[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 152 (Friday, November 30, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7293-S7300]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013--Continued

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I would like to thank the majority leader 
again for his encouragement of this process. As I said before, I think 
it should be an example for addressing further pieces of legislation 
before this body. It has been very tough. There have been hundreds of 
amendments that have been filed, many of which have been disposed of.
  I believe on Monday night we could complete this legislation with the 
cooperation of all Members so that this body could move on to other 
business. I want to thank again my friend, the chairman, who continues 
to show unlimited patience, which is a quality that I do not possess.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

[[Page S7294]]

Amendments Nos. 2959, 2984, 3079, 3082, 3087, as modified, 3102, 3105, 
  3135, 3145, 3196, as modified, 3198, 3234, 3244, 3247, as modified, 
                            3258, 3280, 3290

  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I call up now a list of 17 amendments which 
have been cleared by myself and Senator McCain: Wyden amendment No. 
2959; Bingaman amendment No. 2984; Grassley amendment No. 3079; 
Barrasso amendment No. 3082; Vitter amendment No. 3087, as modified by 
changes at the desk; Klobuchar amendment No. 3102; Klobuchar amendment 
No. 3105; Murkowski amendment No. 3135; Warner amendment No. 3145; 
Collins amendment No. 3196, as modified by changes at the desk; 
Barrasso amendment No. 3198; Klobuchar amendment No. 3234; Reid 
amendment No. 3244; McCain amendment No. 3247, as modified by changes 
at the desk; Alexander amendment No. 3258; Levin amendment No. 3280; 
Begich amendment No. 3290.
  Mr. McCAIN. The amendments have been cleared on our side.
  Mr. LEVIN. I ask unanimous consent that these amendments be 
considered en bloc, the amendments be agreed to, and the motion to 
reconsider be laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendments were agreed to, as follows:


                           amendment no. 2959

 (Purpose: To require reports on the use of indemnification agreements 
                  in Department of Defense contracts)

       At the end of subtitle C of title VIII, add the following:

     SEC. 847. REPORTS ON USE OF INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the end of 
     each of fiscal years 2013 through 2016, the Secretary of 
     Defense shall submit to the appropriate committees of 
     Congress a report on any actions described in subsection (b) 
     which occurred during the preceding fiscal years.
       (b) Actions Described.--
       (1) In general.--An action described in this subsection is 
     the Secretary of Defense--
       (A) entering into a contract that includes an 
     indemnification provision relating to bodily injury caused by 
     negligence or relating to wrongful death; or
       (B) modifying an existing contract to include a provision 
     described in subparagraph (A) in a contract.
       (2) Excluded contracts.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to 
     any contract awarded in accordance with--
       (A) section 2354 of title 10, United States Code; or
       (B) the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 
     and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.).
       (c) Matters Included.--For each action covered in a report 
     under subsection (a), the report shall include--
       (1) the name of the contractor;
       (2) a description of the indemnification provision included 
     in the contract; and
       (3) a justification for the contract including the 
     indemnification provision.
       (d) Form.--Each report under subsection (a) shall be 
     submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified 
     annex.
       (e) Appropriate Committees of Congress Defined.--In this 
     section, the term ``appropriate committees of Congress'' 
     means--
       (1) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on the 
     Budget, and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; 
     and
       (2) the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on the 
     Budget, and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives.


                           amendment no. 2984

  (Purpose: To provide for national security benefits for White Sands 
                     Missile Range and Fort Bliss)

       At the end of title X, add the following:

     SEC. 10__. WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE AND FORT BLISS.

       (a) Withdrawal.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to valid existing rights and 
     paragraph (3), the Federal land described in paragraph (2) is 
     withdrawn from--
       (A) entry, appropriation, and disposal under the public 
     land laws;
       (B) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
       (C) operation of the mineral leasing, mineral materials, 
     and geothermal leasing laws.
       (2) Description of federal land.--The Federal land referred 
     to in paragraph (1) consists of--
       (A) the approximately 5,100 acres of land depicted as 
     ``Parcel 1'' on the map entitled ``White Sands Missile Range/
     Fort Bliss/BLM Land Transfer and Withdrawal'' and dated April 
     3, 2012 (referred to in this section as the ``map'');
       (B) the approximately 37,600 acres of land depicted as 
     ``Parcel 2'', ``Parcel 3'', and ``Parcel 4'' on the map; and
       (C) any land or interest in land that is acquired by the 
     United States within the boundaries of the parcels described 
     in subparagraph (B).
       (3) Limitation.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the land 
     depicted as ``Parcel 4'' on the map is not withdrawn for 
     purposes of the issuance of oil and gas pipeline rights-of-
     way.
       (b) Reservation.--The Federal land described in subsection 
     (a)(2)(A) is reserved for use by the Secretary of the Army 
     for military purposes in accordance with Public Land Order 
     833, dated May 21, 1952 (17 Fed. Reg. 4822).
       (c) Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction.--Effective on 
     the date of enactment of this Act, administrative 
     jurisdiction over the approximately 2,050 acres of land 
     generally depicted as ``Parcel 2'' on the map--
       (1) is transferred from the Secretary of the Army to the 
     Secretary of the Interior (acting through the Director of the 
     Bureau of Land Management); and
       (2) shall be managed in accordance with--
       (A) the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 
     U.S.C. 1701 et seq.); and
       (B) any other applicable laws.
       (d) Legal Description.--
       (1) In general.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall 
     publish in the Federal Register a legal description of the 
     Federal land withdrawn by subsection (a).
       (2) Force of law.--The legal description published under 
     paragraph (1) shall have the same force and effect as if 
     included in this Act, except that the Secretary of the 
     Interior may correct errors in the legal description.
       (3) Reimbursement of costs.--The Secretary of the Army 
     shall reimburse the Secretary of the Interior for any costs 
     incurred by the Secretary of the Interior in implementing 
     this subsection with regard to the Federal land described in 
     subsection (a)(2)(A).


                           amendment no. 3079

 (Purpose: To permit Federal officers to remove cases involving crimes 
                     of violence to Federal court)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC. __. REMOVAL OF ACTION.

