Congressional Record, Volume 148 Issue 88 (Thursday, June 27, 2002)

[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 88 (Thursday, June 27, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H4076-H4110]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2003

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 461 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

H. Res. 461

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this
resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule
XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of
the bill (H.R. 5010) making appropriations for the Department
of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, and
for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be
dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of
the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the
bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the
Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the bill
shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule.
Points of order against provisions in the bill for failure to
comply with clause 2 of rule XXI are waived. During
consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole may accord priority in recognition on
the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment has
caused it to be printed in the portion of the Congressional
Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII.
Amendments so printed shall be considered as read. At the
conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the
Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with
such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous
question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and
amendments thereto to final passage without intervening
motion except one motion to recommit with or without
instructions.
Sec. 2. That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall
be in order, any rule of the House to the contrary
notwithstanding, to consider concurrent resolutions providing
for adjournment of the House and Senate during the month of
July.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). The gentlewoman from North
Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) is recognized for 1 hour.
Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost); pending
which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration
of the resolution, all time yielded is for purposes of debate only.
Yesterday, the Committee on Rules met and granted an open rule for
H.R. 5010, the fiscal year 2003 Department of Defense Appropriations
Act. The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided
between the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Appropriations.
This is a fair and open rule for a very important bill. It cannot get
any better than that. The rule allows any Member to offer any amendment
to the bill, as long as their amendment complies with the normal rules
of the House.
The defense appropriations bill provides the tools and the resources
for our military to wage an aggressive war against terrorism while
defending our Nation against an ever-changing military threat. In our
global campaign against global terror, our military must have every
resource, every tool, every weapon and every advantage they need for
the missions to come.

[[Page H4077]]

I agree with President Bush when he says that there is no silver
bullet, no single event or single action that is going to suddenly make
the threat of terrorism disappear. This broad-based and sustained
effort will continue until terrorism is routed out. The situation is
similar to the Cold War, when continuous pressure from many nations
caused communism to collapse from within. We will press the fight as
long as it takes, and we will prevail.
I am very pleased that this bill makes significant improvements in
the quality of life of the men and women who serve in the Armed Forces.
These improvements include a 4.1 percent military personnel pay raise
and targeted pay raises to mid-grade non-commissioned officers;
generous housing allowances that will significantly decrease service
personnel's out-of-pocket housing expenses; and access to quality
health care.
We can never pay our men and women in uniform on a scale that matches
the magnitude of their sacrifice, but this bill reflects our respect
for their selfless service.
Today, more than ever, we also owe those in uniform the resources
they need to maintain a very high state of readiness. Our enemies rely
upon surprise and deception. They used to rely upon the fact that they
thought we were soft, but I do not think they think that way anymore.
Our forces must be ready to deploy to any point on the globe on short
notice. This bill increases operation and maintenance by over $9.7
billion. Our Nation must have, and will have, ready forces that can
bring victory to our country and safety to our people.
The world's best soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines also deserve
the world's best weaponry. To ensure that, our Nation must invest in
procurement. This defense bill contains about $70.3 billion for
procurement. The Nation must give our military the weapons it needs to
meet the threats of our future. If the war against terror means we must
find terror wherever it exists, pull it out by its roots, and bring
people to justice, our military must have the means to achieve the
objective.
To that end, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule
and to support the underlying bill. Because now, more than ever, we
must improve our national security.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Over the past several months, Mr. Speaker, the world has seen the
skill, courage and professionalism of the United States military.
America's men and women in uniform have done everything this country
has asked of them, and they have done it well. So I am pleased to
report that the defense appropriations bill on the floor today provides
them with the resources they need to continue to ensure our national
security.
I would like to commend the chairman of the Committee on
Appropriations, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young); the ranking
Democrat, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey); the subcommittee
chairman, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis); and the
subcommittee ranking member, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Murtha), for the tremendous job they have done to support America's
troops and to protect Americans here at home. The bill represents the
bipartisan support this Congress has for our troops and the war on
terrorism.
Overall, it provides nearly $34 billion more for national defense
than we spent last year. It reflects the homeland security priorities
for which Democrats have fought so hard, including $385 million for the
chemical and biological defense program, and it funds substantial
quality of life improvements for America's men and women in uniform and
their families.
In particular, this bill includes a 4.1 percent military pay raise
and even larger increases for the mid-grade non-commissioned officers
whom the armed services must retain. To improve military health care,
it significantly increases funding for the Defense Health Program, some
$141 million above the President's request.
I also am pleased that this bill continues to fund the wide range of
weapons programs that will ensure America's military superiority
throughout the world. For instance, it includes $4.1 billion to procure
23 F-22 Raptor aircraft, the next-generation air dominance fighter for
the Air Force. It also provides $882 million for research and
development for this aircraft.
Additionally, the bill provides $3.5 billion for continued
development of the Joint Strike Fighter, the high-technology multi-role
fighter of the future for the Air Force, the Navy and the Marines; and
it includes $1 billion for 11 V-22 aircraft.
In sum, Mr. Speaker, this bill does a good job of providing needed
resources to our troops for the fiscal year that begins on October 1,
but I would be remiss if I did not call attention to the more pressing
problem facing America's military right now. Specifically, U.S. troops
are fighting the war on terrorism around the world at this very moment.
They are winning, but they desperately need additional resources now
for the remainder of this fiscal year.
Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that the Armed Forces will have to take
drastic steps if they do not get help soon. The Army could have to
cancel training exercises, for instance; and the Air Force could have
to severely cut flight hours.
That is why both the House and the Senate passed the emergency
supplemental appropriations bill with substantial bipartisan support.
Unfortunately, that bill is still stuck in a conference committee. Why?
Because Republican leaders are playing a high-stakes game of political
chicken with our troops.

{time} 1130

They are trying to use the wartime spending bill to hide the fact
that they have increased America's national debt and are raiding Social
Security.
Make no mistake, America's debt is increasing because of the fiscally
irresponsible tax plan Republicans passed last year. But House
Republican leaders are desperate to disguise that fact from the
American people, so they are holding hostage the wartime emergency
spending supplemental bill.
Mr. Speaker, House Democrats have repeatedly tried to work with
Republicans to ensure the United States does not default on its debt.
We have offered to help pass a bipartisan, short-term increase in the
debt limit. All we ask is that Republicans join us in an honest,
comprehensive budget summit so we can stop the fiscal irresponsibility
that is rating the Social Security trust fund.
Unfortunately, Republican leaders are afraid to take responsibility
for their actions. They are afraid that a straight up-or-down vote to
raise the debt ceiling will highlight the rising tide of red ink
Republicans have created.
That sort of budgetary dishonesty is bad enough, but holding up the
emergency supplemental spending bill that our troops need is beyond the
pale. Simply put, it is a particularly shameful form of war
profiteering.
Mr. Speaker, it does not have to be that way. Historically, Democrats
and Republicans in Congress have worked together to support America's
national defense. On the floor today, we are doing just that with the
spending bill for the next fiscal year.
I urge the Republican leadership to stop holding hostage the
emergency wartime supplemental spending bill. Have the courage to
increase the debt separately and free the supplemental.
How, Mr. Speaker, can the Republican leadership let this body adjourn
for the Fourth of July recess, our most patriotic celebration, without
tending to the needs of the men and women who are defending our flag
and our country in every corner of this globe? To me, it is an
abdication of the responsibilities we, the elected Members of the House
of Representatives, have to our constituents and to our country.
If the Republican majority wants to govern, now is the time to show
the country that they are capable of doing so. Pass a separate debt
limit and bring up the supplemental that is so desperately needed right
now by every branch of the armed services.
If the Republican leadership will do that, then we can pass the
supplemental with an overwhelmingly bipartisan majority and get the
troops the assistance that they need today. We are providing the
assistance in this legislation that is before us that they need
starting October 1, and that is good and we all support that. But what
about the months of July, August, and September? Let us move on and
provide that help also.

[[Page H4078]]

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the ranking member on the Committee on
Appropriations.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, this is a bipartisan bill. It is a bipartisan
rule. Both ought to be supported. The bill itself will pass
overwhelmingly after the House is finished disposing of it. I want to
congratulate all of those who had anything to do with putting it
together, most especially the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) and
the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha).
Having said that, I cannot help but noting how ironic it is that on
the same day that the House will be debating the bill that provides the
resources to enable our military to defend this country and to take the
battle to terrorists around the world, how ironic it is that this House
on another bill coming up later today will not stand up for the very
values that we are today buttressing by the funding that we are
providing in this bill.
What will happen today, in my view, on the rule on prescription drugs
will demonstrate that the biggest threat to this democracy and the
biggest threat to the average citizen just trying to get through the
day and pay their bills, the biggest threat to them is not from any
foreign power. The biggest threat is from some of their own
representatives who will refuse to practice democracy here at home.
We are shortly going to be considering a prescription drug bill which
is of, by, and for the pharmaceutical industry. It is designed not to
solve the problem of seniors who face mounting drug costs. It is
designed to block us from being able to provide any comprehensive,
meaningful relief by providing a guaranteed benefit under Medicare.
It is apparent to me that those who run this House have determined
that the only way they can win with their proposal is to avoid giving
the elected representatives of every senior in America an opportunity
to choose how we can most effectively solve the problem of runaway
prescription drug prices.
It seems to me that a Congress which can produce legislation such as
we have before us this morning is a Congress that ought not to be
afraid to provide choice in the way we deal with the problems of our
senior citizens. We hear the Republican leadership of this Congress
prattle on to an almost nauseating degree about the need for us to
provide choice programs in schools; but they are apparently afraid to
give us the opportunity to choose among alternatives when it comes to
dealing with what is probably the biggest financial crisis that our
senior citizens have today.
I am going to support this rule, and I will support this bill; but it
is a sad day when the elected leadership of this House, who more than
any other have a responsibility to defend democratic values, decide
instead that the only way they can win is by crushing those same
democratic values.
Make no mistake about it, the prescription drug bill which is coming
at us today is not designed to solve a problem. It is designed to
prevent Members of this House from producing a comprehensive
alternative that will solve the problem. It says to America's seniors,
you are going to have to accept the fact that we have decided in our
infinite wisdom that the only solution we will provide for the problem
is a subsidizing of insurance companies.
Mr. Speaker, that is not what the average senior expects. It is not
what our constituents, regardless of age, elected us to come here to
do. Before this day is over, it will be a shameful day in the history
of democracy in this House.
Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Hayes).
(Mr. HAYES asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this
time.
The irony today that we stand before this body and ask for the needed
resources and assets that our men in uniform need to protect our
freedom and our liberty and our heritage, we stand here under the very
appropriate words ``In God We Trust,'' but yet a judge in California,
with the stroke of a pen, would undo these things that we fight for. I
hope that irony is not lost on us today.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule that will allow for
consideration of H.R. 5010, the defense appropriations bill for fiscal
year 2003. The tragic events of September 11, 2001, have thrust our
Nation's military into the spotlight and called to duty the brave men
and women of the U.S. Armed Forces. Once again, U.S. citizens are
rallying behind them in strong support of the harrowing mission they
have been called upon to do; and today the United States Congress has a
duty to pass this important legislation that will help provide the
necessary resources for these brave men and women to do their job.
This legislation first and foremost takes care of our most vital
asset in the military, our people. It provides every servicemember with
a 4.1 percent pay raise. It approves housing allowances for the buy-
down of service personnel's out-of-pocket housing expenses from 11.3 to
7.5 percent in 2003. For the soldiers and airmen in my district at Fort
Bragg and Pope Air Force Base, the ability to adequately care for their
families and train for the mission for which they are called are the
two issues which are second to none. I believe this legislation makes
significant progress in these areas.
The defense appropriations bill for fiscal year 2003 builds upon our
work from last year and continues to reverse the decline of military
readiness by funding key operations, maintenance, and training
accounts. This financial support devoted to our national security is
long in coming. We must adequately provide the men and women from Fort
Bragg and Pope Air Force Base and all of our military personnel who are
currently prosecuting the war on terrorism adequate and necessary
resources to do their job.
I would like to specifically mention that this bill provides some
funding for some key capabilities for our U.S. Special Forces, whose
anniversary we celebrated last week. While they, alongside members from
all our Armed Forces, serve in Afghanistan and all over the world
today, we show our support by providing the funding necessary to
effectively and safely do their job. The $354.7 billion we are voting
on today will help do that. It is targeted at two of the most critical
areas crucial to maintaining a quality of life and readiness.
Furthermore, this bill funds the development and testing of an
effective ballistic missile defense system.
Mr. Speaker, it is gross injustice and misfortune that it took the
tragedy in September to focus the public eye on the need for a more
robust defense budget; but I feel the legislation in front of us takes
that step, and the rule provides for its consideration. I urge Members
to vote strongly in favor of the bill.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Kucinich).
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, at a time when this country is prepared to
spend up to $400 billion for the military and an extra $50 billion for
defense, $37 billion for homeland security, I think it is appropriate
to ask how we can create peace around the world.
Last summer, I introduced H.R. 2459, legislation to create a Cabinet-
level Department of Peace which embodies a broad-based approach to
peaceful, nonviolent conflict resolution at domestic and international
levels. The mission of the Department is to make nonviolence an
organizing principle in our society and to help create conditions for a
more peaceful world where someday we can make war itself archaic. Over
43 Members of Congress support this bill.
The Department would be headed by a Secretary of Peace appointed by
the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. Domestically,
the Department would be responsible for developing policies which
address issues, including domestic violence, child abuse, mistreatment
of the elderly. Internationally, the Department would analyze foreign
policy and make recommendations to the President on matters pertaining
to national security, including the protection of human rights and the
prevention and de-escalation on armed and unarmed international
conflict.
I have received thousands of letters of support and e-mails from all
over

[[Page H4079]]

the United States and all over the world in support of a Department of
Peace. People are demanding an end to violence. They are demanding an
end to war, and the Department of Peace can be instrumental in
realizing this goal.
We are in a new millennium, and the time has come to review age-old
challenges with new thinking, wherein we can conceive of peace as
simply not being the absence of violence, but the active presence and
the capacity for a higher evolution of human awareness, of respect,
trust and integrity; wherein we all may tap the infinite capabilities
of humanity to transform consciousness and conditions which impel or
compel violence at a personal, group, or national level toward
developing a new understanding of, and a commitment to, compassion and
love.
We have above the Speaker the words ``In God We Trust.'' Let us place
our faith in our capacity to go beyond weapons as instruments of
resolving international conflict and believe in our own ability to
evolve and to make a difference. The Department of Peace is a path
toward just that.

{time} 1145

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the rule.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). Pursuant to House
Resolution 461 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. 5010.

{time} 1145

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. 5010) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 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 California (Mr. Lewis) and the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis).
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
It is my privilege to rise today and join the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) to take up the defense appropriations bill
for the year 2003. We have been allocated adequate time on both sides.
This bill involves an expenditure of some $354.7 billion on behalf of
our national defense, and at this point, I would like to insert for the
Record a summary of this bill, by appropriations account.

[[Page H4080]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN02.001

[[Page H4081]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN02.002

[[Page H4082]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN02.003

[[Page H4083]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN02.004

[[Page H4084]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH27JN02.005

[[Page H4085]]

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
We did the best we could do with the amount of money we had
available. This is a good bill.
Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to rise in support of this
legislation to provide for the FY 2003 Department of Defense
appropriations. I extend my appreciation to both Subcommittee Chairman
Lewis and Ranking Member Murtha for this bipartisan legislation.
I have the pleasure of representing portions of the Hampton Roads
area--home to Newport News Shipyard and the world's largest naval base,
Norfolk Naval base. The recently released 2000 census figures show that
the Hampton Roads area is the military capital of the United States. We
have 91,615 men and women in uniform that live in the Hampton Roads
metropolitan area, more than anywhere else in the country. For these
men and women, I am especially pleased that the appropriations bill
funds a 4.1 percent pay increase and increases the basic housing
allowance for our hardworking military personnel. Now more than ever,
it is important that we show our appreciation for our men and women in
uniform.
I would also like to compliment the Committee for appropriating $250
million for the new carrier, CVN-77. Since 9-11, we have overextended
the use of our current carriers. Given the new threats we face, it is
appropriate that we proceed with the construction of the new carrier.
This is also an item for which the entire Virginia Delegation worked
very hard to secure appropriations.
In addition to the funding for the new carrier, funding to allow for
the construction of the fourth Virginia class submarine is vitally
important.
Finally, I would like to thank the Subcommittee for funding that
would go to science programs at historically black colleges and
universities and for institutions serving Hispanic students.
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, last year, as it has since 1990, the General
Accounting Office (GAO) declared that Department of Defense's financial
management systems pose a high risk of fraud, waste and mismanagement.
To get a better understanding of how the acquisition and procurement
processes should operate, the House Government Reform Committee,
National Security, Veterans Affairs and International Relations
Subcommittee asked GAO to follow a defense inventory item from the
initial idea through procurement and operation. They reviewed the
procurement, accounting, control and payment processes for the Joint
Lightweight Integrated Suit Technology (JSLIST), a chemical and
biological protection garment for use by military personnel.
The General Accounting Office found DOD's nonintegrated data systems
and processes are wasting money and degrading readiness. Despite
pledges to the Subcommittee 2 years ago to fix scattered inventory
controls, DOD still cannot provide a real-time accounting of the
location and condition of critical protective equipment.
As a result, as DOD procures hundreds of thousands of new JSLIST
garments annually, some military units have formally declared JSLIST
garment surpluses while others cannot get enough suits for training.
While DOD is scheduled to procure 2.8 million more JSLIST garments for
approximately $100 each, GAO found some had been auctioned on the
Internet for less than $3 each.
This form of waste directly affects readiness. When the chemical
alarms again sound in the desert, U.S. forces will need those suits.
Transformation of DOD's last-century financial management systems into
a 21st Century enterprise architecture is a critical element of their
ability to survive, and prevail, against tomorrow's threats.
DOD has been bogged down by scores of outdated data information
systems that do not allow commanders and managers to make effective
management decisions. The Secretary of Defense has stated, ``One of my
highest priorities is to have reliable, accurate and timely financial
management information upon which to make the most effective business
decisions,'' and has tasked the Under Secretary of Defense
(Comptroller) to achieve this goal.
The use of chemical and biological weapons is a very real threat. The
Comptroller must have the tools to assure military inventory, such as
the JSLST and other protective equipment, and medical supplies, is
readily available when needed. Except for system changes that are the
results of statutory directives, the Department and its components
should not allocate any funding to modify any system that is part of
DOD's current financial management environment without the approval of
the Comptroller. In granting this approval, the Under Secretary of
Defense should assure that a valid business case has been made and that
the systems modifications or enhancements comply with the new
enterprise architecture DOD is attempting to implement.
Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the FY03 National
Defense Appropriations Act, which provides critical resources for our
military to ensure that they have the adequate training, modern
equipment, and sufficient resources to do their job in protection our
nation. I am proud of the work this Congress has done in crafting a
bill that will support our troops and their families.
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 are entitled to
in return for 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 now is an immediate threat to the
people of the United States. 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 to Georgia. We fully
funded the president's budget requests for vital modern aircraft for
our Air Force, include the F-22 advanced tactical fighter, the C-17,
the C-130 and JSTARS and I oppose attempts to decrease funding for
these critical weapons systems that our troops need to successfully
fight and win a war.
Mr. Chairman, terrorism and our national security are not temporary
problems, but perpetual reminders of the uncertainty of the days ahead
and the need for our continued support for a strong national defense. I
encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting our military and our
President by voting for this bill and ensuring that the men and women
in uniform who serve our nation valiantly everyday to protect and
defend our freedom have the resources which they need to do their job
and win the war on terrorism.
Mr. PASTOR. Mr. Chairman, it has come to my attention that the
application of precisely controlled heat has shown excellent results in
the treatment of benign and malignant skin disease. I am aware of the
great potential of the ThermoMed Instrument in this regard and the
published results of physicians using it. Impressive benefits including
high cure rates, non-invasive and safe treatment, rapid healing and
excellent cosmetic results, confirm the applicability of this new
technology for the curative treatment of diseased tissue. Accordingly,
I encourage the Department of Defense to conduct clinical evaluation of
the ThermoMed Instrument and its applications for treating armed forces
deployed around the world.
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Chairman, today I rise in support of H.R. 5010,
important legislation that provides $354.7 billion appropriations to
the Department of Defense (DoD), supporting the honorable men and
women, at home and abroad, who are in service to the nation at this
critical time. As our nation continues to face the most pressing
military and defense priorities in its history, we must continue to
provide adequate and secure funding for the continuing war on
terrorism, and the DoD remains at the forefront of these vigilant
efforts.
Mr. Chairman, I do have concerns about placing this measure first in
our annual drive to pass appropriations bills, as we run the risk of
drying up the well of funds available for the other funding measures.
However, I am pleased that the Appropriations Committee has approved
appropriate, responsible increases in funding for military personnel
and operations and management over the Fiscal Year 2002 budget, as the
DoD infrastructure must be capable of handling continuing and
unanticipated demands in the global fight against terrorism.
More importantly, I am pleased that H.R. 5010 provides $11 million in
federal funds for the Texas Training and Technology for Trauma and
Terrorism (T5) program, $9.5 million for the Biology, Education,
Screening, Chemoprevention, and Treatment (BESCT) lung cancer program
at University of Texas (U.T.) M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, and $500,000
to the 147th Fighter Squadron of the U.S. Air Force's Texas Air
National Guard to obtain chiropractic health care services. As the
Texas delegation's lead sponsor of these projects, I have worked with
the Memorial Hermann Hospital, Texas Heart Institute, and M.D. Anderson
Cancer Center in my district, and the House Appropriations Committee,
to secure funding as part of H.R. 5010.
Mr. Chairman, the T5 program is a collaborative effort with Memorial
Hermann Hospital, the Texas Heart Institute, and M.D. Anderson Cancer
Center, that focuses on improving emergency care. The goal of the
program is to identify the best ways of protecting Houston, and any
other cities, from the mortality and cost of terrorism and other
disasters. The T5 program is the successor program to the acclaimed
University of Texas-Army collaboration known as DREAMS (Disaster Relief
and

[[Page H4086]]

