[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 14, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S289-S293]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. Specter, Ms. Cantwell, Mrs. 
        Clinton, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Carper, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Durbin, 
        Mr. Leahy, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Craig, Mr. Warner, Mrs. Murray, 
        Mr. Edwards, Ms. Collins, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Allen, Ms. Landrieu, 
        Mr. Kohl, and Ms. Stabenow):
  S. 152. A bill to assess the extent of the backlog in DNA analysis of 
rape kit samples, and to improve investigation and prosecution of 
sexual assault cases with DNA evidence; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I rise along with the distinguished Senior 
Senator from Pennsylvania, Senator Specter, to introduce the DNA Sexual 
Assault Justice Act of 2003, a bill that guarantees prompt justice to 
victims of sexual assault crimes through DNA technology. This bill is 
not new to my colleagues. Last session, I introduced the DNA Sexual 
Assault Justice Act with Senators Specter, Cantwell, Clinton, and 
Schumer. The bill was voted favorably out of the Judiciary Committee 
with the key support of my good friend across the aisle, Senator 
Specter. And in September, with twenty co-sponsors, Republicans and 
Democrats, the DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act unanimously passed the 
Senate. Regrettably, our House counterparts were not able to act so 
quickly or decisively on a DNA bill, so I am back to re-introduce the 
bill and to urge quick passage of the DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act of 
2003. I am pleased that, once again, this bill has strong bipartisan 
support and I look forward to working with my good friend from Utah, 
the distinguished Senior Senator, Senator Hatch, in acting promptly in 
marking up this bill when he assumes chairmanship of the Judiciary 
Committee.
  Promoting and supporting DNA technology as a crime-fighting tool is 
not a new endeavor for me. A provision of my 1994 Crime Bill created 
the Combined DNA Index System, called ``CODIS'', which is an electronic 
database of DNA profiles, much like the FBI's fingerprint database. 
CODIS includes two kinds of DNA information, convicted offender DNA 
samples and DNA from crime scenes. CODIS uses the two indexes to 
generate investigative leads in crimes where biological evidence is 
recovered from the scene. In essence, CODIS facilitates the DNA match. 
And once that match is made a crime is solved because of the incredible 
accuracy and durability of DNA evidence.
  99.9 percent--that is how accurate DNA evidence is. 1 in 30 billion, 
those are the odds someone else committed a crime if a suspect's DNA 
matches evidence at the crime scene. 20 or 30 years, that is how long 
DNA evidence from a crime scene lasts.
  Just ten years ago DNA analysis of evidence could have cost thousands 
of dollars and taken months; now testing one sample costs $40 and can 
take days. Ten years ago forensic scientists needed blood the size of a 
bottle cap, now DNA testing can be done on a sample the size of a 
pinhead. The changes in DNA technology are remarkable, and mark a sea 
change in how we can fight crime, particularly sexual assault crimes.
  The FBI reports that since 1998 the national DNA database has helped 
put away violent criminals in 6,257 investigations in 40 States. How? 
By matching the DNA crime evidence to the DNA profiles of offenders. 
Individual success stories of DNA ``cold hits'' in sexual assault cases 
make these numbers all too real.
  Just last month, Alabama authorities charged a man in the rape of an 
85-year-old woman almost ten years ago after he was linked to the case 
by a DNA sample he was compelled to submit while in prison on unrelated 
charges.
  In Colorado Springs, CO, a trial will soon begin of a man accused of 
at least fourteen rapes and sexual assaults. Due to the national DNA 
database, prosecutors were able to trace the defendant to rapes and 
assaults that occurred in Colorado, California, Arizona, Nevada and 
Oklahoma between 1999 and 2002.
  In Florida, Kellie Green was brutally attacked and raped in the 
laundry room of her apartment complex. Because of lack of funds, her 
rape kit sat on the shelf for three years until a persistent detective 
had it analyzed. The evidence matched the profile of a man already 
incarcerated for beating and raping a woman 6 weeks before Kellie.
  Or take, for example, a 1996 case in St. Louis where two young girls 
were abducted from bus stops and raped at opposite ends of the city. 
The police were unable to identify a suspect. In 1999, the police 
decided to re-run the DNA testing to develop new leads. In January 
2000, the DNA database matched the case to a 1999 rape case, and police 
were able to identify the perpetrator.
  Last spring, the New York Police Department arrested a man linked to 
the rape of a woman years ago. In 1997, a woman was horribly beaten, 
robbed and raped, there were no suspects. Five years later, the 
perpetrator submitted a DNA sample as a condition of probation after 
serving time for burglary. The DNA sample matched the DNA from the 1997 
rape. Crime solved, streets safer.
  Undoubtedly, DNA matching by comparing evidence gathered at the crime 
scene with offender samples entered on the national DNA database has 
proven to be the deciding factor in solving stranger sexual assault 
cases--it has revolutionized the criminal justice system, and brought 
closure and justice for victims.
  In light of the past successes and the future potential of DNA 
evidence, the reports about the backlog of untested rape kits and other 
crime scene evidence waiting in police warehouses are simply shocking. 
It is a national problem, plaguing both urban and rural areas, that 
deserves national attention and solutions. One woman, in particular, 
has reminded State and Federal lawmakers that we cannot ignore even one 
rape kit sitting on a shelf gathering dust, Debbie Smith. In 1989, Mrs. 
Smith was brutally taken from her home and raped. There were no known 
suspects and Mrs. Smith lived in fear of her attacker's return. Six 
years later, the Virginia crime laboratory discovered a DNA match 
between the rape scene evidence and a State prisoner's DNA sample. Mrs. 
Smith had her first moment of real security and closure and since then, 
she has traveled the country to advocate on behalf of assault victims 
and champion the use of DNA to fight sexual assault. I am pleased that 
the DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act of 2003 bears a provision entitled, 
``The Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grants.''
  Today I am introducing legislation, ``The DNA Sexual Assault Justice 
Act of 2003'', to strengthen the existing Federal DNA regime as an 
effective crimefighting tool. My bill addresses five pressing issues.
  First, exactly how bad is the backlog of untested rape kits 
nationwide? A