       Section 1442 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
       ``(c) Solely for purposes of determining the propriety of 
     removal under subsection (a), a law enforcement officer, who 
     is the defendant in a criminal prosecution, shall be deemed 
     to have been acting under the color of his office if the 
     officer--
       ``(1) protected an individual in the presence of the 
     officer from a crime of violence;
       ``(2) provided immediate assistance to an individual who 
     suffered, or who was threatened with, bodily harm; or
       ``(3) prevented the escape of any individual who the 
     officer reasonably believed to have committed, or was about 
     to commit, in the presence of the officer, a crime of 
     violence that resulted in, or was likely to result in, death 
     or serious bodily injury.
       ``(d) In this section, the following definitions apply:
       ``(1) The terms `civil action' and `criminal prosecution' 
     include any proceeding (whether or not ancillary to another 
     proceeding) to the extent that in such proceeding a judicial 
     order, including a subpoena for testimony or documents, is 
     sought or issued. If removal is sought for a proceeding 
     described in the previous sentence, and there is no other 
     basis for removal, only that proceeding may be removed to the 
     district court.
       ``(2) The term `crime of violence' has the meaning given 
     that term in section 16 of title 18.
       ``(3) The term `law enforcement officer' means any employee 
     described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of section 
     8401(17) of title 5 and any special agent in the Diplomatic 
     Security Service of the Department of State.
       ``(4) The term `serious bodily injury' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 1365 of title 18.
       ``(5) The term `State' includes the District of Columbia, 
     United States territories and insular possessions, and Indian 
     country (as defined in section 1151 of title 18).
       ``(6) The term `State court' includes the Superior Court of 
     the District of Columbia, a court of a United States 
     territory or insular possession, and a tribal court.''.


                           amendment no. 3082

   (Purpose: To require a report on the issuance by the Armed Forces 
Medical Examiner of death certificates for members of the Armed Forces 
                     who die on active duty abroad)

       At the end of subtitle F of title VI, add the following:

     SEC. 662. REPORT ON ISSUANCE BY ARMED FORCES MEDICAL EXAMINER 
                   OF DEATH CERTIFICATES FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED 
                   FORCES WHO DIE ON ACTIVE DUTY ABROAD.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than 120 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense 
     shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report 
     on the issuance by the Armed Forces Medical Examiner of death 
     certificates for members of the Armed Forces who die on 
     active duty abroad, including mechanisms for reducing or 
     ameliorating delays in the issuance of such death 
     certificates.
       (b) Elements.--The report required by subsection (a) shall 
     include the following:
       (1) A description of the process used by the Armed Forces 
     Medical Examiner to issue a death certificate for members of 
     the Armed Forces who die on active duty abroad, including an 
     explanation for any current delays in the issuance of such 
     death certificates.
       (2) A description of the average amount of time taken by 
     the Armed Forces Medical Examiner to issue such death 
     certificates.

[[Page S7295]]

       (3) An assessment of the feasibility and advisability of 
     issuing temporary death certificates for members of the Armed 
     Forces who die on active duty abroad in order to provide 
     necessary documentation for survivors.
       (4) A description of the actions required to enable the 
     Armed Forces Medical Examiner to issue a death certificate 
     for a member of the Armed Forces who dies on active duty 
     abroad not later than seven days after the return of the 
     remains of the member to the United States.
       (5) Such other recommendations for legislative or 
     administrative action as the Secretary considers appropriate 
     to provide for the issuance by the Armed Forces Medical 
     Examiner of a death certificate for members of the Armed 
     Forces who die on active duty abroad not later than seven 
     days after the return of the remains of such members to the 
     United States.


                    amendment no. 3087, as modified

       At the end of subtitle F of title X, add the following:

     SEC. 1064. REPORT ON PLANNED EFFICIENCY INITIATIVES AT SPACE 
                   AND NAVAL WARFARE SYSTEMS COMMAND.

       (a) Report Required.--Not later than 90 days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Navy shall 
     submit to the congressional defense committees a report on 
     plans to implement efficiency initiatives to reduce overhead 
     costs at the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command 
     (SPAWAR), including a detailed description of the long-term 
     impacts on current and planned future mission requirements.


                           amendment no. 3102

 (Purpose: To provide for the retention of certain forms in connection 
  with Restricted Reports on sexual assault involving members of the 
                             Armed Forces)

       At the end of subtitle E of title V, add the following:

     SEC. 544. RETENTION OF CERTAIN FORMS IN CONNECTION WITH 
                   RESTRICTED REPORTS ON SEXUAL ASSAULT INVOLVING 
                   MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES.

       (a) Period of Retention.--The Secretary of Defense shall 
     ensure that all copies of Department of Defense Form 2910 and 
     Department of Defense Form 2911 filed in connection with a 
     Restricted Report on an incident of sexual assault involving 
     a member of the Armed Forces shall be retained for the longer 
     of--
       (1) 50 years commencing on the date of signature of the 
     member on Department of Defense Form 2910; or
       (2) the time provided for the retention of such forms in 
     connection with Unrestricted Reports on incidents of sexual 
     assault involving members of the Armed Forces under 
     Department of Defense Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 11-062, 
     entitled ``Document Retention in Cases of Restricted and 
     Unrestricted Reports of Sexual Assault'', or any successor 
     directive or policy.
       (b) Protection of Confidentiality.--Any Department of 
     Defense form retained under subsection (a) shall be retained 
     in a manner that protects the confidentiality of the member 
     of the Armed Forces concerned in accordance with procedures 
     for the protection of confidentiality of information in 
     Restricted Reports under Department of Defense memorandum 
     JTF-SAPR-009, relating to the Department of Defense policy on 
     confidentiality for victims of sexual assault, or any 
     successor policy or directive.


                           amendment no. 3105

(Purpose: Relating to the prevention and response to sexual harassment 
                          in the Armed Forces)

       At the end of subtitle E of title V, add the following:

     SEC. 544. PREVENTION AND RESPONSE TO SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE 
                   ARMED FORCES.

