
       (A) The extent to which engineering and manufacturing 
     development under the program is meeting the goals 
     established for engineering and manufacturing development 
     under the program, including the performance, cost, and 
     schedule goals.
       (B) The status of modifications expected to have a 
     significant effect on cost, schedule, or performance of RAH-
     66 aircraft.
       (C) The plan for engineering and manufacturing development 
     (leading to production) under the program for the fiscal year 
     that begins in the following year.
       (D) A conclusion regarding whether the plan referred to in 
     subparagraph (C) is consistent with the limitation in 
     subsection (a).
       (E) A conclusion regarding whether engineering and 
     manufacturing development (leading to production) under the 
     program is likely to be completed at a total cost not in 
     excess of the amount specified in subsection (a).
       (3) No report is required under this subsection after the 
     RAH-66 aircraft has completed engineering and manufacturing 
     development.
       (e) Limitation on Obligation of Funds.--Of the total amount 
     authorized to be appropriated for the RAH-66 Comanche 
     aircraft program for research, development, test, and 
     evaluation for a fiscal year, not more than 90 percent of 
     that amount may be obligated until the Department of Defense 
     Inspector General submits to Congress the report required to 
     be submitted in that fiscal year under subsection (d).

     SEC. 212. EXTENSION OF REQUIREMENT RELATING TO MANAGEMENT 
                   RESPONSIBILITY FOR NAVAL MINE COUNTERMEASURES 
                   PROGRAMS.

       Section 216(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Years 1992 and 1993 (Public Law 102-190; 105 Stat. 
     1317), as most recently amended by section 211 of the Strom 
     Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1999 (Public Law 105-261; 112 Stat. 1946), is amended by 
     striking ``through 2003'' and inserting ``through 2008''.

     SEC. 213. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT PILOT PROGRAM 
                   FOR REVITALIZING THE LABORATORIES AND TEST AND 
                   EVALUATION CENTERS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF 
                   DEFENSE.

       Section 246 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261; 
     112 Stat. 1955; 10 U.S.C. 2358 note) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1), by inserting before the period at 
     the end the following: ``, and to demonstrate improved 
     efficiency in the performance of the research, development, 
     test, and evaluation functions of the Department of 
     Defense'';
       (2) in subsection (a)(4), by striking ``for a period'' and 
     all that follows through the period at the end and inserting 
     ``until March 1, 2008.'';
       (3) in subsection (b)(2), by striking ``Promptly after'' 
     and all that follows through ``The report shall contain'' and 
     inserting ``Not later than December 31 of each year, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional 
     defense committees a report on the activities of the pilot 
     program during the preceding fiscal year. Each such report 
     shall contain, for each laboratory or center in the pilot 
     program,''; and
       (4) by adding at the end of subsection (b) the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(3) Not later than March 1, 2007, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to the committees referred to in 
     paragraph (2) the Secretary's recommendation as to whether, 
     and to what extent, the authority to carry out the pilot 
     program should be extended.''.

     SEC. 214. REVISED REQUIREMENTS FOR PLAN FOR MANUFACTURING 
                   TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.

       (a) Streamlined Contents of Plan.--Subsection (e) of 
     section 2521 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``prepare a five-year plan'' in paragraph (1) and 
     all that follows through the end of subparagraph (B) of 
     paragraph (2) and inserting the following: ``prepare and 
     maintain a five-year plan for the program.
       ``(2) The plan shall establish the following:
       ``(A) The overall manufacturing technology objectives, 
     milestones, priorities, and investment strategy for the 
     program.
       ``(B) The specific objectives of, and funding for the 
     program by, each military department and each Defense Agency 
     participating in the program.''.
       (b) Biennial Report.--Such subsection is further amended in 
     paragraph (3)--
       (1) by striking ``annually'' and inserting ``biennially''; 
     and
       (2) by striking ``for a fiscal year'' and inserting ``for 
     each even-numbered fiscal year''.

     SEC. 215. TECHNOLOGY TRANSITION INITIATIVE.

       (a) Establishment and Conduct.--Chapter 139 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 
     2359 the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2359a. Technology Transition Initiative

       ``(a) Initiative Required.--The Secretary of Defense, 
     acting through the Under Secretary of Defense for 
     Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, shall carry out an 
     initiative, to be known as the Technology Transition 
     Initiative (hereinafter in this section referred to as the 
     `Initiative'), to facilitate the rapid transition of new 
     technologies from science and technology programs of the 
     Department of Defense into acquisition programs of the 
     Department for the production of such technologies.
       ``(b) Objectives.--The Initiative shall have the following 
     objectives:
       ``(1) To accelerate the introduction of new technologies 
     into appropriate acquisition programs.
       ``(2) To successfully demonstrate new technologies in 
     relevant environments.
       ``(3) To ensure that new technologies are sufficiently 
     mature for production.
       ``(c) Management of Initiative.--(1) The Initiative shall 
     be managed by a senior official in the Office of the 
     Secretary of Defense designated by the Secretary (hereinafter 
     in this section referred to as the `Manager'). In managing 
     the Initiative, the Manager shall report directly to the 
     Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
     Logistics.
       ``(2) The Secretary shall establish a board of directors 
     (hereinafter in this section referred to as the `Board'), 
     composed of the acquisition executive of each military 
     department, the members of the Joint Requirements Oversight 
     Council, and the commander of the Joint Forces Command. The 
     Board shall assist the Manager in managing the Initiative.
       ``(3) The Secretary shall establish, under the auspices of 
     the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, 
     and Logistics, a panel of highly qualified scientists and 
     engineers. The panel shall advise the Under Secretary on 
     matters relating to the Initiative.
       ``(d) Duties of Manager.--The Manager shall have following 
     duties:
       ``(1) To identify, in consultation with the Board, 
     promising technologies that have been demonstrated in science 
     and technology programs of the Department.
       ``(2) To identify potential sponsors in the Department to 
     undertake the transition of such technologies into 
     production.
       ``(3) To work with the science and technology community and 
     the acquisition community to develop memoranda of agreement, 
     joint funding agreements, and other cooperative arrangements 
     to provide for the transition of such technologies into 
     production.

[[Page H2288]]

       ``(4) Provide funding support for projects selected under 
     subsection (e).
       ``(e) Jointly Funded Projects.--(1) The acquisition 
     executive of each military department shall identify 
     technology projects of that military department to recommend 
     for funding support under the Initiative and shall submit to 
     the Manager a list of such recommended projects, ranked in 
     order of priority. Such executive shall identify such 
     projects, and establish priorities among such projects, using 
     a competitive process, on the basis of the greatest potential 
     benefits in areas of interest identified by the Secretary of 
     that military department.
       ``(2) The Manager, in consultation with the Board, shall 
     select projects for funding support from among the projects 
     on the lists submitted under paragraph (1). From the funds 
     made available to the Manager for the Initiative, the Manager 
     shall provide funds for each selected project in an amount 
     determined by mutual agreement between the Manager and the 
     acquisition executive of the military department concerned, 
     but not less than 50 percent of the total cost of the 
     project.
       ``(3) The acquisition executive of the military department 
     concerned shall manage each project selected under paragraph 
     (2) that is undertaken by the military department. Memoranda 
     of agreement, joint funding agreements, and other cooperative 
     arrangements between the science and technology community and 
     the acquisition community shall be used in carrying out the 
     project if the acquisition executive determines that it is 
     appropriate to do so to achieve the objectives of the 
     project.
       ``(f) Requirement for Program Element.--In the budget 
     justification materials submitted to Congress in support of 
     the Department of Defense budget for any fiscal year (as 
     submitted with the budget of the President under section 
     1105(a) of title 31), the amount requested for activities of 
     the Initiative shall be set forth in a separate program 
     element within amounts requested for research, development, 
     test, and evaluation for Defense-wide activities.
       ``(g) Definition of Acquisition Executive.--In this 
     section, the term `acquisition executive', with respect to a 
     military department, means the official designated as the 
     senior procurement executive for that military department 
     under section 16(3) of the Office of Federal Procurement 
     Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 414(3)).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 2359 the following new item:

``2359a. Technology Transition Initiative.''.

     SEC. 216. DEFENSE ACQUISITION CHALLENGE PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 139 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 2359a (as added 
     by section 215) the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2359b. Defense Acquisition Challenge Program

       ``(a) Program Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     carry out a program to provide opportunities for the 
     increased introduction of innovative and cost-saving 
     technology in acquisition programs of the Department of 
     Defense. The program, to be known as the Defense Acquisition 
     Challenge Program (hereinafter in this section referred to as 
     the `Challenge Program'), shall provide any person or 
     activity within or outside the Department of Defense with the 
     opportunity to propose alternatives, to be known as challenge 
     proposals, at the component, subsystem, or system level of an 
     existing Department of Defense acquisition program that would 
     result in improvements in performance, affordability, 
     manufacturability, or operational capability of that 
     acquisition program.
       ``(b) Panel.--(1) In carrying out the Challenge Program, 
     the Secretary shall establish a panel of highly qualified 
     scientists and engineers (hereinafter in this section 
     referred to as the `Panel') under the auspices of the Under 
     Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
     Logistics. The duty of the Panel shall be to carry out 
     evaluations of challenge proposals under subsection (c).
       ``(2) A member of the Panel may not participate in any 
     evaluation of a challenge proposal under subsection (c) if at 
     any time within the previous five years that member has, in 
     any capacity, participated in or been affiliated with the 
     acquisition program for which the challenge proposal is 
     submitted.
       ``(c) Evaluation by Panel.--(1) Under procedures prescribed 
     by the Secretary, a person or activity within or outside the 
     Department of Defense may submit challenge proposals to the 
     Panel.
       ``(2) The Panel shall carry out an evaluation of each 
     challenge proposal submitted under paragraph (1) to determine 
     each of the following criteria:
       ``(A) Whether the challenge proposal has merit.
       ``(B) Whether the challenge proposal is likely to result in 
     improvements in performance, affordability, 
     manufacturability, or operational capability at the 
     component, subsystem, or system level of the applicable 
     acquisition program.
       ``(C) Whether the challenge proposal could be implemented 
     rapidly in the applicable acquisition program.
       ``(3) If the Panel determines that a challenge proposal 
     satisfies each of the criteria specified in paragraph (2), 
     the person or activity submitting that challenge proposal 
     shall be provided an opportunity to submit such challenge 
     proposal for a full review and evaluation under subsection 
     (d).
       ``(d) Full Review and Evaluation.--(1) Under procedures 
     prescribed by the Secretary, for each challenge proposal 
     submitted for a full review and evaluation as provided in 
     subsection (c)(3), the office carrying out the applicable 
     acquisition program, and the prime system contractor carrying 
     out such program, shall jointly conduct a full review and 
     evaluation of the challenge proposal.
       ``(2) The full review and evaluation shall, independent of 
     the determination of the Panel under subsection (c)(2), 
     determine each of the matters specified in subparagraphs (A), 
     (B), and (C) of such subsection.
       ``(e) Action Upon Favorable Full Review and Evaluation.--
     (1) Under procedures prescribed by the Secretary, each 
     challenge proposal determined under a full review and 
     evaluation to satisfy each of the criteria specified in 
     subsection (c)(2) shall be considered by the prime system 
     contractor for incorporation into the applicable acquisition 
     program as a new technology insertion at the component, 
     subsystem, or system level.
       ``(2) The Secretary shall encourage the adoption of each 
     challenge proposal referred to in paragraph (1) by providing 
     suitable incentives to the office carrying out the applicable 
     acquisition program and the prime system contractor carrying 
     out such program.
       ``(f) Access to Technical Resources.--The Secretary shall 
     ensure that the Panel (in carrying out evaluations of 
     challenge proposals under subsection (c)) and each office and 
     prime system contractor (in conducting a full review and 
     evaluation under subsection (d)) have the authority to call 
     upon the technical resources of the laboratories, research, 
     development, and engineering centers, test and evaluation 
     activities, and other elements of the Department.
       ``(g) Elimination of Conflicts of Interest.--In carrying 
     out each evaluation under subsection (c) and full review 
     under subsection (d), the Secretary shall ensure the 
     elimination of conflicts of interest.
       ``(h) Report.--The Secretary shall submit to Congress, with 
     the submission of the budget request for the Department of 
     Defense for each fiscal year during which the Challenge 
     Program is carried out, a report on the Challenge Program for 
     that fiscal year. The report shall include the number and 
     scope of challenge proposals submitted, evaluated, subjected 
     to full review, and adopted.
       ``(i) Sunset.--The authority to carry out this section 
     shall terminate on September 30, 2007.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     2359a (as added by section 215) the following new item:

``2359b. Defense Acquisition Challenge Program.''.

       (b) Initial Funding.--(1) Of the funds authorized to be 
     appropriated by section 201(4) for Defense-wide research, 
     development, test, and evaluation for fiscal year 2003, 
     $25,000,000 shall be available in program element 0603826D8Z 
     for the Defense Acquisition Challenge Program required by 
     section 2359b of title 10, United States Code, as added by 
     subsection (a).
       (2) The funds provided under paragraph (1) may be used only 
     for review and evaluation of challenge proposals, and not for 
     implementation of challenge proposals.

                 Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense

     SEC. 231. LIMITATION ON OBLIGATION OF FUNDS FOR PROCUREMENT 
                   OF PATRIOT (PAC-3) MISSILES PENDING SUBMISSION 
                   OF REQUIRED CERTIFICATION.

       None of the funds appropriated for fiscal year 2003 for 
     procurement of missiles for the Army may be obligated for the 
     Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC-3) missile program until the 
     Secretary of Defense has submitted to the congressional 
     defense committees the following:
       (1) The criteria for the transfer of responsibility for a 
     missile defense program from the Director of the Missile 
     Defense Agency to the Secretary of a military department, as 
     required by section 224(b)(2) of title 10, United States 
     Code.
       (2) The notice and certification with respect to the 
     transfer of responsibility for the Patriot Advanced 
     Capability (PAC-3) missile program from the Director to the 
     Secretary of the Army required by section 224(c) of such 
     title.

     SEC. 232. RESPONSIBILITY OF MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY FOR 
                   RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION 
                   RELATED TO SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS OF PROGRAMS 
                   TRANSFERRED TO MILITARY DEPARTMENTS.

       Section 224(e) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``before a'' and inserting ``for each'';
       (2) by striking ``is''; and
       (3) by striking ``roles and responsibilities'' and all that 
     follows through the period at the end and inserting 
     ``responsibility for research, development, test, and 
     evaluation related to system improvements for that program 
     remains with the Director.''.

     SEC. 233. AMENDMENTS TO REFLECT CHANGE IN NAME OF BALLISTIC 
                   MISSILE DEFENSE ORGANIZATION TO MISSILE DEFENSE 
                   AGENCY.

       (a) Title 10, United States Code.--Title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended as follows:
       (1) Sections 203, 223, and 224 are each amended by striking 
     ``Ballistic Missile Defense Organization'' each place it 
     appears and inserting ``Missile Defense Agency''.
       (2)(A) The heading of section 203 is amended to read as 
     follows:

     ``Sec. 203. Director of Missile Defense Agency''.

       (B) The item relating to such section in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of subchapter II of chapter 8 is 
     amended to read as follows:

``203. Director of Missile Defense Agency.''.

       (b) Public Law 107-107.--(1) Section 232 of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 
     107-107; 10 U.S.C. 2431 note) is amended by striking 
     ``Ballistic Missile Defense Organization'' each place it 
     appears and inserting ``Missile Defense Agency''.
       (2) The heading for such section is amended to read as 
     follows:

[[Page H2289]]

     ``SEC. 232. PROGRAM ELEMENTS FOR MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY.''.

       (c) Public Law 106-398.--(1) Section 3132 of the Floyd D. 
     Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     2001 (as enacted into law by Public Law 106-398; 10 U.S.C. 
     2431 note) is amended by striking ``Ballistic Missile Defense 
     Organization'' each place it appears and inserting ``Missile 
     Defense Agency''.
       (2) Such section is further amended in subsection (c) by 
     striking ``BMDO'' and inserting ``MDA''.
       (3) The section heading for such section is amended to read 
     as follows:

     ``SEC. 3132. ENHANCED COOPERATION BETWEEN NATIONAL NUCLEAR 
                   SECURITY ADMINISTRATION AND MISSILE DEFENSE 
                   AGENCY.''.

       (d) Other Laws.--The following provisions are each amended 
     by striking ``Ballistic Missile Defense Organization'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``Missile Defense Agency'':
       (1) Section 233 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85; 10 U.S.C. 223 note).
       (2) Section 234 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 10 U.S.C. 2431 
     note).
       (3) Sections 235 (10 U.S.C. 2431 note) and 243 (10 U.S.C. 
     2431 note) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160).

                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations

     SEC. 301. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FUNDING.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2003 for the use of the Armed Forces and other 
     activities and agencies of the Department of Defense for 
     expenses, not otherwise provided for, for operation and 
     maintenance, in amounts as follows:
       (1) For the Army, $24,159,733,000.
       (2) For the Navy, $29,428,876,000.
       (3) For the Marine Corps, $3,588,512,000.
       (4) For the Air Force, $27,299,404,000.
       (5) For Defense-wide activities, $14,370,037,000.
       (6) For the Army Reserve, $1,918,110,000.
       (7) For the Naval Reserve, $1,233,759,000.
       (8) For the Marine Corps Reserve, $185,532,000.
       (9) For the Air Force Reserve, $2,194,719,000.
       (10) For the Army National Guard, $4,300,767,000.
       (11) For the Air National Guard, $4,077,845,000.
       (12) For the Defense Inspector General, $155,165,000.
       (13) For the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed 
     Forces, $9,614,000.
       (14) For Environmental Restoration, Army, $395,900,000.
       (15) For Environmental Restoration, Navy, $256,948,000.
       (16) For Environmental Restoration, Air Force, 
     $389,773,000.
       (17) For Environmental Restoration, Defense-wide, 
     $23,498,000.
       (18) For Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense 
     Sites, $212,102,000.
       (19) For Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid 
     programs, $58,400,000.
       (20) For Drug Interdiction and Counter-drug Activities, 
     Defense-wide, $848,907,000.
       (21) For the Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation, and 
     Environmental Restoration Trust Fund, $25,000,000.
       (22) For Defense Health Program, $14,242,541,000.
       (23) For Cooperative Threat Reduction programs, 
     $416,700,000.
       (24) For Support for International Sporting Competitions, 
     Defense, $19,000,000.

     SEC. 302. WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2003 for the use of the Armed Forces and other 
     activities and agencies of the Department of Defense for 
     providing capital for working capital and revolving funds in 
     amounts as follows:
       (1) For the Defense Working Capital Funds, $1,504,956,000.
       (2) For the National Defense Sealift Fund, $934,129,000.

     SEC. 303. ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME.

       There is hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2003 from the Armed Forces Retirement Home Trust Fund 
     the sum of $69,921,000 for the operation of the Armed Forces 
     Retirement Home.

                  Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions

     SEC. 311. INCIDENTAL TAKING OF MIGRATORY BIRDS DURING 
                   MILITARY READINESS ACTIVITY.

       Section 3 of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 704) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c)(1) Section 2 shall not apply to the incidental taking 
     of a migratory bird by a member of the Armed Forces during a 
     military readiness activity authorized by the Secretary of 
     Defense or the Secretary of the military department 
     concerned.
       ``(2)(A) In this subsection, the term `military readiness 
     activity' includes--
       ``(i) all training and operations of the Armed Forces that 
     relate to combat; and
       ``(ii) the adequate and realistic testing of military 
     equipment, vehicles, weapons, and sensors for proper 
     operation and suitability for combat use.
       ``(B) The term does not include--
       ``(i) the routine operation of installation operating 
     support functions, such as administrative offices, military 
     exchanges, commissaries, water treatment facilities, storage 
     facilities, schools, housing, motor pools, laundries, morale, 
     welfare, and recreation activities, shops, and mess halls;
       ``(ii) the operation of industrial activities; or
       ``(iii) the construction or demolition of facilities used 
     for a purpose described in clause (i) or (ii).''.

     SEC. 312. MILITARY READINESS AND THE CONSERVATION OF 
                   PROTECTED SPECIES.

       (a) Limitation on Designation of Critical Habitat.--Section 
     4(a)(3) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 
     1533(a)(3)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as clauses 
     (i) and (ii), respectively;
       (2) by inserting ``(A)'' after ``(3)''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(B)(i) The Secretary may not designate as critical 
     habitat any lands or other geographical areas owned or 
     controlled by the Department of Defense, or designated for 
     its use, that are subject to an integrated natural resources 
     management plan prepared under section 101 of the Sikes Act 
     (16 U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines that such plan 
     addresses special management considerations or protection (as 
     those terms are used in section 3(5)(A)(i)).
       ``(ii) Nothing in this subparagraph affects the requirement 
     to consult under section 7(a)(2) with respect to an agency 
     action (as that term is defined in that section).
       ``(iii) Nothing in this subparagraph affects the obligation 
     of the Department of Defense to comply with section 9 of the 
     Endangered Species Act of 1973, including the prohibition 
     preventing extinction and taking of endangered species and 
     threatened species.''.
       (b) Consideration of Effects of Designation of Critical 
     Habitat.--Section 4(b)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 
     1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(2)) is amended by inserting ``the 
     impact on national security,'' after ``the economic 
     impact,''.

     SEC. 313. SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT FOR POLICY AND BUDGETING 
                   ISSUES REGARDING UNEXPLODED ORDNANCE, DISCARDED 
                   MILITARY MUNITIONS, AND MUNITIONS CONSTITUENTS.

       Section 2701 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(k) UXO Program Manager.--(1) The Secretary of Defense 
     shall establish a program manager who shall serve as the 
     single point of contact in the Department of Defense for 
     policy and budgeting issues involving the characterization, 
     remediation, and management of explosive and related risks 
     with respect to unexploded ordnance, discarded military 
     munitions, and munitions constituents at defense sites (as 
     such terms are defined in section 2710 of this title) that 
     pose a threat to human health or safety.
       ``(2) The Secretary of Defense may delegate this authority 
     to the Secretary of a military department, who may delegate 
     the authority to the Under Secretary of that military 
     department. The authority may not be further delegated.
       ``(3) The program manager may establish an independent 
     advisory and review panel that may include representatives of 
     the National Academy of Sciences, nongovernmental 
     organizations with expertise regarding unexploded ordnance, 
     discarded military munitions, or munitions constituents, the 
     Environmental Protection Agency, States (as defined in 
     section 2710 of this title), and tribal governments. If 
     established, the panel would report annually to Congress on 
     progress made by the Department of Defense to address 
     unexploded ordnance, discarded military munitions, or 
     munitions constituents at defense sites and make such 
     recommendations as the panel considered appropriate.''.

  Subtitle C--Commissaries and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities

     SEC. 321. AUTHORITY FOR EACH MILITARY DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE 
                   BASE OPERATING SUPPORT TO FISHER HOUSES.

       Section 2493(f) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(f) Base Operating Support.--The Secretary of a military 
     department may provide base operating support for Fisher 
     Houses associated with health care facilities of that 
     military department.''.

     SEC. 322. USE OF COMMISSARY STORES AND MWR RETAIL FACILITIES 
                   BY MEMBERS OF NATIONAL GUARD SERVING IN 
                   NATIONAL EMERGENCY.

       (a) Additional Basis for Authorized Use.--Section 1063a of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``or national 
     emergency'' after ``federally declared disaster''; and
       (2) in subsection (c), by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(3) National emergency.--The term `national emergency' 
     means a national emergency declared by the President or 
     Congress.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading of such section 
     is amended to read as follows:

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

       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 54 of 
     such title is amended by striking the item relating to 
     section 1063a and inserting the following new item:

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

     SEC. 323. UNIFORM FUNDING AND MANAGEMENT OF MORALE, WELFARE, 
                   AND RECREATION PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 147 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

[[Page H2290]]

     ``Sec. 2494. Uniform funding and management of morale, 
       welfare, and recreation programs

       ``(a) Authority for Uniform Funding and Management.--Under 
     regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, funds 
     appropriated to the Department of Defense and available for 
     morale, welfare, and recreation programs may be treated as 
     nonappropriated funds and expended in accordance with laws 
     applicable to the expenditures of nonappropriated funds. When 
     made available for morale, welfare, and recreation programs 
     under such regulations, appropriated funds shall be 
     considered to be nonappropriated funds for all purposes and 
     shall remain available until expended.
       ``(b) Conditions on Availability.--Funds appropriated to 
     the Department of Defense may be made available to support a 
     morale, welfare, or recreation program only if the program is 
     authorized to receive appropriated fund support and only in 
     the amounts the program is authorized to receive.
       ``(c) Conversion of Employment Positions.--(1) The 
     Secretary of Defense may identify positions of employees in 
     morale, welfare, and recreation programs within the 
     Department of Defense who are paid with appropriated funds 
     whose status may be converted from the status of an employee 
     paid with appropriated funds to the status of an employee of 
     a nonappropriated fund instrumentality.
       ``(2) The status of an employee in a position identified by 
     the Secretary under paragraph (1) may, with the consent of 
     the employee, be converted to the status of an employee of a 
     nonappropriated fund instrumentality. An employee who does 
     not consent to the conversion may not be removed from the 
     position because of the failure to provide such consent.
       ``(3) The conversion of an employee from the status of an 
     employee paid by appropriated funds to the status of an 
     employee of a nonappropriated fund instrumentality shall be 
     without a break in service for the concerned employee. The 
     conversion shall not entitle an employee to severance pay, 
     back pay or separation pay under subchapter IX of chapter 55 
     of title 5, or be considered an involuntary separation or 
     other adverse personnel action entitling an employee to any 
     right or benefit under such title or any other provision of 
     law or regulation.
       ``(4) In this subsection, the term `an employee of a 
     nonappropriated fund instrumentality' means an employee 
     described in section 2105(c) of title 5.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``2494. Uniform funding and management of morale, welfare, and 
              recreation programs.''.

                 Subtitle D--Workplace and Depot Issues

     SEC. 331. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH 
                   REQUIRED STUDIES FOR CONVERSION OF COMMERCIAL 
                   OR INDUSTRIAL TYPE FUNCTIONS TO CONTRACTOR 
                   PERFORMANCE.

       Subsection (c) of section 2461 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(c) Submission of Analysis Results.--(1) Upon the 
     completion of an analysis of a commercial or industrial type 
     function described in subsection (a) for possible change to 
     performance by the private sector, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to Congress a report containing the results of 
     the analysis, including the results of the examinations 
     required by subsection (b)(3).
       ``(2) The report shall also contain the following:
       ``(A) The date when the analysis of the function was 
     commenced.
       ``(B) The Secretary's certification that the Government 
     calculation of the cost of performance of the function by 
     Department of Defense civilian employees is based on an 
     estimate of the most cost effective manner for performance of 
     the function by Department of Defense civilian employees.
       ``(C) The number of Department of Defense civilian 
     employees who were performing the function when the analysis 
     was commenced and the number of such employees whose 
     employment was or will be terminated or otherwise affected by 
     changing to performance of the function by the private sector 
     or by implementation of the most efficient organization of 
     the function.
       ``(D) The Secretary's certification that the factors 
     considered in the examinations performed under subsection 
     (b)(3), and in the making of the decision regarding changing 
     to performance of the function by the private sector or 
     retaining performance in the most efficient organization of 
     the function, did not include any predetermined personnel 
     constraint or limitation in terms of man years, end strength, 
     full-time equivalent positions, or maximum number of 
     employees.
       ``(E) A statement of the potential economic effect of 
     implementing the decision regarding changing to performance 
     of the function by the private sector or retaining 
     performance in the most efficient organization of the 
     function on each affected local community, as determined in 
     the examination under subsection (b)(3)(B)(ii).
       ``(F) A schedule for completing the change to performance 
     of the function by the private sector or implementing the 
     most efficient organization of the function
       ``(G) In the case of a commercial or industrial type 
     function performed at a Center of Industrial and Technical 
     Excellence designated under section 2474(a) of this title or 
     an Army ammunition plant, a description of the effect that 
     the manner of performance of the function, and administration 
     of the resulting contract if any, will have on the overhead 
     costs of the center or ammunition plant, as the case may be.
       ``(H) The Secretary's certification that the entire 
     analysis is available for examination.
       ``(3)(A) If a decision is made to change the commercial or 
     industrial type function that was the subject of the analysis 
     to performance by the private sector, the change of the 
     function to contractor performance may not begin until after 
     the submission of the report required by paragraph (1).
       ``(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), in the case of a 
     commercial or industrial type function performed at a Center 
     of Industrial and Technical Excellence designated under 
     section 2474(a) of this title or an Army ammunition plant, 
     the change of the function to contractor performance may not 
     begin until at least 60 days after the submission of the 
     report.''.

     SEC. 332. WAIVER AUTHORITY REGARDING PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTS 
                   FOR PERFORMANCE OF SECURITY-GUARD FUNCTIONS.

       Section 2465 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(c) The Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of a 
     military department may waive the prohibition under 
     subsection (a) regarding contracting for the performance of 
     security-guard functions at a military installation or 
     facility under the jurisdiction of the Secretary if such 
     functions--
       ``(1) are or will be performed by members of the armed 
     forces in the absence of a waiver; or
       ``(2) were not performed at the installation or facility 
     before September 11, 2001.''.

     SEC. 333. EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN EXPENDITURES FROM PERCENTAGE 
                   LIMITATION ON CONTRACTING FOR PERFORMANCE OF 
                   DEPOT-LEVEL MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR WORKLOADS.

       Section 2474(f)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``for fiscal years 2002 through 2005''.

     SEC. 334. REPEAL OF OBSOLETE PROVISION REGARDING DEPOT-LEVEL 
                   MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR WORKLOADS THAT WERE 
                   PERFORMED AT CLOSED OR REALIGNED MILITARY 
                   INSTALLATIONS.

       (a) Repeal.--Section 2469a of title 10, United States Code, 
     is repealed.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 146 of such title is amended by striking 
     the item relating to section 2469a.

     SEC. 335. CLARIFICATION OF REQUIRED CORE LOGISTICS 
                   CAPABILITIES.

       Section 2464(a)(3) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``those capabilities that are necessary 
     to maintain and repair the weapon systems'' and inserting 
     ``those logistics capabilities (including acquisition 
     logistics, supply management, system engineering, 
     maintenance, and modification management) that are necessary 
     to sustain the weapon systems''.

                Subtitle E--Defense Dependents Education

     SEC. 341. ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES THAT 
                   BENEFIT DEPENDENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED 
                   FORCES AND DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN 
                   EMPLOYEES.

       (a) Continuation of Department of Defense Program for 
     Fiscal Year 2003.--Of the amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to section 301(5) for operation and 
     maintenance for Defense-wide activities, $30,000,000 shall be 
     available only for the purpose of providing educational 
     agencies assistance to local educational agencies.
       (b) Notification.--Not later than June 30, 2003, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall notify each local educational 
     agency that is eligible for educational agencies assistance 
     for fiscal year 2003 of--
       (1) that agency's eligibility for the assistance; and
       (2) the amount of the assistance for which that agency is 
     eligible.
       (c) Disbursement of Funds.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     disburse funds made available under subsection (a) not later 
     than 30 days after the date on which notification to the 
     eligible local educational agencies is provided pursuant to 
     subsection (b).
       (d) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) The term ``educational agencies assistance'' means 
     assistance authorized under section 386(b) of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 
     102-484; 20 U.S.C. 7703 note).
       (2) The term ``local educational agency'' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 8013(9) of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7713(9)).

     SEC. 342. AVAILABILITY OF QUARTERS ALLOWANCE FOR 
                   UNACCOMPANIED DEFENSE DEPARTMENT TEACHER 
                   REQUIRED TO RESIDE ON OVERSEAS MILITARY 
                   INSTALLATION.

       (a) Authority to Provide Allowance.--Subsection (b) of 
     section 7 of the Defense Department Overseas Teachers Pay and 
     Personnel Practices Act (20 U.S.C. 905) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new sentence: ``If the teacher is 
     unaccompanied by dependents and is required to reside on a 
     United States military installation in an overseas area, the 
     teacher may receive a quarters allowance to reside in excess 
     family housing at the installation notwithstanding the 
     availability single room housing at the installation.''.
       (b) Technical Correction to Reflect Codification.--Such 
     section is further amended by striking ``the Act of June 26, 
     1930 (5 U.S.C. 118a)'' both places it appears and inserting 
     ``section 5912 of title 5, United States Code''.

     SEC. 343. PROVISION OF SUMMER SCHOOL PROGRAMS FOR STUDENTS 
                   WHO ATTEND DEFENSE DEPENDENTS' EDUCATION 
                   SYSTEM.

       Section 1402(d) of the Defense Dependents' Education Act of 
     1978 (20 U.S.C. 921(d)) is

[[Page H2291]]

     amended by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following 
     new paragraph (2):
       ``(2) Individuals eligible to receive a free public 
     education under subsection (a) may enroll without charge in a 
     summer school program offered under this subsection. Students 
     who are required under section 1404 to pay tuition to enroll 
     in a school of the defense dependents' education system shall 
     also be charged a fee, at a rate established by the 
     Secretary, to attend a course offered as part of the summer 
     school program.''.

                   Subtitle F--Information Technology

     SEC. 351. NAVY-MARINE CORPS INTRANET CONTRACT.

       (a) Authorized Duration of Contract.--Section 814 of the 
     Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 2001, as enacted into law by Public Law 106-398 (114 
     Stat. 1654A-215) and amended by section 362 of Public Law 
     107-107 (115 Stat. 1065), is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (i) as subsection (j); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (h) the following new 
     subsection (i):
       ``(i) Duration of Navy-Marine Corps Intranet Contract.--
     Notwithstanding section 2306c of title 10, United States 
     Code, the Navy-Marine Corps Intranet contract may have a term 
     in excess of five years, but not more than seven years.''.
       (b) Clarification of Phased Implementation Requirements.--
     Subsection (b) of such section is amended in paragraphs (2) 
     and (3) by striking ``provided'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``ordered''.

     SEC. 352. ANNUAL SUBMISSION OF INFORMATION ON NATIONAL 
                   SECURITY AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CAPITAL 
                   ASSETS.

       (a) Requirement To Submit Information.--Not later than the 
     date that the President submits the budget of the United 
     States Government to Congress each year, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to Congress a description of, and 
     relevant budget information on, each information technology 
     and national security capital asset of the Department of 
     Defense that--
       (1) has an estimated life cycle cost (as computed in fiscal 
     year 2003 constant dollars), in excess of $120,000,000; and
       (2) has a cost for the fiscal year in which the description 
     is submitted (as computed in fiscal year 2003 constant 
     dollars) in excess of $30,000,000.
       (b) Information To Be Included.--The description submitted 
     under subsection (a) shall include, with respect to each such 
     capital asset and national security system--
       (1) the name and identifying acronym;
       (2) the date of initiation;
       (3) a summary of performance measurements and metrics;
       (4) the total amount of funds, by appropriation account, 
     appropriated and obligated for prior fiscal years, with a 
     specific breakout of such information for the two preceding 
     fiscal years;
       (5) the funds, by appropriation account, requested for that 
     fiscal year;
       (6) each prime contractor and the work to be performed;
       (7) a description of program management and management 
     oversight;
       (8) the original baseline cost and most current baseline 
     information; and
       (9) a description of compliance with the provisions enacted 
     in the Government Performance Results Act of 1993 (Public Law 
     103-62; 107 Stat. 285) and the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 
     (division D of Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 642).
       (c) Additional Information To Be Included For Certain 
     Systems.--(1) For each information technology and national 
     security system of the Department of Defense that has a cost 
     for the fiscal year in excess of $2,000,000, the Secretary 
     shall identify that system by name, function, and total funds 
     requested for the system.
       (2) For each information technology and national security 
     system of the Department of Defense that has a cost for the 
     fiscal year in excess of $10,000,000, the Secretary shall 
     identify that system by name, function, and total funds 
     requested (by appropriation account) for that fiscal year, 
     the funds appropriated for the preceding fiscal year, and the 
     funds estimated to be requested for the next fiscal year.
       (d) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) The term ``information technology'' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 5002 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 
     1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401(3)).
       (2) The term ``capital asset'' has the meaning given that 
     term in Office of Management and Budget Circular A-11.
       (3) The term ``national security system'' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 5142 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 
     1996 (40 U.S.C. 1452).

     SEC. 353. IMPLEMENTATION OF POLICY REGARDING CERTAIN 
                   COMMERCIAL OFF-THE-SHELF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 
                   PRODUCTS.

       The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that--
       (1) the Department of Defense implements the policy 
     established by the Committee on National Security Systems 
     (formerly the National Security Telecommunications and 
     Information Systems Security Committee) that limits the 
     acquisition by the Federal Government of all commercial off-
     the-shelf information assurance and information assurance-
     enabled information technology products to those products 
     that have been evaluated and validated in accordance with 
     appropriate criteria, schemes, or programs; and
       (2) implementation of such policy includes uniform 
     enforcement procedures.

     SEC. 354. INSTALLATION AND CONNECTION POLICY AND PROCEDURES 
                   REGARDING DEFENSE SWITCH NETWORK.

       (a) Establishment of Policy and Procedures.--Not later than 
     180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall establish clear and uniform policy 
     and procedures, applicable to the military departments and 
     Defense Agencies, regarding the installation and connection 
     of telecom switches to the Defense Switch Network.
       (b) Elements of Policy and Procedures.--The policy and 
     procedures shall address at a minimum the following:
       (1) Clear interoperability and compatibility requirements 
     for certifying, installing, and connecting telecom switches 
     to the Defense Switch Network.
       (2) Current, complete, and enforceable testing, validation, 
     and certification procedures needed to ensure the 
     interoperability and compatibility requirements are 
     satisfied.
       (c) Exceptions.--(1) The Secretary of Defense may specify 
     certain circumstances in which--
       (A) the requirements for testing, validation, and 
     certification of telecom switches may be waived; or
       (B) interim authority for the installation and connection 
     of telecom switches to the Defense Switch Network may be 
     granted.
       (2) Only the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, 
     Control, Communications, and Intelligence, after consultation 
     with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, may approve a 
     waiver or grant of interim authority under paragraph (1).
       (d) Inventory of Defense Switch Network.--The Secretary of 
     Defense shall prepare and maintain an inventory of all 
     telecom switches that, as of the date on which the Secretary 
     issues the policy and procedures--
       (1) are installed or connected to the Defense Switch 
     Network; but
       (2) have not been tested, validated, and certified by the 
     Defense Information Systems Agency (Joint Interoperability 
     Test Center).
       (e) Telecom Switch Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``telecom switch'' means hardware or software designed to 
     send and receive voice, data, and video signals across a 
     network.

                       Subtitle G--Other Matters

     SEC. 361. DISTRIBUTION OF MONTHLY REPORTS ON ALLOCATION OF 
                   FUNDS WITHIN OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET 
                   SUBACTIVITIES.

       (a) Designation of Recipients.--Subsection (a) of section 
     228 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``to Congress'' and inserting ``to the congressional defense 
     committees''.
       (b) Congressional Defense Committees Defined.--Subsection 
     (e) of such section is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(e) O&M Budget Activity Defined.--For 
     purposes of this section, the'' and inserting the following:
       ``(e) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) The''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) The term `congressional defense committees' means the 
     Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Armed 
     Services and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives.''.

     SEC. 362. MINIMUM DEDUCTION FROM PAY OF CERTAIN MEMBERS OF 
                   THE ARMED FORCES TO SUPPORT ARMED FORCES 
                   RETIREMENT HOME.

       Section 1007(i) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``an amount (determined 
     under paragraph (3)) not to exceed $1.00.'' and inserting 
     ``an amount equal to $1.00 and such additional amount as may 
     be determined under paragraph (3).''; and
       (2) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by striking ``the amount'' in the first sentence and 
     inserting ``the additional amount''; and
       (B) by striking ``The amount'' in the second sentence and 
     inserting ``The additional amount''.

     SEC. 363. CONDITION ON CONVERSION OF DEFENSE SECURITY SERVICE 
                   TO A WORKING CAPITAL FUNDED ENTITY.

       The Secretary of Defense may not convert the Defense 
     Security Service to a working capital funded entity of the 
     Department of Defense unless the Secretary submits, in 
     advance, to the Committee on Armed Services of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Armed Services of the 
     Senate a certification that the Defense Security Service has 
     the financial systems in place to fully support operation of 
     the Defense Security Service as a working capital funded 
     entity under section 2208 of title 10, United States Code.

     SEC. 364. CONTINUATION OF ARSENAL SUPPORT PROGRAM INITIATIVE.

       (a) Extension Through Fiscal Year 2004.--Subsection (a) of 
     section 343 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (as enacted into law 
     by Public Law 106-398; 114 Stat. 1654A-65) is amended by 
     striking ``and 2002'' and inserting ``through 2004''.
       (b) Reporting Requirements.--Subsection (g) of such section 
     is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2004''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the first sentence and 
     inserting the following new sentence: ``Not later than July 
     1, 2003, the Secretary of the Army shall submit to the 
     congressional defense committees a report on the results of 
     the demonstration program since its implementation, including 
     the Secretary's views regarding the benefits of the program 
     for Army manufacturing arsenals and the Department of the 
     Army and the success of the program in achieving the purposes 
     specified in subsection (b).''.

[[Page H2292]]

     SEC. 365. TRAINING RANGE SUSTAINMENT PLAN, GLOBAL STATUS OF 
                   RESOURCES AND TRAINING SYSTEM, AND TRAINING 
                   RANGE INVENTORY.

       (a) Plan Required.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
     develop a comprehensive plan for using existing authorities 
     available to the Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of 
     the military departments to address problems created by 
     limitations on the use of military lands, marine areas, and 
     airspace reserved, withdrawn, or designated for training and 
     testing activities by, for, or on behalf of the Armed Forces.
       (2) The plan shall include the following:
       (A) Goals and milestones for tracking planned actions and 
     measuring progress.
       (B) Projected funding requirements for implementing planned 
     actions.
       (C) Designation of an office in the Office of the Secretary 
     of Defense and each of the military departments that will 
     have lead responsibility for overseeing implementation of the 
     plan.
       (3) The Secretary of Defense shall submit the plan to 
     Congress at the same time as the President submits the budget 
     for fiscal year 2004 and shall submit an annual report to 
     Congress describing the progress made in implementing the 
     plan and any additional encroachment problems.
       (b) Readiness Reporting Improvement.--Not later than June 
     30, 2003, the Secretary of Defense, using existing measures 
     within the authority of the Secretary, shall submit to 
     Congress a report on the plans of the Department of Defense 
     to improve the Global Status of Resources and Training 
     System--
       (1) to better reflect the increasing challenges units of 
     the Armed Forces must overcome to achieve training 
     requirements; and
       (2) to quantify the extent to which encroachment and other 
     individual factors are making military lands, marine areas, 
     and airspace less available to support unit accomplishment of 
     training plans and readiness goals.
       (c) Training Range Inventory.--The Secretary of Defense 
     shall develop and maintain a training range data bank for 
     each of the Armed Forces--
       (1) to identify all available operational training ranges;
       (2) to identify all training capacities and capabilities 
     available at each training range;
       (3) to identify all current encroachment threats or other 
     potential limitations on training that are, or are likely to, 
     adversely affect training and readiness; and
       (4) to provide a point of contact for each training range.
       (d) GAO Evaluation.--(1) With respect to each report 
     submitted under this section, the Comptroller General shall 
     submit to Congress, within 60 days after receiving the 
     report, an evaluation of the report.
       (e) Armed Forces Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``Armed Forces'' means the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine 
     Corps.

     SEC. 366. AMENDMENTS TO CERTAIN EDUCATION AND NUTRITION LAWS 
                   RELATING TO ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENT OF 
                   MILITARY HOUSING.

       (a) Eligibility for Heavily Impacted Local Educational 
     Agencies Affected by Privatization of Military Housing.--
     Section 8003(b)(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
     Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7703(b)(2)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(H) Eligibility for heavily impacted local educational 
     agencies affected by privatization of military housing.--
       ``(i) Eligibility.--For any fiscal year beginning with 
     fiscal year 2003, a heavily impacted local educational agency 
     that received a basic support payment under subparagraph (A) 
     for the prior fiscal year, but is ineligible for such payment 
     for the current fiscal year under subparagraph (B) or (C), as 
     the case may be, by reason of the conversion of military 
     housing units to private housing described in clause (iii), 
     shall be deemed to meet the eligibility requirements under 
     subparagraph (B) or (C), as the case may be, for the period 
     during which the housing units are undergoing such 
     conversion.
       ``(ii) Amount of payment.--The amount of a payment to a 
     heavily impacted local educational agency for a fiscal year 
     by reason of the application of clause (i), and calculated in 
     accordance with subparagraph (D) or (E) (as the case may be), 
     shall be based on the number of children in average daily 
     attendance in the schools of such agency for the fiscal year.
       ``(iii) Conversion of military housing units to private 
     housing described.--For purposes of clause (i), `conversion 
     of military housing units to private housing' means the 
     conversion of military housing units to private housing units 
     pursuant to subchapter IV of chapter 169 of title 10, United 
     States Code, or pursuant to any other related provision of 
     law.''.
       (b) Exclusion of Certain Military Basic Allowances for 
     Housing for Determination of Eligibility for Free and Reduced 
     Price Meals.--Section 9(b)(3) of the Richard B. Russell 
     National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1758(b)(3)) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following: ``For the one-year period 
     beginning on the date of the enactment of this sentence, the 
     amount of a basic allowance provided under section 403 of 
     title 37, United States Code, on behalf of an individual who 
     is a member of the uniformed services for housing that is 
     acquired or constructed under the authority of subchapter IV 
     of chapter 169 of title 10, United States Code, or any other 
     related provision of law, shall not be considered to be 
     income for purposes of determining the eligibility of a child 
     of the individual for free or reduced price lunches under 
     this Act.''.

              TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

                       Subtitle A--Active Forces

     SEC. 401. END STRENGTHS FOR ACTIVE FORCES.

       The Armed Forces are authorized strengths for active duty 
     personnel as of September 30, 2003, as follows:
       (1) The Army, 484,800.
       (2) The Navy, 379,457.
       (3) The Marine Corps, 175,000.
       (4) The Air Force, 360,795.

     SEC. 402. REVISION IN PERMANENT END STRENGTH MINIMUM LEVELS.

       (a) Revised End Strength Floors.--Section 691(b) of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``480,000'' and inserting 
     ``484,800'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``376,000'' and inserting 
     ``379,457';
       (3) in paragraph (3), by striking ``172,600'' and inserting 
     ``175,000''; and
       (4) in paragraph (4), by striking ``358,800'' and inserting 
     ``360,795''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on October 1, 2002, or the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, whichever is later.

     SEC. 403. AUTHORITY FOR MILITARY DEPARTMENT SECRETARIES TO 
                   INCREASE ACTIVE-DUTY END STRENGTHS BY UP TO 1 
                   PERCENT.

       (a) Service Secretary Authority.--Section 115 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after subsection 
     (e) the following new subsection:
       ``(f) Upon determination by the Secretary of a military 
     department that such action would enhance manning and 
     readiness in essential units or in critical specialties or 
     ratings, the Secretary may increase the end strength 
     authorized pursuant to subsection (a)(1)(A) for a fiscal year 
     for the armed force under the jurisdiction of that Secretary 
     or, in the case of the Secretary of the Navy, for any of the 
     armed forces under the jurisdiction of that Secretary. Any 
     such increase for a fiscal year--
       ``(1) shall be by a number equal to not more than 1 percent 
     of such authorized end strength; and
       ``(2) shall be counted as part of the increase for that 
     armed force for that fiscal year authorized under subsection 
     (c)(1).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--Subsection (f) of section 115 of title 
     10, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall 
     take effect on October 1, 2002, or the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, whichever is later.

     SEC. 404. GENERAL AND FLAG OFFICER MANAGEMENT.

       (a) Exclusion of Senior Military Assistant to the Secretary 
     of Defense from Limitation on Active Duty Officers in Grades 
     Above Major General and Rear Admiral.--Effective on the date 
     specified in subsection (e), section 525(b) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(8) An officer while serving in a position designated by 
     the Secretary of Defense as Senior Military Assistant to the 
     Secretary of Defense, if serving in the grade of lieutenant 
     general or vice admiral, is in addition to the number that 
     otherwise would be permitted for that officer's armed force 
     for that grade under paragraph (1) or (2). Only one officer 
     may be designated as Senior Military Assistant to the 
     Secretary of Defense for purposes of this paragraph.''.
       (b) Increase in Number of Lieutenant Generals Authorized 
     for the Marine Corps.--Effective on the date specified in 
     subsection (e), paragraph (2)(B) of such section is amended 
     by striking ``16.2 percent'' and inserting ``17.5 percent''.
       (c) Grade of Chief of Veterinary Corps of the Army.--(1) 
     Effective on the date specified in subsection (e), chapter 
     307 of such title is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 3084. Chief of Veterinary Corps: grade

       ``The Chief of the Veterinary Corps of the Army serves in 
     the grade of brigadier general. An officer appointed to that 
     position who holds a lower grade shall be appointed in the 
     grade of brigadier general.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``3084. Chief of Veterinary Corps: grade.''.

       (d) Review of Active Duty and Reserve General and Flag 
     Officer Authorizations.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
     submit to Congress a report containing any recommendations of 
     the Secretary (together with the rationale of the Secretary 
     for the recommendations) concerning the following:
       (A) Revision of the limitations on general and flag officer 
     grade authorizations and distribution in grade prescribed by 
     sections 525, 526, and 12004 of title 10, United States Code.
       (B) Statutory designation of the positions and grades of 
     any additional general and flag officers in the commands 
     specified in chapter 1006 of title 10, United States Code, 
     and the reserve component offices specified in sections 3038, 
     5143, 5144, and 8038 of such title.
       (2) The provisions of subsection (b) through (e) of section 
     1213 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2694) shall apply to 
     the report under paragraph (1) in the same manner as they 
     applied to the report required by subsection (a) of that 
     section.
       (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsections 
     (a), (b), and (c) shall take effect on the date of the 
     receipt by Congress of the report required by subsection (d).

     SEC. 405. EXTENSION OF CERTAIN AUTHORITIES RELATING TO 
                   MANAGEMENT OF NUMBERS OF GENERAL AND FLAG 
                   OFFICERS IN CERTAIN GRADES.

       (a) Senior Joint Officer Positions.--Section 604(c) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``September 30, 2003'' and inserting ``December 31, 2004''.
       (b) Distribution of Officers on Active Duty in General and 
     Flag Officer Grades.--

[[Page H2293]]

     Section 525(b)(5)(C) of such title is amended by striking 
     ``September 30, 2003'' and inserting ``December 31, 2004''.
       (c) Authorized Strength for General and Flag Officers on 
     Active Duty.--Section 526(b)(3) of such title is amended by 
     striking ``October 1, 2002'' and inserting ``December 31, 
     2004''.

                       Subtitle B--Reserve Forces

     SEC. 411. END STRENGTHS FOR SELECTED RESERVE.

       (a) In General.--The Armed Forces are authorized strengths 
     for Selected Reserve personnel of the reserve components as 
     of September 30, 2003, as follows:
       (1) The Army National Guard of the United States, 350,000.
       (2) The Army Reserve, 205,000.
       (3) The Naval Reserve, 87,800.
       (4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 39,558.
       (5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 106,600.
       (6) The Air Force Reserve, 75,600.
       (7) The Coast Guard Reserve, 9,000.
       (b) Adjustments.--The end strengths prescribed by 
     subsection (a) for the Selected Reserve of any reserve 
     component shall be proportionately reduced by--
       (1) the total authorized strength of units organized to 
     serve as units of the Selected Reserve of such component 
     which are on active duty (other than for training) at the end 
     of the fiscal year; and
       (2) the total number of individual members not in units 
     organized to serve as units of the Selected Reserve of such 
     component who are on active duty (other than for training or 
     for unsatisfactory participation in training) without their 
     consent at the end of the fiscal year.

     Whenever such units or such individual members are released 
     from active duty during any fiscal year, the end strength 
     prescribed for such fiscal year for the Selected Reserve of 
     such reserve component shall be proportionately increased by 
     the total authorized strengths of such units and by the total 
     number of such individual members.

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

       Within the end strengths prescribed in section 411(a), the 
     reserve components of the Armed Forces are authorized, as of 
     September 30, 2003, the following number of Reserves to be 
     serving on full-time active duty or full-time duty, in the 
     case of members of the National Guard, for the purpose of 
     organizing, administering, recruiting, instructing, or 
     training the reserve components:
       (1) The Army National Guard of the United States, 24,562.
       (2) The Army Reserve, 14,070.
       (3) The Naval Reserve, 14,572.
       (4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 2,261.
       (5) The Air National Guard of the United States, 11,697.
       (6) The Air Force Reserve, 1,498.

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

       The minimum number of military technicians (dual status) as 
     of the last day of fiscal year 2003 for the reserve 
     components of the Army and the Air Force (notwithstanding 
     section 129 of title 10, United States Code) shall be the 
     following:
       (1) For the Army National Guard of the United States, 
     24,102.
       (2) For the Army Reserve, 6,599.
       (3) For the Air National Guard of the United States, 
     22,495.
       (4) For the Air Force Reserve, 9,911.

     SEC. 414. FISCAL YEAR 2003 LIMITATION ON NON-DUAL STATUS 
                   TECHNICIANS.

       (a) Army.--The number of non-dual status technicians 
     employed by the reserve components of the Army as of 
     September 30, 2003, may not exceed the following:
       (1) For the Army Reserve, 995.
       (2) For the Army National Guard of the United States, 
     1,600, to be counted within the limitation specified in 
     section 10217(c)(2) of title 10, United States Code.
       (b) Air Force.--The number of non-dual status technicians 
     employed by the reserve components of the Army and the Air 
     Force as of September 30, 2003, may not exceed the following:
       (1) For the Air Force Reserve, 90.
       (2) For the Air National Guard of the United States, 350, 
     to be counted within the limitation specified in section 
     10217(c)(2) of title 10, United States Code.
       (c) Non-Dual Status Technicians Defined.--In this section, 
     the term ``non-dual status technician'' has the meaning given 
     that term in section 10217(a) of title 10, United States 
     Code.
       (d) Technical Amendments.--Effective October 1, 2002, 
     section 10217(c)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``Effective October 
     1, 2002, the'' and inserting ``The''; and
       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``after the 
     preceding sentence takes effect''.

              Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations

     SEC. 421. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR MILITARY 
                   PERSONNEL.

       There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Department of Defense for military personnel for fiscal year 
     2003 a total of $93,725,028,000. The authorization in the 
     preceding sentence supersedes any other authorization of 
     appropriations (definite or indefinite) for such purpose for 
     fiscal year 2003.

                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

     SEC. 501. INCREASE IN NUMBER OF DEPUTY 
                   COMMANDANTS OF THE MARINE CORPS.

       Section 5045 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``five'' and inserting ``six''.

     SEC. 502. EXTENSION OF GOOD-OF-THE-SERVICE WAIVER AUTHORITY 
                   FOR OFFICERS APPOINTED TO A RESERVE CHIEF OR 
                   GUARD DIRECTOR POSITION.

       (a) Waiver of Requirement for Significant Joint Duty 
     Experience.--Sections 3038(b)(4), 5143(b)(4), 5144(b)(4), 
     8038(b)(4), and 10506(a)(3)(D) of title 10, United States 
     Code, are each amended by striking ``October 1, 2003'' and 
     inserting ``December 31, 2004''.
       (b) Report on Future Implementation of Requirement.--Not 
     later than one year after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee 
     on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed 
     Services of the House of Representatives a report setting 
     forth the steps being taken (and proposed to be taken) by the 
     Secretary, the Secretaries of the military departments, and 
     the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to ensure that no 
     further extension of the waiver authority under the sections 
     amended by subsection (a) is required and that after December 
     31, 2004, appointment of officers to serve in the positions 
     covered by those sections shall be made from officers with 
     the requisite joint duty experience.

                Subtitle B--Reserve Component Management

     SEC. 511. REVIEWS OF NATIONAL GUARD STRENGTH ACCOUNTING AND 
                   MANAGEMENT AND OTHER ISSUES.

       (a) Comptroller General Assessments.--Not later than one 
     year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report on 
     management of the National Guard. The report shall include 
     the following:
       (1) The Comptroller General's assessment of the 
     effectiveness of the implementation of Department of Defense 
     plans for improving management and accounting for personnel 
     strengths in the National Guard, including an assessment of 
     the process that the Department of Defense, the National 
     Guard Bureau, the Army National Guard and State-level 
     National Guard leadership, and leadership in the other 
     reserve components have for identifying and addressing in a 
     timely manner specific units in which nonparticipation rates 
     are significantly in excess of the established norms.
       (2) The Comptroller General's assessment of the 
     effectiveness of the process for Federal recognition of 
     senior National Guard officers and recommendations for 
     improvement to that process.
       (3) The Comptroller General's assessment of the process 
     for, and the nature and extent of, the administrative or 
     judicial corrective action taken by the Secretary of Defense, 
     the Secretary of the Army, and the Secretary of the Air Force 
     as a result of Inspector General investigations or other 
     investigations in which allegations against senior National 
     Guard officers are substantiated in whole or in part.
       (4) The Comptroller General's determination of the 
     effectiveness of the Federal protections provided for members 
     or employees of the National Guard who report allegations of 
     waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement and the nature and 
     extent to which corrective action is taken against those in 
     the National Guard who retaliate against such members or 
     employees.
       (b) Secretary of Defense Report on Different Army and Air 
     Force Procedures.--Not later than six months after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     submit to Congress a report on the differing Army and Air 
     Force policies for taking adverse administrative actions 
     against National Guard officers in a State status. The report 
     shall include the Secretary's determination as to whether 
     changes should be made in those policies, especially through 
     requiring the Air Force to adopt the same policy as the Army 
     for such administrative actions.

     SEC. 512. COURTS-MARTIAL FOR THE NATIONAL GUARD WHEN NOT IN 
                   FEDERAL SERVICE.