[[Page S290]]

1999 government report found over 180,000 rape kits were sitting, 
untested, on the storage shelves of police department and crime 
laboratories all across the country.
  While recent press reports estimate that the number today is 
approaching 500,000 untested rape kits, I am told that there are no 
current, accurate numbers of the backlog. Behind every single one of 
those rape kits is a victim who deserves recognition and justice. 
Accordingly, my legislation would require the Attorney General to 
survey law enforcement agencies nationwide to assess the extent of the 
backlog of rape kits waiting to undergo DNA testing. To combat the 
problem of rape kit backlogs, it is imperative to know the real 
numbers, and how best to utilize Federal resources.
  Second, how can existing Federal law be strengthened to make sure 
that State crime labs have the funds for the critical DNA analysis 
needed to solve sex assault cases? To fight crime most effectively, we 
must both test rape kits and enter convicted offender DNA samples into 
the DNA database. There has been explosive growth in the use of 
forensic sciences by law enforcement. A government survey found that in 
2000 alone, crime labs received 31,000 cases--a 47 percent increase 
from almost 21,000 cases in 1999. In addition, the labs received 
177,000 convicted offender DNA samples, an almost 77 percent increase 
from 100,242 samples in 1999.
  The backlog in DNA testing is found all across the country. Last 
month a Michigan newspaper reported that its State police forensic unit 
is expected to have a 10-year backlog of items in need of DNA testing. 
Similar news reports are elsewhere. The Florida crime lab system is 
facing a backlog of more than 2,400 rape, murder and assault and 
burglary cases with DNA evidence waiting for testing. In North 
Carolina, up to 20,000 rape kit tests sit on evidence shelves because 
the lab does not have the resources to conduct timely DNA testing.
  Many crime laboratories report personnel shortages in the face of 
this overwhelming work. According to a government survey, on average, 
there are 6 employees in a State crime lab, a lab that must not only 
conduct DNA testing for hundreds of cases, but also run forensic tests 
on blood, footprints or ballistic evidence.
  The bill I'm introducing would: 1. Increase current funding levels to 
both test rape kits and to process and upload offender samples; and 2. 
allow local governments to apply directly to the Justice Department for 
these grants. I thank my colleagues Senators Kohl and DeWine who began 
this effort with the DNA Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 and 
acknowledge their ongoing interest in this area.
  Third, what assistance does the FBI need to keep up with the crushing 
number of DNA samples which need to be tested or stored in the national 
database? I am told that the current national DNA database, ``CODIS'', 
is nearing capacity of convicted offender DNA samples. My bill would 
provide funds to the FBI to 1. Upgrade the national DNA computer 
database to handle the huge projections of samples; and 2. process and 
upload Federal convicted offender DNA samples into the database.