       (a) Comprehensive Policy Required.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall, in 
     consultation with the Secretaries of the military departments 
     and the Equal Opportunity Office of the Department of 
     Defense, develop a comprehensive policy to prevent and 
     respond to sexual harassment in the Armed Forces. The policy 
     shall provide for the following:
       (A) Training for members of the Armed Forces on the 
     prevention of sexual harassment.
       (B) Mechanisms for reporting incidents of sexual harassment 
     in the Armed Forces, including procedures for reporting 
     anonymously.
       (C) Mechanisms for responding to and resolving incidents of 
     alleged sexual harassment incidences involving members of the 
     Armed Forces, including through the prosecution of offenders.
       (2) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit 
     to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the 
     House of Representatives a report setting forth the policy 
     required by paragraph (1).
       (b) Collection and Retention of Records on Disposition of 
     Reports of Sexual Harassment.--
       (1) Collection.--The Secretary of Defense shall require 
     that the Secretary of each military department establish a 
     record on the disposition of any report of sexual harassment, 
     whether such disposition is court martial, non-judicial 
     punishment, or other administrative action. The record of any 
     such disposition shall include the following, as appropriate:
       (A) Documentary information collected about the incident 
     reported.
       (B) Punishment imposed, including the sentencing by 
     judicial or non-judicial means including incarceration, 
     fines, restriction, and extra duty as a result of military 
     court-martial, Federal and local court and other sentencing, 
     or any other punishment imposed.
       (C) Reasons for the selection of the disposition and 
     punishments selected.
       (D) Administrative actions taken, if any.
       (E) Any pertinent referrals offered as a result of the 
     incident (such as drug and alcohol counseling and other types 
     of counseling or intervention).
       (2) Retention.--The Secretary of Defense shall require 
     that--
       (A) the records established pursuant to paragraph (1) be 
     retained by the Department of Defense for a period of not 
     less than 50 years; and
       (B) a copy of such records be maintained at a centralized 
     location for the same period as applies to retention of the 
     records under subparagraph (A).
       (c) Annual Report on Sexual Harassment Involving Members of 
     the Armed Forces.--
       (1) Annual report on sexual harassment.--Not later than 
     March 1, 2015, and each March 1 thereafter through March 1, 
     2018, the Secretary of each military department shall submit 
     to the Secretary of Defense a report on the sexual 
     harassments involving members of the Armed Forces under the 
     jurisdiction of such Secretary during the preceding year. 
     Each Secretary of a military department shall submit the 
     report on a year under this section at the same time as the 
     submittal of the annual report on sexual assaults during that 
     year under section 1631 of the Ike Skelton National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (10 U.S.C. 1561 note). 
     In the case of the Secretary of the Navy, separate reports 
     shall be prepared under this section for the Navy and the 
     Marine Corps.
       (2) Contents.--The report of a Secretary of a military 
     department for an Armed Force under paragraph (1) shall 
     contain the following:
       (A) The number of sexual harassments committed against 
     members of the Armed Force that were reported to military 
     officials during the year covered by the report, and the 
     number of the cases so reported that were substantiated.
       (B) The number of sexual harassments committed by members 
     of the Armed Force that were reported to military officials 
     during the year covered by the report, and the number of the 
     cases so reported that were substantiated. The information 
     required by this subparagraph may not be combined with the 
     information required by subparagraph (A).
       (C) A synopsis of each such substantiated case and, for 
     each such case, the action taken in such case, including the 
     type of disciplinary or administrative sanction imposed, 
     section 815 of title 10, United States Code (article 15 of 
     the Uniform Code of Military Justice).
       (D) The policies, procedures, and processes implemented by 
     the Secretary during the year covered by the report in 
     response to incidents of sexual harassment involving members 
     of that Armed Force.
       (E) Any other matters relating to sexual harassment 
     involving members of the Armed Forces that the Secretary 
     considers appropriate.


                           amendment no. 3135

  (Purpose: To extend the deadline for submission of a report on the 
findings and conclusions of the National Commission on the Structure of 
                             the Air Force)

       On page 502, line 7, strike ``2013'' and insert ``2014''.


                           amendment no. 3145

(Purpose: To require a study on the ability of national air and ground 
   test and evaluation infrastructure facilities to support defense 
               hypersonic test and evaluation activities)

       At the end of subtitle F of title X, add the following:

     SEC. 1064. STUDY ON ABILITY OF NATIONAL AIR AND GROUND TEST 
                   AND EVALUATION INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIES TO 
                   SUPPORT DEFENSE HYPERSONIC TEST AND EVALUATION 
                   ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Study Required.--The Director of the Office of Science 
     and Technology Policy, working with the Secretary of Defense 
     and the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space 
     Administration (NASA), shall conduct a study on the ability 
     of Department of Defense and NASA air and ground test and 
     evaluation infrastructure facilities and private ground test 
     and evaluation infrastructure facilities, including wind 
     tunnels and air test ranges, as well as associated 
     instrumentation, to support defense hypersonic test and 
     evaluation activities for the short and long term.
       (b) Report and Plan.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than one year after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall 
     submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report 
     containing the results of the study required under subsection 
     (a) together with a plan for requirements and proposed 
     investments to meet Department of Defense needs through 2025.
       (2) Content.--The report required under paragraph (1) shall 
     include the following elements:
       (A) An assessment of the current condition and adequacy of 
     the hypersonics test and

[[Page S7296]]

     evaluation infrastructure within the Department of Defense, 
     NASA, and the private sector to support hypersonic research 
     and development within the Department of Defense.
       (B) An identification of test and evaluation infrastructure 
     that could be used to support Department of Defense 
     hypersonic research and development outside the Department 
     and assess means to ensure the availability of such 
     capabilities to the Department in the present and future.
       (C) A time-phased plan to acquire required hypersonics 
     research, development, test and evaluation capabilities, 
     including identification of the resources necessary to 
     acquire any needed capabilities that are currently not 
     available.
       (3) Appropriate congressional committees defined.--In this 
     subsection, the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' 
     means--
       (A) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate; and
       (B) the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on 
     Science, Space, and Technology of the House of 
     Representatives.


                    amendment no. 3196, as Modified

       At the end of subtitle C of title V, add the following:

     SEC. 526. RESEARCH STUDY ON RESILIENCE IN MEMBERS OF THE 
                   ARMY.