       (a) Manner of Prescribing Punishments.--Section 326 of 
     title 32, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new sentence: ``Punishments shall be as 
     provided by the laws of the respective States and 
     Territories, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia.''.
       (b) Convening Authority.--Section 327 of such title is 
     amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 327. Courts-martial of National Guard not in Federal 
       service: convening authority

       ``(a) In the National Guard not in Federal service, 
     general, special, and summary courts-martial may be convened 
     as provided by the laws of the States and Territories, Puerto 
     Rico, and the District of Columbia.
       ``(b) In addition to convening authorities as provided 
     under subsection (a), in the National Guard not in Federal 
     service--
       ``(1) general courts-martial may be convened by the 
     President;
       ``(2) special courts-martial may be convened--
       ``(A) by the commanding officer of a garrison, fort, post, 
     camp, air base, auxiliary air base, or other place where 
     troops are on duty; or
       ``(B) by the commanding officer of a division, brigade, 
     regiment, wing, group, detached battalion, separate squadron, 
     or other detached command; and
       ``(3) summary courts-martial may be convened--
       ``(A) by the commanding officer of a garrison, fort, post, 
     camp, air base, auxiliary air base, or other place where 
     troops are on duty; or
       ``(B) by the commanding officer of a division, brigade, 
     regiment, wing, group, detached battalion, detached squadron, 
     detached company, or other detachment.''.
       (2) The item relating to such section in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 3 of such title is 
     amended to read as follows:

``327. Courts-martial of National Guard not in Federal service: 
              convening authority.''.

       (c) Repeal of Superseded and Obsolete Provisions.--

[[Page H2294]]

       (1) Sections 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, and 333 of title 32, 
     United States Code, are repealed.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 3 of 
     such title is amended by striking the items relating to 
     sections 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, and 333.
       (d) Preparation of Model State Code of Military Justice and 
     Model State Manual for Courts-Martial.--(1) The Secretary of 
     Defense shall prepare, for consideration for enactment by the 
     States, a model State code of military justice and a model 
     State manual of courts-martial for use with respect to the 
     National Guard not in Federal service. Both such models shall 
     be consistent with the recommendations contained in the 
     report, issued in 1998, by the panel known as the Department 
     of Defense Panel to Study Military Justice in the National 
     Guard not in Federal Service.
       (2) The Secretary shall ensure that adequate support for 
     the preparation of such model State code and model State 
     manual (including the detailing of attorneys and other staff) 
     is provided by the General Counsel of the Department of 
     Defense, the Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of the Air 
     Force, and the Chief of the National Guard Bureau.
       (3) If the amounts available to the Chief of the National 
     Guard Bureau are not adequate for the costs required to 
     provide support under paragraph (2) (including costs for 
     increased pay when members of the National Guard are ordered 
     to active duty, cost of detailed attorneys and other staff, 
     allowances, and travel expenses), the Secretary shall, upon 
     request of the Chief of the Bureau, provide such additional 
     amounts as are necessary.
       (4) Not later than one year after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on 
     Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed 
     Services of the House of Representatives a report on the 
     implementation of this subsection. The report shall include 
     proposals in final form of both the model State code and the 
     model State manual required by paragraph (1) and shall set 
     forth the efforts being made to present those proposals to 
     the States for their consideration for enactment.
       (5) In this subsection, the term ``State'' includes the 
     District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the 
     Virgin Islands, and Guam.

     SEC. 513. MATCHING FUNDS REQUIREMENTS UNDER NATIONAL GUARD 
                   YOUTH CHALLENGE PROGRAM.

       Effective October 1, 2002, subsection (d) of section 509 of 
     title 32, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(d) Matching Funds Required.--The amount of assistance 
     provided under this section to a State program of the 
     National Guard Challenge Program for a fiscal year may not 
     exceed 75 percent of the costs of operating the State program 
     during that fiscal year.''.

         Subtitle C--Reserve Component Officer Personnel Policy

     SEC. 521. EXEMPTION FROM ACTIVE STATUS STRENGTH LIMITATION 
                   FOR RESERVE COMPONENT GENERAL AND FLAG OFFICERS 
                   SERVING ON ACTIVE DUTY IN CERTAIN JOINT DUTY 
                   ASSIGNMENTS DESIGNATED BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE 
                   JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF.

       Section 12004 of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(f)(1) A general or flag officer who is on active duty 
     but who is not counted under section 526(a) of this title by 
     reason of section 526(b)(2)(B) of this title shall also be 
     excluded from being counted under subsection (a).
       ``(2) This subsection shall cease to be effective on the 
     date specified in section 526(b)(3) of this title.''.

     SEC. 522. ELIGIBILITY FOR CONSIDERATION FOR PROMOTION TO 
                   GRADE OF MAJOR GENERAL FOR CERTAIN RESERVE 
                   COMPONENT BRIGADIER GENERALS WHO DO NOT 
                   OTHERWISE QUALIFY FOR CONSIDERATION FOR 
                   PROMOTION UNDER THE ONE-YEAR RULE.

       Section 14301(g) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(g) Brigadier Generals.--(1) An officer who is a reserve 
     component brigadier general of the Army or the Air Force who 
     is not eligible for consideration for promotion under 
     subsection (a) because the officer is not on the reserve 
     active status list (as required by paragraph (1) of that 
     subsection for such eligibility) is nevertheless eligible for 
     consideration for promotion to the grade of major general by 
     a promotion board convened under section 14101(a) of this 
     title if--
       ``(A) as of the date of the convening of the promotion 
     board, the officer has been in an inactive status for less 
     than one year; and
       ``(B) immediately before the date of the officer's most 
     recent transfer to an inactive status, the officer had 
     continuously served on the reserve active status list or the 
     active-duty list (or a combination of the reserve active 
     status list and the active-duty list) for at least one year.
       ``(2) An officer who is a reserve component brigadier 
     general of the Army or the Air Force who is on the reserve 
     active status list but who is not eligible for consideration 
     for promotion under subsection (a) because the officer's 
     service does not meet the one-year-of-continuous-service 
     requirement under paragraph (2) of that subsection is 
     nevertheless eligible for consideration for promotion to the 
     grade of major general by a promotion board convened under 
     section 14101(a) of this title if--
       ``(A) the officer was transferred from an inactive status 
     to the reserve active status list during the one-year period 
     preceding the date of the convening of the promotion board;
       ``(B) immediately before the date of the officer's most 
     recent transfer to an active status, the officer had been in 
     an inactive status for less than one year; and
       ``(C) immediately before the date of the officer's most 
     recent transfer to an inactive status, the officer had 
     continuously served for at least one year on the reserve 
     active status list or the active-duty list (or a combination 
     of the reserve active status list and the active-duty 
     list).''.

     SEC. 523. RETENTION OF PROMOTION ELIGIBILITY FOR RESERVE 
                   COMPONENT GENERAL AND FLAG OFFICERS TRANSFERRED 
                   TO AN INACTIVE STATUS.

       Section 14317 of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(f) Effect of Transfer of Officers in Pay Grade O-7 to 
     Inactive Status.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), if a 
     reserve officer on the active-status list in the grade of 
     brigadier general or rear admiral (lower half) is transferred 
     to an inactive status after having been recommended for 
     promotion to the grade of major general or rear admiral under 
     this chapter, or after having been found qualified for 
     Federal recognition in the grade of major general under title 
     32, but before being promoted, the officer shall retain 
     promotion eligibility and, if otherwise qualified, may be 
     promoted to the higher grade after returning to an active 
     status.''.

     SEC. 524. AUTHORITY FOR LIMITED EXTENSION OF MEDICAL 
                   DEFERMENT OF MANDATORY RETIREMENT OR SEPARATION 
                   FOR RESERVE OFFICERS.

       (a) Deferment of Retirement or Separation for Medical 
     Reasons.--Chapter 1407 of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 14519. Deferment of retirement or separation for 
       medical reasons

       ``(a) If the Secretary of the military department concerned 
     determines that the evaluation of the physical condition of a 
     Reserve officer and determination of the officer's 
     entitlement to retirement or separation for physical 
     disability require hospitalization or medical observation and 
     that such hospitalization or medical observation cannot be 
     completed with confidence in a manner consistent with the 
     officer's well-being before the date on which the officer 
     would otherwise be required to be separated, retired, or 
     transferred to the Retired Reserve under this title, the 
     Secretary may defer the separation, retirement, or transfer 
     of the officer under this title.
       ``(b) A deferral under subsection (a) of separation, 
     retirement, or transfer to the Retired Reserve may not extend 
     for more than 30 days after completion of the evaluation 
     requiring hospitalization or medical observation.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``14519. Deferment of retirement or separation for medical reasons.''.

                   Subtitle D--Education and Training

     SEC. 531. AUTHORITY FOR PHASED INCREASE TO 4,400 IN 
                   AUTHORIZED STRENGTHS FOR THE SERVICE ACADEMIES.

       (a) Military Academy.--Section 4342 of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by inserting before the period at 
     the end of the first sentence the following: ``or such higher 
     number as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Army 
     under subsection (j)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(j)(1) Beginning with the 2003-2004 academic year, the 
     Secretary of the Army may prescribe annual increases in the 
     cadet strength limit in effect under subsection (a). For any 
     academic year, any such increase shall be by no more than 100 
     cadets or such lesser number as applies under paragraph (3) 
     for that year. Such annual increases may be prescribed until 
     the cadet strength limit is 4,400. However, no increase may 
     be prescribed for any academic year after the 2007-2008 
     academic year.
       ``(2) Any increase in the cadet strength limit under 
     paragraph (1) with respect to an academic year shall be 
     prescribed not later than the date on which the budget of the 
     President is submitted to Congress under section 1105 of 
     title 31 for the fiscal year beginning in the same year as 
     the year in which that academic year begins. Whenever the 
     Secretary prescribes such an increase, the Secretary shall 
     submit to Congress a notice in writing of the increase. The 
     notice shall state the amount of the increase in the cadet 
     strength limit and the new cadet strength limit, as so 
     increased, and the amount of the increase in Senior Army 
     Reserve Officers' Training Corps enrollment under each of 
     sections 2104 and 2107 of this title.
       ``(3) The amount of an increase under paragraph (1) in the 
     cadet strength limit for an academic year may not exceed the 
     increase (if any) for the preceding academic year in the 
     total number of cadets enrolled in the Army Senior Reserve 
     Officers' Training Corps program under chapter 103 of this 
     title who have entered into an agreement under section 2104 
     or 2107 of this title.
       ``(4) In this subsection, the term `cadet strength limit' 
     means the authorized maximum strength of the Corps of Cadets 
     of the Academy.''.
       (b) Naval Academy.--Section 6954 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by inserting before the period at 
     the end of the first sentence the following: ``or such higher 
     number as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Navy 
     under subsection (h)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(h)(1) Beginning with the 2003-2004 academic year, the 
     Secretary of the Navy may prescribe

[[Page H2295]]

     annual increases in the midshipmen strength limit in effect 
     under subsection (a). For any academic year, any such 
     increase shall be by no more than 100 midshipmen or such 
     lesser number as applies under paragraph (3) for that year. 
     Such annual increases may be prescribed until the midshipmen 
     strength limit is 4,400. However, no increase may be 
     prescribed for any academic year after the 2007-2008 academic 
     year.
       ``(2) Any increase in the midshipmen strength limit under 
     paragraph (1) with respect to an academic year shall be 
     prescribed not later than the date on which the budget of the 
     President is submitted to Congress under section 1105 of 
     title 31 for the fiscal year beginning in the same year as 
     the year in which that academic year begins. Whenever the 
     Secretary prescribes such an increase, the Secretary shall 
     submit to Congress a notice in writing of the increase. The 
     notice shall state the amount of the increase in the 
     midshipmen strength limit and the new midshipmen strength 
     limit, as so increased, and the amount of the increase in 
     Senior Navy Reserve Officers' Training Corps enrollment under 
     each of sections 2104 and 2107 of this title.
       ``(3) The amount of an increase under paragraph (1) in the 
     midshipmen strength limit for an academic year may not exceed 
     the increase (if any) for the preceding academic year in the 
     total number of midshipmen enrolled in the Navy Senior 
     Reserve Officers' Training Corps program under chapter 103 of 
     this title who have entered into an agreement under section 
     2104 or 2107 of this title.
       ``(4) In this subsection, the term `midshipmen strength 
     limit' means the authorized maximum strength of the Brigade 
     of Midshipmen.''.
       (c) Air Force Academy.--Section 9342 of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by inserting before the period at 
     the end of the first sentence the following: ``or such higher 
     number as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Air Force 
     under subsection (j)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(j)(1) Beginning with the 2003-2004 academic year, the 
     Secretary of the Air Force may prescribe annual increases in 
     the cadet strength limit in effect under subsection (a). For 
     any academic year, any such increase shall be by no more than 
     100 cadets or such lesser number as applies under paragraph 
     (3) for that year. Such annual increases may be prescribed 
     until the cadet strength limit is 4,400. However, no increase 
     may be prescribed for any academic year after the 2007-2008 
     academic year.
       ``(2) Any increase in the cadet strength limit under 
     paragraph (1) with respect to an academic year shall be 
     prescribed not later than the date on which the budget of the 
     President is submitted to Congress under sections 1105 of 
     title 31 for the fiscal year beginning in the same year as 
     the year in which that academic year begins. Whenever the 
     Secretary prescribes such an increase, the Secretary shall 
     submit to Congress a notice in writing of the increase. The 
     notice shall state the amount of the increase in the cadet 
     strength limit and the new cadet strength limit, as so 
     increased, and the amount of the increase in Senior Air Force 
     Reserve Officers' Training Corps enrollment under each of 
     sections 2104 and 2107 of this title.
       ``(3) The amount of an increase under paragraph (1) in the 
     cadet strength limit for an academic year may not exceed the 
     increase (if any) for the preceding academic year in the 
     total number of cadets enrolled in the Air Force Senior 
     Reserve Officers' Training Corps program under chapter 103 of 
     this title who have entered into an agreement under section 
     2104 or 2107 of this title.
       ``(4) In this subsection, the term `cadet strength limit' 
     means the authorized maximum strength of Air Force Cadets of 
     the Academy.''.
       (d) Target for Increases in Number of ROTC Scholarship 
     Participants.--Section 2107 of such title is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(i) The Secretary of each military department shall seek 
     to achieve an increase in the number of agreements entered 
     into under this section so as to achieve an increase, by the 
     2006-2007 academic year, of not less than 400 in the number 
     of cadets or midshipmen, as the case may be, enrolled under 
     this section, compared to such number enrolled for the 2002-
     2003 academic year. In the case of the Secretary of the Navy, 
     the Secretary shall seek to ensure that not less than one-
     third of such increase in agreements under this section are 
     with students enrolled (or seeking to enroll) in programs of 
     study leading to a baccalaureate degree in nuclear 
     engineering or another appropriate technical, scientific, or 
     engineering field of study.''.
       (e) Repeal of Limit on Number of ROTC Scholarships.--
     Section 2107 of such title is further amended by striking the 
     first sentence of subsection (h)(1).
       (f) Repeal of Obsolete Language.--Section 4342(i) of such 
     title is amended by striking ``(beginning with the 2001-2002 
     academic year)''.

     SEC. 532. ENHANCEMENT OF RESERVE COMPONENT DELAYED TRAINING 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Increase in Time Following Enlistment for Commencement 
     of Initial Period of Active Duty for Training.--Section 
     12103(d) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``270 days'' in the last sentence and inserting 
     ``one year''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply with respect to enlistments under section 
     12103(d) of title 10, United States Code, after the end of 
     the 90-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.
       (c) Transition.--In the case of a person who enlisted under 
     section 12103(d) of title 10, United States Code, before the 
     date of the enactment of this Act and who as of such date has 
     not commenced the required initial period of active duty for 
     training under that section, the amendment made by subsection 
     (a) may be applied to that person, but only with the 
     agreement of that person and the Secretary concerned.

                   Subtitle E--Decorations and Awards

     SEC. 541. WAIVER OF TIME LIMITATIONS FOR AWARD OF CERTAIN 
                   DECORATIONS TO CERTAIN PERSONS.

       (a) Waiver.--Any limitation established by law or policy 
     for the time within which a recommendation for the award of a 
     military decoration or award must be submitted shall not 
     apply to awards of decorations described in this section, the 
     award of each such decoration having been determined by the 
     Secretary concerned to be warranted in accordance with 
     section 1130 of title 10, United States Code.
       (b) Distinguished Flying Cross.--Subsection (a) applies to 
     the award of the Distinguished Flying Cross (including 
     multiple awards to the same individual) in the case of each 
     individual concerning whom the Secretary of the military 
     department concerned (or a designated official acting on 
     behalf of the Secretary of the military department concerned) 
     submitted to the Committee on Armed Services of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Armed Services of the 
     Senate, during the period beginning on December 28, 2001, and 
     ending on the day before the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, a notice as provided in section 1130(b) of title 10, 
     United States Code, that the award of the Distinguished 
     Flying Cross to that individual is warranted and that a 
     waiver of time restrictions prescribed by law for 
     recommendation for such award is recommended.

     SEC. 542. OPTION TO CONVERT AWARD OF ARMED FORCES 
                   EXPEDITIONARY MEDAL AWARDED FOR OPERATION 
                   FREQUENT WIND TO VIETNAM SERVICE MEDAL.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of the military department 
     concerned shall, upon the application of an individual who is 
     an eligible Vietnam evacuation veteran, award that individual 
     the Vietnam Service Medal, notwithstanding any otherwise 
     applicable requirements for the award of that medal. Any such 
     award shall be made in lieu of the Armed Forces Expeditionary 
     Medal awarded the individual for participation in Operation 
     Frequent Wind.
       (b) Eligible Vietnam Evacuation Veteran.--For purposes of 
     this section, the term ``eligible Vietnam evacuation 
     veteran'' means a member or former member of the Armed Forces 
     who was awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal for 
     participation in military operations designated as Operation 
     Frequent Wind arising from the evacuation of Vietnam on April 
     29 and 30, 1975.

                   Subtitle F--Administrative Matters

     SEC. 551. STAFFING AND FUNDING FOR DEFENSE PRISONER OF WAR/
                   MISSING PERSONNEL OFFICE.

       (a) Requirement for Staffing and Funding At Levels Required 
     for Performance of Full Range of Missions.--Subsection (a) of 
     section 1501 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5)(A) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the 
     office is provided sufficient military and civilian personnel 
     levels, and sufficient funding, to enable the office to fully 
     perform its complete range of missions. The Secretary shall 
     ensure that Department of Defense programming, planning, and 
     budgeting procedures are structured so as to ensure 
     compliance with the preceding sentence for each fiscal year.
       ``(B) For any fiscal year, the number of military and 
     civilian personnel assigned or detailed to the office may not 
     be less than the number requested in the President's budget 
     for fiscal year 2003, unless a level below such number is 
     expressly required by law.
       ``(C) For any fiscal year, the level of funding allocated 
     to the office within the Department of Defense may not be 
     below the level requested for such purposes in the 
     President's budget for fiscal year 2003, unless such a level 
     of funding is expressly required by law.''.
       (b) Name of Office.--Such subsection is further amended by 
     inserting after the first sentence of paragraph (1) the 
     following new sentence: ``Such office shall be known as the 
     Defense Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office.''.

     SEC. 552. THREE-YEAR FREEZE ON REDUCTIONS OF PERSONNEL OF 
                   AGENCIES RESPONSIBLE FOR REVIEW AND CORRECTION 
                   OF MILITARY RECORDS.

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

     ``Sec. 1559. Personnel limitation

       ``(a) Limitation.--During fiscal years 2003, 2004, and 
     2005, the Secretary of a military department may not carry 
     out any reduction in the number of military and civilian 
     personnel assigned to duty with the service review agency for 
     that military department below the baseline number for that 
     agency until--
       ``(1) the Secretary submits to Congress a report that--
       ``(A) describes the reduction proposed to be made;
       ``(B) provides the Secretary's rationale for that 
     reduction; and
       ``(C) specifies the number of such personnel that would be 
     assigned to duty with that agency after the reduction; and
       ``(2) a period of 90 days has elapsed after the date on 
     which the report is submitted.
       ``(b) Baseline Number.--The baseline number for a service 
     review agency under this section is--
       ``(1) for purposes of the first report with respect to a 
     service review agency under this section, the number of 
     military and civilian personnel assigned to duty with that 
     agency as of January 1, 2002; and
       ``(2) for purposes of any subsequent report with respect to 
     a service review agency under

[[Page H2296]]

     this section, the number of such personnel specified in the 
     most recent report with respect to that agency under this 
     section.
       ``(c) Service Review Agency Defined.--In this section, the 
     term `service review agency' means--
       ``(1) with respect to the Department of the Army, the Army 
     Review Boards Agency;
       ``(2) with respect to the Department of the Navy, the Board 
     for Correction of Naval Records; and
       ``(3) with respect to the Department of the Air Force, the 
     Air Force Review Boards Agency.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``1559. Personnel limitation.''.

     SEC. 553. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SUPPORT FOR PERSONS 
                   PARTICIPATING IN MILITARY FUNERAL HONORS 
                   DETAILS.

       Section 1491(d) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``To provide a'' after ``Support.--'' and 
     inserting ``(1) To support a'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (1) as subparagraph (A) and 
     amending such subparagraph, as so redesignated, to read as 
     follows:
       ``(A) For a person who participates in a funeral honors 
     detail (other than a person who is a member of the armed 
     forces not in a retired status or an employee of the United 
     States), either transportation (or reimbursement for 
     transportation) and expenses or the daily stipend prescribed 
     under paragraph (2).'';
       (3) by redesignating paragraph (2) as subparagraph (B) and 
     in that subparagraph--
       (A) by striking ``Materiel, equipment, and training for'' 
     and inserting ``For''; and
       (B) by inserting before the period at the end ``and for 
     members of the armed forces in a retired status, materiel, 
     equipment, and training'';
       (4) by redesignating paragraph (3) as subparagraph (C) and 
     in that subparagraph--
       (A) by striking ``Articles of clothing for'' and inserting 
     ``For''; and
       (B) by inserting ``, articles of clothing'' after 
     ``subsection (b)(2)''; and
       (5) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(2) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe annually a 
     flat rate daily stipend for purposes of paragraph (1)(A). 
     Such stipend shall be set at a rate so as to encompass 
     typical costs for transportation and other miscellaneous 
     expenses for persons participating in funeral honors details 
     who are members of the armed forces in a retired status and 
     other persons are not members of the armed forces or 
     employees of the United States.
       ``(3) A stipend paid under this subsection to a member of 
     the armed forces in a retired status is in addition to any 
     compensation to which the member is entitled under section 
     435(a)(2) of title 37 and any other compensation to which the 
     member may be entitled.''.

     SEC. 554. AUTHORITY FOR USE OF VOLUNTEERS AS PROCTORS FOR 
                   ADMINISTRATION OF ARMED SERVICES VOCATIONAL 
                   APTITUDE BATTERY TEST.

       Section 1588(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(6) Voluntary services as a proctor for administration to 
     secondary school students of the test known as the `Armed 
     Services Vocational Aptitude Battery'.''.

     SEC. 555. ANNUAL REPORT ON STATUS OF FEMALE MEMBERS OF THE 
                   ARMED FORCES.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 23 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 488. Status of female members of the armed forces: 
       annual report

       ``(a) Annual Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit 
     to Congress an annual report on the status of female members 
     of the armed forces. Information in the report shall be shown 
     for the Department of Defense as a whole and separately for 
     each of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps.
       ``(b) Matters To Be Included.--Each report under subsection 
     (a) shall include, at a minimum, the following information 
     with respect to female members:
       ``(1) Access to health care.
       ``(2) Positions open.
       ``(3) Assignment policies.
       ``(4) Joint spouse assignments.
       ``(5) Deployment availability rates.
       ``(6) Promotion and retention rates.
       ``(7) Assignments in nontraditional fields.
       ``(8) Assignments to command positions.
       ``(9) Selection for service schools.
       ``(10) Sexual harassment.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``488. Status of female members of the armed forces: annual report.''.

                          Subtitle G--Benefits

     SEC. 561. VOLUNTARY LEAVE SHARING PROGRAM FOR MEMBERS OF THE 
                   ARMED FORCES.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 40 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 709. Voluntary transfers of leave

       ``(a) Program.--The Secretary concerned shall, by 
     regulation, establish a program under which leave accrued by 
     a member of an armed force may be transferred to another 
     member of the same armed force who requires additional leave 
     because of a qualifying emergency. Any such transfer of leave 
     may be made only upon the voluntary written application of 
     the member whose leave is to be transferred.
       ``(b) Approval of Commanding Officer Required.--Any 
     transfer of leave under a program under this section may only 
     be made with the approval of the commanding officer of the 
     leave donor and the leave recipient.
       ``(c) Qualifying Emergency.--In this section, the term 
     `qualifying emergency', with respect to a member of the armed 
     forces, means a circumstance that--
       ``(1) is likely to require the prolonged absence of the 
     member from duty; and
       ``(2) is due to--
       ``(A) a medical condition of a member of the immediate 
     family of the member; or
       ``(B) any other hardship that the Secretary concerned 
     determines appropriate for purposes of this section.
       ``(d) Military Department Regulations.--Regulations 
     prescribed under this section by the Secretaries of the 
     military department shall be as uniform as practicable and 
     shall be subject to approval by the Secretary of Defense.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``709. Voluntary transfers of leave.''.

       (b) Deadline for Implementing Regulations.--Regulations to 
     implement section 709 of title 10, United States Code, as 
     added by subsection (a), shall be prescribed not later than 
     six months after the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 562. ENHANCED FLEXIBILITY IN MEDICAL LOAN REPAYMENT 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Eligible Persons.--Subsection (d) of section 2173 of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``Participants'' and all that follows through ``and 
     students'' and inserting ``Students''.
       (b) Loan Repayment Amounts.--Subsection (e)(2) of such 
     section is amended by striking the last sentence.

     SEC. 563. EXPANSION OF OVERSEAS TOUR EXTENSION BENEFITS.

       Section 705(b)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``recuperative'' and inserting 
     ``recuperation''; and
       (2) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, or to an alternate location at a cost not to 
     exceed the cost of transportation to the nearest port in the 
     48 contiguous States, and return''.

     SEC. 564. VEHICLE STORAGE IN LIEU OF TRANSPORTATION WHEN 
                   MEMBER IS ORDERED TO A NONFOREIGN DUTY STATION 
                   OUTSIDE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES.

       (a) Storage Costs Authorized.--Subsection (b) of section 
     2634 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting the following:
       ``(b)(1) When a member receives a vehicle storage 
     qualifying order, the member may elect to have a motor 
     vehicle described in subsection (a) stored at the expense of 
     the United States at a location approved by the Secretary 
     concerned. In the case of a vehicle storage qualifying order 
     that is to make a change of permanent station, such storage 
     is in lieu of transportation authorized by subsection (a).
       ``(2) In this subsection, the term `vehicle storage 
     qualifying order' means any of the following:
       ``(A) An order to make a change of permanent station to a 
     foreign country in a case in which the laws, regulations, or 
     other restrictions imposed by the foreign country or by the 
     United States either--
       ``(i) preclude entry of a motor vehicle described in 
     subsection (a) into that country; or
       ``(ii) would require extensive modification of the vehicle 
     as a condition to entry.
       ``(B) An order to make a change of permanent station to a 
     nonforeign area outside the continental United States in a 
     case in which the laws, regulations, or other restrictions 
     imposed by that area or by the United States either--
       ``(i) preclude entry of a motor vehicle described in 
     subsection (a) into that area; or
       ``(ii) would require extensive modification of the vehicle 
     as a condition to entry.
       ``(C) An order under which a member is transferred or 
     assigned in connection with a contingency operation to duty 
     at a location other than the permanent station of the member 
     for a period of more than 30 consecutive days but which is 
     not considered a change of permanent station.''.
       (b) Nonforeign Area Outside the Continental United States 
     Defined.--Subsection (h) of such section is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) The term `nonforeign area outside the continental 
     United States' means any of the following: the States of 
     Alaska and Hawaii, the Commonwealths of Puerto Rico and the 
     Northern Mariana Islands, and any possession of the United 
     States.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     apply to orders to make a change of permanent station to a 
     nonforeign area outside the continental United States (as 
     such term is defined in subsection (h)(3) of section 2634 of 
     title 10, United States Code, as added by subsection (b)) 
     that are issued on or after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act.

                  Subtitle H--Military Justice Matters

     SEC. 571. RIGHT OF CONVICTED ACCUSED TO REQUEST SENTENCING BY 
                   MILITARY JUDGE.

       (a) Sentencing by Judge.--(1) Chapter 47 of title 10, 
     United States Code (the Uniform Code of Military Justice), is 
     amended by inserting after section 852 (article 52) the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 852a. Art. 52a. Right of accused to request sentencing 
       by military judge rather than by members

       ``(a) In the case of an accused convicted of an offense by 
     a court-martial composed of a military judge and members, the 
     sentence shall be tried before and adjudged by the military 
     judge

[[Page H2297]]

     rather than the members if, after the findings are announced 
     and before evidence in the sentencing proceeding is 
     introduced, the accused, knowing the identity of the military 
     judge and after consultation with defense counsel, requests 
     orally on the record or in writing that the sentence be tried 
     before and adjudged by the military judge rather than the 
     members.
       ``(b) This section shall not apply with respect to an 
     offense for which the death penalty may be adjudged unless 
     the case has been previously referred to trial as a 
     noncapital case.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of subchapter 
     VII of such chapter is amended by inserting after the item 
     relating to section 852 (article 52) the following new item:

``852a. 52a. Right of accused to request sentencing by military judge 
              rather than by members.''.

       (b) Effective Date.--Section 852a of title 10, United 
     States Code (article 52a of the Uniform Code of Military 
     Justice), as added by subsection (a), shall apply with 
     respect to offenses committed on or after January 1, 2003.

     SEC. 572. REPORT ON DESIRABILITY AND FEASIBILITY OF 
                   CONSOLIDATING SEPARATE COURSES OF BASIC 
                   INSTRUCTION FOR JUDGE ADVOCATES.

       Not later than February 1, 2003, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate 
     and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of 
     Representatives a report on the desirability and feasibility 
     of consolidating the separate Army, Navy, and Air Force 
     courses of basic instruction for judge advocates into a 
     single course to be conducted at a single location. The 
     report shall include--
       (1) an assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of 
     such a consolidation;
       (2) a recommendation as to whether such a consolidation is 
     desirable and feasible; and
       (3) any proposal for legislative action that the Secretary 
     considers appropriate for carrying out such a consolidation.

          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

                     Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances

     SEC. 601. INCREASE IN BASIC PAY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003.

       (a) Waiver of Section 1009 Adjustment.--The adjustment to 
     become effective during fiscal year 2003 required by section 
     1009 of title 37, United States Code, in the rates of monthly 
     basic pay authorized members of the uniformed services shall 
     not be made.
       (b) Increase in Basic Pay.--Effective on January 1, 2003, 
     the rates of monthly basic pay for members of the uniformed 
     services within each pay grade are as follows:
       

                                            COMMISSIONED OFFICERS \1\
                   Years of service computed under section 205 of title 37, United States Code
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Pay Grade                      2 or less      Over 2       Over 3       Over 4       Over 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O-10 \2\.......................................        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00
O-9............................................         0.00         0.00         0.00         0.00         0.00
O-8............................................     7,474.50     7,719.30     7,881.60     7,927.20     8,129.40
O-7............................................     6,210.90     6,499.20     6,633.00     6,739.20     6,930.90
O-6............................................     4,603.20     5,057.10     5,388.90     5,388.90     5,409.60
O-5............................................     3,837.60     4,323.00     4,622.40     4,678.50     4,864.80
O-4............................................     3,311.10     3,832.80     4,088.70     4,145.70     4,383.00
O-3 \3\........................................     2,911.20     3,300.30     3,562.20     3,883.50     4,069.50
O-2 \3\........................................     2,515.20     2,864.70     3,299.40     3,410.70     3,481.20
O-1 \3\........................................     2,183.70     2,272.50     2,746.80     2,746.80     2,746.80
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Over 8      Over 10      Over 12      Over 14      Over 16
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
O-10 \2\.......................................        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00
O-9............................................         0.00         0.00         0.00         0.00         0.00
O-8............................................     8,468.70     8,547.30     8,868.90     8,961.30     9,238.20
O-7............................................     7,120.80     7,340.40     7,559.40     7,779.00     8,468.70
O-6............................................     5,641.20     5,672.10     5,672.10     5,994.60     6,564.30
O-5............................................     4,977.00     5,222.70     5,403.00     5,635.50     5,991.90
O-4............................................     4,637.70     4,954.50     5,201.40     5,372.70     5,471.10
O-3 \3\........................................     4,273.50     4,405.80     4,623.30     4,736.10     4,736.10
O-2 \3\........................................     3,481.20     3,481.20     3,481.20     3,481.20     3,481.20
O-1 \3\........................................     2,746.80     2,746.80     2,746.80     2,746.80     2,746.80
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Over 18      Over 20      Over 22      Over 24      Over 26
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
O-10 \2\.......................................        $0.00   $12,077.70   $12,137.10   $12,389.40   $12,829.20
O-9............................................         0.00    10,563.60    10,715.70    10,935.60    11,319.60
O-8............................................     9,639.00    10,008.90    10,255.80    10,255.80    10,255.80
O-7............................................     9,051.30     9,051.30     9,051.30     9,051.30     9,096.90
O-6............................................     6,898.80     7,233.30     7,423.50     7,616.10     7,989.90
O-5............................................     6,161.70     6,329.10     6,519.60     6,519.60     6,519.60
O-4............................................     5,528.40     5,528.40     5,528.40     5,528.40     5,528.40
O-3 \3\........................................     4,736.10     4,736.10     4,736.10     4,736.10     4,736.10
O-2 \3\........................................     3,481.20     3,481.20     3,481.20     3,481.20     3,481.20
O-1 \3\........................................     2,746.80     2,746.80     2,746.80     2,746.80     2,746.80
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Notwithstanding the basic pay rates specified in this table, the actual rate of basic pay for commissioned
  officers in pay grades 0-7 through O-10 may not exceed the rate of pay for level III of the Executive Schedule
  and the actual rate of basic pay for all other officers may not exceed the rate of pay for level V of the
  Executive Schedule.
\2\ Subject to the preceding footnote, while serving as Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
  Chief of Staff of the Army, Chief of Naval Operations, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, Commandant of the
  Marine Corps, or Commandant of the Coast Guard, the rate of basic pay for this grade is $14,155.50, regardless
  of cumulative years of service computed under section 205 of title 37, United States Code.
\3\ This table does not apply to commissioned officers in pay grade O-1, O-2, or O-3 who have been credited with
  over 4 years of active duty service as an enlisted member or warrant officer.


     COMMISSIONED OFFICERS WITH OVER 4 YEARS OF ACTIVE DUTY SERVICE AS AN ENLISTED MEMBER OR WARRANT OFFICER
                   Years of service computed under section 205 of title 37, United States Code
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Pay Grade                      2 or less      Over 2       Over 3       Over 4       Over 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O-3E...........................................        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00    $3,883.50    $4,069.50
O-2E...........................................         0.00         0.00         0.00     3,410.70     3,481.20
O-1E...........................................         0.00         0.00         0.00     2,746.80     2,933.70
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Over 8      Over 10      Over 12      Over 14      Over 16
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
O-3E...........................................    $4,273.50    $4,405.80    $4,623.30    $4,806.30    $4,911.00
O-2E...........................................     3,591.90     3,778.80     3,923.40     4,031.10     4,031.10
O-1E...........................................     3,042.00     3,152.70     3,261.60     3,410.70     3,410.70
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Over 18      Over 20      Over 22      Over 24      Over 26
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page H2298]]

 
O-3E...........................................    $5,054.40    $5,054.40    $5,054.40    $5,054.40    $5,054.40
O-2E...........................................     4,031.10     4,031.10     4,031.10     4,031.10     4,031.10
O-1E...........................................     3,410.70     3,410.70     3,410.70     3,410.70     3,410.70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                              WARRANT OFFICERS \1\
                   Years of service computed under section 205 of title 37, United States Code
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Pay Grade                      2 or less      Over 2       Over 3       Over 4       Over 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W-5............................................        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00
W-4............................................     3,008.10     3,236.10     3,329.10     3,420.60     3,578.10
W-3............................................     2,747.10     2,862.00     2,979.30     3,017.70     3,141.00
W-2............................................     2,416.50     2,554.50     2,675.10     2,763.00     2,838.30
W-1............................................     2,133.90     2,308.50     2,425.50     2,501.10     2,662.50
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Over 8      Over 10      Over 12      Over 14      Over 16
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
W-5............................................        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00
W-4............................................     3,733.50     3,891.00     4,044.60     4,203.60     4,356.00
W-3............................................     3,281.70     3,467.40     3,580.50     3,771.90     3,915.60
W-2............................................     2,993.10     3,148.50     3,264.00     3,376.50     3,453.90
W-1............................................     2,782.20     2,888.40     3,006.90     3,085.20     3,203.40
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Over 18      Over 20      Over 22      Over 24      Over 26
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
W-5............................................        $0.00    $5,169.30    $5,346.60    $5,524.50    $5,703.30
W-4............................................     4,512.00     4,664.40     4,822.50     4,978.20     5,137.50
W-3............................................     4,058.40     4,201.50     4,266.30     4,407.00     4,548.00
W-2............................................     3,579.90     3,705.90     3,831.00     3,957.30     3,957.30
W-1............................................     3,320.70     3,409.50     3,409.50     3,409.50     3,409.50
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Notwithstanding the basic pay rates specified in this table, the actual rate of basic pay for warrant
  officers may not exceed the rate of pay for level V of the Executive Schedule.


                                              ENLISTED MEMBERS \1\
                   Years of service computed under section 205 of title 37, United States Code
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Pay Grade                      2 or less      Over 2       Over 3       Over 4       Over 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-9 \2\........................................        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00        $0.00
E-8............................................         0.00         0.00         0.00         0.00         0.00
E-7............................................     2,068.50     2,257.80     2,343.90     2,428.20     2,516.40
E-6............................................     1,770.60     1,947.60     2,033.70     2,117.10     2,204.10
E-5............................................     1,625.40     1,733.70     1,817.40     1,903.50     2,037.00
E-4............................................     1,502.70     1,579.80     1,665.30     1,749.30     1,824.00
E-3............................................     1,356.90     1,442.10     1,528.80     1,528.80     1,528.80
E-2............................................     1,290.00     1,290.00     1,290.00     1,290.00     1,290.00
E-1............................................          \3\     1,150.80     1,150.80     1,150.80     1,150.80
                                                    1,150.80
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Over 8      Over 10      Over 12      Over 14      Over 16
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
E-9 \2\........................................        $0.00    $3,564.30    $3,645.00    $3,747.00    $3,867.00
E-8............................................     2,975.40     3,061.20     3,141.30     3,237.60     3,342.00
E-7............................................     2,667.90     2,753.40     2,838.30     2,990.40     3,066.30
E-6............................................     2,400.90     2,477.40     2,562.30     2,636.70     2,663.10
E-5............................................     2,151.90     2,236.80     2,283.30     2,283.30     2,283.30
E-4............................................     1,824.00     1,824.00     1,824.00     1,824.00     1,824.00
E-3............................................     1,528.80     1,528.80     1,528.80     1,528.80     1,528.80
E-2............................................     1,290.00     1,290.00     1,290.00     1,290.00     1,290.00
E-1............................................     1,150.80     1,150.80     1,150.80     1,150.80     1,150.80
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Over 18      Over 20      Over 22      Over 24      Over 26
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
E-9 \2\........................................    $3,987.30    $4,180.80    $4,344.30    $4,506.30    $4,757.40
E-8............................................     3,530.10     3,625.50     3,787.50     3,877.50     4,099.20
E-7............................................     3,138.60     3,182.70     3,331.50     3,427.80     3,671.40
E-6............................................     2,709.60     2,709.60     2,709.60     2,709.60     2,709.60
E-5............................................     2,283.30     2,283.30     2,283.30     2,283.30     2,283.30
E-4............................................     1,824.00     1,824.00     1,824.00     1,824.00     1,824.00
E-3............................................     1,528.80     1,528.80     1,528.80     1,528.80     1,528.80
E-2............................................     1,290.00     1,290.00     1,290.00     1,290.00     1,290.00
E-1............................................     1,150.80     1,150.80     1,150.80     1,150.80     1,150.80
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Notwithstanding the basic pay rates specified in this table, the actual rate of basic pay for enlisted
  members may not exceed the rate of pay for level V of the Executive Schedule.
\2\ Subject to the preceding footnote, while serving as Sergeant Major of the Army, Master Chief Petty Officer
  of the Navy, Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps, or Master Chief Petty
  Officer of the Coast Guard, basic pay for this grade is $5,732.70, regardless of cumulative years of service
  computed under section 205 of title 37, United States Code.
\3\ In the case of members in pay grade E-1 who have served less than 4 months on active duty, the rate of basic
  pay is $1,064.70.


[[Page H2299]]

     SEC. 602. EXPANSION OF BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR HOUSING LOW-COST 
                   OR NO-COST MOVES AUTHORITY TO MEMBERS ASSIGNED 
                   TO DUTY OUTSIDE UNITED STATES.

       Section 403(c) of title 37, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(4) In the case of a member who is assigned to duty 
     outside of the United States, the location or the 
     circumstances of which make it necessary that the member be 
     reassigned under the conditions of low-cost or no-cost 
     permanent change of station or permanent change of 
     assignment, the member may be treated as if the member were 
     not reassigned if the Secretary concerned determines that it 
     would be inequitable to base the member's entitlement to, and 
     amount of, a basic allowance for housing on the cost of 
     housing in the area to which the member is reassigned.''.

           Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays

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

       (a) Selected Reserve Reenlistment Bonus.--Section 308b(f ) 
     of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``December 31, 2002'' and inserting ``December 31, 2003''.
       (b) Selected Reserve Enlistment Bonus.--Section 308c(e) of 
     such title is amended by striking ``December 31, 2002'' and 
     inserting ``December 31, 2003''.
       (c) Special Pay for Enlisted Members Assigned to Certain 
     High Priority Units.--Section 308d(c) of such title is 
     amended by striking ``December 31, 2002'' and inserting 
     ``December 31, 2003''.
       (d) Selected Reserve Affiliation Bonus.--Section 308e(e) of 
     such title is amended by striking ``December 31, 2002'' and 
     inserting ``December 31, 2003''.
       (e) Ready Reserve Enlistment and Reenlistment Bonus.--
     Section 308h(g) of such title is amended by striking 
     ``December 31, 2002'' and inserting ``December 31, 2003''.
       (f) Prior Service Enlistment Bonus.--Section 308i(f ) of 
     such title is amended by striking ``December 31, 2002'' and 
     inserting ``December 31, 2003''.

     SEC. 612. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BONUS AND SPECIAL PAY 
                   AUTHORITIES FOR CERTAIN HEALTH CARE 
                   PROFESSIONALS.

       (a) Nurse Officer Candidate Accession Program.--Section 
     2130a(a)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``December 31, 2002'' and inserting ``December 31, 
     2003''.
       (b) Repayment of Education Loans for Certain Health 
     Professionals Who Serve in the Selected Reserve.--Section 
     16302(d) of such title is amended by striking ``January 1, 
     2003'' and inserting ``January 1, 2004''.
       (c) Accession Bonus for Registered Nurses.--Section 
     302d(a)(1) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``December 31, 2002'' and inserting ``December 31, 
     2003''.
       (d) Incentive Special Pay for Nurse Anesthetists.--Section 
     302e(a)(1) of such title is amended by striking ``December 
     31, 2002'' and inserting ``December 31, 2003''.
       (e) Special Pay for Selected Reserve Health Professionals 
     in Critically Short Wartime Specialties.--Section 302g(f ) of 
     such title is amended by striking ``December 31, 2002'' and 
     inserting ``December 31, 2003''.
       (f) Accession Bonus for Dental Officers.--Section 
     302h(a)(1) of such title is amended by striking ``December 
     31, 2002'' and inserting ``December 31, 2003''.

     SEC. 613. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF SPECIAL PAY AND BONUS 
                   AUTHORITIES FOR NUCLEAR OFFICERS.

       (a) Special Pay for Nuclear-Qualified Officers Extending 
     Period of Active Service.--Section 312(e) of title 37, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking ``December 31, 2002'' and 
     inserting ``December 31, 2003''.
       (b) Nuclear Career Accession Bonus.--Section 312b(c) of 
     such title is amended by striking ``December 31, 2002'' and 
     inserting ``December 31, 2003''.
       (c) Nuclear Career Annual Incentive Bonus.--Section 312c(d) 
     of such title is amended by striking ``December 31, 2002'' 
     and inserting ``December 31, 2003''.

     SEC. 614. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF OTHER BONUS AND SPECIAL PAY 
                   AUTHORITIES.

       (a) Aviation Officer Retention Bonus.--Section 301b(a) of 
     title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``December 31, 2002'' and inserting ``December 31, 2003''.
       (b) Reenlistment Bonus for Active Members.--Section 308(g) 
     of such title is amended by striking ``December 31, 2002'' 
     and inserting ``December 31, 2003''.
       (c) Enlistment Bonus for Active Members.--Section 309(e) of 
     such title is amended by striking ``December 31, 2002'' and 
     inserting ``December 31, 2003''.
       (d) Retention Bonus for Members With Critical Military 
     Skills.--Section 323(i) of such title is amended by striking 
     ``December 31, 2002'' and inserting ``December 31, 2003''.
       (e) Accession Bonus for New Officers in Critical Skills.--
     Section 324(g) of such title is amended by striking 
     ``December 31, 2002'' and inserting ``December 31, 2003''.

     SEC. 615. MINIMUM LEVELS OF HARDSHIP DUTY PAY FOR DUTY ON THE 
                   GROUND IN ANTARCTICA OR ON ARCTIC ICEPACK.

       Section 305 of title 37, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (a), the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(b) Duty in Certain Locations.--(1) In the case of duty 
     at a location described in paragraph (2) at any time during a 
     month, the member of a uniformed service performing that duty 
     is entitled to special pay under this section at a monthly 
     rate of not less than $240, but not to exceed the monthly 
     rate specified in subsection (a). For each day of that duty 
     during the month, the member shall receive an amount equal to 
     \1/30\ of the monthly rate prescribed under this subsection.
       ``(2) Paragraph (1) applies with respect to duty performed 
     on the ground in Antarctica or on the Arctic icepack.''.

     SEC. 616. INCREASE IN MAXIMUM RATES FOR PRIOR SERVICE 
                   ENLISTMENT BONUS.

       Section 308i(b)(1) of title 37, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``$5,000'' and 
     inserting ``$8,000'';
       (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``$2,500'' and 
     inserting ``$4,000''; and
       (3) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``$2,000'' and 
     inserting ``$3,500''.

     SEC. 617. RETENTION INCENTIVES FOR HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS 
                   QUALIFIED IN A CRITICAL MILITARY SKILL.

       (a) Exception to Limitation on Maximum Bonus Amount.--
     Subsection (d) of section 323 of title 37, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``A member''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) The limitation in paragraph (1) on the total bonus 
     payments that a member may receive under this section does 
     not apply with respect to an officer who is assigned duties 
     as a health care provider.''.
       (b) Exception to Years of Service Limitation.--Subsection 
     (e) of such section is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively;
       (2) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``A retention''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) The limitations in paragraph (1) do not apply with 
     respect to an officer who is assigned duties as a health care 
     provider during the period of active duty for which the bonus 
     is being offered.''.

            Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances

     SEC. 631. EXTENSION OF LEAVE TRAVEL DEFERRAL PERIOD FOR 
                   MEMBERS PERFORMING CONSECUTIVE OVERSEAS TOURS 
                   OF DUTY.

       (a) Authorized Deferral Period.--Section 411b of title 37, 
     United States Code is amended by inserting after subsection 
     (a) the following new subsection:
       ``(b) Authority to Defer Travel; Limitations.--(1) Under 
     the regulations referred to subsection (a), a member may 
     defer the travel for which the member is paid travel and 
     transportation allowances under this section until anytime 
     before the completion of the consecutive tour at the same 
     duty station or the completion of the tour of duty at the new 
     duty station under the order involved, as the case may be.
       ``(2) If a member is unable to undertake the travel before 
     expiration of the deferral period under paragraph (1) because 
     of duty in connection with a contingency operation, the 
     member may defer the travel until not more than one year 
     after the date on which the member's duty in connection with 
     the contingency operation ends.''.
       (b) Conforming and Clerical Amendments.--Such section is 
     further amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``(a)(1)'' and inserting ``(a) Allowances 
     Authorized.--''; and
       (B) by striking paragraph (2); and
       (2) by striking ``(b) The allowances'' and inserting ``(c) 
     Limitation on Allowance Rate.--''.
       (c) Application of Amendment.--Subsection (b) of section 
     411b of title 37, United States Code, as added by subsection 
     (a), shall apply with respect to members of the uniformed 
     services in a deferred leave travel status under such section 
     as of the date of the enactment of this Act or after that 
     date.

             Subtitle D--Retired Pay and Survivors Benefits

     SEC. 641. PHASE-IN OF FULL CONCURRENT RECEIPT OF MILITARY 
                   RETIRED PAY AND VETERANS DISABILITY 
                   COMPENSATION FOR MILITARY RETIREES WITH 
                   DISABILITIES RATED AT 60 PERCENT OR HIGHER.

       (a) Concurrent Receipt.--Section 1414 of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 1414. Members eligible for retired pay who have 
       service-connected disabilities rated at 60 percent or 
       higher: concurrent payment of retired pay and veterans' 
       disability compensation

       ``(a) Payment of Both Retired Pay and Compensation.--
     Subject to subsection (b), a member or former member of the 
     uniformed services who is entitled for any month to retired 
     pay and who is also entitled for that month to veterans' 
     disability compensation for a qualifying service-connected 
     disability (hereinafter in this section referred to as a 
     `qualified retiree') is entitled to be paid both for that 
     month without regard to sections 5304 and 5305 of title 38. 
     For fiscal years 2003 through 2006, payment of retired pay to 
     such a member or former member is subject to subsection (c).
       ``(b) Special Rules for Chapter 61 Disability Retirees.--
       ``(1) Career retirees.--The retired pay of a member retired 
     under chapter 61 of this title with 20 years or more of 
     service otherwise creditable under section 1405 of this title 
     at the time of the member's retirement is subject to 
     reduction under sections 5304 and 5305 of title 38, but

[[Page H2300]]

     only to the extent that the amount of the member's retired 
     pay under chapter 61 of this title exceeds the amount of 
     retired pay to which the member would have been entitled 
     under any other provision of law based upon the member's 
     service in the uniformed services if the member had not been 
     retired under chapter 61 of this title.
       ``(2) Disability retirees with less than 20 years of 
     service.--Subsection (a) does not apply to a member retired 
     under chapter 61 of this title with less than 20 years of 
     service otherwise creditable under section 1405 of this title 
     at the time of the member's retirement.
       ``(c) Phase-in of Full Concurrent Receipt.--For fiscal 
     years 2003 through 2006, retired pay payable to a qualified 
     retiree shall be determined as follows:
       ``(1) Fiscal year 2003.--For a month during fiscal year 
     2003, the amount of retired pay payable to a qualified 
     retiree is the amount (if any) of retired pay in excess of 
     the current baseline offset plus the following:
       ``(A) For a month for which the retiree receives veterans' 
     disability compensation for a qualifying service-connected 
     disability rated as total, $750.
       ``(B) For a month for which the retiree receives veterans' 
     disability compensation for a qualifying service-connected 
     disability rated as 90 percent, $500.
       ``(C) For a month for which the retiree receives veterans' 
     disability compensation for a qualifying service-connected 
     disability rated as 80 percent, $250.
       ``(D) For a month for which the retiree receives veterans' 
     disability compensation for a qualifying service-connected 
     disability rated as 70 percent, $250.
       ``(E) For a month for which the retiree receives veterans' 
     disability compensation for a qualifying service-connected 
     disability rated as 60 percent, $125.
       ``(2) Fiscal year 2004.--For a month during fiscal year 
     2004, the amount of retired pay payable to a qualified 
     retiree is the sum of--
       ``(A) the amount specified in paragraph (1) for that 
     qualified retiree; and
       ``(B) 23 percent of the difference between (i) the current 
     baseline offset, and (ii) the amount specified in paragraph 
     (1) for that member's disability.
       ``(3) Fiscal year 2005.--For a month during fiscal year 
     2005, the amount of retired pay payable to a qualified 
     retiree is the sum of--
       ``(A) the amount determined under paragraph (2) for that 
     qualified retiree; and
       ``(B) 30 percent of the difference between (i) the current 
     baseline offset, and (ii) the amount determined under 
     paragraph (2) for that qualified retiree.
       ``(4) Fiscal year 2006.--For a month during fiscal year 
     2006, the amount of retired pay payable to a qualified 
     retiree is the sum of--
       ``(A) the amount determined under paragraph (3) for that 
     qualified retiree; and
       ``(B) 64 percent of the difference between (i) the current 
     baseline offset, and (ii) the amount determined under 
     paragraph (3) for that qualified retiree.
       ``(d) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Retired pay.--The term `retired pay' includes 
     retainer pay, emergency officers' retirement pay, and naval 
     pension.
       ``(2) Veterans' disability compensation.--The term 
     `veterans' disability compensation' has the meaning given the 
     term `compensation' in section 101(13) of title 38.
       ``(3) Service-connected.--The term `service-connected' has 
     the meaning given that term in section 101(16) of title 38.
       ``(4) Qualifying service-connected disability.--The term 
     `qualifying service-connected disability' means a service-
     connected disability or combination of service-connected 
     disabilities that is rated as not less than 60 percent 
     disabling by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
       ``(5) Disability rated as total.--The term `disability 
     rated as total' means--
       ``(A) a disability, or combination of disabilities, that is 
     rated as total under the standard schedule of rating 
     disabilities in use by the Department of Veterans Affairs; or
       ``(B) a disability, or combination of disabilities, for 
     which the scheduled rating is less than total but for which a 
     rating of total is assigned by reason of inability of the 
     disabled person concerned to secure or follow a substantially 
     gainful occupation as a result of service-connected 
     disabilities.
       ``(6) Current baseline offset.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `current baseline offset' for 
     any qualified retiree means the amount for any month that is 
     the lesser of--
       ``(i) the amount of the applicable monthly retired pay of 
     the qualified retiree for that month; and
       ``(ii) the amount of monthly veterans' disability 
     compensation to which the qualified retiree is entitled for 
     that month.
       ``(B) Applicable retired pay.--In subparagraph (A), the 
     term `applicable retired pay' for a qualified retiree means 
     the amount of monthly retired pay to which the qualified 
     retiree is entitled, determined without regard to this 
     section or sections 5304 and 5305 of title 38), except that 
     in the case of such a retiree who was retired under chapter 
     61 of this title, such amount is the amount of retired pay to 
     which the member would have been entitled under any other 
     provision of law based upon the member's service in the 
     uniformed services if the member had not been retired under 
     chapter 61 of this title.''.
       (b) Repeal of Special Compensation Authority.--Section 1413 
     of title 10, United States Code, is repealed.
       (c) Payment of Increased Retired Pay Costs Due to 
     Concurrent Receipt.--(1) Section 1465(b) of such title is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) At the same time that the Secretary of Defense makes 
     the determination required by paragraph (1) for any fiscal 
     year, the Secretary shall determine the amount of the 
     Treasury contribution to be made to the Fund for the next 
     fiscal year under section 1466(b)(2)(D) of this title. That 
     amount shall be determined in the same manner as the 
     determination under paragraph (1) of the total amount of 
     Department of Defense contributions to be made to the Fund 
     during that fiscal year under section 1466(a) of this title, 
     except that for purposes of this paragraph the Secretary, in 
     making the calculations required by subparagraphs (A) and (B) 
     of that paragraph, shall use the single level percentages 
     determined under subsection (c)(4), rather than those 
     determined under subsection (c)(1).''.
       (2) Section 1465(c) of such title is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A), by inserting before the semicolon 
     at the end the following: ``, to be determined without regard 
     to section 1414 of this title'';
       (ii) in subparagraph (B), by inserting before the period at 
     the end the following: ``, to be determined without regard to 
     section 1414 of this title''; and
       (iii) in the sentence following subparagraph (B), by 
     striking ``subsection (b)'' and inserting ``subsection 
     (b)(1)'';
       (B) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
     paragraph (4):
       ``(4) Whenever the Secretary carries out an actuarial 
     valuation under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall include as 
     part of such valuation the following:
       ``(A) A determination of a single level percentage 
     determined in the same manner as applies under subparagraph 
     (A) of paragraph (1), but based only upon the provisions of 
     section 1414 of this title.
       ``(B) A determination of a single level percentage 
     determined in the same manner as applies under subparagraph 
     (B) of paragraph (1), but based only upon the provisions of 
     section 1414 of this title.

     Such single level percentages shall be used for the purposes 
     of subsection (b)(3).''.
       (3) Section 1466(b) of such title is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``sections 1465(a) and 
     1465(c)'' and inserting ``sections 1465(a), 1465(b)(3), 
     1465(c)(2), and 1465(c)(3)''; and
       (B) by adding at the end of paragraph (2) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(D) The amount for that year determined by the Secretary 
     of Defense under section 1465(b)(3) of this title for the 
     cost to the Fund arising from increased amounts payable from 
     the Fund by reason of section 1414 of this title.''.
       (d) Clerical Amendments.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of chapter 71 of such title is amended--
       (1) by striking the item relating to section 1413; and
       (2) by striking the item relating to section 1414 and 
     inserting the following:

``1414. Members eligible for retired pay who have service-connected 
              disabilities rated at 60 percent or higher: concurrent 
              payment of retired pay and veterans' disability 
              compensation.''.
       (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to retired pay payable for months 
     after September 2002.

     SEC. 642. CHANGE IN SERVICE REQUIREMENTS FOR ELIGIBILITY FOR 
                   RETIRED PAY FOR NON-REGULAR SERVICE.