  Efforts to include more Federal and State convicted offenders in our 
database just makes plain sense to fight crime. We know that sexual 
assault is a crime with one of the highest rates of recidivism, and 
that many sexual assault crimes are committed by those with past 
convictions for other kinds of crime. Their DNA samples from prior 
convictions help law enforcement efforts enormously. We cannot wait; 
the 2001 FBI crime records show that one forcible rape occurs every 5.8 
minutes, and the most recent reports from the first six months of 2002 
indicate a 1.8 percent increase in the number of rapes as compared to 
2001 statistics.
  Fourth, what additional tools are needed to help treat victims of 
sexual assault? One group that understands the importance of gathering 
credible DNA evidence are forensic sexual assault examiners, who are 
sensitive to the trauma of this horrible crime and make sure that 
patients are not revictimized in the aftermath. These programs should 
be in each and every emergency room and play an integral role in police 
departments to bridge the gap between the law and the medicine.
  I first recognized the importance of sexual assault nurse examiners 
in solving rape cases when I authored the Violence Against Women Act. A 
key provision in the Violence Against Women Act requires the Attorney 
General to evaluate and recommend standards for training and practice 
for licensed health care professionals performing sexual assault 
forensic exams. So I knew that any DNA bill aimed at ending sexual 
assault must include resources for sexual forensic examiners, and not 
just one type. My bill ensures that sexual forensic nurses, doctors, 
and response teams are all eligible for assistance.
  Tapping the power of DNA requires well-trained law enforcement who 
know how to collect and preserve DNA evidence from the crime scene. 
Training should be a matter of course for all law enforcement. No rape 
kit evidence will lead to the perpetrator if the DNA evidence is 
collected improperly.
  The DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act would create a new grant program 
to carry out sexual assault examiner programs and training. And it 
would train law enforcement personnel and prosecutors in the handling 
of sexual assault cases, including drug-facilitated assaults, and the 
collection and use of DNA samples for use as forensic evidence at 
trial.
  Fifth, what can be done to ensure that sexual assault offenders who 
cannot be identified by their victim are nevertheless brought to 
justice?
  Profound injustice is done to rape victims when delayed DNA testing 
leads to a ``cold hit'' after the statute of limitations has expired. 
For example, Jeri Elster was brutally raped in her California home, and 
for years the police were unable to solve the crime. Seven years later, 
DNA from the rape matched a man in jail for an unrelated crime. Yet the 
rapist was never charged, convicted or sentenced because California's 
statute of limitations had expired the previous year.
  The DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act of 2003 would change current law 
to authorize Federal ``John Doe/DNA indictments'' that will permit 
Federal prosecutors to issue an indictment identifying an unknown 
defendant by his DNA profile within the five year statute of 
limitations. Once outstanding, the DNA indictment would permit 
prosecution at anytime once there was a DNA ``cold hit'' through the 
national DNA database system.
  John Doe/DNA indictments strike the right balance between encouraging 
swift and efficient investigations, recognizing the durability and 
credibility of DNA evidence and preventing an injustice if a cold hit 
happens years after the crime. Criminal law must catch up with DNA 
technology without the wholesale eradication of prevailing statutes of 
limitations.
  I started looking at the issue of improved prosecution of sexual 
assault crimes almost two decades ago when I began drafting the 
Violence Against Women Act. The DNA Sexual Justice Act of 2003 is the 
next step, a way to connect the dots between the extraordinary strides 
in DNA technology and my commitment to ending violence against women. 
We must ensure that justice delayed is not justice denied.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 152

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``DNA Sexual Assault Justice 
     Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. ASSESSMENT OF BACKLOG IN DNA ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES.