       (a) Research Study Required.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of the Army shall carry out 
     a research program on resilience in members of the Army.
       (2) Purpose.--The purpose of the research study shall be to 
     determine the effectiveness of the current Comprehensive 
     Soldier and Family Fitness (CSF2) Program of the Army while 
     verifying the current means of the Army to reduce trends in 
     high risk or self-destructive behavior and to prepare members 
     of the Army to manage stressful or traumatic situations by 
     training members in resilience strategies and techniques.
       (3) Elements.--In carrying out the research study, the 
     Secretary shall determine the effectiveness of training under 
     the Comprehensive Soldier and Family Fitness program in--
       (A) enhancing individual performance through resiliency 
     techniques and use of positive and sports psychology; and
       (B) identifying and responding to early signs of high-risk 
     behavior in members of the Army assigned to units involved in 
     the research study.
       (4) Science-based evidence and techniques.--The research 
     study shall be rooted in scientific evidence, using 
     professionally accepted measurements of experiments, of 
     longitudinal research, random-assignment, and placebo-
     controlled outcome studies to evaluate which interventions 
     can prove positive results and which result in no impact.
       (b) Locations.--The Secretary carry out the research study 
     at locations selected by the Secretary from among Army 
     installations which are representative of the Total Force. 
     Units from all components of the Army shall be involved in 
     the research study.
       (c) Training.--In carrying out the research study at an 
     installation selected pursuant to subsection (b), the 
     Secretary shall ensure, at a minimum, that whenever a unit 
     returns from combat deployment to the installation the 
     training established for purposes of the research study is 
     provided to all members of the Army returning for such 
     deployment. The training shall include such training as the 
     Secretary considers appropriate to reduce trends in high risk 
     or self-destructive behavior
       (d) Period.--The Secretary shall carry out the research 
     study through September 30, 2014.
       (e) Reports.--Not later than 30 days after the end of each 
     of fiscal years 2013 and 2014, the Secretary shall submit to 
     the Committees on Armed Forces of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives a report on the research study during the 
     preceding fiscal year. Each report shall include the 
     following:
       (1) A description of the trends in high risk or self-
     destructive behavior within each of the units involved in the 
     research study during the fiscal year covered by such report.
       (2) A description of the effectiveness of Comprehensive 
     Soldier and Family Fitness Program training in enhancing 
     individual performance through resiliency techniques, 
     utilization of positive psychology.
       (3) In the case of the report on fiscal year 2014, such 
     recommendations for the expansion or modification of the 
     research study as the Secretary considers appropriate.


                           amendment no. 3198

 (Purpose: To renew expired prohibition on return of veterans memorial 
             objects without specific authorization in law)

       At the end of subtitle H of title X, add the following:

     SEC. 1084. RENEWAL OF EXPIRED PROHIBITION ON RETURN OF 
                   VETERANS MEMORIAL OBJECTS WITHOUT SPECIFIC 
                   AUTHORIZATION IN LAW.

       (a) Codification of Prohibition.--Section 2572 of title 10, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(e)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (3), and 
     notwithstanding this section or any other provision of law, 
     the President may not transfer a veterans memorial object to 
     a foreign country or an entity controlled by a foreign 
     government, or otherwise transfer or convey such an object to 
     any person or entity for purposes of the ultimate transfer or 
     conveyance of the object to a foreign country or entity 
     controlled by a foreign government.
       ``(2) In this subsection:
       ``(A) The term `entity controlled by a foreign government' 
     has the meaning given that term in section 2536(c)(1) of this 
     title.
       ``(B) The term `veterans memorial object' means any object, 
     including a physical structure or portion thereof, that--
       ``(i) is located at a cemetery of the National Cemetery 
     System, war memorial, or military installation in the United 
     States;
       ``(ii) is dedicated to, or otherwise memorializes, the 
     death in combat or combat-related duties of members of the 
     armed forces; and
       ``(iii) was brought to the United States from abroad as a 
     memorial of combat abroad.
       ``(3) The prohibition imposed by paragraph (1) does not 
     apply to a transfer of a veterans memorial object if--
       ``(A) the transfer of that veterans memorial object is 
     specifically authorized by law; or
       ``(B) the transfer is made after September 30, 2017.''.
       (b) Repeal of Obsolete Source Law.--Section 1051 of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 
     (Public Law 106-65; 10 U.S.C. 2572 note) is repealed.


                           amendment no. 3234

   (Purpose: To enhance the annual reports regarding sexual assaults 
                 involving members of the Armed Forces)

       At the end of subtitle E of title V, add the following:

     SEC. 544. ENHANCEMENT OF ANNUAL REPORTS REGARDING SEXUAL 
                   ASSAULTS INVOLVING MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES.

       (a) In General.--Section 1631(b) of the Ike Skelton 
     National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 (10 
     U.S.C. 1561 note) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following 
     new paragraph (3):
       ``(3) A synopsis of each such substantiated case, organized 
     by offense, and, for each such case, the action taken in such 
     case, including the following information:
       ``(A) The type of disciplinary or administrative sanction 
     imposed, if any, including courts-martial sentences, non-
     judicial punishments administered by commanding officers 
     pursuant to section 815 of title 10, United States Code 
     (article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), and 
     administrative separations.
       ``(B) A description of and rationale for the final 
     disposition and punishment, regardless of type of 
     disciplinary or administrative sanction imposed.
       ``(C) The unit and location of service at which the 
     incident occurred.
       ``(D) Whether the accused was previously accused of a 
     substantiated sexual assault or sexual harassment.
       ``(E) Whether the accused was admitted to the Armed Forces 
     under a moral waiver granted with respect to prior sexual 
     misconduct.
       ``(F) Whether alcohol was involved in the incident.
       ``(G) If the member was administratively separated or, in 
     the case of an officer, allowed to resign in lieu of facing a 
     court-martial, the characterization given the service of the 
     member upon separation.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs
       ``(7) The number of applications submitted under section 
     673 of title 10, United States Code, during the year covered 
     by the report for a permanent change of station or unit 
     transfer for members of the Armed Forces on active duty who 
     are the victim of a sexual assault or related offense, the 
     number of applications denied, and, for each application 
     denied, a description of the reasons why such application was 
     denied.
       ``(8) An analysis and assessment of trends in the 
     incidence, disposition, and prosecution of sexual assaults by 
     commands and installations during the year covered by the 
     report, including trends relating to prevalence of incidents, 
     prosecution of incidents, and avoidance of incidents.
       ``(9) An assessment of the adequacy of sexual assault 
     prevention and response activities carried out by training 
     commands during the year covered by the report.
       ``(10) An analysis of the specific factors that may have 
     contributed to sexual assault during the year covered by the 
     report, including sexual harassment and substance abuse, an 
     assessment of the role of such factors in contributing to 
     sexual assaults during that year, and recommendations for 
     mechanisms to eliminate or reduce the incidence of such 
     factors or their contributions to sexual assaults.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     and shall apply beginning with the report required to be 
     submitted by March 1, 2014, under section 1631 of the Ike 
     Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     2011 (as amended by subsection (a)).