       (a) Reduction in Requirement for Years of Reserve Component 
     Service Before Retired Pay Eligibility.--Section 12731(a)(3) 
     of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``eight years'' and inserting ``six years''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on October 1, 2002.

     SEC. 643. ELIMINATION OF POSSIBLE INVERSION IN RETIRED PAY 
                   COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENT FOR INITIAL COLA 
                   COMPUTATION.

       (a) Elimination of Possible COLA Inversion.--Section 1401a 
     of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsections (c)(1), (d), and (e), by inserting ``but 
     subject to subsection (f)(2)'' after ``Notwithstanding 
     subsection (b)'';
       (2) in subsection (c)(2), by inserting ``(subject to 
     subsection (f)(2) as applied to other members whose retired 
     pay is computed on the current rates of basic pay in the most 
     recent adjustment under this section)'' after ``shall be 
     increased''; and
       (3) in subsection (f)--
       (A) by designating the text after the subsection heading as 
     paragraph (1), indenting that text two ems, and inserting 
     ``(1) Prevention of retired pay inversions.--'' before 
     ``Notwithstanding''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Prevention of cola inversions.--The percentage of the 
     first adjustment under this section in the retired pay of any 
     person, as determined under subsection (c)(1), (c)(2), (d), 
     or (e), may not exceed the percentage increase in retired pay 
     determined under subsection (b)(2) that is effective on the 
     same date as the effective date of such first adjustment.''.
       (b) Technical Amendments.--Such section is further 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (d), by inserting ``or on or after August 
     1, 1986, if the member or former member did not elect to 
     receive a bonus under section 322 of title 37'' after 
     ``August 1, 1986,''; and
       (2) in subsection (e), by inserting ``and elected to 
     receive a bonus under section 322 of title 37'' after 
     ``August 1, 1986,''.

     SEC. 644. TECHNICAL REVISIONS TO SO-CALLED ``FORGOTTEN 
                   WIDOWS'' ANNUITY PROGRAM.

       (a) Clarification of Eligibility.--Subsection (a)(1) of 
     section 644 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1998

[[Page H2301]]

     (Public Law 105-85; 10 U.S.C. 1448 note) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by inserting after ``(A)'' the 
     following: ``became entitled to retired or retainer pay 
     before September 21, 1972,''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``was a member of a 
     reserve component of the Armed Forces'' and inserting 
     ``died''.
       (b) Clarification of Interaction With Other Benefits.--(1) 
     Subsection (a)(2) of such section is amended by striking 
     ``and who'' and all that follows through ``note)''.
       (2) Subsection (b)(2) of such section is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(2) The amount of an annuity to which a surviving spouse 
     is entitled under this section for any period shall be 
     reduced (but not below zero) by any amount paid to that 
     surviving spouse for the same period under any of the 
     following provisions of law:
       ``(A) Section 1311(a) of title 38, United States Code 
     (relating to dependency and indemnity compensation payable by 
     the Secretary of Veterans Affairs).
       ``(B) Chapter 73 of title 10, United States Code.
       ``(C) Section 4 of Public Law 92-425 (10 U.S.C. 1448 
     note).''.
       (c) Clarification of Definition of Surviving Spouse.--
     Subsection (d)(2) of such section is amended by striking 
     ``the terms'' and all that follows through ``and (8)'' and 
     inserting ``such term in paragraph (9)''.
       (d) Clarification of Effective Date of Benefits.--
     Subsection (e) of such section is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``the month in which this 
     Act is enacted'' and inserting ``November 1997'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``the first month that 
     begins after the month in which this Act is enacted'' and 
     inserting ``December 1997''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) In the case of a person entitled to an annuity under 
     this section who applies for the annuity after the date of 
     the enactment of this paragraph, such annuity shall be paid 
     only for months beginning after the date on which such 
     application is submitted.''.
       (e) Specification in Law of Current Benefit Amount.--
     Subsection (b) of such section is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``$165'' and inserting 
     ``$185.58''; and
       (2) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by striking ``the date of the enactment of this Act'' 
     and inserting ``May 1, 2002,''; and
       (B) by striking the last sentence.

            Subtitle E--Reserve Component Montgomery GI Bill

     SEC. 651. EXTENSION OF MONTGOMERY GI BILL-SELECTED RESERVE 
                   ELIGIBILITY PERIOD.

       Section 16133(a) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``10-year'' and inserting ``14-year''.

                       Subtitle F--Other Matters

     SEC. 661. ADDITION OF DEFINITION OF CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES 
                   IN TITLE 37.

       (a) Definition.--Section 101(1) of title 37, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     sentence: ``The term `continental United States' means the 48 
     contiguous States and the District of Columbia.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Title 37, United States Code, 
     is amended as follows:
       (1) Section 314(a)(3) is amended by striking ``the 48 
     contiguous States and the District of Columbia'' and 
     inserting ``the continental United States''.
       (2) Section 403b(i) is amended by striking paragraph (6).
       (3) Section 409 is amended by striking subsection (e).
       (4) Section 411b(a) is amended by striking ``the 48 
     contiguous States and the District of Columbia'' both places 
     it appears and inserting ``the continental United States''.
       (5) Section 411d is amended by striking subsection (d).
       (6) Section 430 is amended by striking subsection (f) and 
     inserting the following new subsection (f):
       ``(f) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) The term `formal education' means the following:
       ``(A) A secondary education.
       ``(B) An undergraduate college education.
       ``(C) A graduate education pursued on a full-time basis at 
     an institution of higher education.
       ``(D) Vocational education pursued on a full-time basis at 
     a postsecondary vocational institution.
       ``(2) The term `institution of higher education' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 101 of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001).
       ``(3) The term `postsecondary vocational institution' has 
     the meaning given that term in section 102(c) of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002(c)).''.

                     TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE MATTERS

              Subtitle A--Health Care Program Improvements

     SEC. 701. ELIMINATION OF REQUIREMENT FOR TRICARE 
                   PREAUTHORIZATION OF INPATIENT MENTAL HEALTH 
                   CARE FOR MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE BENEFICIARIES.

       (a) Elimination of Requirement.--Section 1079(i) of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended in paragraph (3) by 
     inserting ``or in the case of a person eligible for health 
     care benefits under section 1086(d)(2) of this title for whom 
     payment for such services is made under subsection 1086(d)(3) 
     of this title'' after ``an emergency''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect October 1, 2004.

     SEC. 702. EXPANSION OF TRICARE PRIME REMOTE FOR CERTAIN 
                   DEPENDENTS.

       (a) Expansion of Eligibility.--Section 1079(p) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended in paragraph (1)--
       (1) by inserting ``(A)'' after ``(1)'';
       (2) by striking ``referred to in subsection (a) of a member 
     of the uniformed services referred to in 1074(c)(3) of this 
     title who are residing with the member'' and inserting 
     ``described in subparagraph (B)''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) A dependent referred to in subparagraph (A) is--
       ``(i) a dependent referred to in subsection (a) of a member 
     of the uniformed services referred to in section 1074(c)(3) 
     of this title, who is residing with the member; or
       ``(ii) a dependent referred to in subsection (a) of a 
     member of the uniformed services with a permanent duty 
     assignment for which the dependent is not authorized to 
     accompany the member and one of the following circumstances 
     exists:
       ``(I) The dependent continues to reside at the location of 
     the former duty assignment of the member (or residence in the 
     case of a member of a reserve component ordered to active 
     duty for a period of more than 30 days), and that location is 
     more than 50 miles, or approximately one hour of driving 
     time, from the nearest military medical treatment facility 
     that can adequately provide needed health care.
       ``(II) There is no reasonable expectation the member will 
     return to the location of the former duty assignment, and the 
     dependent moves to a location that is more than 50 miles, or 
     approximately one hour of driving time, from the nearest 
     military medical treatment facility that can adequately 
     provide needed health care.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect October 1, 2002.

     SEC. 703. ENABLING DEPENDENTS OF CERTAIN MEMBERS WHO DIED 
                   WHILE ON ACTIVE DUTY TO ENROLL IN THE TRICARE 
                   DENTAL PROGRAM.

       Section 1076a(k)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting ``(or, if not enrolled, if the member 
     discontinued participation under subsection (f))'' after 
     ``subsection (a)''.

     SEC. 704. IMPROVEMENTS REGARDING THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
                   MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE RETIREE HEALTH CARE FUND.

       (a) Source of Funds for Monthly Accrual Payments into the 
     Fund.--Section 1116(c) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(c) Amounts paid into the Fund under subsection (a) shall 
     be paid from funds available for the pay of members of the 
     participating uniformed services under the jurisdiction of 
     the respective administering Secretaries.''.
       (b) Mandatory Participation of Other Uniformed Services.--
     Section 1111(c) of such title is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``may enter into an 
     agreement with any other administering Secretary'' and 
     inserting ``shall enter into an agreement with each other 
     administering Secretary''; and
       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``Any'' and 
     inserting ``Each''.

     SEC. 705. CERTIFICATION OF INSTITUTIONAL AND NON-
                   INSTITUTIONAL PROVIDERS UNDER THE TRICARE 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Section 1079 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(q) For purposes of designating institutional and non-
     institutional health care providers authorized to provide 
     care under this section, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     prescribe regulations (in consultation with the other 
     administering Secretaries) that will, to the extent 
     practicable and subject to the limitations of subsection (a), 
     so designate any provider authorized to provide care under 
     title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et 
     seq.).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect October 1, 2003.

     SEC. 706. TECHNICAL CORRECTION REGARDING TRANSITIONAL HEALTH 
                   CARE.

       Effective as of December 28, 2001, section 1145(a)(1) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting ``(and 
     the dependents of the member)'' after ``separated from active 
     duty as described in paragraph (2)''. The amendment made by 
     the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have been enacted 
     as part of section 736 of the National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107).

                          Subtitle B--Reports

     SEC. 711. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON TRICARE CLAIMS 
                   PROCESSING.

       Not later than March 31, 2003, the Comptroller General 
     shall submit to Congress an evaluation of the continuing 
     impediments to a cost effective and provider- and 
     beneficiary-friendly system for claims processing under the 
     TRICARE program. The evaluation shall include a discussion of 
     the following:
       (1) The extent of progress implementing improvements in 
     claims processing, particularly regarding the application of 
     best industry practices.
       (2) The extent of progress in simplifying claims processing 
     procedures, including the elimination of, or reduction in, 
     the complexity of the Health Care Service Record 
     requirements.
       (3) The suitability of a medicare-compatible claims 
     processing system with the data requirements necessary to 
     administer the TRICARE program and related information 
     systems.

[[Page H2302]]

       (4) The extent to which the claims processing system for 
     the TRICARE program impedes provider participation and 
     beneficiary access.
       (5) Recommendations for improving the claims processing 
     system that will reduce processing and administration costs, 
     create greater competition, and improve fraud-prevention 
     activities.

     SEC. 712. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON PROVISION OF CARE 
                   UNDER THE TRICARE PROGRAM.

       Not later than March 31, 2003, the Comptroller General 
     shall submit to Congress an evaluation of the nature of, 
     reasons for, extent of, and trends regarding network provider 
     instability under the TRICARE program, and the effectiveness 
     of efforts by the Department of Defense and managed care 
     support contractors to measure and mitigate such instability. 
     The evaluation shall include a discussion of the following:
       (1) The adequacy of measurement tools of TRICARE network 
     instability and their use by the Department of Defense and 
     managed care support contractors to assess network adequacy 
     and stability.
       (2) Recommendations for improvements needed in measurement 
     tools or their application.
       (3) The relationship of reimbursement rates and 
     administration requirements (including preauthorization 
     requirements) to TRICARE network instability.
       (4) The extent of problems under the TRICARE program and 
     likely future trends with and without intervention using 
     existing authority.
       (5) Use of existing authority by the Department of Defense 
     and TRICARE managed care support contractors to apply higher 
     reimbursement rates in specific geographic areas.
       (6) Recommendations for specific fiscally prudent measures 
     that could mitigate negative trends or improve provider and 
     network stability.

     SEC. 713. REPEAL OF REPORT REQUIREMENT.

       Notwithstanding subsection (f)(2) of section 712 of the 
     Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 2001 (as enacted into law by Public Law 106-398; 114 
     Stat. 1654A-179), the amendment made by subsection (e) of 
     such section shall not take effect and the paragraph amended 
     by such subsection is repealed.

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

     SEC. 801. PLAN FOR ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONAL 
                   EXCHANGE PILOT PROGRAM.

       (a) Plan Required.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
     develop a plan for a pilot program under which--
       (A) an individual in the field of acquisition management 
     employed by the Department of Defense may be temporarily 
     assigned to work in a private sector organization; and
       (B) an individual in such field employed by a private 
     sector organization may be temporarily assigned to work in 
     the Department of Defense.
       (2) In developing the plan under paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary shall address the following:
       (A) The benefits of undertaking such a program.
       (B) The appropriate length of assignments under the 
     program.
       (C) Whether an individual assigned under the program should 
     be compensated by the organization to which the individual is 
     assigned, or the organization from which the individual is 
     assigned.
       (D) The ethics guidelines that should be applied to the 
     program and, if necessary, waivers of ethics laws that would 
     be needed in order to make the program effective and 
     attractive to both Government and private sector employees.
       (E) An assessment of how compensation of individuals 
     suffering employment-related injuries under the program 
     should be addressed.
       (b) Submission to Congress.--Not later than February 1, 
     2003, the Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Armed 
     Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives the 
     plan required under subsection (a).

     SEC. 802. EVALUATION OF TRAINING, KNOWLEDGE, AND RESOURCES 
                   REGARDING NEGOTIATION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 
                   ARRANGEMENTS.

       (a) Availability of Training, Knowledge, and Resources.--
     The Secretary of Defense shall evaluate the training, 
     knowledge, and resources needed by the Department of Defense 
     in order to effectively negotiate intellectual property 
     rights using the principles of the Defense Federal 
     Acquisition Regulation Supplement and determine whether the 
     Department of Defense currently has in place the training, 
     knowledge, and resources available to meet those Departmental 
     needs.
       (b) Report.--Not later than February 1, 2003, the Secretary 
     of Defense shall submit to Congress a report describing--
       (1) the results of the evaluation performed under 
     subsection (a);
       (2) to the extent the Department does not have adequate 
     training, knowledge, and resources available, actions to be 
     taken to improve training and knowledge and to make resources 
     available to meet the Department's needs; and
       (3) the number of Department of Defense legal personnel 
     trained in negotiating intellectual property arrangements.

     SEC. 803. LIMITATION PERIOD FOR TASK AND DELIVERY ORDER 
                   CONTRACTS.

       Chapter 137 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in section 2304a--
       (A) in subsection (e)--
       (i) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``A task''; and
       (ii) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(2) Unless use of procedures other than competitive 
     procedures is authorized by an exception in subsection (c) of 
     section 2304 of this title and approved in accordance with 
     subsection (f) of such section, competitive procedures shall 
     be used for making such a modification.
       ``(3) Notice regarding the modification shall be provided 
     in accordance with section 18 of the Office of Federal 
     Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 416) and section 8(e) of 
     the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(e)).''; and
       (B) by striking subsection (f) and inserting the following:
       ``(f) Limitation on Contract Period.--The base period of a 
     task order contract or delivery order contract entered into 
     under this section may not exceed five years unless a longer 
     period is specifically authorized in a law that is applicable 
     to such contract. The contract may be extended for an 
     additional 5 years (for a total contract period of not more 
     than 10 years) through modifications, options, or 
     otherwise.''; and
       (2) in section 2304b--
       (A) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following:
       ``(a) In General.--A task order contract (as defined in 
     section 2304d of this title) for procurement of advisory and 
     assistance services shall be subject to the requirements of 
     this section, sections 2304a and 2304c of this title, and 
     other applicable provisions of law.'';
       (B) by striking subsections (b), (f), and (g) and 
     redesignating subsections (c), (d), (e), (h), and (i) as 
     subsections (b) through (f);
       (C) by amending subsection (c) (as redesignated by 
     subparagraph (B)) to read as follows:
       ``(c) Required Content of Contract.--A task order contract 
     described in subsection (a) shall contain the same 
     information that is required by section 2304a(b) to be 
     included in the solicitation of offers for that contract.''; 
     and
       (D) in subsection (d) (as redesignated by subparagraph 
     (B))--
       (i) in paragraph (1), by striking ``under this section'' 
     and inserting ``described in subsection (a)''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (2), by striking ``under this section''.

     SEC. 804. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF PROGRAM APPLYING SIMPLIFIED 
                   PROCEDURES TO CERTAIN COMMERCIAL ITEMS; REPORT.

       (a) Extension of Pilot Program.--Section 4202 of the 
     Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (divisions D and E of Public Law 
     104-106; 110 Stat. 652; 10 U.S.C. 2304 note) is amended in 
     subsection (e) by striking ``January 1, 2003'' and inserting 
     ``January 1, 2004''.
       (b) Report Required.--Not later than January 15, 2003, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report on 
     whether the authority to issue solicitations for purchases of 
     commercial items in excess of the simplified acquisition 
     threshold pursuant to the special simplified procedures 
     authorized by section 2304(g)(1) of title 10, United States 
     Code, section 303(g)(1) of the Federal Property and 
     Administrative Services Act of 1949, and section 31(a) of the 
     Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act, should be made 
     permanent.

     SEC. 805. AUTHORITY TO MAKE INFLATION ADJUSTMENTS TO 
                   SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION THRESHOLD.

       Section 4(11) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy 
     Act (41 U.S.C. 403(11)) is amended by inserting ``, except 
     that such amount may be adjusted by the Administrator every 
     five years to the amount equal to $100,000 in constant fiscal 
     year 2002 dollars (rounded to the nearest $10,000)'' before 
     the period at the end.

     SEC. 806. IMPROVEMENT OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND 
                   PROCEDURES APPLICABLE TO THE CIVILIAN 
                   ACQUISITION WORKFORCE.

       (a) Plan Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall develop 
     a plan for improving the personnel management policies and 
     procedures applicable to the Department of Defense civilian 
     acquisition workforce based on the results of the 
     demonstration project described in section 4308 of the 
     Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (division D of Public Law 104-106; 
     10 U.S.C. 1701 note).
       (b) Submission to Congress.--Not later than February 15, 
     2003, the Secretary shall submit to Congress the plan 
     required under subsection (a) and a report including any 
     recommendations for legislative action necessary to implement 
     the plan.

     SEC. 807. MODIFICATION OF SCOPE OF BALL AND ROLLER BEARINGS 
                   COVERED FOR PURPOSES OF PROCUREMENT LIMITATION.

       Section 2534(a)(5) of title 10, United States Code is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``225.71'' and inserting ``225.70'';
       (2) by striking ``October 23, 1992'' and inserting ``April 
     27, 2002''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following: ``In this section 
     the term `ball bearings and roller bearings' includes 
     unconventional or hybrid ball and roller bearings and cam 
     follower bearings, ball screws, and other derivatives of ball 
     and roller bearings.''.

     SEC. 808. RAPID ACQUISITION AND DEPLOYMENT PROCEDURES.

       (a) Requirement To Establish Procedures.--Chapter 141 of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after 
     section 2396 the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2397. Rapid acquisition and deployment procedures

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     establish tailored rapid acquisition and deployment 
     procedures for items urgently needed to react to an enemy 
     threat or to respond to significant and urgent safety 
     situations.
       ``(b) Procedures.--The procedures established under 
     subsection (a) shall include the following:
       ``(1) A process for streamlined communications between the 
     Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the acquisition 
     community, and the testing community.

[[Page H2303]]

       ``(2) A process for expedited technical, programmatic, and 
     financial decisions.
       ``(3) An expedited procurement and contracting process.
       ``(c) Specific Steps To Be Included.--The procedures 
     established under subsection (a) shall provide for the 
     following:
       ``(1) The commander of a unified combatant command may 
     notify the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the need 
     for an item described in subsection (a) that is currently 
     under development.
       ``(2) The Chairman may request the Secretary of Defense to 
     use rapid acquisition and deployment procedures with respect 
     to the item.
       ``(3) The Secretary of Defense shall decide whether to use 
     such procedures with respect to the item and shall notify the 
     Secretary of the appropriate military department of the 
     decision.
       ``(4) If the Secretary of Defense decides to use such 
     procedures with respect to the item, the Secretary of the 
     military department shall prepare a funding strategy for the 
     rapid acquisition of the item and shall conduct a 
     demonstration of the performance of the item.
       ``(5) The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation shall 
     immediately evaluate the existing capability of the item (but 
     under such evaluation shall not assess the capability of the 
     item as regards to the function the item was originally 
     intended to perform).
       ``(6) The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall 
     review the evaluation of the Director of Operational Test and 
     Evaluation and report to the Secretary of Defense regarding 
     whether the capabilities of the tested item are able to meet 
     the urgent need for the item.
       ``(7) The Secretary of Defense shall evaluate the 
     information regarding funding and rapid acquisition prepared 
     pursuant to paragraph (4) and approve or disapprove of the 
     acquisition of the item using the procedures established 
     pursuant to subsection (a).
       ``(d) Limitation.--The quantity of items of a system 
     procured using the procedures established under this section 
     may not exceed the number established for low-rate initial 
     production for the system, and any such items shall be 
     counted for purposes of the number of items of the system 
     that may be procured through low-rate initial production.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 2396 the following new item:

``2397. Rapid acquisition and deployment procedures.''.

     SEC. 809. QUICK-REACTION SPECIAL PROJECTS ACQUISITION TEAM.

       (a) Establishment.--Chapter 141 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 2402 the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 2403. Quick-reaction special projects acquisition team

       ``The Secretary of Defense shall establish a quick-reaction 
     special projects acquisition team, the purpose of which shall 
     be to advise the Secretary on actions that can be taken to 
     expedite the procurement of urgently needed systems. The team 
     shall address problems with the intention of creating 
     expeditious solutions relating to--
       ``(1) industrial-base issues such as the limited 
     availability of suppliers;
       ``(2) compliance with acquisition regulations and lengthy 
     procedures;
       ``(3) compliance with environmental requirements;
       ``(4) compliance with requirements regarding small-business 
     concerns; and
       ``(5) compliance with requirements regarding the purchase 
     of products made in the United States.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 2402 the following new item:

``2403. Quick-reaction special projects acquisition team.''.

     SEC. 810. REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT OF ANTI-CYBERTERRORISM 
                   TECHNOLOGY.

       Not later than February 1, 2003, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to Congress a report on--
       (1) efforts by the Department of Defense to enter into 
     contracts with private entities to develop anticyberterrorism 
     technology; and
       (2) whether such efforts should be increased.

     SEC. 811. CONTRACTING WITH FEDERAL PRISON INDUSTRIES.

       (a) Assuring Best Value for National Defense and Homeland 
     Security.--(1) The Department of Defense or one of the 
     military departments may acquire a product or service from 
     Federal Prison Industries, Inc. only if such acquisition is 
     made through a procurement contract awarded and administered 
     in accordance with chapter 137 of title 10, United States 
     Code, the Federal Acquisition Regulation, and the Department 
     of Defense supplements to such regulation. If a contract is 
     to be awarded to Federal Prison Industries, Inc. by the 
     Department of Defense through other than competitive 
     procedures, authority for such award shall be based upon 
     statutory authority other than chapter 307 of title 18, 
     United States Code.
       (2) The Secretary of Defense shall assure that--
       (A) no purchase of a product or a service is made by the 
     Department of Defense from Federal Prison Industries, Inc. 
     unless the contracting officer determines that--
       (i) the product or service can be timely furnished and will 
     meet the performance needs of the activity that requires the 
     product or service; and
       (ii) the price to be paid does not exceed a fair market 
     price determined by competition or a fair and reasonable 
     price determined by price analysis or cost analysis; and
       (B) Federal Prison Industries, Inc. performs its 
     contractual obligations to the same extent as any other 
     contractor for the Department of Defense.
       (b) Performance as a Subcontractor.--(1) The use of Federal 
     Prison Industries, Inc. as a subcontractor or supplier shall 
     be a wholly voluntary business decision by a Department of 
     Defense prime contractor or subcontractor, subject to any 
     prior approval of subcontractors or suppliers by the 
     contracting officer which may be imposed by regulation or by 
     the contract.
       (2) A defense contractor (or subcontractor at any tier) 
     using Federal Prison Industries, Inc. as a subcontractor or 
     supplier in furnishing a commercial product pursuant to a 
     contract shall implement appropriate management procedures to 
     prevent introducing an inmate-produced product or inmate-
     furnished services into the commercial market.
       (3) Except as authorized under the Federal Acquisition 
     Regulation, the use of Federal Prison Industries, Inc. as a 
     subcontractor or supplier of products or provider of services 
     shall not be imposed upon prospective or actual defense prime 
     contractors or subcontractors at any tier by means of--
       (A) a contract solicitation provision requiring a 
     contractor to offer to make use of Federal Prison Industries, 
     Inc. its products or services;
       (B) specifications requiring the contractor to use specific 
     products or services (or classes of products or services) 
     offered by Federal Prison Industries, Inc. in the performance 
     of the contract;
       (C) any contract modification directing the use of Federal 
     Prison Industries, Inc. its products or services; or
       (D) any other means.
       (c) Protection of Classified and Sensitive Information.--
     The Secretary of Defense shall assure that Federal Prison 
     Industries, Inc. is not permitted to provide services as a 
     contractor or subcontractor at any tier, if an inmate worker 
     has access to--
       (1) data that is classified or will become classified after 
     being merged with other data;
       (2) geographic data regarding the location of surface and 
     subsurface infrastructure providing communications, water and 
     electrical power distribution, pipelines for the distribution 
     of natural gas, bulk petroleum products and other 
     commodities, and other utilities; or
       (3) personal or financial information about individual 
     private citizens, including information relating to such 
     person's real property, however described, without giving 
     prior notice to such persons or class of persons to the 
     greatest extent practicable.
       (d) Regulatory Implementation.--
       (1) Proposed regulations.--Proposed revisions to the 
     Department of Defense Supplement to the Federal Acquisition 
     Regulation to implement this section shall be published not 
     later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act 
     and provide not less than 60 days for public comment.
       (2) Final regulations.--Final regulations shall be 
     published not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act and shall be effective on the date that 
     is 30 days after the date of publication.

                        TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF 
                  DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

     SEC. 901. CHANGE IN TITLE OF SECRETARY OF THE NAVY TO 
                   SECRETARY OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS.

       (a) Change in Title.--The position of the Secretary of the 
     Navy is hereby redesignated as the Secretary of the Navy and 
     Marine Corps.
       (b) References.--Any reference to the Secretary of the Navy 
     in any law, regulation, document, record, or other paper of 
     the United States shall be considered to be a reference to 
     the Secretary of the Navy and Marine Corps.

     SEC. 902. REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF UNITED STATES NORTHERN 
                   COMMAND.

       Not later than September 1, 2002, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
     Senate and the House of Representatives a report providing an 
     implementation plan for the United States Northern Command. 
     The report shall address the following:
       (1) The required budget for standing-up and maintaining 
     that command.
       (2) The location of the headquarters of that command and 
     alternatives considered for that location, together with the 
     criteria used in selection of that location.
       (3) The required manning levels for the command, the effect 
     that command will have on current Department of Defense 
     personnel resources, and the other commands from which 
     personnel will be transferred to provide personnel for that 
     command.
       (4) The chain of command within that command to the 
     component command level and a review of permanently assigned 
     or tasked organizations and units.
       (5) The relationship of that command to the Office of 
     Homeland Security and the Homeland Security Council, to other 
     Federal departments and agencies, and to State and local law 
     enforcement agencies.
       (6) The relationship of that command with the National 
     Guard Bureau, individual State National Guard Headquarters, 
     and civil first responders to ensure continuity of 
     operational plans.
       (7) The legal implications of military forces in their 
     Federal capacity operating on United States territory.
       (8) The status of Department of Defense consultations--
       (A) with Canada regarding Canada's role in, and any 
     expansion of mission for, the North American Air Defense 
     Command; and
       (B) with Mexico regarding Mexico's role in the United 
     States Northern Command.

[[Page H2304]]

       (9) The status of Department of Defense consultations with 
     NATO member nations on efforts to transfer the Supreme Allied 
     Command for the Atlantic from dual assignment with the 
     position of commander of the United States Joint Forces 
     Command.
       (10) The revised mission, budget, and personnel resources 
     required for the United States Joint Forces Command.

     SEC. 903. NATIONAL DEFENSE MISSION OF COAST GUARD TO BE 
                   INCLUDED IN FUTURE QUADRENNIAL DEFENSE REVIEWS.

       Section 118(d) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraph (14) as paragraph (15); and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (13) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(14) The national defense mission of the Coast Guard.''.

     SEC. 904. CHANGE IN YEAR FOR SUBMISSION OF QUADRENNIAL 
                   DEFENSE REVIEW.

       Section 118(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking ``during a year'' and inserting ``during the 
     second year''.

     SEC. 905. REPORT ON EFFECT OF OPERATIONS OTHER THAN WAR ON 
                   COMBAT READINESS OF THE ARMED FORCES.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than February 28, 2004, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed 
     Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of 
     the House of Representatives a report on the effect on the 
     combat readiness of the Armed Forces of operations other than 
     war in which the Armed Forces are participating as of the 
     date of the enactment of this Act (hereinafter in this 
     section referred to as ``current operations other than 
     war''). Such report shall address any such effect on combat 
     readiness for the Armed Forces as a whole and separately for 
     the active components and the reserve components.
       (b) Operations Other Than War.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term ``operations other than war'' includes the 
     followng:
       (1) Humanitarian operations.
       (2) Counter-drug operations.
       (3) Peace operations.
       (4) Nation assistance.
       (c) Matters To Be Addressed.--The report shall, at a 
     minimum, address the following (shown both for the Armed 
     Forces as a whole and separately for the active components 
     and the reserve components):
       (1) With respect to each current operation other than war, 
     the number of members of the Armed Forces who are--
       (A) directly participating in the operation;
       (B) supporting the operation;
       (C) preparing to participate or support an upcoming 
     rotation to the operation; or
       (D) recovering and retraining following participation in 
     the operation.
       (2) The cost to the Department of Defense in time, funds, 
     resources, personnel, and equipment to prepare for, conduct, 
     and recover and retrain from each such operation.
       (3) The effect of participating in such operations on 
     performance, retention, and readiness of individual members 
     of the Armed Forces.
       (4) The effect of such operations on the readiness of 
     forces and units participating, preparing to participate, and 
     returning from participation in such operations.
       (5) The effect that such operations have on forces and 
     units that do not, have not, and will not participate in 
     them.
       (6) The contribution to United States national security and 
     to regional stability of participation by the United States 
     in such operations, to be assessed after receiving the views 
     of the commanders of the regional unified combatant commands.
       (d) Classification of Report.--The report may be provided 
     in classified or unclassified form as necessary.

     SEC. 906. CONFORMING AMENDMENT TO REFLECT DISESTABLISHMENT OF 
                   DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CONSEQUENCE MANAGEMENT 
                   PROGRAM INTEGRATION OFFICE.

       Section 12310(c)(3) of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``only--'' and all that follows through 
     ``(B) while assigned'' and inserting ``only while assigned''.

                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                     Subtitle A--Financial Matters

     SEC. 1001. TRANSFER AUTHORITY.

       (a) Authority To Transfer Authorizations.--(1) Upon 
     determination by the Secretary of Defense that such action is 
     necessary in the national interest, the Secretary may 
     transfer amounts of authorizations made available to the 
     Department of Defense in this division for fiscal year 2003 
     between any such authorizations for that fiscal year (or any 
     subdivisions thereof). Amounts of authorizations so 
     transferred shall be merged with and be available for the 
     same purposes as the authorization to which transferred.
       (2) The total amount of authorizations that the Secretary 
     may transfer under the authority of this section may not 
     exceed $2,000,000,000.
       (b) Limitations.--The authority provided by this section to 
     transfer authorizations--
       (1) may only be used to provide authority for items that 
     have a higher priority than the items from which authority is 
     transferred; and
       (2) may not be used to provide authority for an item that 
     has been denied authorization by Congress.
       (c) Effect on Authorization Amounts.--A transfer made from 
     one account to another under the authority of this section 
     shall be deemed to increase the amount authorized for the 
     account to which the amount is transferred by an amount equal 
     to the amount transferred.
       (d) Notice to Congress.--The Secretary shall promptly 
     notify Congress of each transfer made under subsection (a).

     SEC. 1002. AUTHORIZATION OF SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR 
                   FISCAL YEAR 2002.

       (a) DOD Authorizations.--Amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 
     2002 in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107) are hereby adjusted, with 
     respect to any such authorized amount, by the amount by which 
     appropriations pursuant to such authorization are increased 
     (by a supplemental appropriation) or decreased (by a 
     rescission), or both, or are increased by a transfer of 
     funds, pursuant to the following:
       (1) Chapter 3 of the Emergency Supplemental Act, 2002 
     (division B of Public Law 107-117; 115 Stat. 2299).
       (2) Any Act enacted after May 1, 2002, making supplemental 
     appropriations for fiscal year 2002 for the military 
     functions of the Department of Defense.
       (b) NNSA Authorizations.--Amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of Energy for fiscal year 2002 
     in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     2002 (Public Law 107-107) are hereby adjusted, with respect 
     to any such authorized amount, by the amount by which 
     appropriations pursuant to such authorization are increased 
     (by a supplemental appropriation) or decreased (by a 
     rescission), or both, or are increased by a transfer of 
     funds, pursuant to the following:
       (1) Chapter 5 of the Emergency Supplemental Act, 2002 
     (division B of Public Law 107-117; 115 Stat. 2307).
       (2) Any Act enacted after May 1, 2002, making supplemental 
     appropriations for fiscal year 2002 for the atomic energy 
     defense activities of the Department of Energy.
       (c) Limitation on Transfers Pending Submission of Report.--
     Any amount provided for the Department of Defense for fiscal 
     year 2002 through a so-called `transfer account'', including 
     the Defense Emergency Response Fund or any other similar 
     account, may be transferred to another account for obligation 
     only after the Secretary of Defense submits to the 
     congressional defense committees a report stating, for each 
     such transfer, the amount of the transfer, the appropriation 
     account to which the transfer is to be made, and the specific 
     purpose for which the transferred funds will be used.
       (d) Emergency Designation Requirement.--(1) In the case of 
     a pending contingent emergency supplemental appropriation for 
     the military functions of the Department of Defense or the 
     atomic energy defense activities of the Department of Energy, 
     an adjustment may be made under subsection (a) or (b) in the 
     amount of an authorization of appropriations by reason of 
     that supplemental appropriation only if, and to the extent 
     that, the President transmits to Congress an official budget 
     request for that appropriation that designates the entire 
     amount requested as an emergency requirement.
       (2) For purposes of this subsection, the term ``contingent 
     emergency supplemental appropriation'' means a supplemental 
     appropriation that--
       (A) is designated by Congress as an emergency requirement 
     pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget and 
     Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985; and
       (B) by law is available only to the extent that the 
     President transmits to the Congress an official budget 
     request for that appropriation that includes designation of 
     the entire amount of the request as an emergency requirement.

     SEC. 1003. UNIFORM STANDARDS THROUGHOUT DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
                   FOR EXPOSURE OF PERSONNEL TO PECUNIARY 
                   LIABILITY FOR LOSS OF GOVERNMENT PROPERTY.

       (a) Extension of Army and Air Force Report-of-Survey 
     Procedures to Navy and Marine Corps and all DOD Civilian 
     Employees.--(1) Chapter 165 of title 10, United States Code, 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2787. Reports of survey

       ``(a) Regulations.--Under such regulations as the Secretary 
     of Defense may prescribe, any officer of the Army, Navy, Air 
     Force, or Marine Corps or any civilian employee of the 
     Department of Defense designated by the Secretary may act 
     upon reports of surveys and vouchers pertaining to the loss, 
     spoilage, unserviceability, unsuitability, or destruction of, 
     or damage to, property of the United States under the control 
     of the Department of Defense.
       ``(b) Finality of Action.--Action taken under subsection 
     (a) is final, except that action holding a person pecuniarily 
     liable for loss, spoilage, destruction, or damage is not 
     final until approved by the Secretary.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

``2787. Reports of survey.''.

       (b) Extension to Members of the Navy and Marine Corps of 
     Pay Deduction Authority Pertaining to Damage or Repair of 
     Arms and Equipment .--Section 1007(e) of title 37, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking ``Army or the Air Force'' 
     and inserting ``Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps''.
       (c) Repeal of Superceded Provisions.--(1) Sections 4835 and 
     9835 of title 10, United States Code, are repealed.
       (2)(A) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 
     453 of such title is amended by striking the item relating to 
     section 4835.
       (B) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 953 
     of such title is amended by striking the item relating to 
     section 9835.

     SEC. 1004. ACCOUNTABLE OFFICIALS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF 
                   DEFENSE.

       (a) Accountable Officials Within the Department of 
     Defense.--Chapter 165 of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting after section 2773 the following new 
     section:

[[Page H2305]]

     ``Sec. 2773a. Departmental accountable officials

       ``(a) Designation.--(1) The Secretary of Defense may 
     designate as a `departmental accountable official' any 
     civilian employee of the Department of Defense or member of 
     the armed forces under the Secretary's jurisdiction who is 
     described in paragraph (2). Any such designation shall be in 
     writing.
       ``(2) An employee or member of the armed forces described 
     in this paragraph is an employee or member who is responsible 
     in the performance of the employee's or member's duties for 
     providing to a certifying official of the Department of 
     Defense information, data, or services that are directly 
     relied upon by the certifying official in the certification 
     of vouchers for payment.
       ``(b) Pecuniary Liability.--(1) The Secretary of Defense 
     may impose pecuniary liability on a departmental accountable 
     official to the extent that an illegal, improper, or 
     incorrect payment results from the information, data, or 
     services that that official provides to a certifying official 
     and upon which the certifying official directly relies in 
     certifying the voucher supporting that payment.
       ``(2) The pecuniary liability of a departmental accountable 
     official under this subsection for such an illegal, improper, 
     or incorrect payment is joint and several with that of any 
     other officials who are pecuniarily liable for such payment.
       ``(c) Relief from Liability.--The Secretary of Defense 
     shall relieve a departmental accountable official from 
     liability under subsection (b) if the Secretary determines 
     that the illegal, improper, or incorrect payment was not the 
     result of fault or negligence by that official.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 2773 the following new item:

``2773a. Departmental accountable officials.''.

     SEC. 1005. IMPROVEMENTS IN PURCHASE CARD MANAGEMENT.

       (a) In General.--Section 2784 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 2784. Management of purchase cards

       ``(a) Management of Purchase Cards.--The Secretary of 
     Defense, acting through the Under Secretary of Defense 
     (Comptroller), shall prescribe regulations governing the use 
     and control of all purchase cards and convenience checks that 
     are issued to Department of Defense personnel for official 
     use. Those regulations shall be consistent with regulations 
     that apply Government-wide regarding use of purchase cards by 
     Government personnel for official purposes.
       ``(b) Required Safeguards and Internal Controls.--
     Regulations under subsection (a) shall include safeguards and 
     internal controls to ensure the following:
       ``(1) That there is a record in the Department of Defense 
     of each holder of a purchase card issued by the Department of 
     Defense for official use, annotated with the limitations on 
     amounts that are applicable to the use of each such card by 
     that purchase card holder.
       ``(2) That the holder of a purchase card and each official 
     with authority to authorize expenditures charged to the 
     purchase card are responsible for--
       ``(A) reconciling the charges appearing on each statement 
     of account for that purchase card with receipts and other 
     supporting documentation; and
       ``(B) forwarding that statement after being so reconciled 
     to the designated disbursing office in a timely manner.
       ``(3) That any disputed purchase card charge, and any 
     discrepancy between a receipt and other supporting 
     documentation and the purchase card statement of account, is 
     resolved in the manner prescribed in the applicable 
     Government-wide purchase card contract entered into by the 
     Administrator of General Services.
       ``(4) That payments on purchase card accounts are made 
     promptly within prescribed deadlines to avoid interest 
     penalties.
       ``(5) That rebates and refunds based on prompt payment on 
     purchase card accounts are properly recorded.
       ``(6) That records of each purchase card transaction 
     (including records on associated contracts, reports, 
     accounts, and invoices) are retained in accordance with 
     standard Government policies on the disposition of records.
       ``(7) That an annual review is performed of the use of 
     purchase cards issued by the Department of Defense to 
     determine whether each purchase card holder has a need for 
     the purchase card.
       ``(8) That the Inspectors General of the Department of 
     Defense and the military services perform periodic audits 
     with respect to the use of purchase cards issued by the 
     Department of Defense to ensure that such use is in 
     compliance with regulations.
       ``(9) That appropriate annual training is provided to each 
     purchase card holder and each official with responsibility 
     for overseeing the use of purchase cards issued by the 
     Department of Defense.
       ``(c) Penalties for Violations.--The Secretary shall 
     provide in the regulations prescribed under subsection (a)--
       ``(1) that procedures are implemented providing for 
     appropriate punishment of employees of the Department of 
     Defense for violations of such regulations and for 
     negligence, misuse, abuse, or fraud with respect to a 
     purchase card, including dismissal in appropriate cases; and
       ``(2) that a violation of such regulations by a person 
     subject to chapter 47 of this title (the Uniform Code of 
     Military Justice) is punishable as a violation of section 892 
     of this title (article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military 
     Justice).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The item relating to section 2784 
     in the table of sections at the beginning of chapter 165 of 
     such title is amended to read as follows:

``2784. Management of purchase cards.''.

     SEC. 1006. AUTHORITY TO TRANSFER FUNDS WITHIN A MAJOR 
                   ACQUISITION PROGRAM FROM PROCUREMENT TO RDT&E.

       (a) Program Flexibility.--(1) Chapter 131 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 
     2214 the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2214a. Transfer of funds: transfers from procurement 
       accounts to research and development accounts for major 
       acquisition programs

       ``(a) Transfer Authority Within Major Programs.--Subject to 
     subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense may transfer amounts 
     provided in an appropriation Act for procurement for a 
     covered acquisition program to amounts provided in the same 
     appropriation Act for research, development, test, and 
     evaluation for that program.
       ``(b) Congressional Notice-and-Wait.--A transfer may be 
     made under this section only after--
       ``(1) the Secretary submits to the congressional defense 
     committees notice in writing of the Secretary's intent to 
     make such transfer, together with the Secretary's 
     justification for the transfer; and
       ``(2) a period of 30 days has elapsed following the date of 
     such notification.
       ``(c) Limitations.--From amounts appropriated for the 
     Department of Defense for any fiscal year for procurement--
       ``(1) the total amount transferred under this section may 
     not exceed $250,000,000; and
       ``(2) the total amount so transferred for any acquisition 
     program may not exceed $20,000,000.
       ``(d) Covered Acquisition Programs.--In this section, the 
     term `covered acquisition program' means an acquisition 
     program of the Department of Defense that is--
       ``(A) a major defense acquisition program for purposes of 
     chapter 144 of this title; or
       ``(B) any other acquisition program of the Department of 
     Defense--
       ``(i) that is designated by the Secretary of Defense as a 
     covered acquisition program for purposes of this section; or
       ``(ii) that is estimated by the Secretary of Defense to 
     require an eventual total expenditure for research, 
     development, test, and evaluation of more than $140,000,000 
     (based on fiscal year 2000 constant dollars) or an eventual 
     total expenditure for procurement of more than $660,000,000 
     (based on fiscal year 2000 constant dollars.)
       ``(e) Transfer Back of Unused Transferred Funds.--If funds 
     transferred under this section are not used for the purposes 
     for which transferred, such funds shall be transferred back 
     to the account from which transferred and shall be available 
     for their original purpose.
       ``(f) Additional Authority.--The transfer authority 
     provided in this section is in addition to any other transfer 
     authority available to the Secretary of Defense.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     2214 the following new item:

``2214a. Transfer of funds: transfers from procurement accounts to 
              research and development accounts for major acquisition 
              programs.''.

       (b) Effective Date.--Section 2214a of title 10, United 
     States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall not apply with 
     respect to funds appropriated before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 1007. DEVELOPMENT AND PROCUREMENT OF FINANCIAL AND 
                   NONFINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS.

       (a) Report.--Not later than March 1, 2003, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees 
     a report on the modernization of the Department of Defense's 
     financial management systems and operations. The report shall 
     include the following:
       (1) The goals and objectives of the Financial Management 
     Modernization Program.
       (2) The acquisition strategy for that Program, including 
     milestones, performance metrics, and financial and 
     nonfinancial resource needs.
       (3) A listing of all operational and developmental 
     financial and nonfinancial management systems in use by the 
     Department, the related costs to operate and maintain those 
     systems during fiscal year 2002, and the estimated cost to 
     operate and maintain those systems during fiscal year 2003.
       (4) An estimate of the completion date of a transition plan 
     that will identify which of the Department's operational and 
     developmental financial management systems will not be part 
     of the objective financial and nonfinancial management system 
     and that provides the schedule for phase out of those legacy 
     systems.
       (b) Limitations.--(1) A contract described in subsection 
     (c) may be entered into using funds made available to the 
     Department of Defense for fiscal year 2003 only with the 
     approval in advance in writing of the Under Secretary of 
     Defense (Comptroller).
       (2) Not more than 75 percent of the funds authorized to be 
     appropriated in section 201(4) for research, development, 
     test, and evaluation for the Department of Defense Financial 
     Modernization Program (Program Element 65016D8Z) may be 
     obligated until the report required by subsection (a) is 
     received by the congressional defense committees.
       (c) Covered Contracts.--Subsection (b)(1) applies to a 
     contract for the procurement of any of the following:
       (1) An enterprise architecture system.
       (2) A finance or accounting system.
       (3) A nonfinancial business and feeder system.
       (4) An upgrade to any system specified in paragraphs (1) 
     through (3).

[[Page H2306]]

       (d) Definitions.--As used in this section:
       (1) Financial management system and operations.--The term 
     ``financial management system and operations'' means 
     financial, financial related, and non-financial business 
     operations and systems used for acquisition programs, 
     transportation, travel, property, inventory, supply, medical, 
     budget formulation, financial reporting, and accounting. Such 
     term includes the automated and manual processes, procedures, 
     controls, data, hardware, software, and support personnel 
     dedicated to the operations and maintenance of system 
     functions.
       (2) Feeder systems.--The term ``feeder systems'' means 
     financial portions of mixed systems.
       (3) Developmental systems and projects.--The term 
     ``developmental systems and projects'' means any system that 
     has not reached Milestone C, as defined in the Department of 
     Defense 5000-series regulations.

                          Subtitle B--Reports

     SEC. 1011. AFTER-ACTION REPORTS ON THE CONDUCT OF MILITARY 
                   OPERATIONS CONDUCTED AS PART OF OPERATION 
                   ENDURING FREEDOM.

       (a) Report Required.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall 
     submit to the congressional committees specified in 
     subsection (c) two reports on the conduct of military 
     operations conducted as part of Operation Enduring Freedom. 
     The first report (which shall be an interim report) shall be 
     submitted not later than June 15, 2003. The second report 
     shall be submitted not later than 180 days after the date (as 
     determined by the Secretary of Defense) of the cessation of 
     hostilities undertaken as part of Operation Enduring Freedom.
       (2) Each report shall be prepared in consultation with the 
     Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the commander-in-chief 
     of the United States Central Command, and the Director of 
     Central Intelligence.
       (3) Each report shall be submitted in both a classified 
     form and an unclassified form.
       (b) Matters To Be Included.--Each report shall contain a 
     discussion of accomplishments and shortcomings of the overall 
     military operation. The report shall specifically include the 
     following:
       (1) A discussion of the command, control, coordination, and 
     support relationship between United States Special Operations 
     Forces and Central Intelligence Agency elements participating 
     in Operation Enduring Freedom and any lessons learned from 
     the joint conduct of operations by those forces and elements.
       (2) Recommendations to improve operational readiness and 
     effectiveness.
       (c) Congressional Committees.--The committees referred to 
     in subsection (a)(1) are the following:
       (1) The Committee on Armed Services and the Select 
     Committee on Intelligence of the Senate.
       (2) The Committee on Armed Services and the Permanent 
     Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of 
     Representatives.

     SEC. 1012. REPORT ON BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS DEFENSE AND COUNTER-
                   PROLIFERATION.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
     Senate and the House of Representatives a report--
       (1) describing programs and initiatives to halt, counter, 
     and defend against the development, production, and 
     proliferation of biological weapons agents, technology, and 
     expertise to terrorist organizations and other States; and
       (2) including a detailed list of the limitations and 
     impediments to the biological weapons defense, 
     nonproliferation, and counterproliferation efforts of the 
     Department of Defense, and recommendations to remove such 
     impediments and to make such efforts more effective.
       (b) Classification.--The report may be submitted in 
     unclassified or classified form as necessary.

     SEC. 1013. REQUIREMENT THAT DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE REPORTS TO 
                   CONGRESS BE ACCOMPANIED BY ELECTRONIC VERSION.

       Section 480(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking ``shall, upon request'' and all that follows 
     through ``(or each'' and inserting ``shall provide to 
     Congress (or''.

     SEC. 1014. STRATEGIC FORCE STRUCTURE PLAN FOR NUCLEAR WEAPONS 
                   AND DELIVERY SYSTEMS.

       (a) Plan Required.--The Secretary of Defense and the 
     Secretary of Energy shall jointly prepare a plan for the 
     United States strategic force structure for nuclear weapons 
     and nuclear weapons delivery systems for the period of fiscal 
     years from 2002 through 2012. The plan shall--
       (1) delineate a baseline strategic force structure for such 
     weapons and systems over such period consistent with the 
     Nuclear Posture Review dated January 2002;
       (2) define sufficient force structure, force modernization 
     and life extension plans, infrastructure, and other elements 
     of the defense program of the United States associated with 
     such weapons and systems that would be required to execute 
     successfully the full range of missions called for in the 
     national defense strategy delineated in the Quadrennial 
     Defense Review dated September 30, 2001, under section 118 of 
     title 10, United States Code; and
       (3) identify the budget plan that would be required to 
     provide sufficient resources to execute successfully the full 
     range of missions using such force structure called for in 
     that national defense strategy.
       (b) Report.--(1) The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary 
     of Energy shall submit a report on the plan to the 
     congressional defense committees. Except as provided in 
     paragraph (2), the report shall be submitted not later than 
     January 1, 2003.
       (2) If before January 1, 2003, the President submits to 
     Congress the President's certification that it is in the 
     national security interest of the United States that such 
     report be submitted on a later date (to be specified by the 
     President in the certification), such report shall be 
     submitted not later than such later date.

     SEC. 1015. REPORT ON ESTABLISHMENT OF A JOINT NATIONAL 
                   TRAINING COMPLEX AND JOINT OPPOSING FORCES.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than six months after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate 
     and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of 
     Representatives a report that outlines a plan to develop and 
     implement a joint national training complex. Such a complex 
     may include multiple joint training sites and mobile training 
     ranges and appropriate joint opposing forces and shall be 
     capable of supporting field exercises and experimentation at 
     the operational level of war across a broad spectrum of 
     adversary capabilities.
       (b) Matters To Be Included.--The report under subsection 
     (a) shall include the following:
       (1) An identification and description of the types of joint 
     training and experimentation that would be conducted at such 
     a joint national training complex, together with a 
     description of how such training and experimentation would 
     enhance accomplishment of the six critical operational goals 
     for the Department of Defense specified at page 30 of the 
     Quadrennial Defense Review Report of the Secretary of Defense 
     issued on September 30, 2001.
       (2) A discussion of how establishment of such a complex 
     (including joint opposing forces) would promote innovation 
     and transformation throughout the Department of Defense.
       (3) A discussion of how results from training and 
     experiments conducted at such a complex would be taken into 
     consideration in the Department of Defense plans, programs, 
     and budgeting process and by appropriate decision making 
     bodies within the Department of Defense.
       (4) A methodology, framework, and options for selecting 
     sites for such a complex, including consideration of current 
     training facilities that would accommodate requirements among 
     all the Armed Forces.
       (5) Options for development as part of such a complex of a 
     joint urban warfare training center that could also be used 
     for homeland defense and consequence management training for 
     Federal, State, and local training.
       (6) Cost estimates and resource requirements to establish 
     and maintain such a complex, including estimates of costs and 
     resource requirements for the use of contract personnel for 
     the performance of management, operational, and logistics 
     activities for such a complex .
       (7) An explanation of the relationship between and among 
     such a complex and the Department of Defense Office of 
     Transformation, the Joint Staff, the United States Joint 
     Forces Command, the United States Northern Command, and each 
     element of the major commands within the separate Armed 
     Forces with responsibility for experimentation and training.
       (8) A discussion of how implementation of a joint opposing 
     force would be established, including the feasibility of 
     using qualified contractors for the function of establishing 
     and maintaining joint opposing forces and the role of foreign 
     forces.
       (9) Submission of a time line to establish such a center 
     and for such a center to achieve initial operational 
     capability and full operational capability.

     SEC. 1016. REPEAL OF VARIOUS REPORTS REQUIRED OF THE 
                   DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.

       (a) Provisions of Title 10.--Title 10, United States Code, 
     is amended as follows:
       (1)(A) Section 230 is repealed.
       (B) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 9 is 
     amended by striking the item relating to section 230.
       (2) Section 526 is amended by striking subsection (c).
       (3) Section 721(d) is amended--
       (A) by striking paragraph (2); and
       (B) by striking ``(1)'' before ``If an officer''.
       (4) Section 986 is amended by striking subsection (e).
       (5) Section 1095(g) is amended--
       (A) by striking paragraph (2); and
       (B) by striking ``(1)'' after ``(g)''.
       (6) Section 1798 is amended by striking subsection (d).
       (7) Section 1799 is amended by striking subsection (d).
       (8) Section 2010 is amended by striking subsection (b).
       (9) Section 2327(c)(1) is amended--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``after the date on 
     which such head of an agency submits to Congress a report on 
     the contract'' and inserting ``if in the best interests of 
     the Government''; and
       (B) by striking subparagraph (B).
       (10) Section 2350f is amended by striking subsection (c).
       (11) Section 2350k is amended by striking subsection (d).
       (12) Section 2492 is amended by striking subsection (c).
       (13) Section 2493 is amended by striking subsection (g).
       (14) Section 2563(c)(2) is amended by striking ``and 
     notifies Congress regarding the reasons for the waiver''.
       (15) Section 2611 is amended by striking subsection (e).
       (16) Sections 4357, 6975, and 9356 are each amended--
       (A) by striking subsection (c); and
       (B) in subsection (a), by striking ``Subject to subsection 
     (c), the Secretary'' and inserting ``The Secretary''.

[[Page H2307]]

       (17) Section 4416 is amended by striking subsection (f).
       (18) Section 5721(f) is amended--
       (A) by striking paragraph (2); and
       (B) by striking ``(1)'' after the subsection heading.
       (19) Section 12302 is amended--
       (A) in subsection (b), by striking the last sentence; and
       (B) by striking subsection (d).
       (b) National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     1995.--Section 553(b) of the National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 2772; 
     10 U.S.C. 4331 note) is amended by striking the last 
     sentence.

     SEC. 1017. REPORT ON THE ROLE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE IN 
                   SUPPORTING HOMELAND SECURITY.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than December 31, 2002, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional 
     defense committees a report on Department of Defense 
     responsibilities, mission, and plans for military support of 
     homeland security.
       (b) Content of Report.--The report shall include, but not 
     be limited to, a discussion of the following:
       (1) Changes in organization regarding the roles, mission, 
     and responsibilities carried out by the Department of Defense 
     to support its homeland security mission and the reasons for 
     those changes based upon the findings of the study and report 
     required by section 1511 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107; 
     115 Stat. 1271).
       (2) Changes in the roles, missions, and responsibilities of 
     the Department of the Army, the Department of the Navy, and 
     the Department of the Air Force with respect to homeland 
     security and the reasons for such changes.
       (3) Changes in the roles, missions, and responsibilities of 
     unified commands with homeland security missions and the 
     reasons for such changes.
       (4) Changes in the roles, missions, and responsibilities of 
     the United States Joint Forces Command and the United States 
     Northern Command in expanded homeland security training and 
     experimentation involving the Department of Defense and other 
     Federal, State, and local entities, and the reasons for such 
     changes.
       (5) Changes in the roles, missions, and responsibilities of 
     the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard in the 
     homeland security mission of the Department of Defense, and 
     the reasons for such changes.
       (6) The status of the unconventional nuclear warfare 
     defense test bed program established in response to title IX 
     of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2002 
     (division A of Public Law 107-117; 115 Stat. 2289), including 
     the plan and program for establishing such test beds.
       (7) The plans and status of the Department of Defense 
     homeland security biological defense program, including the 
     plans and status of--
       (A) the biological counter terrorism research program;
       (B) the biological defense homeland security support 
     program;
       (C) pilot programs for establishing biological defense test 
     beds on Department of Defense installations and in selected 
     urban areas of the United States;
       (D) programs for expanding the capacity of the Department 
     of Defense to meet increased demand for vaccines against 
     biological agents; and
       (E) any plans to coordinate Department of Defense work in 
     biological defense programs with other Federal, State, and 
     local programs.
       (8) Recommendations for legislative changes that may be 
     required to execute the roles and missions set forth in 
     Department of Defense homeland security plans.

     SEC. 1018. REPORT ON EFFECTS OF NUCLEAR EARTH PENETRATOR 
                   WEAPONS AND OTHER WEAPONS.

       (a) NAS Study.--The Secretary of Defense shall request the 
     National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study and prepare a 
     report on the anticipated short-term and long-term effects of 
     the use of a nuclear earth penetrator weapon on the target 
     area, including the effects on civilian populations in 
     proximity to the target area and on United States military 
     personnel performing operations and battle damage assessments 
     in the target area, and the anticipated short-term and long-
     term effects on the civilian population in proximity to the 
     target area if--
       (1) a non-penetrating nuclear weapon is used to destroy 
     hard or deeply-buried targets; or
       (2) a conventional high-explosive weapon is used to destroy 
     an adversary's weapons of mass destruction storage or 
     production facilities, and radioactive, nuclear, biological, 
     or chemical weapons materials, agents, or other contaminants 
     are released or spread into populated areas.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
     the report under subsection (a), together with any comments 
     the Secretary may consider appropriate on the report. The 
     report shall be submitted in unclassified form to the maximum 
     extent possible, with a classified annex if needed.