       (a) Assessment.--The Attorney General, acting through the 
     Director of the National Institute of Justice, shall survey 
     Federal, State, local, and tribal law enforcement 
     jurisdictions to assess the amount of DNA evidence contained 
     in rape kits and in other evidence from sexual assault crimes 
     that has not been subjected to testing and analysis.
       (b) Report.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall submit to 
     Congress a report on the assessment carried out under 
     subsection (a).
       (2) Contents.--The report submitted under paragraph (1) 
     shall include--
       (A) the results of the assessment carried out under 
     subsection (a);
       (B) the number of rape kit samples and other evidence from 
     sexual assault crimes

[[Page S291]]

     that have not been subjected to DNA testing and analysis; and
       (C) a plan for carrying out additional assessments and 
     reports on the backlog in crime scene DNA testing and 
     analysis.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Department of Justice to carry out 
     this section $500,000 for fiscal year 2004.

     SEC. 3. THE DEBBIE SMITH DNA BACKLOG GRANT PROGRAM.

       Section 2 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 
     2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135) is amended--
       (1) by striking the heading and inserting ``AUTHORIZATION 
     OF DEBBIE SMITH DNA BACKLOG GRANTS.''; and
       (2) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``including samples from 
     rape kits and samples from other sexual assault evidence, 
     including samples taken in cases with no identified suspect'' 
     after ``crime scene''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) To ensure that DNA testing and analysis of samples 
     from rape kits and nonsuspect cases are carried out in a 
     timely manner.''.

     SEC. 4. INCREASED GRANTS FOR ANALYSIS OF DNA SAMPLES FROM 
                   CONVICTED OFFENDERS AND CRIME SCENES.

       Section 2(j) of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 
     2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135(j)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end; 
     and
       (B) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(C) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       ``(D) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       ``(E) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;
       ``(F) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
       ``(G) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2008.
     Amounts made available to carry out the purposes specified in 
     subsection (a)(1) shall remain available until expended.''; 
     and
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking subparagraphs (C) and (D) 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(C) $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       ``(D) $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       ``(E) $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;
       ``(F) $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2007; and
       ``(G) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2008.
     Amounts made available to carry out the purposes specified in 
     paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (a) shall remain 
     available until expended.''.

     SEC. 5. AUTHORITY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO APPLY FOR AND 
                   RECEIVE DNA BACKLOG ELIMINATION GRANTS.

       Section 2 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 
     2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in the matter preceeding paragraph (1)--
       (i) by inserting ``, units of local government, or Indian 
     tribes'' after ``eligible States''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``, unit of local government, or Indian 
     tribe'' after ``State''; and
       (B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``or by units of local 
     government'' and inserting ``, units of local government, or 
     Indian tribes'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting 
     ``or unit of local government, or the head of the Indian 
     tribe'' after ``State'' each place that term appears;
       (B) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``, unit of local 
     government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State'';
       (C) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``, unit of local 
     government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State'' the first time 
     that term appears;
       (D) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``, unit of local 
     government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State''; and
       (E) in paragraph (5), by inserting ``, unit of local 
     government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State'';
       (3) in subsection (c), by inserting ``, unit of local 
     government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State'';
       (4) in subsection (d)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``or a unit of local 
     government'' and inserting ``, a unit of local government, or 
     an Indian tribe''; and
       (ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``or a unit of local 
     government'' and inserting ``, a unit of local government, or 
     an Indian tribe''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting ``, units of local 
     government, and Indian tribes,'' after ``States'';
       (5) in subsection (e)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``or local government'' 
     after ``State'' each place that term appears; and
       (B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``, unit of local 
     government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State'';
       (6) in subsection (f), in the matter preceeding paragraph 
     (1), by inserting ``, unit of local government, or Indian 
     tribe'' after ``State'';
       (7) in subsection (g)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``, unit of local 
     government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``, units of local 
     government, or Indian tribes'' after ``States''; and
       (8) in subsection (h), by inserting ``, unit of local 
     government, or Indian tribe'' after ``State'' each place that 
     term appears.