                           amendment no. 3244

 (Purpose: To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide penalties 
for transporting minors in foreign commerce for the purposes of female 
                          genital mutilation)

       At the end of subtitle H of title X, add the following:

[[Page S7297]]

     SEC. 1084. TRANSPORT FOR FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION.

       Section 116 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Whoever knowingly transports from the United States 
     and its territories a person in foreign commerce for the 
     purpose of conduct with regard to that person that would be a 
     violation of subsection (a) if the conduct occurred within 
     the United States, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under 
     this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.''.


                    amendment no. 3247, as Modified

       At the end of subtitle H of title X, add the following:

     SEC. 1084. TRANSFER OF EXCESS AIRCRAFT TO OTHER DEPARTMENTS.

       (a) Transfer.--Subject to subsection (c), the Secretary of 
     Defense shall transfer excess aircraft specified in 
     subsection (b) to the Secretary of Agriculture and the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security for use by the Forest Service 
     and the United States Coast Guard. The transfer of any excess 
     aircraft under this subsection shall be without 
     reimbursement.
       (b) Aircraft.--
       (1) In general.--The aircraft transferred under subsection 
     (a) are aircraft of the Department of Defense that are--
       (A) identified by the Forest Service or the United States 
     Coast Guard as a suitable platform to carry out their 
     respective missions;
       (B) subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), excess to the needs 
     of the Department of Defense, as determined by the Secretary 
     of Defense; and
       (C) acceptable for use by the Forest Service, as determined 
     by the Secretary of Agriculture.
       (D) acceptable for use by the United States Coast Guard, as 
     determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
       (2) Limitation on number.--The number of aircraft that may 
     be transfered to either the Secretary of Agriculture or the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security may not exceed 12 aircraft.
       (3) Limitations on determination as excess.--Aircraft may 
     not be determined to be excess for the purposes of this 
     subsection, unless such aircraft are determined to be excess 
     in the report referenced by subsection (b) of section 1703 of 
     Title XVII of this Act, or if such aircraft are otherwise 
     prohibited from being determined excess by law.
       (c) Priority in Transfer.--The Secretary of Agriculture and 
     the Secretary of Homeland Security shall be afforded equal 
     priority in the transfer under subsection (a) of excess 
     aircraft of the Department of Defense specified in subsection 
     (b) before any other department or agency of the Federal 
     Government.
       (d) Conditions of Transfer.--Excess aircraft transferred to 
     the Secretary of Agriculture under subsection (a)--
       (1) may be used only for wildfire suppression purposes; and
       (2) may not be flown or otherwise removed from the United 
     States unless dispatched by the National Interagency Fire 
     Center in support of an international agreement to assist in 
     wildfire suppression efforts or for other purposes approved 
     by the Secretary of Agriculture in writing in advance.
       (e) Expiration of Authority.--The authority to transfer 
     excess aircraft under subsection (a) shall expire on December 
     31, 2013.

     SEC. 1085. REAUTHORIZATION OF SALE OF AIRCRAFT AND PARTS FOR 
                   WILDFIRE SUPPRESSION PURPOSES.

       Section 2 of the Wildfire Suppression Aircraft Transfer Act 
     of 1996 (10 U.S.C. 2576 note) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``during the period 
     beginning on October 1, 1996, and ending on September 30, 
     2005'' and inserting ``during a period specified in 
     subsection (g)'';
       (2) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h); and
       (3) by inserting after subsection (f) the following new 
     subsection (g):
       ``(g) Periods for Exercise of Authority.--The periods 
     specified in this subsection are the following:
       ``(1) The period beginning on October 1, 1996, and ending 
     on September 30, 2005.
       ``(2) The period beginning on October 1, 2012, and ending 
     on September 30, 2017.''.


                           amendment no. 3258

   (Purpose: To modify the authority to carry out a fiscal year 2011 
   military construction project at Nashville International Airport)

       At the end of subtitle B of title XXVI, add the following:

     SEC. 2613. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN 
                   FISCAL YEAR 2011 PROJECT.

       In the case of the authorization contained in the table in 
     section 2604 of the Military Construction Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 2011 (division B of Public Law 111-383; 124 
     Stat. 4453) for Nashville International Airport, Tennessee, 
     for renovation of an Intelligence Squadron Facility, the 
     Secretary of the Air Force may convert up to 4,023 square 
     meters of existing facilities to bed down Intelligence Group 
     and Remotely Piloted Aircraft Remote Split Operations Group 
     missions, consistent with the Air National Guard's 
     construction guidelines for these missions.


                           amendment no. 3280

     (Purpose: To require reports to the Department of Defense on 
      penetrations of networks and information systems of certain 
                              contractors)

       At the end of subtitle C title IX, add the following:

     SEC. 935. REPORTS TO DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ON PENETRATIONS OF 
                   NETWORKS AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS OF CERTAIN 
                   CONTRACTORS.