     SEC. 1019. REPORT ON EFFECTS OF NUCLEAR-TIPPED BALLISTIC 
                   MISSILE INTERCEPTORS AND NUCLEAR MISSILES NOT 
                   INTERCEPTED.

       (a) NAS Study.--The Secretary of Defense shall request the 
     National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study and prepare a 
     report on the anticipated short-term and long-term effects of 
     the use of a nuclear-tipped ballistic missile interceptor, 
     including the effects on civilian populations and on United 
     States military personnel in proximity to the target area, 
     and the immediate, short-term, and long-term effects on the 
     civilian population of a major city of the United States, and 
     the Nation as a whole, if a ballistic missile carrying a 
     nuclear weapon is not intercepted and detonates directly 
     above a major city of the United States.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
     the report under subsection (a), together with any comments 
     the Secretary may consider appropriate on the report. The 
     report shall be submitted in unclassified form to the maximum 
     extent possible, with a classified annex if needed.

                       Subtitle C--Other Matters

     SEC. 1021. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON MAINTENANCE OF A RELIABLE, 
                   FLEXIBLE, AND ROBUST STRATEGIC DETERRENT.

       It is the sense of Congress that, consistent with the 
     national defense strategy delineated in the Quadrennial 
     Defense Review dated September 30, 2001 (as submitted under 
     section 118 of title 10, United States Code), the Nuclear 
     Posture Review dated January 2002, and the global strategic 
     environment, the President should, to defend the Nation, 
     deter aggressors and potential adversaries, assure friends 
     and allies, defeat enemies, dissuade competitors, advance the 
     foreign policy goals and vital interests of the United 
     States, and generally ensure the national security of the 
     United States, take the following actions:
       (1) Maintain an operationally deployed strategic force of 
     not less than 1,700 nuclear weapons for immediate and 
     unexpected contingencies.
       (2) Maintain a responsive force of non-deployed nuclear 
     weapons for potential contingencies at readiness and 
     numerical levels determined to be--
       (A) essential to the execution of the Single Integrated 
     Operational Plan; or
       (B) necessary to maintain strategic flexibility and 
     capability in accordance with the findings and conclusions of 
     such Nuclear Posture Review.
       (3) Develop advanced conventional weapons, and nuclear 
     weapons, capable of destroying--
       (A) hard and deeply buried targets; and
       (B) enemy weapons of mass destruction and the development 
     and production facilities of such enemy weapons.
       (4) Develop a plan to achieve and maintain the capability 
     to resume conducting underground tests of nuclear weapons 
     within one year after a decision is made to resume conducting 
     such tests, so as to have the means to maintain robust and 
     adaptive strategic forces through a ready, responsive, and 
     capable nuclear infrastructure, as prescribed in such Nuclear 
     Posture Review.
       (5) Develop a plan to revitalize the Nation's nuclear 
     weapons industry and infrastructure so as to facilitate the 
     development and production of safer, more reliable, and more 
     effective nuclear weapons.

     SEC. 1022. TIME FOR TRANSMITTAL OF ANNUAL DEFENSE 
                   AUTHORIZATION LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 2 of title 10, United States Code, 
     is amended by inserting after section 113 the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 113a. Transmission of annual defense authorization 
       request

       ``(a) Time for Transmittal.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     transmit to Congress the annual defense authorization request 
     for a fiscal year during the first 30 days after the date on 
     which the President transmits to Congress the budget for that 
     fiscal year pursuant to section 1105 of title 31.
       ``(b) Defense Authorization Request Defined.--In this 
     section, the term `defense authorization request', with 
     respect to a fiscal year, means a legislative proposal 
     submitted to Congress for the enactment of the following:
       ``(1) Authorizations of appropriations for that fiscal 
     year, as required by section 114 of this title.
       ``(2) Personnel strengths for that fiscal year, as required 
     by section 115 of this title.
       ``(3) Any other matter that is proposed by the Secretary of 
     Defense to be enacted as part of the annual defense 
     authorization bill for that fiscal year.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 113 the following new item:

``113a. Transmission of annual defense authorization request.''.

     SEC. 1023. TECHNICAL AND CLERICAL AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Title 10, United States Code.--Title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended as follows:
       (1) Section 153 is amended by inserting ``(a) Planning; 
     Advice; Policy Formulation.--'' at the beginning of the text.
       (2) Section 663(e)(2) is amended by striking ``Armed Forces 
     Staff College'' and inserting ``Joint Forces Staff College''.
       (3) Section 2399(a)(2) is amended--
       (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``means--'' and inserting ``means a conventional weapons 
     system that--''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``a conventional 
     weapons system that''.
       (4)(A) Section 2410h is transferred to the end of 
     subchapter IV of chapter 87 and is redesignated as section 
     1747.
       (B) The item relating to that section in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 141 is transferred to 
     the end of the table of sections at the beginning of 
     subchapter IV of chapter 87 and is amended to reflect the 
     redesignation made by subparagraph (A).
       (5) Section 2677 is amended by striking subsection (c).
       (6) Section 2680(e) is amended by striking ``the'' after 
     ``the Committee on'' the first place it appears.
       (7) Section 2815(b) is amended by striking ``for fiscal 
     year 2003 and each fiscal year thereafter'' and inserting 
     ``for any fiscal year''.
       (8) Section 2828(b)(2) is amended by inserting ``time'' 
     after ``from time to''.

[[Page H2308]]

       (b) Title 37, United States Code.--Title 37, United States 
     Code, is amended as follows:
       (1) Section 302j(a) is amended by striking ``subsection 
     (c)'' and inserting ``subsection (d)''.
       (2) Section 324(b) is amended by striking ``(1)'' before 
     ``The Secretary''.
       (c) Public Law 107-107.--Effective as of December 28, 2001, 
     and as if included therein as enacted, the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107) 
     is amended as follows:
       (1) Section 602(a)(2) (115 Stat. 1132) is amended by 
     striking ``an'' in the first quoted matter.
       (2) Section 1410(a)(3)(C) (115 Stat. 1266) by inserting 
     ``both places it appears'' before ``and inserting''.
       (3) Section 3007(d)(1)(C) (115 Stat. 1352) is amended by 
     striking ``2905(b)(7)(B)(iv)'' and inserting 
     ``2905(b)(7)(C)(iv)''.
       (d) Public Law 106-398.--Effective as of October 30, 2000, 
     and as if included therein as enacted, the Floyd D. Spence 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (as 
     enacted into law by Public Law 106-398) is amended as 
     follows:
       (1) Section 577(b)(2) (114 Stat. 1654A-140) is amended by 
     striking ``Federal'' in the quoted matter and inserting 
     ``Department of Defense''.
       (2) Section 612(c)(4)(B) (114 Stat. 1654A-150) is amended 
     by striking the comma at the end of the first quoted matter.
       (e) Public Law 106-65.--The National Defense Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) is amended as 
     follows:
       (1) Section 573(b) (10 U.S.C. 513 note) is amended by 
     inserting a period at the end of paragraph (2).
       (2) Section 1305(6) (22 U.S.C. 5952 note) is amended by 
     striking the first period after ``facility''.
       (f) Title 14, United States Code.--Section 516(c) of title 
     14, United States Code, is amended by striking ``his 
     section'' and inserting ``this section''.

     SEC. 1024. WAR RISK INSURANCE FOR VESSELS IN SUPPORT OF NATO-
                   APPROVED OPERATIONS.

       Section 1205 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 App. 
     U.S.C. 1285) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Insurance of Vessels in Support of NATO-Approved 
     Operations.--(1) Upon request made under subsection (b), the 
     Secretary may provide insurance for a vessel, regardless of 
     the country in which the vessel is registered and the 
     citizenship of its owners, that is supporting a military 
     operation approved by the North Atlantic Council, including a 
     vessel that is not operating under contract with a department 
     or agency of the United States.
       ``(2) If a vessel is insured under paragraph (1) in 
     response to a request made pursuant to an international 
     agreement providing for the sharing among nations of the 
     risks involved in mutual or joint operations, the Secretary 
     of Transportation, with the concurrence of the Secretary of 
     State, may seek from another nation that is a party to such 
     agreement a commitment to indemnify the United States for any 
     amounts paid by the United States for claims against such 
     insurance.
       ``(3) Amounts received by the United States as indemnity 
     from a nation pursuant to paragraph (2) shall be deposited 
     into the insurance fund created under section 1208.
       ``(4) Any obligation of a department or agency of the 
     United States to indemnify the Secretary or the insurance 
     fund for any claim against insurance provided under this 
     subsection is extinguished to the extent of any 
     indemnification received from a nation pursuant to paragraph 
     (2) with respect to the claim.''.

     SEC. 1025. CONVEYANCE, NAVY DRYDOCK, PORTLAND, OREGON.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Navy may 
     sell Navy Drydock No. YFD-69, located in Portland, Oregon, to 
     Portland Shipyard, LLC, which is the current user of the 
     drydock.
       (b) Condition of Conveyance.--The conveyance under 
     subsection (a) shall be subject to the condition that the 
     purchaser agree to retain the drydock on Swan Island in 
     Portland, Oregon, until at least September 30, 2007.
       (c) Consideration.--As consideration for the conveyance of 
     the drydock under subsection (a), the purchaser shall pay to 
     the Secretary an amount equal to the fair market value of the 
     drydock at the time of the conveyance, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (d) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.

     SEC. 1026. ADDITIONAL WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION CIVIL 
                   SUPPORT TEAMS.

       (a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the Secretary of Defense should--
       (1) establish 23 additional teams designated as Weapons of 
     Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (for a total of 55 such 
     teams); and
       (2) ensure that of such 55 teams there is at least one team 
     established for each State and territory.
       (b) State and Territory Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``State and territory'' means the several States, the 
     District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin 
     Islands.

                  TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS

     SEC. 1101. ELIGIBILITY OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
                   NONAPPROPRIATED FUND EMPLOYEES FOR LONG-TERM 
                   CARE INSURANCE.

       (a) In General.--Section 9001(1) of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'';
       (2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the comma at the end 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(D) an employee of a nonappropriated fund instrumentality 
     of the Department of Defense described in section 2105(c),''.
       (b) Discretionary Authority.--Section 9002 of such title is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e) as 
     subsections (c), (d), (e), and (f), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new 
     subsection (b):
       ``(b) Discretionary Authority Regarding Nonappropriated 
     Fund Instrumentalities.--The Secretary of Defense may 
     determine that a nonappropriated fund instrumentality of the 
     Department of Defense is covered under this chapter or is 
     covered under an alternative long-term care insurance 
     program.''.

     SEC. 1102. EXTENSION OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORITY TO 
                   MAKE LUMP-SUM SEVERANCE PAYMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 5595(i)(4) of title 5, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking ``2003'' and inserting 
     ``2006''.
       (b) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to Congress 
     a report including recommendations whether the authority 
     under section 5595(i) of title 5, United States Code, should 
     be made permanent or expanded to be made Governmentwide.

     SEC. 1103. COMMON OCCUPATIONAL AND HEALTH STANDARDS FOR 
                   DIFFERENTIAL PAYMENTS AS A CONSEQUENCE OF 
                   EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS.

       (a) Prevailing Rate Systems.--Section 5343(c)(4) of title 
     5, United States Code, is amended by inserting before the 
     semicolon at the end the following: ``, and for any hardship 
     or hazard related to asbestos, such differentials shall be 
     determined by applying occupational safety and health 
     standards consistent with the permissible exposure limit 
     promulgated by the Secretary of Labor under the Occupational 
     Safety and Health Act of 1970''.
       (b) General Schedule Pay Rates.--Section 5545(d) of such 
     title is amended by inserting before the period at the end of 
     the first sentence the following: ``, and for any hardship or 
     hazard related to asbestos, such differentials shall be 
     determined by applying occupational safety and health 
     standards consistent with the permissible exposure limit 
     promulgated by the Secretary of Labor under the Occupational 
     Safety and Health Act of 1970''.
       (c) Applicability.--Subject to any vested constitutional 
     property rights, any administrative or judicial determination 
     after the date of enactment of this Act concerning backpay 
     for a differential established under sections 5343(c)(4) or 
     5545(d) of such title shall be based on occupational safety 
     and health standards described in the amendments made by 
     subsections (a) and (b).

     SEC. 1104. CONTINUATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS 
                   PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY.

       Paragraph (4)(B) of section 8905a(d) of title 5, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) in clause (i), by striking ``2003'' and inserting 
     ``2006''; and
       (2) in clause (ii)--
       (A) by striking ``2004'' and inserting ``2007''; and
       (B) by striking ``2003'' and inserting ``2006''.

     SEC. 1105. TRIENNIAL FULL-SCALE FEDERAL WAGE SYSTEM WAGE 
                   SURVEYS.

       Section 5343(b) of title 5, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``2 years'' and 
     inserting ``3 years''; and
       (2) in the second sentence, by striking the period at the 
     end and inserting ``, based on criteria developed by the 
     Office.''.

              TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS

     SEC. 1201. SUPPORT OF UNITED NATIONS-SPONSORED EFFORTS TO 
                   INSPECT AND MONITOR IRAQI WEAPONS ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Limitation on Amount of Assistance in Fiscal Year 
     2003.--The total amount of the assistance for fiscal year 
     2003 that is provided by the Secretary of Defense under 
     section 1505 of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Control Act 
     of 1992 (22 U.S.C. 5859a) as activities of the Department of 
     Defense in support of activities under that Act may not 
     exceed $15,000,000.
       (b) Extension of Authority To Provide Assistance.--
     Subsection (f) of section 1505 of the Weapons of Mass 
     Destruction Control Act of 1992 (22 U.S.C. 5859a) is amended 
     by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2003''.

     SEC. 1202. STRENGTHENING THE DEFENSE OF TAIWAN.

       (a) Implementation of Training Plan.--Not later than 180 
     days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
     of Defense shall implement a comprehensive plan to conduct 
     joint operational training for, and exchanges of senior 
     officers between, the Armed Forces of the United States and 
     the military forces of Taiwan. Such plan shall include 
     implementation of a wide range of programs, activities, 
     exercises, and arrangements focused on threat analysis, 
     military doctrine, force planning, logistical support, 
     intelligence collection and analysis, operational tactics, 
     techniques, and procedures, civil-military relations, and 
     other subjects designed to improve the defensive capabilities 
     of Taiwan and to enhance interoperability between the 
     military forces of Taiwan and the Armed Forces of the United 
     States.
       (b) Submission to Congress.--At least 30 days before 
     commencing implementation of the plan described in subsection 
     (a), the Secretary of Defense shall submit the plan to 
     Congress, in classified and unclassified form as necessary.

     SEC. 1203. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AND SUPPORT FOR FOREIGN 
                   LIAISON OFFICERS.

       (a) Authority.--Subchapter II of chapter 138 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

[[Page H2309]]

     ``Sec. 2350m. Administrative services and support for foreign 
       liaison officers

       ``(a) Authority To Provide Services and Support.--The 
     Secretary of Defense may provide administrative services and 
     support for foreign liaison officers performing duties while 
     such officers temporarily are assigned to components or 
     commands of the armed forces. Such administrative services 
     and support may include base or installation operation 
     support services, office space, utilities, copying services, 
     fire and police protection, and computer support. The 
     Secretary may provide such administrative services and 
     support with or without reimbursement, as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate.
       ``(b) Expiration of Authority.--The authority under this 
     section shall expire on September 30, 2005.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such subchapter is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new item:

``2350m. Administrative services and support for foreign liaison 
              officers.''.

       (c) Report.--Not later than March 1, 2005, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall provide to the Committees on Armed Services of 
     the Senate and the House of Representatives a report 
     describing, as of the date of submission of the report--
       (1) the number of foreign liaison officers for which 
     support has been provided under section 2350m of title 10, 
     United States Code (as added by subsection (a));
       (2) the countries from which such foreign liaison officers 
     are or were assigned;
       (3) the type of support provided, the duration for which 
     the support was provided, and the reasons the support was 
     provided; and
       (4) the costs to the Department of Defense and the United 
     States of providing such support.

     SEC. 1204. ADDITIONAL COUNTRIES COVERED BY LOAN GUARANTEE 
                   PROGRAM.

       Section 2540 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(5) A country that, as determined by the Secretary of 
     Defense in consultation with the Secretary of State, assists 
     in combatting drug trafficking organizations or foreign 
     terrorist organizations.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Report.--The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary 
     of State, whenever the Secretaries consider such action to be 
     warranted, shall jointly submit to the Committees on Armed 
     Services and Foreign Relations of the Senate and the 
     Committees on Armed Services and International Relations of 
     the House of Representatives a report enumerating those 
     countries to be added or removed under subsection (b).''.

     SEC. 1205. LIMITATION ON FUNDING FOR JOINT DATA EXCHANGE 
                   CENTER IN MOSCOW.

       (a) Limitation.--Not more than 50 percent of the funds made 
     available to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2003 
     for activities associated with the Joint Data Exchange Center 
     in Moscow, Russia, may be obligated or expended for any such 
     activity until--
       (1) the United States and the Russian Federation enter into 
     a cost-sharing agreement as described in subsection (d) of 
     section 1231 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (as enacted into law 
     by Public Law 106-398; 114 Stat. 1654A-329);
       (2) the United States and the Russian Federation enter into 
     an agreement or agreements exempting the United States and 
     any United States person from Russian taxes, and from 
     liability under Russian laws, with respect to activities 
     associated with the Joint Data Exchange Center;
       (3) the Secretary of Defense submits to the Committee on 
     Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed 
     Services of the House of Representatives a copy of each 
     agreement referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2); and
       (4) a period of 30 days has expired after the date of the 
     final submission under paragraph (3).
       (b) Joint Data Exchange Center.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term ``Joint Data Exchange Center'' means the 
     United States-Russian Federation joint center for the 
     exchange of data to provide early warning of launches of 
     ballistic missiles and for notification of such launches that 
     is provided for in a joint United States-Russian Federation 
     memorandum of agreement signed in Moscow in June 2000.

     SEC. 1206. LIMITATION ON NUMBER OF MILITARY PERSONNEL IN 
                   COLOMBIA.

       (a) Limitation.--None of the funds available to the 
     Department of Defense may be used to support or maintain more 
     than 500 members of the Armed Forces on duty in the Republic 
     of Colombia at any time.
       (b) Exceptions.--There shall be excluded from counting for 
     the purposes of the limitation in subsection (a) the 
     following:
       (1) A member of the Armed Forces in the Republic of 
     Colombia for the purpose of rescuing or retrieving United 
     States military or civilian Government personnel, except that 
     the period for which such a member may be so excluded may not 
     exceed 30 days unless expressly authorized by law.
       (2) A member of the Armed Forces assigned to the United 
     States Embassy in Colombia as an attache, as a member of the 
     security assistance office, or as a member of the Marine 
     Corps security contingent.
       (3) A member of the Armed Forces in Colombia to participate 
     in relief efforts in responding to a natural disaster.
       (4) Nonoperational transient military personnel.
       (5) A member of the Armed Forces making a port call from a 
     military vessel in Colombia.
       (c) Waiver.--The Secretary of Defense may waive the 
     limitation in subsection (a) if he determines that such 
     waiver is in the national security interest.
       (d) Notification.--The Secretary shall notify the 
     congressional defense committees not later 15 days after the 
     date of the exercise of the waiver authority under subsection 
     (c).

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

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

       (a) Specification of CTR Programs.--For purposes of section 
     301 and other provisions of this Act, Cooperative Threat 
     Reduction programs are the programs specified in section 
     1501(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2731; 50 U.S.C. 2362 
     note).
       (b) Fiscal Year 2003 Cooperative Threat Reduction Funds 
     Defined.--As used in this title, the term ``fiscal year 2003 
     Cooperative Threat Reduction funds'' means the funds 
     appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations 
     in section 301 for Cooperative Threat Reduction programs.
       (c) Availability of Funds.--Funds appropriated pursuant to 
     the authorization of appropriations in section 301 for 
     Cooperative Threat Reduction programs shall be available for 
     obligation for three fiscal years.

     SEC. 1302. FUNDING ALLOCATIONS.

       (a) Funding for Specific Purposes.--Of the $416,700,000 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Defense 
     for fiscal year 2003 in section 301(23) for Cooperative 
     Threat Reduction programs, the following amounts may be 
     obligated for the purposes specified:
       (1) For strategic offensive arms elimination in Russia, 
     $70,500,000.
       (2) For strategic nuclear arms elimination in Ukraine, 
     $6,500,000.
       (3) For nuclear weapons transportation security in Russia, 
     $19,700,000.
       (4) For nuclear weapons storage security in Russia, 
     $39,900,000.
       (5) For activities designated as Other Assessments/
     Administrative Support, $14,700,000.
       (6) For defense and military contacts, $18,900,000.
       (7) For weapons of mass destruction infrastructure 
     elimination activities in Kazakhstan, $9,000,000.
       (8) For weapons of mass destruction infrastructure 
     elimination activities in Ukraine, $8,800,000.
       (9) For chemical weapons destruction in Russia, 
     $50,000,000.
       (10) For biological weapons facility dismantlement in the 
     States of the former Soviet Union $11,500,000.
       (11) For biological weapons facility security and safety in 
     the States of the former Soviet Union, $34,800,000.-
       (12) For biological weapons collaborative research in the 
     States of the former Soviet Union, $8,700,000.
       (13) For personnel reliability programs in Russia, 
     $100,000.
       (14) For weapons of mass destruction proliferation 
     prevention in the States of the former Soviet Union, 
     $40,000,000.
       (b) Additional Funds Authorized for Certain Purposes.--Of 
     the funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of 
     Defense for fiscal year 2003 in section 301(23) for 
     Cooperative Threat Reduction programs, $83,600,000 may be 
     obligated for any of the purposes specified in paragraphs (1) 
     through (4) and (9) of subsection (a) in addition to the 
     amounts specifically authorized in such paragraphs.
       (c) Report on Obligation or Expenditure of Funds for Other 
     Purposes.--No fiscal year 2003 Cooperative Threat Reduction 
     funds may be obligated or expended for a purpose other than a 
     purpose listed in paragraphs (1) through (14) of subsection 
     (a) until 30 days after the date that the Secretary of 
     Defense submits to Congress a report on the purpose for which 
     the funds will be obligated or expended and the amount of 
     funds to be obligated or expended. Nothing in the preceding 
     sentence shall be construed as authorizing the obligation or 
     expenditure of fiscal year 2003 Cooperative Threat Reduction 
     funds for a purpose for which the obligation or expenditure 
     of such funds is specifically prohibited under this title or 
     any other provision of law.
       (d) Limited Authority To Vary Individual Amounts.--(1) 
     Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), in any case in which the 
     Secretary of Defense determines that it is necessary to do so 
     in the national interest, the Secretary may obligate amounts 
     appropriated for fiscal year 2003 for a purpose listed in any 
     of the paragraphs in subsection (a) in excess of the amount 
     specifically authorized for such purpose (including amounts 
     authorized under subsection (b)).
       (2) An obligation of funds for a purpose stated in any of 
     the paragraphs in subsection (a) in excess of the specific 
     amount authorized for such purpose may be made using the 
     authority provided in paragraph (1) only after--
       (A) the Secretary submits to Congress notification of the 
     intent to do so together with a complete discussion of the 
     justification for doing so; and
       (B) 15 days have elapsed following the date of the 
     notification.
       (3) The Secretary may not, under the authority provided in 
     paragraph (1), obligate amounts for the purposes stated any 
     of paragraphs (5) through (13) of subsection (a) in excess of 
     115 percent of the amount specifically authorized for such 
     purposes.

     SEC. 1303. PROHIBITION AGAINST USE OF FUNDS UNTIL SUBMISSION 
                   OF REPORTS.

       No fiscal year 2003 Cooperative Threat Reduction funds may 
     be obligated or expended until 30 days after the date of the 
     submission of--

[[Page H2310]]

       (1) the report required to be submitted in fiscal year 2002 
     under section 1308(a) of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (as enacted into law 
     by Public Law 106-398; 114 Stat. 1654A-341); and
       (2) the update for the multiyear plan required to be 
     submitted for fiscal year 2001 under section 1205 of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 
     (Public Law 103-337; 22 U.S.C. 5952 note).

     SEC. 1304. REPORT ON USE OF REVENUE GENERATED BY ACTIVITIES 
                   CARRIED OUT UNDER COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION 
                   PROGRAMS.

       Section 1308(c) of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (as enacted into law 
     by Public Law 106-398; 114 Stat. 1654A-341) is amended by 
     inserting at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(6) To the maximum extent practicable, a description of 
     how revenue generated by activities carried out under 
     Cooperative Threat Reduction programs in recipient States is 
     being utilized, monitored, and accounted for.''.

     SEC. 1305. PROHIBITION AGAINST USE OF FUNDS FOR SECOND WING 
                   OF FISSILE MATERIAL STORAGE FACILITY.

       No funds authorized to be appropriated for Cooperative 
     Threat Reduction programs for any fiscal year may be used for 
     the design, planning, or construction of a second wing for a 
     storage facility for Russian fissile material.

     SEC. 1306. SENSE OF CONGRESS AND REPORT REQUIREMENT REGARDING 
                   RUSSIAN PROLIFERATION TO IRAN.

       (a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) Russian proliferation to Iran constitutes a clear 
     threat to the national security and vital interests of the 
     United States and undermines the purpose and goals of 
     Cooperative Threat Reduction programs;
       (2) such proliferation consists primarily of nuclear and 
     missile technology, goods, and know-how, and dual-use items 
     that could contribute to the development of weapons of mass 
     destruction and ballistic missiles;
       (3) because of ongoing Russian assistance, the intelligence 
     community estimates that Iran could attempt to launch an 
     intercontinental ballistic missile by 2005, and could possess 
     a nuclear weapon by 2010;
       (4) Russian proliferation is providing Iran with the 
     capability to strike United States military forces, 
     interests, allies, and friends in the region with weapons-of-
     mass-destruction-tipped ballistic missiles;
       (5) the issue of Russian proliferation to Iran has been 
     raised by United States officials at the highest levels of 
     the Russian Government;
       (6) Iran has long been identified as a State sponsor of 
     terrorism by the United States because of its support of 
     foreign terrorist organizations, and the combination of 
     terrorist organizations and weapons of mass destruction 
     constitutes a grave threat to the national security of the 
     United States;
       (7) Russian proliferation to Iran raises serious questions 
     regarding the intentions of the Russian Government, and its 
     commitment to nonproliferation and improved relations with 
     the United States;
       (8) Russian proliferation to Iran could undermine 
     Congressional support for Cooperative Threat Reduction 
     programs; and
       (9) the President must safeguard United States national 
     security and demonstrate United States resolve and commitment 
     to stopping the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction 
     and ballistic missiles through clear, firm, and coherent 
     policies and strategies that employ the full range of 
     diplomatic and economic tools at his disposal, both positive 
     and negative, to halt the serious and continuing problem of 
     Russian proliferation.
       (b) Report.--Not later than March 15 of 2003 through 2009, 
     the President shall submit to Congress a report (in 
     unclassified and classified form as necessary) describing in 
     detail Russian proliferation of weapons of mass destruction 
     and ballistic missile goods, technology, and know-how, and of 
     dual-use items that may contribute to the development of 
     weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles, to Iran 
     and to other countries during the year preceding the year in 
     which the report is submitted. The report shall include--
       (1) a net assessment prepared by the Office of Net 
     Assessment of the Department of Defense; and
       (2) a detailed description of the following:
       (A) The number, type, and quality of direct and dual-use 
     weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile goods, 
     items, and technology being transferred.
       (B) The form, location, and manner in which such transfers 
     take place.
       (C) The contribution that such transfers could make to the 
     recipient States' weapons of mass destruction and ballistic 
     missile programs, and how soon such States will test, 
     possess, and deploy weapons of mass destruction and ballistic 
     missiles.
       (D) The impact that such transfers have, or could have, on 
     United States national security, on regional friends, allies, 
     and interests, and on United States military forces deployed 
     in the region to which such transfers are being made.
       (E) The actions being taken by the United States to counter 
     and defend against capabilities developed by the recipient 
     States as a result of such transfers.
       (F) The strategy, plan, or policy incorporating the full 
     range of policy tools available that the President intends to 
     employ to halt Russian proliferation, the rationale for 
     employing such tools, and the timeline by which the President 
     expects to see material progress in ending Russian 
     proliferation of direct and dual-use weapons of mass 
     destruction and missile goods, technologies, and know-how.

     SEC. 1307. PROHIBITION AGAINST USE OF COOPERATIVE THREAT 
                   REDUCTION FUNDS OUTSIDE THE STATES OF THE 
                   FORMER SOVIET UNION.

       No Cooperative Threat Reduction funds authorized or 
     appropriated for any fiscal year may be used for threat 
     reduction projects, programs, or activities in countries 
     other than the States of the former Soviet Union.

     SEC. 1308. LIMITED WAIVER OF RESTRICTION ON USE OF FUNDS.

       (a) Waiver Authority.--(1) The restriction described in 
     subsection (d)(5) of section 1203 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160; 
     107 Stat. 1779; 22 U.S.C. 5952) shall not apply with respect 
     to United States assistance to Russia if the President 
     submits to Congress a written certification that waiving the 
     restriction is important to the national security interests 
     of the United States.
       (2) The authority under paragraph (1) shall expire on 
     December 31, 2005.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 30 days after the date that the 
     President applies the waiver authority under subsection (a), 
     the President shall submit to Congress a report (in 
     classified and unclassified form as necessary) describing--
       (1) the arms control agreements with which Russia is not 
     committed to complying, the form or forms of noncommittal, 
     and detailed evidence of such noncommittal;
       (2) why use of the waiver of authority was important to 
     protect national security interests; and
       (3) a strategy, plan, or policy incorporating the full 
     range of policy tools available to the President for 
     promoting Russian commitment to, and compliance with, all 
     relevant arms control agreements.

     SEC. 1309. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS UNTIL SUBMISSION OF 
                   REPORT ON DEFENSE AND MILITARY CONTACTS 
                   ACTIVITIES.

       Not more than 50 percent of fiscal year 2003 Cooperative 
     Threat Reduction Funds may be obligated or expended for 
     defense and military contacts activities until the Secretary 
     of Defense submits to Congress a report describing in detail 
     the operation and success of such activities carried out 
     under Cooperative Threat Reduction programs during fiscal 
     years 2001 and 2002. Such report shall include a description 
     of--
       (1) the amounts obligated or expended for such activities;
       (2) the purposes, goals, and objectives for which such 
     amounts were obligated and expended;
       (3) a description of the activities carried out, including 
     the forms of assistance provided, and the justification for 
     each form of assistance provided;
       (4) the success of each activity, including the goals and 
     objectives achieved for each;
       (5) a description of participation by private sector 
     entities in the United States in carrying out such 
     activities, and the participation of any other Federal 
     department or agency in such activities; and
       (6) any other information that the Secretary considers 
     relevant to provide a complete description of the operation 
     and success of activities carried out under Cooperative 
     Threat Reduction programs.

                TITLE XIV--UTAH TEST AND TRAINING RANGE

     SEC. 1401. DEFINITION OF UTAH TEST AND TRAINING RANGE.

       In this title, the term ``Utah Test and Training Range'' 
     means those portions of the military operating area of the 
     Utah Test and Training Area located solely in the State of 
     Utah. The term includes the Dugway Proving Ground.

     SEC. 1402. MILITARY OPERATIONS AND OVERFLIGHTS AT UTAH TEST 
                   AND TRAINING RANGE.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
       (1) The testing and development of military weapons systems 
     and the training of military forces are critical to ensuring 
     the national security of the United States.
       (2) The Utah Test and Training Range is a unique and 
     irreplaceable national asset at the core of the test and 
     training mission of the Department of Defense.
       (3) Areas designated as wilderness study areas are located 
     near lands withdrawn for military use and are beneath special 
     use airspace critical to the support of military test and 
     training missions at the Utah Test and Training Range.
       (4) Continued unrestricted access to the special use 
     airspace and lands that comprise the Utah Test and Training 
     Range is a national security priority and is not incompatible 
     with the protection and proper management of the natural, 
     environmental, cultural, and other resources of such lands.
       (b) Overflights.--(1) Nothing in this title, the Wilderness 
     Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), or other land management laws 
     generally applicable to federally designated wilderness areas 
     or wilderness study areas in the Utah Test and Training Range 
     shall restrict or preclude low-level overflights, low-level 
     military overflights and operations of military aircraft, 
     helicopters, unmanned aerial vehicles, military overflights 
     or military overflights and operations that can be seen or 
     heard within those areas.
       (2) Paragraph (1) precludes any restriction regarding 
     altitude or airspeed, noise level, supersonic flight, route 
     of flight, time of flight, seasonal usage, or numbers of 
     flights of any military aircraft, helicopters, unmanned 
     aerial vehicles, missiles, aerospace vehicles, and other 
     military weapons systems over federally designated wilderness 
     areas or wilderness study areas in the Utah Test and Training 
     Range.
       (3) In this subsection, the term ``low-level'' includes any 
     flight down to and including 10 feet above ground level.
       (c) Special Use Airspace and Training Routes.--Nothing in 
     this title, the Wilderness

[[Page H2311]]

     Act, or other land management laws generally applicable to 
     federally designated wilderness areas or wilderness study 
     areas in the Utah Test and Training Range shall restrict or 
     preclude the designation of new units of special use 
     airspace, the expansion of existing units of special use 
     airspace, or the use or establishment of military training 
     routes over federally designated wilderness areas or 
     wilderness study areas in the Utah Test and Training Range.
       (d) Communications and Tracking Systems.--Nothing in this 
     title, the Wilderness Act, or other land management laws 
     generally applicable to federally designated wilderness areas 
     or wilderness study areas in the Utah Test and Training Range 
     shall be construed to require the removal of existing 
     communications, instrumentation, or electronic tracking 
     systems from these areas, to prevent any required maintenance 
     of such systems, or to prevent the installation of new 
     communication, instrumentation, or other equipment necessary 
     for effective testing and training to meet military 
     requirements so long as the installation and maintenance of 
     such systems do not require construction of any permanent 
     roads in any federally designated wilderness area or 
     wilderness study area.
       (e) Emergency Access and Response.--(1) Nothing in this 
     title, the Wilderness Act, or other land management laws 
     generally applicable to federally designated wilderness areas 
     or wilderness study areas in the Utah Test and Training Range 
     shall restrict or preclude timely access to any area 
     necessary to respond to emergency situations. Immediate 
     access, including access for emergency and rescue vehicles 
     and equipment, shall not be restricted if human life or 
     health may be in jeopardy.
       (2) Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force and the Secretary 
     of Interior shall enter into a memorandum of understanding 
     providing formal procedures for access to the federally 
     designated wilderness areas or wilderness study areas that 
     are located beneath airspace of the Utah Test and Training 
     Range, which may be necessary to respond to emergency 
     situations, to rescue downed aircrew members, to investigate 
     accident locations, to recover military aircraft or other 
     weapons systems, and to restore accident locations. Military 
     operations in the Utah Test and Training Range shall not be 
     limited or restricted in any way pending completion of the 
     memorandum of understanding.
       (f) Control or Restriction of Public Access.--(1) When 
     required by national security or public safety, public access 
     to federally designated wilderness areas or wilderness study 
     areas in the Utah Test and Training Range that are located 
     beneath airspace designated as special use airspace may be 
     controlled, restricted, or prohibited entirely. Such 
     controls, restrictions, or prohibitions shall remain in force 
     for the minimum duration necessary. The Secretary of the Air 
     Force shall provide advance notice of such controls, 
     restrictions, or prohibitions to the Secretary of the 
     Interior.
       (2) Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force and the Secretary 
     of Interior shall enter into a memorandum of understanding 
     prescribing procedures for implementing access controls, 
     restrictions, or prohibitions. Military operations in the 
     Utah Test and Training Range shall not be limited or 
     restricted in any way pending completion of the memorandum of 
     understanding.

     SEC. 1403. DESIGNATION AND MANAGEMENT OF LANDS IN UTAH TEST 
                   AND TRAINING RANGE.

       (a) Designation.--The following Federal lands that are in 
     the Utah Test and Training Range are hereby designated as 
     wilderness:
       (1) Those lands that were managed pursuant to the 
     nonimpairment standard set forth in section 603(c) of Public 
     Law 94-579 (43 U.S.C. 1782(c)) on or before January 1, 1991.
       (2) Those lands that were acquired by the United States 
     through donation, exchange, or other method of acquisition 
     and--
       (A) are located entirely within the areas identified in 
     paragraph (1); or
       (B) are located within a logical extension of the 
     boundaries of the areas identified in paragraph (1).
       (b) Planning Process for Federal Lands in Utah Test and 
     Training Range.--(1) The Secretary of the Interior shall not 
     continue the plan amendment process initiated pursuant to 
     section 202 of Public Law 94-579 (43 U.S.C. 1712) and 
     published in the Federal Register on March 18, 1999 (64 Fed. 
     Reg. 13439), for Federal lands located in the Utah Test and 
     Training Range.
       (2) The Secretary of the Interior shall not develop, 
     maintain, or revise land use plans pursuant to section 202 of 
     Public Law 94-579 (43 U.S.C. 1712) for Federal lands located 
     in the Utah Test and Training Range without the prior 
     concurrence of the Secretary of the Air Force and the 
     Commander-in-Chief of the military forces of the State of 
     Utah.
       (c) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid existing rights, the 
     Federal lands in the areas designated as wilderness by this 
     title are hereby withdrawn from all forms of entry, 
     appropriation, or disposal under the public land laws, from 
     location, entry, and patent under the United States mining 
     laws, and from disposition under all laws pertaining to 
     mineral and geothermal leasing, and mineral materials, and 
     all amendments to such laws.
       (d) Water.--Nothing in this title or any action taken 
     pursuant to this title shall constitute an express or implied 
     reservation of surface or groundwater by any person, 
     including the United States. Nothing in this title affects 
     any valid existing water rights in existence before the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, including any water rights held 
     by the United States. If the United States determines that 
     additional water resources are needed for the purposes of 
     this title, the United States shall acquire such rights in 
     accordance with the water laws of the State of Utah.
       (e) Map and Description.--(1) As soon as practicable after 
     the date of the enactment of this title, the Secretary of 
     Interior shall transmit a map and legal description of the 
     areas designated as wilderness by this title to the Committee 
     on Resources of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate.
       (2) The map and legal description shall have the same force 
     and effect as if included in this title, except that the 
     Secretary of Interior may correct clerical and typographical 
     errors in the map and legal description.
       (3) The map and legal description shall be on file and 
     available for public inspection in the office of the Director 
     of the Bureau of Land Management and the office of the State 
     Director of the Bureau of Land Management in the State of 
     Utah.
       (f) Administration.--(1) Subject to valid existing rights 
     and this title, the areas designated as wilderness in this 
     title shall be administered by the Secretary of Interior in 
     accordance with the provisions of the Wilderness Act, except 
     that any reference in such provisions to the effective date 
     of the Wilderness Act (or any similar reference) shall be 
     deemed to be a reference to the date of the enactment of this 
     Act.
       (2) Any lands or interest in lands within the boundaries of 
     an area designated as wilderness by this title that is 
     acquired by the United States after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act shall be added to and administered as part of the 
     wilderness area within which the acquired lands or interest 
     in lands are located.
       (3) The Secretary of the Interior may offer to acquire 
     lands and interest in lands located within the areas 
     designated as wilderness by this title. Such lands may be 
     acquired at fair market value under this subsection by 
     purchase from willing sellers, by exchange for lands of 
     approximately equal value, or by donation.
       (4) In furtherance of the purposes and principles of the 
     Wilderness Act, management activities to maintain or restore 
     fish and wildlife populations and the habitats to support 
     such populations may be carried out within the areas 
     designated as wilderness by this title where consistent with 
     relevant wilderness management plans, in accordance with 
     appropriate policies and guidelines such as those set forth 
     in appendix B of the Report of the Committee on Interior and 
     Insular Affairs to accompany H.R. 2570 of the 101st Congress 
     (H. Rept. 101-405).
       (5) Within the areas designated as wilderness by this 
     title, the grazing of livestock, where established before the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, shall be permitted to 
     continue subject to such reasonable regulations, policies, 
     and practices as the Secretary of the Interior considers 
     necessary, as long as such regulations, policies, and 
     practices fully conform with and implement the intent of 
     Congress regarding grazing in such areas, as such intent is 
     expressed in the Wilderness Act, section 101(f) of Public Law 
     101-628, and House Report 101-405, Appendix A.
       (6) Congress does not intend for the designation of the 
     wilderness in this title to lead to the creation of 
     protective perimeters or buffer zones around any area 
     designated as wilderness by this title. The fact that 
     nonwilderness activities or uses can be seen or heard within 
     the areas designated as wilderness by this title shall not, 
     of itself, preclude such activities or uses up to the 
     boundary of that wilderness.
       (7) Until completion of a full revision of the Pony Express 
     Area Resource Management Plan, dated January 12, 1990, by the 
     Salt Lake Field Office of the Bureau of Land Management, the 
     Secretary of Interior shall not grant or issue any 
     authorizations pursuant to section 501(a)(6) of Public Law 
     94-579 (43 U.S.C. 1761(a)(6)) upon Federal lands identified 
     as inventory units UTU-020-088, UTU-020-095, UTU-020-096, and 
     UTU-020-100, as generally depicted on the map entitled 
     ``Wilderness Inventory, State of Utah'', dated August 1979.

     SEC. 1404. DESIGNATION OF PILOT RANGE WILDERNESS.

       Certain Federal lands in Box Elder County, Utah, as 
     generally depicted on the map entitled ``Pilot Range 
     Wilderness'', and dated October 1, 2001, are hereby 
     designated as wilderness, and shall be known as the Pilot 
     Range Wilderness Area.

     SEC. 1405. DESIGNATION OF CEDAR MOUNTAIN WILDERNESS.

       Certain Federal lands in Tooele County, Utah, as generally 
     depicted on the map entitled ``Cedar Mountain Wilderness'', 
     and dated May 1, 2002, are hereby designated as wilderness, 
     and shall be known as the Cedar Mountain Wilderness Area.

            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

     SEC. 2001. SHORT TITLE.

       This division may be cited as the ``Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003''.

                            TITLE XXI--ARMY

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

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

[[Page H2312]]



                                         Army: Inside the United States
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      State                                 Installation or location                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama.........................................  Anniston Army Depot........................         $1,900,000
                                                  Fort Rucker................................         $3,050,000
                                                  Redstone Arsenal...........................         $1,950,000
Alaska..........................................  Fort Wainwright............................       $111,010,000
Arizona.........................................  Fort Huachuca..............................        $10,400,000
                                                  Yuma Proving Ground........................         $4,500,000
Arkansas........................................  Pine Bluff Arsenal.........................        $18,937,000
California......................................  Monterey Defense Language Institute........         $1,500,000
Colorado........................................  Fort Carson................................         $5,350,000
District of Columbia............................  Walter Reed Army Medical Center............         $9,950,000
Georgia.........................................  Fort Benning...............................        $74,250,000
                                                  Fort Stewart/Hunter Army Air Field.........        $26,000,000
Hawaii..........................................  Schofield Barracks.........................       $191,000,000
Kansas..........................................  Fort Leavenworth...........................         $3,150,000
                                                  Fort Riley.................................        $51,950,000
Kentucky........................................  Blue Grass Army Depot......................         $5,500,000
                                                  Fort Campbell..............................       $106,300,000
Louisiana.......................................  Fort Polk..................................        $31,000,000
Maryland........................................  Fort Detrick...............................        $22,500,000
Massachusetts...................................  Natick Research Development and Engineering         $4,100,000
                                                   Center....................................
Missouri........................................  Fort Leonard Wood..........................        $15,500,000
New Jersey......................................  Picatinny Arsenal..........................         $7,500,000
New York........................................  Fort Drum..................................        $18,300,000
North Carolina..................................  Fort Bragg.................................        $94,900,000
Pennsylvania....................................  Letterkenny Army Depot.....................         $1,550,000
Texas...........................................  Fort Bliss.................................        $10,200,000
                                                  Fort Hood..................................        $85,000,000
Virginia........................................  Fort Lee...................................         $5,200,000
Washington......................................  Fort Lewis.................................        $53,800,000
                                                                                              ------------------
                                                    Total....................................       $976,247,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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


                     Army: Outside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
            Country                      location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Belgium........................  Supreme Headquarters,       $13,600,000
                                  Allied Powers Europe..
Germany........................  Area Support Group,         $17,200,000
                                  Bamberg.
                                 Campbell Barracks......      $8,300,000
                                 Coleman Barracks.......      $1,350,000
                                 Darmstadt..............      $3,500,000
                                 Grafenwoehr............     $69,866,000
                                 Landstuhl..............      $2,400,000
                                 Mannheim...............     $42,000,000
                                 Schweinfurt............      $2,000,000
Italy..........................  Vicenza................     $34,700,000
Korea..........................  Camp Carroll...........     $20,000,000
                                 Camp Castle............      $6,800,000
                                 Camp Hovey.............     $25,000,000
                                 Camp Humphreys.........     $36,000,000
                                 Camp Henry.............     $10,000,000
                                 K16 Airfield...........     $40,000,000
                                 Yongsan................     $12,600,000
                                                         ---------------
                                 Total..................    $345,316,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (c) Unspecified Worldwide.--Using the amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2104(a)(3), the Secretary of the Army may acquire real 
     property and carry out military construction projects for the 
     installation and location, and in the amount, set forth in 
     the following table:


                       Army: Unspecified Worldwide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Location                   Installation           Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unspecified Worldwide..........  Unspecified Worldwide..      $4,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2102. FAMILY HOUSING.

       (a) Construction and Acquisition.--Using amounts 
     appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations 
     in section 2104(a)(6)(A), the Secretary of the Army may 
     construct or acquire family housing units (including land 
     acquisition and supporting facilities) at the installations, 
     for the purposes, and in the amounts set forth in the 
     following table:


                                              Army: Family Housing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           State or Country              Installation or location             Purpose                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska................................  Fort Wainwright..........  38 Units.....................     $17,752,000
Arizona...............................  Yuma Proving Ground......  33 Units.....................      $6,100,000
Germany...............................  Stuttgart................  1 Unit.......................        $990,000
Korea.................................  Yongsan..................  10 Units.....................      $3,100,000
                                                                                                 ---------------

[[Page H2313]]

 
                                          Total:.................                                    $27,942,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (b) Planning and Design.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2104(a)(6)(A), the Secretary of the Army may carry out 
     architectural and engineering services and construction 
     design activities with respect to the construction or 
     improvement of family housing units in an amount not to 
     exceed $15,653,000.

     SEC. 2103. IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING UNITS.

       Subject to section 2825 of title 10, United States Code, 
     and using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization 
     of appropriations in section 2104(a)(6)(A), the Secretary of 
     the Army may improve existing military family housing units 
     in an amount not to exceed $234,831,000.

     SEC. 2104. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, ARMY.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     2002, for military construction, land acquisition, and 
     military family housing functions of the Department of the 
     Army in the total amount of $2,935,609,000 as follows:
       (1) For military construction projects inside the United 
     States authorized by section 2101(a), $803,247,000.
       (2) For military construction projects outside the United 
     States authorized by section 2101(b), $345,316,000.
       (3) For military construction projects at unspecified 
     worldwide locations authorized by section 2101(c), 
     $4,000,000.
       (4) For unspecified minor construction projects authorized 
     by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, $21,550,000.
       (5) For architectural and engineering services and 
     construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United 
     States Code, $158,796,000.
       (6) For military family housing functions:
       (A) For construction and acquisition, planning and design 
     and improvement of military family housing and facilities, 
     $278,426,000.
       (B) For support of military family housing (including the 
     functions described in section 2833 of title 10, United 
     States Code), $1,122,274,000.
       (7) For the construction of phase 3 of a barracks complex, 
     Butner Road, at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, authorized by 
     section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (division B of the Floyd D. Spence 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001, as 
     enacted into law by Public Law 106-398; 114 Stat. 1654A-389), 
     $50,000,000.
       (8) For the construction of phase 2 of a barracks complex, 
     D Street, at Fort Richardson, Alaska, authorized by section 
     2101(a) of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107; 115 Stat. 
     1280), $21,000,000.
       (9) For the construction of phase 2 of a barracks complex, 
     Nelson Boulevard, at Fort Carson, Colorado, authorized by 
     section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107; 
     115 Stat. 1280), as amended by section 2105 of this Act, 
     $42,000,000.
       (10) For the construction of phase 2 of a basic combat 
     trainee complex at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, authorized 
     by section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107; 
     115 Stat. 1280), as amended by section 2105 of this Act, 
     $39,000,000.
       (11) For the construction of phase 2 of a barracks complex, 
     17th and B Streets at Fort Lewis, Washington, authorized by 
     section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107; 
     115 Stat. 1280), $50,000,000.
       (b) Limitation on Total Cost of Construction Projects.--
     Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 
     2853 of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost 
     variation authorized by law, the total cost of all projects 
     carried out under section 2101 of this Act may not exceed--
       (1) the total amount authorized to be appropriated under 
     paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of subsection (a);
       (2) $18,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2101(a) for construction of a barracks complex, Main 
     Post, at Fort Benning, Georgia);
       (3) $100,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized 
     under section 2101(a) for construction of a barracks complex, 
     Capron Avenue, at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii);
       (4) $50,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2101(a) for construction of a barracks complex, Range 
     Road, at Fort Campbell, Kentucky); and
       (5) $5,000,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2101(a) for a military construction project at Fort 
     Bliss, Texas).
       (c) Adjustment.--The total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to paragraphs (1) through (11) of 
     subsection (a) is the sum of the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated in such paragraphs, reduced by $13,676,000, 
     which represents the combination of savings resulting from 
     adjustments to foreign currency exchange rates for military 
     construction, military family housing construction, and 
     military family housing support outside the United States and 
     savings resulting from favorable bids, reduced overhead 
     charges, and cancellations due to force structure changes.

     SEC. 2105. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN 
                   FISCAL YEAR 2002 PROJECTS.

       (a) Modification.--The table in section 2101(a) of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 
     (division B of Public Law 107-107; 115 Stat. 1281) is 
     amended--
       (1) in the item relating to Fort Carson, Colorado, by 
     striking ``$66,000,000'' in the amount column and inserting 
     ``$67,000,000''; and
       (2) in the item relating to Fort Jackson, South Carolina, 
     by striking ``$65,650,000'' in the amount column and 
     inserting ``$68,650,000''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 2104(b) of that Act 
     (115 Stat. 1284) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``$41,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$42,000,000''; and
       (2) in paragraph (4), by striking ``$36,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$39,000,000''.

                            TITLE XXII--NAVY

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

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

                     Navy: Inside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
             State                      location              Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona........................  Marine Corps Air             $3,000,000
                                  Station, Yuma.
California.....................  Auxiliary Landing            $6,150,000
                                  Field, San Diego (San
                                  Clemente Island).....
                                 Marine Corps Air-           $40,870,000
                                  Ground Combat Center,
                                  Twentynine Palms.....
                                 Marine Corps Air            $31,930,000
                                  Station, Camp
                                  Pendleton............
                                 Marine Corps Air            $12,210,000
                                  Station, Miramar.....
                                 Marine Corps Base,          $64,040,000
                                  Camp Pendleton.......
                                 Marine Corps Logistics       $4,450,000
                                  Base, Barstow........
                                 Naval Air Station,          $35,855,000
                                  Lemoore.
                                 Naval Air Warfare            $6,760,000
                                  Center, Point Mugu,
                                  San Nicholas Island..
                                 Naval Air Weapons           $10,100,000
                                  Station, China Lake..
                                 Naval Post Graduate          $9,020,000
                                  School, Monterey.....
                                 Naval Station, San          $12,210,000
                                  Diego................
Connecticut....................  Naval Submarine Base,        $7,880,000
                                  New London...........
District of Columbia...........  Marine Corps Barracks.       $3,700,000
                                 Naval District,              $2,690,000
                                  Washington.
Florida........................  Naval Air Base,             $13,342,000
                                  Jacksonville.
                                 Naval Air Station,             $990,000
                                  Pensacola.
                                 Naval School Explosive       $6,350,000
                                  Ordinance Detachment,
                                  Eglin................
                                 Naval Station, Mayport       $1,900,000

[[Page H2314]]

 
                                  Whiting Field........       $1,780,000
Georgia........................  Naval Submarine Base,        $1,580,000
                                  Kings Bay.
Hawaii.........................  Naval Shipyard, Pearl       $18,500,000
                                  Harbor.
                                 Naval Station, Pearl        $14,690,000
                                  Harbor.
Illinois.......................  Naval Training Center,      $93,190,000
                                  Great Lakes.
Indiana........................  Crane Naval Surface         $11,610,000
                                  Weapons Station......
Maine..........................  Naval Shipyard,             $15,200,000
                                  Kittery-Portsmouth.
Maryland.......................  Naval Air Facility,          $9,680,000
                                  Andrews Air Force
                                  Base.................
                                 United States Naval          $1,800,000
                                  Academy.
Mississippi....................  Naval Air Station,           $2,850,000
                                  Meridian.
                                 Naval Construction           $5,460,000
                                  Battalion Center,
                                  Gulfport.............
                                 Naval Station,              $16,160,000
                                  Pascagoula.
Nevada.........................  Naval Air Station,           $4,010,000
                                  Fallon.
New Jersey.....................  Naval Weapons Center,        $5,200,000
                                  Lakehurst.
                                 Naval Weapons Station        $5,600,000
                                  Earle, Colts Neck....
North Carolina.................  Marine Corps Air            $10,470,000
                                  Station, Cherry Point.
                                 Marine Corps Air             $6,920,000
                                  Station, New River.
                                 Marine Corps Base,           $9,570,000
                                  Camp Lejeune.
Rhode Island...................  Naval Station, Newport       $6,870,000
South Carolina.................  Marine Corps Air            $13,700,000
                                  Station, Beaufort....
                                 Marine Corps Recruit        $10,490,000
                                  Depot, Parris Island.
                                 Naval Weapons Station,       $5,740,000
                                  Charlestown..........
Texas..........................  Naval Air Station,           $7,150,000
                                  Corpus Christi.
                                 Naval Air Station            $8,850,000
                                  Joint Reserve Base,
                                  Fort Worth...........
                                 Naval Air Station,           $6,210,000
                                  Kingsville.
Virginia.......................  Dam Neck Fleet Combat        $3,900,000
                                  Training Center,
                                  Atlantic.............
                                 Little Creek Naval           $9,770,000
                                  Amphibious Base.
                                 Marine Corps Combat         $24,864,000
                                  Development Command,
                                  Quantico.............
                                 Naval Air Station           $16,490,000
                                  Oceana.
                                 Naval Shipyard,             $19,660,000
                                  Norfolk, Portsmouth.
                                 Naval Station, Norfolk     $171,505,000
                                 Naval Surface Warfare       $15,830,000
                                  Center, Dahlgren.....
                                 Naval Weapons Station,      $15,020,000
                                  Yorktown.
Washington.....................  Naval Air Station,          $17,580,000
                                  Whidbey Island.
                                 Keyport Naval Undersea      $10,500,000
                                  Warfare Command......
                                 Naval Magazine, Indian       $4,030,000
                                  Island.
                                 Naval Station,              $45,870,000
                                  Bremerton.
                                 Naval Submarine Base,       $22,310,000
                                  Bangor.
                                 Puget Sound Naval           $57,132,000
                                  Shipyard, Bremerton..
                                 Strategic Weapons            $7,340,000
                                  Facility, Bangor.
Various Locations..............  Host Nation                  $1,000,000
                                  Infrastructure.
                                                        ----------------
                                   Total...............   $1,009,528,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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


                     Navy: Outside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
            Country                      location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bahrain........................  Naval Support Activity,     $25,970,000
                                  Bahrain...............
Diego Garcia...................  Diego Garcia, Naval         $11,090,000
                                  Support Facility......
Greece.........................  Naval Support Activity,     $14,800,000
                                  Joint Headquarters
                                  Command, Larissa......
Guam...........................  Commander, United           $13,400,000
                                  States Naval Forces,
                                  Guam..................
Iceland........................  Naval Air Station,          $14,920,000
                                  Keflavik.
Italy..........................  Naval Air Station,          $55,660,000
                                  Sigonella.
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................    $135,840,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2202. FAMILY HOUSING.

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


                                              Navy: Family Housing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           State or Country              Installation or location             Purpose                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California............................  Naval Air Station,         178 Units....................     $40,981,000
                                         Lemoore.................
                                        Marine Corps Air-Ground    76 Units.....................     $19,425,000
                                         Combat Center,
                                         Twentynine Palms........
Connecticut...........................  Naval Submarine Base, New  100 Units....................     $24,415,000
                                         London..................
Florida...............................  Naval Station, Mayport...  1 Unit.......................        $329,000
Hawaii................................  Marine Corps Base,         65 Units.....................     $24,797,000
                                         Kaneohe Bay.............
Maine.................................  Naval Air Station,         26 Units.....................      $5,800,000
                                         Brunswick...............
Mississippi...........................  Naval Air Station,         56 Units.....................      $9,755,000
                                         Meridian................
North Carolina........................  Marine Corps Base, Camp    317 Units....................     $43,650,000
                                         LeJeune.................
Virginia..............................  Marine Corps Base,         290 Units....................     $41,843,000
                                         Quantico................
 United Kingdom.......................  Joint Maritime Facility,   62 Units.....................     $18,524,000
                                         St. Mawgan..............
                                                                                                 ---------------
                                                                     Total......................    $229,519,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page H2315]]

       (b) Planning and Design.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriation in section 
     2204(a)(5)(A), the Secretary of the Navy may carry out 
     architectural and engineering services and construction 
     design activities with respect to the construction or 
     improvement of military family housing units in an amount not 
     to exceed $11,281,000.

     SEC. 2203. IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING UNITS.