     SEC. 6. IMPROVING ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR BACKLOG GRANTS.

       Section 2 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 
     2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) in paragraph (5), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) if the applicant is a unit of local government, 
     certify that the applicant participates in a State laboratory 
     system;
       ``(7) provide assurances that, not later than 3 years after 
     the date on which the application is submitted, the State, 
     unit of local government, or Indian tribe will implement a 
     plan for forwarding, not later than 180 days after a DNA 
     evidence sample is obtained, all samples collected in cases 
     of sexual assault to a laboratory that meets the quality 
     assurance standards for testing under subsection (d); and
       ``(8) upon issuance of the regulations specified in section 
     10(d), certify that the State, unit of local government, or 
     Indian tribe is in compliance with those regulations.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(k) Priority.--In awarding grants under this section, the 
     Attorney General shall give priority to a State or unit of 
     local government that has a significant rape kit or 
     nonsuspect case backlog per capita as compared with other 
     applicants.''.

     SEC. 7. QUALITY ASSURANCE STANDARDS FOR COLLECTION AND 
                   HANDLING OF DNA EVIDENCE.

       (a) National Protocol.--
       (1) In general.--The Attorney General shall review 
     national, State, local, and tribal government protocols, that 
     exist on or before the date of enactment of this Act, on the 
     collection and processing of DNA evidence at crime scenes.
       (2) Recommended protocol.--Based upon the review described 
     in paragraph (1), the Attorney General shall develop a 
     recommended national protocol for the collection of DNA 
     evidence at crime scenes, including crimes of rape and other 
     sexual assault.
       (b) Standards, Practice, and Training for Sexual Assault 
     Forensic Examinations.--Section 1405(a) of the Victims of 
     Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 
     3796gg note) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``and emergency response 
     personnel'' after ``health care students''; and
       (2) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``and DNA evidence 
     collection'' after ``sexual assault forensic examinations''.

     SEC. 8. SEXUAL ASSAULT FORENSIC EXAM PROGRAM GRANTS.

       (a) Authorization of Grants.--The Attorney General shall 
     make grants to eligible entities to--
       (1) establish and maintain sexual assault examiner 
     programs;
       (2) carry out sexual assault examiner training and 
     certification; and
       (3) acquire or improve forensic equipment.
       (b) Eligible Entity.--For purposes of this section, the 
     term ``eligible entity'' means--
       (1) a State;
       (2) a unit of local government;
       (3) a college, university, or other institute of higher 
     learning;
       (4) an Indian tribe;
       (5) sexual assault examination programs, including sexual 
     assault nurse examiner (SANE) programs, sexual assault 
     forensic examiner (SAFE) programs, and sexual assault 
     response team (SART) programs; and
       (6) a State sexual assault coalition.
       (c) Application.--To receive a grant under this section--
       (1) an eligible entity shall submit to the Attorney General 
     an application in such form and containing such information 
     as the Attorney General may require; and
       (2) an existing or proposed sexual assault examination 
     program shall also--
       (A) certify that the program complies with the standards 
     and recommended protocol developed by the Attorney General 
     pursuant to section 1405 of the Victims of Trafficking and 
     Violence Protection Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 3796gg note); and
       (B) certify that the applicant is aware of, and utilizing, 
     uniform protocols and standards issued by the Department of 
     Justice on the collection and processing of DNA evidence at 
     crime scenes.
       (d) Priority.--In awarding grants under this section, the 
     Attorney General shall give priority to proposed or existing 
     sexual assault examination programs that are serving, or will 
     serve, populations currently underserved by existing sexual 
     assault examination programs.
       (e) Restrictions on Use of Funds.--
       (1) Supplemental funds.--Funds made available under this 
     section shall not be used to supplant State funds, but shall 
     be used to increase the amount of funds that would, in the 
     absence of Federal funds, be made available from State 
     sources for the purposes of this section.
       (2) Administrative costs.--An eligible entity may not use 
     more than 5 percent of the funds it receives under this 
     section for administrative expenses.
       (3) Nonexclusivity.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to limit or restrict the ability of proposed or 
     existing sexual assault examination programs to apply for and 
     obtain Federal funding from any other agency or department or 
     any other Federal grant program.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Department of Justice, to remain 
     available until expended, $30,000,000 for each of