Emergency Medical Services). This program will develop cutting-edge
digital technology to link ambulances, hospitals, and LifeFlight
helicopters to ensure faster diagnosis and treatment for patients; it
establishes a Center for Disaster Preparedness that will focus on
developing training programs for public health workers, emergency
medical technicians, physicians, nurses, and public health programs in
bioterrorism and disaster preparedness; and T5 establishes a new Army
Training Center at the University of Texas Research Park where Army
personnel undergo training in chemical and biological defenses and
trauma surgery. The $11 million approved for this program represents
the first federal support for the project. In the past, I helped secure
$38 million for DREAMS, the previous program that T5 is modeled after.
Memorial Hermann Hospital, Texas Heart Institute and M.D. Anderson
Cancer Center are to be commended for their leadership in developing
the medical technologies and treatments of the 21st Century.
In addition to that funding, the $9.5 million approved in H.R. 5010
for the BESCT lung cancer program at the U.T. M.D. Anderson Center is
the fourth installment in a five-year plan to provide comprehensive
services for lung cancer patients, including smoking cessation, early
diagnosis, inhibition of cancer development in active and former
smokers, and improved treatment and survival for patients with active
lung cancer. In the past, I helped secure $18 million for this program
as part of the Appropriations process. Mr. Speaker, lung cancer is the
leading cause of cancer death in the United States today, killing more
than 160,000 individuals a year. Research for this disease has not
received adequate funding in proportion to the number of lung cancer
patients who are suffering from this disease. I am pleased that U.T.
M.D. Anderson's ambitious and vital program will have the funds
necessary to help save lives and reduce health care costs.
H.R. 5010 also provides $750,000 for the 147th Fighter Squadron of
the U.S. Air Force's Texas Air National Guard, which will enhance
chiropractic health care services on the campus of Texas Chiropractic
College in Pasadena, Texas. This funding will allow the Moody Clinic at
the Texas Chiropractic College and the 147th Fighter Squadron to
provide the men and women of the Texas Air National Guards with the
resources to help provide new diagnostic imaging assets and other tools
that will enhance chiropractic, pain management, and related health
care services. At a time when many of our military are facing increased
stress in service to our nation, I believe that this is a much needed
first step in both relieving some of their pain and advancing
chiropractic medicine.
Mr. Chairman, as H.R. 5010 provides critical funding for these and
other important and timely programs, I urge my colleagues to join me in
supporting this measure, to support our Armed Forces in their efforts
to fight terrorism at home and abroad, and to provide homeland defense
and protection to keep America strong and freedom alive.
Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 5010, the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2003 and I ask
my colleagues to support this important legislation.
This year's annual defense appropriations bill is good for both
America and for my home state of Connecticut. This legislation provides
the resources needed to fight the war on terrorism and build our
nation's military infrastructure and readiness.
This legislation continues our efforts at transforming our military
for the threats of the future. The bill contains $4.1 billion for 23,
F-22 fighter aircraft, each of which are powered by two F135 engines
assembled by Pratt and Whitney in Middletown, Connecticut. The F-22
will ensure that the U.S. maintains air dominance in any conflict in
the years ahead.
The bill also continues our efforts at having the Pentagon buy
smarter and more efficiently through continued research and development
of the Joint Strike Fighter, now designated the F-35 and powered by the
Pratt and Whitney award-winning F-135 engine system. Variants of one
aircraft, the F-35, will eventually replace four aircraft, the F-16,
the A-10, and the AV-8B and F-18 C/D, bringing important cost savings
not only in production but in the maintenance and operation over the
life of each aircraft.
Building on our transformation to a more mobile force the bill
approves $3.7 billion to procure 12, C-17 Globemaster III transport
aircraft; each of which are powered by four Pratt and Whitney F117
engines. The C-17 is the workhorse of getting our military to the fight
and will be for years to come.
For our Army, this bill contains funds for 4 additional Black Hawk
helicopters, built by Sikorsky in Connecticut, for a total of 31
aircraft. Our ground troops greatly benefit from the speed,
reliability, and safety of this first-class helicopter.
For our Navy, this bill allocates $1.49 billion for one new Virginia
Class attack submarine and over $1.03 billion for Trident Class
submarine conversion. The Virginia Class and Trident conversion
programs assure America's continual dominance of the seas well into the
21st century. Electric Boat, located in my district, has been
manufacturing submarines for over a century. It manufactures the
Virginia Class and designs much of the Trident conversion.
For these systems, the bill includes an additional $7 million for
research and development of new payloads and sensors for submarines,
much of which will be done at Electric Boat, in Groton, Connecticut.
As every regional military commander will attest, our Navy is
stretched thin, especially our submarine force. These investments will
add significant capability to the commanders in the field at low cost
and low risk to the taxpayer. We must do continue to invest more in our
submarine force.
Finally, this bill again addresses the needs of our best asset in our
military: our troops. The bill funds a 4.1 percent military pay raise
and selected targeted pay raises to mid-grade and non-commissioned
officers. It approves housing allowances to bring down military
personnel's out-of-pocket housing expenses from 11.3 percent to 7.5
percent. For years much of the nation has taken the men and women in
the military for granted. This brings needed relief to these gallant
personnel.
This is just a partial list of the support this legislation gives our
men and women in uniform. When we pass this bill we will be providing
for the financial and housing needs of our servicemen and women, who
stand ready to go into harm's way anywhere in the world to defend our
nation and our interests. It also allocates resources to continue our
military's transformation to meet the challenges of tomorrow and it
responds to the realities of the war on terrorism and sets us on course
to meet the new challenges that unquestionably lie ahead.
When I came to Congress I pledged to do more to help Connecticut's
defense industries and the men and women who work so hard 24 hours a
day, seven days a week, to defend our nation. Looking at this
legislation, I am pleased with what has been provided thus far and I
look forward to building on these successes.
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. WATTS of Oklahoma. Mr. Chairman, I rise to explain why the United
States Army needed to develop the Crusader Advanced Field Artillery
System, and still very much needs the Crusader technologies for near
future cannon artillery protection for our combat soldiers.
I stand here as the Congressman representing the U.S. Army Field
Artillery Center at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. For decades, Fort Sill has
been recognized as the Center for Excellence in field artillery for the
United States, for NATO, in fact, for the world over. I champion
Crusader because it is a superior weapon system that will equip our
combat soldiers with the best field artillery system in the world--not
the 9th best, behind China, Iran, North Korea and Russia. Crusader's
leap-ahead mobility, lethality, and responsiveness is what our modern
battlefield requirements dictate.
Countless news articles, speeches, testimony and letters emphasize
that the U.S. Army has needed an advanced field artillery system for
over a decade. The need for greater mobility in our self-propelled
cannon howitzer became embarrassingly apparent during Desert Storm when
our existing howitzers could not keep pace with the maneuver force.
Poor performance in Desert Storm accelerated the Army's planning for
a major new artillery system that began in 1985. By mid-1993, the
requirements for the advanced field artillery system and armored
resupply vehicle were approved, and development commenced. In 1996, a
major design change from a liquid propellant to a solid propellant for
this system altered the development and deployment schedule.
Then came Governor George Bush's 1999 Citadel speech asserting that
our heavy forces must be lighter. Shortly thereafter, Army Chief of
Staff General Eric Shinseki directed that the Crusader howitzer become
deployable as a system on a single C-17 sortie. That transformational
forward-thinking General called it right. The Crusader team put the
howitzer on a diet.
Lighter weight, more mobility was the upside of the trade off. The
down side was a delay in deployment from FY2005 to FY2008.
Next, then Governor Bush debated Senator John McCain in New Hampshire
and uttered the word ``Crusader'' when asked for an example of a weapon
system a President Bush might terminate. But Governor Bush was talking
about a 60-ton howitzer. By 2001, the Army requirements already
incorporated the weight reduction to 40 tons.
Maybe President Bush and his staff zeroed in to kill a platform they
thought was still too heavy at 60 tons. Maybe that is why the Defense
Acquisition Executive, Undersecretary

[[Page H4087]]

Pete Aldridge, penned a memo to Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld urging a
Crusader briefing for the President, actually calling it ``Crusader
II'' as if to emphasize its transformation. Aldridge's memo stated:
``In response to the President's continued concern over Crusader, I
have prepared the attached that could be used as a memorandum for the
President or a talking paper for a personal discussion. As we have said
before the current Crusader II is not the 60-ton Crusader of the past.
. . . The paper is written to return to basics: Why we need artillery;
what are the artillery characteristics desired; and, what is the best
artillery option (Paladin or Crusader II). A side-by-side comparison of
Paladin and Crusader II clearly shows the comparative advantage of
Crusader II.''
In the proposed memorandum to the President, the bottom line
``Recommendation'' stated:
``Proceed with the development of Crusader II. It has the
firefighting features, to include lethality, deployability and
mobility, we need. The alternative is to surrender the technological
gains made in this program and defer the qualitative edge we require
relative to potential adversaries well into the next decade. Crusader
II is a success story well worth sustaining.''

All the way through February, March and April, reports, testimony,
and other statements from the Department of Defense, the Department of
the Army, the General Accounting Office, etc. reflected support for
Crusader.
Out of the blue, by early May, the Defense Department decided to
voice opposition to the Crusader. Surprising many in Government, media
and even in our military, Pentagon officials undertook a unilateral
campaign to reverse years of Army testimony in support for a weapons
system which I believe is vital to our combat soldiers in fighting and
winning wars.
The Crusader meets the needs of the 21st Century and the mission of
transformation of U.S. Army weaponry. As Secretary Aldridge's memo
noted, Crusader is deployable as a system anywhere in the world on a
single C-17. It is reliable and versatile, prepared to perform in many
different climates with many different scenarios. Crusader's
characteristics of survivability and lethality make it a weapon to be
feared by enemies of freedom--a word dear to president Bush.
I will never know what exactly caused the about-face, change of heart
at the Pentagon over Crusader. Earlier this month, some of my
colleagues and I sent a letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
requesting documentation on, among other issues, an Assessment of
Alternatives that would justify the abrupt decision to cancel the
Crusader system. I never received a written response to my request. Nor
did I ever receive the documents I requested, even in a personal
meeting I had with the Deputy Secretary of Defense. Perhaps those
documents, which should exist, do not. Perhaps I will never know.
What I do know, however, is that our ground forces need a balance in
weaponry. They need fire support that includes missiles, rockets,
helicopters, aircraft, gunfire and cannons. No matter how modern the
warfare, battles cannot be fought, nor won, using only computers.
With great prescience, our forefathers drafted the United States
Constitution giving the Congress the power ``to raise and support
armies.'' And, I am proud to say that the Congress, in its wisdom, has
taken a different, and more studied approach to its decision-making on
the Crusader.
For example, the House Armed Services Committee recommended, and the
full House approved, full funding for FY 2003 for the Crusader Advanced
Field Artillery System. This action included funding to complete the
Assessment of Alternatives (AOA) study by which the Army normally
determines how its new weapons system stacks up against predecessor and
alternative systems.
The Senate just voted 93-3 to permit the Assessment of Alternatives
study to proceed as well.
Today the House will vote on the recommendation of the House
Appropriations Committee to take the logical next step. Acknowledging
the last eight years of work, Costing roughly $2 billion to develop the
Crusader system, the House Appropriations Committee report emphasizes
that the major technological advances achieved by the Crusader program
must be retained. The report lists as examples of Crusader's
technological advances: a liquid cooled cannon; ammunition auto loader
mechanism; digital fire control and targeting computers; and a glass
cockpit.
The Committee report recommends that Crusader's technical team and
facilities be retained to further develop an organic indirect fire
cannon artillery system. Accordingly, the House Appropriations
Committee has recommended a total of $368.5 million to provide for
integrating cannon technologies with a suitable platform, and
munitions, and to insure that such a system can be delivered not later
than Fiscal Year 2008. Under the circumstances, the House
Appropriations Committee has taken a good approach.

Remember, however, our combat soldiers continue to be at risk. We
cannot afford any more delay in delivering them an advanced artillery
system like Crusader. Therefore, as final action, the Congress must
ensure that we provide the army with sufficient funding to deliver an
indirect fire cannon and platform no later than FY 2008.
Before I close, I want to quote from a letter written by the former
Commanding General of the Field Artillery Center at Fort Sill, Major
General Leo J. Baxter (RET). General Baxter wrote:
``I have watched the development and maturity of many Army programs,
none of which has matched the performance and capabilities of Crusader.
Crusader is the answer for fire support in the future. It provides the
close fire support necessary for our troops to maneuver on the
battlefield. It also can provide the long-range precision fires enabled
by Excalibur. Unlike air power, which certainly is important, Crusader
will be available 24/7 and in all weather. The Defense Department has
yet to specifically explain what new system will provide this support
and then they will be ready. They simply are winging it and putting
fighting men at risk.''
In voting on the DOD Appropriations bill, including the provision on
Crusader, you can rely on my words, or those of General Baxter. Or you
can take your lead from the strong endorsements of over two dozen
retired 4-Star Generals who bring to bear some 1,000 years of first-
hand experience in the art of warfare. Many of the 4-Star Generals
listed have supported Crusader in articles and letters, which I
circulated earlier and place in the Congressional Record today. Many of
these statements express grave concerns about the abrupt decision to
cancel Crusader without first consulting with the Army leadership. In
fact, the House Appropriations Committee Report expresses the same
concern.
To a man, these Generals believe that the Army has waited too long
already for robust advanced field artillery with Crusader's
capabilities. These Army generals know best the battlefield
requirements in any scenarios because they have fought and taken fire
in many of them. Many of these Generals have personally witnessed the
Crusader prototype, which has successfully fired over 6,500 rounds in
Yuma, Arizona. I urge all of you to review these Generals' compelling
statements.
Crusader's performance has earned support for full funding in the
House-passed DOD Authorization bill, and FY2003 Appropriations for its
next iteration deployable by FY2008.
I urge my colleagues to support the House authorization position and
continued development of this technology on this critical artillery
system.
Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I want to express my disappointment
that the Appropriations Committee included $94 million to fund the
Department of the Navy's Military Sealift Command purchase of T-5
Tankers.
As I have stated to the Chairman and the Ranking Member of the
Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, I believe the Military Sealift
Command has not determined the actual cost of exercising their buyout
option--particularly by underestimating the purchase costs of the ships
and by not taking into account lease and other termination costs.
There is no cost penalty for waiting until future fiscal years to
purchase these vessels, when the T-5 Tankers will be older and will
have a lower residual value.
However, Mr. Chairman, I note that the Committee acknowledged the
excellent operating history of the T-5 Tankers by conditioning any
changes in operating contracts resulting from this new acquisition
strategy on a certification to the Committee that the readiness and
efficiency attained in the current operation of these tankers be
maintained.
Knowing how the Committee operates, it would be my understanding that
such certification to the Committee is not pro forma, but substantive,
supported by facts and timely submitted before agreements are executed
affecting T-5 Tanker operators or operating personnel responsible for
meeting the Defense Energy Support center's military fuel resupply
needs.
The current T-5 Tankers operator with this excellent record, Ocean
Shipholdings, Inc--a Texas-based company--has long expressed its hope
that the Navy will extend the existing leases when they expire. At the
time Ocean Shipholdings is willing to renegotiate its operating
contract in a fashion which secures these ships under operating rates
beneficial to the Navy.
The Congress has been struggling to find additional funding to
procure advanced combatant vessels and auxiliary craft for the Navy
mission; using current procurement funds to purchase aging vessel
already under lease is not the best use of those funds. It will reduce
the funds available to the Navy for new vessel construction.

[[Page H4088]]

Ocean Shipholdings designed and built these five unique and
environmentally compliant double-hulled ocean going oil tankers. These
U.S. flag T-5 Tankers were completed in 1985 and 1986, at which time
they were purchased and then leased back by private sector leasing
companies.
The T-5 Tankers were then Time Chartered to the Military Sealift
Command for a term of 20 years to transport petroleum fuels globally to
meet the requirements of the Defense Energy Support Center under the
Defense Logistics Agency.
Ocean Shipholdings was awarded the prime contract to manage, operate
and maintain the T-5 Tankers for the term of the 20-year Time Charters.
This included crew, maintenance, insurance, drydocking and logistics
support on a turnkey basis.
Under the operation of Ocean Shipholdings, the T-5 Tanker fleet has
reliably moved clean petroleum products worldwide for the Navy over the
last sixteen years in some of the most hostile ocean environments,
including Antarctica and Arctic seaports.
Ocean Shipholdings has a perfect safety and environmental record in
the operation of the T-5 fleet, has maintained all five ships in full
operating status and continuous deployment for sixteen years, and has
established comprehensive in-house protocols and contractual
arrangements for oil pollution response.
During Operation Desert Storm, this Texas-based tanker operator ran
the T-5s in the war zone effectively and continuously with U.S. citizen
officers and crew.
Instead of using scarce resources for the purchase of these T-5
Tankers in this time of increasing burdens on U.S. military global
operations, maintaining the current leases will ensure the continued
efficient operation of these T-5 Tankers by Ocean Shipholdings--while
meeting the Defense Energy Support Center's requirements for global
movement of defense fuels.
Extending the ship leases and Ocean Shipholdings operating contract--
at rates favorable to the Navy and taxpayers--are the most stable and
prudent courses of action to meet the Navy's defense fuels needs over
the next decade.
As this bill moves through conference committee, I hope my colleagues
will insist that the Navy maintain the same level of readiness and
efficiency already experienced in the operation of these tankers by
retaining their relationship with Ocean Shipholdings.
Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill, and want to
thank Mr. Lewis and Mr. Murtha for their fine work, particularly on the
provisions related to the Army Crusader artillery program.
The gentlemen have been fair and responsive to my concerns that the
Administration acted hastily in recommending cancellation of the
Crusader program.
I am also grateful for the hard work of the staff--especially Greg
Dahlberg, Bill Gnacek, Kevin Roper, Paul Juola and Letitia White--who
helped the Subcommittee sort through these complex issues and produce a
good bill.
Mr. Chairman, over the past two months, I have become increasingly
convinced that the administration is wrong in asking Congress to
terminate Crusader. I believe there is too much risk.
No one can argue that U.S. Army artillery is seriously outdated.
Crusader was on-track and on budget to give us a fast, accurate, world-
class artillery system to support and protect American soldiers in
combat--by 2008.
Mr. Chairman, let me stress that date--2008. In military procurement
terms, that is practically tomorrow. It puzzles me that we are at this
point.
Clearly, we must maintain a robust heavy artillery development
program. Therefore, I have pressed hard to ensure that this bill gives
very clear direction to the Army regarding our intent for the follow-on
artillery program.
For this challenging task, we give the Army a strict deadline and
strong guidance to leverage the best elements of the Crusader program,
the breakthrough technologies and the intellectual property, including
the technical workforce, as they develop and field the next-generation
heavy artillery system.
To underscore this point, I want to read from the bill:

Immediately upon termination of the Crusader Artillery
System program, the Secretary of the Army shall enter into a
contract to leverage technologies developed with funds
invested in fiscal year 2002 and prior years under the
Crusader Artillery System program . . . and other Army
development programs in order to develop and field, by 2008,
a Non-Line of Sight (NLOS) Objective Force artillery system
and Resupply Vehicle variants of the Future Combat System.

I think I speak for many when I say that we will be watching their
progress closely.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the overall
bill, which does a lot of good things for our service men and women and
for our nation's defense.
I appreciate the good work of the Subcommittee Chairman, Mr. Lewis
and the Ranking Member, Mr. Murtha in drafting this bill.
However, I have serious concerns over the Pentagon's cancellation of
the Crusader artillery system--a decision that this bill ratifies.
We are blessed as a nation with soldiers who are willing to serve and
sacrifice to defend our freedom. Our Army is the envy of the world. Our
artillery, however, is not.
The Paladin artillery system, fielded today, is outgunned by at least
12 different countries, including all three countries in the Axis of
Evil.
Remember, any war with Iran, Iraq or North Korea is going to be
completely unlike Afghanistan. In each of these hypothetical conflicts,
we will need heavy ground forces, just like the Gulf War, but we will
face artillery systems superior to our own.
One of the Army's top priorities over the last decade has been to
give our soldiers artillery support that is second to none, the
Crusader, a program that has been on time and under budget.
On February 27, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz said:

I'm not one of those people who think that I can bet the
farm on not needing artillery 10 years from now. And I think
this [the Crusader] is the best artillery system available.

On February 28, the Army Chief of Staff, General Eric Shinseki, said:

Crusader's ability to keep up with ground maneuver forces,
its longer range, its high rate of fire, its precision, would
be a significant increase to the potential shortage of fire
we have today.

Suddenly, in direct conflict with the President's Budget, the
Pentagon reversed its unwavering support for Crusader and announced its
cancellation.
The Administration has said they'll have alternatives in production
by 2008. If that does not happen, the delay will put thousands of
soldiers at undue risk.
Given the administration's commitment to cancel Crusader, I think the
subcommittee leadership did its best to preserve funding for
alternatives.
In conclusion, I believe the Pentagon think tank gurus have
prematurely canceled Crusader. Canceling Crusader with nothing ready to
take its place is putting the cart before the horse. However, I will
work with them to get an effective alternative on line.
I hope those who killed the Crusader now feel an enormous
responsibility to field a new artillery system by 2008. Delay in doing
so could, God forbid, be measured in soldiers' lives lost in combat
after 2008.
Mr. Chairman, I would finally like to include in the Record a
statement by Congressman Norm Dicks and myself.

Additional Views of Hon. Norman D. Dicks and Hon. Chet Edwards

the gamble on crusader

The Administration's recent decision to terminate the
Crusador artillery system is a decision fraught with risk.
Risk that we hope will not end up costing soldier's lives.
The Crusader self-propelled howitzer has been under
development for the last eight years. This program is running
under budget and on schedule with fielding of the first new
howitzer set for 2008. The Crusader has been considered by
the Army to be its highest priority acquisition program,
because it would rectify the one glaring operational weakness
that endangers the Army's battlefield success--heavy
artillery support.
Currently, our Army is outgunned in heavy artillery by at
least 12 different countries (including all 3 countries in
the so-called ``Axis of Evil'')--a situation the Crusader
would rectify. It is estimated that as many as 40 countries
could soon have artillery systems that out-range the Army's
current howitzer--the Paladin--and that 28 countries are
developing artillery-delivered high precision munitions to
complement these systems. Clearly, most other countries
around the world plan on making high performance heavy
artillery a mainstay of their military force for some time to
come.
Last month, the Administration took the highly unusual step
of deciding to cancel the Crusador program in the middle of
the budget cycle. This action was taken without consultation
with the Army's military leadership, and over their strong
substantive objection. This decision will fundamentally alter
the role that U.S. heavy artillery will play in future
battles, yet we have seen very little evidence of any serious
analytical effort to support this radical departure from the
Army's accepted doctrine.
The Administration has essentially made a giant strategic
bet on behalf of our land forces that the combination of
future advances in precision cannon and rocket munitions (as
distinguished from precision bombs and missiles) combined
with hoped for perfection of real time target identification
and selection technology (based on ubiquitous ``24/7'' all
weather surveillance capabilities) will supplant the need to
replace the Army's outdated Paladin howitzer with a system
that shoots farther and faster.
This decision depends upon unproven technology and unproven
tactics--betting that more traditional lethality and combat
over-match capabilities can be replaced by precision and
speed. It is a decision that--as the Army's vaunted
``Crusader talking points'' said--``could put soldier's lives
at risk'' if

[[Page H4089]]

the Department's hypothetical assumptions about how and where
future wars will be fought turn out to be wrong.
What is somewhat puzzling to us in that the Army's
artillery upgrade plan that the Secretary of Defense has now
rejected calls for improvements in both areas--lethality and
precision. The Army's Crusader plan that was devised in the
last Administration and endorsed in the first two Bush
Administration budgets called for fielding the new world-
class Crusader howitzer by 2008 giving the U.S. Army an
artillery system that is operationally and technologically
superior to any artillery system in the world. The second
part of the Army's plan was to perfect and field the GPS-
guided Excalibur projectile to shoot from the Crusader within
3 to 5 years after the Crusader was in the force. The
combination of Crusader and Excalibur would give the Army a
truly devastating capability to support its soldiers--
combining unprecedented accuracy with vastly superior rate of
fire and range.
The Army had a prudent and affordable plan that recognized
the possibility that developing precision-guided cannon
projectiles and rocket systems is a difficult task that may
end up falling short of expectations. Contrary to popular
wisdom, precision-guided cannon and rocket systems are not
perfected yet. Shooting sensitive high-tech precision
guidance systems out of cannons exerts several hundred times
the G-forces exerted on air-delivered precision-guided bombs
and missiles such as JDAM or Tomahawk, and the cost that
contractors propose charging to overcome these factors is
very high at the current time. For instance, the Army's
published plans call for paying $222,000 per round for the
first 9,417 Excalibur projectiles when and if they are
perfected. This is 7 times greater than the Secretary of
Defense' target price of $33,000 per round, and many experts
question whether this target price will ever be achieved. It
seems the Army had a very prudent plan--both from a
warfighting perspective and from a development and cost risk
perspective--that the Secretary of Defense summarily and
unilaterally rejected.
So what is the Army left with under the Administration's
new plan? In essence, the Army will be left with the outdated
Paladin howitzer that sits on a 40-year-old chassis design
that has already been upgraded six different times. The
Paladin of the future will continue to shoot standard 155mm
ammunition at low rates of fire and at substandard ranges as
well as the new Excalibur precision projectile if it can be
perfected, if the Paladin chassis can be shown to withstand
the additional forces generated by firing this new round.
Whether Excalibur works or not, the Administration now
plans on keeping the Paladin in the force until 2032 when the
Future Combat System will finally phase it out.
The Administration explains that the risk of keeping the
Paladin is acceptable because the greater precision and range
of Excalibur rounds and the projected availability of fire
support systems such as Guided MLRS and air-delivered
precision munitions can cover the existing indirect fire
support shortfall. Aside from the issues of bad weather,
responsiveness, and ability to support the close fight, this
new plan discounts many of the traditional roles of artillery
that depend upon volume of fire over accuracy--such as fire
to suppress enemy attacks, and cover fire to protect friendly
troop movements or to protect sectors of a battlefield. Rate
of fire is completely discounted as a priority under the
new plan.
It does not overstate the case to say that Army military
leaders do not support this plan--they see too much risk.
While the Administration points to skirmishes in Afghanistan
to support its bet on precision, many of our military leaders
worry about the potential major battles that could erupt in
Korea or other theaters where mechanized forces will
determine the outcome. A high level Defense Department
official echoed these exact concerns just 3 months ago when
discussing the Crusader:
``Unless we want to have no new artillery facing North
Korea's artillery, we need something. We have to remember,
it's not just a matter of fighting on horseback with
satellites and B-52s as we did in Afghanistan. We still face
Kim Jung-II in North Korea. We still face Saddam Hussein in
Iraq. We face others who use conventional weapons and the
question then becomes do you want to modernize those or do
you not.--Dov Zakheim, Comptroller, Department of Defense.
Comments on The News House With Jim Lehrer March 18, 2002.''
The Crusader decision also signals a troubling change of
direction about how we will equip and fight our future force.
Over the last several decades there has been a consensus that
we should take maximum advantage of America's Scientific and
technological strength to field military systems and devise
military strategy and tactics to achieve decisive ``combat
overmatch'' capabilities against any potential opponent.
General Michael E. Ryan, former Air Force Chief of Staff,
succinctly summed up the combat overmatch philosophy as
follows: ``I'm not interested in fair fights. What I'm
interested in is a 100 to nothing score, not 51-49.''
This philosophy has proven its worth--not only does it save
American lives on the battlefield, but it is an effective way
to win the peace. Our vastly superior military capabilities
cause potential adversaries to think twice before confronting
us or our allies militarily, which contributes significantly
to world peace and stability. This was not always the case,
and we must continue to work at keeping this edge.
Of all the military services, it is perhaps most important
for the Army to continue with the philosophy of ``combat
overmatch'' through superior technology. Unlike the Air Force
and the Navy, we have a small Army compared to other
countries. Currently, eight other armies in the world
outnumber our Army. We make up for this with superior people,
superior leadership, and superior technology, but numbers
still matter if we let our technological edge slip.
It is disturbing that the Defense Department seems willing
to rest on the laurels of past administrations and go back to
a philosophy of ``just enough,'' The Crusader would provide
US military personnel with the best technology in the world
that meets a know deficiency of a military service that
American industry has shown it can deliver on time and on
budget. The Crusader system is a state-of-the-art heavy
artillery system that has already produced 7 new patents
from its new technology. Over 6,000 test rounds have
already been fired and the system is meeting or exceeding
range, rate-of-fire, and reliability requirements by all
accounts.
It is simply hard to understand why a system that meets the
biggest Army warfighting deficiency is being scrapped.
If the President persists in demanding the termination of
the Crusader, the weaknesses of the outdated Paladin (with or
without the Excalibur projectile) make it imperative that we
expedite the development and fielding of the Objective Force
next generation artillery system. American soldiers do not
deserve to continue to endure the risks of substandard
artillery support. This deficiency must be eliminated as
quickly as possible.
We therefore support the Committee position of adding $173
million to the $195 million budget request for development of
the Objective Force artillery system in order to field a new
system by 2008. This would accelerate the Army's old schedule
by four to six years. This acceleration is possible only if
the Army uses the existing Crusader engineering team and
leverages the technology advances garnered with the Army's $2
billion investment that has already been spent on Crusader
development.
Following are some of the detailed answers received from
DOD to our specific questions on the Crusader that have been
raised in the course of this debate.
1. How does the Crusader compare to other top foreign
systems? Why don't we simply buy one of those systems?
A comparison of the most advanced artillery systems in the
global marketplace available to our allies shows why the Army
believes the Crusader is a superior artillery system. The
Crusader delivers more firepower, is more mobile, protects
its crew better, weighs less, uses fewer crewmembers, and is
the only system that can be fully networked on the
battlefield.