       Subject to section 2825 of title 10, United States Code, 
     and using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization 
     of appropriations in section 2204(a)(5)(A), the Secretary of 
     the Navy may improve existing military family housing units 
     in an amount not to exceed $136,816,000.

     SEC. 2204. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, NAVY.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     2002, for military construction, land acquisition, and 
     military family housing functions of the Department of the 
     Navy in the total amount of $2,308,007,000, as follows:
       (1) For military construction projects inside the United 
     States authorized by section 2201(a), $776,806,000.
       (2) For military construction projects outside the United 
     States authorized by section 2201(b), $133,270,000.
       (3) For unspecified minor construction projects authorized 
     by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, $23,262,000.
       (4) For architectural and engineering services and 
     construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United 
     States Code, $95,745,000.
       (5) For military family housing functions:
       (A) For construction and acquisition, planning and design, 
     and improvement of military family housing and facilities, 
     $377,616,000.
       (B) For support of military family housing (including 
     functions described in section 2833 of title 10, United 
     States Code), $867,788,000.
       (6) For replacement of a pier at Naval Station, Norfolk, 
     Virginia, authorized in section 2201(a) of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (division 
     B of Public Law 107-107; 115 Stat. 1287), as amended by 
     section 2205 of this Act, $33,520,000.
       (b) Limitation on Total Cost of Construction Projects.--
     Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 
     2853 of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost 
     variation authorized by law, the total cost of all projects 
     carried out under section 2201 of this Act may not exceed--
       (1) the total amount authorized to be appropriated under 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a);
       (2) $48,120,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2201(a) for a bachelors enlisted quarters shipboard 
     ashore, Naval Station, Norfolk, Virginia); and
       (3) $2,570,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2201(b) for a quality of life support facility, Naval 
     Air Station Sigonella, Italy).
       (c) Adjustment.--The total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to paragraphs (1) through (6) of 
     subsection (a) is the sum of the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated in such paragraphs, reduced by $1,340,000, which 
     represents the combination of savings resulting from 
     adjustments to foreign currency exchange rates for military 
     construction, military family housing construction, and 
     military family housing support outside the United States and 
     savings resulting from favorable bids, reduced overhead 
     charges, and cancellations due to force structure changes.

     SEC. 2205. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN 
                   FISCAL YEAR 2002 PROJECT.

       (a) Modification.--The table in section 2201(a) of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 
     (division B of Public Law 107-107; 115 Stat. 1286) is 
     amended--
       (1) in the item relating to Naval Station, Norfolk, 
     Virginia, by striking ``$139,270,000'' in the amount column 
     and inserting ``$139,550,000''; and
       (2) by striking the amount identified as the total in the 
     amount column and inserting ``$1,059,030,000''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2204(b)(2) of that Act 
     (115 Stat. 1289) is amended by striking ``$33,240,000'' and 
     inserting ``$33,520,000''.

                         TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE

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

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

                   Air Force: Inside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
             State                       location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama........................  Maxwell Air Force Base.      $8,000,000
Alaska.........................  Clear Air Station......     $14,400,000
                                 Eielson Air Force Base.     $21,600,000
Arizona........................  Davis-Monthan Air Force     $19,270,000
                                  Base.
                                 Luke Air Force Base....     $13,000,000
Arkansas.......................  Little Rock Air Force       $25,600,000
                                  Base.
California.....................  Beale Air Force Base...     $11,740,000
                                 Travis Air Force Base..      $9,600,000
                                 Vandenberg Air Force        $10,500,000
                                  Base.
Colorado.......................  Buckley Air National        $17,700,000
                                  Guard Base.
                                 Peterson Air Force Base      $2,000,000
                                 Schriever Air Force          $5,700,000
                                  Base.
                                 United States Air Force      $9,400,000
                                  Academy.
District of Columbia...........  Bolling Air Force Base.      $1,500,000
Florida........................  Elgin Air Force Base...      $4,250,000
                                 Hurlburt Field.........     $15,000,000
                                 McDill Air Force Base..     $21,000,000
                                 Tyndall Air Force Base.      $8,100,000
Georgia........................  Robins Air Force Base..      $5,400,000
Hawaii.........................  Hickam Air Force Base..      $1,350,000
Kansas.........................  McConnell Air Force          $7,500,000
                                  Base.
Louisiana......................  Barksdale Air Force         $10,900,000
                                  Base.
Maryland.......................  Andrews Air Force Base.      $9,600,000
Massachusetts..................  Hanscom Air Force Base.      $7,700,000
Mississippi....................  Keesler Air Force Base.     $22,000,000
Nevada.........................  Nellis Air Force Base..     $37,350,000
New Jersey.....................  McGuire Air Force Base.     $24,631,000
New Mexico.....................  Cannon Air Force Base..      $4,650,000
                                 Holloman Air Force Base      $4,650,000
                                 Kirtland Air Force Base     $21,900,000
North Carolina.................  Pope Air Force Base....      $9,700,000
Ohio...........................  Wright-Patterson Air        $25,000,000
                                  Force Base.
Oklahoma.......................  Tinker Air Force Base..      $7,500,000
South Carolina.................  Shaw Air Force Base....      $6,800,000
Texas..........................  Lackland Air Force Base     $37,300,000
                                 Laughlin Air Force Base      $8,000,000
                                 Sheppard Air Force Base     $24,000,000
Utah...........................  Hill Air Force Base....     $14,500,000
Virginia.......................  Langley Air Force Base.     $71,940,000
                                                         ---------------
                                 Total..................    $580,731,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page H2316]]

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


                  Air Force: Outside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
            Country                      location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diego Garcia...................  Diego Garcia...........     $17,100,000
Germany........................  Ramstein Air Force Base     $71,783,000
Guam...........................  Andersen Air Force Base     $31,000,000
Italy..........................  Aviano Air Force Base..      $6,600,000
Japan..........................  Kadena Air Force Base..      $6,000,000
Korea..........................  Osan Air Base..........     $15,100,000
Spain..........................  Naval Station, Rota....     $31,818,000
Turkey.........................  Incirlik Air Force Base      $1,550,000
United Kingdom.................  Royal Air Force,            $19,000,000
                                  Fairford.
                                 Royal Air Force,            $13,400,000
                                  Lakenheath.
Wake Island....................  Wake Island............     $24,900,000
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................    $238,251,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (c) Unspecified Worldwide.--Using the amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2304(a)(3), the Secretary of the Air Force may acquire real 
     property and carry out military construction projects for the 
     installation and location, and in the amount, set forth in 
     the following table:


                    Air Force: Unspecified Worldwide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Location                   Installation           Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unspecified Worldwide..........  Classified Location....     $32,562,000
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................     $32,562,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2302. FAMILY HOUSING.

       (a) Construction and Acquisition.--Using amounts 
     appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations 
     in section 2304(a)(6)(A), the Secretary of the Air Force may 
     construct or acquire family housing units (including land 
     acquisition and supporting facilities) at the installations, 
     for the purposes, and in the amounts set forth in the 
     following table:


                                            Air Force: Family Housing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           State or Country              Installation or location             Purpose                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona...............................  Luke Air Force Base......  140 Units....................     $18,954,000
California............................  Travis Air Force Base....  110 Units....................     $24,320,000
Colorado..............................  Peterson Air Force Base..  2 Units......................        $959,000
                                        United States Air Force    71 Units.....................     $12,424,000
                                         Academy.................
Delaware..............................  Dover Air Force Base.....  112 Units....................     $19,615,000
Florida...............................  Eglin Air Force Base.....  Housing Office...............        $597,000
                                        Eglin Air Force Base.....  134 Units....................     $15,906,000
                                        MacDill Air Force Base...  96 Units.....................     $18,086,000
Hawaii................................  Hickam Air Force Base....  96 Units.....................     $29,050,000
Idaho.................................  Mountain Home Air Force    95 Units.....................     $24,392,000
                                         Base....................
Kansas................................  McConnell Air Force Base.  Housing Maintenance Facility.      $1,514,000
Maryland..............................  Andrews Air Force Base...  53 Units.....................      $9,838,000
                                        Andrews Air Force Base...  52 Units.....................      $8,807,000
Mississippi...........................  Columbus Air Force Base..  Housing Office...............        $412,000
                                        Keesler Air Force Base...  117 Units....................     $16,505,000
Missouri..............................  Whiteman Air Force Base..  97 Units.....................     $17,107,000
Montana...............................  Malmstrom Air Force Base.  18 Units.....................      $4,717,000
New Mexico............................  Holloman Air Force Base..  101 Units....................     $20,161,000
North Carolina........................  Pope Air Force Base......  Housing Maintenance Facility.        $991,000
                                        Seymour Johnson Air Force  126 Units....................     $18,615,000
                                         Base....................
North Dakota..........................  Grand Forks Air Force      150 Units....................     $30,140,000
                                         Base....................
                                        Minot Air Force Base.....  112 Units....................     $21,428,000
                                        Minot Air Force Base.....  102 Units....................     $20,315,000
Oklahoma..............................  Vance Air Force Base.....  59 Units.....................     $11,423,000
South Dakota..........................  Ellsworth Air Force Base.  Housing Maintenance Facility.        $447,000
                                        Ellsworth Air Force Base.  22 Units.....................      $4,794,000
Texas.................................  Dyess Air Force Base.....  85 Units.....................     $14,824,000
                                        Randolph Air Force Base..  Housing Maintenance Facility.        $447,000
                                        Randolph Air Force Base..  112 Units....................     $14,311,000
Virginia..............................  Langley Air Force Base...  Housing Office...............      $1,193,000
Germany...............................  Ramstein Air Force Base..  19 Units.....................      $8,534,000
Korea.................................  Osan Air Base............  113 Units....................     $35,705,000
                                        Osan Air Base............  Housing Supply Warehouse.....        $834,000
United Kingdom........................  Royal Air Force,           Housing Office and                 $2,203,000
                                         Lakenheath..............   Maintenance Facility........
                                                                  --------------------------------
                                        Total....................                                   $429,568,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page H2317]]

       (b) Planning and Design.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2304(a)(6)(A), the Secretary of the Air Force may carry out 
     architectural and engineering services and construction 
     design activities with respect to the construction or 
     improvement of military family housing units in an amount not 
     to exceed $34,188,000.

     SEC. 2303. IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING UNITS.

       Subject to section 2825 of title 10, Unites States Code, 
     and using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization 
     of appropriations in section 2304(a)(6)(A), the Secretary of 
     the Air Force may improve existing military family housing 
     units in an amount not to exceed $217,286,000.

     SEC. 2304. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, AIR FORCE.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     2002, for military construction, land acquisition, and 
     military family housing functions of the Department of the 
     Air Force in the total amount of $2,495,094,000, as follows:
       (1) For military construction projects inside the United 
     States authorized by section 2301(a), $580,731,000.
       (2) For military construction projects outside the United 
     States authorized by section 2301(b), $238,251,000.
       (3) For the military construction projects at unspecified 
     worldwide locations authorized by section 2301(c), 
     $32,562,000.
       (4) For unspecified minor construction projects authorized 
     by section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, $11,500,000.
       (5) For architectural and engineering services and 
     construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United 
     States Code, $76,958,000.
       (6) For military housing functions:
       (A) For construction and acquisition, planning and design, 
     and improvement of military family housing and facilities, 
     $681,042,000.
       (B) For support of military family housing (including 
     functions described in section 2833 of title 10, United 
     States Code), $874,050,000.
       (b) Limitation on Total Cost of Construction Projects.--
     Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 
     2853 of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost 
     variation authorized by law, the total cost of all projects 
     carried out under section 2301 of this Act may not exceed the 
     total amount authorized to be appropriated under paragraphs 
     (1), (2) and (3) of subsection (a).
       (c) Adjustment.--The total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to paragraphs (1) through (6) of 
     subsection (a) is the sum of the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated in such paragraphs, reduced by $10,281,000, 
     which represents the combination of savings resulting from 
     adjustments to foreign currency exchange rates for military 
     construction, military family housing construction, and 
     military family housing support outside the United States and 
     savings resulting from favorable bids, reduced overhead 
     charges, and cancellations due to force structure changes.

                      TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES

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

       (a) Inside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2404(a)(1), the Secretary of Defense may acquire real 
     property and carry out military construction projects for the 
     installations and locations inside the United States, and in 
     the amounts, set forth in the following table:


               Defense Agencies: Inside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
             Agency                      location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Missile Defense Agency.........  Kauai, Hawaii..........     $23,400,000
Defense Intelligence Agency....  Bolling Air Force Base,    $121,958,000
                                  District of Columbia..
Defense Logistics Agency.......  Columbus, Ohio.........      $5,021,000
                                 Defense Supply Center,       $5,500,000
                                  Richmond, Virginia....
                                 Naval Air Station, New       $9,500,000
                                  Orleans, Louisiana....
                                 Travis Air Force Base,      $16,000,000
                                  California............
Defense Threat Reduction Agency  Fort Belvoir, Virginia.     $76,388,000
Department of Defense            Fort Bragg, North            $2,036,000
 Dependents Schools............   Carolina..............
                                 Fort Jackson, South          $2,506,000
                                  Carolina..............
                                 Marine Corps Base, Camp     $12,138,000
                                  Lejeune, North
                                  Carolina..............
                                 Marine Corps Base,           $1,418,000
                                  Quantico, Virginia....
                                 United States Military       $4,347,000
                                  Academy, West Point,
                                  New York..............
                                 Fort Meade, Maryland...      $4,484,000
Joint Chiefs of Staff..........  Peterson Air Force          $18,400,000
                                  Base, Colorado.
National Security Agency.......  Fort Bragg, North           $30,800,000
                                  Carolina.
Special Operations Command.....  Hurlburt Field, Florida     $11,100,000
                                 Naval Amphibious Base,      $14,300,000
                                  Little Creek, Virginia
TRICARE Management Activity....  Elmendorf Air Force         $10,400,000
                                  Base, Alaska..........
                                 Hickam Air Force Base,       $2,700,000
                                  Hawaii.
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................    $372,396,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------


       (b) Outside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated 
     pursuant to the authorization of appropriations in section 
     2404(a)(2), the Secretary of Defense may acquire real 
     property and carry out military construction projects for the 
     installations and locations outside the United States, and in 
     the amounts, set forth in the following table:


               Defense Agencies: Outside the United States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Installation or
             Agency                      location             Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defense Logistics Agency.......  Andersen Air Force          $17,586,000
                                  Base, Guam.
                                 Naval Forces Marianas        $6,000,000
                                  Islands, Guam.........
                                 Naval Station, Rota,        $23,400,000
                                  Spain.................
                                 Royal Air Force,            $17,000,000
                                  Fairford, United
                                  Kingdom...............
                                 Yokota Air Base, Japan.     $23,000,000
Department of Defense            Kaiserslautern, Germany        $957,000
 Dependents Schools............
                                 Lajes Field, Azores,         $1,192,000
                                  Portugal..............
                                 Seoul, Korea...........     $31,683,000
                                 Supreme Headquarters,        $1,573,000
                                  Allied Powers Europe,
                                  Belgium...............
                                 Spangdahlem Air Base,          $997,000
                                  Germany...............
                                 Vicenza, Italy.........      $2,117,000
TRICARE Management Activity....  Naval Support Activity,     $41,449,000
                                  Naples, Italy.........
                                 Spangdahlem Air Base,       $39,629,000
                                  Germany...............
                                                         ---------------
                                   Total................    $206,583,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------


     SEC. 2402. IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING UNITS.

       Subject to section 2825 of title 10, United States Code, 
     and using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization 
     of appropriations in section 2404(a)(8)(A), the Secretary of 
     Defense may improve existing military family housing units in 
     an amount not to exceed $5,530,000.

     SEC. 2403. ENERGY CONSERVATION PROJECTS.

       Using amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of 
     appropriations in section 2404(a)(4), the Secretary of 
     Defense may carry out energy conservation projects under 
     section 2865 of title 10, United States Code, in the amount 
     of $49,531,000.

[[Page H2318]]

     SEC. 2404. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, DEFENSE AGENCIES.

       (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be 
     appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 
     2002, for military construction, land acquisition, and 
     military family housing functions of the Department of 
     Defense (other than the military departments) in the total 
     amount of $1,417,779,000, as follows:
       (1) For military construction projects inside the United 
     States authorized by section 2401(a), $335,796,000.
       (2) For military construction projects outside the United 
     States authorized by section 2401(b), $206,583,000.
       (3) For unspecified minor construction projects under 
     section 2805 of title 10, United States Code, $16,293,000.
       (4) For contingency construction projects of the Secretary 
     of Defense under section 2804 of title 10, United States 
     Code, $10,000,000.
       (5) For architectural and engineering services and 
     construction design under section 2807 of title 10, United 
     States Code, $45,432,000.
       (6) For energy conservation projects authorized by section 
     2403 of this Act, $49,531,000.
       (7) For base closure and realignment activities as 
     authorized by the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 
     1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 
     2687 note), $545,138,000.
       (8) For military family housing functions:
       (A) For improvement of military family housing and 
     facilities, $5,480,000.
       (B) For support of military family housing (including 
     functions described in section 2833 of title 10, United 
     States Code), $42,432,000.
       (C) For credit to the Department of Defense Housing 
     Improvement Fund established by section 2883(a) of title 10, 
     United States Code, as amended by section 2801 of this Act, 
     $2,000,000.
       (9) For payment of a claim against the Hospital Replacement 
     project at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, $10,400,000.
       (10) For the construction of phase 4 of an ammunition 
     demilitarization facility at Pueblo Chemical Activity, 
     Colorado, authorized by section 2401(a) of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (division 
     B of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2775), as amended by 
     section 2406 of the Military Construction Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 2000 (division B of Public Law 106-65; 113 
     Stat. 839) and section 2407 of this Act, $38,000,000.
       (11) For the construction of phase 5 of an ammunition 
     demilitarization facility at Newport Army Depot, Indiana, 
     authorized by section 2401(a) of the Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (division B of Public 
     Law 105-261; 112 Stat. 2193), as amended by section 2406 of 
     this Act, $61,494,000.
       (12) For the construction of phase 5 of an ammunition 
     demilitarization facility at Aberdeen Proving Ground, 
     Maryland, authorized by section 2401(a) of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (division 
     B of Public Law 105-261; 112 Stat. 2193), as amended by 
     section 2406 of the Military Construction Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107; 115 
     Stat. 1299), $30,600,000.
       (13) For the construction of phase 3 of an ammunition 
     demilitarization facility at Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky, 
     authorized by section 2401(a) of the Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (division B of Public 
     Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 835), as amended by section 2405 of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 
     (division B of Public Law 107-107; 115 Stat. 1298) and 
     section 2405 of this Act, $10,300,000.
       (14) For the construction of phase 3 of an ammunition 
     demilitarization support facility at Blue Grass Army Depot, 
     Kentucky, authorized by section 2401(a) of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (division 
     B of Public Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 835), $8,300,000.
       (b) Limitation on Total Cost of Construction Projects.--
     Notwithstanding the cost variations authorized by section 
     2853 of title 10, United States Code, and any other cost 
     variation authorized by law, the total cost of all projects 
     carried out under section 2401 of this Act may not exceed--
       (1) the total amount authorized to be appropriated under 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a); and
       (2) $26,200,000 (the balance of the amount authorized under 
     section 2401(a) for the construction of the Defense Threat 
     Reduction Center, Fort Belvoir, Virginia).
       (c) Adjustment.--The total amount authorized to be 
     appropriated pursuant to paragraphs (1) through (14) of 
     subsection (a) is the sum of the amounts authorized to be 
     appropriated in such paragraphs, reduced by $42,833,000, 
     which represents the combination of savings resulting from 
     adjustments to foreign currency exchange rates for military 
     construction, military family housing construction, and 
     military family housing support outside the United States and 
     savings resulting from favorable bids, reduced overhead 
     charges, and cancellations due to force structure changes.

     SEC. 2405. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN 
                   FISCAL YEAR 2000 PROJECT.

       (a) Modification.--The table in section 2401(a) of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 
     (division B of Public Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 835), as amended 
     by section 2405 of the Military Construction Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107; 
     115 Stat. 1298), is further amended--
       (1) under the agency heading relating to Chemical 
     Demilitarization, in the item relating to Blue Grass Army 
     Depot, Kentucky, by striking ``$254,030,000'' in the amount 
     column and inserting ``$290,325,000''; and
       (2) by striking the amount identified as the total in the 
     amount column and inserting ``$748,245,000''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2405(b)(3) of that Act 
     (113 Stat. 839), as so amended, is further amended by 
     striking ``$231,230,000'' and inserting ``$267,525,000''.

     SEC. 2406. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN 
                   FISCAL YEAR 1999 PROJECT.

       (a) Modification.--The table in section 2401(a) of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 
     (division B of Public Law 105-261; 112 Stat. 2193), as 
     amended by section 2406 of the Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public 
     Law 107-107; 115 Stat. 1299), is amended--
       (1) under the agency heading relating to Chemical 
     Demilitarization, in the item relating to Newport Army Depot, 
     Indiana, by striking ``$191,550,000'' in the amount column 
     and inserting ``$293,853,000''; and
       (2) by striking the amount identified as the total in the 
     amount column and inserting ``$829,919,000''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2404(b)(2) of that Act 
     (112 Stat. 2196) is amended by striking ``$162,050,000'' and 
     inserting ``$264,353,000''.

     SEC. 2407. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN 
                   FISCAL YEAR 1997 PROJECT.

       (a) Modification.--The table in section 2401(a) of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 
     (division B of Public Law 104-201; 110 Stat. 2775), as 
     amended by section 2406 of the Military Construction 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (division B of Public 
     Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 839), is further amended--
       (1) under the agency heading relating to Chemical 
     Demilitarization Program, in the item relating to Pueblo 
     Chemical Activity, Colorado, by striking ``$203,500,000'' in 
     the amount column and inserting ``$261,000,000''; and
       (2) by striking the amount identified as the total in the 
     amount column and inserting ``$607,454,000''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2406(b)(2) of that Act 
     (110 Stat. 2779), as so amended, is further amended by 
     striking ``$203,500,000'' and inserting ``$261,000,000''.

        TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY 
                           INVESTMENT PROGRAM

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

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

     SEC. 2502. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, NATO.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     years beginning after September 30, 2002, for contributions 
     by the Secretary of Defense under section 2806 of title 10, 
     United States Code, for the share of the United States of the 
     cost of projects for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     Security Investment program authorized by section 2501, in 
     the amount of $168,200,000.

            TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

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

       (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2002, for the 
     costs of acquisition, architectural and engineering services, 
     and construction of facilities for the Guard and Reserve 
     Forces, and for contributions there for, under chapter 1803 
     of title 10, United States Code (including the cost of 
     acquisition of land for those facilities), the following 
     amounts:
       (1) For the Department of the Army--
       (A) for the Army National Guard of the United States, 
     $170,793,000; and

[[Page H2319]]

       (B) for the Army Reserve, $86,789,000.
       (2) For the Department of the Navy, for the Naval and 
     Marine Corps Reserve, $66,971,000.
       (3) For the Department of the Air Force--
       (A) for the Air National Guard of the United States, 
     $119,266,000; and
       (B) for the Air Force Reserve, $68,576,000.

        TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS

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

       (a) Expiration of Authorizations After Three Years.--Except 
     as provided in subsection (b), all authorizations contained 
     in titles XXI through XXVI for military construction 
     projects, land acquisition, family housing projects and 
     facilities, and contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty 
     Organization Security Investment program (and authorizations 
     of appropriations therefor) shall expire on the later of--
       (1) October 1, 2005; or
       (2) the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds 
     for military construction for fiscal year 2006.
       (b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to 
     authorizations for military construction projects, land 
     acquisition, family housing projects, and facilities, and 
     contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     Security Investment program (and authorizations of 
     appropriations therefor) for which appropriated funds have 
     been obligated before the later of--
       (1) October 1, 2005; or
       (2) the date of the enactment of an Act authorized funds 
     for fiscal year 2005 for military construction projects, land 
     acquisition, family housing projects and facilities, and 
     contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
     Security Investment program.

     SEC. 2702. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 
                   2000 PROJECTS.

       (a) Extension of Certain Projects.--Notwithstanding section 
     2701 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 2000 (division B of Public Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 
     841), authorizations set forth in the tables in subsection 
     (b), as provided in section 2302 or 2601 of that Act, shall 
     remain in effect until October 1, 2003, or the date of the 
     enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military 
     construction for fiscal year 2004, whichever is later.
       (b) Tables.--The tables referred to in subsection (a) are 
     as follows:

                               Air Force: Extension of 2000 Project Authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or location             Project                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oklahoma..............................  Tinker Air Force Base....  Replace Family Housing (41         $6,000,000
                                                                    Units)......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                          Army National Guard: Extension of 2000 Project Authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or location             Project                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virginia..............................  Fort Pickett.............  Multi-Purpose Range Complex-      $13,500,000
                                                                    Heavy.......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       (c) Extension of Additional Project.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, the authorization set forth in the 
     table in subsection (d), as provided in section 8160 of the 
     Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2000 (Public Law 
     106-79; 113 Stat. 1274), shall remain in effect until October 
     1, 2003, or the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing 
     funds for military construction for fiscal year 2004, 
     whichever is later.
       (d) Table for Extension of Additional Project.--The table 
     referred to in subsection (c) is as follows:


                          Army National Guard: Extension of 2000 Project Authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or location             Project                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania..........................  Connellsville............  Readiness Center.............      $1,700,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2703. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 
                   1999 PROJECTS.

       (a) Extension.--Notwithstanding section 2701 of the 
     Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 
     (division B of Public Law 105-261; 112 Stat. 2199), 
     authorizations set forth in the table in subsection (b), as 
     provided in section 2302 of that Act and extended by section 
     2702 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107; 115 Stat. 
     1301), shall remain in effect until October 1, 2003, or the 
     date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for 
     military construction for fiscal year 2004, whichever is 
     later.
       (b) Table.--The table referred to in subsection (a) is as 
     follows:


                               Air Force: Extension of 1999 Project Authorizations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 State                   Installation or location             Project                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delaware..............................  Dover Air Force Base.....  Replace Family Housing (55         $8,988,000
                                                                    Units)......................
Florida...............................  Patrick Air Force Base...  Replace Family Housing (46         $9,692,000
                                                                    Units)......................
New Mexico............................  Kirtland Air Force Base..  Replace Family Housing (37         $6,400,000
                                                                    Units)......................
Ohio..................................  Wright-Patterson Air       Replace Family Housing (40         $5,600,000
                                         Force Base..............   Units)......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     SEC. 2704. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Titles XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV, and XXVI of this Act 
     shall take effect on the later of--
       (1) October 1, 2002; or
       (2) the date of the enactment of this Act.

                    TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

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

     SEC. 2801. CHANGES TO ALTERNATIVE AUTHORITY FOR ACQUISITION 
                   AND IMPROVEMENT OF MILITARY HOUSING.

       (a) Authorized Utilities and Services.--Section 2872a(b) of 
     title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new paragraphs:
       ``(11) Firefighting and fire protection services.
       ``(12) Police protection services.''.
       (b) Leasing of Housing.--Subsection (a) of section 2874 of 
     such title is amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) Lease Authorized.--(1) The Secretary concerned may 
     enter into contracts for the lease

[[Page H2320]]

     of housing units that the Secretary determines are suitable 
     for use as military family housing or military unaccompanied 
     housing.
       ``(2) The Secretary concerned shall utilize housing units 
     leased under paragraph (1) as military family housing or 
     military unaccompanied housing, as appropriate.''.
       (c) Repeal of Interim Lease Authority.--Section 2879 of 
     such title is repealed.
       (d) Space Limitations by Pay Grade.--Section 2880(b)(2) of 
     such title is amended by striking ``unless the unit is 
     located on a military installation''.
       (e) Department of Defense Housing Fund.--(1) Section 2883 
     of such title is amended by striking subsections (a), (b), 
     and (c) inserting the following new subsections (a) and (b):
       ``(a) Establishment.--There is hereby established on the 
     books of the Treasury an account to be known as the 
     Department of Defense Housing Improvement Fund (in this 
     section referred to as the `Fund').
       ``(b) Credits to Fund.--There shall be credited to the Fund 
     the following:
       ``(1) Amounts authorized for and appropriated to the Fund.
       ``(2) Subject to subsection (e), any amounts that the 
     Secretary of Defense transfers, in such amounts as are 
     provided for in appropriation Acts, to the Fund from amounts 
     authorized and appropriated to the Department of Defense for 
     the acquisition or construction of military family housing or 
     military unaccompanied housing.
       ``(3) Proceeds from the conveyance or lease of property or 
     facilities under section 2878 of this title for the purpose 
     of carrying out activities under this subchapter with respect 
     to military family housing or military unaccompanied housing.
       ``(4) Income derived from any activities under this 
     subchapter with respect to military family housing or 
     military unaccompanied housing, income and gains realized 
     from investments under section 2875 of this title, and any 
     return of capital invested as part of such investments.
       ``(5) Any amounts that the Secretary of the Navy transfers 
     to the Fund pursuant to section 2814(i)(3) of this title, 
     subject to the restrictions on the use of the transferred 
     amounts specified in that section.''.
       (2) Such section is further amended--
       (A) by redesignating subsections (d) through (g) as (c) 
     through (f), respectively;
       (B) in subsection (c), as so redesignated--
       (i) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Funds'' and 
     inserting ``Fund'';
       (ii) in paragraph (1)--
       (I) by striking ``subsection (e)'' and inserting 
     ``subsection (d)''; and
       (II) by striking ``Department of Defense Family Housing 
     Improvement Fund'' and inserting ``Fund'';
       (iii) by striking paragraph (2); and
       (iv) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2);
       (C) in subsection (d), as so redesignated, by striking 
     ``required to be used to satisfy the obligation'';
       (D) in subsection (e), as so redesignated, by striking ``a 
     Fund under paragraph (1)(B) or (2)(B) of subsection (c)'' and 
     inserting ``the Fund under subsection (b)(2)''; and
       (E) in subsection (f), as so redesignated--
       (i) in paragraph (1), by striking ``$850,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$1,700,000,000''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (2), by striking ``$150,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$300,000,000''.
       (f) Transfer of Unobligated Amounts.--(1) The Secretary of 
     Defense shall transfer to the Department of Defense Housing 
     Improvement Fund established under section 2883(a) of title 
     10, United States Code (as amended by subsection (e)), any 
     amounts in the Department of Defense Family Housing 
     Improvement Fund and the Department of Defense Military 
     Unaccompanied Housing Improvement that remain available for 
     obligation as of the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) Amounts transferred to the Department of Defense 
     Housing Improvement Fund under paragraph (1) shall be merged 
     with amounts in that Fund, and shall be available for the 
     same purposes, and subject to the same conditions and 
     limitations, as other amounts in that Fund.
       (g) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Paragraph (3) of section 
     2814(i) of such title is amended--
       (A) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the 
     following new subparagraph (A):
       ``(A) The Secretary may transfer funds from the Ford Island 
     Improvement Account to the Department of Defense Housing 
     Improvement Fund established by section 2883(a) of this 
     title.''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``a fund'' and 
     inserting ``the Fund''.
       (2) Section 2871(6) of such title is amended by striking 
     ``Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund or 
     the Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied Housing 
     Improvement Fund'' and inserting ``Department of Defense 
     Housing Improvement Fund''.
       (3) Section 2875(e) of such title is amended by striking 
     ``Department of Defense Family Housing Improvement Fund or 
     the Department of Defense Military Unaccompanied Housing 
     Improvement Fund'' and inserting ``Department of Defense 
     Housing Improvement Fund''.
       (h) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The section heading for 
     section 2874 of such title is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 2874. Leasing of housing''.

       (2) The section heading for section 2883 of such title is 
     amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 2883. Department of Defense Housing Improvement 
       Fund''.

       (3) The table of sections at the beginning subchapter IV of 
     chapter 169 of such title is amended--
       (A) by striking the item relating to section 2874 and 
     inserting the following new item:

``2874. Leasing of housing.'';
       (B) by striking the item relating to section 2879; and
       (C) by striking the item relating to section 2883 and 
     inserting the following new item:

``2883. Department of Defense Housing Improvement Fund.''.

     SEC. 2802. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT 
                   CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AS PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL 
                   RESPONSE ACTION.

       (a) Authority to Carry Out Unauthorized Projects.--
     Subsection (a) of section 2810 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) Authority to Carry Out Unauthorized Construction 
     Projects.--The Secretary concerned may carry out a military 
     construction project not otherwise authorized by law if the 
     Secretary determines that the project is necessary to carry 
     out a response under chapter 160 of this title or the 
     Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
     Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.).''.
       (b) Congressional Notification.--Subsection (b) of such 
     section is amended by striking ``(1)'' and the first sentence 
     and inserting ``Congressional Notification.--(1) When a 
     decision is made to carry out a military construction project 
     under this section that exceeds the amount specified in 
     section 2805(b)(1) of this title, the Secretary concerned 
     shall submit a report in writing to the appropriate 
     committees of Congress on that decision.''.
       (c) Definition.--Subsection (c) of such section is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``Response Defined.--'' after ``(c)''; and
       (2) by striking ``action''.

     SEC. 2803. LEASING OF MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING IN KOREA.

       Paragraph (3) of section 2828(e) of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(3) In addition to the 450 units of family housing 
     referred to in paragraph (1) for which the maximum lease 
     amount is $25,000 per unit per year, the Secretary of the 
     Army may lease in Korea--
       ``(A) not more than 1,175 units of family housing subject 
     to that maximum lease amount; and
       ``(B) not more than 2,400 units of family housing subject 
     to a maximum lease amount of $35,000 per unit per year.''.

        Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration

     SEC. 2811. AGREEMENTS WITH PRIVATE ENTITIES TO LIMIT 
                   ENCROACHMENTS AND OTHER CONSTRAINTS ON MILITARY 
                   TRAINING, TESTING, AND OPERATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 159 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 2684 the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 2684a. Agreements to limit encroachments and other 
       constraints on military training, testing, and operations

       ``(a) Agreements Authorized.--The Secretary of a military 
     department may enter into an agreement with a private entity 
     described in subsection (b) to address the use or development 
     of real property in the vicinity of a military installation 
     for purposes of--
       ``(1) limiting any development or use of the property that 
     would otherwise be incompatible with the mission of the 
     installation; or
       ``(2) preserving habitat on the property in a manner that 
     is compatible with both--
       ``(A) current or anticipated environmental restrictions 
     that would or might otherwise restrict, impede, or otherwise 
     interfere, whether directly or indirectly, with current or 
     anticipated military training, testing, or operations on the 
     installation; and
       ``(B) current or anticipated military training, testing, or 
     operations on the installation.
       ``(b) Covered Private Entities.--A private entity referred 
     to in subsection (a) is any private entity that has as its 
     stated principal organizational purpose or goal the 
     conservation, restoration, or preservation of land and 
     natural resources, or a similar purpose or goal, as 
     determined by the Secretary concerned.
       ``(c) Inapplicability of Certain Contract Requirements.--
     Chapter 63 of title 31 shall not apply to any agreement 
     entered into under this section.
       ``(d) Acquisition and Acceptance of Property and 
     Interests.--(1) An agreement with a private entity under this 
     section--
       ``(A) may provide for the private entity to acquire all 
     right, title, and interest in and to any real property, or 
     any lesser interest in the property, as may be appropriate 
     for purposes of this section; and
       ``(B) shall provide for the private entity to transfer to 
     the United States, upon the request of the United States, any 
     property or interest so acquired.
       ``(2) Property or interests may not be acquired pursuant to 
     an agreement under this section unless the owner of the 
     property or interests, as the case may be, consents to the 
     acquisition.
       ``(3) An agreement under this section providing for the 
     acquisition of property or interests under paragraph (1)(A) 
     shall provide for the sharing by the United States and the 
     private entity concerned of the costs of the acquisition of 
     the property or interests.
       ``(4) The Secretary concerned shall identify any property 
     or interests to be acquired pursuant to an agreement under 
     this section. The property or interests shall be limited to 
     the minimum property or interests necessary to ensure that 
     the property concerned is developed and used in a manner 
     appropriate for purposes of this section.
       ``(5) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary concerned may accept on behalf of the United States 
     any property or interest to be transferred to the United 
     States under paragraph (1)(B).

[[Page H2321]]

       ``(6) The Secretary concerned may, for purposes of the 
     acceptance of property or interests under this subsection, 
     accept an appraisal or title documents prepared or adopted by 
     a non-Federal entity as satisfying the applicable 
     requirements of section 301 of the Uniform Relocation 
     Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 
     (42 U.S.C. 4651) or section 355 of the Revised Statutes (40 
     U.S.C. 255) if the Secretary finds that the appraisal or 
     title documents substantially comply with the requirements.
       ``(e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary 
     concerned may require such additional terms and conditions in 
     an agreement under this section as the Secretary considers 
     appropriate to protect the interests of the United States.
       ``(f) Funding.--(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     funds authorized to be appropriated for operation and 
     maintenance of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, or 
     Defense-wide activities, including funds authorized to be 
     appropriated for the Legacy Resources Management Program, may 
     be used to enter into agreements under this section.
       ``(2) In the case of a military installation operated 
     primarily with funds authorized to be appropriated for 
     research, development, test, and evaluation, funds authorized 
     to be appropriated for the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air 
     Force, or Defense-wide activities for research, development, 
     test, and evaluation may be used to enter into agreements 
     under this section with respect to the installation.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 2684 the following new item:

``2684a. Agreements to limit encroachments and other constraints on 
              military training, testing, and operations.''.

      SEC. 2812. CONVEYANCE OF SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY FOR NATURAL 
                   RESOURCE CONSERVATION PURPOSES.

       (a) Conveyance Authority.--(1) Chapter 159 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 
     2694 the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2694a. Conveyance of surplus real property for natural 
       resource conservation

       ``(a) Authority to Convey.--The Secretary of a military 
     department may convey to an eligible recipient described in 
     subsection (b) any surplus real property that--
       ``(1) is under the administrative control of the Secretary;
       ``(2) is suitable and desirable for conservation purposes;
       ``(3) has been made available for public benefit transfer 
     for a sufficient period of time to potential claimants; and
       ``(4) is not subject to a pending request for transfer to 
     another Federal agency or for conveyance to any other 
     qualified recipient for public benefit transfer under the 
     real property disposal processes and authorities established 
     pursuant to the Federal Property and Administrative Services 
     Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 471, et seq.).
       ``(b) Eligible Recipients.--The conveyance of surplus real 
     property under subsection (a) may be made to any of the 
     following:
       ``(A) A State or political subdivision of a State.
       ``(B) A nonprofit organization that exists for the primary 
     purpose of conservation of natural resources on real 
     property.
       ``(c) Revisionary Interest and Other Deed Requirements.--
     (1) The deed of conveyance of any surplus real property 
     conveyed under subsection (a) disposed of under this 
     subsection shall require the property to be used and 
     maintained for the conservation of natural resources in 
     perpetuity. If the Secretary of the military department that 
     made the conveyance determines at any time that the property 
     is not being used or maintained for such purpose, then, at 
     the option of the Secretary, all or any portion of the 
     property shall revert to the United States.
       ``(2) The deed of conveyance may permit the recipient of 
     the property--
       ``(A) to convey the property to another eligible entity 
     described in subsection (b), subject to the approval of the 
     Secretary of the military department that made the conveyance 
     and subject to the same covenants and terms and conditions as 
     provided in the deed from the United States; and
       ``(B) to conduct incidental revenue-producing activities on 
     the property that are compatible with the use of the property 
     for conservation purposes.
       ``(3) The deed of conveyance may contain such additional 
     terms, reservations, restrictions, and conditions as the 
     Secretary of the military department considers appropriate to 
     protect the interests of the United States.
       ``(d) Release of Covenants.--The Secretary of the military 
     department that conveys real property under subsection (a), 
     with the concurrence of the Secretary of Interior, may grant 
     a release from a covenant included in the deed of conveyance 
     of the property under subsection (c) on the condition that 
     the recipient of the property pay the fair market value, as 
     determined by the Secretary of the military department, of 
     the property at the time of the release of the covenant. The 
     Secretary of the military department may reduce the amount 
     required to be paid under this subsection to account for the 
     value of the natural resource conservation benefit that has 
     accrued to the United States during the period the covenant 
     was in effect, if the benefit was not taken into account in 
     determining the original consideration for the conveyance.
       ``(e) Limitations.--A conveyance under subsection (a) shall 
     not be used in settlement of any litigation, dispute, or 
     claim against the United States, or as a condition of 
     allowing any defense activity under any Federal, State, or 
     local permitting or review process. The Secretary of a 
     military department may make a conveyance under subsection 
     (a), with the restrictions specified in subsection (c), to 
     establish a mitigation bank, but only if the establishment of 
     the mitigation bank does not occur in order to satisfy any 
     condition for permitting military activity under a Federal, 
     State, or local permitting or review process.
       ``(f) Consideration.--In fixing the consideration for the 
     conveyance of real property under subsection (a) or in 
     determining the amount of any reduction of the amount to be 
     paid for the release of a covenant under subsection (d), the 
     Secretary of the military department concerned shall take 
     into consideration any benefit that has accrued or may accrue 
     to the United States from the use of such property for the 
     conservation of natural resources.
       ``(g) Relation to Other Conveyance Authorities.--(1) The 
     Secretary of a military department may not make a conveyance 
     under this section of any real property to be disposed of 
     under a base closure law in a manner that is inconsistent 
     with the requirements and conditions of the base closure law.
       ``(2) In the case of real property on Guam, the Secretary 
     of a military department may not make a conveyance under this 
     section unless the Government of Guam has been first afforded 
     the opportunity to acquire the real property as authorized by 
     section 1 of Public Law 106-504 (114 Stat. 2309).
       ``(h) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) The term `State' includes the District of Columbia, 
     the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Marianas, and the territories and possessions of the 
     United States.
       ``(2) The term `base closure law' means the following:
       ``(A) Section 2687 of this title.
       ``(B) Title II of the Defense Authorization Amendments and 
     Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1988 (10 U.S.C. 2687 
     note).
       ``(C) The Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 
     (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 
     note).
       ``(D) Any other similar authority for the closure or 
     realignment of military installations that is enacted after 
     the date of the enactment of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     2694 the following new item:

``2694a. Conveyance of surplus real property for natural resource 
              conservation.''.
       (b) Acceptance of Funds to Cover Administrative Expenses.--
     Section 2695(b) of such title is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) The conveyance of real property under section 2694a 
     of this title.''.
       (c) Agreements With Nonprofit Natural Resource Conservation 
     Organizations.--Section 2701(d) of such title is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``with any State or local 
     government agency, or with any Indian tribe,'' and inserting 
     ``any State or local government agency, any Indian tribe, or 
     any nonprofit conservation organization''; and
       (2) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(3) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       ``(A) The term `Indian tribe' has the meaning given such 
     term in section 101(36) of Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 
     9601(36)).
       ``(B) The term `nonprofit conservation organization' means 
     any non-governmental nonprofit organization whose primary 
     purpose is conservation of open space or natural 
     resources.''.

     SEC. 2813. NATIONAL EMERGENCY EXEMPTION FROM SCREENING AND 
                   OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF MCKINNEY-VENTO HOMELESS 
                   ASSISTANCE ACT FOR PROPERTY USED IN SUPPORT OF 
                   RESPONSE ACTIVITIES.

       Section 501 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 11411) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (i) as subsection (j); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (h) the following new 
     subsection (i):
       ``(i) Applicability to Certain Property During 
     Emergencies.--The screening requirements and other provisions 
     of this section shall not apply to any property that is 
     excess property or surplus property or that is described as 
     unutilized or underutilized property if the property is 
     subject to a request for conveyance or use for the purpose of 
     directly supporting activities in response to--
       ``(1) a war or national emergency declared in accordance 
     with the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.); 
     or
       ``(2) an emergency or major disaster declared in accordance 
     with the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
     Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.).''.

     SEC. 2814. DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM ON REDUCTION IN LONG-TERM 
                   FACILITY MAINTENANCE COSTS.

       (a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary of Defense may 
     conduct a demonstration program to assess the feasibility and 
     desirability of including facility maintenance requirements 
     in construction contracts for military construction projects 
     for the purpose of determining whether such requirements 
     facilitate reductions in the long-term facility maintenance 
     costs of the military departments.
       (b) Contracts.--Not more than 12 contracts may contain 
     requirements referred to in subsection (a) for the purpose of 
     the demonstration program under this section. The 
     demonstration program may only cover contracts entered into 
     on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (c) Effective Period of Requirements.--The effective period 
     of a requirement referred to in subsection (a) that is 
     included in a contract

[[Page H2322]]

     for the purpose of the demonstration program under this 
     program may not exceed five years.
       (d) Reporting Requirements.--Not later than January 31, 
     2005, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a 
     report on the demonstration program authorized by this 
     section and the related Department of the Army demonstration 
     program authorized by section 2814 of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (division 
     B of Public Law 107-107; 115 Stat. 1310; 10 U.S.C. 2809 
     note), including the following:
       (1) A description of all contracts entered into under the 
     demonstration programs.
       (2) An evaluation of the demonstration programs and a 
     description of the experience of the Secretary of Defense and 
     the Secretary of the Army respect to such contracts.
       (3) Any recommendations, including recommendations for the 
     termination, continuation, or expansion of the demonstration 
     programs, that the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of 
     the Army considers appropriate.
       (e) Expiration.--The authority under subsection (a) to 
     include requirements referred to in that subsection in 
     contracts under the demonstration program under this section 
     shall expire on September 30, 2006.
       (f) Funding.--Amounts authorized to be appropriated for a 
     fiscal year for military construction shall be available for 
     the demonstration program under this section in such fiscal 
     year.
       (g) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2814 of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (division 
     B of Public Law 107-107; 115 Stat. 1310; 10 U.S.C. 2809 note) 
     is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (d); and
       (2) by redesignating subsections (e) and (f) as subsections 
     (d) and (e), respectively.

     SEC. 2815. EXPANDED AUTHORITY TO TRANSFER PROPERTY AT 
                   MILITARY INSTALLATIONS TO BE CLOSED TO PERSONS 
                   WHO CONSTRUCT OR PROVIDE MILITARY FAMILY 
                   HOUSING.

       (a) 1988 Law.--Section 204(e)(1) of the Defense 
     Authorization Amendments and Base Closure and Realignment Act 
     (Public Law 100-526; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) is amended by 
     striking the last sentence.
       (b) 1990 Law.--Section 2905(f)(1) of the Defense Base 
     Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of 
     Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) is amended by 
     striking the last sentence.

                      Subtitle C--Land Conveyances

                        PART I--ARMY CONVEYANCES

     SEC. 2821. LAND CONVEYANCES, LANDS IN ALASKA NO LONGER 
                   REQUIRED FOR NATIONAL GUARD PURPOSES.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey to an eligible entity described subsection (b) all 
     right, title, and interest of the United States in and to any 
     parcel of real property, including any improvements thereon, 
     in the State of Alaska described in subsection (c) if the 
     Secretary determines the conveyance would be in the public 
     interest.
       (b) Eligible Recipients.--The following entities shall be 
     eligible to receive real property under subsection (a):
       (1) The State of Alaska.
       (2) A governmental entity in the State of Alaska.
       (3) A Native Corporation (as defined in section 3 of the 
     Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1602)).
       (4) The Metlakatla Indian Community.
       (c) Covered Property.--Subsection (a) applies to real 
     property located in the State of Alaska that--
       (1) is under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Army 
     and, before December 2, 1980, was under such jurisdiction for 
     the use of the Alaska National Guard;
       (2) is located in a unit of the National Wildlife Refuge 
     System designated in the Alaska National Interest Lands 
     Conservation Act (Public Law 96-487; 16 U.S.C. 668dd note);
       (3) is excess to the needs of the Alaska National Guard and 
     the Department of Defense; and
       (4) the Secretary determines that--
       (A) the anticipated cost to the United States of retaining 
     the property exceeds the value of such property; or
       (B) the condition of the property makes it unsuitable for 
     retention by the United States.
       (d) Consideration.--The conveyance of real property under 
     this section shall, at the election of the Secretary, be for 
     no consideration or for consideration in an amount determined 
     by the Secretary to be appropriate under the circumstances.
       (e) Use of Consideration.--If consideration is received for 
     the conveyance of real property under subsection (a), the 
     Secretary may use the amounts received, in such amounts as 
     are provided in appropriations Acts, to pay for--
       (1) the cost of a survey described in subsection (f) with 
     respect to the property;
       (2) the cost of carrying out any environmental assessment, 
     study, or analysis, and any remediation, that may be required 
     under Federal law, or is considered appropriate by the 
     Secretary, in connection with the property or the conveyance 
     of the property; and
       (3) any other costs incurred by the Secretary in conveying 
     the property.
       (f) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of any real property to be conveyed under 
     subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory 
     to the Secretary.
       (g) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with a conveyance of real property under this section as the 
     Secretary considers appropriate to protect the interests of 
     the United States.

     SEC. 2822. LAND CONVEYANCE, FORT CAMPBELL, KENTUCKY.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey, without consideration, to the City of Hopkinsville, 
     Kentucky, all right, title, and interest of the United States 
     in and to a parcel of real property at Fort Campbell, 
     Kentucky, consisting of approximately 50 acres and containing 
     an abandoned railroad spur for the purpose of permitting the 
     City to use the property for storm water management, 
     recreation, transportation, and other public purposes.
       (b) Description of Property.--The acreage of the real 
     property to be conveyed under subsection (a) has been 
     determined by the Secretary through a legal description 
     outlining such acreage. No further survey of the property 
     before transfer is necessary.
       (c) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.

     SEC. 2823. LAND CONVEYANCE, ARMY RESERVE TRAINING CENTER, 
                   BUFFALO, MINNESOTA.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey, without consideration, to the Buffalo Independent 
     School District 877 of Buffalo, Minnesota (in this section 
     referred to as the ``School District''), all right, title, 
     and interest of the United States in and to a parcel of real 
     property, including improvements thereon, that is located at 
     800 8th Street, N.E., in Buffalo, Minnesota, and contains a 
     former Army Reserve Training Center, which is being used by 
     the School District as the site of the Phoenix Learning 
     Center.
       (b) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the real property to be conveyed under 
     subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory 
     to the Secretary. The cost of the survey shall be borne by 
     the School District.
       (c) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.

     SEC. 2824. LAND CONVEYANCE, FORT BLISS, TEXAS

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey, without consideration, to the County of El Paso, 
     Texas (in this section referred to as the ``County''), all 
     right, title, and interest of the United States in and to a 
     parcel of real property, including improvements thereon, 
     consisting of approximately 44 acres at Fort Bliss, Texas, 
     for the purpose of facilitating the construction by the State 
     of Texas of a nursing home for veterans of the Armed Forces.
       (b) Reversionary Interest.--If, at the end of the five-year 
     period beginning on the date the Secretary makes the 
     conveyance under subsection (a), the Secretary determines 
     that a nursing home for veterans is not in operation on the 
     conveyed real property, all right, title, and interest in and 
     to the property, including any improvements thereon, shall 
     revert to the United States, and the United States shall have 
     the right of immediate entry onto the property. Any 
     determination of the Secretary under this subsection shall be 
     made on the record after an opportunity for a hearing.
       (c) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the real property to be conveyed under 
     subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory 
     to the Secretary. The cost of the survey shall be borne by 
     the County.
       (d) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.

     SEC. 2825. LAND CONVEYANCE, FORT HOOD, TEXAS.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey, without consideration, to the Veterans Land Board of 
     the State of Texas (in this section referred to as the 
     ``Board''), all right, title, and interest of the United 
     States in and to a parcel of real property, including any 
     improvements thereon, consisting of approximately 174 acres 
     at Fort Hood, Texas, for the purpose of permitting the Board 
     to establish a State-run cemetery for veterans.
       (b) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the real property to be conveyed under 
     subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory 
     to the Secretary. The cost of the survey shall be borne by 
     the Board.
       (c) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.

                       PART II--NAVY CONVEYANCES

     SEC. 2831. LAND CONVEYANCE, MARINE CORPS AIR STATION, 
                   MIRAMAR, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Navy may 
     convey to the ENPEX Corporation, Incorporated (in this 
     section referred to as the ``Corporation''), all right, 
     title, and interest of the United States in and to a parcel 
     of real property, including any improvements thereon, at 
     Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, San Diego, California, 
     consisting of approximately 60 acres and appurtenant 
     easements and any other necessary interests in real property 
     for the purpose of permitting the Corporation to use the 
     property for the production of electric power and related 
     ancillary activities.
       (b) Consideration.--(1) As consideration for the conveyance 
     under subsection (a), the Corporation shall--

[[Page H2323]]

       (A) convey to the United States all right, title, and 
     interest of the Corporation in and to a parcel of real 
     property in the San Diego area that is suitable for military 
     family housing, as determined by the Secretary; and
       (B) if the parcel conveyed under subparagraph (A) does not 
     contain housing units suitable for use as military family 
     housing, design and construct such military family housing 
     units and supporting facilities as the Secretary considers 
     appropriate.
       (2) The total combined value of the real property and 
     military family housing conveyed by the Corporation under 
     this subsection shall be at least equal to the fair market 
     value of the real property conveyed to the Secretary under 
     subsection (a), including any severance costs arising from 
     any diminution of the value or utility of other property at 
     Marine Corps Air Station Miramar attributable to the 
     prospective future use of the property conveyed under 
     subsection (a).
       (3) The Secretary shall determine the fair market value of 
     the real property to be conveyed under subsection (a) and the 
     fair market value of the consideration to be provided under 
     this subsection. Such determinations shall be final.
       (c) Reversionary Interest.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2), 
     if the Secretary determines at any time that the property 
     conveyed under subsection (a) is not being used in accordance 
     with the purpose of the conveyance specified in such 
     subsection, all right, title, and interest in and to the 
     property, including any improvements thereon, shall revert, 
     at the option of the Secretary, to the United States, and the 
     United States shall have the right of immediate entry onto 
     the property. Any determination of the Secretary under this 
     subsection shall be made on the record after an opportunity 
     for a hearing.
       (2) If Marine Corps Air Station Miramar is no longer used 
     as a Federal aviation facility, paragraph (1) shall no longer 
     apply, and the Secretary shall release, without 
     consideration, the reversionary interest retained by the 
     United States under such paragraph.
       (d) Administrative Expenses.--(1) The Corporation shall 
     make funds available to the Secretary to cover costs to be 
     incurred by the Secretary, or reimburse the Secretary for 
     costs incurred, to carry out the conveyance under subsection 
     (a), including survey costs, costs related to environmental 
     documentation, and other administrative costs related to the 
     conveyance. This paragraph does not apply to costs associated 
     with the removal of explosive ordnance from the parcel and 
     environmental remediation of the parcel.
       (2) Section 2695(c) of title 10 United States Code, shall 
     apply to any amount received under paragraph (1). If the 
     amounts received in advance under such paragraph exceed the 
     costs actually incurred by the Secretary, the Secretary shall 
     refund the excess amount to the Corporation.
       (e) Descriptions of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     descriptions of the real property to be conveyed by the 
     Secretary under subsection (a) and the property to be 
     conveyed by the Corporation under subsection (b) shall be 
     determined by a survey satisfactory to the Secretary.
       (f) Exemptions.--Section 2696 of title 10, United States 
     Code, does not apply to the conveyance authorized by 
     subsection (a), and the authority to make the conveyance 
     shall not be considered to render the property excess or 
     underutilized.
       (g) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyances authorized by this section as the 
     Secretary considers appropriate to protect the interests of 
     the United States.

     SEC. 2832. BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS, MARINE CORPS BASE, QUANTICO, 
                   AND PRINCE WILLIAM FOREST PARK, VIRGINIA.

       (a) Boundary Adjustments and Related Transfers.--(1) The 
     Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the Interior shall 
     adjust the boundaries of Marine Corps Base, Quantico, 
     Virginia, and Prince William Forest Park, Virginia, to 
     conform to the boundaries depicted on the map entitled ``Map 
     Depicting Boundary Adjustments Proposed With March 10, 1998, 
     MOU Between Prince William Forest Park and Marine Corps Base 
     Quantico''.
       (2) As part of the boundary adjustment, the Secretary of 
     the Navy shall transfer, without reimbursement, to the 
     administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior 
     approximately 352 acres of land, as depicted on the map, and 
     the Secretary of the Interior shall retain administrative 
     jurisdiction over approximately 1,034 acres of land, which is 
     a portion of the Department of Interior land commonly known 
     as the Quantico Special Use Permit Land.
       (3) As part of the boundary adjustment, the Secretary of 
     the Interior shall transfer, without reimbursement, to the 
     administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Navy 
     approximately 3398 acres of land, as depicted on the map.
       (b) Effect of Subsequent Determination Property is 
     Excess.--(1) If land transferred or retained under paragraph 
     (2) or (3) of subsection (a) is subsequently determined to be 
     excess to the needs of the Federal agency that received or 
     retained the land, the head of that Federal agency shall 
     offer to return administrative jurisdiction over the land, 
     without reimbursement, to the Federal agency from which the 
     land was received or retained.
       (2) If the offer under paragraph (1) is not accepted within 
     90 days or is otherwise rejected, the head of the Federal 
     agency holding the land may proceed to dispose of the land 
     under then current law and regulations governing the disposal 
     of excess property.

                    PART III--AIR FORCE CONVEYANCES

     SEC. 2841. LAND CONVEYANCES, WENDOVER AIR FORCE BASE 
                   AUXILIARY FIELD, NEVADA.