       (a) Process for Reporting Penetrations.--The Under 
     Secretary of Defense for Intelligence shall, in coordination 
     with the officials specified in subsection (c), establish a 
     process by which cleared defense contractors shall report to 
     elements of the Department of Defense designated by the Under 
     Secretary for purposes of the process when a network or 
     information system of such contractors designated pursuant to 
     subsection (b) is successfully penetrated.
       (b) Designation of Networks and Information Systems.--The 
     Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence shall, in 
     coordination with the officials specified in subsection (c), 
     establish criteria for designating the cleared defense 
     contractors' networks or information systems that contain or 
     process information created by or for the Department of 
     Defense to be subject to the reporting process established 
     pursuant to subsection (a).
       (c) Officials.--The officials specified in this subsection 
     are the following:
       (1) The Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.
       (2) The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
     Technology, and Logistics.
       (3) The Chief Information Officer of the Department of 
     Defense.
       (4) The Commander of the United States Cyber Command.
       (d) Process Requirements.--
       (1) Rapid reporting.--The process required by subsection 
     (a) shall provide for rapid reporting by contractors of 
     successful penetrations of designated network or information 
     systems.
       (2) Report elements.--The report by a contractor on a 
     successful penetration of a designated network or information 
     system under the process shall include the following:
       (A) A description of the technique or method used in the 
     penetration.
       (B) A sample of the malicious software, if discovered and 
     isolated by the contractor.
       (3) Access.--The process shall include mechanisms by which 
     Department of Defense personnel may, upon request, obtain 
     access to equipment or information of a contractor necessary 
     to conduct a forensic analysis to determine whether 
     information created by or for the Department in connection 
     with any Department program was successfully exfiltrated from 
     a network or information system of the contractor and, if so, 
     what information was exfiltrated.
       (4) Limitation on dissemination of certain information.--
     The process shall prohibit the dissemination outside the 
     Department of Defense of information obtained or derived 
     through the process that is not created by or for the 
     Department except with the approval of the contractor 
     providing such information.
       (e) Cleared Defense Contractor Defined.--In this section, 
     the term ``cleared defense contractor'' means a private 
     entity granted clearance by the Defense Security Service to 
     receive and store classified information for the purpose of 
     bidding for a contract or conducting activities under a 
     contract with the Department of Defense.


                           amendment no. 3290

    (Purpose: To modify notice requirements in advance of permanent 
   reductions of sizeable numbers of members of the Armed Forces at 
                        military installations)

       On page 543, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following:

     SEC. 2705. MODIFICATION OF NOTICE REQUIREMENTS IN ADVANCE OF 
                   PERMANENT REDUCTION OF SIZABLE NUMBERS OF 
                   MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AT MILITARY 
                   INSTALLATIONS.

       (a) Calculation of Number of Affected Members.--Subsection 
     (a) of section 993 of title 10, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``In 
     calculating the number of members to be reduced, the 
     Secretary shall take into consideration both direct 
     reductions and indirect reductions.''.
       (b) Notice Requirements.--Subsection (b) of such section is 
     amended by striking paragraphs (1) through (3) and inserting 
     the following new paragraphs:
       ``(1) the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of the 
     military department concerned--
       ``(A) submits to Congress a notice of the proposed 
     reduction and the number of military and civilian personnel 
     assignments affected, including reductions in base operations 
     support services and personnel to occur because of the 
     proposed reduction; and
       ``(B) includes in the notice a justification for the 
     reduction and an evaluation of the costs and benefits of the 
     reduction and of the local economic, strategic, and 
     operational consequences of the reduction; and
       ``(2) a period of 90 days expires following the day on 
     which the notice is submitted to Congress.''.
       (c) Definitions.--Such section is further amended by adding 
     at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) The term `direct reduction' means a reduction 
     involving one or more members of a unit.
       ``(2) The term `indirect reduction' means subsequent 
     planned reductions or relocations in base operations support 
     services and personnel able to occur due to the direct 
     reductions.

[[Page S7298]]

       ``(3) The term `military installation' means a base, camp, 
     post, station, yard, center, homeport facility for any ship, 
     or other activity under the jurisdiction of the Department of 
     Defense, including any leased facility, which is located 
     within any of the several States, the District of Columbia, 
     the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, American Samoa, the Virgin 
     Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, or 
     Guam. Such term does not include any facility used primarily 
     for civil works, rivers and harbors projects, or flood 
     control projects.
       ``(4) The term `unit' means a unit of the armed forces at 
     the battalion, squadron, or an equivalent level (or a higher 
     level).''.