COMPARISON OF MODERN SELF-PROPELLED HOWITZERS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crusader (U.S.)* Paladin (U.S.) G6 (S. Africa) AS90 (U.K.) PzH2000 (Germany)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Max Range (km)*................ 40..................... 30.................... 30.................... 37.4.................. 37.4
Max Rate of Fire*.............. 10 to 12/Minute. 4/minute for 3........ 3/minute.............. 6/minute for 3........ 6-8 minute for 3
Indefinitely.
Crew Size (howitzer + resupply 3 + 3.................. 4 + 4................. 6+resupply crew....... 5+resupply crew....... 5+resupply crew
veh)..
Curb Wt. (ton)................. 40..................... 27.................... 52.................... 46.3.................. 54+
Combat Wt. (ton)............... 50..................... 32.................... 55.6.................. 50.7.................. 60.3
Horsepower..................... 1500................... 440................... 520................... 660................... 991
Projectile Qty................. 48..................... 39.................... 45.................... 58.................... 60
Accuracy....................... 96m @ 30km............. 232m@30km............. Unknown............... 246m@30km............. 200m@km
Simultaneous rounds on target 4-10 rounds............ N/A................... Unknown............... Unknown............... 2-6 rounds
(MRSI Capability).
Highway speed (km/hr)*......... 67..................... 60.................... 85.................... 52.................... 62.5
X-Country Speed (km/hr)*....... 48..................... 27.................... 30.................... 25.................... 45
NBC Macro Protection........... Yes.................... No.................... No.................... No.................... No
Resupply Vehicle............... Yes/Automated.......... Yes/Manual............ No.................... No.................... No
U.S. Command & Control......... Yes.................... Yes/Not All........... No.................... No.................... No
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\1\ G6 is a South African howitzer, AS90 is from the United Kingdom, and PzH2000 is German.
\2\ * indicates a key performance parameter (KPP). An additional KPP is the ability to automatically transfer 48 rounds from the resupply vehicle to the
howitzer within 10.4 minutes, including maneuver time to link the vehicles--no other system can meet this requirement.
\3\ CEP is circular error probability.
\4\ MRSI is multiple round simultaneous impact capability.
\5\ NBC is nuclear (radiological) biological 1 warfare, and chemical warfare crew protection.
Maximum Rate of Fire is at all deflections and quadrants using all projectile and fuse combinations.

[[Page H4090]]

2. How Much Does Crusader Cost?
A two-vehicle Crusader system (howitzer and resupply
vehicle) could be procured for about $10.01 million
(recurring production costs, FY 01 constant dollars) which is
about 70% of the cost of one Army Blackhawk helicopter. In
budget terms, the total procurement cost of $7 billion for
480 systems (another $4 billion is for development) is
substantial in and of itself, but in terms of the total
Defense budget the Army's planned average appropriation level
of about $1 billion per year represents about one percent of
the Army's annual budget, and about 3 tenths of one percent
of the annual Defense Department budget. The total cost of
the entire Crusader procurement is less than one year's worth
of research for the missile defense program.
3. How much are the new Excalibur and guided MLRS munitions
expected to cost, and how does that compare to standard 155mm
ammunition?
Excalibur. The latest February 12, 2002 Army estimate
pegged the future Excalibur program acquisition cost for the
first 9,417 unitary projectiles at $222,000 per round, or a
total cost of $2.1 billion. The Army could purchase nearly
half of the entire Crusader fleet (209 out of 480 systems)
for the cost of the first 10,000 rounds of Excalibur
ammunition. The Administration's target unit cost for
Excalibur unitary is $33,000 per round for 200,000 rounds, a
seven-fold decrease compared to the current price, for a
total cost of $6.6 billion. In addition, the Administration
plans on buying an additional 40,264 Excalibur senior-fused
(infra-red sensing skeet bomblets) projectiles at $96,000 per
round, for a total cost of $3.9 billion. The past Army track
record in precision/smart munitions programs (SADARM, MSTAR,
BAT, WAM, Copperhead) does not support this cost reduction
assumption. But assuming the Army can attain these ``best
cost'' estimates the cost of the first 200,000 rounds of
Excalibur unitary and 40,000 rounds of Excalibur sensor-fused
projectiles would cost $10.5 billion, more than one and half
times the total cost of the Crusader procurement ($7
billion). If the $33,000 ``best cost'' estimate for Excalibur
unitary cannot be reached and the price can be reduced by
only 50% to say, $100,000 per round, the total cost for
Excalibur unitary projectiles sky-rockets to over $20 billion
in order to attain the Army's initial 200,000-unit inventory
objective. In any case, it would require annual
appropriations of well over $1 billion per year in order to
finance the Excalibur production rate efficiencies used as
the basis for the target cost estimate--something that is
unprecedented for one type of round of Army ammunition. It is
also expected that the Army Excalibur inventory objective
over time would increase well above 200,000 units.
Guided MLRS. The latest Army estimates peg the expected
cost of Guided MLRS unitary rockets at $65,000 per unit.
Assuming that the Army would fire a minimum of two rockets
per target, the cheapest ``kill'' cost for a truck or a tank
using guided MLRS would be $130,000. Each salvo of 12 MLRS
rockets would cost $780,000 for unitary warheads (equivalent
to the cost of 3,250 155mm projectiles).
Non-precision 155mm HE ammunition. The Army's most recent
purchase of M107 HE 155mm projectiles was $240 per round for
155,000 rounds. M795 HE rounds are estimated to cost between
$500 and $770 per round.
Inventory. The Army has an inventory of over 4.2 million
155mm HE rounds already paid for. There are no Excalibur
projectiles or Guided MLRS rockets in the current inventory.
4. The Army has the best tank, the best infantry fighting
vehicle, and the best attack helicopter in the world. Why has
the Army operated so long with an inferior heavy artillery
system?
During the late 1970's and 1980's the Army introduced new
families of fighting systems that included the Abrams tank,
Bradley fighting vehicle, air defense systems and helicopters
such as Apache and Blackhawk. Due to fiscal constraints and
diverging priorities in the mid 80's, the field artillery was
forced to skip a generation of cannon modernization.
During that time period, the Army developed the Multiple
Launch Rocket System (MLRS) to satisfy its deficiency in deep
attack and Paladin was developed as an interim solution for
its cannon deficiencies. Consequently, Paladin was a simple
product improvement to the old M 109 that lacked mobility,
lethality, and survivability. Because if the limitations of
the chassis, Paladin lacks the potential or significant
product improvement.
5. Can indirect cannon fire support missions be
accomplished by greater investment in other systems--
aircraft, missiles, and rockets?
U.S. ground forces have traditionally required a mix of
rocket, missile and cannon systems to meet their fire support
requirements. Cannons have historically provided close
support to the maneuver arms on a 24-hour all weather basis.
Although the unique characteristics that made cannon systems
ideal for this mission are becoming less distinct as the
capabilities of precision and smart munitions are improved,
several distinct characteristics are likely to remain.
Flexibility and responsiveness. Flexibility and
responsiveness are probably the cannon's hallmark. The close
combat environment demands the ability to rapidly accommodate
change. Cannon systems are more responsive to rapidly
changing battle conditions because they carry a readily
available quantity and variety of munitions and can rapidly
change from one type of munition to another as required.
Cannons reload by individual rounds vice pods for rockets/
missiles. Rocket/missile pods can only accommodate one type
of munition at a time. Often, the type of rocket/missile pod
loaded may not be the optimum munition required for the
specific target. Fires and effects coordinators then face
what can be a dilemma. They must either search for launchers
loaded with the correct munition, fire the launcher loaded
with the less than optimum munition, or direct reload.
Launcher reload operations can take approximately 7-20
minutes, making them less than ideal in a time critical
situation. Aircraft carry limited amounts and types of
munitions and must land to reconfigure or replenish their
load. Aircraft reload cycles are generally much longer than
missile and rocket systems. Army data indicated that a
Crusader battalion could provide 130 tons of munitions in one
hour, and 900 rounds in close support before the first
aircraft sorties arrives on station.
Continuous Fires. Cannon systems are more capable of
providing continuous fires (fires without gaps over a period
of time) than are rocket/missile launchers and aircraft. With
an actively cooled cannon, and fully automated rearm and
resupply provided by Crusader resupply vehicles, the
capability to provide continuous fires is greatly enhanced.
Cannons have the capability to shift from target to target
quickly--a matter of seconds in many cases. While launches do
well in providing massed fires, there can often experience
unacceptable gaps for reloading operation in sustaining
fires.
Employment in Proximity to Friendly Forces. Providing fires
in close proximity to friendly forces is an essential fire
support task in the close fight. The minimum safe distance as
measured by bursting radius is considerably smaller for
cannons compared to existing rocket/missile systems. Final
protective fires and ``danger close'' missions end up placing
fires extremely close to friendly forces. The smaller
bursting radius of cannon munitions enables the ``echelonment
of fires'' whereby the infantry uses a succession of cannon
and mortar systems interchangeably to maximize the coverage
of fires until they must be shifted or lifted. Close fires
require accuracy, responsiveness, timely delivery, and
``controlled'' (or limited) effects (burst radius), to reduce
risk to supported forces. Cannon artillery can be employed
much closer to our forces and is an absolute necessity in the
close support role since it can be employed in all weather,
in all terrain, day or night. Weather can severely hamper
close air support. For instance, during the Kosovo air
campaign, 56% of sorties were aborted due to weather. Of
those sorties executed, 33% were adversely affected by
weather, resulting in less than half of the targets being
effectively engaged.
Sustainability. According to the Army, the logistical
footprint for cannons is generally smaller than for rocket/
missile launchers based on ammunition weight and cube size.
Cost of Munitions. Cannon munitions have historically been
less expensive than rockets or missiles on a per-unit cost
basis, and they provide a larger family of munitions to
select from to deal with battlefield dynamics. Compared to
the expected range of cost for new precision guided cannon
and rocket munitions, the cost per round of non-precision
15mm cannon projectiles is cheaper on the order of 140-925 to
one (see #3 above).
6. Will there be a void in indirect fire support without
Crusader?
Possibly. According to the requirement that was developed
by the Army and approved by the Joint Requirements Council of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Paladin was judged to be not
mobile enough to keep up with our mechanized force in a
maneuver-dominated fight. The Army is also concerned that the
Paladin's range and rate-of-fire limitations prevent it from
providing the required counter-fire ``umbrella'' for our
forces. In addition to the significant increase in mobility,
range, and rate-of-fire, Crusader provides the responsive,
continuous fires and mobility required for fast moving close
combat operations. Its automated ammunition handling and
resupply system combined with an actively cooled cannon
provide accurate sustained fires where needed in the required
volume. Crusader interoperability with Joint and all Army
command and control networks assures that effects are
delivered when needed; providing direct link capability to
any platform on the battlefield.
7. How old is Paladin and how much longer would it need to
be in the force if Crusader is canceled? Can Paladin be
upgraded to meet many of the Crusader requirements?
The M109 series howitzer design began in the mid-1950s and
entered service in 1961. Paladin is the sixth modification to
the M109 design--no Paladins are new howitzers.

[[Page H4091]]

While maintaining virtually the same chassis, engine,
transmission, and basic suspension, the Paladin's weight has
grown by one third from 24 tons to 32 tons. The armament
system has grown from a 24 caliber cannon with a range of 14
kilometers to a 39 caliber cannon with a range of 30
kilometers.
The Crusader was planned to remain in the force beyond
2032. If Crusader is not available and the M109 series
howitzer must be continued in its place, it is probable that
it too would be in the field in 2032. This would mean that
the M109 series howitzer would be in the field 70 years after
it initially entered service. The soldiers in 2030 could be
fighting with the same howitzer used by their great
grandfathers.
The Army evaluated the prospect of improving Paladin during
the Cost and Operational Effectiveness Analysis completed for
Crusader's Milestone 1 decision and the Congressional report
delivered in December 2000. The analysis shows that to attain
Crusader's rate-of-fire (10-12 RPM), cross country mobility
(39-48 KPH) and firing range (40-50 KM), Paladin would
require an automated ammunition handling system, increased
horsepower, improved suspension, and a cooled 56 caliber
cannon. Paladin lacks sufficient growth capacity in the
chassis to allow these improvements. To strengthen the
chassis to withstand these stresses would require replacing
or significant design changes in the hull structure,
hydraulics, engine, transmission and suspension sub-systems.
8. Is Crusader rate of fire oversold because it can't be
resupplied at high enough rates? What is the logistical plan
to resupply Crusader during maximum rates of fire?
Ammunition resupply has been an issue that has plagued
artilerymen for years. Because Crusader has a fully automated
resupply system, it allows a 300% improvement in resupply
operations. The key to successfully achieving this new
resupply requirement will be the fielding of fully automated
resupply vehicles (RSVs) that can rearm a Crusader howitzer
with 48 rounds and refuel it in 10 minutes--a 50%
improvement. One technique employs two resupply vehicles
(RSV's) per howitzer battery in the vicinity of the firing
area to conduct rearming and refueling, two RSVs in hide
areas with full loads of ammunition, and two RSVs uploading
at the Logistics Resupply Point. Other methods may be
employed, depending on the individual tactical situation, and
considerations of distances that have to be traveled between
the locations. The introduction of the wheeled RSV gives the
commander enhanced flexibility to conduct resupply operations
depending on the threat. For example, when facing a high
counter fire threat, the commander could deploy the tracked
resupply vehicles forward providing maximum protection for
the crew while using the wheeled vehicles to upload and
transport ammunition in the less vulnerable rear
positions and transfer the ammunition to the tracked
carriers. In a law counter fire threat, the commander
could also deploy the wheeled vehicles forward maximizing
through put of ammunition. The automatic resupply and
cannon autoloader capability is a major technological leap
forward for the Army, which has never had this capability
before.
9. What force structure was sacrificed in anticipation of
fielding Crusader? Will structure be added back if Crusader
is terminated? What will that cost?
In anticipation of the increased firepower and productivity
of the Crusader system, the Army reduced force structure in
both maneuver and fire support units by 25 percent in the
mid-1990s. The Army reduced Paladin and all other cannon
battalions from three batteries of eight howitzers (3x8) to
three batteries of six howitzers (3x6). MLRS battalions were
also reduced to 3 batteries of 6 launchers each (down from 8
or 9 launchers each), at the same time, Army tactics were
changed to take full advantage of the speed of its tanks,
Bradley fighting vehicles the Crusader, and other situation
awareness capabilities, increasing the planned battle space
for Army forces by over 200 percent. Termination of the
Crusader will necessitate a reexamination of Army force
structure, tactics, techniques, and procedures.
10. What are remaining development and cost risks of the
Crusader?
The Army has testified that it rates the Crusader program a
moderate to low risk for technical performance, cost, and
schedule. The software build for Crusader is on schedule and
within cost estimates. The range and rate-of-fire key
performance parameters are being demonstrated with the first
prototype vehicle at Yuma Proving Grounds and the resupply
and mobility are on schedule for demonstration in 2002. Over
6,000 test firings have shown the Crusader to be 142% more
accurate to date than Paladin. Accuracy improvements come
from: A new projectile tracking system that removes
meteorological errors; Precision pointing with electric
drives; thermal management; Muzzle velocity management; On-
board projectile weighting; and Inertial reference unit
coupled to GPS to null out position errors.
The program has been focusing significant effort on
building the reliability of the system in order to remove
soldiers from the technical and manual operational aspect of
fighting a weapon system.
11. How much does the Crusader weigh and what can carry it?
The Crusader howitzer was redesigned several years ago to
reduce its weight from 60 tons to 40 tons. Under the Army's
current plan, Crusader artillery would be either
prepositioned or moved by sea as part of a counterattack
corps. If needed, Crusader systems could be airlifted on C-17
or C-5B aircraft. Deployments by airlift would most likely
entail a battery of 3 Crusader systems to meet special
contingencies. Crusader airlift ranges would be:

Nautical Miles
C-17:
2 howitzers (84 tons).........................................2,276
1 howitzer and 1 resupply vehicle (w) (73 tons)...............2,782
C-5B:
2 howitzers (84 tons).........................................3,200
1 howitzer and 1 resupply vehicle (w) (73 tons)...............3,500
Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 5010, the
Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2003. This piece of
legislation is perhaps the most important component of our wartime
budget for America. It is the first bill we are considering pursuant to
the 302(b) allocations filed by the Appropriations Committee on June
24. I am happy to report that it is consistent with the levels
established in H. Con. Res. 353, the House concurrent resolution on the
budget for fiscal year 2003, which we subsequently deemed as having the
effect of a conference report on the resolution. The budget resolution
provided $393.8 billion in budget authority for national defense,
including $10 billion for a war reserve fund. This bill funds the bulk
of that commitment. The rest is funded in separate military
construction and energy and water appropriations bills.
H.R. 5010 provides $354.446 billion in new discretionary budget
authority, which is $1 million less than the 302(b) allocation to the
House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense. Outlays of $345.328
billion are $782 million below the subcommittee's allocation. The bill
contains no emergency-designated new budget authority, but does include
$1.9 billion worth of BA savings including $945 million in Working
Capital Revolving Fund reductions, $615 million in foreign currency
savings and $195 million worth of rescissions of previously enacted BA.
Accordingly, the bill complies with section 302(f) of the Budget Act,
which prohibits consideration of bills in excess of an appropriations
subcommittee's 302(b) allocation of budget authority and outlays
established in the budget resolution.
This bill represents the House's unwavering commitment to win the war
against terrorism. But in addition to combating terrorism, H.R. 5010
follows the blueprint set forth in the resolution to give every service
member a 4.1-percent pay raise, increased housing allowances, and
incentive pay.
Finally, section 201 of the budget resolution provided for a $10-
billion reserve fund to continue military operations in fiscal year
2003. The Appropriations Committee has advised that it will deal with
the war reserve fund when the Pentagon provides more budgetary detail
about how it plans to spend the $10 billion.
In conclusion, I express my support for H.R. 5010 and yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, this Member rises in strong support for
H.R. 5010, the Defense appropriations bill for FY 2003. This Member
would like to offer particular thanks to the Chairman of the
Subcommittee on Department of Defense Appropriations, the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) and the Ranking Minority Member
on the Subcommittee on Department of Defense Appropriations, the
distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) for their work
on this important bill.
This Member sincerely thanks the Committee on Appropriations for
including $2.75 million in fiscal year 2003 for the Air National
Guard's Project ALERT. Currently, Project ALERT serves as an on-line
training tool developed and used by the Nebraska National Guard in
collaboration with the Department of Defense, the National Guard
Bureau, the University of Nebraska, and Nebraska Educational
Television. The $2.75 million appropriated in H.R. 5010 will assist
with the development of the new courses and the modification of
existing courses.
Indeed, the implications of Project ALERT extend nationwide and to
components of both the active and reserve military forces. Allowing
military forces to complete some training courses on their own time, as
Project ALERT does, provides an opportunity to cut on-site training
costs and time and to maximize exercise time. For the U.S. military to
meet the challenges it will face during the current war on terrorism
and throughout the 21st Century, it is crucial that Congress invest in
innovative and flexible training tools such as Project ALERT.
Furthermore, this Member is very appreciative that the Committee has
approved the appropriation of $4 million for a bioprocessing facility
at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, giving (UNL).
These funds will be used for the third phase of the project to
establish and validate a current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP)
processing facility with the capability to make vaccines as therapeutic
countermeasures against biological warfare agents. Two cGMP

[[Page H4092]]

pilot plants, one dedicated to yeast/bacterial culture and the other
dedicated to mammalian cell culture will be built within the new
Chemical Engineering building on the UNL campus. The funds will be used
to build and equip the laboratories.
This will be a commercial-grade facility, giving UNL the capability,
if required by the Department of Defense (DoD), to make vaccines
against biological warfare agents and products that can be used as
therapeutic countermeasures to treat people who have been exposed to
biological agents. UNL is currently doing this on a smaller level and
is well suited to pursue this expansion. These facilities certainly
will enhance our nation's ability to respond to biological warfare.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, this Member urges his colleagues to support
H.R. 5010.
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the
Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2003. This bill provides our
armed forces with the resources to fight terrorism and strengthens
military quality of life, readiness, infrastructure and modernization
programs. I would like to commend Chairman Lewis, Ranking Member Murtha
and their staffs for their bipartisan work in putting this bill
together.
The bill also includes funding for 12 new C-17 airlifters along with
other acquisitions and improvements for our cargo and tanker fleet.
Combat forces cannot fight, peacekeepers cannot keep the peace and
humanitarian aid cannot be distributed without an effective, rapid
global mobility force. Continuing to build up our cargo and tanker
fleet will help ensure that the United States military can continue to
effectively deliver both guns and butter anytime, anyplace.
Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I wish to thank the
distinguished Chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee,
Congressman Lewis, and Full Committee Chairman Young for the incredible
amount of work they and their Committees have put into this bill. The
American people deserve a bill that provides for the defense of our
nation and this bill puts us well on the way to a fully restored and
invigorated military.
Earlier this year it came to my attention that across the Armed
Services, Tuition Assistance funds had been exhausted for Fiscal Year
2002. As many Members know, the Tuition Assistance Program, commonly
referred to as TA, provides soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines the
opportunity to construct an educational plan and have up to 75 percent
of their tuition paid by their branch of service for amounts up to
$3,500 per year. It's an extremely popular program and a great
opportunity for our men and women in uniform to pursue a degree while
serving their country. Unfortunately, instead of having this
educational benefit available to them, our service members are
confronted with a budget shortfall for 2002.
These men and women have put their lives on hold to serve their
country; our nation should never put their educational plans on hold
because of the exhaustion of TA dollars. That's why I am especially
thankful to Chairman Young, Chairman Lewis, and their staffs for taking
a close look at this program, which seeks to give our men and women in
uniform greater access to higher education and eventually the dream of
obtaining a college degree.
This bill includes a substantial increase in Tuition Assistance
dollars--over $90 million in all. That's a twenty-five percent increase
for this important program. So again, I thank the gentleman from
California for bringing a bill to the floor that fully funds the
President's request for Tuition Assistance and allows our service
members the full measure of their educational benefits.
Mr. STARK. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Defense
Appropriation Act for FY 2003. This bill is full of all the usual pork.
On September 11, we were tragically shown how easy it is to defeat
conventional defenses and deliver a weapon of mass destruction anywhere
in the United States. This bill calls for spending billions on programs
that don't directly respond to this basic security concern. In fact,
most of this money will do nothing to help defend our country from
terrorism or stop terrorist elements overseas.
We have now wasted over $100 billion on several different versions of
a national missile defense system. If we continue to spend at this
level for the next ten years, we will spend more than $200 billion. Why
would anyone spend billions developing ICBMs when it would be far more
cost effective and technologically feasible to put it on a boat, a
plane, or in a cargo container?
We also are going to spend $7.6 billion on two advanced strike
fighters designed to combat advanced tactical aircraft and penetrate
enemy countries with integrated air defense systems. Yet, we are more
threatened by those with the capability of building bombs in their
basements than our most sophisticated adversaries, all of whom don't
even possess these specialized air defenses. Will these multi-million
dollar fighter planes help us? No. But, we are going to throw billions
of dollars after these defense contractors anyway.
Finally, when the Administration decided to cancel the $11 billion
Crusader mobile howitzer, the Republican Leadership refused to consider
my amendment supporting the Administration's decision. Later when they
saw the wisdom of cutting this program to put toward current homeland
security needs, they still left a few hundred million in an account to
continue to fund an identical artillery system. Why? To give more pork
to our poor defense contractors.
It is time this Congress realizes: more money for unneeded and
outdated programs will not improve our national security. We need to be
wise in our defense spending. That is why I oppose this bill and urge
my colleagues to vote against it.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I intend to support this bill before us
today, but I have grave reservations about several of its provisions.
This bill spends $354.7 billion, $33.7 billion more than the current
level. $7.4 billion of that is for the misguided missile defense
system, which costs too much and is not in the best interest of the
country. At this critical time in our nation's struggle against
terrorism, we must spend our resources wisely on America's most
immediate defense needs. Missile defense is not among them.
There are a few broader dimensions in this bill that are encouraging
to me. The bill provides no funds for the outmoded Crusader mobile
howitzer, a weapons system designed for a war from an age long past. I
was pleased to see that the bill fully funds the President's request
for the Defense Environmental Restoration Account.
I especially appreciate the emerging recognition by the Subcommittee
of the importance of addressing the problem of unexploded ordnance
(UXO), the bombs and shells that did not go off as intended and
subsequently litter the landscape. I am pleased to be working with the
Subcommittee leadership on this issue. We have made a step in the right
direction toward getting the federal government to clean up after
itself and be a good steward of the land. As we continue to consider
defense appropriations funding as the year progresses, I hope that we
will be able to address the critical needs for UXO research &
development and cleanup.
Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule. During consideration of the bill for
amendment, the Chair may accord priority in recognition to a Member
offering an amendment that he has printed in the designated place in
the Congressional Record. Those amendments will be considered read.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:

H.R. 5010

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the
following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2003, for military functions
administered by the Department of Defense, and for other
purposes, namely:

TITLE I

MILITARY PERSONNEL

Mr. LEWIS of California (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill through page 115, line
16, be considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment
at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
California?
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the right to object. Mr.
Chairman, if I can have an inquiry of the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. MURTHA. This just opens the bill up.
Mr. KUCINICH. A number of Members have amendments that might be
relevant earlier in the bill. I just wondered, Will this open the
process up to amendments at any point?
Mr. MURTHA. That is right.
Mr. KUCINICH. So all of our amendments, then, would have a chance to
be brought forward. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
California?
There was no objection.
The text of the remainder of the bill through page 115, line 16, is
as follows:

[[Page H4093]]

Military Personnel, Army

For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence,
interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station
travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational
movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between
permanent duty stations, for members of the Army on active
duty (except members of reserve components provided for
elsewhere), cadets, and aviation cadets; and for payments
pursuant to section 156 of Public Law 97-377, as amended (42
U.S.C. 402 note), and to the Department of Defense Military
Retirement Fund, $26,832,217,000.