       (a) Conveyances Authorized To West Wendover, Nevada.--(1) 
     The Secretary of the Interior may convey, without 
     consideration, to the City of West Wendover, Nevada, all 
     right, title, and interest of the United States in and to the 
     following:
       (A) The lands at Wendover Air Force Base Auxiliary Field, 
     Nevada, identified in Easement No. AFMC-HL-2-00-334 that are 
     determined by the Secretary of the Air Force to be no longer 
     required for Air Force purposes.
       (B) The lands at Wendover Air Force Base Auxiliary Field 
     identified for disposition on the map entitled ``West 
     Wendover, Nevada-Excess'', dated January 5, 2001, that are 
     determined by the Secretary of the Air Force to be no longer 
     required for Air Force purposes.
       (2) The purposes of the conveyances under this subsection 
     are--
       (A) to permit the establishment and maintenance of runway 
     protection zones; and
       (B) to provide for the development of an industrial park 
     and related infrastructure.
       (3) The map referred to in paragraph (1)(B) shall be on 
     file and available for public inspection in the offices of 
     the Director of the Bureau of Land Management and the Elko 
     District Office of the Bureau of Land Management.
       (b) Conveyance Authorized to Tooele County, Utah.--(1) The 
     Secretary of the Interior may convey, without consideration, 
     to Tooele County, Utah, all right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in and to the lands at Wendover Air Force Base 
     Auxiliary Field identified in Easement No. AFMC-HL-2-00-318 
     that are determined by the Secretary of the Air Force to be 
     no longer required for Air Force purposes.
       (2) The purpose of the conveyance under this subsection is 
     to permit the establishment and maintenance of runway 
     protection zones and an aircraft accident potential 
     protection zone as necessitated by continued military 
     aircraft operations at the Utah Test and Training Range.
       (c) Phased Conveyances.--The land conveyances authorized by 
     subsections (a) and (b) may be conducted in phases. To the 
     extent practicable, the first phase of the conveyances should 
     involve at least 3,000 acres.
       (d) Management of Conveyed Lands.--The lands conveyed under 
     subsections (a) and (b) shall be managed by the City of West 
     Wendover, Nevada, City of Wendover, Utah, Tooele County, 
     Utah, and Elko County, Nevada--
       (1) in accordance with the provisions of an Interlocal 
     Memorandum of Agreement entered into between the Cities of 
     West Wendover, Nevada, and Wendover, Utah, Tooele County, 
     Utah, and Elko County, Nevada, providing for the coordinated 
     management and development of the lands for the economic 
     benefit of both communities; and
       (2) in a manner that is consistent with such provisions of 
     the easements referred to subsections (a) and (b) that, as 
     jointly determined by the Secretary of the Air Force and 
     Secretary of the Interior, remain applicable and relevant to 
     the operation and management of the lands following 
     conveyance and are consistent with the provisions of this 
     section.
       (e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary of the 
     Air Force and the Secretary of the Interior may jointly 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyances required by subsections (a) and (b) as 
     the Secretaries consider appropriate to protect the interests 
     of the United States.

                       Subtitle D--Other Matters

     SEC. 2861. EASEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ROADS OR HIGHWAYS, 
                   MARINE CORPS BASE, CAMP PENDLETON, CALIFORNIA.

       Section 2851(a) of the Military Construction Authorization 
     Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (division B of Public Law 105-261; 
     112 Stat. 2219), as amended by section 2867 of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 
     107-107; 115 Stat. 1334) is amended in the first sentence by 
     striking ``easement to construct'' and all that follows 
     through the period at the end and inserting ``easement to 
     construct, operate, and maintain a restricted access highway, 
     notwithstanding any provision of State law that would 
     otherwise prevent the Secretary from granting the easement or 
     the Agency from constructing, operating, or maintaining the 
     restricted access highway.''.

     SEC. 2862. SALE OF EXCESS TREATED WATER AND WASTEWATER 
                   TREATMENT CAPACITY, MARINE CORPS BASE, CAMP 
                   LEJEUNE, NORTH CAROLINA.

       (a) Sale Authorized.--The Secretary of the Navy may provide 
     to Onslow County, North Carolina, or any authority or 
     political subdivision organized under the laws of North 
     Carolina to provide public water or sewage services in Onslow 
     County (in this section referred to as the ``County''), 
     treated water and wastewater treatment services from 
     facilities at Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune, North 
     Carolina, if the Secretary determines that the provision of 
     these utility services is in the public interest and will not 
     interfere with current or future operations at Camp Lejeune.
       (b) Inapplicability of Certain Requirements.--Section 2686 
     of title 10, United States Code, shall not apply to the 
     provision of public water or sewage services authorized by 
     subsection (a).
       (c) Consideration.--As consideration for the receipt of 
     public water or sewage services under subsection (a), the 
     County shall pay to the Secretary an amount (in cash or in 
     kind) equal to the fair market value of the services. Amounts 
     received in cash shall be credited to the base operation and 
     maintenance accounts of Camp Lejeune.
       (d) Expansion.--The Secretary may make minor expansions and 
     extensions and permit

[[Page H2324]]

     connections to the public water or sewage systems of the 
     County in order to furnish the services authorized under 
     subsection (a). The Secretary shall restrict the provision of 
     services to the County to those areas in the County where 
     residential development would be compatible with current and 
     future operations at Camp Lejeune.
       (e) Administrative Expenses.--The Secretary may require the 
     County to reimburse the Secretary for the costs incurred by 
     the Secretary to provide public water or sewage services to 
     the County under subsection (a).
       (2) Section 2695(c) of title 10 United States Code, shall 
     apply to any amount received under this subsection.
       (f) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the provision of public water or sewage services under 
     this section as the Secretary considers appropriate to 
     protect the interests of the United States.

     SEC. 2863. RATIFICATION OF AGREEMENT REGARDING ADAK NAVAL 
                   COMPLEX, ALASKA, AND RELATED LAND CONVEYANCES.

       (a) Ratification of Agreement.--The document entitled the 
     ``Agreement Concerning the Conveyance of Property at the Adak 
     Naval Complex'', and dated September 20, 2000, executed by 
     the Aleut Corporation, the Department of the Interior, and 
     the Department of the Navy, together with any technical 
     amendments or modifications to the boundaries that may be 
     agreed to by the parties, is hereby ratified, confirmed, and 
     approved and the terms, conditions, procedures, covenants, 
     reservations, indemnities and other provisions set forth in 
     the Agreement are declared to be obligations and commitments 
     of the United States as a matter of Federal law. 
     Modifications to the maps and legal descriptions of lands to 
     be removed from the National Wildlife Refuge System within 
     the military withdrawal on Adak Island set forth in Public 
     Land Order 1949 may be made only upon agreement of all 
     Parties to the Agreement and notification given to the 
     Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives and 
     the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate. 
     The acreage conveyed to the United States by the Aleut 
     Corporation under the Agreement, as modified, shall be at 
     least 36,000 acres.
       (b) Removal of Lands From Refuge.--Effective on the date of 
     conveyance to the Aleut Corporation of the Adak Exchange 
     Lands as described in the Agreement, all such lands shall be 
     removed from the National Wildlife Refuge System and shall 
     neither be considered as part of the Alaska Maritime National 
     Wildlife Refuge nor subject to any laws pertaining to lands 
     within the boundaries of the Alaska Maritime National 
     Wildlife Refuge. The conveyance restrictions imposed by 
     section 22(g) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 
     U.S.C. 1621(g)) for land in the National Wildlife Refuge 
     System shall not apply. The Secretary shall adjust the 
     boundaries of the Refuge so as to exclude all interests in 
     lands and land rights, surface and subsurface, received by 
     the Aleut Corporation in accordance with this section and the 
     Agreement.
       (c) Relation to Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.--Lands 
     and interests therein exchanged and conveyed by the United 
     States pursuant to this section shall be considered and 
     treated as conveyances of lands or interests therein under 
     the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, except that receipt 
     of such lands and interests therein shall not constitute a 
     sale or disposition of land or interests received pursuant to 
     such Act. The public easements for access to public lands and 
     waters reserved pursuant to the Agreement are deemed to 
     satisfy the requirements and purposes of section 17(b) of the 
     Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.
       (d) Reacquisition Authority.--The Secretary of the Interior 
     is authorized to acquire by purchase or exchange, on a 
     willing seller basis only, any land conveyed to the Aleut 
     Corporation under the Agreement and this section. In the 
     event any of the lands are subsequently acquired by the 
     United States, they shall be automatically included in the 
     National Wildlife Refuge System. The laws and regulations 
     applicable to refuge lands shall then apply to these lands 
     and the Secretary shall then adjust the boundaries 
     accordingly.
       (e) Conveyance of Navy Personal Property.--Notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law, and for the purposes of the 
     transfer of property authorized by this section, Department 
     of Navy personal property that remains on Adak Island is 
     deemed related to the real property and shall be conveyed by 
     the Department of the Navy to the Aleut Corporation, at no 
     additional cost, when the related real property is conveyed 
     by the Department of the Interior.
       (f) Additional Conveyance.--The Secretary of the Interior 
     shall convey to the Aleut Corporation those lands identified 
     in the Agreement as the former landfill sites without charge 
     to the Aleut Corporation's entitlement under the Alaska 
     Native Claims Settlement Act.
       (g) Valuation.--For purposes of section 21(c) of the Alaska 
     Native Claims Settlement Act, the receipt of all property by 
     the Aleut Corporation shall be entitled to a tax basis equal 
     to fair value on date of transfer. Fair value shall be 
     determined by replacement cost appraisal.
       (h) Certain Property Treated as Not Developed.--Any 
     property, including, but not limited to, appurtenances and 
     improvements, received pursuant to this section shall, for 
     purposes of section 21(d) of the Alaska Native Claims 
     Settlement Act and section 907(d) of the Alaska National 
     Interest Lands Conservation Act be treated as not developed 
     until such property is actually occupied, leased (other than 
     leases for nominal consideration to public entities) or sold 
     by the Aleut Corporation, or, in the case of a lease or other 
     transfer by the Aleut Corporation to a wholly owned 
     development subsidiary, actually occupied, leased, or sold by 
     the subsidiary.
       (i) Certain Lands Unavailable for Selection.--Upon 
     conveyance to the Aleut Corporation of the lands described in 
     Appendix A of the Agreement, the lands described in Appendix 
     C of the Agreement will become unavailable for selection 
     under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.
       (j) Maps.--The maps included as part of Appendix A to the 
     Agreement depict the lands to be conveyed to the Aleut 
     Corporation. The maps are on file at the Region 7 Office of 
     the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the offices 
     of the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge in Homer, 
     Alaska. The written legal descriptions of the lands to be 
     conveyed to the Aleut Corporation are also part of Appendix 
     A. In case of discrepancies, the maps shall control.
       (k) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) The term ``Agreement'' means the agreement ratified, 
     confirmed, and approved under subsection (a).
       (2) The term ``Aleut Corporation'' means the Alaskan Native 
     Regional Corporation known as the Aleut Corporation 
     incorporated in the State of Alaska pursuant to the Alaska 
     Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.).

     SEC. 2864. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ADDING MILITARY 
                   INSTALLATION TO CLOSURE LIST.

       Section 2914(d) of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment 
     Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 
     U.S.C. 2687 note), as added by section 3003 of the Military 
     Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (division 
     B of Public Law 107-107; 155 Stat, 1346), is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs 
     (5) and (6), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
     paragraph (4):
       ``(4) Limitation on authority to recommend additional 
     installation for closure.--Notwithstanding paragraph (3), the 
     decision of the Commission to add a military installation to 
     the Secretary's list of installations recommended for closure 
     must be unanimous, and at least two members of the Commission 
     must have visited the installation during the period of the 
     Commission's review of the list.''.

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

      TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

         Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations

     SEC. 3101. NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Energy for 
     fiscal year 2003 for the activities of the National Nuclear 
     Security Administration in carrying out programs necessary 
     for national security in the amount of $8,034,349,000, to be 
     allocated as follows:
       (1) For weapons activities, $5,937,000,000.
       (2) For defense nuclear nonproliferation activities, 
     $1,074,630,000.
       (3) For naval reactors, $706,790,000.
       (4) For the Office of the Administrator for Nuclear 
     Security, $315,929,000.
       (b) Authorization of New Plant Projects.--From funds 
     referred to in subsection (a) that are available for carrying 
     out plant projects, the Secretary may carry out new plant 
     projects as follows:
       (1) For weapons activities, the following new plant 
     projects:
       Project 03-D-101, Sandia underground reactor facility 
     (SURF), Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New 
     Mexico, $2,000,000.
       Project 03-D-103, project engineering and design, various 
     locations, $15,539,000.
       Project 03-D-121, gas transfer capacity expansion, Kansas 
     City Plant, Kansas City, Missouri, $4,000,000.
       Project 03-D-122, prototype purification facility, Y-12 
     plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, $20,800,000.
       Project 03-D-123, special nuclear materials 
     requalification, Pantex plant, Amarillo, Texas, $3,000,000.
       (2) For naval reactors, the following new plant project:
       Project 03-D-201, cleanroom technology facility, Bettis 
     Atomic Power Laboratory, West Mifflin, Pennsylvania, 
     $7,200,000.

     SEC. 3102. ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Funds are hereby 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Energy for 
     fiscal year 2003 for environmental restoration and waste 
     management activities and other defense activities in 
     carrying out programs necessary for national security in the 
     amount of $7,366,510,000, to be allocated as follows:
       (1) For defense environmental restoration and waste 
     management, $4,544,133,000.
       (2) For defense environmental management cleanup reform in 
     carrying out environmental restoration and waste management 
     activities necessary for national security programs, 
     $800,000,000.
       (3) For defense facilities closure projects, 
     $1,091,314,000.
       (4) For defense environmental management privatization, 
     $158,399,000.
       (5) For other defense activities in carrying out programs 
     necessary for national security, $457,664,000.
       (6) For defense nuclear waste disposal for payment to the 
     Nuclear Waste Fund established in section 302(c) of the 
     Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10222(c)), 
     $315,000,000.
       (b) Authorization of New Plant Project.--From funds 
     referred to in subsection (a) that are available for carrying 
     out plant projects, the Secretary may carry out, for 
     environmental restoration and waste management activities, 
     the following new plant project:

[[Page H2325]]

       Project 03-D-403, immobilized high-level waste interim 
     storage facility, Richland, Washington, $6,363,000.

   Subtitle B--Department of Energy National Security Authorizations 
                           General Provisions

     SEC. 3120. SHORT TITLE; DEFINITIONS.

       (a) Short Title.--This subtitle may be cited as the 
     ``Department of Energy National Security Authorizations 
     General Provisions Act''.
       (b) Definitions.--In this subtitle:
       (1) The term ``DOE national security authorization'' means 
     an authorization of appropriations for activities of the 
     Department of Energy in carrying out programs necessary for 
     national security.
       (2) The term ``congressional defense committees'' means--
       (A) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the Senate; and
       (B) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives.
       (3) The term ``minor construction threshold'' means 
     $5,000,000.

     SEC. 3121. REPROGRAMMING.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in sections 3129 and 
     3130, the Secretary of Energy may not use amounts 
     appropriated pursuant to a DOE national security 
     authorization for a program--
       (1) in amounts that exceed, in a fiscal year, the amount 
     authorized for that program by that authorization for that 
     fiscal year; or
       (2) which has not been presented to, or requested of, 
     Congress,
     until the Secretary submits to the congressional defense 
     committees a report referred to in subsection (b) with 
     respect to that program and a period of 30 days has elapsed 
     after the date on which such committees receive the report.
       (b) Report.--The report referred to in subsection (a) is a 
     report containing a full and complete statement of the action 
     proposed to be taken and the facts and circumstances relied 
     upon in support of the proposed action.
       (c) Computation of Days.--In the computation of the 30-day 
     period under subsection (a), there shall be excluded any day 
     on which either House of Congress is not in session because 
     of an adjournment of more than three days to a day certain.
       (d) Limitations.--
       (1) Total amount obligated.--In no event may the total 
     amount of funds obligated pursuant to a DOE national security 
     authorization for a fiscal year exceed the total amount 
     authorized to be appropriated by that authorization for that 
     fiscal year.
       (2) Prohibited items.--Funds appropriated pursuant to a DOE 
     national security authorization may not be used for an item 
     for which Congress has specifically denied funds.

     SEC. 3122. MINOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.

       (a) Authority.--Using operation and maintenance funds or 
     facilities and infrastructure funds authorized by a DOE 
     national security authorization, the Secretary of Energy may 
     carry out minor construction projects.
       (b) Annual Report.--The Secretary shall submit to the 
     congressional defense committees on an annual basis a report 
     on each exercise of the authority in subsection (a) during 
     the preceding fiscal year. Each report shall provide a brief 
     description of each minor construction project covered by the 
     report.
       (c) Cost Variation Reports to Congressional Committees.--
     If, at any time during the construction of any minor 
     construction project authorized by a DOE national security 
     authorization, the estimated cost of the project is revised 
     and the revised cost of the project exceeds the minor 
     construction threshold, the Secretary shall immediately 
     submit to the congressional defense committees a report 
     explaining the reasons for the cost variation.
       (d) Minor Construction Project Defined.--In this section, 
     the term ``minor construction project'' means any plant 
     project not specifically authorized by law for which the 
     approved total estimated cost does not exceed the minor 
     construction threshold.

     SEC. 3123. LIMITS ON CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Construction cost ceiling.--Except as provided in 
     paragraph (2), construction on a construction project which 
     is in support of national security programs of the Department 
     of Energy and was authorized by a DOE national security 
     authorization may not be started, and additional obligations 
     in connection with the project above the total estimated cost 
     may not be incurred, whenever the current estimated cost of 
     the construction project exceeds by more than 25 percent the 
     higher of--
       (A) the amount authorized for the project; or
       (B) the amount of the total estimated cost for the project 
     as shown in the most recent budget justification data 
     submitted to Congress.
       (2) Exception where notice-and-wait given.--An action 
     described in paragraph (1) may be taken if--
       (A) the Secretary of Energy has submitted to the 
     congressional defense committees a report on the actions and 
     the circumstances making such action necessary; and
       (B) a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on which 
     the report is received by the committees.
       (3) Computation of days.--In the computation of the 30-day 
     period under paragraph (2), there shall be excluded any day 
     on which either House of Congress is not in session because 
     of an adjournment of more than three days to a day certain.
       (b) Exception for Minor Projects.--Subsection (a) does not 
     apply to a construction project with a current estimated cost 
     of less than the minor construction threshold.

     SEC. 3124. FUND TRANSFER AUTHORITY.

       (a) Transfer to Other Federal Agencies.--The Secretary of 
     Energy may transfer funds authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Department of Energy pursuant to a DOE national security 
     authorization to other Federal agencies for the performance 
     of work for which the funds were authorized. Funds so 
     transferred may be merged with and be available for the same 
     purposes and for the same time period as the authorizations 
     of the Federal agency to which the amounts are transferred.
       (b) Transfer Within Department of Energy.--
       (1) Transfers permitted.--Subject to paragraph (2), the 
     Secretary of Energy may transfer funds authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of Energy pursuant to a DOE 
     national security authorization between any such 
     authorizations. Amounts of authorizations so transferred may 
     be merged with and be available for the same purposes and for 
     the same period as the authorization to which the amounts are 
     transferred.
       (2) Maximum amounts.--Not more than 5 percent of any such 
     authorization may be transferred between authorizations under 
     paragraph (1). No such authorization may be increased or 
     decreased by more than 5 percent by a transfer under such 
     paragraph.
       (c) Limitations.--The authority provided by this subsection 
     to transfer authorizations--
       (1) may be used only to provide funds for items relating to 
     activities necessary for national security programs that have 
     a higher priority than the items from which the funds are 
     transferred; and
       (2) may not be used to provide funds for an item for which 
     Congress has specifically denied funds.
       (d) Notice to Congress.--The Secretary of Energy shall 
     promptly notify the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate 
     and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of 
     Representatives of any transfer of funds to or from any DOE 
     national security authorization.

     SEC. 3125. AUTHORITY FOR CONCEPTUAL AND CONSTRUCTION DESIGN.

       (a) Requirement of Conceptual Design.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2) and except as 
     provided in paragraph (3), before submitting to Congress a 
     request for funds for a construction project that is in 
     support of a national security program of the Department of 
     Energy, the Secretary of Energy shall complete a conceptual 
     design for that project.
       (2) Requests for conceptual design funds.--If the estimated 
     cost of completing a conceptual design for a construction 
     project exceeds $3,000,000, the Secretary shall submit to 
     Congress a request for funds for the conceptual design before 
     submitting a request for funds for the construction project.
       (3) Exceptions.--The requirement in paragraph (1) does not 
     apply to a request for funds--
       (A) for a construction project the total estimated cost of 
     which is less than the minor construction threshold; or
       (B) for emergency planning, design, and construction 
     activities under section 3126.
       (b) Authority for Construction Design.--
       (1) In general.--Within the amounts authorized by a DOE 
     national security authorization, the Secretary of Energy may 
     carry out construction design (including architectural and 
     engineering services) in connection with any proposed 
     construction project if the total estimated cost for such 
     design does not exceed $600,000.
       (2) Specific authority required.--If the total estimated 
     cost for construction design in connection with any 
     construction project exceeds $600,000, funds for that design 
     must be specifically authorized by law.

     SEC. 3126. AUTHORITY FOR EMERGENCY PLANNING, DESIGN, AND 
                   CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Authority.--The Secretary of Energy may use any funds 
     available to the Department of Energy pursuant to a DOE 
     national security authorization, including funds authorized 
     to be appropriated for advance planning, engineering, and 
     construction design, and for plant projects, to perform 
     planning, design, and construction activities for any 
     Department of Energy national security program construction 
     project that, as determined by the Secretary, must proceed 
     expeditiously in order to protect public health and safety, 
     to meet the needs of national defense, or to protect 
     property.
       (b) Limitation.--The Secretary may not exercise the 
     authority under subsection (a) in the case of a construction 
     project until the Secretary has submitted to the 
     congressional defense committees a report on the activities 
     that the Secretary intends to carry out under this section 
     and the circumstances making those activities necessary.
       (c) Specific Authority.--The requirement of section 
     3125(b)(2) does not apply to emergency planning, design, and 
     construction activities conducted under this section.

     SEC. 3127. FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR ALL NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS 
                   OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY.

       Subject to the provisions of appropriation Acts and section 
     3121, amounts appropriated pursuant to a DOE national 
     security authorization for management and support activities 
     and for general plant projects are available for use, when 
     necessary, in connection with all national security programs 
     of the Department of Energy.

     SEC. 3128. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), 
     amounts appropriated for operation and maintenance or for 
     plant projects may, when so specified in an appropriations 
     Act, remain available until expended.
       (b) Exception for NNSA Funds.--Amounts appropriated for the 
     National Nuclear Security Administration pursuant to a DOE 
     national security authorization for a fiscal year shall 
     remain available to be expended--
       (1) only until the end of that fiscal year, in the case of 
     amounts appropriated for the Office of the Administrator for 
     Nuclear Security; and

[[Page H2326]]

       (2) only in that fiscal year and the two succeeding fiscal 
     years, in all other cases.

     SEC. 3129. TRANSFER OF DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 
                   FUNDS.

       (a) Transfer Authority for Defense Environmental Management 
     Funds.--The Secretary of Energy shall provide the manager of 
     each field office of the Department of Energy with the 
     authority to transfer defense environmental management funds 
     from a program or project under the jurisdiction of that 
     office to another such program or project.
       (b) Limitations.--
       (1) Number of transfers.--Not more than one transfer may be 
     made to or from any program or project under subsection (a) 
     in a fiscal year.
       (2) Amounts transferred.--The amount transferred to or from 
     a program or project in any one transfer under subsection (a) 
     may not exceed $5,000,000.
       (3) Determination required.--A transfer may not be carried 
     out by a manager of a field office under subsection (a) 
     unless the manager determines that the transfer is 
     necessary--
       (A) to address a risk to health, safety, or the 
     environment; or
       (B) to assure the most efficient use of defense 
     environmental management funds at the field office.
       (4) Impermissible uses.--Funds transferred pursuant to 
     subsection (a) may not be used for an item for which Congress 
     has specifically denied funds or for a new program or project 
     that has not been authorized by Congress.
       (c) Exemption From Reprogramming Requirements.--The 
     requirements of section 3121 shall not apply to transfers of 
     funds pursuant to subsection (a).
       (d) Notification.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management, 
     shall notify Congress of any transfer of funds pursuant to 
     subsection (a) not later than 30 days after such transfer 
     occurs.
       (e) Definitions.--In this section--
       (1) the term ``program or project'' means, with respect to 
     a field office of the Department of Energy, a program or 
     project that is for environmental restoration or waste 
     management activities necessary for national security 
     programs of the Department, that is being carried out by that 
     office, and for which defense environmental management funds 
     have been authorized and appropriated; and
       (2) the term ``defense environmental management funds'' 
     means funds appropriated to the Department of Energy pursuant 
     to an authorization for carrying out environmental 
     restoration and waste management activities necessary for 
     national security programs.

     SEC. 3130. TRANSFER OF WEAPONS ACTIVITIES FUNDS.

       (a) Transfer Authority for Weapons Activities Funds.--The 
     Secretary of Energy shall provide the manager of each field 
     office of the Department of Energy with the authority to 
     transfer weapons activities funds from a program or project 
     under the jurisdiction of that office to another such program 
     or project.
       (b) Limitations.--
       (1) Number of transfers.--Not more than one transfer may be 
     made to or from any program or project under subsection (a) 
     in a fiscal year.
       (2) Amounts transferred.--The amount transferred to or from 
     a program or project in any one transfer under subsection (a) 
     may not exceed $5,000,000.
       (3) Determination required.--A transfer may not be carried 
     out by a manager of a field office under subsection (a) 
     unless the manager determines that the transfer--
       (A) is necessary to address a risk to health, safety, or 
     the environment; or
       (B) will result in cost savings and efficiencies.
       (4) Limitation.--A transfer may not be carried out by a 
     manager of a field office under subsection (a) to cover a 
     cost overrun or scheduling delay for any program or project.
       (5) Impermissible uses.--Funds transferred pursuant to 
     subsection (a) may not be used for an item for which Congress 
     has specifically denied funds or for a new program or project 
     that has not been authorized by Congress.
       (c) Exemption From Reprogramming Requirements.--The 
     requirements of section 3121 shall not apply to transfers of 
     funds pursuant to subsection (a).
       (d) Notification.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Administrator for Nuclear Security, shall notify Congress of 
     any transfer of funds pursuant to subsection (a) not later 
     than 30 days after such transfer occurs.
       (e) Definitions.--In this section--
       (1) the term ``program or project'' means, with respect to 
     a field office of the Department of Energy, a program or 
     project that is for weapons activities necessary for national 
     security programs of the Department, that is being carried 
     out by that office, and for which weapons activities funds 
     have been authorized and appropriated; and
       (2) the term ``weapons activities funds'' means funds 
     appropriated to the Department of Energy pursuant to an 
     authorization for carrying out weapons activities necessary 
     for national security programs.

     SEC. 3131. SCOPE OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT PLANT PROJECTS.

       In carrying out programs necessary for national security, 
     the authority of the Secretary of Energy to carry out plant 
     projects includes authority for maintenance, restoration, 
     planning, construction, acquisition, modification of 
     facilities, and the continuation of projects authorized in 
     prior years, and land acquisition related thereto.

   Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations

     SEC. 3141. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF PANEL TO ASSESS THE 
                   RELIABILITY, SAFETY, AND SECURITY OF THE UNITED 
                   STATES NUCLEAR STOCKPILE.

       Section 3159 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (42 U.S.C. 2121 note) 
     is amended--
       (1) in subsection (d), by striking ``February 1, 2002,'' 
     and inserting ``February 1 of 2002 and 2003,''; and
       (2) in subsection (g), by striking ``three years'' and all 
     that follows through the period at the end and inserting 
     ``April 1, 2003.''.

     SEC. 3142. TRANSFER TO NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY 
                   ADMINISTRATION OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE'S 
                   COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION PROGRAM RELATING 
                   TO ELIMINATION OF WEAPONS GRADE PLUTONIUM IN 
                   RUSSIA.

       (a) Transfer of Program.--There are hereby transferred to 
     the Administrator for Nuclear Security the following:
       (1) The program, within the Cooperative Threat Reduction 
     program of the Department of Defense, relating to the 
     elimination of weapons grade plutonium in Russia.
       (2) All functions, powers, duties, and activities of that 
     program performed before the date of the enactment of this 
     Act by the Department of Defense.
       (b) Transfer of Assets.--(1) So much of the property, 
     records, and unexpended balances of appropriations, 
     allocations, and other funds employed, used, held, available, 
     or to be made available in connection with the program 
     transferred by subsection (a) are transferred to the 
     Administrator for use in connection with the program 
     transferred.
       (2) Funds so transferred--
       (A) shall be credited to the appropriation account of the 
     Department of Energy for the activities of the National 
     Nuclear Security Administration in carrying out defense 
     nuclear nonproliferation activities; and
       (B) remain subject to such limitations as applied to such 
     funds before such transfer.
       (c) References.--Any reference in any other Federal law to 
     the Secretary of Defense (or an officer of the Department of 
     Defense) or the Department of Defense shall, to the extent 
     such reference pertains to a function transferred by this 
     section, be deemed to refer to the Administrator for Nuclear 
     Security or the National Nuclear Security Administration, as 
     applicable.

     SEC. 3143. REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT FOR REPORTS ON OBLIGATION OF 
                   FUNDS FOR PROGRAMS ON FISSILE MATERIALS IN 
                   RUSSIA.

       Section 3131 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 617; 22 
     U.S.C. 5952 note) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``(a) Authority.--''; 
     and
       (2) by striking subsection (b).

     SEC. 3144. ANNUAL CERTIFICATION TO THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS 
                   ON THE CONDITION OF THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR 
                   WEAPONS STOCKPILE.

       (a) Certification Required.--(1) Not later than January 15 
     of each year, each official specified in subsection (b)(1) 
     shall submit to the Secretary concerned a certification 
     regarding the safety, reliability, and performance of each 
     nuclear weapon type in the active stockpile of the United 
     States for which such official is responsible.
       (2) Not later than February 1 of each year, the Secretary 
     of Defense and the Secretary of Energy shall each submit to 
     the President and the Congress--
       (A) each certification, without change, submitted under 
     paragraph (1) to that Secretary;
       (B) each report, without change, submitted under subsection 
     (d) to that Secretary;
       (C) the comments of that Secretary with respect to each 
     such certification and each such report; and
       (D) any other information that the Secretary considers 
     appropriate.
       (b) Covered Officials and Secretaries.--(1) The officials 
     referred to in subsection (a) are the following:
       (A) The head of each national security laboratory, as 
     defined in section 3281 of the National Nuclear Security 
     Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 2471).
       (B) The commander of the United States Strategic Command.
       (2) In this section, the term ``Secretary concerned'' 
     means--
       (A) the Secretary of Energy, with respect to matters 
     concerning the Department of Energy; and
       (B) the Secretary of Defense, with respect to matters 
     concerning the Department of Defense.
       (c) Use of ``Red Teams'' For Laboratory Certifications.--
     The head of each national security laboratory shall, to 
     assist in the certification process required by subsection 
     (a), establish one or more teams of experts known as ``red 
     teams''. Each such team shall--
       (1) subject to challenge the matters covered by that 
     laboratory's certification, and submit the results of such 
     challenge, together with findings and recommendations, to the 
     head of that laboratory; and
       (2) carry out peer review of the certifications carried out 
     by the other laboratories, and submit the results of such 
     peer review to the head of the laboratory concerned.
       (d) Report Accompanying Certification.--Each official 
     specified in subsection (b)(1) shall submit with each such 
     certification a report on the stockpile stewardship and 
     management program of the Department of Energy. The report 
     shall include the following:
       (1) An assessment of the adequacy of the science-based 
     tools and methods being used to determine the matters covered 
     by the certification.
       (2) An assessment of the capability of the manufacturing 
     infrastructure required by section 3137 of the National 
     Defense Authorization

[[Page H2327]]

     Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (42 U.S.C. 2121 note) to identify 
     and fix any inadequacy with respect to the matters covered by 
     the certification.
       (3) An assessment of the need of the United States to 
     resume testing of nuclear weapons and the readiness of the 
     United States to resume such testing, together with an 
     identification of the specific tests the conduct of which 
     might have value and the anticipated value of conducting such 
     tests.
       (4) An identification and discussion of any other matter 
     that adversely affects the ability to accurately determine 
     the matters covered by the certification.
       (5) In the case of a report submitted by the head of a 
     national security laboratory, the findings and 
     recommendations submitted by the ``red teams'' under 
     subsection (c) that relate to such certification, and a 
     discussion of those findings and recommendations.
       (6) In the case of a report submitted by the head of a 
     national security laboratory, a discussion of the relative 
     merits of other weapon types that could accomplish the 
     mission of the weapon type covered by such certification.
       (e) Classified Form.--Each submission required by this 
     section shall be made only in classified form.

     SEC. 3145. PLAN FOR ACHIEVING ONE-YEAR READINESS POSTURE FOR 
                   RESUMPTION BY THE UNITED STATES OF UNDERGROUND 
                   NUCLEAR WEAPONS TESTS.

       (a) Plan Required.--The Secretary of Energy, in 
     consultation with the Administrator for Nuclear Security, 
     shall prepare a plan for achieving, not later than one year 
     after the date on which the plan is submitted under 
     subsection (c), a one-year readiness posture for resumption 
     by the United States of underground nuclear weapons tests.
       (b) Definition.--For purposes of this section, a one-year 
     readiness posture for resumption by the United States of 
     underground nuclear weapons tests is achieved when the 
     Department of Energy has the capability to resume such tests, 
     if directed by the President to resume such tests, not later 
     than one year after the date on which the President so 
     directs.
       (c) Report.--The Secretary shall include with the budget 
     justification materials submitted to Congress in support of 
     the Department of Energy budget for fiscal year 2004 (as 
     submitted with the budget of the President under section 
     1105(a) of title 31, United States Code) a report on the plan 
     required by subsection (a). The report shall include the plan 
     and a budget for implementing the plan.

    Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Defense Environmental Management

     SEC. 3151. DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CLEANUP REFORM 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Program Required.--From funds made available pursuant 
     to section 3102(a)(2) for defense environmental management 
     cleanup reform, the Secretary of Energy shall carry out a 
     program to reform DOE environmental management activities. In 
     carrying out the program, the Secretary shall allocate, to 
     each site for which the Secretary has submitted to the 
     congressional defense committees a site performance 
     management plan, the amount of those funds that such plan 
     requires.
       (b) Transfer and Merger of Funds.--Funds so allocated 
     shall, notwithstanding section 3124, be transferred to the 
     account for DOE environmental management activities and, 
     subject to subsection (c), shall be merged with and be 
     available for the same purposes and for the same period as 
     the funds available in such account. The authority provided 
     by section 3129 shall apply to funds so transferred.
       (c) Limitation on Use of All Merged Funds.--Upon a transfer 
     and merger of funds under subsection (b), all funds in the 
     merged account that are available with respect to the site 
     may be used only to carry out the site performance management 
     plan for such site.
       (d) Site Performance Management Plan Defined.--For purposes 
     of this section, a site performance management plan for a 
     site is a plan, agreed to by the applicable Federal and State 
     agencies with regulatory jurisdiction with respect to the 
     site, for the performance of activities to accelerate the 
     reduction of environmental risk in connection with, and to 
     accelerate the environmental cleanup of, the site.
       (e) DOE Environmental Management Activities Defined.--For 
     purposes of this section, the term ``DOE environmental 
     management activities'' means environmental restoration and 
     waste management activities of the Department of Energy in 
     carrying out programs necessary for national security.

     SEC. 3152. REPORT ON STATUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 
                   INITIATIVES TO ACCELERATE THE REDUCTION OF 
                   ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS AND CHALLENGES POSED BY THE 
                   LEGACY OF THE COLD WAR.

       (a) Report Required.--The Secretary of Energy shall prepare 
     a report on the status of those environmental management 
     initiatives specified in subsection (b) that are being 
     undertaken to accelerate the reduction of the environmental 
     risks and challenges that, as a result of the legacy of the 
     Cold War, are faced by the Department of Energy, contractors 
     of the Department, and applicable Federal and State agencies 
     with regulatory jurisdiction.
       (b) Contents.--The report shall include the following 
     matters:
       (1) A discussion of the progress made in reducing such 
     risks and challenges in each of the following areas:
       (A) Acquisition strategy and contract management.
       (B) Regulatory agreements.
       (C) Interim storage and final disposal of high-level waste, 
     spent nuclear fuel, transuranic waste, and low-level waste.
       (D) Closure and transfer of environmental remediation 
     sites.
       (E) Achievements in innovation by contractors of the 
     Department with respect to accelerated risk reduction and 
     cleanup.
       (F) Consolidation of special nuclear materials and 
     improvements in safeguards and security.
       (2) An assessment of the progress made in streamlining risk 
     reduction processes of the environmental management program 
     of the Department.
       (3) An assessment of the progress made in improving the 
     responsiveness and effectiveness of the environmental 
     management program of the Department.
       (4) Any proposals for legislation that the Secretary 
     considers necessary to carry out such initiatives, including 
     the justification for each such proposal.
       (c) Initiatives Covered.--The environmental management 
     initiatives referred to in subsection (a) are the initiatives 
     arising out of the report titled ``Top-to-Bottom Review of 
     the Environmental Management Program'' and dated February 4, 
     2002, with respect to the environmental restoration and waste 
     management activities of the Department of Energy in carrying 
     out programs necessary for national security.
       (d) Submission of Report.--On the date on which the budget 
     justification materials in support of the Department of 
     Energy budget for fiscal year 2004 (as submitted with the 
     budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31, 
     United States Code) are submitted to Congress, the Secretary 
     shall submit to the congressional defense committees the 
     report required by subsection (a).

          TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

     SEC. 3201. AUTHORIZATION.

       There are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 
     2003, $19,000,000 for the operation of the Defense Nuclear 
     Facilities Safety Board under chapter 21 of the Atomic Energy 
     Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2286 et seq.).

                TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE

     SEC. 3301. AUTHORIZED USES OF NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE 
                   FUNDS.

       (a) Obligation of Stockpile Funds.--During fiscal year 
     2003, the National Defense Stockpile Manager may obligate up 
     to $76,400,000 of the funds in the National Defense Stockpile 
     Transaction Fund established under subsection (a) of section 
     9 of the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act 
     (50 U.S.C. 98h) for the authorized uses of such funds under 
     subsection (b)(2) of such section, including the disposal of 
     hazardous materials that are environmentally sensitive.
       (b) Additional Obligations.--The National Defense Stockpile 
     Manager may obligate amounts in excess of the amount 
     specified in subsection (a) if the National Defense Stockpile 
     Manager notifies Congress that extraordinary or emergency 
     conditions necessitate the additional obligations. The 
     National Defense Stockpile Manager may make the additional 
     obligations described in the notification after the end of 
     the 45-day period beginning on the date on which Congress 
     receives the notification.
       (c) Limitations.--The authorities provided by this section 
     shall be subject to such limitations as may be provided in 
     appropriations Acts.

                 TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

     SEC. 3401. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Amount.--There are hereby authorized to be appropriated 
     to the Secretary of Energy $21,069,000 for fiscal year 2003 
     for the purpose of carrying out activities under chapter 641 
     of title 10, United States Code, relating to the naval 
     petroleum reserves.
       (b) Period of Availability.--Funds appropriated pursuant to 
     the authorization of appropriations in subsection (a) shall 
     remain available until expended.

                  TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

     SEC. 3501. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 
                   2003.

       Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
     year 2003, to be available without fiscal year limitation if 
     so provided in appropriations Acts, for the use of the 
     Department of Transportation for the Maritime Administration 
     as follows:
       (1) For expenses necessary for operations and training 
     activities, $93,132,000.
       (2) For expenses under the loan guarantee program 
     authorized by title XI of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 
     App. U.S.C. 1271 et seq.), $54,126,000, of which--
       (A) $50,000,000 is for the cost (as defined in section 
     502(5) of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 
     661a(5))) of loan guarantees under the program; and
       (B) $4,126,000 is for administrative expenses related to 
     loan guarantee commitments under the program.
       (3) For expenses to dispose of obsolete vessels in the 
     National Defense Reserve Fleet, including provision of 
     assistance under section 7 of Public Law 92-402 (as amended 
     by this title), $20,000,000.

     SEC. 3502. AUTHORITY TO CONVEY VESSEL USS SPHINX (ARL-24).

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other law, the 
     Secretary of Transportation may convey the right, title, and 
     interest of the United States Government in and to the vessel 
     USS SPHINX (ARL-24), to the Dunkirk Historical Lighthouse and 
     Veterans Park Museum (a not-for-profit corporation, in this 
     section referred to as the ``recipient'') for use as a 
     military museum, if--
       (1) the recipient agrees to use the vessel as a nonprofit 
     military museum;
       (2) the vessel is not used for commercial transportation 
     purposes;
       (3) the recipient agrees to make the vessel available to 
     the Government when the Secretary requires use of the vessel 
     by the Government;

[[Page H2328]]

       (4) the recipient agrees that when the recipient no longer 
     requires the vessel for use as a military museum--
       (A) the recipient will, at the discretion of the Secretary, 
     reconvey the vessel to the Government in good condition 
     except for ordinary wear and tear; or
       (B) if the Board of Trustees of the recipient has decided 
     to dissolve the recipient according to the laws of the State 
     of New York, then--
       (i) the recipient shall distribute the vessel, as an asset 
     of the recipient, to a person that has been determined exempt 
     from taxation under the provisions of section 501(c)(3) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code, or to the Federal Government or a 
     State or local government for a public purpose; and
       (ii) the vessel shall be disposed of by a court of 
     competent jurisdiction of the county in which the principal 
     office of the recipient is located, for such purposes as the 
     court shall determine, or to such organizations as the court 
     shall determine are organized exclusively for public 
     purposes;
       (5) the recipient agrees to hold the Government harmless 
     for any claims arising from exposure to asbestos after 
     conveyance of the vessel, except for claims arising from use 
     by the Government under paragraph (3) or (4); and
       (6) the recipient has available, for use to restore the 
     vessel, in the form of cash, liquid assets, or a written loan 
     commitment, financial resources of at least $100,000.
       (b) Delivery of Vessel.--If a conveyance is made under this 
     Act, the Secretary shall deliver the vessel at the place 
     where the vessel is located on the date of enactment of this 
     Act, in its present condition, without cost to the 
     Government.
       (c) Other Unneeded Equipment.--The Secretary may also 
     convey any unneeded equipment from other vessels in the 
     National Defense Reserve Fleet in order to restore the USS 
     SPHINX (ARL-24) to museum quality.
       (d) Retention of Vessel in NDRF.--The Secretary shall 
     retain in the National Defense Reserve Fleet the vessel 
     authorized to be conveyed under subsection (a), until the 
     earlier of--
       (1) 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act; or
       (2) the date of conveyance of the vessel under subsection 
     (a).

     SEC. 3503. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO STATES FOR PREPARATION OF 
                   TRANSFERRED OBSOLETE SHIPS FOR USE AS 
                   ARTIFICIAL REEFS.

       (a) In General.--Public Law 92-402 (16 U.S.C. 1220 et seq.) 
     is amended by redesignating section 7 as section 8, and by 
     inserting after section 6 the following:

     ``SEC. 7. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE TO PREPARE 
                   TRANSFERRED SHIP.

       ``(a) Assistance Authorized.--The Secretary, subject to the 
     availability of appropriations, may provide, to any State to 
     which an obsolete ship is transferred under this Act, 
     financial assistance to prepare the ship for use as an 
     artificial reef, including for--
       ``(1) environmental remediation;
       ``(2) towing; and
       ``(3) sinking.
       ``(b) Amount of Assistance.--The Secretary shall determine 
     the amount of assistance under this section with respect to 
     an obsolete ship based on--
       ``(1) the total amount available for providing assistance 
     under this section;
       ``(2) the benefit achieved by providing assistance for that 
     ship; and
       ``(3) the cost effectiveness of disposing of the ship by 
     transfer under this Act and provision of assistance under 
     this section, compared to other disposal options for the 
     vessel.
       ``(c) Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary--
       ``(1) shall require a State seeking assistance under this 
     section to provide cost data and other information determined 
     by the Secretary to be necessary to justify and document the 
     assistance; and
       ``(2) may require a State receiving such assistance to 
     comply with terms and conditions necessary to protect the 
     environment and the interests of the United States.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 4(4) of such Act (16 
     U.S.C. 1220a(4)) is amended by inserting ``(except for any 
     financial assistance provided under section 7)'' after ``at 
     no cost to the Government''.

     SEC. 3504. INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS OF TITLE XI INSURANCE 
                   GUARANTEE APPLICATIONS.

       Section 1104A of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 App. 
     U.S.C. 1274) is amended--
       (1) by adding at the end of subsection (d) the following:
       ``(4) The Secretary may obtain independent analysis of an 
     application for a guarantee or commitment to guarantee under 
     this title.''; and
       (2) in subsection (f) by inserting ``(including for 
     obtaining independent analysis under subsection (d)(4))'' 
     after ``applications for a guarantee''.

  The CHAIRMAN. No amendment to the committee amendment in the nature 
of a substitute is in order except those printed in House Report 107-
450 and amendments en bloc described in section 3 of House Resolution 
415.
  Except as specified in section 4 of the resolution, each amendment 
printed in the report shall be considered only in the order printed, 
may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be 
considered read, and shall not be subject to a demand for a division of 
the question.
  Unless otherwise specified in the report, each amendment printed in 
the report shall be debatable for 10 minutes, equally divided and 
controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject 
to amendment, except as specified in the report and except that the 
chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed Services 
each may offer one pro forma amendment for the purpose of further 
debate on any pending amendment.
  It shall be in order at any time for the chairman of the Committee on 
Armed Services or his designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting 
of amendments printed in part B of the report not earlier disposed of 
or germane modifications of any such amendment.
  Amendments en bloc shall be considered read, except that 
modifications shall be reported, shall be debatable for 40 minutes, 
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority 
member or their designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall 
not be subject to a demand for division of the question.
  The original proponent of an amendment included in the amendments en 
bloc may insert a statement in the Congressional Record immediately 
before disposition of the amendments en bloc.
  The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may recognize for 
consideration of any amendment out of the order printed, but not sooner 
than 1 hour after the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services or a 
designee announces from the floor a request to that effect.


                Amendments En Bloc Offered by Mr. Stump

  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendments en bloc consisting of the 
following amendments printed in part B of House Report 107-450: 
amendment No. 11, amendment No. 12, amendment No. 13, amendment No. 14, 
amendment No. 16, amendment No. 17, amendment No. 18, amendment No. 19, 
amendment No. 20, amendment No. 22 offered by the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Snyder), amendment No. 23, amendment No. 24, and 
amendment No. 22 offered by the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt).
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
  The text of the amendments en bloc is as follows:

       Amendment No. 11 offered by Mr. Culberson:
       At the end of title X (page 218, after line 15), insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. ____. USE FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES OF DNA SAMPLES 
                   MAINTAINED BY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FOR 
                   IDENTIFICATION OF HUMAN REMAINS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 80 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 1566. DNA samples maintained for identification of 
       human remains: use for law enforcement purposes

       ``(a) Compliance with Court Order.--(1) Subject to 
     paragraph (2), if a valid order of a Federal court (or 
     military judge) so requires, an element of the Department of 
     Defense that maintains a repository of DNA samples for the 
     purpose of identification of human remains shall make 
     available, for the purpose specified in subsection (b), such 
     DNA samples on such terms and conditions as such court (or 
     military judge) directs.
       ``(2) A DNA sample with respect to an individual shall be 
     provided under paragraph (1) in a manner that does not 
     compromise the ability of the Department of Defense to 
     maintain a sample with respect to that individual for the 
     purpose of identification of human remains.
       ``(b) Covered Purpose.--The purpose referred to in 
     subsection (a) is the purpose of an investigation or 
     prosecution of a felony, or any sexual offense, for which no 
     other source of DNA information is available.
       ``(c) Definition.--In this section, the term `DNA sample' 
     has the meaning given such term in section 1565(c) of this 
     title.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

     ``Sec. 1566. DNA samples maintained for identification of 
       human remains: use for law enforcement purposes.''.

       Amendment No. 12 offered by Mrs. Jo Ann Davis of Virginia:
       At the end of title X (page 218, after line 15), insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. ____. SENSE OF CONGRESS CONCERNING AIRCRAFT CARRIER 
                   FORCE STRUCTURE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The aircraft carrier has been an integral component in 
     Operation Enduring Freedom and in the homeland defense 
     mission beginning on September 11, 2001. The aircraft 
     carriers that have participated in Operation Enduring 
     Freedom, as of May 1, 2002, are the USS Enterprise (CVN-65), 
     the USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70), the USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63),

[[Page H2329]]

     the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71), the USS John C. Stennis 
     (CVN-74), and the USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67). The aircraft 
     carriers that have participated in the homeland defense 
     mission are the USS George Washington (CVN-73), the USS John 
     F. Kennedy (CV-67), and the USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74).
       (2) Since 1945, the United States has built 172 bases 
     overseas, of which only 24 are currently in use.
       (3) The aircraft carrier provides an independent base of 
     operations should no land base be available for aircraft.
       (4) The aircraft carrier is an essential component of the 
     Navy.
       (5) Both the F/A-18E/F aircraft program and the Joint 
     Strike Fighter aircraft program are proceeding on schedule 
     for deployment on aircraft carriers.
       (6) As established by the Navy, the United States requires 
     the service of 15 aircraft carriers to completely fulfill all 
     the naval commitments assigned to it without gapping carrier 
     presence.
       (7) The Navy requires, at a minimum, at least 12 carriers 
     to accomplish its current missions.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the number of aircraft carriers of the Navy in active service 
     should not be less than 12.
       (c) Commendation of Crews.--Congress hereby commends the 
     crews of the aircraft carriers that have participated in 
     Operation Enduring Freedom and the homeland defense mission.
       Amendment No. 13 offered by Mr. Farr of California:
       At the end of title X (page 218, after line 15), insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. ____. ENHANCED AUTHORITY TO OBTAIN FOREIGN LANGUAGE 
                   SERVICES DURING PERIODS OF EMERGENCY.

       (a) National Foreign Language Skills Registry.--(1) The 
     Secretary of Defense may establish and maintain a secure data 
     registry to be known as the ``National Foreign Language 
     Skills Registry''. The data registry shall consist of the 
     names of, and other pertinent information on, linguistically 
     qualified United States citizens and permanent resident 
     aliens who state that they are willing to provide linguistic 
     services in times of emergency designated by the Secretary of 
     Defense to assist the Department of Defense and other 
     Departments and agencies of the United States with 
     translation and interpretation in languages designated by the 
     Secretary of Defense as critical languages.
       (2) The name of a person may be included in the Registry 
     only if the person expressly agrees for the person's name to 
     be included in the Registry. Any such agreement shall be made 
     in such form and manner as may be specified by the Secretary.
       (b) Authority To Accept Voluntary Translation and 
     Interpretation Services.--Section 1588(a) of title 10, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(6) Language translation and interpretation services.''.
       Amendment No. 14 offered by Mr. Hefley:
       Strike section 351 (page 68, beginning line 2), and insert 
     the following new section:

     SEC. 351. AUTHORIZED DURATION OF BASE CONTRACT FOR NAVY-
                   MARINE CORPS INTRANET.

       Section 814 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001, as enacted into law 
     by Public Law 106-398 (114 Stat. 1654A-215) and amended by 
     section 362 of Public Law 107-107 (115 Stat. 1065), is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (i) as subsection (j); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (h) the following new 
     subsection (i):
       ``(i) Duration of Base Navy-Marine Corps Intranet 
     Contract.--Notwithstanding section 2306c of title 10, United 
     States Code, the base contract of the Navy-Marine Corps 
     Intranet contract may have a term in excess of five years, 
     but not more than seven years.''.
       Amendment No. 16 offered by Mr. Manzullo:
       At the end of title VIII (page 174, after line 5), add the 
     following new section:

     SEC. ____. RENEWAL OF CERTAIN PROCUREMENT TECHNICAL 
                   ASSISTANCE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS AT FUNDING 
                   LEVELS AT LEAST SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT EXISTING 
                   PROGRAMS.

       Section 2413 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) With respect to any eligible entity that has 
     successfully performed under a cooperative agreement entered 
     into under subsection (a), the Secretary shall strive, to the 
     greatest extent practicable and subject to appropriations, to 
     renew such agreement with such entity at a level of funding 
     which is at least equal to the level of funding under the 
     cooperative agreement being renewed.''.
       Amendment No. 17 offered by Mr. Ortiz:
       At the end of subtitle B of title I (page 21, after line 
     20), insert the following new section:

     SEC. ____. PROHIBITION ON ACQUISITION OF CHAMPION-CLASS, T-5 
                   FUEL TANKERS.

       (a) Prohibition.--Except as provided in subsection (b), a 
     Champion-class fuel tanker, known as a T-5, which features a 
     double hull and reinforcement against ice damage, may not be 
     acquired for the Military Sealift Command or for other Navy 
     purposes.
       (b) Termination.--The prohibition in subsection (a) shall 
     not apply if the acquisition of a T-5 tanker is specifically 
     authorized in a defense authorization Act that--
       (1) is enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act;
       (2) specifically refers to subsection (a); and
       (3) specifically states that the prohibition in such 
     subsection does not apply.
       Amendment No. 18 offered by Mr. Pallone:
       Page 312, after line 15, insert the following new section:

     SEC. 2826. LAND CONVEYANCE, FORT MONMOUTH, NEW JERSEY.

       (a) Conveyance Authorized.--The Secretary of the Army may 
     convey by sale all right, title, and interest of the United 
     States in and to a parcel of land, consisting of 
     approximately 63.95 acres of military family housing known as 
     Howard Commons, that comprises a portion of Fort Monmouth, 
     New Jersey.
       (b) Competitive Bid Requirement.--The Secretary shall use 
     competitive procedures for the sale authorized by subsection 
     (a).
       (c) Consideration.--As consideration for the conveyance 
     authorized under subsection (a), the recipient of the land 
     shall pay an amount that is no less than fair market value, 
     as determined by the Secretary. Such recipient may, as in-
     kind consideration, build replacement military family housing 
     or rehabilitate existing military family housing at Fort 
     Monmouth, New Jersey, as agreed upon by the Secretary. Any 
     proceeds received by the Secretary not used to construct or 
     rehabilitate such military family housing shall be deposited 
     in the special account in the Treasury established pursuant 
     to section 204(h) of the Federal property and Administrative 
     Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 485(h)).
       (d) Description of Parcel.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the parcel to be conveyed under subsection (a) 
     shall be determined by a survey that is satisfactory to the 
     Secretary. The cost of the survey shall be borne by the 
     recipient of the parcel.
       (e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyance under subsection (a) as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United 
     States.
       Amendment No. 19 offered by Mr. Saxton:
       At the end of title X (page 218, after line 15), insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. ____. SURFACE COMBATANT INDUSTRIAL BASE.

       (a) Review.--The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a 
     review of the effect of the contract award announced on April 
     29, 2002, for the lead design agent for the DD(X) ship 
     program on the industrial base for ship combat system 
     development, including the industrial base for each of the 
     following: ship systems integration, radar, electronic 
     warfare, launch systems, and other components.
       (b) Report Required.--Not later than March 31, 2003, the 
     Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense 
     committees a report based on the review under subsection (a). 
     The report shall provide the Secretary's assessment of the 
     effect of that contract award on the ship combat system 
     technology and industrial base and shall describe any actions 
     that the Secretary proposes to ensure future competition 
     across the array of technologies that encompass the combat 
     systems of future surface ships, including the next 
     generation cruiser (CG(X)), the littoral combat ship (LCS), 
     and the joint command ship (JCC(X)).
       Amendment No. 20 offered by Mr. Schrock:
       At the end of subtitle A of title XXVIII (page 292, after 
     line 7), insert the following new section:

     SEC. ____. PILOT HOUSING PRIVATIZATION AUTHORITY FOR 
                   ACQUISITION OR CONSTRUCTION OF MILITARY 
                   UNACCOMPANIED HOUSING.

       (a) In General.--(1) Subchapter IV of chapter 169 of title 
     10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 
     2881 the following new section:

     ``Sec. 2881a. Pilot projects for acquisition or construction 
       of military unaccompanied housing

       ``(a) Pilot Projects Authorized.--The Secretary of the Navy 
     may carry out not more than 3 pilot projects under the 
     authority of this section or another provision of this 
     subchapter to use the private sector for the acquisition or 
     construction of military unaccompanied housing in the United 
     States, including any territory or possession of the United 
     States.
       ``(b) Assignment of Members and Basic Allowance for 
     Housing.--(1) The Secretary of the Navy may assign members of 
     the armed forces to housing units acquired or constructed 
     under the pilot projects, and such housing units shall be 
     considered as quarters of the United States or a housing 
     facility under the jurisdiction of a uniformed service for 
     purposes of section 403 of title 37.
       ``(2) Notwithstanding section 403(n)(2) of title 37, the 
     Secretary of Defense may set specific higher rates of partial 
     basic allowance for housing for a member of the armed forces 
     who is assigned to a housing unit acquired or constructed 
     under the pilot projects. Any increase in the rate of partial 
     basic allowance for housing to accommodate the pilot programs 
     shall be in addition to any partial basic allowance for 
     housing that the member may otherwise be eligible to receive 
     under section 403(n) of title 37. A member may not sustain a 
     reduction in partial basic allowance for housing as a result 
     of assignment to a housing unit acquired or constructed under 
     the pilot projects.
       ``(c) Funding.--(1) The Department of Defense Housing 
     Improvement Fund shall be used to carry out activities under 
     the pilot projects.