[[Page S292]]

     fiscal years 2004 through 2008 to carry out this section.

     SEC. 9. DNA EVIDENCE TRAINING GRANTS.

       (a) Authorization of Grants.--The Attorney General shall 
     make grants to eligible entities to--
       (1) train law enforcement personnel and all other first 
     responders at crime scenes, including investigators, in the 
     handling of sexual assault cases and the collection and use 
     of DNA samples for use as forensic evidence;
       (2) train State and local prosecutors on the use of DNA 
     samples for use as forensic evidence; and
       (3) train law enforcement personnel to recognize, detect, 
     report, and respond to drug-facilitated sexual assaults.
       (b) Eligible Entity.--For purposes of this section, the 
     term ``eligible entity'' means--
       (1) a State;
       (2) a unit of local government;
       (3) a college, university, or other institute of higher 
     learning; and
       (4) an Indian tribe.
       (c) Application.--To receive a grant under this section, 
     the chief executive officer of a State, unit of local 
     government, or university, or the head of a tribal government 
     that desires a grant under this section shall submit to the 
     Attorney General--
       (1) an application in such form and containing such 
     information as the Attorney General may require;
       (2) certification that the applicant is aware of, and 
     utilizing, uniform protocols and standards issued by the 
     Department of Justice on the collection and processing of DNA 
     evidence at crime scenes;
       (3) certification that the applicant is aware of, and 
     utilizing, the national sexual assault forensic examination 
     training protocols developed under section 1405(a) of the 
     Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 
     (42 U.S.C. 3796gg note); and
       (4) if the applicant is a unit of local government, 
     certification that the applicant participates in a State 
     laboratory system.
       (d) Restrictions on Use of Funds.--
       (1) Supplemental funds.--Funds made available under this 
     section shall not be used to supplant State funds, but shall 
     be used to increase the amount of funds that would, in the 
     absence of Federal funds, be made available from State 
     sources for the purposes of this section.
       (2) Administrative costs.--An eligible entity may not use 
     more than 5 percent of the funds it receives under this 
     section for administrative expenses.
       (3) Nonexclusivity.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to limit or restrict the ability of an eligible 
     entity to apply for and obtain Federal funding from any other 
     agency or department or any other Federal grant program.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Department of Justice $10,000,000 
     for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2008 to carry out this 
     section.

     SEC. 10. AUTHORIZING JOHN DOE DNA INDICTMENTS.