Military Personnel, Navy

For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence,
interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station
travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational
movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between
permanent duty stations, for members of the Navy on active
duty (except members of the Reserve provided for elsewhere),
midshipmen, and aviation cadets; and for payments pursuant to
section 156 of Public Law 97-377, as amended (42 U.S.C. 402
note), and to the Department of Defense Military Retirement
Fund, $21,874,395,000.

Military Personnel, Marine Corps

For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence,
interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station
travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational
movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between
permanent duty stations, for members of the Marine Corps on
active duty (except members of the Reserve provided for
elsewhere); and for payments pursuant to section 156 of
Public Law 97-377, as amended (42 U.S.C. 402 note), and to
the Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund,
$8,504,172,000.

Military Personnel, Air Force

For pay, allowances, individual clothing, subsistence,
interest on deposits, gratuities, permanent change of station
travel (including all expenses thereof for organizational
movements), and expenses of temporary duty travel between
permanent duty stations, for members of the Air Force on
active duty (except members of reserve components provided
for elsewhere), cadets, and aviation cadets; and for payments
pursuant to section 156 of Public Law 97-377, as amended (42
U.S.C. 402 note), and to the Department of Defense Military
Retirement Fund, $21,957,757,000.

Reserve Personnel, Army

For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Army
Reserve on active duty under sections 10211, 10302, and 3038
of title 10, United States Code, or while serving on active
duty under section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code,
in connection with performing duty specified in section
12310(a) of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing
reserve training, or while performing drills or equivalent
duty or other duty, and for members of the Reserve Officers'
Training Corps, and expenses authorized by section 16131 of
title 10, United States Code; and for payments to the
Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund,
$3,373,455,000.

Reserve Personnel, Navy

For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Navy
Reserve on active duty under section 10211 of title 10,
United States Code, or while serving on active duty under
section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code, in
connection with performing duty specified in section 12310(a)
of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing reserve
training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty, and
for members of the Reserve Officers' Training Corps, and
expenses authorized by section 16131 of title 10, United
States Code; and for payments to the Department of Defense
Military Retirement Fund, $1,897,352,000.

Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps

For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Marine
Corps Reserve on active duty under section 10211 of title 10,
United States Code, or while serving on active duty under
section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code, in
connection with performing duty specified in section 12310(a)
of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing reserve
training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty, and
for members of the Marine Corps platoon leaders class, and
expenses authorized by section 16131 of title 10, United
States Code; and for payments to the Department of Defense
Military Retirement Fund, $553,983,000.

Reserve Personnel, Air Force

For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Air Force
Reserve on active duty under sections 10211, 10305, and 8038
of title 10, United States Code, or while serving on active
duty under section 12301(d) of title 10, United States Code,
in connection with performing duty specified in section
12310(a) of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing
reserve training, or while performing drills or equivalent
duty or other duty, and for members of the Air Reserve
Officers' Training Corps, and expenses authorized by section
16131 of title 10, United States Code; and for payments to
the Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund,
$1,236,904,000.

National Guard Personnel, Army

For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Army
National Guard while on duty under section 10211, 10302, or
12402 of title 10 or section 708 of title 32, United States
Code, or while serving on duty under section 12301(d) of
title 10 or section 502(f) of title 32, United States Code,
in connection with performing duty specified in section
12310(a) of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing
training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty or
other duty, and expenses authorized by section 16131 of title
10, United States Code; and for payments to the Department of
Defense Military Retirement Fund, $5,070,188,000.

National Guard Personnel, Air Force

For pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,
travel, and related expenses for personnel of the Air
National Guard on duty under section 10211, 10305, or 12402
of title 10 or section 708 of title 32, United States Code,
or while serving on duty under section 12301(d) of title 10
or section 502(f) of title 32, United States Code, in
connection with performing duty specified in section 12310(a)
of title 10, United States Code, or while undergoing
training, or while performing drills or equivalent duty or
other duty, and expenses authorized by section 16131 of title
10, United States Code; and for payments to the Department of
Defense Military Retirement Fund, $2,124,411,000.

TITLE II

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

Operation and Maintenance, Army

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of the Army, as authorized by law;
and not to exceed $10,818,000 can be used for emergencies and
extraordinary expenses, to be expended on the approval or
authority of the Secretary of the Army, and payments may be
made on his certificate of necessity for confidential
military purposes, $23,942,768,000: Provided, That of the
funds appropriated in this paragraph, not less than
$355,000,000 shall be made available only for conventional
ammunition care and maintenance.

Operation and Maintenance, Navy

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of the Navy and the Marine Corps,
as authorized by law; and not to exceed $4,415,000 can be
used for emergencies and extraordinary expenses, to be
expended on the approval or authority of the Secretary of the
Navy, and payments may be made on his certificate of
necessity for confidential military purposes,
$29,121,836,000.

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of the Marine Corps, as authorized
by law, $3,579,359,000.

Operation and Maintenance, Air Force

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of the Air Force, as authorized by
law; and not to exceed $7,902,000 can be used for emergencies
and extraordinary expenses, to be expended on the approval or
authority of the Secretary of the Air Force, and payments may
be made on his certificate of necessity for confidential
military purposes, $27,587,959,000: Provided, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, that of the funds
available under this heading, $750,000 shall only be
available to the Secretary of the Air Force for a grant to
Florida Memorial College for the purpose of funding minority
aviation training: Provided further, That of the amount
provided under this heading, not less than $2,000,000 shall
be obligated for the deployment of Air Force active and
Reserve aircrews that perform combat search and rescue
operations to operate and evaluate the United Kingdom's Royal
Air Force EH-101 helicopter, to receive training using that
helicopter, and to exchange operational techniques and
procedures regarding that helicopter.

Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide

(including transfer of funds)

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance of activities and agencies of the
Department of Defense (other than the military departments),
as authorized by law, $14,850,377,000, of which not to exceed
$25,000,000 may be available for the CINC initiative fund
account; and of which not to exceed $34,500,000 can be used
for emergencies and extraordinary expenses, to be expended on
the approval or authority of the Secretary of Defense, and
payments may be made on his certificate of necessity for
confidential military purposes: Provided, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, of the funds
provided in this Act for Civil Military programs under this
heading, $750,000 shall be available for a grant for Outdoor
Odyssey, Roaring Run, Pennsylvania, to support the Youth
Development and Leadership program and Department of Defense
STARBASE program: Provided further, That none of the funds
appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be
used to plan or implement the consolidation of a budget or
appropriations liaison office of the Office of the Secretary
of Defense, the office of the Secretary of a military
department, or the service headquarters of one of the Armed
Forces into a legislative affairs or legislative liaison
office: Provided further, That $4,675,000, to remain
available until expended, is available

[[Page H4094]]

only for expenses relating to certain classified activities,
and may be transferred as necessary by the Secretary to
operation and maintenance appropriations or research,
development, test and evaluation appropriations, to be merged
with and to be available for the same time period as the
appropriations to which transferred: Provided further, That
any ceiling on the investment item unit cost of items that
may be purchased with operation and maintenance funds shall
not apply to the funds described in the preceding proviso:
Provided further, That the transfer authority provided under
this heading is in addition to any other transfer authority
provided elsewhere in this Act.

Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance, including training, organization,
and administration, of the Army Reserve; repair of facilities
and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles; travel and
transportation; care of the dead; recruiting; procurement of
services, supplies, and equipment; and communications,
$1,976,710,000.

Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance, including training, organization,
and administration, of the Navy Reserve; repair of facilities
and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles; travel and
transportation; care of the dead; recruiting; procurement of
services, supplies, and equipment; and communications,
$1,239,309,000.

Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance, including training, organization,
and administration, of the Marine Corps Reserve; repair of
facilities and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles;
travel and transportation; care of the dead; recruiting;
procurement of services, supplies, and equipment; and
communications, $189,532,000.

Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
operation and maintenance, including training, organization,
and administration, of the Air Force Reserve; repair of
facilities and equipment; hire of passenger motor vehicles;
travel and transportation; care of the dead; recruiting;
procurement of services, supplies, and equipment; and
communications, $2,165,604,000.

Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard

For expenses of training, organizing, and administering the
Army National Guard, including medical and hospital treatment
and related expenses in non-Federal hospitals; maintenance,
operation, and repairs to structures and facilities; hire of
passenger motor vehicles; personnel services in the National
Guard Bureau; travel expenses (other than mileage), as
authorized by law for Army personnel on active duty, for Army
National Guard division, regimental, and battalion commanders
while inspecting units in compliance with National Guard
Bureau regulations when specifically authorized by the Chief,
National Guard Bureau; supplying and equipping the Army
National Guard as authorized by law; and expenses of repair,
modification, maintenance, and issue of supplies and
equipment (including aircraft), $4,231,967,000.

Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard

For operation and maintenance of the Air National Guard,
including medical and hospital treatment and related expenses
in non-Federal hospitals; maintenance, operation, repair, and
other necessary expenses of facilities for the training and
administration of the Air National Guard, including repair of
facilities, maintenance, operation, and modification of
aircraft; transportation of things, hire of passenger motor
vehicles; supplies, materials, and equipment, as authorized
by law for the Air National Guard; and expenses incident to
the maintenance and use of supplies, materials, and
equipment, including such as may be furnished from stocks
under the control of agencies of the Department of Defense;
travel expenses (other than mileage) on the same basis as
authorized by law for Air National Guard personnel on active
Federal duty, for Air National Guard commanders while
inspecting units in compliance with National Guard Bureau
regulations when specifically authorized by the Chief,
National Guard Bureau, $4,113,010,000.

United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

For salaries and expenses necessary for the United States
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, $9,614,000, of which
not to exceed $2,500 can be used for official representation
purposes.

Environmental Restoration, Army

(including transfer of funds)

For the Department of the Army, $395,900,000, to remain
available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of
the Army shall, upon determining that such funds are required
for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of
hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris of
the Department of the Army, or for similar purposes, transfer
the funds made available by this appropriation to other
appropriations made available to the Department of the Army,
to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes
and for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that
all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation.

Environmental Restoration, Navy

(including transfer of funds)

For the Department of the Navy, $256,948,000, to remain
available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of
the Navy shall, upon determining that such funds are required
for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of
hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris of
the Department of the Navy, or for similar purposes, transfer
the funds made available by this appropriation to other
appropriations made available to the Department of the Navy,
to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes
and for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that
all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation.

Environmental Restoration, Air Force

(including transfer of funds)

For the Department of the Air Force, $389,773,000, to
remain available until transferred: Provided, That the
Secretary of the Air Force shall, upon determining that such
funds are required for environmental restoration, reduction
and recycling of hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings
and debris of the Department of the Air Force, or for similar
purposes, transfer the funds made available by this
appropriation to other appropriations made available to the
Department of the Air Force, to be merged with and to be
available for the same purposes and for the same time period
as the appropriations to which transferred: Provided further,
That upon a determination that all or part of the funds
transferred from this appropriation are not necessary for the
purposes provided herein, such amounts may be transferred
back to this appropriation.

Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide

(including transfer of funds)

For the Department of Defense, $23,498,000, to remain
available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of
Defense shall, upon determining that such funds are required
for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of
hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris of
the Department of Defense, or for similar purposes, transfer
the funds made available by this appropriation to other
appropriations made available to the Department of Defense,
to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes
and for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that
all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation.

Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites

(including transfer of funds)

For the Department of the Army, $212,102,000, to remain
available until transferred: Provided, That the Secretary of
the Army shall, upon determining that such funds are required
for environmental restoration, reduction and recycling of
hazardous waste, removal of unsafe buildings and debris at
sites formerly used by the Department of Defense, transfer
the funds made available by this appropriation to other
appropriations made available to the Department of the Army,
to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes
and for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred: Provided further, That upon a determination that
all or part of the funds transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation.

Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid

For expenses relating to the Overseas Humanitarian,
Disaster, and Civic Aid programs of the Department of Defense
(consisting of the programs provided under sections 401, 402,
404, 2547, and 2551 of title 10, United States Code),
$58,400,000, to remain available until September 30, 2004.

Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction

For assistance to the republics of the former Soviet Union,
including assistance provided by contract or by grants, for
facilitating the elimination and the safe and secure
transportation and storage of nuclear, chemical and other
weapons; for establishing programs to prevent the
proliferation of weapons, weapons components, and weapon-
related technology and expertise; for programs relating to
the training and support of defense and military personnel
for demilitarization and protection of weapons, weapons
components and weapons technology and expertise, and for
defense and military contacts, $416,700,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2005.

Support for International Sporting Competitions, Defense

For logistical and security support for international
sporting competitions (including pay and non-travel related
allowances

[[Page H4095]]

only for members of the Reserve Components of the Armed
Forces of the United States called or ordered to active duty
in connection with providing such support), $19,000,000, to
remain available until expended.

TITLE III

PROCUREMENT

Aircraft Procurement, Army

For construction, procurement, production, modification,
and modernization of aircraft, equipment, including ordnance,
ground handling equipment, spare parts, and accessories
therefor; specialized equipment and training devices;
expansion of public and private plants, including the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes,
$2,214,369,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2005, of which not less than $225,675,000 shall
be available for the Army National Guard and Army Reserve:
Provided, That of the funds made available under this
heading, $45,000,000 shall be available only to support a
restructured CH-47F helicopter upgrade program that increases
the production rate to 48 helicopters per fiscal year by
fiscal year 2005: Provided further, That funds in the
immediately preceding proviso shall not be made available
until the Secretary of the Army has certified to the
congressional defense committees that the Army intends to
budget for the upgrade of the entire CH-47 fleet that is
planned to be part of the Objective Force.

Missile Procurement, Army

For construction, procurement, production, modification,
and modernization of missiles, equipment, including ordnance,
ground handling equipment, spare parts, and accessories
therefor; specialized equipment and training devices;
expansion of public and private plants, including the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes,
$1,112,772,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2005, of which not less than $168,580,000 shall
be available for the Army National Guard and Army Reserve.

Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army

For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of weapons and tracked combat vehicles, equipment, including
ordnance, spare parts, and accessories therefor; specialized
equipment and training devices; expansion of public and
private plants, including the land necessary therefor, for
the foregoing purposes, and such lands and interests therein,
may be acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to
approval of title; and procurement and installation of
equipment, appliances, and machine tools in public and
private plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-
owned equipment layaway; and other expenses necessary for the
foregoing purposes, $2,248,358,000, to remain available for
obligation until September 30, 2005, of which not less than
$40,849,000 shall be available for the Army National Guard
and Army Reserve.

Procurement of Ammunition, Army

For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of ammunition, and accessories therefor; specialized
equipment and training devices; expansion of public and
private plants, including ammunition facilities authorized by
section 2854 of title 10, United States Code, and the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes,
$1,207,560,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2005, of which not less than $124,716,000 shall
be available for the Army National Guard and Army Reserve.

Other Procurement, Army

For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of vehicles, including tactical, support, and non-tracked
combat vehicles; the purchase of not to exceed 40 passenger
motor vehicles for replacement only; and the purchase of 6
vehicles required for physical security of personnel,
notwithstanding price limitations applicable to passenger
vehicles but not to exceed $180,000 per vehicle;
communications and electronic equipment; other support
equipment; spare parts, ordnance, and accessories therefor;
specialized equipment and training devices; expansion of
public and private plants, including the land necessary
therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such lands and
interests therein, may be acquired, and construction
prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; and
procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, and
machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant and
Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and other
expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes,
$6,017,380,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2005, of which not less than $1,129,578,000
shall be available for the Army National Guard and Army
Reserve.

Aircraft Procurement, Navy

For construction, procurement, production, modification,
and modernization of aircraft, equipment, including ordnance,
spare parts, and accessories therefor; specialized equipment;
expansion of public and private plants, including the land
necessary therefor, and such lands and interests therein, may
be acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to
approval of title; and procurement and installation of
equipment, appliances, and machine tools in public and
private plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-
owned equipment layaway, $8,682,655,000, to remain available
for obligation until September 30, 2005, of which not less
than $19,644,000 shall be available for the Navy Reserve and
Marine Corps Reserve.

Weapons Procurement, Navy

For construction, procurement, production, modification,
and modernization of missiles, torpedoes, other weapons, and
related support equipment including spare parts, and
accessories therefor; expansion of public and private plants,
including the land necessary therefor, and such lands and
interests therein, may be acquired, and construction
prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title; and
procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, and
machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant and
Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway,
$2,384,617,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2005.

Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps

For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of ammunition, and accessories therefor; specialized
equipment and training devices; expansion of public and
private plants, including ammunition facilities authorized by
section 2854 of title 10, United States Code, and the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes,
$1,167,130,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2005, of which not less than $18,162,000 shall
be for the Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve.

Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy

For expenses necessary for the construction, acquisition,
or conversion of vessels as authorized by law, including
armor and armament thereof, plant equipment, appliances, and
machine tools and installation thereof in public and private
plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned
equipment layaway; procurement of critical, long leadtime
components and designs for vessels to be constructed or
converted in the future; and expansion of public and private
plants, including land necessary therefor, and such lands and
interests therein, may be acquired, and construction
prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title, as follows:
Carrier Replacement Program (CY), $250,000,000;
Carrier Replacement Program (AP-CY), $243,703,000;
Virginia Class Submarine, $1,490,652,000;
Virginia Class Submarine (AP-CY), $706,309,000;
SSGN Conversion, $404,305,000;
SSGN Conversion (AP-CY), $421,000,000;
CVN Refueling Overhauls (AP-CY), $296,781,000;
Submarine Refueling Overhauls, $231,292,000;
Submarine Refueling Overhauls (AP-CY), $88,257,000;
DDG-51, $2,273,002,000;
DDG-51 (AP-CY), $74,000,000;
LPD-17, $596,492,000;
LPD-17 (AP-CY), $8,000,000;
LCU (X), $9,756,000;
Outfitting, $300,608,000;
LCAC SLEP, $81,638,000;
Mine Hunter SWATH, $7,000,000; and
Completion of Prior Year Shipbuilding Programs,
$644,899,000;
In all: $8,127,694,000, to remain available for obligation
until September 30, 2007: Provided, That additional
obligations may be incurred after September 30, 2007, for
engineering services, tests, evaluations, and other such
budgeted work that must be performed in the final stage of
ship construction: Provided further, That none of the funds
provided under this heading for the construction or
conversion of any naval vessel to be constructed in shipyards
in the United States shall be expended in foreign facilities
for the construction of major components of such vessel:
Provided further, That none of the funds provided under this
heading shall be used for the construction of any naval
vessel in foreign shipyards.

Other Procurement, Navy

For procurement, production, and modernization of support
equipment and materials not otherwise provided for, Navy
ordnance (except ordnance for new aircraft, new ships, and
ships authorized for conversion);

[[Page H4096]]

the purchase of not to exceed 141 passenger motor vehicles
for replacement only, and the purchase of 3 vehicles required
for physical security of personnel, notwithstanding price
limitations applicable to passenger vehicles but not to
exceed $240,000 per unit for one unit and not to exceed
$125,000 per unit for the remaining two units; expansion of
public and private plants, including the land necessary
therefor, and such lands and interests therein, may be
acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to
approval of title; and procurement and installation of
equipment, appliances, and machine tools in public and
private plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-
owned equipment layaway, $4,631,299,000, to remain available
for obligation until September 30, 2005, of which not less
than $19,869,000 shall be for the Naval Reserve.

Procurement, Marine Corps

For expenses necessary for the procurement, manufacture,
and modification of missiles, armament, military equipment,
spare parts, and accessories therefor; plant equipment,
appliances, and machine tools, and installation thereof in
public and private plants; reserve plant and Government and
contractor-owned equipment layaway; vehicles for the Marine
Corps, including the purchase of not to exceed 28 passenger
motor vehicles for replacement only; and expansion of public
and private plants, including land necessary therefor, and
such lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title,
$1,369,383,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2005, of which not less than $253,724,000 shall
be available for the Marine Corps Reserve.

Aircraft Procurement, Air Force

For construction, procurement, lease, and modification of
aircraft and equipment, including armor and armament,
specialized ground handling equipment, and training devices,
spare parts, and accessories therefor; specialized equipment;
expansion of public and private plants, Government-owned
equipment and installation thereof in such plants, erection
of structures, and acquisition of land, for the foregoing
purposes, and such lands and interests therein, may be
acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to
approval of title; reserve plant and Government and
contractor-owned equipment layaway; and other expenses
necessary for the foregoing purposes including rents and
transportation of things, $12,492,730,000, to remain
available for obligation until September 30, 2005, of which
not less than $312,700,000 shall be available for the Air
National Guard and Air Force Reserve: Provided, That of the
amount provided under this heading, not less than
$207,000,000 shall be used only for the producability
improvement program directly related to the F-22 aircraft
program: Provided further, That amounts provided under this
heading shall be used for the advance procurement of 15 C-17
aircraft.

Missile Procurement, Air Force

For construction, procurement, and modification of
missiles, spacecraft, rockets, and related equipment,
including spare parts and accessories therefor, ground
handling equipment, and training devices; expansion of public
and private plants, Government-owned equipment and
installation thereof in such plants, erection of structures,
and acquisition of land, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned equipment
layaway; and other expenses necessary for the foregoing
purposes including rents and transportation of things,
$3,185,439,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2005.

Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force

For construction, procurement, production, and modification
of ammunition, and accessories therefor; specialized
equipment and training devices; expansion of public and
private plants, including ammunition facilities authorized by
section 2854 of title 10, United States Code, and the land
necessary therefor, for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances,
and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant
and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and
other expenses necessary for the foregoing purposes,
$1,290,764,000, to remain available for obligation until
September 30, 2005, of which not less than $120,200,000 shall
be available for the Air National Guard and Air Force
Reserve.

Other Procurement, Air Force

For procurement and modification of equipment (including
ground guidance and electronic control equipment, and ground
electronic and communication equipment), and supplies,
materials, and spare parts therefor, not otherwise provided
for; the purchase of not to exceed 263 passenger motor
vehicles for replacement only, and the purchase of 2 vehicles
required for physical security of personnel, notwithstanding
price limitations applicable to passenger vehicles but not to
exceed $232,000 per vehicle; lease of passenger motor
vehicles; and expansion of public and private plants,
Government-owned equipment and installation thereof in such
plants, erection of structures, and acquisition of land, for
the foregoing purposes, and such lands and interests therein,
may be acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon, prior
to approval of title; reserve plant and Government and
contractor-owned equipment layaway, $10,622,660,000, to
remain available for obligation until September 30, 2005, of
which not less than $167,600,000 shall be available for the
Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve.

Procurement, Defense-Wide

For expenses of activities and agencies of the Department
of Defense (other than the military departments) necessary
for procurement, production, and modification of equipment,
supplies, materials, and spare parts therefor, not otherwise
provided for; the purchase of not to exceed 99 passenger
motor vehicles for replacement only; the purchase of 4
vehicles required for physical security of personnel,
notwithstanding price limitations applicable to passenger
vehicles but not to exceed $250,000 per vehicle; expansion of
public and private plants, equipment, and installation
thereof in such plants, erection of structures, and
acquisition of land for the foregoing purposes, and such
lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and
construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title;
reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned equipment
layaway, $3,457,405,000, to remain available for obligation
until September 30, 2005: Provided, That funds provided under
this heading for Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3)
missiles may be used for procurement of critical parts for
PAC-3 missiles to support production of such missiles in
future fiscal years.

Defense Production Act Purchases

For activities by the Department of Defense pursuant to
sections 108, 301, 302, and 303 of the Defense Production Act
of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2078, 2091, 2092, and 2093),
$73,057,000 to remain available until expended.