                           Amendment No. 3018

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the National Defense Authorization Act, 
NDAA, that was enacted into law last December contained several deeply 
troubling provisions related to the indefinite detention of individuals 
without charge or trial. These provisions undermine our Nation's 
fundamental principles of due process and civil liberties. I strongly 
opposed these provisions during last year's debate, and believe that we 
must eliminate and fix those flawed provisions. Toward that end, I 
voted last night in favor of the amendment offered by Senator 
Feinstein, which clarified that our Government cannot detain 
indefinitely any citizen or legal permanent resident apprehended in the 
United States. It is my hope that this is a positive step forward in 
our efforts to undo some of the damage from last year's NDAA.
  But our work is not done. As I have stated before, I believe that the 
vital protections of our Constitution extend to all persons here in the 
United States, regardless of citizenship or immigration status. That is 
why I cosponsored an amendment filed by Senator Mark Udall that would 
go beyond the scope of the Feinstein amendment to extend the protection 
against indefinite detention to any person within the United States. I 
look forward to working with Senator Udall and others in our continuing 
efforts to improve the law in this area.
  I am fundamentally opposed to indefinite detention without charge or 
trial. I fought against the Bush administration policies that led to 
the current situation, with indefinite detention as the de facto 
policy. I opposed President Obama's executive order in March 2011 that 
contemplated indefinite detention, and I helped lead the efforts 
against the detention-related provisions in last year's NDAA. Simply 
put, a policy of indefinite detention has no place in the justice 
system of any democracy let alone the greatest democracy in the world.
  The American justice system is the envy of the world, and a regime of 
indefinite detention diminishes the credibility of this great Nation 
around the globe, particularly when we criticize other governments for 
engaging in such conduct, and as new governments in the midst of 
establishing legal systems look to us as a model of justice. Indefinite 
detention contradicts the most basic principles of law that I have 
pledged to uphold since my years as a prosecutor and in our senatorial 
oath to defend the Constitution. That is why I have opposed and will 
continue to oppose indefinite detention.
  Last December, Senator Feinstein introduced the Due Process Guarantee 
Act, which was at the core of her amendment to this year's NDAA. Both 
the Due Process Guarantee Act and Senator Feinstein's amendment make 
clear that neither an authorization to use military force nor a 
declaration of war confer unfettered authority to the executive branch 
to hold Americans in indefinite detention. In February, I chaired a 
hearing to examine the Due Process Guarantee Act, and the Judiciary 
Committee heard testimony from witnesses who asserted that no 
individual arrested within the United States should be detained 
indefinitely regardless of citizenship or immigration status. I 
wholeheartedly agree, and I believe that the Constitution requires no 
less.
  The notion of indefinitely imprisoning American citizens is the most 
striking, but to me the Constitution creates a framework that imposes 
important legal limits on the Government and provides that all people 
in the U.S. have fundamental liberty protections. That is why I have 
cosponsored Senator Udall's amendment, which provides expansive 
protections against indefinite detention and fixes this unwise policy 
for all people. As I said before, though, I view the adoption of 
Senator Feinstein's amendment as a positive first step towards this 
goal.
  During last night's Senate floor debate on Senator Feinstein's 
amendment, however, some made fundamentally flawed legal arguments and 
interpretations. As chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I feel 
it is important to set the record straight.
  According to those who had opposed our efforts and support indefinite 
detention, Senator Feinstein's amendment should somehow be read as 
authorizing the indefinite detention of United States citizens captured 
on U.S. soil. They contended that the Supreme Court in Hamdi v. 
Rumsfeld held that the Authorization for the Use of Military Force 
(AUMF) expressly authorized the indefinite detention of citizens, 
regardless of where they were apprehended. This assertion is flatly 
wrong, entirely unsupported by the actual text of the opinion and, I 
believe, contrary to the Constitution.
  Much of last night's debate centered on the language in Senator 
Feinstein's amendment that prohibited the ``detention without charge or 
trial of a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States 
apprehended in the United States, unless an act of Congress expressly 
authorizes such detention.'' Senators who had opposed our remedial 
efforts and support indefinite detention asserted that the Supreme 
Court in Hamdi concluded that the AUMF was an ``explicit 
authorization'' of such detention even for citizens captured in the 
U.S. and that the AUMF was an act of Congress that fulfills the 
exception in the Feinstein amendment. The Senators ignore the fact that 
the text of the AUMF contains no reference whatsoever to the detention 
of individuals without charge or trial, and certainly no express 
reference to or authority for the detention of citizens in such a 
manner. Moreover, nowhere in the plurality or dissenting opinions in 
Hamdi do any of the Justices state that the AUMF expressly authorizes 
the detention of citizens without charge or trial.
  The preexistence of the AUMF does not fulfill the requirement that 
the amendment seeks to create and that requires express congressional 
authorization of exceptional authority after the adoption of the 
Feinstein amendment. Senator Feinstein did not intend to write and the 
Senate did not intend to pass a nullity. If this opposition argument 
were right, the amendment changed nothing.
  Senator Levin acknowledged in his remarks last night that the 
``Supreme Court in Hamdi held that the existing authorization for use 
of military force does address this issue and does explicitly, in their 
words, authorize detention of United States citizens in that situation 
which was on the battlefield in Afghanistan.'' (emphasis added) The 
Hamdi case did not address and did not expressly authorize the 
indefinite detention of U.S. citizens apprehended in the U.S. As 
Senator Feinstein and Senator Durbin have pointed out, the Hamdi ruling 
was limited to ``individuals who fought against the United States in 
Afghanistan as part of the Taliban.''
  The substance of the Supreme Court's legal analysis is important 
here, and the attempts to gloss over the actual text of the Hamdi 
opinion cannot go unchecked. The starting point of the Court's analysis 
in this regard was the text of the Non-Detention Act, codified at 18 
U.S.C. Section 4001(a), which states that ``no citizen shall be 
imprisoned or otherwise detained by the United States except pursuant 
to an Act of Congress.'' The Hamdi court then turned to whether the 
AUMF constituted an act of Congress within the scope of this exception, 
such that Hamdi's detention would be authorized. In her plurality 
opinion, Justice O'Connor concluded that the answer was yes, but she 
made certain to circumscribe carefully the scope of that ruling by 
saying ``we conclude that the AUMF is explicit congressional 
authorization for the detention of individuals in the narrow category 
we describe,'' i.e. ``individuals who fought against the United States 
in Afghanistan as part of the Taliban.'' Stated simply, the Hamdi 
decision does not stand for the proposition that the AUMF expressly 
authorizes the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens captured on U.S. 
soil.
  Although last night's debate on the Hamdi decision focused largely on 
the

[[Page S7299]]