       (a) Limitations.--Section 3282 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Except'' and inserting the following:
       ``(a) Limitation.--Except''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) DNA Profile Indictment.--
       ``(1) In general.--In any indictment found for an offense 
     under chapter 109A, if the identity of the accused is 
     unknown, it shall be sufficient to describe the accused as an 
     individual whose name is unknown, but who has a particular 
     DNA profile.
       ``(2) Exception.--Any indictment described in paragraph 
     (1), which is found within 5 years after the offense under 
     chapter 109A shall have been committed, shall not be subject 
     to--
       ``(A) the limitations period described in subsection (a); 
     and
       ``(B) the provisions of chapter 208 until the individual is 
     arrested or served with a summons in connection with the 
     charges contained in the indictment.
       ``(3) Definition.--For purposes of this subsection, the 
     term `DNA profile' means a set of DNA identification 
     characteristics.''.
       (b) Rules of Criminal Procedure.--Rule 7 of the Federal 
     Rules of Criminal Procedure is amended in subdivision (c)(1) 
     by adding at the end the following: ``For purposes of an 
     indictment referred to in section 3282 of title 18, United 
     States Code, if the identity of the defendant is unknown, it 
     shall be sufficient to describe the defendant, in the 
     indictment, as an individual whose name is unknown, but who 
     has a particular DNA profile, as defined in that section 
     3282.''.

     SEC. 11. INCREASED GRANTS FOR COMBINED DNA INDEX (CODIS) 
                   SYSTEM.

       Section 210306 of the DNA Identification Act of 1994 (42 
     U.S.C. 14134) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``There'' and inserting the following:
       ``(a) In General.--There''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Increased Grants for CODIS.--There is authorized to 
     be appropriated to the Federal Bureau of Investigation to 
     carry out upgrades to the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) 
     $9,700,000 for fiscal year 2003.''.

     SEC. 12. INCREASED GRANTS FOR FEDERAL CONVICTED OFFENDER 
                   PROGRAM (FCOP).

       Section 3 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 
     2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135a) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Federal Bureau of Investigation to 
     carry out this section $500,000 for fiscal year 2003.''.

     SEC. 13. PRIVACY REQUIREMENTS FOR HANDLING DNA EVIDENCE AND 
                   DNA ANALYSES.

       (a) Privacy Protection Standard.--Section 10(a) of the DNA 
     Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 
     14135e(a)) is amended by inserting before the period at the 
     end the following: ``or in section 3282(b) of title 18, 
     United States Code''.
       (b) Limitation on Access to DNA Information.--Section 10 of 
     the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 
     14135e) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Limitation on Access to DNA Information.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Attorney General shall establish, by 
     regulation, procedures to limit access to, or use of, stored 
     DNA samples or DNA analyses.
       ``(2) Regulations.--The regulations established under 
     paragraph (1) shall establish conditions for using DNA 
     information to--
       ``(A) limit the use and dissemination of such information, 
     as provided under subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of section 
     210304(b)(3) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement 
     Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14132(b)(3));
       ``(B) limit the redissemination of such information;
       ``(C) ensure the accuracy, security, and confidentiality of 
     such information;
       ``(D) protect any privacy rights of individuals who are the 
     subject of such information; and
       ``(E) provide for the timely removal and destruction of 
     obsolete or inaccurate information, or information required 
     to be expunged.''.
       (c) Criminal Penalty.--Section 10(c) of the DNA Analysis 
     Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 14135e) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``discloses a sample or 
     result'' and inserting ``discloses or uses a DNA sample or 
     DNA analysis''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``per offense'' after 
     ``$100,000''.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to cosponsor this important 
legislation to address the shameful backlog of unanalyzed DNA evidence 
in rape kits. Senator Biden, Senator Spector and I worked closely on 
this issue last year and this bill is an excellent compromise that 
combines aspects of bills introduced by myself and by Senator Biden. 
This bill provides critical resources to State and Federal Governments 
to ensure that all the DNA evidence sitting in storage rooms across the 
country can be tested and perpetrators found and convicted. As more and 
more states have moved to require DNA samples from all convicted 
felons, the Federal resources that this bill provides to aid in the 
building of convicted offender records has also become more critical. 
The bill unanimously passed both the Judiciary Committee and the full 
Senate last year. It once again has strong bipartisan support, and I 
anticipate that we will work quickly to pass the bill in this new 
Congress, so that the bill can also pass the House of Representatives 
and become law. This bill reauthorizes a 2000 bill and time is of the 
essence as those authorizations expire soon. The power of DNA to find 
and convict rapists in cases where there have never even been an 
identified suspect cannot be overstated. We must act now to help law 
enforcement and prosecutors across the country be able to make full use 
of the most valuable tool at their disposal.
  One of the things that I am most pleased about is that the grant 
program in this bill to fund DNA testing of existing rape kits 
throughout the country will bear the name of Debbie Smith. In her 
testimony before the Crime Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee last 
June, she proved herself an extraordinary spokesperson on the power of 
DNA evidence to bring not just justice but peace to victims of sexual 
assault.
  The heart of this bill is about getting DNA evidence from rape cases 
that is currently sitting in police evidence rooms tested and checked 
against the DNA profiles of convicted felons. We all know that DNA is a 
tool that works and as more states begin building their felon data 
bases, more and more cases of rape where police have no suspect are 
being solved.
  We owe every woman in this country who has had the courage to come 
forward and undergo an invasive physical exam and evidence gathering 
after the trauma of a sexual assault, at a minimum, the absolute 
guarantee that the collected evidence is being checked against known 
felons. That is what this bill does.
  In my state of Washington alone, in the past five years at least 
12,950 women have submitted to humiliating and traumatic exams for the 
collection