[[Page H2330]]

       ``(2) Subject to 90 days prior notification to the 
     appropriate committees of Congress, such additional amounts 
     as the Secretary of Defense considers necessary may be 
     transferred to the Department of Defense Housing Improvement 
     Fund from amounts appropriated for construction of military 
     unaccompanied housing projects in military construction 
     accounts. The amounts so transferred shall be merged with and 
     to be available for the same purposes and for the same period 
     of time as amounts appropriated directly to the Fund.
       ``(d) Reports.--(1) The Secretary of the Navy shall 
     transmit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report 
     describing--
       ``(A) each contract for the acquisition of military 
     unaccompanied housing that the Secretary proposes to solicit 
     under the pilot projects;
       ``(B) each conveyance or lease proposed under section 2878 
     of this title in furtherance of the pilot projects; and
       ``(C) the proposed partial basic allowance for housing 
     rates for each contract as they vary by grade of the member 
     and how they compare to basic allowance for housing rates for 
     other contracts written under the authority of the pilot 
     programs.
       ``(2) The report shall describe the proposed contract, 
     conveyance, or lease and the intended method of participation 
     of the United States in the contract, conveyance, or lease 
     and provide a justification of such method of participation. 
     The report shall be submitted not later than 90 days before 
     the date on which the Secretary issues the contract 
     solicitation or offers the conveyance or lease.
       ``(e) Expiration.--Notwithstanding section 2885 of this 
     title, the authority of the Secretary of the Navy to enter 
     into a contract under the pilot programs shall expire 
     September 30, 2007.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such 
     subchapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to 
     section 2881 the following new item:
``2881a. Pilot projects for acquisition or construction of military 
              unaccompanied housing.''.

       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2871(7) of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting before the period 
     at the end the following: ``and transient housing intended to 
     be occupied by members of the armed forces on temporary 
     duty''.
       Amendment No. 22 offered by Mr. Snyder:
       At the end of title IX (page 179, after line 21), insert 
     the following new section:

     SEC. 9____. AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT GIFTS FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE 
                   UNIVERSITY.

       (a) In General.--Section 2605 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``administration of''; and
       (B) by inserting before the period at the end of the first 
     sentence ``, or (2) the National Defense University'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(b)'';
       (B) by striking ``subsection (a)'' and inserting 
     ``subsection (a)(1)'';
       (C) by designating the last sentence as paragraph (3) and 
     in that sentence by inserting ``or for the benefit or use of 
     the National Defense University, as the case may be,'' after 
     ``schools,''; and
       (D) by inserting before paragraph (3), as designated by 
     subparagraph (C), the following:
       ``(2) There is established in the Treasury a fund to be 
     known as the `National Defense University Gift Fund'. Gifts 
     of money, and the proceeds of the sale of property, received 
     under subsection (a)(2) shall be deposited in the Fund.'';
       (3) in subsection (d)(1)(A), by inserting ``and the 
     National Defense University Gift Fund'' before the semicolon; 
     and
       (4) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(h) In this section, the term `National Defense 
     University' includes any school or other component of the 
     National Defense University.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--(1) The heading of such section is 
     amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 2605. Acceptance of gifts for defense dependents' 
       schools and National Defense University''.

       (2) The item relating to such section in the table of 
     sections at the beginning of chapter 151 of such title is 
     amended to read as follows:
``2605. Acceptance of gifts for defense dependents' schools and 
              National Defense University.''.
       Amendment No. 23 offered by Mr. Spratt:
       At the end of title XI (page 222, after line 3), insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. ____. CERTIFICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
                   PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTING POSITIONS.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 81 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``Sec. 1599d. Professional accounting positions: authority to 
       prescribe certification and credential standards

       ``(a) Authority To Prescribe Professional Certification 
     Standards.--The Secretary of Defense may prescribe 
     professional certification and credential standards for 
     professional accounting positions within the Department of 
     Defense. Any such standard shall be prescribed as a 
     Department of Defense regulation.
       ``(b) Waiver Authority.--The Secretary may waive any 
     standard prescribed under subsection (a) whenever the 
     Secretary determines such a waiver to be appropriate.
       ``(c) Applicability.--A standard prescribed under 
     subsection (a) shall not apply to any person employed by the 
     Department of Defense before the standard is prescribed.
       ``(d) Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall submit to 
     Congress a report on the Secretary's plans to provide 
     training to appropriate Department of Defense personnel to 
     meet any new professional and credential standards prescribed 
     under subsection (a). Such report shall be prepared in 
     conjunction with the Director of the Office of Personnel 
     Management. Such a report shall be submitted not later than 
     one year after the effective date of any regulations, or any 
     revision to regulations, prescribed pursuant to subsection 
     (a).
       ``(e) Definition.--In this section, the term `professional 
     accounting position' means a position or group of positions 
     in the GS-510, GS-511, and GS-505 series that involves 
     professional accounting work.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
``1599d. Professional accounting positions: authority to establish 
              certification and credential standards.''.

       (b) Effective Date.--Standards established pursuant to 
     section 1599d of title 10, United States Code, as added by 
     subsection (a), may take effect no sooner than 120 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.
       Amendment No. 24 offered by Mr. Stump:
       At the end of subtitle C of title I (page 23, after line 
     5), insert the following new section:

     SEC. ____. REALLOCATION OF CERTAIN FUNDS FOR AIR FORCE 
                   RESERVE COMMAND F-16 AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT.

       Of the funds authorized to be appropriated by section 
     103(1) that are available for procurement of F-16 aircraft 
     for the Air Force Reserve Command, $14,400,000 shall be 
     available for 36 Litening II modernization upgrade kits for 
     the F-16 block 25 and block 30 aircraft (rather than for 
     Litening AT pods for such aircraft).
       Page 65, line 11, strike ``$30,00,000'' and insert 
     ``$35,000,000''.
       In section 2811, page 295, after line 11, insert the 
     following new subsection (and redesignate subsequent 
     subsections accordingly):
       ``(e) Acquisition of Water Rights.--The authority of the 
     Secretary of a military department to enter into an agreement 
     under subsection (a) for the acquisition of real property (or 
     an interest therein) includes the authority to support the 
     purchase of water rights from any available source when 
     necessary to support or protect the mission of a military 
     installation.
       Amendment No. 22 offered by Mr. Tiahrt:
       At the end of subtitle B of title X (page 209, after line 
     25), insert the following new section:

     SEC. ____. LIMITATION ON DURATION OF FUTURE DEPARTMENT OF 
                   DEFENSE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 23 of title 10, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 480 the following 
     new section:

     ``Sec. 480a. Recurring reporting requirements: five-year 
       limitation

       ``(a) Five-Year Sunset.--Any recurring congressional 
     defense reporting requirement that is established by a 
     provision of law enacted on or after the date of the 
     enactment of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 2003 (including a provision of law enacted as 
     part of that Act) shall cease to be effective, with respect 
     to that requirement, at the end of the five-year period 
     beginning on the date on which such provision is enacted, 
     except as otherwise provided by law.
       ``(b) Rule of Construction.--A provision of law enacted 
     after the date of the enactment of this section may not be 
     considered to supersede the provisions of subsection (a) 
     unless that provision specifically refers to subsection (a) 
     and specifically states that it supersedes subsection (a).
       ``(c) Recurring Congressional Defense Reporting 
     Requirements.--In this section, the term `recurring defense 
     congressional reporting requirement' means a requirement by 
     law for the submission of an annual, semiannual, or other 
     regular periodic report to Congress, or one or more 
     committees of Congress, that applies only to the Department 
     of Defense or to one or more officers of the Department of 
     Defense.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the 
     beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to section 480 the following new item:
``480a. Recurring reporting requirements: five-year limitation.''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 415, the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Stump) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump).
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  This en bloc amendment has been crafted in full consultation with the 
committee's ranking Democrat, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Skelton), and includes the part B amendments as reported by the 
Committee on Rules offered by the following Members: the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Culberson), the gentlewoman from

[[Page H2331]]

Virginia (Mrs. Jo Ann Davis), the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr), 
the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley), the gentleman from Illinois 
(Mr. Manzullo), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz), the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Saxton), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Schrock), the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Snyder), the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), 
the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt) and myself.
  I would like to thank all those Members for their work in putting 
this en bloc amendment together and for their cooperation in allowing 
us to consider them in this fashion.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. 
Let me take this opportunity to thank the chairman for his work on the 
en bloc amendments. I might say, Mr. Chairman, that we have reviewed 
each of the proposed en bloc amendments, that we agree to the 
submission thereof and the passage thereof, and that they should all be 
supported by the Members of this body.
  Let me take just a moment in addition thereto, Mr. Chairman. Part of 
our duties as members of the Committee on Armed Services besides having 
hearings and having the briefings and doing the study here in 
Washington is to meet with the various members of the military 
personnel wherever they may be. Not long ago, I was aboard the USS 
Harry S Truman in Norfolk and met with the officers and men and women 
of that ship.
  Not long thereafter, I was in San Diego and I went aboard the USS 
Peleliu and visited extensively with the sailors thereon. By the way, 
they had just returned from their duties in the Indian Ocean. And then 
I have been to Little Rock Air Force Base and saw the extensive 
training there; to Fort Campbell, Kentucky; to Whiteman Air Force base, 
which is in the State of Missouri.
  I must tell my colleagues that the young people in American uniform 
are working hard, that they are dedicated and that they are 
professionals and the purpose of our being here today is to give them 
support. However, it is interesting to note two things. The first is 
that they are being stretched and strained in their efforts because 
there are too few in number in many instances. This is pointed out by 
the fact that General Buck Kernan of forces command down in Norfolk 
testified not long ago to the effect that the troops are tired and that 
they are stretched. Then a week later, the commander of our forces in 
Europe, General Joe Ralston, testified that there were needs for 
additional forces and resources in his jurisdiction. Admiral Dennis 
Blair, Commander in Chief of the Pacific, testified similarly.
  The young men and young women are stretched. Their families are 
paying a price of them being gone so much, but that is only half the 
story. The other half of the story, Mr. Chairman, is the fact that the 
morale is sky high, that they know why they are there, that they are 
supporting the men and women of the United States of America; and I 
think all of us should add a special note of pride and appreciation to 
them.
  So I take this means while we are discussing these en bloc 
amendments, which we, of course, have no objection to, to say that 
added word in honor and in recognition of our young folks who represent 
the United States of America in uniform.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. 
Stump) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for including the 
Tiahrt amendment language in the en bloc. This sunsets many unneeded 
reports after 5 years.
  The bill already contains the Tiahrt-Kirk language ending 20 unneeded 
reports that were previously required by law. Our effort is the first 
fruit of Secretary Rumsfeld's tooth-to-tail effort to increase the 
amount of effort we have on the front line by decreasing unneeded 
logistic efforts behind the lines. The Secretary launched this effort 
on September 10, but we are now yielding real fruit.
  The current bill language killing unneeded reports is estimated to 
save over 21,000 man-hours inside the Pentagon. This effort in the en 
bloc to sunset all reports after 5 years will go a long way to focus 
efforts on the combat front line and away from the rear echelon.
  I thank the gentleman from Arizona, and I thank the gentleman from 
Missouri for including this in the en bloc.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Spratt).
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment included among the en 
bloc amendments which was specifically requested by the Department of 
Defense. In fact, the idea for this amendment arose at a breakfast we 
had with Secretary Rumsfeld at which there were complaints about 
limitations on their ability to manage the Pentagon. One was in the 
quality of personnel they have for financial management, the attraction 
of personnel with the requisite qualifications for handling a budget 
that is now approaching $400 billion, the certification of these 
qualifications, hiring, firing.
  I responded to that by calling Dr. Dov Zakheim, who is the 
comptroller of the Department of Defense, and telling him if he had 
problems like this, we were not going to be stinting about the cost of 
professional personnel in the Department of Defense. We need to raise 
the quality of management throughout the Federal Government and 
certainly in the Department that has the largest budget.
  I asked him to send me legislation of what he would like to have in 
the way of professional qualifications, certification, what he could 
reasonably require for those who worked in the Department of the 
Controller. He sent me some legislation, and we made a few minor 
revisions to it. We made some revisions primarily to make it 
prospective instead of retrospective so that nobody loses his job 
because he does not meet these new qualifications or these new 
certifications. Secondly, we worked with the American Federation of 
Government Employees to make sure that they were satisfied with the 
proposal we have got.
  This amendment is just a crucial first step to helping the Department 
of Defense improve their abilities in the area of financial management 
and their ability to track and account for the funding that Congress 
provides. The heart and soul, obviously, of any accounting system is 
the people it employs. This will enable the Department to raise the 
level, raise the bar in the qualifications for people who are attracted 
and hired in the Department of Defense for financial management.
  It is my understanding that the Committee on Government Reform has 
also vetted this legislation and supports it as well. I urge an ``aye'' 
vote on the en bloc amendment.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt).
  Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairman of the 
Committee on Armed Services for the outstanding work he has done for 
our armed services. His leadership is going to be greatly missed. We 
appreciate the job he has done for America.
  My amendment, Mr. Chairman, would require that future regular 
reporting requirements imposed on the Department of Defense would have 
a sunset provision of 5 years after enactment. This would not apply to 
existing reporting requirements and only be applicable to new reports, 
including those in this bill, H.R. 4546.
  This amendment serves both Congress and DOD by ensuring that all 
future reports are reviewed regularly and remain relevant and 
responsive. This is endorsed by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. 
This legislation does not abdicate Congress' traditional oversight role 
and will insist that the Department of Defense remain responsive to 
congressional requests and questions about their activities. Those 
reporting requirements deemed useful after 5 years can easily be 
reauthorized at the conclusion of the sunset period. Conversely, 
Congress must demonstrate responsibility in its oversight authority by 
limiting burdensome and unnecessary and unending reporting 
requirements.
  In fiscal year 2001, the Department of Defense was required to 
prepare 983

[[Page H2332]]

various reports to Congress, of which 449 are listed right here in this 
packet. This is simply a listing and a brief explanation of the 449 
reports that are perennially required by Congress and stipulated year 
after year. The House Committee on Armed Services in conjunction with 
the Department of Defense has carefully examined these 449 reports and 
determined that only 20 out of the 449 were redundant, outdated or no 
longer relevant enough and should be terminated.
  Since it is unlikely that Congress will be unable to significantly 
reduce the number of existing reports, it is our goal to limit the 
future ones. Remember, each existing and future report is an unfunded 
and unprogrammed mandate that has proven extremely difficult to 
eliminate. The cumulative effect of these required reports is highly 
burdensome and costly. Limiting these requirements in the future will 
allow the military staff to concentrate more fully on their primary 
mission of national security.

                              {time}  1500

  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Platts) for the purposes of a colloquy.
  Mr. PLATTS. Mr. Chairman, I first would like to add my words of 
thanks and praise to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) for his 
fine leadership for the Committee on Armed Services and doing right by 
our armed men and women in uniform.
  I rise for the purpose now of engaging in a colloquy with the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton), the chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Military Installations and Facilities of the Committee 
on Armed Services.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. PLATTS. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I would be happy to engage in a colloquy 
with the gentleman from the State capital area of Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Platts).
  Mr. PLATTS. Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman knows, I requested that 
his subcommittee authorize the first phase of an important 5-phase 
project to replace seriously deteriorated family housing at the Army 
War College at Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania, which is in my 
district. The first phase is a modest beginning of 27 new units costing 
$5.4 million. I understand that there was insufficient money to 
accommodate all Members' requests, however worthy. However, I have been 
informed that the Army intends to fund this project in the fiscal year 
2004 budget that will be submitted in February 2003.
  Mr. Chairman, this project is sorely needed, and I ask that the 
gentleman support this needed family housing project when his 
subcommittee reviews the Army's military construction request next 
year.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. PLATTS. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman. The gentleman is 
correct that there is or was insufficient funding available to provide 
for all of the military construction and family housing improvements 
that are needed across our military. I might add that we have tried to 
increase the amount of money available for this purpose and, in fact, 
we were able to add some money to the request that we received from the 
Department of Defense. I wish that we could have done more, and I 
particularly wish we could have taken care of all family housing needs, 
as quality-of-life improvements are so important and necessary in 
today's volunteer service.
  I agree that family housing at Carlisle Barracks is among those 
housing projects that must be replaced, and I assure the gentleman that 
any request by the Army for new family housing at Carlisle will receive 
careful consideration by my subcommittee in the next year.
  Family housing is an important priority and has always received the 
subcommittee's full support. I thank the gentleman for bringing this 
important matter to our attention, and I look forward to working with 
him on it in the next Congress.
  Mr. PLATTS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman 
for his interest and support on this issue, and I also look forward to 
working with him, and I thank him for his fine leadership.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Virginia (Mrs. Jo Ann Davis).
  Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, today I rise to support 
the en bloc amendment containing a Sense of Congress on Aircraft 
Carrier Force Structure. This amendment would do 2 things.
  First, it would commend the crews of the aircraft carriers that 
contributed directly to Operation Enduring Freedom and the homeland 
defense mission. Many people are aware that our aircraft carriers 
contributed to our initial actions in Operation Enduring Freedom, but 
most people are unaware as to the number of carriers and also the 
incredible effort and number of aircraft carriers it took to effect our 
initial response to the attack on September 11.
  Second, this amendment would recognize the full value and worth that 
our carriers have for America's power and force projection 
capabilities. There is no doubt that the aircraft carriers have been 
integral to our war in Afghanistan. We have all heard the story of how 
the USS Enterprise turned around and went back when the captain heard 
about what was going on. Every munition and bomb dropped from a carrier 
air wing has been a precision-guided munition. The carriers worked 
around the clock after the attacks on September 11.
  Mr. Chairman, the Sense of Congress expresses a simple truism that is 
laid out in the Quadrennial Defense Review. The Navy needs, at a 
minimum, at least 12 aircraft carriers.
  Mr. Chairman, I would strongly encourage all of my colleagues to vote 
in support of this en bloc amendment.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Scott).
  Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  I would like to rise in support of the amendment of the gentlewoman 
from Virginia. One would not think that there would be much controversy 
about the important role Navy aircraft carriers are playing in this 
very dangerous world. Indeed, if we want to follow the war on terrorism 
on a daily basis, it is difficult to read a newspaper article or see 
television coverage that does not mention what our carriers are doing 
to keep fighting that remains away from our shores. No less than 8 
carriers have been involved in Operation Enduring Freedom or patrolling 
our own shores in the name of homeland security since September 11.
  This amendment also reaffirms our support for a fleet of no less than 
12 carriers, the absolute minimum necessary to sustain coverage in the 
oceans around the hot spots in the world. The underlying bill restores 
both the funding and the original program of record for the next 
generation of aircraft carriers, CVNX program, and for that, Mr. 
Chairman, I am truly grateful.
  Those of us who have had the privilege of representing Hampton Roads 
in Virginia, where carriers are built and many home-ported, we see on a 
daily basis the service and sacrifice made by these brave men and women 
and their families they leave behind when they race off to war. It 
would be my hope that our action on this amendment here would reaffirm 
once again that we in Congress both recognize and salute all of those 
in the armed services, including those Navy families who remain behind 
as their loved ones are deployed on these massive carriers.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate the gentlewoman from Virginia 
(Mrs. Jo Ann Davis) on offering this amendment, and I urge my 
colleagues to agree to the amendment.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Hunter).
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I want to do 2 things. The first is to 
mention, and I neglected to mention in my opening statement, that the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan) has been my partner on the 
Subcommittee on Military Research and Development of the Committee on 
Armed Services, and has done a wonderful job and has helped us to walk 
this bill through the subcommittee mark and the full floor mark, and I 
really appreciate his great work on this bill.
  I also wanted to talk for just a minute about an area that I think is

[[Page H2333]]

pretty important to all of us from an environmental standpoint and also 
from a security standpoint, and that is our reserve fleet of ships, 
many of which are in very bad condition, which presently are at anchor 
in the James River, and our great colleague, Herb Bateman, worked on 
this issue for many years, the idea of trying to take care of these 
ships in an environmentally responsible way. It requires a lot of 
money. It usually requires about $2.5 million per ship if you are going 
to scrap the ships in an American yard. You can give them to a foreign 
entity, but you are not really guaranteed that that entity is not just 
going to take the ships out and dump them, complete with PCBs and oil 
and other materials in the ocean, thereby creating another 
environmental problem.
  So we have come up, in working with a working group that is headed by 
the gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Jo Ann Davis), very much a part of 
her creation, and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes) who has a 
nearby district and also the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Schrock) who 
has a near district, we have come up with an idea of how to make some 
lemonade out of these lemons, and that is to use these ships in the 
States where reefs are required and would, in fact, be a benefit to 
those shorelines.
  Now, today reefs are used by a number of States to not only protect 
shorelines from erosion, but also to provide great opportunities for 
fishing enthusiasts and also for scuba divers and lots of other folks 
who are interested in recreation. So we have in our bill, originally in 
the mark in our maritime panel mark, and now in the full bill, a 
provision that will send some money to the States as grants from the 
MARAD administrator so that they can pay for towing, cleaning up and 
ultimately sinking these ships as reefs in these States that would like 
to have this new asset along their shorelines.
  So I want to thank the gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Jo Ann Davis) 
for her great work on this and also her colleagues that she has brought 
into this process, including the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes) 
and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Schrock), who have a real 
interest, because they have the surrounding districts.
  We have already hooked up with some of the sport fishing 
associations, and we are going to move forward with this working group 
and take direction from the Members of Congress led by the gentlewoman 
from Virginia (Mrs. Jo Ann Davis) who have a real interest in this 
issue because it is in their districts. We are going to move forward 
with this working group and I think we can find a home for these ships 
in such a way that we not only take them off our hands and eliminate 
this prospect of the ships sinking in the James River and the pollution 
that would attend that. We can not only take those ships out of 
inventory, but we can also provide an asset for the States that want to 
have this new shoreline presence of reefs that we can provide by 
sinking these ships.
  So this could be a winner for everybody, and I look forward to 
working with the gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Jo Ann Davis) on this 
issue.
  Mr. HORN. Mr. Chairman, there has been considerable concern that this 
legislation gives the Department of Defense some limited exemptions 
from current environmental laws. Although this is a complicated issue 
and there are legitimate concerns on both sides, I think it is 
important to keep in mind some simple facts. Here are a few:
  Fact Number One: The Migratory Bird Treaty Act did not interfere with 
military training in past wars for a simple reason. The courts never 
applied the act in this way until March of this year--2002--when the 
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia interpreted the 
Migratory Bird Treaty Act to apply to military readiness activities. 
This is an important and real change in application of the Migratory 
Bird Act and we must address it. Navy Carrier Battle Groups and 
deploying Marine Corps and Air Force squadrons have been blocked by 
court order from using the only U.S. bombing range available to them in 
the Western Pacific. Let's be clear, our forces deploying to 
Afghanistan cannot now use the only range suitable for training with 
smart, laser-guided weapons, as a result of unprecedented judicial 
interference with military readiness activities.
  Fact Number Two: There is no Presidential exemption available under 
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Under the current District Court 
interpretation, any military training can be enjoined and, except 
through legal appeals, there is no way to continue that vital military 
training.
  Fact Number Three: There is an exemption under the Endangered Species 
Act (ESA) if the Secretary of Defense finds it is necessary for reasons 
of national security. That exemption, however, is better used to 
address emergencies or unusual, short-term situations. The need to 
train for combat, to plan and execute military readiness activities, is 
a seven day a week, 52 weeks a year requirement. The young men and 
women serving in our armed forces need to achieve basic readiness 
levels and then develop and sustain high levels of proficiency. Using 
statutory exemptions in that context is bad public policy. Balancing 
two public goods--national defense and environmental conservation--on a 
daily and long-term basis is a function properly vested in the 
Congress.
  Mr. Chairman, our armed forces are not seeking a broad, total 
exemption from all environmental laws and regulations. They are seeking 
a balanced, sensible and responsible application of those laws. We must 
address this problem in a way that holds the Pentagon accountable for 
environmental concerns while also allowing the service to conduct 
essential combat training. This legislation sets the necessary balance 
and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. ORTIZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise to briefly describe my amendment to 
today's bill . . . it is a simple amendment. It merely re-enforces for 
the services that the journey to approval of any policy or purchase on 
their part must travel through the House Armed Services Committee.
  The genesis of this amendment lies with the Navy's intention to 
purchase five T-5 tankers (surface ships) now under contract with Ocean 
Freedom Shipping. These tankers are being used to ship diesel fuel for 
the Defense Energy Supply Center.
  Under the contract, the Navy has the option to buy the tankers. The 
contract also requires the Navy to have the purchase authorized and 
appropriated.
  This amendment reinforces for the services the procedure for which 
such policy must past muster. This is for the HASC to authorize, not 
for the Navy to seek appropriations for alone.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered by 
the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump).
  The amendments en bloc were agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed 
in part A of House report 107-450.


     Part A, Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania

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

       Part A, amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Weldon of 
     Pennsylvania:
       At the end of title X (page 218, after line 15), insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. 10____. ENHANCED COOPERATION BETWEEN UNITED STATES AND 
                   RUSSIAN FEDERATION TO PROMOTE MUTUAL SECURITY.

       (a) Statement of Policy.--It is the policy of the United 
     States to pursue greater cooperation, transparency, and 
     confidence with the Russian Federation regarding nuclear 
     weapons policy, force structure, safeguards, testing, and 
     proliferation prevention, as well as nuclear weapons 
     infrastructure, production, and dismantlement, so as to 
     promote mutual security, stability, and trust.
       (b) Sense of Congress Regarding Enhanced Cooperation With 
     Russia.--It is the sense of Congress that the President of 
     the United States should continue to engage the President of 
     the Russian Federation to achieve the following objectives, 
     consistent with United States national security, in the 
     interest of promoting mutual trust, security, and stability:
       (1) An agreement that would seek to prevent the illicit 
     use, diversion, theft, or proliferation of tactical nuclear 
     weapons, and their key components and materials, by--
       (A) withdrawing deployed nonstrategic nuclear weapons;
       (B) accounting for, consolidating, and securing the Russian 
     Federation's nonstrategic nuclear weapons; and
       (C) dismantling or destroying United States and Russian 
     nonstrategic nuclear weapons in excess of each nation's 
     legitimate defense needs.
       (2) A reciprocal program of joint visits by nuclear weapons 
     scientists and experts of the United States and the Russian 
     Federation to the United States nuclear test site in Nevada, 
     and the Russian nuclear test site at Novya Zemlya.
       (3) A reciprocal program of joint visits and conferences at 
     each nation's nuclear weapons laboratories and nuclear 
     weapons development and production facilities to discuss how 
     to improve the safety and security of

[[Page H2334]]

     each nation's nuclear stockpile, nuclear materials, and 
     nuclear infrastructure.
       (4) A reciprocal program of joint visits and conferences to 
     explore greater cooperation between the United States and the 
     Russian Federation with regard to ballistic missile defenses 
     against intentional, unauthorized, and accidental launches of 
     ballistic missiles.
       (5) A joint commission on nonproliferation, composed of 
     senior nonproliferation and intelligence officials from the 
     United States and the Russian Federation, to meet regularly 
     in a closed forum to discuss ways to prevent rogue states and 
     potential adversaries from acquiring--
       (A) weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles;
       (B) the dual-use goods, technologies, and expertise 
     necessary to develop weapons of mass destruction and 
     ballistic missiles; and
       (C) advanced conventional weapons.
       (6) A joint program to develop advanced methods for 
     disposal of weapons-grade nuclear materials excess to defense 
     needs, including safe, proliferation resistant, advanced 
     nuclear fuel cycles that achieve more complete consumption of 
     weapons materials, and other methods that minimize waste and 
     hazards to health and the environment.
       (7) A joint program to develop methods for safeguarding, 
     treating, and disposing of spent reactor fuel and other 
     nuclear waste so as to minimize the risk to public health, 
     property, and the environment, as well as the possibility of 
     diversion to illicit purposes.
       (8) A joint program, built upon existing programs, to 
     cooperatively develop advanced methods and techniques for 
     establishing a state-of-the-art inventory control and 
     monitoring system for nuclear weapons and material.
       (c) Report.--No later than March 1, 2003, the President 
     shall submit to Congress a report (in unclassified or 
     classified form as necessary) on the status of the objectives 
     under subsection (b). The report shall include the following:
       (1) A description of the actions taken by the President to 
     engage the Russian Federation to achieve those objectives.
       (2) A description of the progress made to achieve those 
     objectives.
       (3) A description of the response of the Russian Federation 
     to the actions referred to in paragraph (1).
       (4) The President's assessment of the Russian Federation's 
     commitment to a better, closer relationship with the United 
     States based on the principles of increased cooperation and 
     transparency.
       At the end of subtitle C of title XXXI (page 352, after 
     line 24) insert the following new section:

     SEC. 3146. CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH PROHIBITION ON RESEARCH AND 
                   DEVELOPMENT OF LOW-YIELD NUCLEAR WEAPONS IS 
                   REPEALED.

       (a) Presidential Certification.--Subsection (b) shall take 
     effect as of the date on which the President submits to 
     Congress the President's certification that--
       (1) another nation has conducted a nuclear test for the 
     purpose of developing new or improved nuclear weapons;
       (2) another nation is developing weapons of mass 
     destruction in underground facilities, and such weapons could 
     pose an imminent risk to the United States or to United 
     States military personnel deployed abroad; or
       (3) it is in the national security interest of the United 
     States that subsection (b) take effect.
       (b) Repeal.--Effective as of the date provided in 
     subsection (a), section 3136 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (42 U.S.C. 2121 note) 
     is repealed.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 415, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and a Member opposed each will control 10 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon).


          Motion to Rise Offered by Mr. Taylor of Mississippi

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do 
now rise.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the motion to rise offered by the 
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 51, 
noes 356, not voting 27, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 138]

                                AYES--51

     Abercrombie
     Baldwin
     Becerra
     Berry
     Bonior
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Capuano
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cunningham
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Filner
     Frank
     Hinchey
     Holt
     Honda
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Markey
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Napolitano
     Owens
     Pelosi
     Pomeroy
     Roybal-Allard
     Schakowsky
     Shows
     Slaughter
     Solis
     Stark
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Tierney
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Wu

                               NOES--356

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boozman
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilliard
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Lynch
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, Jeff
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Otter
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Sullivan
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--27

     Berman
     Burton
     Cannon
     Crane
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Hall (OH)
     Hilleary
     Hyde
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson, Sam
     Kennedy (MN)
     LaFalce
     Lewis (GA)
     Maloney (CT)
     Mollohan
     Nethercutt
     Ose
     Reyes
     Riley
     Roukema
     Schaffer
     Souder
     Traficant
     Watson (CA)
     Waxman

                              {time}  1535

  Messrs. OLVER, FARR of California, GOSS, BARTON of Texas, HERGER and 
Ms. CARSON of Indiana changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California changed his vote from ``no'' to 
``aye.''
  So the motion to rise was rejected.

[[Page H2335]]

  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                          personal explanation

  Mr. MALONEY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I was absent on May 9, 2002, 
and missed rollcall votes 134, 135, 136, 137 and 138. If I had been 
present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote 134, ``no'' on 
rollcall vote 135, ``no'' on rollcall vote 136, ``no'' on rollcall vote 
137 and ``no'' on rollcall vote 138.


    Modification to Part A Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Weldon of 
                              Pennsylvania

  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to 
modify my amendment with the modification I place at the desk as worked 
out with my colleagues on the other side.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Modification to Part A Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. 
     Weldon of Pennsylvania:
       Strike section 3146 as proposed to be inserted by the 
     amendment and insert the following:

     SEC. 3146. PROHIBITION ON DEVELOPMENT OF LOW-YIELD NUCLEAR 
                   WEAPONS.

       (a) United States Policy.--It shall be the policy of the 
     United States not to conduct development which could lead to 
     the production by the United States of a new low-yield 
     nuclear weapon, including a precision low-yield warhead.
       (b) Limitation.--The Secretary of Energy may not conduct, 
     or provide for the conduct of, development which could lead 
     to the production by the United States of a low-yield nuclear 
     weapon which, as of the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     has not entered production.
       (c) Effect on Other Development.--Nothing in this section 
     shall prohibit the Secretary of Energy from conducting, or 
     providing for the conduct of, development necessary--
       (1) to design a testing device that has a yield of less 
     than five kilotons;
       (2) to modify an existing weapon for the purpose of 
     addressing safety and reliability concerns; or
       (3) to address proliferation concerns.
       (d) Definition.--In this section--
       (1) the term ``low-yield nuclear weapon'' means a nuclear 
     weapon that has a yield of less than five kilotons; and
       (2) the term ``development'' does not include concept 
     definition studies, feasibility studies, or detailed 
     engineering design work.
       (e) Conforming Repeal.--Section 3136 of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (42 U.S.C. 
     2121 note) is repealed.

  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask 
unanimous consent that the modification be considered as read and 
printed in the Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the modification of the 
amendment?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The amendment is modified.
  The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and a Member opposed 
each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon).
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a historic day in the House of Representatives 
as we consider an amendment that is bipartisan, co-sponsored by my 
colleagues the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry), the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner), 
the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie), and the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Spratt).
  Mr. Chairman, this is a historic amendment and a historic day because 
this body is rising in a bipartisan voice to support the leadership of 
the President of the United States and the President of Russia to begin 
a new era in nuclear cooperation.
  The amendment before us today has eight specific thrusts in opening 
up the transparency between the American and the Russian nuclear 
program. It calls for American scientists to be allowed to visit Novaya 
Zemlya, the underground test site in Russia, and for Russian scientists 
to visit our sites in Nevada.
  It calls for joint cooperation in conferences on ways to monitor our 
nuclear stockpiles. It calls for joint visits and conferences to 
discuss the safety and security of our nuclear weapons. It calls for a 
joint commission on non-proliferation, a joint commission on 
cooperation on missile defense.
  This program puts this body on record with a bipartisan vote that we, 
in fact, support the new vision of President Bush and President Putin. 
We started this process last fall when one-third of this Congress with 
my colleagues on the Democratic side and my colleagues on the 
Republican side joining together in a 45-page document outlining a new 
relationship with Russia.
  This amendment calls for the specifics in implementing this new 
vision. This amendment allows the President and the President of Russia 
to truly open the doors for strong bilateral cooperation between our 
nations. It is a historic day. Our nuclear regulatory agencies and our 
security agency, I talked to General Holland and he totally supports 
the direction that we are going.
  We have agreement on the Democrat and Republican sides about the 
thrust. We also give the President some flexibility in the research 
area to make sure that we have the ability to do additional research 
that up until this point in time has been prohibited. I am extremely 
pleased that we were able to work out a very carefully crafted piece of 
legislation with my colleagues on the other side that I hope we will 
vote unanimously or overwhelmingly show that this Congress is behind a 
new direction in the security relationship between the United States 
and Russia.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) 
opposed?
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I am not opposed to the amendment, but I 
claim the time on my side.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
South Carolina to control the time?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) is 
recognized for 10 minutes.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I would have been opposed to the amendment as of 
yesterday, but we have had a work in progress here and I must say we 
have come up with a very good effort. I commend the gentleman for his 
efforts. I think he has a good bill.
  The gentleman is probably more engaged than any member of Congress in 
either house in trying to bring Russia and the United States closer 
together. What he has in this bill, the first part of it, is an 
ambitious agenda dealing with nonproliferation, lab exchanges, visits 
to our testing sites.
  What the gentleman has in the first part of the bill is an ambitious 
agenda of how we can bring Russia and the United States closer together 
in strategic cooperation. It lays out a number of specifics ranging 
from nonproliferation efforts to lab exchanges to joint visits to our 
testing sites, an ambitious agenda but nevertheless all the things we 
ought to be doing, the whole strategic spectrum.
  I think it is well stated and well in order, and I think the bill 
deserves support for that reason alone.
  I had a problem with the last page of the bill originally because the 
last page dealt with an amendment that I had added to the law, to Title 
XX, some six or seven years ago. That provision, the Spratt provision, 
Spratt first provision, prohibited testing below the level of five 
kilotons for reasons I will not get into here. There is no longer a 
provision in this bill that would repeal that. But there is a provision 
in this bill that would broaden the type of research that our labs can 
do with low yield weapons, the kind of development work they can do. It 
limits that work to what we could call in the Subcommittee on Military 
Research and Development 6-2-A; that is to say; they can do concept 
definition work, they can do research work, they can do design work, 
they can build a wooden mock-up, but they cannot bend metal or do 
fissile component parts until the law itself is changed.
  I think that is a reasonable provision that gives the labs a much 
clearer definition of what the boundaries are, broadens the scope of 
what they can do, but stops short of decreeing a repeal of the 2-K-T 
provision.
  In addition, yesterday this bill contained a call for a joint Russia 
collaboration on the development of nuclear penetrating weapons, 
nuclear and conventional, and the gentleman, after some reflection and 
discussion with the Department of Energy and others, has decided to 
take that off the bill.

[[Page H2336]]

  With those two improvements this is a very good bill, a very good 
piece of work, and I commend it to everybody's support.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry) a leader on these issues in the 
Congress.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the distinguished 
subcommittee chairman yielding me time. He truly is the leader in 
Congress in our relationship with Russia and I believe that here, 
working with the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), who is one 
of the most knowledgeable Members in Congress on these nuclear and 
strategic issues, they have come up with a very good product.
  As the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) mentioned, this 
includes an ambitious list of items to be on the agenda between the 
United States and Russia, including joint and reciprocal programs that 
deal with everything from nonproliferation all the way to disposal of 
waste. It is something that gives all of our contacts with Russia an 
agenda to go by and to encourage them to remove more of the distrust 
that still remains after years of Cold War and to work together in ways 
that are to our mutual benefit, but also to the benefit of the world.
  So as the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) mentioned, this 
amendment recognizes the need for a credible deterrent in the post-Cold 
War world, removing some restrictions that have made it uncomfortable 
for some of the folks in our laboratories to even be thinking about the 
kind of things we need for the future. So I want to commend both 
leaders on this issue. I think this is an important step that gives us 
a lot to work with in the future, and I hope Members will support it.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the ranking member of our committee.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from South Carolina (Mr. 
Spratt) for yielding me time.
  Mr. Chairman, I think this is true what the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) has said that this is an historic moment in 
this House because it makes a giant step forward in the nuclear 
nonproliferation effort. It retains the existing ban on developing low 
yield nuclear weapons, but the most important part is it allows 
scientific research to go forward in our nuclear weapons laboratories.

                              {time}  1545

  As the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) said, in the 
original wording of the amendment, the latter part thereof did cause a 
great deal of concern on my part, and I am sure it was in the minds of 
others. So I compliment the gentleman on the compromise and our working 
together.
  This is an excellent example between the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Weldon) and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) and all 
the others that were interested in this nonproliferation issue to make 
a step forward and to have an excellent compromise. We thank the 
gentlemen for that.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson) who has also 
been a tireless advocate on the nuclear security issues for this 
country and in the world.
  Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) for yielding me the time, and I thank him for 
his leadership on this issue and for really understanding the 
relationship between the United States and Russia.
  I particularly appreciate this amendment because it focuses on some 
of the things we need to do now in the 21st century as opposed to 
looking backwards to the old relationship between the United States and 
the former Soviet Union. We need to focus on increasing transparency 
and cooperation with Russia because the situation has changed.
  The principal threat is no longer each other. The principal threat to 
the United States and to Russia are third parties that threaten both of 
us and, therefore, cooperation and transparency are in our mutual 
interest.
  I think we also have to recognize that Russia has a very active 
tactical nuclear program and there are some questions we have about 
their nuclear testing sites, and the best way to move forward is to 
actively and aggressively seek the cooperation of Russia in opening 
things up, cooperating, opening transparency at these places, so we as 
the United States can be reassured about what is going on now.
  This is a good amendment. It is a good step in the right direction, 
and I commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania for his leadership.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) has 6 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) has 4 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Turner), one of the key players in the compromises that have 
perfected and made this a better bill.
  Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from South Carolina 
(Mr. Spratt) for yielding me time, and I want to thank him for his 
leadership in working on this amendment, and I want to commend the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) for his leadership in trying 
to work out the compromise that we have before us that I think moves us 
forward in the bipartisan manner that I think serves the national 
interests of this country very well.
  This amendment sets in place for the first time a set of objectives 
that would be pursued between our Nation and Russia to try to enhance 
cooperation and furthering the efforts to end proliferation of nuclear 
weapons. Specific provisions of the amendment provide for exchange 
programs between our Nation and Russia, provides for increased 
transparency of the activities of each Nation in the area of nuclear 
research, and I want to say that having had the opportunity to travel 
to Russia with our friend, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Weldon), I have the highest regard for his interest, his dedication, 
and his commitment to working with Russia to end nuclear proliferation 
and to be sure that this Nation's national interests are protected in 
that process. So I think all of us want to say to him we appreciate his 
leadership in this area.
  I know that many Members heretofore had questions about this 
amendment. I want to remind Members on both sides of the aisle that the 
compromise that we are laying before the House today was just arrived 
at a few moments ago. We think it deserves the support of the entire 
House on both sides. We think it is an important step forward toward 
peace and toward improving our cooperative relationship with Russia.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Tauscher).
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, this is right for the United States and 
this is right for this Congress. This is an opportunity for the 
bilateral relationships between the United States and Russia to 
improve, and I am here to say that I am very thankful to see that it is 
also a real sign of bipartisanship of this Congress where Democrats and 
Republicans, who up to yesterday had some disagreements about some 
language in this amendment, have come together in a very practical and 
common sense way to increase the opportunities for our national labs, 
two of which are in my district in northern California, to work to 
provide for the American people and frankly for the people of Russia 
and around the world much more opportunities for nonproliferation, much 
more opportunities for bilateral work and cooperation, and the ability 
for us to have agreements between our countries that are much more 
transparent and give a sense that we are very committed to working 
together and to turn aside the old adversarial relationships in the 
post-Cold War and move to a new time where we can be cooperative 
against the threats that we both share.
  I want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for being so 
cooperative in working together.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the distinguished chairman of 
the Subcommittee on Military Research and Development of the Committee 
on

[[Page H2337]]

Armed Services, and a leader on defense issues in this country.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Weldon) for yielding me the time, and I thank him for his 
leadership in this area.
  We have moved from the era of confrontation with the former Soviet 
Union to what I would call the era of engagement, and the engagement 
needs to be pursued in a number of areas. A couple of areas that are 
very important to this Member, and I know a lot of others, is the idea 
of disposal of weapons-grade materials, making sure that all of the 
ideas of stockpile security that we adhere to are adhered to also in 
the former Soviet Union.
  Also, the idea of making sure that the genius of the scientists' 
population in the former Soviet Union that put together that massive 
weapons complex in the weapons that they produced, to make sure that 
that genius does not migrate to nations that at some point may be 
adversaries to the United States is of utmost concern to us, and I 
think that this amendment makes good sense, and the engagement that it 
promotes is going to serve those ends.
  I thank the gentleman and commend him for his leadership and everyone 
on both sides of the aisle who worked on the amendment.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 90 seconds to the gentleman from 
Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie).
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, one of the motivating forces in my 
life to enter electoral politics was civil rights, and the other 
element that I wanted to devote whatever energy I could in terms of 
politics was nuclear proliferation.
  What we are about to do today, I think, may set us on the path that 
for many of us has been decades in the realizing.
  I want to pay tribute especially to the gentleman from South Carolina 
(Mr. Spratt). When I think of someone who I believe to be the ideal 
Member of Congress, ready to deal with Members in every way, in a 
straightforward and forthright manner, when I think of someone who has 
a tenacious capacity to pursue his ideals, I think of the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), and I think there is an amalgam today 
of interests on behalf of peace.
  I just want to reiterate for the record what the policy will be when 
the gentleman from Pennsylvania's (Mr. Weldon) and the gentleman from 
South Carolina's (Mr. Spratt) work comes to fruition. Greater 
cooperation, transparency and confidence with the Russian federation 
regarding nuclear weapons, policy, forestructure, safeguards, testing, 
proliferation, prevention, infrastructure, production and 
dismantlement, everything associated with nuclear proliferation in our 
attempt to deal with it in three-dimensional human terms is in this 
amendment, and the wording that has been arrived at, because the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and the gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Spratt) are not theologians on this floor, they are 
legislators. Legislators in every good sense of the word, and I am 
proud to be associated with them.


          Motion to Rise Offered by Mr. Taylor of Mississippi

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do 
now rise.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman 
from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 49, 
noes 352, not voting 33, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 139]

                                AYES--49

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Baldwin
     Bartlett
     Berry
     Blumenauer
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Capuano
     Clay
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cummings
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Evans
     Filner
     Frank
     Hinchey
     Holt
     Honda
     Jefferson
     Jones (OH)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Lynch
     Markey
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Obey
     Pallone
     Pelosi
     Radanovich
     Shows
     Solis
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Tiberi
     Towns
     Waters
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NOES--352

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Boozman
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Manzullo
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, Jeff
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Ney
     Northup
     Oberstar
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Otter
     Owens
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Sullivan
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--33

     Boehlert
     Burton
     Crane
     Davis (IL)
     DeLay
     Ford
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hulshof
     Hyde
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Kennedy (MN)
     Lewis (GA)
     Maloney (NY)
     McCrery
     Meek (FL)
     Millender-McDonald
     Nethercutt
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ose
     Oxley
     Pryce (OH)
     Reyes
     Riley
     Roukema
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Stark
     Traficant
     Watson (CA)
     Waxman
     Young (FL)

                              {time}  1615

  Messrs. GRAVES, RUSH and SCHIFF changed their vote from ``aye'' to 
``no.''
  So the motion to rise was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

[[Page H2338]]

                              {time}  1615

  The CHAIRMAN. The Committee is considering amendment No. 1, as 
modified, offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon).
  The gentleman from Pennsylvania has 2\1/2\ minutes remaining. The 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania has the right to close.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Bartlett), one of our Ph.D.'s in Congress, 
who has visited Russia on three or four occasions.
  Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, the Cold War is over, and the 
United States and Russia are recognizing that our two countries have 
far more that unites us than divides us. This amendment is one area 
that we recognize that when we join forces, when we focus on those 
things that unite us, that both countries and the world are better off 
for that.
  We have spent far too much time focusing on what divides us from 
Russia and not near enough time focusing on our common interests. This 
amendment does just that. It should have been done last year, or 10 
years ago. Let us not be next year saying we should have done this last 
year. This is the right thing to do. I urge Members to vote for this 
amendment.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment, 
and thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), the gentleman 
from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Turner), the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher), and the 
others involved in crafting this compromise.
  I think this language recognizes the balance that has to be struck in 
the new dynamic between our country and Russia. Most of this amendment 
deals with cooperation, with transparency and technology, joint 
visitation, joint research and development, things that would not have 
been possible a dozen years ago; and the authors of the amendment 
deserve great credit for making those possibilities a reality.
  The amendment also wisely recognizes, though, that as close as our 
friendship with Russia is growing, there is still risk. There is still 
uncertainty, and there is still need for a joint process between the 
executive branch and those of us in the Congress to recognize and react 
to emergency circumstances. I hope such circumstances never arise, but 
if they do, this amendment strikes the proper balance. I urge its 
adoption by both Republicans and Democrats.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a good compromise and a good bill, and I urge 
support for it on both sides of the aisle.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, in closing, I thank Members on both sides of the aisle 
for what has become I think one of the most important statements that 
we will make in this bill about a new era of our security, our security 
in working together with Russia as partners.
  Yesterday a group of Members met in the House of Representatives with 
a Minister of Atomic Energy, Rumyantsev, from Russia, and he told us 
that Russia is ready for a new era of transparency, that the days of 
the Cold War are over. This amendment tests that language. This 
amendment says, Mr. Rumyantsev, we agree with you, and we are ready for 
a new era. Open up the test facilities, underground test sites, and 
laboratories for joint cooperation, and we will do the same. It says 
that America and Russia truly can be, should be, and will be partners; 
but it does not do it through rose-colored glasses.
  This amendment says in the new century Russia and America together 
can be key partners, whether it is solving the war in Kosovo, solving 
the problem in the Middle East, or dealing with security issues, that 
Russia can help us accomplish our objectives.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask Members on both sides of the aisle to support 
this amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment, as modified, offered 
by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Weldon) will be postponed.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed 
in part A of House Report 107-450.


            Part A Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mrs. Tauscher

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

       Part A Amendment No. 2 offered by Mrs. Tauscher:
       At the end of section 1014 of the bill (page 200, after 
     line 6), insert the following new subsection:
       (c) Report on Options for Achieving, Prior to Fiscal Year 
     2012, President's Objective for Operationally Deployed 
     Nuclear Warheads.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy shall 
     submit to Congress a report on options for achieving, prior 
     to fiscal year 2012, a posture under which the United States 
     maintains a number of operationally deployed nuclear warheads 
     at a level of from 1,700 to 2,200 such warheads, as outlined 
     in the Nuclear Posture Review. The report shall include the 
     following:
       (1) For each of fiscal years 2006, 2008, and 2010, an 
     assessment of the options for achieving such posture as of 
     such fiscal year.
       (2) An assessment of the effects of achieving such posture 
     prior to fiscal year 2012 on cost, the dismantlement 
     workforce, and any other affected matter.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 415, the gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Tauscher) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher).
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment adds a small but critical requirement to 
the language in the bill on the Nuclear Posture Review.
  As Members know, the Nuclear Posture Review provides Congress with 
crucial information about the administration's intentions on the 
country's nuclear strategy, warhead levels and infrastructure over the 
next 10 years.
  Some of the review's comments are positive, such as the restatement 
of the need to deploy the lowest number of nuclear weapons consistent 
with our security requirements.
  Other findings are more troubling, especially the review's failure to 
outline significant and verifiable cuts to our nuclear arsenal.
  Recent comments by Assistant Secretary of Defense Crouch about 
warhead reduction that ``there is no such thing as something that is 
irreversible,'' directly contradict the President's objective stated in 
Crawford, Texas, in the summit with President Putin last summer.
  The credibility of the United States' leadership in the area of arms 
control will be significantly undermined if we do not live up to the 
President's proposal to reduce our nuclear arsenal.
  The gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Stump) and the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the ranking member, took a first and valuable 
step toward addressing this disconnect.
  Indeed, the bill requests clarification of the administration's plans 
for our strategic force structure, including specific definitions of 
how many warheads will be dismantled or placed in the ready reserve and 
associated costs.
  I ask for Members' support for an additional requirement to this 
section mandating a report from the Secretary of Energy on options for 
achieving the President's objectives for operationally deployed nuclear 
warheads before 2012.
  This is a nonbinding, common sense requirement that simply asks the 
Secretary of Energy to look at whether the President's arms objective 
can be achieved in a shorter time frame. Additionally, it is my belief 
that this

[[Page H2339]]

should actually be addressed to the National Nuclear Security 
Administration, which is a semi-autonomous agency inside the Department 
of Energy.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, this side applauds the 
gentlewoman for her leadership on these issues, and we are happy to 
accept this amendment in the spirit in which it is offered, and think 
it will be a productive addition to the bill.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Spratt).
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I rise to commend both the gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Tauscher) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Weldon) for reaching agreement on what I think is a good amendment to 
an amendment.
  Basically the Nuclear Posture Review raised more questions than it 
answered; among them, why does it take 10 years to draw down the 
operationally deployed force; why do we have to maintain a responsive 
force of the magnitude that was indicated? We may have as many warheads 
actually deployed in 2012 as we do today. How costly will it be to 
maintain this force? These are all questions that we need to ask 
directly, and that is what this amendment will do. It will put these 
questions back to DOD and get a further addendum or response to clarify 
NPR on these critical points.
  Mr. Chairman, I commend the gentlewoman for offering this amendment, 
and support it fully.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) 
for accepting the amendment and appreciate the opportunity to work with 
the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to speak in opposition to the 
amendment?
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Tauscher).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed 
in part A of House Report 107-450.


              Part A Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Markey

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

       Part A Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Markey:
       At the end of subtitle C of title XXXI (page 352, after 
     line 24), insert the following new section:

     SEC. 3146. PROHIBITION ON RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF NUCLEAR 
                   EARTH PENETRATOR WEAPON.

       (a) Permanent Prohibition.--No funds available to the 
     Department of Energy may be used for any development, 
     testing, or engineering of a nuclear earth penetrator weapon.
       (b) Fiscal Year 2003.--No funds appropriated for or 
     otherwise made available to the Secretary of Energy for 
     fiscal year 2003 may be used for a feasibility study for a 
     nuclear earth penetrator weapon.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 415, the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and a Member opposed each will control 10 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) 
for 10 minutes.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment that is before the House that I 
would hope as the staffs talk right now we might be able to work out 
some form of a compromise on; but pending that, the subject is around 
the whole subject of a robust nuclear earth penetrator.
  Now this weapon is one which is contemplated being used as a nuclear 
weapon to be a bunker buster, but potentially bigger than that, in 
fact, and will breach this psychological and political barrier that we 
have established in the world for 57 years that nuclear weapons are not 
usable.
  What my amendment says is that there should be a permanent 
prohibition; that is, that no funds should be available to the 
Department of Energy for any development, testing or engineering of a 
nuclear earth penetrator weapon. The objective, of course, is to say if 
we moved to that phase of testing, unfortunately, it would most likely 
result in a breach of the test ban accommodation which has been lived 
with by the United States and the Soviet Union and the rest of the 
world for the last 15 years or so.
  Since we already have a generation of nuclear earth penetrating 
weapons, it seems to me it does not make a lot of sense for us to run 
the risk of sending a signal to the rest of the world that we are 
trying to dissuade from using these weapons towards the goal of just 
improving one to make it more usable, but at the same time because of 
the sensitivity of our relations with Russia, amongst others, in terms 
of their nuclear testing, but every other country in the world that we 
are trying to convince that nuclear weapons are unusable, that as we 
cross this nuclear Rubicon we are sending a very strong signal that the 
weapons are usable.
  So my amendment seeks to stop the testing, stop any engineering or 
development of such a weapon.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) is 
recognized for 10 minutes.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, we have made a good-faith effort both in the committee 
and on this floor to reach bipartisan compromise on issues regarding 
our nuclear policy.
  We just completed a vote on a comprehensive program to engage Russia, 
a program that I think is historic. We just accepted an amendment from 
the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher). We agreed to a report 
that she wants to have issued on the size of our nuclear weapon force 
over the next dozen years.
  But, Mr. Chairman, this amendment in my opinion is a dangerous 
amendment. There are certain things we cannot discuss on the House 
floor. I would think before any Member voted on this amendment, they 
would want to have had the Code Word level briefing that I arranged for 
Members of the Committee on Armed Services last week.