TITLE IV

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy

For expenses necessary for basic and applied scientific
research, development, test and evaluation, including
maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and operation of
facilities and equipment, $13,562,218,000, to remain
available for obligation until September 30, 2004: Provided,
That funds appropriated in this paragraph which are available
for the V-22 may be used to meet unique operational
requirements of the Special Operations Forces.

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide

For expenses of activities and agencies of the Department
of Defense (other than the military departments), necessary
for basic and applied scientific research, development, test
and evaluation; advanced research projects as may be
designated and determined by the Secretary of Defense,
pursuant to law; maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and
operation of facilities and equipment, $17,863,462,000, to
remain available for obligation until September 30, 2004.

Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
independent activities of the Director, Operational Test and
Evaluation, in the direction and supervision of operational
test and evaluation, including initial operational test and
evaluation which is conducted prior to, and in support of,
production decisions; joint operational testing and
evaluation; and administrative expenses in connection
therewith, $242,054,000, to remain available for obligation
until September 30, 2004.

TITLE V

REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS

Defense Working Capital Funds

For the Defense Working Capital Funds, $1,832,956,000:
Provided, That during fiscal year 2003, funds in the Defense
Working Capital Funds may be used for the purchase of not to
exceed 315 passenger carrying motor vehicles for replacement
only for the Defense Security Service, and the purchase of
not to exceed 7 vehicles for replacement only for the Defense
Logistics Agency.

National Defense Sealift Fund

For National Defense Sealift Fund programs, projects, and
activities, and for expenses of the National Defense Reserve
Fleet, as established by section 11 of the Merchant Ship
Sales Act of 1946 (50 U.S.C. App. 1744), and for the
necessary expenses to maintain and preserve a U.S.-flag
merchant fleet to serve the national security needs of the
United States, $944,129,000, to remain

[[Page H4097]]

available until expended: Provided, That none of the funds
provided in this paragraph shall be used to award a new
contract that provides for the acquisition of any of the
following major components unless such components are
manufactured in the United States: auxiliary equipment,
including pumps, for all shipboard services; propulsion
system components (that is; engines, reduction gears, and
propellers); shipboard cranes; and spreaders for shipboard
cranes: Provided further, That the exercise of an option in a
contract awarded through the obligation of previously
appropriated funds shall not be considered to be the award of
a new contract: Provided further, That the Secretary of the
military department responsible for such procurement may
waive the restrictions in the first proviso on a case-by-case
basis by certifying in writing to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate
that adequate domestic supplies are not available to meet
Department of Defense requirements on a timely basis and that
such an acquisition must be made in order to acquire
capability for national security purposes: Provided further,
That, notwithstanding any other provision of law, $10,000,000
of the funds available under this heading shall be available
in addition to other amounts otherwise available, only to
finance the cost of constructing additional sealift capacity.

TITLE VI

OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS

Defense Health Program

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, for medical and
health care programs of the Department of Defense, as
authorized by law, $14,600,748,000, of which $13,916,791,000
shall be for Operation and maintenance, of which not to
exceed 2 percent shall remain available until September 30,
2004; of which $283,743,000, to remain available for
obligation until September 30, 2005, shall be for
Procurement; of which $400,214,000, to remain available for
obligation until September 30, 2004, shall be for Research,
development, test and evaluation, and of which not less than
$10,000,000 shall be available for HIV prevention educational
activities undertaken in connection with U.S. military
training, exercises, and humanitarian assistance activities
conducted primarily in African nations.

Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army

For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the
destruction of the United States stockpile of lethal chemical
agents and munitions in accordance with the provisions of
section 1412 of the Department of Defense Authorization Act,
1986 (50 U.S.C. 1521), and for the destruction of other
chemical warfare materials that are not in the chemical
weapon stockpile, $1,490,199,000, of which $974,238,000 shall
be for Operation and maintenance to remain available until
September 30, 2004, $213,278,000 shall be for Procurement to
remain available until September 30, 2005, and $302,683,000
shall be for Research, development, test and evaluation to
remain available until September 30, 2004.

Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense

(including transfer of funds)

For drug interdiction and counter-drug activities of the
Department of Defense, for transfer to appropriations
available to the Department of Defense for military personnel
of the reserve components serving under the provisions of
title 10 and title 32, United States Code; for Operation and
maintenance; for Procurement; and for Research, development,
test and evaluation, $859,907,000: Provided, That the funds
appropriated under this heading shall be available for
obligation for the same time period and for the same purpose
as the appropriation to which transferred: Provided further,
That upon a determination that all or part of the funds
transferred from this appropriation are not necessary for the
purposes provided herein, such amounts may be transferred
back to this appropriation: Provided further, That the
transfer authority provided under this heading is in addition
to any other transfer authority contained elsewhere in this
Act.

Office of the Inspector General

For expenses and activities of the Office of the Inspector
General in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector
General Act of 1978, as amended, $157,165,000, of which
$155,165,000 shall be for Operation and maintenance, of which
not to exceed $700,000 is available for emergencies and
extraordinary expenses to be expended on the approval or
authority of the Inspector General, and payments may be made
on the Inspector General's certificate of necessity for
confidential military purposes; and of which $2,000,000 to
remain available until September 30, 2005, shall be for
Procurement.

TITLE VII

RELATED AGENCIES

Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System Fund

For payment to the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement
and Disability System Fund, to maintain the proper funding
level for continuing the operation of the Central
Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System,
$212,000,000.

Intelligence Community Management Account

(including transfer of funds)

For necessary expenses of the Intelligence Community
Management Account, $162,254,000, of which $24,252,000 for
the Advanced Research and Development Committee shall remain
available until September 30, 2004: Provided, That of the
funds appropriated under this heading, $34,100,000 shall be
transferred to the Department of Justice for the National
Drug Intelligence Center to support the Department of
Defense's counter-drug intelligence responsibilities, and of
the said amount, $1,500,000 for Procurement shall remain
available until September 30, 2005 and $1,000,000 for
Research, development, test and evaluation shall remain
available until September 30, 2004: Provided further, That
the National Drug Intelligence Center shall maintain the
personnel and technical resources to provide timely support
to law enforcement authorities and the intelligence community
by conducting document and computer exploitation of materials
collected in Federal, State, and local law enforcement
activity associated with counter-drug, counter-terrorism, and
national security investigations and operations.

Payment to Kaho'olawe

Island Conveyance, Remediation, and Environmental Restoration Fund

For payment to Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation,
and Environmental Restoration Fund, as authorized by law,
$25,000,000, to remain available until expended.

National Security Education Trust Fund

For the purposes of title VIII of Public Law 102-183,
$8,000,000, to be derived from the National Security
Education Trust Fund, to remain available until expended.

TITLE VIII

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 8001. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not
authorized by the Congress.
Sec. 8002. During the current fiscal year, provisions of
law prohibiting the payment of compensation to, or employment
of, any person not a citizen of the United States shall not
apply to personnel of the Department of Defense: Provided,
That salary increases granted to direct and indirect hire
foreign national employees of the Department of Defense
funded by this Act shall not be at a rate in excess of the
percentage increase authorized by law for civilian employees
of the Department of Defense whose pay is computed under the
provisions of section 5332 of title 5, United States Code, or
at a rate in excess of the percentage increase provided by
the appropriate host nation to its own employees, whichever
is higher: Provided further, That this section shall not
apply to Department of Defense foreign service national
employees serving at United States diplomatic missions whose
pay is set by the Department of State under the Foreign
Service Act of 1980: Provided further, That the limitations
of this provision shall not apply to foreign national
employees of the Department of Defense in the Republic of
Turkey.
Sec. 8003. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current
fiscal year, unless expressly so provided herein.
Sec. 8004. No more than 20 percent of the appropriations in
this Act which are limited for obligation during the current
fiscal year shall be obligated during the last 2 months of
the fiscal year: Provided, That this section shall not apply
to obligations for support of active duty training of reserve
components or summer camp training of the Reserve Officers'
Training Corps.

(transfer of funds)

Sec. 8005. Upon determination by the Secretary of Defense
that such action is necessary in the national interest, he
may, with the approval of the Office of Management and
Budget, transfer not to exceed $2,500,000,000 of working
capital funds of the Department of Defense or funds made
available in this Act to the Department of Defense for
military functions (except military construction) between
such appropriations or funds or any subdivision thereof, to
be merged with and to be available for the same purposes, and
for the same time period, as the appropriation or fund to
which transferred: Provided, That such authority to transfer
may not be used unless for higher priority items, based on
unforeseen military requirements, than those for which
originally appropriated and in no case where the item for
which funds are requested has been denied by the Congress:
Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense shall notify
the Congress promptly of all transfers made pursuant to this
authority or any other authority in this Act: Provided
further, That no part of the funds in this Act shall be
available to prepare or present a request to the Committees
on Appropriations for reprogramming of funds, unless for
higher priority items, based on unforeseen military
requirements, than those for which originally appropriated
and in no case where the item for which reprogramming is
requested has been denied by the Congress: Provided further,
That a request for multiple reprogrammings of funds using
authority provided in this section must be made prior to May
1, 2003.

(transfer of funds)

Sec. 8006. During the current fiscal year, cash balances in
working capital funds of the Department of Defense
established pursuant to section 2208 of title 10, United
States Code, may be maintained in only such amounts as are
necessary at any time for

[[Page H4098]]

cash disbursements to be made from such funds: Provided, That
transfers may be made between such funds: Provided further,
That transfers may be made between working capital funds and
the ``Foreign Currency Fluctuations, Defense'' appropriation
and the ``Operation and Maintenance'' appropriation accounts
in such amounts as may be determined by the Secretary of
Defense, with the approval of the Office of Management and
Budget, except that such transfers may not be made unless the
Secretary of Defense has notified the Congress of the
proposed transfer. Except in amounts equal to the amounts
appropriated to working capital funds in this Act, no
obligations may be made against a working capital fund to
procure or increase the value of war reserve material
inventory, unless the Secretary of Defense has notified the
Congress prior to any such obligation.
Sec. 8007. Funds appropriated by this Act may not be used
to initiate a special access program without prior
notification 30 calendar days in session in advance to the
congressional defense committees.
Sec. 8008. None of the funds provided in this Act shall be
available to initiate: (1) a multiyear contract that employs
economic order quantity procurement in excess of $20,000,000
in any 1 year of the contract or that includes an unfunded
contingent liability in excess of $20,000,000; or (2) a
contract for advance procurement leading to a multiyear
contract that employs economic order quantity procurement in
excess of $20,000,000 in any 1 year, unless the congressional
defense committees have been notified at least 30 days in
advance of the proposed contract award: Provided, That no
part of any appropriation contained in this Act shall be
available to initiate a multiyear contract for which the
economic order quantity advance procurement is not funded at
least to the limits of the Government's liability: Provided
further, That no part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall be available to initiate multiyear procurement
contracts for any systems or component thereof if the value
of the multiyear contract would exceed $500,000,000 unless
specifically provided in this Act: Provided further, That no
multiyear procurement contract can be terminated without 10-
day prior notification to the congressional defense
committees: Provided further, That the execution of multiyear
authority shall require the use of a present value analysis
to determine lowest cost compared to an annual procurement.
Funds appropriated in title III of this Act may be used for
multiyear procurement contracts as follows:
C-130 aircraft; and
F/A-18E and F engine.
Sec. 8009. Within the funds appropriated for the operation
and maintenance of the Armed Forces, funds are hereby
appropriated pursuant to section 401 of title 10, United
States Code, for humanitarian and civic assistance costs
under chapter 20 of title 10, United States Code. Such funds
may also be obligated for humanitarian and civic assistance
costs incidental to authorized operations and pursuant to
authority granted in section 401 of chapter 20 of title 10,
United States Code, and these obligations shall be reported
to the Congress as of September 30 of each year: Provided,
That funds available for operation and maintenance shall be
available for providing humanitarian and similar assistance
by using Civic Action Teams in the Trust Territories of the
Pacific Islands and freely associated states of Micronesia,
pursuant to the Compact of Free Association as authorized by
Public Law 99-239: Provided further, That upon a
determination by the Secretary of the Army that such action
is beneficial for graduate medical education programs
conducted at Army medical facilities located in Hawaii, the
Secretary of the Army may authorize the provision of medical
services at such facilities and transportation to such
facilities, on a nonreimbursable basis, for civilian patients
from American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of
Micronesia, Palau, and Guam.
Sec. 8010. (a) During fiscal year 2003, the civilian
personnel of the Department of Defense may not be managed on
the basis of any end-strength, and the management of such
personnel during that fiscal year shall not be subject to any
constraint or limitation (known as an end-strength) on the
number of such personnel who may be employed on the last day
of such fiscal year.
(b) The fiscal year 2004 budget request for the Department
of Defense as well as all justification material and other
documentation supporting the fiscal year 2004 Department of
Defense budget request shall be prepared and submitted to the
Congress as if subsections (a) and (b) of this provision were
effective with regard to fiscal year 2004.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to apply to
military (civilian) technicians.
Sec. 8011. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none
of the funds made available by this Act shall be used by the
Department of Defense to exceed, outside the 50 United
States, its territories, and the District of Columbia,
125,000 civilian workyears: Provided, That workyears shall be
applied as defined in the Federal Personnel Manual: Provided
further, That workyears expended in dependent student hiring
programs for disadvantaged youths shall not be included in
this workyear limitation.
Sec. 8012. None of the funds made available by this Act
shall be used in any way, directly or indirectly, to
influence congressional action on any legislation or
appropriation matters pending before the Congress.
Sec. 8013. None of the funds appropriated by this Act shall
be available for the basic pay and allowances of any member
of the Army participating as a full-time student and
receiving benefits paid by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs
from the Department of Defense Education Benefits Fund when
time spent as a full-time student is credited toward
completion of a service commitment: Provided, That this
subsection shall not apply to those members who have
reenlisted with this option prior to October 1, 1987:
Provided further, That this subsection applies only to active
components of the Army.
Sec. 8014. None of the funds appropriated by this Act shall
be available to convert to contractor performance an activity
or function of the Department of Defense that, on or after
the date of the enactment of this Act, is performed by more
than 10 Department of Defense civilian employees until a most
efficient and cost-effective organization analysis is
completed on such activity or function and certification of
the analysis is made to the Committees on Appropriations of
the House of Representatives and the Senate: Provided, That
this section and subsections (a), (b), and (c) of 10 U.S.C.
2461 shall not apply to a commercial or industrial type
function of the Department of Defense that: (1) is included
on the procurement list established pursuant to section 2 of
the Act of June 25, 1938 (41 U.S.C. 47), popularly referred
to as the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act; (2) is planned to be
converted to performance by a qualified nonprofit agency for
the blind or by a qualified nonprofit agency for other
severely handicapped individuals in accordance with that Act;
or (3) is planned to be converted to performance by a
qualified firm under 51 percent ownership by an Indian tribe,
as defined in section 450b(e) of title 25, United States
Code, or a Native Hawaiian organization, as defined in
section 637(a)(15) of title 15, United States Code.

(transfer of funds)

Sec. 8015. Funds appropriated in title III of this Act for
the Department of Defense Pilot Mentor-Protege Program may be
transferred to any other appropriation contained in this Act
solely for the purpose of implementing a Mentor-Protege
Program developmental assistance agreement pursuant to
section 831 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1991 (Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2301 note),
as amended, under the authority of this provision or any
other transfer authority contained in this Act.
Sec. 8016. None of the funds in this Act may be available
for the purchase by the Department of Defense (and its
departments and agencies) of welded shipboard anchor and
mooring chain 4 inches in diameter and under unless the
anchor and mooring chain are manufactured in the United
States from components which are substantially manufactured
in the United States: Provided, That for the purpose of this
section manufactured will include cutting, heat treating,
quality control, testing of chain and welding (including the
forging and shot blasting process): Provided further, That
for the purpose of this section substantially all of the
components of anchor and mooring chain shall be considered to
be produced or manufactured in the United States if the
aggregate cost of the components produced or manufactured in
the United States exceeds the aggregate cost of the
components produced or manufactured outside the United
States: Provided further, That when adequate domestic
supplies are not available to meet Department of Defense
requirements on a timely basis, the Secretary of the service
responsible for the procurement may waive this restriction on
a case-by-case basis by certifying in writing to the
Committees on Appropriations that such an acquisition must be
made in order to acquire capability for national security
purposes.
Sec. 8017. None of the funds appropriated by this Act
available for the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the
Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS) or TRICARE shall be available
for the reimbursement of any health care provider for
inpatient mental health service for care received when a
patient is referred to a provider of inpatient mental health
care or residential treatment care by a medical or health
care professional having an economic interest in the facility
to which the patient is referred: Provided, That this
limitation does not apply in the case of inpatient mental
health services provided under the program for persons with
disabilities under subsection (d) of section 1079 of title
10, United States Code, provided as partial hospital care, or
provided pursuant to a waiver authorized by the Secretary of
Defense because of medical or psychological circumstances of
the patient that are confirmed by a health professional who
is not a Federal employee after a review, pursuant to rules
prescribed by the Secretary, which takes into account the
appropriate level of care for the patient, the intensity of
services required by the patient, and the availability of
that care.
Sec. 8018. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
during the current fiscal year, the Secretary of Defense may,
by executive agreement, establish with host nation
governments in NATO member states a separate account into
which such residual value amounts negotiated in the return of
United States military installations in NATO member states
may be deposited, in the currency of the host nation, in lieu
of direct monetary transfers to the United States Treasury:
Provided, That such credits may be utilized only

[[Page H4099]]

for the construction of facilities to support United States
military forces in that host nation, or such real property
maintenance and base operating costs that are currently
executed through monetary transfers to such host nations:
Provided further, That the Department of Defense's budget
submission for fiscal year 2004 shall identify such sums
anticipated in residual value settlements, and identify such
construction, real property maintenance or base operating
costs that shall be funded by the host nation through such
credits: Provided further, That all military construction
projects to be executed from such accounts must be previously
approved in a prior Act of Congress: Provided further, That
each such executive agreement with a NATO member host nation
shall be reported to the congressional defense committees,
the Committee on International Relations of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the
Senate 30 days prior to the conclusion and endorsement of any
such agreement established under this provision.
Sec. 8019. None of the funds available to the Department of
Defense may be used to demilitarize or dispose of M-1
Carbines, M-1 Garand rifles, M-14 rifles, .22 caliber rifles,
.30 caliber rifles, or M-1911 pistols.
Sec. 8020. No more than $500,000 of the funds appropriated
or made available in this Act shall be used during a single
fiscal year for any single relocation of an organization,
unit, activity or function of the Department of Defense into
or within the National Capital Region: Provided, That the
Secretary of Defense may waive this restriction on a case-by-
case basis by certifying in writing to the congressional
defense committees that such a relocation is required in the
best interest of the Government.
Sec. 8021. In addition to the funds provided elsewhere in
this Act, $8,000,000 is appropriated only for incentive
payments authorized by section 504 of the Indian Financing
Act of 1974 (25 U.S.C. 1544): Provided, That a subcontractor
at any tier shall be considered a contractor for the purposes
of being allowed additional compensation under section 504 of
the Indian Financing Act of 1974 (25 U.S.C. 1544).
Sec. 8022. None of the funds appropriated by this Act shall
be available to perform any cost study pursuant to the
provisions of OMB Circular A-76 if the study being performed
exceeds a period of 24 months after initiation of such study
with respect to a single function activity or 48 months after
initiation of such study for a multi-function activity.
Sec. 8023. Funds appropriated by this Act for the American
Forces Information Service shall not be used for any national
or international political or psychological activities.
Sec. 8024. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or
regulation, the Secretary of Defense may adjust wage rates
for civilian employees hired for certain health care
occupations as authorized for the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs by section 7455 of title 38, United States Code.
Sec. 8025. (a) Of the funds for the procurement of supplies
or services appropriated by this Act, qualified nonprofit
agencies for the blind or other severely handicapped shall be
afforded the maximum practicable opportunity to participate
as subcontractors and suppliers in the performance of
contracts let by the Department of Defense.
(b) During the current fiscal year, a business concern
which has negotiated with a military service or defense
agency a subcontracting plan for the participation by small
business concerns pursuant to section 8(d) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(d)) shall be given credit toward
meeting that subcontracting goal for any purchases made from
qualified nonprofit agencies for the blind or other severely
handicapped.
(c) For the purpose of this section, the phrase ``qualified
nonprofit agency for the blind or other severely
handicapped'' means a nonprofit agency for the blind or other
severely handicapped that has been approved by the Committee
for the Purchase from the Blind and Other Severely
Handicapped under the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-
48).
Sec. 8026. During the current fiscal year, net receipts
pursuant to collections from third party payers pursuant to
section 1095 of title 10, United States Code, shall be made
available to the local facility of the uniformed services
responsible for the collections and shall be over and above
the facility's direct budget amount.
Sec. 8027. During the current fiscal year, and from any
funds available to the Department of Defense, the Department
is authorized to incur obligations of not to exceed
$350,000,000 for purposes specified in section 2350j(c) of
title 10, United States Code, in anticipation of receipt of
contributions, only from the Government of Kuwait, under that
section: Provided, That upon receipt, such contributions from
the Government of Kuwait shall be credited to the
appropriations or fund which incurred such obligations.
Sec. 8028. Of the funds made available in this Act, not
less than $23,003,000 shall be available for the Civil Air
Patrol Corporation, of which $21,503,000 shall be available
for Civil Air Patrol Corporation operation and maintenance to
support readiness activities which includes $1,500,000 for
the Civil Air Patrol counterdrug program: Provided, That
funds identified for ``Civil Air Patrol'' under this section
are intended for and shall be for the exclusive use of the
Civil Air Patrol Corporation and not for the Air Force or any
unit thereof.
Sec. 8029. (a) None of the funds appropriated in this Act
are available to establish a new Department of Defense
(department) federally funded research and development center
(FFRDC), either as a new entity, or as a separate entity
administrated by an organization managing another FFRDC, or
as a nonprofit membership corporation consisting of a
consortium of other FFRDCs and other non-profit entities.
(b) No member of a Board of Directors, Trustees, Overseers,
Advisory Group, Special Issues Panel, Visiting Committee, or
any similar entity of a defense FFRDC, and no paid consultant
to any defense FFRDC, except when acting in a technical
advisory capacity, may be compensated for his or her services
as a member of such entity, or as a paid consultant by more
than one FFRDC in a fiscal year: Provided, That a member of
any such entity referred to previously in this subsection
shall be allowed travel expenses and per diem as authorized
under the Federal Joint Travel Regulations, when engaged in
the performance of membership duties.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the
funds available to the department from any source during
fiscal year 2003 may be used by a defense FFRDC, through a
fee or other payment mechanism, for construction of new
buildings, for payment of cost sharing for projects funded by
Government grants, for absorption of contract overruns, or
for certain charitable contributions, not to include employee
participation in community service and/or development.
(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, of the
funds available to the department during fiscal year 2003,
not more than 6,277 staff years of technical effort (staff
years) may be funded for defense FFRDCs: Provided, That of
the specific amount referred to previously in this
subsection, not more than 1,029 staff years may be funded for
the defense studies and analysis FFRDCs.
(e) The Secretary of Defense shall, with the submission of
the department's fiscal year 2004 budget request, submit a
report presenting the specific amounts of staff years of
technical effort to be allocated for each defense FFRDC
during that fiscal year.
Sec. 8030. None of the funds appropriated or made available
in this Act shall be used to procure carbon, alloy or armor
steel plate for use in any Government-owned facility or
property under the control of the Department of Defense which
were not melted and rolled in the United States or Canada:
Provided, That these procurement restrictions shall apply to
any and all Federal Supply Class 9515, American Society of
Testing and Materials (ASTM) or American Iron and Steel
Institute (AISI) specifications of carbon, alloy or armor
steel plate: Provided further, That the Secretary of the
military department responsible for the procurement may waive
this restriction on a case-by-case basis by certifying in
writing to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and the Senate that adequate domestic
supplies are not available to meet Department of Defense
requirements on a timely basis and that such an acquisition
must be made in order to acquire capability for national
security purposes: Provided further, That these restrictions
shall not apply to contracts which are in being as of the
date of the enactment of this Act.
Sec. 8031. For the purposes of this Act, the term
``congressional defense committees'' means the Armed Services
Committee of the House of Representatives, the Armed Services
Committee of the Senate, the Subcommittee on Defense of the
Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, and the
Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations of
the House of Representatives.
Sec. 8032. During the current fiscal year, the Department
of Defense may acquire the modification, depot maintenance
and repair of aircraft, vehicles and vessels as well as the
production of components and other Defense-related articles,
through competition between Department of Defense depot
maintenance activities and private firms: Provided, That the
Senior Acquisition Executive of the military department or
defense agency concerned, with power of delegation, shall
certify that successful bids include comparable estimates of
all direct and indirect costs for both public and private
bids: Provided further, That Office of Management and Budget
Circular A-76 shall not apply to competitions conducted under
this section.
Sec. 8033. (a)(1) If the Secretary of Defense, after
consultation with the United States Trade Representative,
determines that a foreign country which is party to an
agreement described in paragraph (2) has violated the terms
of the agreement by discriminating against certain types of
products produced in the United States that are covered by
the agreement, the Secretary of Defense shall rescind the
Secretary's blanket waiver of the Buy American Act with
respect to such types of products produced in that foreign
country.
(2) An agreement referred to in paragraph (1) is any
reciprocal defense procurement memorandum of understanding,
between the United States and a foreign country pursuant to
which the Secretary of Defense has prospectively waived the
Buy American Act for certain products in that country.
(b) The Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Congress a
report on the amount of Department of Defense purchases from
foreign entities in fiscal year 2002. Such report shall
separately indicate the dollar value of items for which the
Buy American Act was waived pursuant to any agreement
described in subsection (a)(2), the Trade Agreement

[[Page H4100]]

Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.), or any international
agreement to which the United States is a party.
(c) For purposes of this section, the term ``Buy American
Act'' means title III of the Act entitled ``An Act making
appropriations for the Treasury and Post Office Departments
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1934, and for other
purposes'', approved March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a et seq.).
Sec. 8034. Appropriations contained in this Act that remain
available at the end of the current fiscal year as a result
of energy cost savings realized by the Department of Defense
shall remain available for obligation for the next fiscal
year to the extent, and for the purposes, provided in section
2865 of title 10, United States Code.