[[Page S293]]

of evidence that has not been analyzed to help solve their rape. When 
applied on a national scale, these findings would indicate a national 
backlog of 615,000 cases of untested evidence. Washington State 
University is currently in the process of conducting a national 
assessment of the backlog of rape kits and I look forward to learning 
those results but we simply must provide the resources to get this 
evidence analyzed now.
  We need to pass this bill and fund this bill to help police solve 
more rapes and give women receive the peace of mind of knowing that 
everything that can be done to catch their attacker is being done.
  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today in support of S. 152, the DNA 
Sexual Justice Act of 2003. Building on the success of the Kohl-DeWine 
DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act enacted during the 106th Congress, 
this legislation will provide law enforcement and prosecutors with 
critical physical evidence that will help put more criminals behind 
bars. Currently, DNA evidence is languishing untested at laboratories 
nationwide, simply for lack of funding. The DNA Sexual Justice Act will 
assess the extent of the backlog and provide funding for its 
elimination. Further, this legislation will ensure that DNA evidence 
from cases involving sexual assault is handled properly by providing 
training for emergency personnel, medical examiners, law enforcement, 
forensic analysts and prosecutors.
  Currently, all 50 States and the Federal Government require DNA 
samples to be obtained from certain convicted offenders, and these 
samples increasingly can be shared through a national DNA database 
established by Federal law. This national database, part of the 
Combined Database Index System, CODIS, enables law enforcement 
officials to link DNA evidence found at a crime scene with any suspect 
whose DNA is already on file. By identifying repeat offenders, this DNA 
sharing can and does make a difference.
  Before passage of the Kohl-DeWine Backlog Elimination Act in 2000, 
law enforcement was in large part unable to take advantage of DNA 
analysis as a crime-fighting technology. This was primarily due to the 
fact that DNA sample collection was not required of all Federal 
offenders, forensic labs did not have enough resources or equipment to 
analyze collected samples, and State databases were not interoperable 
with Federal databases. This bill will further address these issues by 
directing the Attorney General to survey forensic laboratories across 
the country to determine the scope of the backlog and authorizes the 
funding necessary to eliminate the backlog over the next four years.
  However this legislation goes even further, focusing new, targeted 
grant programs toward DNA evidence collected from crimes of sexual 
assault or violence. By authorizing funding for the training of 
emergency personnel and medical examiners, this legislation ensures 
that DNA evidence will be properly collected. With funding for forensic 
equipment and the training of forensic examiners, it ensures that DNA 
evidence will be accurately analyzed. And by providing funding for the 
training of prosecutors, this legislation ensures that the evidence 
will be used to its greatest possible effect in the courtroom.
  This measure will ensure that women who have been victims of sexual 
assault or violence will have the most reliable tools to bring their 
assailants to justice. Most importantly, this legislation will help 
police use modern technology to solve crimes and prevent repeat 
offenders from committing new ones.
                                 ______