                              {time}  1630

  A number of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle attended that 
briefing, where at a Code Word level we were given certain information 
about what appears to be to the Intelligence Community some new 
movement in the area of nuclear weapons and nuclear materials. We 
cannot discuss that on the floor of the House because we are in open 
session. So, therefore, even though Members have access to that 
information, I would say to you that probably no more than 10 Members 
of this body, maybe 20, have received the security classified briefing 
on the implications of this amendment. For that reason alone, this 
amendment should be defeated.
  But, Mr. Chairman, beyond that, this amendment says that the 
Secretary of Energy cannot even do a feasibility study for a nuclear 
earth penetrating weapon. If we look at Afghanistan and the wars and 
the situation we are involved in, one of our biggest problems are deep 
underground hardened targets. This amendment says we cannot even do a 
feasibility study. We are not talking about building a weapon. We are 
not talking about producing something to drop. We are talking about a 
feasibility study. This amendment says no feasibility study.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment goes way too far. This amendment is more 
about, I think, a political statement than it is about substance. I 
would aggressively urge our colleagues to vote ``no.''
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the ranking member of the Committee on Armed 
Services.
  Mr. SKELTON. I thank my friend from Massachusetts for yielding me 
this time.
  Mr. Chairman, we all know from our experience in Afghanistan that 
adversaries use caves and bunkers to counter our American conventional 
strength

[[Page H2340]]

and we are right to be concerned that future enemies might use such 
bunkers to protect weapons of mass destruction. However, the use of 
nuclear bunker busters is absolutely not the way to go. It is 
counterproductive.
  Using nuclear weapons would spread deadly radiation, putting both 
American troops in the theater as well as local populations at risk. It 
would also prevent American troops from entering caves and bunkers to 
retrieve potentially valuable intelligence. We have been doing that in 
Afghanistan. Perhaps most significantly, the use of tactical nuclear 
weapons would mark a dramatic change in United States policy and would 
undermine our nonproliferation policies around the globe. This is a 
very needed and a very necessary amendment to proceed on the non-
nuclear proliferation effort.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson).
  Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania for yielding me this time. I rise to oppose this 
amendment.
  The reality is that our enemies are burrowing in their chemical 
weapons capability, their conventional capability, their command and 
control biological and nuclear weapons programs. Our current weapons 
systems cannot destroy targets that are deeply buried in tunnels. They 
were not designed to. Our enemies know that.
  Nuclear weapons are useful precisely because they are unusable. That 
is the nature of deterrence and the reason that we want to be able to 
keep these targets at risk. The robust nuclear earth penetrating weapon 
is being studied as directed by this Congress in the 2001 defense 
authorization bill. It is not a new nuclear weapon. The question is 
whether you can take an existing nuclear weapon, package it and encase 
it in such a way so that it will penetrate the Earth before it explodes 
in order to hold at risk those hard and deeply buried targets. It does 
not make it more likely that the President would use such a weapon. It 
does make it more probable that that weapon would work if he had to use 
it. Any President should have at his disposal the ability to hold at 
risk the most important targets that people have who would want to 
destroy and to hurt us. By holding those targets at risk, we make it 
less likely that they will hurt us and attack us or our allies with 
chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.
  The President should have options, the options of conventional 
forces, of precision conventional weapons, and of nuclear weapons that 
are capable of holding those targets at risk so that we do not have to 
use them. That is precisely why we need to continue with this 
feasibility study.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from 
Massachusetts for yielding me this time and for his leadership in 
leading the world, I think, in the right direction.
  I rise in strong support of the Markey amendment really to prohibit 
the development of this nuclear earth penetrator weapon. This weapon 
poses unacceptable risks. Our own troops would be endangered by nuclear 
fallout and innocent civilians could be caught in a nuclear crossfire. 
Furthermore, developing this weapon really does take us down the path 
of nuclear testing and nuclear proliferation. Where we go, others will 
follow.
  It is bad enough that we have not ratified the Comprehensive Test Ban 
Treaty. United States nuclear testing would destroy this treaty. The 
United States cannot preach nonproliferation while escalating the arms 
race ourselves.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I want to again thank 
the gentleman from Massachusetts for offering this amendment.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the distinguished chairman of 
the Subcommittee on Research and Development.
  Mr. HUNTER. I thank the distinguished gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, we are in this amendment proposing to kill what could 
be the centerpiece of a certain deterrent capability that is important 
to us. We want to send a message to anybody who would strike America, 
whether on a conventional battlefield or in a terrorist manner, we want 
them to know that we will hunt them down and find them and, if 
necessary, dig them out, wherever we have to.
  That means no safe havens. One way you ensure that there are no safe 
havens is to be able to go deep. Unless we do a lot more research and 
development and we find some quantum breakthrough in conventional 
systems, to go deep is going to require a nuclear capability. That is a 
good message to send to people who would hurt this country, because if 
you look at the array of fixtures that are going to be buried by 
potential adversaries, you see several things. You see their command 
and control; you see their development of nuclear, chemical and 
biological weapons; and, most importantly, you see the people 
themselves who ordered the strike on the United States.
  That is where leadership goes. Leadership, in terms of our potential 
adversaries, will go deep. They will go as far underground as they 
possibly can go. They need to know there is no safe haven. That 
requires that we vote ``no'' on this amendment.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).
  Mr. FRANK. Mr. Chairman, I welcome this latest in the acts of 
leadership my friend and colleague has dealt with in the nuclear area.
  I have listened to the arguments of the gentleman from California and 
the gentlewoman from New Mexico. They are very honest. They are really 
talking about obliterating the distinction between nuclear and non-
nuclear weapons that has been a centerpiece for 50 years. What they say 
is if they threaten us, we will go after them, we will find them.
  What we are being told is that we should develop a nuclear capacity 
to respond to non-nuclear threats. We are being told that conventional 
threats will call from America a nuclear response. Not only is that 
greatly unnecessary, it will further destabilize the world. We have 
been trying to preach non-nuclear proliferation, but the town drunk is 
a poor advocate for temperance. We cannot simultaneously obliterate the 
distinction that has existed for the entire period between nuclear and 
non-nuclear weapons. We cannot threaten, as we have heard, a nuclear 
response to a non-nuclear attack and then still have any credibility in 
preaching temperance.
  Secondly, we have said in Afghanistan, in Iraq, we are these days 
likely to be in the posture not of war against a people, say, as in 
World War II but in an effort to rescue a people from an oppressive 
government. How welcome will our wagon be when it comes to nuclear 
arms? Do we tell the people of Afghanistan, do not worry, we will free 
you from the Taliban by using nuclear weapons within your country. Do 
not worry, we will overthrow Saddam Hussein with nuclear attacks in 
Iraq.
  I think you undercut the whole notion that America can be coming to 
the rescue of the victims of oppression. The United States is hardly a 
pitiful giant weakened without nuclear weapons. We just saw in 
Afghanistan no shortage of overwhelming American power. It was not a 
lack of force, a lack of potency. To destroy the distinction between 
nuclear and non-nuclear weapons as we have heard is with very grave 
error.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  First of all, Mr. Chairman, we are not talking about a new nuclear 
weapon. That is not the discussion here. We are talking about an 
attempt to repackage an existing nuclear weapon for a new threat that 
we have to deal with. We know the Russians have 13,000 tactical nuclear 
weapons.
  If you really want to stop proliferation, I would like to see my 
colleague from Massachusetts offer an amendment to negotiate for a 
serious reduction of tactical nuclear weapons. These tactical nuclear 
weapons are a real threat to us. The Russians have 13,000 of them.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Hunter).
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, let me just say that there has been a 
policy among a number of nations in the Western democracies, including 
our allies, that would respond to chemical or

[[Page H2341]]

biological attack with nuclear systems. We have never foreclosed that.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 seconds to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).
  Mr. FRANK. Mr. Chairman, I think the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
invited either myself or my colleague to offer an amendment on 
nonproliferation, but the problem is that the way the Committee on 
Rules has been working, at your behest, it would not have been in 
order. That is why we did not bother to try.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 5 seconds.
  I felt that same way just a few short years ago. I understand the 
gentleman from Massachusetts' frustration.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Woolsey).
  (Ms. WOOLSEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Markey 
amendment to halt development, testing or use of so-called mini nukes. 
I thank my colleague from Massachusetts for his continuing leadership 
on nonproliferation issues.
  Let us make no mistake about it. Developing these mini nukes would 
make their use more likely, which would make a nuclear war more likely. 
The fact is if we sanction their development, we only provide 
legitimacy for other nations to do exactly the same.
  My constituents in Marin and Sonoma Counties in California, like most 
Americans, have made it very clear that they support a reduction in 
America's nuclear arsenal. They are rightly demanding that we take a 
reasoned approach toward nuclear weapons policy, not a renewed buildup 
of nuclear arms. Without the Markey amendment, United States nuclear 
policy will take a U-turn that would prompt more nuclear competition, 
threaten our national security, and undermine nonproliferation efforts.
  Reject this vision. Support the Markey amendment.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds.
  Mr. Chairman, this is not a mini nuclear weapon. I do not know where 
that term came from, but it is totally incorrect. A deep earth 
penetrating weapon is a large weapon designed to do damage. In fact, in 
our committee we called for a report, again with the bipartisan spirit 
of our members on the other side, for a study of the effects of this. 
This amendment should be rejected.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
  Mr. THORNBERRY. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Chairman, I have always found it rather odd that some of our most 
difficult battles in the area of national security are preventing our 
own people by limiting our options and tying our hands behind our back.
  There are some military capabilities that we may decide are not worth 
the time to pursue, and there are some capabilities that in the 
priority of things we may want to leave behind. But I find it very 
troubling that some people do not even want us to explore options which 
could be critical for our future national security.
  Frankly, I am skeptical that any Member of this body can know for 
certain all of the circumstances that any President in the future will 
face in a world full of chemical and biological and radiological and 
nuclear weapons, and we want to say we are not even going to consider 
those options to deal with all of those things. I think that would be a 
mistake.
  To have a credible deterrent, that means political adversaries, and 
even friends have to believe in that deterrent. If we say up front, if 
you burrow down in the ground we cannot touch you because our 
conventional capabilities have obvious limitations, and so if we say we 
are not even going to consider going after buried targets in any other 
way, then we are simply saying, ``Go to it. We'll leave you alone.'' We 
are encouraging people to bury their communication, their factories, 
their silos, and we will not be able to do anything about it.

                              {time}  1645

  Mr. Chairman, we know Russia has buried targets deep. We have seen 
what al Qaeda has done in Afghanistan. We know Iraq is burying things. 
So to take an option off the table, to say we are not even going to 
explore it, that we are going to tie our own hands behind our backs, 
even in a world with all of these difficult, complex situations I think 
would be a tragic mistake. We should reject the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) has 1 
minute remaining. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) has 
1\3/4\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) 
has the right to close.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Kucinich).
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, the question is not whether we should 
permit targets to be buried deep; the question is whether we are going 
to permit peace to be buried deep.
  We have a nonproliferation treaty that stops nuclear weapons from 
becoming a sword of Damocles hanging over this world. We had an ABM 
Treaty that stopped the United States and Russia from engaging each 
other. We had START II and START III that was the basis of getting rid 
of nuclear weapons. We had a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty waiting to 
be signed. Now, we have gone from that kind of a hopeful approach to 
sustain the world to an approach that puts the world at an abyss, to an 
approach that envisions target nations, nuclear first strike, bunker 
busters.
  It is time that we took a stand for peace. It is time that we took a 
stand for the continuation of life on this planet. Why should that be 
hard to do, even for the Congress?
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining time.
  We do not use biological weapons in Afghanistan. We do not use 
chemical weapons in Afghanistan. We do not use this present generation 
of nuclear earth penetrators in Afghanistan because we know it is 
wrong, and because we just have to ask al Qaeda how well our existing 
conventional bombs did in destroying them. I have not heard anyone say 
that there was some problem that needed nuclear weapons to be dropped 
on Afghanistan.
  The consequences of opposing the Markey amendment will be that a new 
generation of nuclear testing, breaching the test ban between the 
United States and the Soviet Union, sending a signal to countries all 
around the world that nuclear weapons are now usable, even though we do 
not need them in Afghanistan, we do not need them in Iraq; we can 
destroy, level those countries. If we use nuclear weapons in Tora Bora, 
it will only be in order to ensure that the rubble is bouncing, not 
that we have destroyed the entire country already with conventional 
weapons.
  This is the wrong road to go down. We are breaching a barrier which 
would be a very serious mistake for our country.
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance 
of the time.
  Mr. Chairman, we have just completed almost an hour's worth of work 
of starting a new era in our relationship with Russia on nuclear 
weapons. It has been bold. It has been bipartisan. It has been 
bilateral. We have shown, without any doubt, that we are willing to 
move into a new era. But, Mr. Chairman, as we saw on September 11, 
there are those people who do not play by the rules. Anyone who would 
take out almost 3,000 lives in the most unbelievable way thinkable 
would not hesitate to do work in one of 10,000 underground bunkers and 
caves around the world, most of which are in our adversaries' 
territory, to develop and potentially use weapons of mass destruction. 
This amendment would go to the extreme. It would prevent the President 
from even doing a feasibility study.
  This is not about peace. I am a teacher by profession. Nobody wants 
peace more than I do. We do not have a handle on peace with a certain 
few in this body. This is about giving the President legitimate ability 
to protect us against those threats that we see emerging in the 21st 
century. I ask my colleagues to vote no on the Markey amendment.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Markey 
amendment, and I want to thank my colleagues, Mr. Rahall and Mr. 
Markey, for their leadership in standing up for the environment.

[[Page H2342]]

  The Defense Authorization Bill as written grants the Department of 
Defense sweeping the blanket exemptions to existing environmental laws.
  The American public doesn't want fewer environmental protections. 
They want more. Eighty-five percent of registered voters surveyed on 
this question believe that the Department of Defense should have to 
follow the same environmental and public health laws as everyone else.
  We have already seen efforts to roll back protections on our air and 
water. It is time to stand up and put a stop to these assaults on our 
environment.
  Biodiversity is essential to our national heritage. We have an 
obligation to our children and to their children to protect that 
biodiversity.
  And so, I urge you to adopt this amendment. It does not impose any 
unreasonable restrictions on the Department of Defense. It simply 
ensures that the U.S. government will abide by existing U.S. laws.


          Motion to Rise Offered by Mr. Taylor of Mississippi

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do 
now rise.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the motion to rise offered by the 
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 51, 
noes 360, not voting 23, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 140]

                                AYES--51

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Baldwin
     Berry
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Capuano
     Clay
     Condit
     Conyers
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Filner
     Frank
     Hinchey
     Honda
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Lynch
     Markey
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pelosi
     Roemer
     Schakowsky
     Shows
     Slaughter
     Solis
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Towns
     Waters
     Wu

                               NOES--360

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boozman
     Borski
     Boswell
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, Jeff
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Otter
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Stump
     Sullivan
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--23

     Boucher
     Burton
     Cannon
     Cox
     Crane
     Davis (IL)
     Dooley
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Kennedy (MN)
     Lewis (GA)
     Millender-McDonald
     Nethercutt
     Nussle
     Ose
     Reyes
     Riley
     Roukema
     Smith (MI)
     Traficant
     Watson (CA)
     Waxman

                              {time}  1719

  Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the motion to rise was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  Mr. CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, the Chair will 
reduce to 5 minutes the time for a recorded vote on amendment No. 1.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 172, 
noes 243, not voting 19, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 141]

                               AYES--172

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barrett
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     Coyne
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank
     Frost
     Gephardt
     Gonzalez
     Gutierrez
     Hastings (FL)
     Hill
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hoeffel
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Lynch
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott
     Serrano
     Shays
     Sherman
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tauscher
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)

[[Page H2343]]


     Thurman
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Weiner
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NOES--243

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bereuter
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boyd
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clement
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis (FL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Diaz-Balart
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Everett
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kerns
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     Mascara
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, Jeff
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Otter
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sandlin
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schrock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Sullivan
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Turner
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--19

     Burton
     Cannon
     Crane
     Davis (IL)
     Hall (OH)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Kennedy (MN)
     Lewis (GA)
     Millender-McDonald
     Nethercutt
     Ose
     Reyes
     Riley
     Roukema
     Smith (MI)
     Traficant
     Watson (CA)
     Waxman
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1738

  Mr. CROWLEY and Mr. FORD changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


    Part A, Amendment No. 1, as Modified, Offered by Mr. Weldon of 
                              Pennsylvania

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on amendment No. 1, as modified, printed in part A of House Report 107-
450 offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) on which 
further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by 
voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 362, 
noes 53, not voting 19, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 142]

                               AYES--362

     Abercrombie
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boozman
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Lynch
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, Jeff
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Napolitano
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Otter
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watts (OK)
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--53

     Ackerman
     Baldwin
     Becerra
     Bonior
     Capuano
     Carson (IN)
     Clay
     Clayton
     Condit
     Conyers
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank
     Hinchey
     Holt
     Honda
     Inslee
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kucinich
     Lee
     Lofgren
     Markey
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Nadler
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Paul
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Rangel
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Schakowsky
     Slaughter
     Solis
     Stark
     Tierney
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Woolsey

                             NOT VOTING--19

     Aderholt
     Burton
     Cannon
     Crane
     Hall (OH)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Kennedy (MN)
     Lewis (GA)
     Millender-McDonald
     Nethercutt
     Ose
     Reyes
     Riley
     Roukema
     Smith (MI)
     Traficant
     Watson (CA)
     Waxman
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1749

  Mr. MEEHAN and Ms. SLAUGHTER changed their vote from ``aye'' to 
``no.''

[[Page H2344]]

  So the amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Ms. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 142, I should have voted 
``no.'' I mistakenly voted ``yea.''
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed 
in part A of House Report 107-450.


             Part A Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Tierney

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

       Part A amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Tierney:
       At the end of subtitle C of title II (page 49, after line 
     17), insert the following new section:

     SEC. 234. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR SPACE-BASED 
                   NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE PROGRAM.

       No funds appropriated for fiscal year 2003 for the 
     Department of Defense may be used for a space-based national 
     missile defense program.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 415, the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney) and a Member opposed each will control 10 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney).
  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  It is clear from the size of this Department of Defense budget, 
including the $48 billion-or-so increase, that the administration and 
others here are using the circumstances of our involvement in 
Afghanistan and the circumstances of September 11 to put money into 
this budget for all manner of programs whether or not they deal with 
priority threats to this country now and here.
  Every Member of this body is concerned and wants the best defense 
possible for this country. We all want support for the men and women 
who serve. We want fair pay, decent housing, working weapons. We are 
collectively concerned with the security of this country, and we need 
to be certain we allocate our limited resources toward programs that 
target those threats and risks which are the most likely to endanger us 
now and in the near future.
  This amendment then focuses on just that. It is to make the point 
that this bill is a repository for already-repudiated programs, some of 
which our own Secretary of Defense is surprised to still see in this 
bill. The amendment does it by prohibiting the Department of Defense 
from using funds this fiscal year for space-based national missile 
defense, or Star Wars. Not sea based, not air based, not land based, 
not components of any of those. We should debate those matters. But 
this amendment focuses on space-based, or Star Wars, programs, the same 
concept which was here before, on which we spent billions of dollars 
and lost that money.
  This bill authorizes $54 million for a Boost Program Space-Based 
Lasers, which act as interceptors in space, as well as the kinetic 
physical interceptors. This space-based interceptor has gone through 
two iterations already. They are behind schedule and over budget. 
Testing for this space-based laser system has been pushed back 
indefinitely. And that is just the testing for the system. Nobody can 
even predict when such a space-based system might actually be deployed.
  How does continued funding for this program serve us towards a more 
agile force? We should not repeat the past errors, like Safeguard, 
which was the first stab at a failed missile defense space wars system 
in the 1970s. Rushing to fund an untested program with the questionable 
capabilities of this one makes no sense. It jeopardizes strategic 
judgment and wastes our much-needed money.
  At the very least, we should be alarmed that we are not taking the 
time as a Nation to have a thoughtful dialogue on this and the 
ramifications of this national missile defense system. There are 
billions in this budget that have little to do with our priority 
realistic threats to our security. This Star Wars program is but one 
small part of that.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California is recognized for 10 
minutes.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  My colleagues, we are in space. We are in space in a way that is 
inextricably linked with not only our missile defense system but almost 
all of our systems.
  If we take a look at the architecture for our space systems, we have 
in space literally everything from weather and the environment, to 
navigation, to surveillance and reconnaissance, to missile warning, to 
communications. The successful intercepts that we have made now out of 
the Kwajalein Test Range took place 148 miles above the surface of the 
Earth.
  I want to read the amendment of my friend, the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney): ``No funds appropriated for fiscal year 
2003 for the Department of Defense may be used for a space-based 
national missile defense program.''
  Now, in the first place, we simply have a missile defense program, 
not a national missile versus a theater missile defense program, 
because we are now dealing with a number of missiles which have varying 
rates of speed and distances. For example, we have the old Model T scud 
that goes fairly slowly, several hundred miles, all the way up to the 
fast-moving ICBM that will go several times the speed of a high-powered 
rifle bullet when it reenters the atmosphere aimed at an American city.
  So we are putting in place an architecture which is layered, which 
will give us, hopefully, several shots at these missiles as they 
progress toward either our troops in theater or the United States of 
America and our cities. We have to have space assets to be able to 
intercept those incoming missiles.
  Now, one thing we have seen in this debate today is what I would call 
the new imposition of Marquis of Queensbury rules on our side. We just 
had an amendment in which the other people may drive an airplane into 
an American tower and destroy thousands of American civilians, but it 
is against the rules for us to go after their leadership if they are 
buried deep underground and we use a nuclear penetrator. That is not 
Marquis of Queensbury rules. And no matter what the other side does, we 
must play by the Marquis of Queensbury rules.
  Well, we are already in space. It does not make any sense to have a 
very broadly worded amendment that, if we take it literally, would ban 
the very systems that we are testing right now.
  There is another aspect of this, and that is this: we had the 
predator over in Afghanistan, and the predator is our unmanned 
aircraft. And from that aircraft we take certain recon capability, 
certain sensors, and we target the enemy. And then we use another 
platform, whether it is from a ship or a plane or a land-based unit, to 
hit that enemy that was targeted by the predator. And our war-fighting 
commanders, who were trying to win the war over there, with as few 
Americans as possible being killed, said this: They said, maybe we 
should just use that airborne unit up there. Instead of just using that 
for information and relaying that information to the ground, why do we 
not just put a hell fire missile on that particular UAV and go ahead 
and strike the enemy with the UAV? In other words, let us use this 
recon unit for both a reconnaissance and for the attack shot.
  So we are becoming more efficient in the way we use technology. So 
the idea that we have to play by some obscure Marquis of Queensbury 
rules that says we cannot use space to stop a missile that may be 
incoming to an American city does not make any sense.
  So I would just urge all Members to vote against this amendment. This 
is a dangerous amendment. If taken literally, it freezes our present 
programs in place.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.


          Motion to Rise Offered by Mr. Taylor of Mississippi

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do 
now rise.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the motion to rise offered by the 
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).

[[Page H2345]]

  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 46, 
noes 356, not voting 32, as follows:

                             [Roll No 143]

                                AYES--46

     Abercrombie
     Baldwin
     Berry
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Capuano
     Condit
     Conyers
     Davis (IL)
     DeGette
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Filner
     Frank
     Hill
     Holt
     Honda
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Lynch
     Markey
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Oberstar
     Olver
     Pelosi
     Rush
     Shows
     Slaughter
     Solis
     Stark
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Towns
     Waters
     Weiner
     Wu

                               NOES--356

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boozman
     Borski
     Boswell
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Grucci
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, Jeff
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Obey
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Otter
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--32

     Ballenger
     Bentsen
     Berman
     Boucher
     Burton
     Cannon
     Crane
     Delahunt
     Diaz-Balart
     Greenwood
     Hall (OH)
     Hansen
     Kennedy (MN)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Meek (FL)
     Millender-McDonald
     Murtha
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Ose
     Reyes
     Riley
     Roukema
     Sanders
     Simpson
     Souder
     Stump
     Traficant
     Watson (CA)
     Waxman
     Young (FL)

                              {time}  1826

  Ms. LOFGREN, Mr. BEREUTER and Mr. CRAMER changed their vote from 
``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the motion was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Spratt).
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to engage the gentleman from 
Massachusetts in a colloquy about his amendment.
  The gentleman from California was just showing us a number of space-
based systems, satellites and sensors, that are in one way or another 
connected with ballistic missile defense.
  Is it the gentleman's intention in this amendment to prohibit funding 
for space-based sensors that are instrumental to the airborne laser and 
ground-based and sea-based ballistic missile defense systems?
  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SPRATT. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. TIERNEY. No, the amendment does not affect space-based sensors. 
It only affects space-based interceptors.
  Mr. SPRATT. So, specifically, your amendment would not prohibit or 
affect funding for what we call SBIRS-High, space-based infrared 
sensors, SBIRS-High or SBIRS-Low sensor programs like this?
  Mr. TIERNEY. The gentleman is correct.
  Mr. SPRATT. I thank the gentleman for these clarifications. 
Therefore, the gentleman's amendment would prohibit funding for the 
space-based ballistic missile defense interceptors, $54 million is 
requested, but it would not affect sensors at all.
  Mr. TIERNEY. The gentleman is correct.
  Mr. SPRATT. I thank the gentleman for the clarification. The space-
based interceptor, as some know, has gone through a couple of 
iterations, both of which have eventually been discarded. I think the 
Missile Defense Agency has already a full plate. It ought to stay 
focused on ground-based and ship-based interceptors. For that reason, 
with this clarification, I can support the amendment.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  The problem here is we are not dealing with the amendment as the 
gentleman from Massachusetts would rewrite it. We are dealing with the 
amendment as it is written, because that is the amendment that is going 
to be dealt with by DOD lawyers. It says, ``No funds appropriated for 
fiscal year 2003 for the Department of Defense may be used for a space-
based national defense missile program.''
  The point is we have to deal with the law as it is written, not as he 
would rewrite it. If he is going to rewrite it, I would recommend he 
come back next year with another text. This thing would basically put a 
freeze on the programs that we have right now.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Doggett).
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chairman, space-based missile defense is the true 
faith-based initiative because it takes a mighty big leap of faith to 
believe we can master the technology, distinguish the decoys and 
achieve perfection.
  Of course, in the real world this spacey shield idea has been rather 
hit or miss, mostly miss, since you need perfect weather and a honing 
beacon on the incoming missile for it to work. But the experience never 
seems to faze those who have seen so many Star Wars sequels that they 
abide by the questionable principle, ``build it and it will work.'' I 
prefer the wisdom of Dr. Steven Weinberg, a Nobel Prize-winning 
physicist at the University of Texas, who says this system will 
``worsen our security'', and that of

[[Page H2346]]

former Defense Secretary William Perry, who warned that ``a relatively 
small deployment of defensive systems could have the effect of 
triggering a considerable nuclear arms race.''
  If terrorism is now our greatest threat, if we have learned anything 
from September 11, we know an ICBM is not the most likely way to wreak 
devastation and that putting so many more taxpayers' dollars in this 
one NMD basket makes so little security sense.
  We can spend billions trying to build a shield to blunt every sword 
or we can invest our resources and diplomacy more wisely to keep the 
sword, or missile from ever being drawn.

                              {time}  1830

  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Maine (Mr. Allen).
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Tierney amendment to ban 
spending on space-based national missile defense systems in fiscal year 
2003. Before funding space-based weapons, we should have a consensus on 
the wisdom of space-based warfare and today there is no such consensus.
  The Missile Defense Agency has requested $35 million to do R&D on a 
space-based laser which has not completed concept definition and was 
killed by the House Committee on Appropriations last year. The 
administration wants to resurrect space-based kinetic interceptors to 
shoot down missiles in the boost phase. This approach has been tried 
and rejected twice before on technological and cost grounds.
  The Missile Defense Agency should focus on getting the most mature 
systems like PAC 3 and THAAD to the field to protect our troops, not to 
invest in systems that will make outer space the next battlefield.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge support for the Tierney amendment.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon).
  (Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, this is a 1980s amendment; 
Ronald Reagan was President. The term ``Stars Wars'' is again 
resurrecting itself. It has no relevancy to what we are doing today. 
This is not a discussion of whether or not we are going to deploy a 
strategic defense initiative. That discussion is over; it ended in the 
1980s and 1990s. There is no national missile defense, so the amendment 
is not relative.
  In fact, if we take this amendment, it is so poorly worded, which is 
why the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) had to get 
clarification, because even he has concerns, but to get clarification, 
he is trying to qualify some things. It is so poorly worded we could in 
fact end the only joint program we have with Russia. Does the gentleman 
know about the RAMOS program which the Russians proposed that we do, 
which Carl Levin on the Senate side led the fight to restore? That 
program is 2 satellites. Under the gentleman's amendment, we cut the 
funding for the RAMOS program because, heaven forbid, satellites are in 
space.
  But wait a minute. What about all of my colleagues here who care 
about Israel's security? We funded with our money the Arrow program. We 
spent almost $500 million on Arrow, the most successful missile defense 
program operating today.
  Well, guess what? Maybe the gentleman does not know this, but we are 
now retrofitting Arrow so it can interact with our systems. So what the 
gentleman wants to say is no more national missile defense.
  Well, guess what? To Israel, Arrow is their national missile defense, 
and we funded it.
  So the fact is that while the gentleman may have wanted to end one 
specific program, the amendment is so vague that it applies to 
everything, and it really does not make any sense. It really was 
designed for a Ronald Reagan-era debate when Stars Wars could be used 
like Darth Vader, that somehow we were advocating some obscene process 
to start war in space. That is not the case.
  We have a very deliberate program that has been supported by 
Democrats and Republicans because we have confidence, perhaps more than 
ever, in the director of our Missile Defense Agency. General Kadish is 
respected by Democrats and Republicans for giving us a thoughtful, 
interconnected, multi-layered approach to missile defense. There is no 
more national missile defense. It does not exist. It is no longer a 
term used in the jargon. To say somehow we are going to end it is a 
misnomer.
  In terms of space, if we ended the space assets, whether it is 
airborne or higher, we would basically end a whole ton of programs that 
are now under way, and we would deny eventually the ability of Israel 
to do what she is going to have to do. We cannot have it both ways on 
this debate. If my colleagues want to defend the people of Israel 
against the Shahab III missile from Iran, which is there today, Israel 
cannot shoot that missile down midstream. Because like the Patriot, it 
will rain on the people. Israel needs to take down that Scud missile 
when it is launched. We cannot do that without assets that allow us to 
take it out in the boost phase. That is going to eventually require 
some type of space-based assets.
  So we are having a debate for the 1980s. Let us all join hands and 
sing peace songs and let us all hug each other and say we are all for 
peace, but this amendment is absolutely outrageous. I encourage my 
colleagues to vote no, and let us sing Kumbaya together in voting no.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I am told the gentleman is like that all 
the time, so I will not carry on, except to note that the chief 
investigator of the director of Operations, Testing and Evaluation has 
said that the deployment of this is so far into the future, it is 
beyond the horizon.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Kucinich).
  Mr. KUCINICH. Actually, Mr. Chairman, there are some people who 
believe that the world does have the possibility to live in peace and 
that the instrumentalities of violence will eventually give way to 
human reason and that our ability to talk to each other as human beings 
may be the basis for peace in the world as opposed to weaponizing 
space.
  The gentleman's amendment is well taken because, according to an Air 
Force briefing, the space-based laser is being contemplated for anti-
satellite missions, denying access to space, disrupting satellite 
communications, knocking out high altitude aircraft, or unmanned aerial 
vehicles. These missions go far beyond intercepting missiles, and they 
echo the Quadrennial Defense Review's call for the United States to 
exploit space for military purposes, and the Air Force's wish in a 
Joint Vision 20/20 document for full spectrum dominance in space.
  What colossal arrogance it is to assume that we can seize the high 
heavens and control the world through space. Yes, work for peace on 
earth, and when we do that, we will not have to worry about a later 
generation creating peace in space.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
to just remind my colleagues that when we are considering this 
amendment and we consider all of the things that our military uses that 
are space-based right now, right from a marine platoon leader's GPS, it 
tells him where he is, to the recon satellites that we have to, yes, 
the cueing system that we are going to have to hopefully be able to 
intercept missiles before they impact our cities, I think we are going 
to come to the conclusion that the American people do not have too much 
tolerance for the argument that is being put forward.
  There are no people in space. There are people in those towers that 
got hit by those incoming planes. If we ask the American people would 
you accept a space-based system that might have protected the Twin 
Towers, they probably would say yes. We do not care if we are violating 
the Marquis of Queensbury rules by somehow using assets that are in 
space. So this is an argument that I think should be given short shrift 
by the American people. We are in space, other nations are in space, 
and the idea that we are going to take from General Kadish, who 
Democrats and Republicans trust and feel is a good steward of this 
program, the idea that we are going to take one of his options that he 
has laid out to

[[Page H2347]]

test, we are going to move it off of the table because we want to 
impose our judgment in place of his judgment is not a good thing.
  We have given him this set of options. We have let him pick them. We 
are going to let him go through with the test. We have a robust testing 
schedule ahead of us. He is going to throw the losers out and reward 
the winners by trying to get something that can stop incoming ballistic 
missiles in the next 4 to 5 years. That is a good goal. We should leave 
this package that he has intact. Let us let him make some decisions and 
let us let General Kadish have some discretion. Please vote no on this.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, it is Mr. Kadish's plans, which the 
director of Operations, Testing and Evaluation said had no testing 
regime that anybody could trust or that would work.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Holt).
  (Mr. HOLT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, while there are many things in the defense 
authorization bill that I support, national missile defense is not one 
of them, and the gentleman from Massachusetts is seeking to eliminate 
one of the more senseless parts of the supposed national missile 
defense system.
  The proposed missile defense system would not work as designed, as 
wishing will not overcome the physics. It could be confused with the 
decoys, it could be bypassed for suitcase bombs, pickup trucks, sea-
launched missiles. It would be billions of dollars down the drain. But 
it is not just a diversion of resources. It is worse than a waste. 
Simple strategic analysis tells us that provocative yet permeable 
defenses are destabilizing and would reduce our security.
  Americans have been awakened in recent months to threats to our 
national security and they understand that a space-based missile 
defense will not help. Americans have learned in recent months that we 
need anthrax defense, we need container ship defense, we need bridge 
and tunnel defense. We do not need space-based national missile 
defense.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) has 15 
seconds remaining. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney) has 
2\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Tierney 
amendment to prohibit the Bush administration from spending taxpayer 
dollars on a space-based, 21st century version of a Stars Wars missile 
defense system.
  The simple question we should always ask is does this system make us 
safer? Are my children and my grandchildren safer if we spend these 
millions of dollars? I believe the answer is no. Not now, and not in 
the future.
  Today we do face some very real threats. Warnings are issued on a 
regular basis of possible terrorist attacks. Interceptors from space 
are not going to help us. We need better intelligence to intercept 
phone conversations and shoe bombs and biological weapons at our 
airports, seaports, trains and highways.
  Long-range, weaponizing space, bringing weapons into another 
dimension, is not a formula for security. Rather, as the Union of 
Concerned Scientists contend, such a move destabilizes arms control as 
we know it.
  The only Stars Wars any Members of this Congress should see will be 
at a theater near you on May 16. I strongly urge a yes vote on the 
Tierney amendment.
  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remaining time to the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).
  Mr. FRANK. Mr. Chairman, I congratulate the gentleman from California 
on his debating tactic. He has me focused on how that space-based 
interceptor was going to stop the attack on the World Trade Center when 
no one knew the attack was coming. Maybe it has psychic powers. So I do 
not know what else I am supposed to talk about.
  Except I would note that I was struck, when forced to defend this 
notion of a space-based system, we are told that it is for Israel. I 
have to say, in addition to all of Israel's other problems, getting 
schlepped into every defense debate when my colleagues are short of an 
argument seems to me an unnecessary burden on them. Yes, people are 
prepared to deal with the Arrow and support the Arrow.
  As to the gentleman's amendment, it is not perfectly worded because 
of the process we have. He had another amendment, a very specific 
amendment that the Committee on Rules kept out. If we were in a normal 
situation, we could have amended the amendment. It is clear what is 
intended. If this amendment passes and goes to conference, the colloquy 
will be carried out.
  The question is this: Everywhere but on the floor of the House, 
people on the other side talk about how we are going to have these 
space-based interceptors that are going to come down and probably knock 
down the planes at the World Trade Center when we did not know there 
were planes that we should have been going after, and do all of these 
other things. The fact is that we do not believe that putting billions 
and billions of dollars, when we are already underfunding all manner of 
other priorities, into a space-based system makes sense.
  I have heard people say if we do not do this, we are going to 
encounter a space-based Pearl Harbor. Well, fortunately, there is no 
space-based Japan of 1941. We have it to ourselves.
  Finally, I want to say, Mr. Chairman, time and again we are told 
America is terribly weak and we have to spend all of these billions. 
That is totally at variance with the reality of a very strong America, 
and the need to spend these additional billions on these ill-thought-
out programs does not exist.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, during the testimony when General Eberhardt was before 
our committee, and a question was put to him as to what is of utmost 
importance for the future, his answer was what we call SBIRS, Space-
Based Infrared System.

                              {time}  1845

  I think that is very, very important to the defense of our country, 
based upon General Eberhardt's comments to us that day.
  Now, based upon the colloquy between the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Tierney) and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), it is 
apparent that the SBIRS, or the space-based infrared systems, are 
exempt from the language and the intent of this amendment, which allows 
me, based upon that, to support this amendment.
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SKELTON. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
  (Mr. ROEMER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend, the gentleman from 
Missouri, for yielding to me.
  I want to start by applauding my friend, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Hunter); my friend, the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Weldon), and this side of the aisle for putting together a good 
bill that I rise in strong support of.
  I rise in strong support of the ability of the gentleman from 
Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) or anybody else in this body to stand up and 
offer motions to adjourn because they have not had the opportunity to 
offer an important amendment.
  I rise in strong support, Mr. Chairman, of the principles in this 
great House of free debate and free speech on a bill that has been on 
this floor in the past for 2 and 3 weeks, yet somehow we want to get it 
through in hours today.
  There are very many important amendments that were denied the 
possibility of being debated in the Committee on Rules on this floor. 
Why is that important? Back in 1969, a man by the name of Robert 
Wilson, the first director of the Fermilab, a particle physics 
facility, was asked to testify before Congress.
  Congress asked him, What does your testimony and your lab have to do 
with the defense of this country? And here is what he said: ``This new 
knowledge has all to do with honor and country, but it has nothing to 
do directly with defending our country, except to make it worth 
defending.''

[[Page H2348]]

  Now, ``make it worth defending'' is when we can have the amendment of 
the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) on base closure debated on 
the floor; when we can have a Crusader missile amendment, which even 
the Secretary of the Defense Department wants to eliminate, debated on 
this floor. That is in the best interests of this country.
  The Secretary of Defense has said we can save the taxpayer $11 
billion, yet the Committee on Rules, run by the Republican Party, said 
they are going to deny five different amendments the opportunity to be 
debated on this floor.
  Mr. Chairman, when those terrorists attacked our country in New York 
City and at the Pentagon, they attacked more than our people and more 
than our buildings. They attacked the principles of free speech. They 
attacked what we stand for in this country.
  Let us not let the people's House deny the people of this great House 
the opportunity to offer their amendments. Let us let the gentleman 
from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) offer that amendment, and let us give the 
taxpayer the opportunity for an amendment to save $11 billion.
  Mr. SKELTON. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I again reiterate, based 
upon the colloquy between the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. 
Spratt) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney) and those 
concerned about the future of the SBIRS system, I can fully support the 
amendment.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Just to conclude, Mr. Chairman, this is a three-sentence amendment. 
When it takes a colloquy to explain what a three-sentence amendment 
means, we know we are in trouble.
  This amendment, as it is written, would freeze our present programs 
with respect to testing missile defense. Please vote ``no'' on this 
amendment.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Tierney 
amendment. Considering the poor results that recent N.M.D. tests have 
had, it's mind-boggling that funding for a national missile defense 
system is still being debated.
  Since 1940, the U.S. has spent $5.8 trillion dollars on nuclear 
weapons programs . . . more than on any other single program, except 
Social Security! The U.S. has already spent more than $100 billion on 
missile defenses with little to show--so why do we keep throwing good 
money after bad?
  Mr. Chairman, where are our priorities? Instead of investing in 
missile defense programs--we should be spending our scarce financial 
resources on our real domestic needs . . . like our children's 
education; our seniors, and their health care; our families and their 
financial security.
  If this Congress wants to really increase U.S. security, we must 
invest in people, not weapons.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Tierney amendment.


          Motion to Rise Offered by Mr. Taylor of Mississippi

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do 
now rise.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the motion to rise offered by the 
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 48, 
noes 356, not voting 30, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 144]

                                AYES--48

     Abercrombie
     Baldwin
     Berry
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Capuano
     Clay
     Condit
     Conyers
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Filner
     Frank
     Hastings (FL)
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Holt
     Honda
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Lynch
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Oberstar
     Olver
     Pelosi
     Schakowsky
     Shows
     Slaughter
     Solis
     Stark
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Towns
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Wu

                               NOES--356

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boozman
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hilliard
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Manzullo
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, Jeff
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Neal
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Obey
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Otter
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Sullivan
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watts (OK)
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--30

     Bartlett
     Boehner
     Burton
     Cannon
     Crane
     Dooley
     English
     Gallegly
     Hall (OH)
     Hilleary
     Hinojosa
     John
     Kennedy (MN)
     Lewis (GA)
     McCrery
     Millender-McDonald
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Nethercutt
     Ose
     Oxley
     Reyes
     Riley
     Roukema
     Stupak
     Thomas
     Tierney
     Traficant
     Watson (CA)
     Waxman

                              {time}  1917

  Ms. McCOLLUM and Messrs. WYNN, BRADY of Texas and Kingston changed 
their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the motion to rise was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as aboved recorded.


             Part A Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Tierney

  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.

[[Page H2349]]

                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 159, 
noes 253, not voting 22, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 145]

                               AYES--159

     Abercrombie
     Allen
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barrett
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Coyne
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duncan
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank
     Frost
     Gephardt
     Gonzalez
     Green (TX)
     Gutierrez
     Hastings (FL)
     Hill
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larson (CT)
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Lynch
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Moore
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tauscher
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NOES--253

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Andrews
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bereuter
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boyd
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clement
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Everett
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     Kildee
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Maloney (CT)
     Manzullo
     Mascara
     McCarthy (NY)
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, Jeff
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Otter
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sandlin
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schrock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Sullivan
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Turner
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--22

     Boehner
     Burton
     Cannon
     Crane
     Edwards
     Hall (OH)
     John
     Kennedy (MN)
     Lewis (GA)
     McCrery
     Millender-McDonald
     Nethercutt
     Ose
     Pryce (OH)
     Reyes
     Riley
     Roukema
     Sherwood
     Thomas
     Traficant
     Watson (CA)
     Waxman

                              {time}  1935

  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 printed 
in part A of House Report 107-450.


              Part A Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Spratt

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

       Part A Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Spratt:
       At the end of subtitle B of title II (page 45, after line 
     19), insert the following new section:

     SEC. 217. TRANSFER OF FUNDS TO INCREASE AMOUNTS FOR PAC-3 
                   MISSILE PROCUREMENT AND ISRAELI ARROW PROGRAM.

       (a) Increase for PAC-3 Procurement.--The amount provided in 
     section 101 for Missile Procurement, Army, is hereby 
     increased by $65,000,000, to be available for an additional 
     24 PAC-3 missiles.
       (b) Increase for Israeli Arrow Program.--The amount 
     provided in section 201(4) for research, development, test, 
     and evaluation, Defense-wide, is hereby increased by 
     $70,000,000, to be available within program element 0603881C, 
     Terminal Defense Segement, only for the Israeli Arrow 
     Ballistic Missile System program.
       (c) Corresponding Reduction.--The amount provided in 
     section 201(4) for research, development, test, and 
     evaluation, Defense-wide, is hereby reduced by $135,000,000, 
     to be derived from amounts for the Missile Defense Agency for 
     program element 0603883C, Boost Defense Segment, of which--
       (1) $54,393,000 shall be derived from project 4040, Space-
     Based Boost;
       (2) $24,810,000 shall be derived from project 4043, Space-
     Based Laser; and
       (3) $55,797,000 shall be derived from project 4020, Sea-
     Based Boost.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 415, the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) and a Member opposed each will control 10 
minutes.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, 
until it is amended.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina 
(Mr. Spratt).
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The purpose of this amendment, Mr. Chairman, is to move $135 million 
within the ballistic missile defense account. Not outside it, not away 
from it, not to take a dime out of the top line, but to rearrange $135 
million within the $7.8 billion account in the following manner:
  First, we would move $65 million into production of 24 additional 
PAC-3 missiles. The PAC-3, the most advanced missile, the only missile 
defense system that we will really deploy for nearly the next 5 years, 
is woefully short in supply at the present time. We could very well 
need it in the near future. And so this would move $65 million into the 
PAC-3 line and allow 24 additional PAC-3s to be purchased.
  There is an economic effect. By buying more, we buy more efficiently. 
We run the plant at a higher and more efficient rate; and as a 
consequence, these 24 missiles will cost nearly $1 million a copy less 
than they would otherwise cost if we were buying fewer.
  Secondly, this amendment would move $70 million out of other accounts 
into manufacturing and development for the Arrow missile, which is 
being manufactured at a plant in Alabama, a Boeing plant in Alabama. 
Once again, this would provide us with a system which may be needed in 
the here and now, in the near future. This is a system that is ready to 
go but is not fully funded for production.
  Now, where does this money come from? Under my amendment, we would 
take first of all funds out of space-based interceptors. Mr. Chairman, 
we have in the past, since the inauguration of SDI in 1983, we have 
developed at least two iterations of a space-based kinetic kill 
interceptor. The original

[[Page H2350]]

space-based interceptor was based on a satellite. A number of different 
interceptors would have been garaged on a single satellite and deployed 
from that satellite. Because such a satellite is a highly valuable and 
highly visible target in a fixed orbit circling the Earth at given 
times constantly, it becomes an easy target to take out. Because of its 
vulnerability, it was discontinued. Actually, it was defeated here on 
the House floor; discontinued the next year by SDI.
  In its place, SDI proposed something called Brilliant Pebbles. The 
idea was to make these interceptors single autonomous satellites and so 
prolific they would be too prolific for any adversary to take out 
enough to make a difference. Well, Brilliant Pebbles II, after the 
expenditure of several hundred million dollars, was abandoned and 
discarded.
  What I am proposing here tonight, Mr. Chairman, is that we have a 
full plate already for the Missile Defense Agency. We are trying to 
bring to fruition the mid-course interceptor. We are trying to develop 
a boost-phase intercept for the Navy. We are trying to develop a mid-
course intercept system based upon a Navy ship. We have an airborne 
laser system. Given the full plate that the MDA, Missile Defense 
Agency, already has for the systems it has started up or is starting 
now, it does not need to complicate its problems with an additional 
space-based system, particularly after we have already abandoned two 
iterations of it.
  Secondly, we would deplete the funding except for $10 million for 
further feasibility and concept definition studies of the space-based 
laser, a truly futuristic and, in my opinion, highly dubious system. We 
take the money out of those systems; and we put it in theater missile 
defense where the danger is clear, present, and imminent.
  That is the purpose here, to rearrange money. Not to take money out 
of missile defense, but to rearrange it and to accomplish some near-
term needs of systems that we very well may have to call upon in the 
near future.
  The gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) has an amendment that 
would rearrange my rearrangement. He would leave in place the 
allocations I have made, but he would allow General Kadish to determine 
which systems would be debited in order for these two systems to be 
plussed up. And I can live with the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, is it in order for me to offer the 
substitute at this time?
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 printed 
in part A of House Report 107-450.


 Part A Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Hunter as a Substitute for the 
              Part A Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Spratt

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

       Part A amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. Hunter as a 
     substitute for part A amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Spratt:
       At the end of subtitle C of title II (page 218, after line 
     15), insert the following new section:

     SEC. ____. TRANSFER OF FUNDS TO INCREASE AMOUNTS FOR PAC-3 
                   MISSILE PROCUREMENT AND ISRAELI ARROW PROGRAM.

       (a) Increase for PAC-3 Procurement.--The amount provided in 
     section 101 for Missile Procurement, Army, is hereby 
     increased by $65,000,000, to be available for an additional 
     24 PAC-3 missiles.
       (b) Increase for Israeli Arrow Program.--The amount 
     provided in section 201(4) for the Missile Defense Agency is 
     hereby increased by $70,000,000, to be available within 
     program element 0603881C, Terminal Defense Segment, only for 
     the Israeli Arrow Ballistic Missile Defense System program.
       (c) Corresponding Reduction.--The amount provided in 
     section 201(4) for research, development, test, and 
     evaluation, Defense-wide, is hereby reduced by $135,000,000, 
     to be derived from amounts available to the Missile Defense 
     Agency.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 415, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Hunter) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter).
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment offered by the gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Spratt) is very excellent with respect to the requirement 
or the proposal that we increase in two areas in missile defense, one 
of which is for additional PAC-3 missiles. Those in fact are the 
missiles, the antimissile system that we are deploying in the near 
term. We started deploying those around September of 2001. We are 
moving ahead to deploy that first battery. We are in what is known as 
low-rate initial production right now, finishing up EMD; and we are 
starting to move out with that program. And it is a great improvement 
over the Patriot missile that we utilized during Desert Storm. So it 
makes sense to try to get as many of those in the field as quickly as 
possible.
  Similarly, we have been the prime mover in the Arrow missile program, 
which is also a theater antimissile system. It is an excellent system. 
It has been proven out and is in deployment right now, and we are 
trying to increase the deployment and get a third battery up for the 
Arrow missile. So both of those adds, I think, are good adds, Mr. 
Chairman.
  What we do that is a little different in the substitute, the way we 
modify Mr. Spratt's amendment, is instead of designating certain places 
where we mandate cuts in the missile defense program, we are not 
replacing General Kadish's discretion with our own. We are leaving him 
the discretion to move money around and decide where he is going to 
take the money from to come up with this additional $135 million-or-so 
for these two missile programs.
  So if the gentleman will accept our substitute, I am inclined to 
accept his amendment.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HUNTER. I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I will indeed.
  I do, however, Mr. Chairman, still wish to reserve my time so I can 
recognize others to make comments upon the amendment.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.


          Motion to Rise Offered by Mr. Taylor of Mississippi

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do 
now rise.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the motion to rise offered by the 
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 55, 
noes 336, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 42, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 146]

                                AYES--55

     Abercrombie
     Baldwin
     Berry
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Capuano
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Davis (FL)
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Filner
     Frank
     Hill
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Lynch
     Markey
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     Meek (FL)
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Napolitano
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Pelosi
     Rodriguez
     Schakowsky
     Shows
     Slaughter
     Solis
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Towns
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Wu

                               NOES--336

     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Boehlert
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boozman
     Borski
     Boswell
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier

[[Page H2351]]


     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, Jeff
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Ney
     Northup
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Otter
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watts (OK)
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

     DeFazio
       
       

                             NOT VOTING--42

     Ballenger
     Berman
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Boucher
     Burton
     Cannon
     Clay
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Crane
     Dooley
     Everett
     Foley
     Ganske
     Gillmor
     Gordon
     Hall (OH)
     Hinchey
     John
     Johnson, Sam
     Kennedy (MN)
     LaFalce
     LaTourette
     Lewis (GA)
     McCrery
     Millender-McDonald
     Nethercutt
     Norwood
     Ose
     Oxley
     Pryce (OH)
     Radanovich
     Reyes
     Riley
     Roukema
     Royce
     Simpson
     Thomas
     Traficant
     Watson (CA)
     Waxman

                              {time}  2011

  Messrs. BACHUS, FERGUSON and LaHOOD changed their vote from ``aye'' 
to ``no.''
  Mr. RODRIGUEZ changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the motion to rise was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) has 13 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) has 
10\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from South Carolina and I 
have discussed his accepting of my substitute and our accepting of the 
amendment. I know he has several speakers. We do not have any more 
speakers. What I would be happy to do is yield my time on the 
substitute to the gentleman from South Carolina's speakers and maybe we 
could move this process along.
  Mr. SPRATT. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Skelton), the ranking member of our committee.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the amendment by my 
friend from South Carolina, and I compliment him as well as the 
gentleman from California.
  This amendment addresses what I see as a relevance problem. I have 
looked at the future and found it wanting. There just is not enough 
money to carry out the current defense program through the next few 
years.
  But instead of keeping its priorities on what the troops need, we see 
the Department of Defense canceling programs with real-world relevance 
while throwing money at any missile defense item that comes down the 
pike.
  As a gesture of national unity, Democrats last year foreswore a 
significant debate on missile defense. We did not debate the 57 percent 
increase in spending. We have not debated Secretary Rumsfeld's removal 
of most of the controls and oversight required of all other major 
defense programs. We have not debated other significant changes.
  But I hope, Mr. Chairman, that we can at least begin, with this 
amendment, to reestablish relevance as a consideration when spending 
the national treasury.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Harman).
  (Ms. HARMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me 
and I rise in support of this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe I was the first Member of Congress in January 
2001 to see the Arrow system deployed at Palmachim Air Force Base in 
Israel. It was very exciting to see the radar, the launchers, and also 
to see some members of the United States Navy working on the 
interoperable aspects of the system.

                              {time}  2015

  An important thing for this House to understand is that this system 
is interoperable. The cost-sharing between our country and Israel has 
produced a system that will protect Israel against current and future 
missile attacks, and these are real threats, but also will protect U.S. 
troops deployed in the field. The work we have done on this system and 
the costs we have shared with our democratic ally, Israel, will help us 
as we develop our own more advanced theater missile defense and 
national missile defense systems. This amendment transfers money in 
this defense authorization bill to support more advanced deployment of 
a system Israel needs now, and to support the continued development of 
missile defense systems for the United States. It is a win-win; a win 
for our ally, Israel; a win for our troops and our homeland.
  At a time when our homeland is under serious threat, an issue I 
devote a lot of my time to, this amendment will assure that we are more 
capable against a missile threat.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge our colleagues to support the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I support this bill, which provides for a strong 
defense for our nation. This chamber and this Committee, of which I am 
a former member, have a long record of providing our armed forces with 
the capabilities needed to win wars overseas. The overwhelming success 
of the ongoing operations in Afghanistan demonstrates these 
capabilities, and attests to the skill and dedication of our armed 
forces.
  We now face a new challenge. While our military forces will be called 
to win wars overseas, the nation must also wage a war at home. This is 
not a war we can win with artillery or uniformed troops. It is a war of 
intelligence, of technology, and of wills.
  Similarly, the war against terrorism in Afghanistan was not won with 
the force structure and equipment of the Cold War. We relied on long-
range platforms, on stealth, and on precision-guided munitions. 
Technology is replacing the need to put our uniformed personnel in 
harm's way and providing situational awareness to commanders thousands 
of miles away. While we will maintain the ability to go it alone, the 
ability to lead a coalition will frequently replace the need to 
shoulder the burden exclusively.
  The bill before us today is a step in the right direction in 
transforming the military to a truly modern fighting force. The 
authorization of programs to protect the homeland shows an 
understanding of the threats we now face. The authorization of 
uninhabited vehicles, of stealthy aircraft, and improved communications 
and sensors embraces new technologies.
  This bill moves down the path of defense reform. To be sure, there 
still is more to go. I urge my friends on the committee to continue

[[Page H2352]]

the fight against legacy systems and programs, to replace them with 
agile and smart systems, and to improve the poor tooth to tail ratio 
through better business practices in the defense establishment.
  Finally, I am proud to represent the aerospace capital of the 
universe. The companies in my district forge the reconnaissance and 
communications satellites, UAVs, and other cutting edge technologies 
that will drive the new defense. I support these programs, and I 
support this bill.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Turner), in whose district the PAC III is built.
  Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  I think it is important for us to understand what this amendment is 
really all about. It is the intent of the sponsors of these amendments 
to be sure that our troops are prepared to deal with what we may 
potentially face if we are involved in a land battle in a country like 
Iraq.
  Today we have only 20 PAC III missiles in our inventory. We 
authorized 72 additional missiles last year. They are not on line yet. 
What that means is if we get into a battle, a land battle where our 
troops need the protection from those Scud missiles coming from Iraq, 
we will simply not have the protection our troops should have.
  The PAC III missile is the only hit-to-kill missile that we have that 
has been proven to be successful. The old Patriot missiles are a 
different technology. We will certainly want as a House tonight to 
stand behind our troops and ensure that an additional 24 missiles are 
authorized under this bill.
  The Army says they need over 2,000 PAC III missiles in their 
inventory. We will have to appropriate money for a decade to get that 
inventory to that level. But we can take a small step tonight by 
authorizing an additional 24 missiles for PAC III, as well as the 
authorization for additional funding for the Arrow missile, which is 
also a missile that will defend against the Scud missiles of Iraq.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Chairman, let me first of all state my support for this 
legislation as it relates to the funding of the military personnel in 
this country. I support the increased compensation that this 
authorization bill will provide.
  Let me also thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) for 
a very thoughtful amendment as it relates to dealing with the missile 
activities in the theater or grounded missile activity. I support that 
kind of utilization of missile defense, in the theater, on the ground.
  I think it is important to note that I do oppose in its totality the 
utilization of $7 billion for missile defense in this particular bill. 
I think the thoughtful amendment that the gentleman from South Carolina 
(Mr. Spratt) has that deals with the particular distribution of the 
funds, particularly as it relates to Israeli defense, is very helpful. 
However, let me share with my colleagues my concerns about missile 
defense.
  First of all, Operation Enduring Freedom is costing roughly $1.8 
billion per month. This bill funds missile defense at $7 billion, and 
we will also use $7 billion in 4 months for Operation Enduring Freedom. 
The money for Missile defense was put in this legislation even after a 
top defense official has said that a successful U.S. missile defense 
system which was completed recently does not realistically duplicate 
conditions of an actual attack, a fault in the missile defense. We also 
find that kinetic kill as a concept for destroying long-range ballistic 
missiles is even more problematic at this stage. There is no empirical 
evidence to support the contention that kinetic kill for ICBM defense 
will work.
  So I simply say that the amendment before us, the Spratt amendment, 
with the distribution of funds as he is offering to do, is an amendment 
that makes sense, because it is related to ground missile defense. But 
I am opposed, Mr. Chairman, to the utilization of $7 billion for the 
missile defense program as offered in this bill and in the President's 
budget. I ask my colleagues to support the Spratt amendment.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Hunter).
  Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I thank him for accepting my amendment.
  This Arrow missile was a program that we started in 1987. Members of 
the Committee on Armed Services contacted Mr. Rabin and Mr. Abramson 
and said you have to develop a system against incoming ballistic 
missiles because at some point we are going to see them coming from 
neighboring countries built presumably by Russia. We saw that. We are 
going to see more of it. This is a prudent move. The PAC III is also an 
excellent addition. I thank the gentleman for accepting this 
substitute.
  Mr. Chairman, I move the substitute at this time.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, Operation Enduring Freedom is 
costing roughly $1.8 billion per month. Within four months time that 
amount will climb to $7.2 billion, while funding the ballistic missile 
defense program in H.R. 4546 will cost approximately $7.784 billion.
  The Ballistic Missile Defense system has failed most of its tests. 
Kinetic kill as a concept for destroying long-range ballistic missiles 
is even more problematic at this stage. There is no empirical evidence 
to support the contention that kinetic kill for ICBM defense will work.
  The military personnel conducting the war in Afghanistan are showing 
measurable victories in achieving the United States goals. While the 
ballistic missile defense program is not a proven deterrent, let's not 
fund an unproven, instead let's fund success. By diverting the funds to 
military personnel we are insuring their welfare and the welfare of 
their families, which results in increased security for America.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) as a substitute for the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt).
  The amendment offered as a substitute for the amendment was agreed 
to.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), as amended.
  The amendment, as amended, was agreed to.


          Motion to Rise Offered by Mr. Taylor of Mississippi

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do 
now rise.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the motion to rise offered by the 
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 56, 
noes 339, not voting 39, as follows:

                             [Roll No 147]

                                AYES--56

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Baldwin
     Berry
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Capuano
     Condit
     Conyers
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     Doggett
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Holt
     Honda
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Lynch
     Markey
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     Meeks (NY)
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Napolitano
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Rodriguez
     Sanchez
     Schakowsky
     Shows
     Solis
     Stenholm
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Wu

                               NOES--339

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boozman
     Borski
     Boswell
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox

[[Page H2353]]


     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller, Dan
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, Jeff
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Ney
     Northup
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Otter
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Rivers
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--39

     Ballenger
     Barr
     Boehner
     Boucher
     Burton
     Cannon
     Clay
     Clayton
     Combest
     Crane
     DeFazio
     Edwards
     Everett
     Gillmor
     Gordon
     Grucci
     Hall (OH)
     Hansen
     Hoyer
     John
     Kennedy (MN)
     LaFalce
     LaTourette
     Lewis (GA)
     Millender-McDonald
     Nethercutt
     Norwood
     Ose
     Oxley
     Pryce (OH)
     Reyes
     Riley
     Roukema
     Simpson
     Stark
     Traficant
     Watson (CA)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman

                              {time}  2043

  Mr. TIBERI changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the motion to rise was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 printed 
in part A of House Report 107-450.


             Part A Amendment No. 7 Offered by Ms. Sanchez

  Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendment No. 7.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Part A Amendment No. 7 offered by Ms. Sanchez:
       At the end of title VII (page 159, after line 14) insert 
     the following:

     SEC. 7  . LIMITING RESTRICTION OF USE OF DEPARTMENT OF 
                   DEFENSE MEDICAL FACILITIES TO PERFORM ABORTIONS 
                   TO FACILITIES IN THE UNITED STATES.

       Section 1093(b) of title 10, United States Code, is amended 
     by inserting ``in the United States'' after ``Defense''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 415, the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Sanchez) and a Member opposed each will control 10 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez).
  Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, today I offer an amendment about freedom, safety, and 
choice. Members of the Armed Forces are entitled to a quality of life 
equal to that of the Nation they are pledged to defend.



                          ____________________