(including transfer of funds)

Sec. 8035. Amounts deposited during the current fiscal year
to the special account established under 40 U.S.C. 485(h)(2)
and to the special account established under 10 U.S.C.
2667(d)(1) are appropriated and shall be available until
transferred by the Secretary of Defense to current applicable
appropriations or funds of the Department of Defense under
the terms and conditions specified by 40 U.S.C. 485(h)(2)(A)
and (B) and 10 U.S.C. 2667(d)(1)(B), to be merged with and to
be available for the same time period and the same purposes
as the appropriation to which transferred.
Sec. 8036. The President shall include with each budget for
a fiscal year submitted to the Congress under section 1105 of
title 31, United States Code, materials that shall identify
clearly and separately the amounts requested in the budget
for appropriation for that fiscal year for salaries and
expenses related to administrative activities of the
Department of Defense, the military departments, and the
defense agencies.
Sec. 8037. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds available for ``Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug
Activities, Defense'' may be obligated for the Young Marines
program.

(including transfer of funds)

Sec. 8038. During the current fiscal year, amounts
contained in the Department of Defense Overseas Military
Facility Investment Recovery Account established by section
2921(c)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act of 1991
(Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) shall be available
until expended for the payments specified by section
2921(c)(2) of that Act.
Sec. 8039. (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the Secretary of the Air Force may convey
at no cost to the Air Force, without consideration, to Indian
tribes located in the States of North Dakota, South Dakota,
Montana, and Minnesota relocatable military housing units
located at Grand Forks Air Force Base and Minot Air Force
Base that are excess to the needs of the Air Force.
(b) Processing of Requests.--The Secretary of the Air Force
shall convey, at no cost to the Air Force, military housing
units under subsection (a) in accordance with the request for
such units that are submitted to the Secretary by the
Operation Walking Shield Program on behalf of Indian tribes
located in the States of North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana,
and Minnesota.
(c) Resolution of Housing Unit Conflicts.--The Operation
Walking Shield program shall resolve any conflicts among
requests of Indian tribes for housing units under subsection
(a) before submitting requests to the Secretary of the Air
Force under subsection (b).
(d) Indian Tribe Defined.--In this section, the term
``Indian tribe'' means any recognized Indian tribe included
on the current list published by the Secretary of the
Interior under section 104 of the Federally Recognized Indian
Tribe Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-454; 108 Stat. 4792; 25
U.S.C. 479a-1).
Sec. 8040. During the current fiscal year, appropriations
which are available to the Department of Defense for
operation and maintenance may be used to purchase items
having an investment item unit cost of not more than
$100,000.
Sec. 8041. (a) During the current fiscal year, none of the
appropriations or funds available to the Department of
Defense Working Capital Funds shall be used for the purchase
of an investment item for the purpose of acquiring a new
inventory item for sale or anticipated sale during the
current fiscal year or a subsequent fiscal year to customers
of the Department of Defense Working Capital Funds if such an
item would not have been chargeable to the Department of
Defense Business Operations Fund during fiscal year 1994 and
if the purchase of such an investment item would be
chargeable during the current fiscal year to appropriations
made to the Department of Defense for procurement.
(b) The fiscal year 2004 budget request for the Department
of Defense as well as all justification material and other
documentation supporting the fiscal year 2004 Department of
Defense budget shall be prepared and submitted to the
Congress on the basis that any equipment which was classified
as an end item and funded in a procurement appropriation
contained in this Act shall be budgeted for in a proposed
fiscal year 2004 procurement appropriation and not in the
supply management business area or any other area or category
of the Department of Defense Working Capital Funds.
Sec. 8042. None of the funds appropriated by this Act for
programs of the Central Intelligence Agency shall remain
available for obligation beyond the current fiscal year,
except for funds appropriated for the Reserve for
Contingencies, which shall remain available until September
30, 2004: Provided, That funds appropriated, transferred, or
otherwise credited to the Central Intelligence Agency Central
Services Working Capital Fund during this or any prior or
subsequent fiscal year shall remain available until expended:
Provided further, That any funds appropriated or transferred
to the Central Intelligence Agency for agent operations and
for covert action programs authorized by the President under
section 503 of the National Security Act of 1947, as amended,
shall remain available until September 30, 2004.
Sec. 8043. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds made available in this Act for the Defense Intelligence
Agency may be used for the design, development, and
deployment of General Defense Intelligence Program
intelligence communications and intelligence information
systems for the Services, the Unified and Specified Commands,
and the component commands.
Sec. 8044. Of the funds appropriated to the Department of
Defense under the heading ``Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide'', not less than $10,000,000 shall be made
available only for the mitigation of environmental impacts,
including training and technical assistance to tribes,
related administrative support, the gathering of information,
documenting of environmental damage, and developing a system
for prioritization of mitigation and cost to complete
estimates for mitigation, on Indian lands resulting from
Department of Defense activities.
Sec. 8045. Amounts collected for the use of the facilities
of the National Science Center for Communications and
Electronics during the current fiscal year and hereafter
pursuant to section 1459(g) of the Department of Defense
Authorization Act, 1986, and deposited to the special account
established under subsection 1459(g)(2) of that Act are
appropriated and shall be available until expended for the
operation and maintenance of the Center as provided for in
subsection 1459(g)(2).
Sec. 8046. (a) None of the funds appropriated in this Act
may be expended by an entity of the Department of Defense
unless the entity, in expending the funds, complies with the
Buy American Act. For purposes of this subsection, the term
``Buy American Act'' means title III of the Act entitled ``An
Act making appropriations for the Treasury and Post Office
Departments for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1934, and for
other purposes'', approved March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a et
seq.).
(b) If the Secretary of Defense determines that a person
has been convicted of intentionally affixing a label bearing
a ``Made in America'' inscription to any product sold in or
shipped to the United States that is not made in America, the
Secretary shall determine, in accordance with section 2410f
of title 10, United States Code, whether the person should be
debarred from contracting with the Department of Defense.
(c) In the case of any equipment or products purchased with
appropriations provided under this Act, it is the sense of
the Congress that any entity of the Department of Defense, in
expending the appropriation, purchase only American-made
equipment and products, provided that American-made equipment
and products are cost-competitive, quality-competitive, and
available in a timely fashion.
Sec. 8047. None of the funds appropriated by this Act shall
be available for a contract for studies, analysis, or
consulting services entered into without competition on the
basis of an unsolicited proposal unless the head of the
activity responsible for the procurement determines--
(1) as a result of thorough technical evaluation, only one
source is found fully qualified to perform the proposed work;
(2) the purpose of the contract is to explore an
unsolicited proposal which offers significant scientific or
technological promise, represents the product of original
thinking, and was submitted in confidence by one source; or
(3) the purpose of the contract is to take advantage of
unique and significant industrial accomplishment by a
specific concern, or to insure that a new product or idea of
a specific concern is given financial support:
Provided, That this limitation shall not apply to contracts
in an amount of less than $25,000, contracts related to
improvements of equipment that is in development or
production, or contracts as to which a civilian official of
the Department of Defense, who has been confirmed by the
Senate, determines that the award of such contract is in the
interest of the national defense.
Sec. 8048. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and
(c), none of the funds made available by this Act may be
used--
(1) to establish a field operating agency; or
(2) to pay the basic pay of a member of the Armed Forces or
civilian employee of the department who is transferred or
reassigned from a headquarters activity if the member or
employee's place of duty remains at the location of that
headquarters.
(b) The Secretary of Defense or Secretary of a military
department may waive the limitations in subsection (a), on a
case-by-case basis, if the Secretary determines, and
certifies to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and Senate that the granting of the waiver
will reduce the personnel requirements or the financial
requirements of the department.

[[Page H4101]]

(c) This section does not apply to field operating agencies
funded within the National Foreign Intelligence Program.
Sec. 8049. Notwithstanding section 303 of Public Law 96-487
or any other provision of law, the Secretary of the Navy is
authorized to lease real and personal property at Naval Air
Facility, Adak, Alaska, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 2667(f), for
commercial, industrial or other purposes: Provided, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of
the Navy may remove hazardous materials from facilities,
buildings, and structures at Adak, Alaska, and may demolish
or otherwise dispose of such facilities, buildings, and
structures.

(RESCISSIONS)

Sec. 8050. Of the funds provided in Department of Defense
Appropriations Acts, the following funds are hereby rescinded
from the following accounts and programs in the specified
amounts:
``Aircraft Procurement, Army, 2002/2004'', $3,000,000;
``Missile Procurement, Army, 2002/2004'', $28,350,000;
``Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army,
2002/2004'', $9,500,000;
``Procurement of Ammunition, Army, 2002/2004'',
$25,500,000;
``Procurement, Marine Corps, 2002/2004'', $4,682,000;
``Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, 2002/2004'',
$23,500,000;
``Missile Procurement, Air Force, 2002/2004'', $26,900,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army, 2002/
2003'', $2,500,000;
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy, 2002/
2003'', $2,000,000; and
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force,
2002/2003'', $67,000,000.
Sec. 8051. None of the funds available in this Act may be
used to reduce the authorized positions for military
(civilian) technicians of the Army National Guard, the Air
National Guard, Army Reserve and Air Force Reserve for the
purpose of applying any administratively imposed civilian
personnel ceiling, freeze, or reduction on military
(civilian) technicians, unless such reductions are a direct
result of a reduction in military force structure.
Sec. 8052. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available in this Act may be obligated or expended for
assistance to the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea
unless specifically appropriated for that purpose.
Sec. 8053. During the current fiscal year, funds
appropriated in this Act are available to compensate members
of the National Guard for duty performed pursuant to a plan
submitted by a Governor of a State and approved by the
Secretary of Defense under section 112 of title 32, United
States Code: Provided, That during the performance of such
duty, the members of the National Guard shall be under State
command and control: Provided further, That such duty shall
be treated as full-time National Guard duty for purposes of
sections 12602(a)(2) and (b)(2) of title 10, United States
Code.
Sec. 8054. Funds appropriated in this Act for operation and
maintenance of the Military Departments, Combatant Commands
and Defense Agencies shall be available for reimbursement of
pay, allowances and other expenses which would otherwise be
incurred against appropriations for the National Guard and
Reserve when members of the National Guard and Reserve
provide intelligence or counterintelligence support to
Combatant Commands, Defense Agencies and Joint Intelligence
Activities, including the activities and programs included
within the National Foreign Intelligence Program (NFIP), the
Joint Military Intelligence Program (JMIP), and the Tactical
Intelligence and Related Activities (TIARA) aggregate:
Provided, That nothing in this section authorizes deviation
from established Reserve and National Guard personnel and
training procedures.
Sec. 8055. During the current fiscal year, none of the
funds appropriated in this Act may be used to reduce the
civilian medical and medical support personnel assigned to
military treatment facilities below the September 30, 2002
level: Provided, That the Service Surgeons General may waive
this section by certifying to the congressional defense
committees that the beneficiary population is declining in
some catchment areas and civilian strength reductions may be
consistent with responsible resource stewardship and
capitation-based budgeting.
Sec. 8056. (a) Limitation on Pentagon Renovation Costs.--
Not later than the date each year on which the President
submits to Congress the budget under section 1105 of title
31, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit
to Congress a certification that the total cost for the
planning, design, construction, and installation of equipment
for the renovation of wedges 2 through 5 of the Pentagon
Reservation, cumulatively, will not exceed four times the
total cost for the planning, design, construction, and
installation of equipment for the renovation of wedge 1.
(b) Annual Adjustment.--For purposes of applying the
limitation in subsection (a), the Secretary shall adjust the
cost for the renovation of wedge 1 by any increase or
decrease in costs attributable to economic inflation, based
on the most recent economic assumptions issued by the Office
of Management and Budget for use in preparation of the budget
of the United States under section 1104 of title 31, United
States Code.
(c) Exclusion of Certain Costs.--For purposes of
calculating the limitation in subsection (a), the total cost
for wedges 2 through 5 shall not include--
(1) any repair or reconstruction cost incurred as a result
of the terrorist attack on the Pentagon that occurred on
September 11, 2001;
(2) any increase in costs for wedges 2 through 5
attributable to compliance with new requirements of Federal,
State, or local laws; and
(3) any increase in costs attributable to additional
security requirements that the Secretary of Defense considers
essential to provide a safe and secure working environment.
(d) Certification Cost Reports.--As part of the annual
certification under subsection (a), the Secretary shall
report the projected cost (as of the time of the
certification) for--
(1) the renovation of each wedge, including the amount
adjusted or otherwise excluded for such wedge under the
authority of paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (c) for the
period covered by the certification; and
(2) the repair and reconstruction of wedges 1 and 2 in
response to the terrorist attack on the Pentagon that
occurred on September 11, 2001.
(e) Duration of Certification Requirement.--The requirement
to make an annual certification under subsection (a) shall
apply until the Secretary certifies to Congress that the
renovation of the Pentagon Reservation is completed.
Sec. 8057. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, that
not more than 35 percent of funds provided in this Act for
environmental remediation may be obligated under indefinite
delivery/indefinite quantity contracts with a total contract
value of $130,000,000 or higher.
Sec. 8058. (a) None of the funds available to the
Department of Defense for any fiscal year for drug
interdiction or counter-drug activities may be transferred to
any other department or agency of the United States except as
specifically provided in an appropriations law.
(b) None of the funds available to the Central Intelligence
Agency for any fiscal year for drug interdiction and counter-
drug activities may be transferred to any other department or
agency of the United States except as specifically provided
in an appropriations law.

(transfer of funds)

Sec. 8059. Appropriations available in this Act under the
heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' for
increasing energy and water efficiency in Federal buildings
may, during their period of availability, be transferred to
other appropriations or funds of the Department of Defense
for projects related to increasing energy and water
efficiency, to be merged with and to be available for the
same general purposes, and for the same time period, as the
appropriation or fund to which transferred.
Sec. 8060. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may
be used for the procurement of ball and roller bearings other
than those produced by a domestic source and of domestic
origin: Provided, That the Secretary of the military
department responsible for such procurement may waive this
restriction on a case-by-case basis by certifying in writing
to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and the Senate, that adequate domestic
supplies are not available to meet Department of Defense
requirements on a timely basis and that such an acquisition
must be made in order to acquire capability for national
security purposes: Provided further, That this restriction
shall not apply to the purchase of ``commercial items'', as
defined by section 4(12) of the Office of Federal Procurement
Policy Act, except that the restriction shall apply to ball
or roller bearings purchased as end items.
Sec. 8061. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds available to the Department of Defense shall be made
available to provide transportation of medical supplies and
equipment, on a nonreimbursable basis, to American Samoa, and
funds available to the Department of Defense shall be made
available to provide transportation of medical supplies and
equipment, on a nonreimbursable basis, to the Indian Health
Service when it is in conjunction with a civil-military
project.
Sec. 8062. None of the funds in this Act may be used to
purchase any supercomputer which is not manufactured in the
United States, unless the Secretary of Defense certifies to
the congressional defense committees that such an acquisition
must be made in order to acquire capability for national
security purposes that is not available from United States
manufacturers.
Sec. 8063. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Naval shipyards of the United States shall be eligible to
participate in any manufacturing extension program financed
by funds appropriated in this or any other Act.
Sec. 8064. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, each
contract awarded by the Department of Defense during the
current fiscal year for construction or service performed in
whole or in part in a State (as defined in section 381(d) of
title 10, United States Code) which is not contiguous with
another State and has an unemployment rate in excess of the
national average rate of unemployment as determined by the
Secretary of Labor, shall include a provision requiring the
contractor to employ, for the purpose of performing that
portion of the

[[Page H4102]]

contract in such State that is not contiguous with another
State, individuals who are residents of such State and who,
in the case of any craft or trade, possess or would be able
to acquire promptly the necessary skills: Provided, That the
Secretary of Defense may waive the requirements of this
section, on a case-by-case basis, in the interest of national
security.
Sec. 8065. None of the funds made available in this or any
other Act may be used to pay the salary of any officer or
employee of the Department of Defense who approves or
implements the transfer of administrative responsibilities or
budgetary resources of any program, project, or activity
financed by this Act to the jurisdiction of another Federal
agency not financed by this Act without the express
authorization of Congress: Provided, That this limitation
shall not apply to transfers of funds expressly provided for
in Defense Appropriations Acts, or provisions of Acts
providing supplemental appropriations for the Department of
Defense.
Sec. 8066. (a) Limitation on Transfer of Defense Articles
and Services.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
none of the funds available to the Department of Defense for
the current fiscal year may be obligated or expended to
transfer to another nation or an international organization
any defense articles or services (other than intelligence
services) for use in the activities described in subsection
(b) unless the congressional defense committees, the
Committee on International Relations of the House of
Representatives, and the Committee on Foreign Relations of
the Senate are notified 15 days in advance of such transfer.
(b) Covered Activities.--This section applies to--
(1) any international peacekeeping or peace-enforcement
operation under the authority of chapter VI or chapter VII of
the United Nations Charter under the authority of a United
Nations Security Council resolution; and
(2) any other international peacekeeping, peace-
enforcement, or humanitarian assistance operation.
(c) Required Notice.--A notice under subsection (a) shall
include the following:
(1) A description of the equipment, supplies, or services
to be transferred.
(2) A statement of the value of the equipment, supplies, or
services to be transferred.
(3) In the case of a proposed transfer of equipment or
supplies--
(A) a statement of whether the inventory requirements of
all elements of the Armed Forces (including the reserve
components) for the type of equipment or supplies to be
transferred have been met; and
(B) a statement of whether the items proposed to be
transferred will have to be replaced and, if so, how the
President proposes to provide funds for such replacement.
Sec. 8067. To the extent authorized by subchapter VI of
chapter 148 of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of
Defense may issue loan guarantees in support of United States
defense exports not otherwise provided for: Provided, That
the total contingent liability of the United States for
guarantees issued under the authority of this section may not
exceed $15,000,000,000: Provided further, That the exposure
fees charged and collected by the Secretary for each
guarantee shall be paid by the country involved and shall not
be financed as part of a loan guaranteed by the United
States: Provided further, That the Secretary shall provide
quarterly reports to the Committees on Appropriations, Armed
Services, and Foreign Relations of the Senate and the
Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, and
International Relations in the House of Representatives on
the implementation of this program: Provided further, That
amounts charged for administrative fees and deposited to the
special account provided for under section 2540c(d) of title
10, shall be available for paying the costs of administrative
expenses of the Department of Defense that are attributable
to the loan guarantee program under subchapter VI of chapter
148 of title 10, United States Code.
Sec. 8068. None of the funds available to the Department of
Defense under this Act shall be obligated or expended to pay
a contractor under a contract with the Department of Defense
for costs of any amount paid by the contractor to an employee
when--
(1) such costs are for a bonus or otherwise in excess of
the normal salary paid by the contractor to the employee; and
(2) such bonus is part of restructuring costs associated
with a business combination.
Sec. 8069. (a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise
made available in this Act may be used to transport or
provide for the transportation of chemical munitions or
agents to the Johnston Atoll for the purpose of storing or
demilitarizing such munitions or agents.
(b) The prohibition in subsection (a) shall not apply to
any obsolete World War II chemical munition or agent of the
United States found in the World War II Pacific Theater of
Operations.
(c) The President may suspend the application of subsection
(a) during a period of war in which the United States is a
party.

(including transfer of funds)

Sec. 8070. During the current fiscal year, no more than
$30,000,000 of appropriations made in this Act under the
heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' may be
transferred to appropriations available for the pay of
military personnel, to be merged with, and to be available
for the same time period as the appropriations to which
transferred, to be used in support of such personnel in
connection with support and services for eligible
organizations and activities outside the Department of
Defense pursuant to section 2012 of title 10, United States
Code.
Sec. 8071. During the current fiscal year, in the case of
an appropriation account of the Department of Defense for
which the period of availability for obligation has expired
or which has closed under the provisions of section 1552 of
title 31, United States Code, and which has a negative
unliquidated or unexpended balance, an obligation or an
adjustment of an obligation may be charged to any current
appropriation account for the same purpose as the expired or
closed account if--
(1) the obligation would have been properly chargeable
(except as to amount) to the expired or closed account before
the end of the period of availability or closing of that
account;
(2) the obligation is not otherwise properly chargeable to
any current appropriation account of the Department of
Defense; and
(3) in the case of an expired account, the obligation is
not chargeable to a current appropriation of the Department
of Defense under the provisions of section 1405(b)(8) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991,
Public Law 101-510, as amended (31 U.S.C. 1551 note):
Provided, That in the case of an expired account, if
subsequent review or investigation discloses that there was
not in fact a negative unliquidated or unexpended balance in
the account, any charge to a current account under the
authority of this section shall be reversed and recorded
against the expired account: Provided further, That the total
amount charged to a current appropriation under this section
may not exceed an amount equal to 1 percent of the total
appropriation for that account.
Sec. 8072. Funds appropriated in title II of this Act and
for the Defense Health Program in title VI of this Act for
supervision and administration costs for facilities
maintenance and repair, minor construction, or design
projects may be obligated at the time the reimbursable order
is accepted by the performing activity: Provided, That for
the purpose of this section, supervision and administration
costs includes all in-house Government cost.
Sec. 8073. During the current fiscal year, the Secretary of
Defense may waive reimbursement of the cost of conferences,
seminars, courses of instruction, or similar educational
activities of the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies
for military officers and civilian officials of foreign
nations if the Secretary determines that attendance by such
personnel, without reimbursement, is in the national security
interest of the United States: Provided, That costs for which
reimbursement is waived pursuant to this section shall be
paid from appropriations available for the Asia-Pacific
Center.
Sec. 8074. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
the Chief of the National Guard Bureau may permit the use of
equipment of the National Guard Distance Learning Project by
any person or entity on a space-available, reimbursable
basis. The Chief of the National Guard Bureau shall establish
the amount of reimbursement for such use on a case-by-case
basis.
(b) Amounts collected under subsection (a) shall be
credited to funds available for the National Guard Distance
Learning Project and be available to defray the costs
associated with the use of equipment of the project under
that subsection. Such funds shall be available for such
purposes without fiscal year limitation.
Sec. 8075. Using funds available by this Act or any other
Act, the Secretary of the Air Force, pursuant to a
determination under section 2690 of title 10, United States
Code, may implement cost-effective agreements for required
heating facility modernization in the Kaiserslautern Military
Community in the Federal Republic of Germany: Provided, That
in the City of Kaiserslautern such agreements will include
the use of United States anthracite as the base load energy
for municipal district heat to the United States Defense
installations: Provided further, That at Landstuhl Army
Regional Medical Center and Ramstein Air Base, furnished heat
may be obtained from private, regional or municipal services,
if provisions are included for the consideration of United
States coal as an energy source.
Sec. 8076. None of the funds appropriated in title IV of
this Act may be used to procure end-items for delivery to
military forces for operational training, operational use or
inventory requirements: Provided, That this restriction does
not apply to end-items used in development, prototyping, and
test activities preceding and leading to acceptance for
operational use: Provided further, That this restriction does
not apply to programs funded within the National Foreign
Intelligence Program: Provided further, That the Secretary of
Defense may waive this restriction on a case-by-case basis by
certifying in writing to the Committees on Appropriations of
the House of Representatives and the Senate that it is in the
national security interest to do so.
Sec. 8077. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to approve or license the sale of the F-22 advanced
tactical fighter to any foreign government.
Sec. 8078. (a) The Secretary of Defense may, on a case-by-
case basis, waive with respect to a foreign country each
limitation on the procurement of defense items from foreign
sources provided in law if the Secretary

[[Page H4103]]

determines that the application of the limitation with
respect to that country would invalidate cooperative programs
entered into between the Department of Defense and the
foreign country, or would invalidate reciprocal trade
agreements for the procurement of defense items entered into
under section 2531 of title 10, United States Code, and the
country does not discriminate against the same or similar
defense items produced in the United States for that country.
(b) Subsection (a) applies with respect to--
(1) contracts and subcontracts entered into on or after the
date of the enactment of this Act; and
(2) options for the procurement of items that are exercised
after such date under contracts that are entered into before
such date if the option prices are adjusted for any reason
other than the application of a waiver granted under
subsection (a).
(c) Subsection (a) does not apply to a limitation regarding
construction of public vessels, ball and roller bearings,
food, and clothing or textile materials as defined by section
11 (chapters 50-65) of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule and
products classified under headings 4010, 4202, 4203, 6401
through 6406, 6505, 7019, 7218 through 7229, 7304.41 through
7304.49, 7306.40, 7502 through 7508, 8105, 8108, 8109, 8211,
8215, and 9404.
Sec. 8079. Funds made available to the Civil Air Patrol in
this Act under the heading ``Drug Interdiction and Counter-
Drug Activities, Defense'' may be used for the Civil Air
Patrol Corporation's counterdrug program, including its
demand reduction program involving youth programs, as well as
operational and training drug reconnaissance missions for
Federal, State, and local government agencies; and for
equipment needed for mission support or performance:
Provided, That the Department of the Air Force should waive
reimbursement from the Federal, State, and local government
agencies for the use of these funds.
Sec. 8080. (a) Prohibition.--None of the funds made
available by this Act may be used to support any training
program involving a unit of the security forces of a foreign
country if the Secretary of Defense has received credible
information from the Department of State that the unit has
committed a gross violation of human rights, unless all
necessary corrective steps have been taken.
(b) Monitoring.--The Secretary of Defense, in consultation
with the Secretary of State, shall ensure that prior to a
decision to conduct any training program referred to in
subsection (a), full consideration is given to all credible
information available to the Department of State relating to
human rights violations by foreign security forces.
(c) Waiver.--The Secretary of Defense, after consultation
with the Secretary of State, may waive the prohibition in
subsection (a) if he determines that such waiver is required
by extraordinary circumstances.
(d) Report.--Not more than 15 days after the exercise of
any waiver under subsection (c), the Secretary of Defense
shall submit a report to the congressional defense committees
describing the extraordinary circumstances, the purpose and
duration of the training program, the United States forces
and the foreign security forces involved in the training
program, and the information relating to human rights
violations that necessitates the waiver.
Sec. 8081. The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with
the Secretary of Health and Human Services, may carry out a
program to distribute surplus dental equipment of the
Department of Defense, at no cost to the Department of
Defense, to Indian health service facilities and to
federally-qualified health centers (within the meaning of
section 1905(l)(2)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1396d(l)(2)(B))).
Sec. 8082. The total amount appropriated in this Act is
hereby reduced by $615,000,000 to reflect savings from
favorable foreign currency fluctuations, to be derived as
follows:
``Military Personnel, Army'', $154,000,000;
``Military Personnel, Navy'', $11,000,000;
``Military Personnel, Marine Corps'', $21,000,000;
``Military Personnel, Air Force'', $49,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Army'', $189,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'', $40,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps'', $3,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force'', $80,000,000; and
``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'', $68,000,000.
Sec. 8083. None of the funds appropriated or made available
in this Act to the Department of the Navy shall be used to
develop, lease or procure the T-AKE class of ships unless the
main propulsion diesel engines and propulsors are
manufactured in the United States by a domestically operated
entity: Provided, That the Secretary of Defense may waive
this restriction on a case-by-case basis by certifying in
writing to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives and the Senate that adequate domestic
supplies are not available to meet Department of Defense
requirements on a timely basis and that such an acquisition
must be made in order to acquire capability for national
security purposes or there exists a significant cost or
quality difference.
Sec. 8084. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this or other Department of Defense
Appropriations Acts may be obligated or expended for the
purpose of performing repairs or maintenance to military
family housing units of the Department of Defense, including
areas in such military family housing units that may be used
for the purpose of conducting official Department of Defense
business.
Sec. 8085. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds appropriated in this Act under the heading ``Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'' for any
advanced concept technology demonstration project may only be
obligated 30 days after a report, including a description of
the project and its estimated annual and total cost, has been
provided in writing to the congressional defense committees:
Provided, That the Secretary of Defense may waive this
restriction on a case-by-case basis by certifying to the
congressional defense committees that it is in the national
interest to do so.
Sec. 8086. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for
the purpose of establishing all Department of Defense
policies governing the provision of care provided by and
financed under the military health care system's case
management program under 10 U.S.C. 1079(a)(17), the term
``custodial care'' shall be defined as care designed
essentially to assist an individual in meeting the activities
of daily living and which does not require the supervision of
trained medical, nursing, paramedical or other specially
trained individuals: Provided, That the case management
program shall provide that members and retired members of the
military services, and their dependents and survivors, have
access to all medically necessary health care through the
health care delivery system of the military services
regardless of the health care status of the person seeking
the health care: Provided further, That the case management
program shall be the primary obligor for payment of medically
necessary services and shall not be considered as secondarily
liable to title XIX of the Social Security Act, other welfare
programs or charity based care.
Sec. 8087. During the current fiscal year, refunds
attributable to the use of the Government travel card,
refunds attributable to the use of the Government Purchase
Card and refunds attributable to official Government travel
arranged by Government Contracted Travel Management Centers
may be credited to operation and maintenance accounts of the
Department of Defense which are current when the refunds are
received.
Sec. 8088. (a) Registering Financial Management Information
Technology Systems With DOD Chief Information Officer.--None
of the funds appropriated in this Act may be used for a
mission critical or mission essential financial management
information technology system (including a system funded by
the defense working capital fund) that is not registered with
the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense. A
system shall be considered to be registered with that officer
upon the furnishing to that officer of notice of the system,
together with such information concerning the system as the
Secretary of Defense may prescribe. A financial management
information technology system shall be considered a mission
critical or mission essential information technology system
as defined by the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller).
(b) Certifications as to Compliance With Financial
Management Modernization Plan.--(1) During the current fiscal
year, a financial management major automated information
system may not receive Milestone A approval, Milestone B
approval, or full rate production, or their equivalent,
within the Department of Defense until the Under Secretary of
Defense (Comptroller) certifies, with respect to that
milestone, that the system is being developed and managed in
accordance with the Department's Financial Management
Modernization Plan. The Under Secretary of Defense
(Comptroller) may require additional certifications, as
appropriate, with respect to any such system.
(2) The Chief Information Officer shall provide the
congressional defense committees timely notification of
certifications under paragraph (1).
(c) Certifications as to Compliance With Clinger-Cohen
Act.--(1) During the current fiscal year, a major automated
information system may not receive Milestone A approval,
Milestone B approval, or full rate production approval, or
their equivalent, within the Department of Defense until the
Chief Information Officer certifies, with respect to that
milestone, that the system is being developed in accordance
with the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.).
The Chief Information Officer may require additional
certifications, as appropriate, with respect to any such
system.
(2) The Chief Information Officer shall provide the
congressional defense committees timely notification of
certifications under paragraph (1). Each such notification
shall include, at a minimum, the funding baseline and
milestone schedule for each system covered by such a
certification and confirmation that the following steps have
been taken with respect to the system:
(A) Business process reengineering.
(B) An analysis of alternatives.
(C) An economic analysis that includes a calculation of the
return on investment.
(D) Performance measures.
(E) An information assurance strategy consistent with the
Department's Global Information Grid.
(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
(1) The term ``Chief Information Officer'' means the senior
official of the Department of Defense designated by the
Secretary of Defense pursuant to section 3506 of title 44,
United States Code.

[[Page H4104]]

(2) The term ``information technology system'' has the
meaning given the term ``information technology'' in section
5002 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1401).
(3) The term ``major automated information system'' has the
meaning given that term in Department of Defense Directive
5000.1.
Sec. 8089. During the current fiscal year, none of the
funds available to the Department of Defense may be used to
provide support to another department or agency of the United
States if such department or agency is more than 90 days in
arrears in making payment to the Department of Defense for
goods or services previously provided to such department or
agency on a reimbursable basis: Provided, That this
restriction shall not apply if the department is authorized
by law to provide support to such department or agency on a
nonreimbursable basis, and is providing the requested support
pursuant to such authority: Provided further, That the
Secretary of Defense may waive this restriction on a case-by-
case basis by certifying in writing to the Committees on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate
that it is in the national security interest to do so.
Sec. 8090. None of the funds provided in this Act may be
used to transfer to any nongovernmental entity ammunition
held by the Department of Defense that has a center-fire
cartridge and a United States military nomenclature
designation of ``armor penetrator'', ``armor piercing (AP)'',
``armor piercing incendiary (API)'', or ``armor-piercing
incendiary-tracer (API-T)'', except to an entity performing
demilitarization services for the Department of Defense under
a contract that requires the entity to demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the Department of Defense that armor piercing
projectiles are either: (1) rendered incapable of reuse by
the demilitarization process; or (2) used to manufacture
ammunition pursuant to a contract with the Department of
Defense or the manufacture of ammunition for export pursuant
to a License for Permanent Export of Unclassified Military
Articles issued by the Department of State.
Sec. 8091. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Chief of the National Guard Bureau, or his designee, may
waive payment of all or part of the consideration that
otherwise would be required under 10 U.S.C. 2667, in the case
of a lease of personal property for a period not in excess of
1 year to any organization specified in 32 U.S.C. 508(d), or
any other youth, social, or fraternal non-profit organization
as may be approved by the Chief of the National Guard Bureau,
or his designee, on a case-by-case basis.
Sec. 8092. None of the funds appropriated by this Act shall
be used for the support of any nonappropriated funds activity
of the Department of Defense that procures malt beverages and
wine with nonappropriated funds for resale (including such
alcoholic beverages sold by the drink) on a military
installation located in the United States unless such malt
beverages and wine are procured within that State, or in the
case of the District of Columbia, within the District of
Columbia, in which the military installation is located:
Provided, That in a case in which the military installation
is located in more than one State, purchases may be made in
any State in which the installation is located: Provided
further, That such local procurement requirements for malt
beverages and wine shall apply to all alcoholic beverages
only for military installations in States which are not
contiguous with another State: Provided further, That
alcoholic beverages other than wine and malt beverages, in
contiguous States and the District of Columbia shall be
procured from the most competitive source, price and other
factors considered.
Sec. 8093. During the current fiscal year, under
regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, the
Center of Excellence for Disaster Management and Humanitarian
Assistance may also pay, or authorize payment for, the
expenses of providing or facilitating education and training
for appropriate military and civilian personnel of foreign
countries in disaster management, peace operations, and
humanitarian assistance.
Sec. 8094. (a) The Department of Defense is authorized to
enter into agreements with the Veterans Administration and
federally-funded health agencies providing services to Native
Hawaiians for the purpose of establishing a partnership
similar to the Alaska Federal Health Care Partnership, in
order to maximize Federal resources in the provision of
health care services by federally-funded health agencies,
applying telemedicine technologies. For the purpose of this
partnership, Native Hawaiians shall have the same status as
other Native Americans who are eligible for the health care
services provided by the Indian Health Service.
(b) The Department of Defense is authorized to develop a
consultation policy, consistent with Executive Order No.
13084 (issued May 14, 1998), with Native Hawaiians for the
purpose of assuring maximum Native Hawaiian participation in
the direction and administration of governmental services so
as to render those services more responsive to the needs of
the Native Hawaiian community.
(c) For purposes of this section, the term ``Native
Hawaiian'' means any individual who is a descendant of the
aboriginal people who, prior to 1778, occupied and exercised
sovereignty in the area that now comprises the State of
Hawaii.
Sec. 8095. Of the amounts appropriated in this Act for the
Arrow missile defense program under the heading ``Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'',
$131,700,000 shall be made available for the purpose of
continuing the Arrow System Improvement Program (ASIP),
continuing ballistic missile defense interoperability with
Israel, and continuing development of an Arrow production
capability in the United States.
Sec. 8096. Funds available to the Department of Defense for
the Global Positioning System during the current fiscal year
may be used to fund civil requirements associated with the
satellite and ground control segments of such system's
modernization program.

(including transfer of funds)

Sec. 8097. Of the amounts appropriated in this Act under
the heading, ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'',
$68,000,000 shall remain available until expended: Provided,
That notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary of Defense is authorized to transfer such funds to
other activities of the Federal Government.
Sec. 8098. Section 8106 of the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act, 1997 (titles I through VIII of the matter
under subsection 101(b) of Public Law 104-208; 110 Stat.
3009-111; 10 U.S.C. 113 note) shall continue in effect to
apply to disbursements that are made by the Department of
Defense in fiscal year 2003.
Sec. 8099. In addition to amounts provided in this Act,
$2,000,000 is hereby appropriated for ``Defense Health
Program'', to remain available for obligation until expended:
Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of law,
these funds shall be available only for a grant to the Fisher
House Foundation, Inc., only for the construction and
furnishing of additional Fisher Houses to meet the needs of
military family members when confronted with the illness or
hospitalization of an eligible military beneficiary.
Sec. 8100. The total amount appropriated in Title II of
this Act is hereby reduced by $51,000,000, to reflect savings
attributable to improvements in the management of advisory
and assistance services contracted by the military
departments, to be derived as follows:
``Operation and Maintenance, Army'', $11,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'', $10,000,000; and
``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force'', $30,000,000.

(including transfer of funds)

Sec. 8101. Of the amounts appropriated in this Act under
the heading ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy,''
$644,899,000 shall be available until September 30, 2003, to
fund prior year shipbuilding cost increases: Provided, That
upon enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall
transfer such funds to the following appropriations in the
amount specified: Provided further, That the amounts
transferred shall be merged with and shall be available for
the same purposes as the appropriations to which transferred:
To:
Under the heading, ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy,
1996/2003'':
LPD-17 Amphibious Transport Dock Ship Program,
$232,681,000;
Under the heading, ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy,
1998/2003'':
DDG-51 Destroyer Program, $47,400,000;
New SSN, $156,682,000;
Under the heading, ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy,
1999/2003'':
LPD-17 Amphibious Transport Dock Ship Program, $10,000,000;
DDG-51 Destroyer Program, $56,736,000;
New SSN, $120,000,000;
Under the heading, ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy,
2000/2003'':
DDG-51 Destroyer Program, $21,200,000;
Under the heading, ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy,
2001/2008'':
DDG-51 Destroyer Program, $200,000.
Sec. 8102. The Secretary of the Navy may settle, or
compromise, and pay any and all admiralty claims under 10
U.S.C. 7622 arising out of the collision involving the U.S.S.
GREENEVILLE and the EHIME MARU, in any amount and without
regard to the monetary limitations in subsections (a) and (b)
of that section: Provided, That such payments shall be made
from funds available to the Department of the Navy for
operation and maintenance.
Sec. 8103. The total amount appropriated in Title II of
this Act is hereby reduced by $97,000,000, to reflect savings
attributable to improved supervision in determining
appropriate purchases to be made using the Government
purchase card, to be derived as follows:
``Operation and Maintenance, Army'', $24,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'', $29,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps'', $3,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force'', $27,000,000; and
``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'', $14,000,000.
Sec. 8104. Funds provided for the current fiscal year or
hereafter for Operation and Maintenance for the Armed Forces
may be used, notwithstanding any other provision of law, for
the purchase of ultralightweight camouflage net systems as
unit spares.

[[Page H4105]]

(including transfer of funds)

Sec. 8105. During the current fiscal year and hereafter,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of
Defense may transfer not more than $20,000,000 of unobligated
balances remaining in a Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Army appropriation account during the last fiscal
year before the account closes under section 1552 of title 31
United States Code, to a current Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Army appropriation account to be used only
for the continuation of the Venture Capital Fund
demonstration, as originally approved in Section 8150 of
Public Law 107-117, to pursue high payoff technology and
innovations in science and technology: Provided, That any
such transfer shall be made not later than July 31 of each
year: Provided further, That funds so transferred shall be
merged with and shall be available for the same purposes and
for the same time period as the appropriation to which
transferred: Provided further, That the transfer authority
provided in this section is in addition to any other transfer
authority available to the Department of Defense: Provided
further, That, no funds for programs, projects, or activities
designated as special congressional interest items in DD Form
1414 shall be eligible for transfer under the authority of
this section: Provided further, That any unobligated balances
transferred under this authority may be restored to the
original appropriation if required to cover unexpected upward
adjustments: Provided further, That the Secretary of the Army
shall provide an annual report to the House and Senate
Appropriations Committees no later than 15 days prior to the
annual transfer of funds under authority of this section
describing the sources and amounts of funds proposed to be
transfered, summarizing the projects funded under this
demonstration program (including the name and location of
project sponsors) to date, a description of the major program
accomplishments to date, and an overall assessment of the
benefits of this demonstration program compared to the goals
expressed in the legislative history accompanying Section
8150 of Public Law 107-117.
Sec. 8106. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or
regulation, the Secretary of Defense may exercise the
provisions of 38 U.S.C. 7403(g) for occupations listed in 38
U.S.C. 7403(a)(2) as well as the following:
Pharmacists, Audiologists, and Dental Hygienists.
(A) The requirements of 38 U.S.C. 7403(g)(1)(A) shall
apply.
(B) The limitations of 38 U.S.C. 7403(g)(1)(B) shall not
apply.
Sec. 8107. Funds appropriated by this Act, or made
available by the transfer of funds in this Act, for
intelligence activities are deemed to be specifically
authorized by the Congress for purposes of section 504 of the
National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 414) during fiscal
year 2003 until the enactment of the Intelligence
Authorization Act for fiscal year 2003.
Sec. 8108. Section 1111(c) of title 10 is amended in the
first sentence by striking ``may'' after the Secretary of
Defense and inserting ``shall'' after the Secretary of
Defense.

(including transfer of funds)

Sec. 8109. During the current fiscal year, amounts in or
credited to the Defense Cooperation Account under 10 U.S.C.
2608(b) are hereby appropriated and shall be available for
obligation and expenditure consistent with the purposes for
which such amounts were contributed and accepted for transfer
by the Secretary of Defense to such appropriations or funds
of the Department of Defense as the Secretary shall
determine, to be merged with and to be available for the same
purposes and for the same time period as the appropriation or
fund to which transferred: Provided, That the Secretary shall
provide written notification to the congressional defense
committees 30 days prior to such transfer: Provided further,
That the Secretary of Defense shall report to the Congress
quarterly all transfers made pursuant to this authority:
Provided further, That this transfer authority is in addition
to any other transfer authority available to the Department
of Defense.
Sec. 8110. Notwithstanding section 1116(c) of title 10,
United States Code, payments into the Department of Defense
Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund for fiscal year
2003 under section 1116(a) of such title shall be made from
funds available in this Act for the pay of military
personnel.
Sec. 8111. None of the funds in this Act may be used to
initiate a new start program without prior notification to
the Office of Secretary of Defense and the congressional
defense committees.
Sec. 8112. The amount appropriated in title II of this Act
is hereby reduced by $470,000,000 to reflect Working Capital
Fund cash balance and rate stabilization adjustments, to be
derived as follows:
``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'', $440,000,000; and
``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force'', $30,000,000.
Sec. 8113. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Act,
the total amount appropriated in this Act is hereby reduced
by $475,000,000, to reduce excess funded carryover, to be
derived as follows:
``Operation and Maintenance, Army'', $48,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'', $285,000,000;
``Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps'', $8,000,000;
and
``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force'', $134,000,000.
Sec. 8114. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none
of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this
or any other appropriations Acts may be obligated for the
purpose of transferring the Medical Free Electron Laser
(MFEL) Program from the Department of Defense to any other
Government agency.
Sec. 8115. (a) In addition to the amounts provided
elsewhere in this Act, the amount of $4,000,000 is hereby
appropriated to the Department of Defense for ``Operation and
Maintenance, Army National Guard''. Such amount shall be made
available to the Secretary of the Army only to make a grant
in the amount of $4,000,000 to the entity specified in
subsection (b) to facilitate access by veterans to
opportunities for skilled employment in the construction
industry.
(b) The entity referred to in subsection (a) is the Center
for Military Recruitment, Assessment and Veterans Employment,
a nonprofit labor-management co-operation committee provided
for by section 302(c)(9) of the Labor-Management Relations
Act, 1947 (29 U.S.C. 186(c)(9)), for the purposes set forth
in section 6(b) of the Labor Management Cooperation Act of
1978 (29 U.S.C. 175a note).
Sec. 8116. (a) During the current fiscal year, funds
available to the Secretary of a military department for
Operation and Maintenance may be used for the purposes stated
in subsection (b) to support chaplain-led programs to assist
members of the Armed Forces and their immediate family
members in building and maintaining a strong family
structure.
(b) The purposes referred to in subsection (a) are costs of
transportation, food, lodging, supplies, fees, and training
materials for members of the Armed Forces and their family
members while participating in such programs, including
participation at retreats and conferences.
Sec. 8117. (a) Commission on Adequacy of Armed Forces
Training Facilities.--The Secretary of Defense shall
establish an advisory committee under section 173 of title
10, United States Code, to assess the availability of
adequate training facilities for the Armed Forces in the
United States and overseas and the adverse impact of
residential and industrial encroachment, requirements of
environmental laws, and other factors on military training
and the coordination of military training among the United
States and its allies.
(b) Members.--The advisory committee shall be composed of
persons who are not active-duty members of the Armed Forces
or officers or employees of the Department of Defense.
(c) Report.--Not later than July 31, 2003, the advisory
committee shall submit to the Secretary of Defense and the
congressional defense committees a report containing the
results of the assessment and such recommendations as the
committee considers necessary.
(d) Funding.--Funds for the activities of the advisory
committee shall be provided from amounts appropriated for
operation and maintenance for Defense-Wide activities for
fiscal year 2003.
Sec. 8118. (a) Limitation on Additional NMCI Contract Work
Stations.--Notwithstanding 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)
or any other provision of law, the total number of work
stations provided under the Navy-Marine Corps Intranet
contract (as defined in subsection (i) of such section 814)
may not exceed 160,000 work stations until the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics and the Chief Information Officer of the Department
of Defense certify to the congressional defense committees
that all of the conditions specified in subsection (b) have
been satisfied.
(b) Conditions.--The conditions referred to in subsection
(a) are the following:
(1) There is a full transition of not less than 20,000 work
stations to the Navy-Marine Corps Intranet.
(2) Those work stations undergo operational test and
evaluation--
(A) to evaluate and demonstrate the ability of the
infrastructure and services of the Navy-Marine Corps Intranet
to support Department of the Navy operational, office, and
business functionality and processes; and
(B) to evaluate the effectiveness and suitability of the
Navy-Marine Corps Intranet to support accomplishment of Navy
and Marine Corps missions.
(3) The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation of the
Department of Defense completes an assessment of the
operational test and evaluation and provides the results of
the assessment and recommendations to the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and the
Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense.
(4) The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics and the Chief Information Officer
of the Department of Defense determine that the results of
the test and evaluation are acceptable.
Sec. 8119. None of the funds in this Act, excluding funds
provided for advance procurement of fiscal year 2004
aircraft, may be obligated for acquisition of more than 16 F-
22 aircraft until the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics has provided to the
congressional defense committees:

[[Page H4106]]

(a) A formal risk assessment which identifies and
characterizes the potential cost, technical, schedule or
other significant risks resulting from increasing the F-22
procurement quantities prior to the conclusion of Dedicated
Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (DIOT&E) of the
aircraft: Provided, That such risk assessment shall evaluate
based on the best available current information (1) the range
of potential additional program costs (compared to the
program costs assumed in the President's fiscal year 2003
budget) that could result from retrofit modifications to F-22
production aircraft that are placed under contract or
delivered to the government prior to the conclusion of DIOT&E
and (2) a cost-benefit analysis comparing, in terms of unit
cost and total program cost, the cost advantages of
increasing aircraft production at this time to the potential
cost of retrofitting production aircraft once DIOT&E has been
completed;
(b) Certification that any future retrofit costs to F-22
production aircraft, ordered or delivered prior to the
conclusion of DIOT&E, that result from changes required from
developmental or operational test and evaluation will not
increase the total F-22 program cost as estimated in the
President's fiscal year 2003 budget; and
(c) Certification that increasing the F-22 production
quantity for fiscal year 2003 beyond 16 airplanes involves
lower risk and lower total program cost than staying at that
quantity, or he submits a revised production plan, funding
plan and test schedule.

(including transfer of funds)

Sec. 8120. Section 305(a) of the Emergency Supplemental
Act, 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-117; 115 Stat. 2300),
is amended by adding at the end the following new sentences:
``From amounts transferred to the Pentagon Reservation
Maintenance Revolving Fund pursuant to the preceding
sentence, not to exceed $305,000,000 may be transferred to
the Defense Emergency Response Fund, but only in amounts
necessary to reimburse that fund (and the category of that
fund designated as `Pentagon Repair/Upgrade') for expenses
charged to that fund (and that category) between September
11, 2001, and January 10, 2002, for reconstruction costs of
the Pentagon Reservation. Funds transferred to the Defense
Emergency Response Fund pursuant to this section shall be
available only for reconstruction, recovery, force
protection, or security enhancements for the Pentagon
Reservation.''.
Sec. 8121. (a) Termination of Crusader Artillery System.--
Consistent with the budget amendment to the fiscal year 2003
President's Budget submitted to Congress on May 29, 2002, for
termination of the Crusader Artillery System, the Department
of Defense is authorized to terminate the Crusader program.
Such termination shall be carried out in a prudent and
deliberate manner in order to provide for the orderly
termination of the program.
(b) Acceleration of Other Indirect Fire Systems.--Of the
funds appropriated or otherwise made available in this Act,
under the heading ``Research, Development, Test, and
Evaluation, Army'', $305,109,000 shall be available only to
accelerate the development, demonstration, and fielding of
indirect fire platforms, precision munitions, and related
technology.
(c) Acceleration of Objective Force Artillery and Resupply
Systems.--(1) Immediately upon termination of the Crusader
Artillery System program, the Department of the Army shall
enter into a contract to leverage technologies developed with
funds invested in fiscal year 2002 and prior years under the
Crusader Artillery System program, the Future Scout and
Cavalry System program, the Composite Armored Vehicle
program, and other Army development programs in order to
develop and field, by 2008, a Non-Line of Sight (NLOS)
Objective Force artillery system and Resupply Vehicle
variants of the Future Combat System.
(2) Of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available
in this Act under the heading ``Research, Development, Test,
and Evaluation, Army'', $368,500,000 is available only for
the Objective Force Indirect Fire Systems for the Army to
implement this subsection: Provided, That none of the funds
in this or any other Act shall be available for research,
development, test, or evaluation of any Objective Force or
Future Combat System indirect fire system until the Secretary
of the Army has submitted a written certification to the
congressional defense committees that a contract has been
awarded pursuant to subsection (c)(1) containing a program
plan and schedule for production and fielding a Future Combat
System Non-Line of Sight Objective Force artillery system and
Resupply Vehicle variants by 2008.
Sec. 8122. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality
of the United States Government, except pursuant to a
transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act
or any other appropriations Act.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Tierney

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

Amendment offered by Mr. Tierney:
In the item relating to ``Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Defense-Wide'', after the dollar amount, insert
the following: ``(reduced by $44,393,000)''.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on
the amendment. We have not seen it.
The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is reserved.
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Chairman, this defense appropriations bill allocates
some $44.4 million for space-based boost interceptors, the so-called
kinetic interceptors. According to Philip Coyle, who was the Pentagon's
chief testing evaluator last year in testimony before our Committee on
Government Reform, he indicated that this particular test program has
been pushed back indefinitely and that it is nowhere near ready to be
moved forward in terms of construction. It has not been tested
adequately.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Point of order, Mr. Chairman. Could the
gentleman provide me a copy of the amendment, please? I have not seen
it.
Mr. TIERNEY. We can. If we had had more time of when this was going
to happen, we would have been happy to do it ahead of time. Somebody is
going to have to help you out on the floor with that.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman may proceed.
Mr. TIERNEY. Again, I go to the point of Philip Coyle, who was the
director of the operations and testing evaluation program for the
Pentagon, who came out clearly and has testified before committees in
this House and has made it quite known publicly on the record both
while he was in office and since his retirement from the last
administration that the testing regime for this national missile
defense is nowhere near adequate for us to have any level of confidence
that it will be workable, particularly within the time frame that this
administration has now set forth, which they claim they are going to
have a system workable by 2004. Certainly moving forward and looking at
their proposed space-based matters, they are nowhere near that date, or
any date within a decade or more beyond that, for deployment.
However, within this budget they have some $44.4 million for space-
based boost interceptors or the so-called kinetic interceptors and it
makes no common sense at all to move forward on this until there has
been a formalized plan that lays out specifically how the system can
demonstrate its effectiveness and establish some reasonable time frame
for accomplishing the goals that the administration has in mind.
I simply put forth for this body's deliberation and consideration the
fact that we are spending money here well before it is appropriate to
do so, that the general practice had been in this House and should be
in this House that first we test and evaluate matters for their ability
to work so that we can have some confidence in their reliability before
we move forward.
It has been the experience of programs in the past that when we fail
to test first before we deploy and construct, we get burned. We end up
spending a considerable amount of money and losing a lot of time going
back to the beginning to start construction over again in accordance
with the tests and the evaluation. We have done that time after time.
In fact, that is why this House passed a law setting up the Department
of Operational Testing and Evaluation. Now we seem intent on ignoring
the advice of that body and the comments of its director and moving
forward and funding things well before their time, well before they
have been adequately tested and well before, certainly, they have met
the kind of evaluation that would give us any reasonable confidence
that this would be a reliable system.
We have many other things, Mr. Chairman, that we could be spending
money on within the defense budget. Homeland security is only one of
those that certainly has a higher priority than space-based laser
systems that so far have proved well beyond our grasp and have not been
adequately tested.
I ask that we have some consideration for that, that we strike this
44.4 million from the budget, find a better use for it next time
around, and move forward with reasonable testing and reasonable
assumptions that we are not going to build something with this
Congress' assent until it has been shown to have been adequately tested
and shown to be able to work.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Tierney amendment. The bill
before us

[[Page H4107]]

today provides $121.8 million for the initial construction of an
inadequately tested mid-course missile defense system based in Fort
Greely, Alaska. The Tierney amendment would cut these funds from Fort
Greely construction.
To start Fort Greely construction is premature, it is technologically
infeasible, and it is unrealistic. Fort Greely construction is the
first step in what would become a larger system whose final price tag
would be $238 billion by the year 2025. And no one knows if it even can
work. Do the taxpayers not deserve some amount of confidence? Do the
taxpayers not deserve to know that a $238 billion initiative is being
started with the knowledge that it is at least possible? Because right
now no one knows if it is possible or not. No problem here. Just go
right ahead and spend the money, and we will figure out later on if it
is possible.
According to the Pentagon's former chief investigator, Philip Coyle,
testing on a national missile defense program is unrealistic and it is
behind schedule. At a recent congressional briefing, Philip Coyle and
missile defense expert Dr. Lisbeth Gronlund of the Union of Concerned
Scientists testified that 15 of 17 critical components needed for
interceptor deployment at Fort Greely will not be completed by the year
2004. Why? The technology simply is not at the required level. No
problem here. Just spend the money, regardless.
Up to the present time, missile tests have failed to distinguish the
target from a decoy except when the decoy has been made unrealistically
easy to detect and smash, kind of like putting up a ``hit me'' sign
electronically. There is even reason to question the success of the
decoy hits. A General Accounting Office investigation found that
defense contractors who conducted decoy tests found serious flaws in a
1997 test that the contractors had claimed was successful. I think
America is learning about corruption involving corporations.
The administration has promised to have this site at least partially
operational by 2004. However, the Defense Department has moved to put
these accelerated plans under greater secrecy from Congress and the
public by exempting missile defense projects from planning and
reporting requirements, ending reports to Congress with detailed cost
estimates and timetables and pulling the plug on disclosing the results
of missile defense tests to the public. Can there be any greater
example of why there is an urgent need to get a handle on this program?
The taxpayers are being asked to give this program a blank check, and
no one even knows that it works. As a matter of fact, we have got
plenty of evidence that it does not work, and it is all going to be
hush-hush, a secret. With evidence of testing flaws in the past, it is
a little bit too much to go along with the military contractors who are
saying, Just trust us. How is Congress or the public expected to take
military contractors' word or the Pentagon's word on the success of
missile defense tests? And think of what it means to the American
people if we rely on this to protect us and the results of tests have
been phonied up. Yet all this money is being spent, instead of putting
money where it really ought to be, developing technologies for peaceful
resolution of our conflicts.
The missile defense system is being built when the Defense Department
does not have the tools to make it work. Construction is being rushed
ahead on false premises and false promises. The Department of Defense
has failed to successfully test the main components of the missile
defense program. Now, as more money is being sought for this
boondoggle, the Department of Defense refuses to show where the money
is going or how it is being used. The American taxpayers have a right
to demand how their hard-earned tax dollars are being spent on programs
in every place in government. And here it becomes even more important
when the defense of our country is on the line.

{time} 1200

If Congress appropriates these funds, it will be impossible to hold
the Department of Defense accountable. Congress should not continue to
throw good money after bad. Vote ``yes'' on the Tierney amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) still
reserve his point of order?
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I do not believe a point of
order applies to this amendment. So let me say, I was going to rise and
suggest that we oppose the amendment.
The gentleman who is speaking to the amendment, however, talked about
a program that was going to spend X number of tens of millions of
dollars, and claiming we do not know if it will work or not. But the
amendment he is speaking to essentially, Mr. Chairman, would eliminate
research on that very program to determine its feasibility, and whether
it will work.
The CHAIRMAN. So the gentleman withdraws his point of order.
Is there anyone else who wishes to be heard on the amendment?
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, this month, like thousands of proud parents from around
the country, I attended the graduation ceremonies for my two daughters,
one an educator, one a physician. As I watched my oldest prepare to
return to our hometown with her physician husband, both of them to care
for people there, I was mindful of the guidance given to doctors from
as far back as we can remember: ``First, do no harm.''
I think that the Administration and supporters of this bill would do
well to heed this cornerstone of medicine as they continue to pursue an
insular defense policy--without the agreement of many of our allies,
and without truly the consent of this Congress. This misguided policy
emphasizes nuclear missile defense from space and abandons the
Antiballistic Missile Treaty, which has played such an important role
in keeping nuclear Armageddon at bay.
The Administration has also abandoned the wisdom, extensive writing,
and testimony of Dr. Steven Weinberg, a Nobel-Prize-winning physicist
at the University of Texas at Austin, who concludes that this system
will ``harm our security,'' not strengthen it.
There is no shortage of reasons why a space-based ``Star Wars''
sequel is undesirable. It targets too many of our resources toward the
least likely threat. We all know and are reminded each evening on the
nightly news that terrorists have many other ways to deliver
destruction to our country and threaten the security of our families.
Perhaps the least likely way is some type of missile that would be
clearly identified as to its source and which could be the target of a
space-based missile defense system.
The Star Wars plan diverts billions of dollars that we need to meet
the obligation to our children, to our seniors, to our families, and to
address other more immediate homeland security needs. Of course, NMD
also requires the technology to hit a bullet with a bullet, to
distinguish the bullet from the decoys, and to target bullets that come
in a wobbly fashion and a nonwobbly fashion. Doing all of this requires
what I suggest is truly a ``faith-based initiative,'' because it takes
immense faith to believe that such a space-based system will even work.
But chief among the reasons to oppose this plan and to support the
Tierney amendment is that admonition to our physicians: ``First, do no
harm.''
In working to build a world worthy of our children, the false
security of space-based missile defense is far outweighed by the
warning of former defense Secretary William Perry, that ``even a
relatively small deployment of defensive weapons could trigger a
considerable nuclear arms race.'' With all of the recent loose talk in
Washington about first strikes, about increased reliance on nuclear
weapons and new ways with new weapons, this is not talk and this is not
a system that adds to the security of our families; it jeopardizes that
security.
Intercontinental ballistic missiles are hardly America's greatest
threat. The most serious nuclear threat we have is that there are so
many weapons here and abroad that remain on hair-trigger alert and the
risk that some nuclear device will be smuggled into our country on a
truck, in a boat, or by some other means that could expose us to
danger.
Now, the Administration and this bill seek over $44 million for
space-based boost interceptors. The sky is the limit. This is part of a
broader package

[[Page H4108]]

where we spent billions of dollars already and billions more are being
requested over time. I think we need to draw a line at the heavens.
If wisdom's price is suffering, we cannot afford to belatedly learn
that proceeding unilaterally with Star Wars is going to get the job
done. It is not enough to learn by and by if the system works. It is
not enough to let ``by and by'' be the words to spend more and more
taxpayer resources on a system that does not work.
The modern version of the Hippocratic oath states, ``A prevention is
preferable to a cure.'' Instead of spending billions to try to build a
shield to blunt the sword, our focus should be on the resources, on the
diplomacy, to keep that sword from ever being forged or drawn in the
first place.
Mr. Chairman, I urge support of the Tierney amendment. I believe it
will add to the security of American families.
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.
Mr. TIERNEY. 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 Massachusetts (Mr.
Tierney) will be postponed.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there further amendments?
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
(Mr. LINDER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this
legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of both this rule and the underlying
legislation, H.R. 5010, the Fiscal Year 2003 Defense Appropriations
bill. This is an open and fair rule that will allow the House to work
its will on the Defense Appropriations bill.
Over the past decade, the Armed Forces of this country have excelled
beyond our expections. Since 1991, the U.S. military has been involved
in over 40 different conflicts around the globe--nearly four times the
number of engagements than the previous four and a half decades! Yet
this government, more specifically the previous Administration, has
asked our men and women to perform more of these duties with
increasingly less support. I believe that time has come to put an end
to this policy, and to provide the support our men and women in uniform
deserve.
That is why I rise in support of H.R. 5010. This legislation
represents the largest increase in defense spending in two decades, and
provides a 4.1 percent increase in pay for our military personnel,
adequate funding to maintain our current defense systems, and provides
support for new, innovative systems, including full funding for the F-
22. The F-22, built primarily by the dedicated men and women of
Lockheed Martin in my home state of Georgia, will revolutionize our
nation's Air Force, save the lives of American pilots, and ensure that
the United States retains its dominance over the skies.
In addition to the best possible equipment, this legislation also
ensures our support for the best possible training for our increasingly
called-upon military reservists, such as funding for flight training
devices for the 94th Airlift Wing at Dobbins Air Reserve Base in
Marietta, Georgia.
As an individual who has served in U.S. Air Force myself, I am
pleased to see this Administration and this Congress realize the
significance of our military to freedom and democracy. I have worked
closely with my good friend, Subcommittee Chairman Jerry Lewis, to
provide the best for our nation's military, and I thank him not only
for his leadership on this legislation, but also for his commitment to
defending the citizens of this country.
This past January, President Bush stood before this House and
announced his intention to rebuild our military, to lead this nation
against the scourge of international terrorism, and to root out those
who seek to harm the citizens of this country. He has delivered on his
promise, Mr. Chairman, and it is now time for us to deliver on ours.
That is why I urge my colleagues to vote for this rule, vote for the
underlying legislation, and give our men and women in uniform the
support, dedication, and commitment that they have given to us.
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
(Mr. DICKS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this bill.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the FY03 Defense
Appropriations Act, and I want to thank Chairman Lewis and Ranking
Member Murtha for putting together a great defense bill. This bill will
substantially improve the lives of the soldiers, sailors, and airmen of
the U.S. armed services as they carry on the nation's defense. I
particularly want to make note of the Committee's work to fully fund
the conversion of the Trident submarine into an SSGN conventional
strike platform. Last year, Chairman Lewis, Mr. Murtha and our entire
subcommittee added over $300 million to the FY02 Defense bill to get
this program started. Today's bill includes $907 million to refuel and
convert two Tridents into SSGNs. This bill also takes the first step in
realizing the Air Force's vision for a common Widebody Aircraft to use
for Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance. It includes $596
million to purchase and outfit one 767 aircraft as the first Air Force
Multimission Command and Control Aircraft (MC2A). I also want to
commend the Committee for including $10 million to fund a new medical
technology, Remote Acoustic Hemostatis, which can be used by field
medics to stop traumatic bleeding on the battlefield. In my home
district, we lost a fine soldier, Sgt. 1st Class Nathan Chapman of Ft.
Lewis, in Afghanistan due to catastrophic bleeding. I believe this
technology will let us prevent this kind of death in a few years.
As good as this bill is, Mr. Chairman, it does include one glaring
weakness. The committee struck the best balance for meeting our defense
obligations that it could given the top line constraints imposed by the
Budget Committee and the Republican leadership. However, it barely
begins to address what I call the Crisis in Procurement. The
committee's recommendation of $70,285,272,000 for defense procurement
is an increase of $9,420,324,000 over the amount approved for fiscal
year 2002, and it is an increase of $3,065,238,000 over the President's
budget request. However, despite the committee's best efforts, it has
not changed the fundamental fact that the Defense Department
procurement budget is in crisis.
Numerous reputable studies performed in the last several years have
affirmed this growing crisis. Even the most conservative analysis
conducted by the Congressional Budget Office has found that the
procurement budget needs to be increased to at least $94 billion in
order to sustain the military force structure that has now been
ratified in the Quadrennial Defense Review. Other credible outside
studies have reached estimates of over $120 billion. DOD's own studies
on procurement needs, performed by the individual Services and the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, show a requirement for $100-110 billion. The
Navy has testified to Congress that it faces a procurement shortfall of
$10 billion a year, and CBO estimates that including the Marine Corps
this shortfall is $12 billion. The Air Force has told Congress of a
shortfall of $14 billion, and the Army has a shortfall estimated by CBO
at $5 billion a year.
The effects of this crisis are all too visible in the procurement
programs and in the condition of military equipment and service
maintenance budget. The cost and length of individual procurement
programs have reached absurdity as buy quantities are reduced to
minimum levels driving up unit costs. Drawn out procurement programs
mean that average equipment ages are increasing rapidly. The average
age of Air Force aircraft has increased by 24 percent in the last
decade. Navy aircraft average age has increased 21 percent since 1990.
The average age of Army helicopters has increased 12 percent since
1990. These increases have occurred even as force structure is reduced
and the oldest equipment is retired. Furthermore, the current rate of
procurement of Navy ships will lead to a fleet of only 230 ships by
2030.

The impact on operation and maintenance budgets is severe. The number
of maintenance hours required for each aircraft flying hour is
skyrocketing. For example, the Air Force had a 293 percent increase in
the number of maintenance hours per flying hour on the F-15E from 1992
to 1999. The Navy experienced a 227 percent increase in the number of
maintenance hours per flying hour on the F-14 in the same period. The
direct effect is a dramatic increase in the Air Force budget for flying
hours, more than 45 percent above inflation in the last five years. And
the Navy's cost of Aviation Depot Level Repairables increased 68
percent between 1996 and 1999.
The President's proposed $48 billion increase for defense spending
contained only a $7.6 billion increase for procurement. That means that
despite the crisis in procurement spending, if the committee had
accepted the President's budget recommendation, growth in procurement
funds for fiscal year 2003 would have been slower than the growth in
the overall defense budget. The fiscal year 2003 budget request follows
the first Bush defense budget in which procurement was actually lower
than the last defense budget of the Clinton Administration. More
important, the size of the shortfall in procurement funding is more
than

[[Page H4109]]

4 times the increase proposed for procurement in the President's FY03
budget.
The credibility of studies by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, CBO and the
other higher estimates are strongly reinforced by a consideration of
the historical patterns of defense spending. The current budget for
procurement is less than half what it was at the peak of the Reagan
years in 1985 when considered in constant dollars. Operations and
maintenance spending, on the other hand, now exceeds the peak of the
Reagan years even though our military force structure is about one
third smaller. As a result, procurement, which was 25 percent of the
defense budget in 1980 under President Carter, and 34 percent in 1985,
is now only 19 percent of the budget. This historically low level is
inadequate for sustaining our current force structure, let alone for
transforming the military into a 21st Century fighting force.
There remains one more chance this year to begin addressing the
crisis in procurement when the Department of Defense requests and the
committee considers the $10 billion contingency fund for FY03. This
fund must begin the process of modernizing our oldest military
equipment. The longer we delay in facing up to this problem, the
greater the cost of the solution and the more severe the crisis in both
condition and quantity of the systems that we ask our military to use
in our nation's defense. We owe it to our men and women in uniform and
to the entire nation to step up to this crisis in procurement and
commit ourselves to provide the sustained level of resources that will
solve it.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Kucinich

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Will the gentleman transmit the amendment to the Chair.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, we have not seen the
amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. Kucinich:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following new section:
Sec. . Of the total amount appropriated pursuant to
this Act for any component of the Department of Defense that
the Director of the Office of Management and Budget has
identified (as of the date of the enactment of this Act)
under subsection (c) of section 3515 of title 31, United
States Code, as being required to have audited financial
statements meeting the requirements of subsection (b) of that
section, not more than 99 percent may be obligated until the
Inspector General of the Department of Defense expresses an
opinion on the audited financial statements of that component
pursuant to section 3521(e) of title 31, United States Code.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on
the amendment.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, today I am offering an amendment to the
Defense Appropriations bill that will withhold 1 percent of the budget
of any component of the Department of Defense from being obligated if
that component has not passed the test of the Department of Defense
Inspector General audit.
This extraordinary measure is required to protect the taxpayer, since
no major part of the Pentagon has ever passed the test of an
independent audit since audits were mandated by the CFO Act in 1990.
The GAO found in its 2001 High-Risk Series Report that, of 22 high-
risk operations listed in the GAO report, six are Department of Defense
programs, more than any other agency.
According to the report, DOD could not match $22 billion worth of
expenditures to the items they purchased. The Navy wrote off as lost
over $3 billion worth of in-transit inventory. The Department of
Defense also purchases material it does not need. Based on current
requirements, over $1.6 billion of inventory should not have been
ordered. Nor are these problems recent phenomena.
In March, 2000, the Pentagon Inspector General found that, of $7.6
trillion in accounting entries, $2.3 trillion were not supported, and
this is a quote, ``were not supported by adequate audit trails or is
sufficient evidence to determine their validity.''
At a March, 2001, hearing of the Committee on Government Reform
Subcommittee on National Security, Veterans' Affairs, and International
Relations, of which I am the ranking member, United States Comptroller
General David Walker gave the Department of Defense an F on financial
management. When asked, he admitted that it is probably the worst of
any Federal agency in this respect.
Bad accounting practices have left troops vulnerable to biological
and chemical weapon attacks, and I want every Member of the House to
follow this. At a hearing last week of the same Committee on Government
Reform subcommittee, the GAO reported on the results of their effort to
track a single procurement item through the maze of different
accounting, inventory and financial management systems at the
Department of Defense.
The GAO chose one item, a suit worn by service members to protect
themselves in the event of a chemical or biological weapon attack.
Obviously, in light of the anthrax attacks and our military's
deployment and prospective deployment to various parts of the world,
these suits are extremely sought after. The Department is spending over
a billion dollars to buy these suits at $200 apiece. The Pentagon has
plans to buy 4.4 million of these suits, but to date they have issued
only a quarter of these.
According to the official in charge of this program, service members
have been clamoring for these suits to protect them from biological and
chemical weapon attacks. Despite the intense demand within the
military, the GAO found that the Pentagon is simultaneously selling the
same suits at a deep discount on the Internet for $3 apiece. That is a
99 percent discount from what it cost the U.S. taxpayers. The
Pentagon's accounting systems are so bad that several military units
actually thought they had an excess of the protective suits. As a
result, they went ahead and resold their suits to the public through
actions and on the Internet. Our troops have been left unprotected from
biological and chemical attacks by bad accounting practices in the
Department of Defense, and the taxpayer continues to have their money
mistreated.
Mr. Chairman, we even had testimony in committee this week that says
that of 1.6 million protective suits that have been requisitioned, the
Pentagon cannot even locate 1.2 million. I want to say that again. Of
1.6 million protective suits that have been requisitioned, the Pentagon
cannot locate 1.2 million suits that would be used to put on our troops
so they would be able to be protected against any chemical or
biological weapons attack.
We have an obligation to the men and women who serve to say that the
Department of Defense has to be accountable. My amendment withholds
only 1 percent of defense funding to encourage the Department of
Defense to follow the law to ensure taxpayer money is accounted for, to
ensure that the men and women who serve will get the equipment that
they need, to make sure that our national defense will be the highest
priority; and we cannot do that if we do not have any ability to
control the spending and if we do not have any ability to monitor where
all of these materials are.
They cannot locate 1.2 million protective suits. Can the Members
imagine that on the eve of the difficulties we have with Iraq?
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) has
expired.
(On request of Mr. Doggett, and by unanimous consent, Mr. Kucinich
was allowed to proceed for 1 additional minute.)
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. KUCINICH. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chairman, is the gentleman aware that the
President's budget, a new feature of it, was to give a performance
grade on all the different agencies in government and that on the very
issues that the gentleman from Ohio is talking about, the Office of
Management and Budget itself gave an F, a failing grade, to the
Department of Defense? If the gentleman could answer on that and if you
could tell us how the security of our men and women in arms, in harm's
way, is advanced by the kind of accounting failures that would test
even the talents of Arthur Andersen to justify.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, obviously, the gentleman from Texas's
(Mr. Doggett) question is well taken because the Pentagon cannot pass a
test of an audit. Not only that, but they do not know where their
equipment is. Here is a case where 1.2 million protective suits cannot
be located. That is incomprehensible. That ought to cause people at the
high levels in the Army to shake in their boots.
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chairman, does the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.

[[Page H4110]]

Kucinich) think it would be better if we gave them more money to
manage?
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, think about that. Of course they should
not have more money. The point of this amendment is that we take away 1
percent until they could pass an independent audit.

{time} 1215

Point of Order

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, because this is legislation on
an appropriations bill, and just as importantly, because we did not
have the courtesy of seeing it before the case, I must object to the
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman insists on his point of order?
Mr. LEWIS of California. I insist on my point of order, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, would the gentleman please restate his
point of order?
Mr. LEWIS of California. I object on the ground that this is
legislation on an appropriations bill; and because of that, it is
subject to a point of order, I believe, and I place that point of order
and I object.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) wish to be
heard on the point of order?
Mr. KUCINICH. I certainly do.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I want to state that as a matter of law,
this amendment complies with the rules of the House. The Department of
Defense Inspector General is required by the Chief Financial Officers
Act of 1990 to perform audits. There can be no dispute about that.
This law requires the Inspector General to report its findings to
Congress. It cannot be disputed. The Comptroller General of the United
States sets accounting standards for the United States Government,
absolutely true. These standards are required to be followed by the
Inspector General in the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990.
Mr. Chairman, I have just stated chapter and verse why this amendment
is in order. It is not legislating on an appropriation bill. Anyone
familiar with these laws, with the Inspector General act, with the
Chief Financial Officers Act, with the comptroller general's
responsibilities for setting accounting standards, and with the
standards required to be followed by the IG and the chief financial
officer knows that we certainly are in a position of being able to
offer this amendment and to call on a vote on it.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) wish to
be heard further on this point of order?
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I have made a point of order
because this is legislation on an appropriations bill, and it violates
clause 2, rule XXI. I understand the rule is that an amendment to a
general appropriation bill shall not be in order if it changes existing
law.
Further, Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that expressing an
opinion is not required under the CFO act.
I ask for a ruling of the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is prepared to rule on the point of order.
The gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) makes a point of order that
the amendment changes existing law in violation of clause 2 of rule
XXI. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) has the burden to show that
the amendment does not change existing law.
In the opinion of the Chair, the gentleman has failed to meet his
burden as to showing that, under law, the Inspector General is required
to express an opinion on the financial statements, beyond the general
auditing requirement in 31 U.S.C. 3521(e).
The point of order is sustained.
Are there any further amendments?