statutory authority to detain individuals, we must also not lose sight 
of other aspects of that opinion regarding the nature and duration of 
law of war detention, and how changing circumstances might warrant re-
examination of the authority for such detention. Last night, Senator 
Graham stated that Hamdi's imprisonment ``could last for the rest of 
his life because the law of war detention can last for the duration of 
the relevant conflict.'' Although I do not necessarily disagree that 
law of war detention has historically been viewed as appropriate for 
the duration of the relevant conflict, this statement begs the question 
of when and how the duration of the relevant conflict is determined.
  In her opinion in Hamdi, Justice O'Connor stated that the AUMF 
justified detention as part of the exercise of necessary and 
appropriate force ``if the record establishes that United States troops 
are still involved in active combat in Afghanistan'' against Taliban 
combatants. Significantly, Justice O'Connor wrote that ``if the 
practical circumstances of a given conflict are entirely unlike those 
of the conflicts that informed the development of the law of war, that 
understanding may unravel.'' Accordingly, as we wind down our combat 
operations in Afghanistan, Congress and the courts should consider 
carefully how those changing circumstances might affect the legitimacy 
of so-called law of war detention authority under the AUMF.
  I also continue to be deeply disturbed by the mandatory military 
detention provisions that were included in last year's NDAA through 
Section 1022. In the fight against al Qaeda and other terrorist 
threats, we should give our intelligence, military, and law enforcement 
professionals all the tools they need not limit those tools, as was 
required by this law. That is why the Secretary of Defense, Attorney 
General, Director of the FBI, and Director of National Intelligence all 
objected to this section and it was modified to require the President 
to produce procedures to determine who meets the definition of a person 
subject to mandatory military detention. I appreciate that the 
President took an aggressive approach in these procedures to preserve 
the flexibility of law enforcement, as well as military and 
intelligence professionals, to investigate and prosecute alleged 
terrorists.
  However, these procedures do not mitigate my concerns that the 
mandatory military detention requirements are overly broad and threaten 
core constitutional principles. Once sacrificed, our treasured 
constitutional protections are not easily restored. After all, the 
policy directive of this President can be undone by a future 
administration. That is why I have cosponsored Senator Udall's 
amendment to this year's NDAA that would repeal this ill-advised 
authority.
  In Hamdi, Justice O'Connor stated unequivocally that ``[w]e have long 
since made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the 
President when it comes to the rights of the Nation's citizens.'' We 
can never forget that the power of our Federal Government is bound by 
the Constitution. The detention provisions enacted through last year's 
NDAA are deeply troublesome. They do not represent Vermont values, they 
do not represent American values, and they have no place in this world. 
Moving forward, I urge all Senators to join in support of upholding the 
principles of our Constitution, protecting American values, and 
championing the rule of law. We need a bipartisan effort to guarantee 
that the United States remains the model for the rule of law to the 
world.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss several issues of 
importance to the future of our Nation's military. The National Defense 
Authorization Act before us this year will affect the size and strength 
of the U.S. Armed Forces and the resources and programs available to 
our service members and their families.
  According to GEN Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff, ``capability is more important than size.'' As the size of our 
military begins to decrease, there is more need than ever to ensure 
that they have the right equipment to fulfill their missions. 
Therefore, I am pleased that the committee has given the Pentagon the 
authority through this bill to negotiate multiyear procurements for the 
military's workhorse, the CH-47 Chinook, and for the V-22 Osprey and 
the unique capabilities it brings to the field. I also want to note my 
frustration with the Army's lack of strategic and long-term thinking 
related to armored combat vehicles. The Army's desire to temporarily 
cease production of tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles without long-
term plans as to what will replace them is nonsense. These proposals, 
should they be approved, jeopardize the Nation's combat vehicle 
industrial base, our national security and the livelihoods of many 
individuals throughout the Nation.
  Small businesses are the backbone of the economy both in Pennsylvania 
and across the Nation. Given their importance, I am committed to 
advocating for the needs of businesses, particularly women and minority 
business enterprises, in the U.S. Senate. My amendment, No. 2986, would 
ensure that subcontractors are aware of their inclusion on bids for 
Federal contracts and establish a system to report fraudulent 
procurement practices.
  In order to secure government contracts, big companies routinely list 
small businesses as subcontractors on their bids in order to strengthen 
their applications without the intention of actually giving the work to 
the named subcontractor. This especially happens with women and 
minority owned businesses. Currently, there is no legal requirement to 
notify subcontractors of their inclusion on Federal bids and no way to 
report this. This is taking business away from hard working men and 
women and it is time for this fraudulent activity to end.
  Amendment No. 2986 would prohibit prime contractors from using small 
businesses as straw men to win government bids. First, it would require 
that subcontractors identified on a solicitation for a competitive 
proposal are notified by the prime contractor before the application is 
submitted. Second, it would establish a reporting mechanism that allows 
subcontractors to report any fraudulent activity. This amendment is in 
direct response to concerns raised by my constituents, Alexander 
Nicholas of the Western Pennsylvania Minority Supplier Development 
Council, and Craig Bingham, owner of DCI Logistics in Carnegie, PA. I 
ask my colleagues to join me in support for promoting transparency and 
accountability in Federal procurement processes and support amendment 
No. 2986.
  Another long-term objective that the Nation and our military must 
recognize is the need for a secure and reliable source of strategic 
materials, such as rare earths. In filing amendment No. 2994 to the 
fiscal year 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, I want the 
Department of Defense to conduct a cost-benefit analysis on the 
feasibility of recycling heavy rare earth elements from fluorescent 
lighting waste. New innovations by Pennsylvanian businesses have taken 
the theory of recycling rare earths and made it a reality. With China 
controlling 95 percent of the world supply of rare earth elements, the 
United States must look at methods, including the recycling of 
products, to increase our domestic supply of rare earths.
  Investing in alternative fuels and energy technology is also critical 
to sustaining our national defense capabilities in the 21st century. 
DOD is the largest single user of oil in the world and their fuel bill 
was more than $17 billion in fiscal year 2011. DOD recognizes that this 
type of expenditure, not to mention where we have to go in the world to 
get that oil, is unsustainable. That is why they began investing in 
alternative fuels and energy technology under Secretary Rumsfeld back 
in the early 2000s. I think it would be a mistake to disinvest in that 
effort now when the return on investment could be so beneficial to our 
country.
  As they are currently written, sections 313 and 2823 of the NDAA put 
unnecessary restrictions on our military's ability to invest in 
alternative fuels, which could prove harmful to our national defense 
capabilities and our economy by keeping our military dependent on 
imported fossil fuels. I think it is very important that we fix 
sections 313 and 2823 with Senator Udall's amendment 2985 and Senator 
Hagan's amendment 3095, respectively.
  Currently, DOD invests only a small portion of their budget in 
alternative fuel development but this is an important investment for 
American businesses that focus on alternative fuel

[[Page S7300]]

development and energy technology research. Therefore, our Nation 
benefits three times from the fruits of these investments: once by 
improving our national defense capabilities, a second time by 
supporting jobs in the energy research and development sector, and 
again because these innovations can be applied in the marketplace 
benefiting all Americans. It is a smart investment to keep our military 
strong and develop 21st century energy solutions that we can use here 
and export abroad. Therefore, I support my colleagues' amendments to 
strike sections 313 and 2823 from the NDAA.
  Lastly, we must take care of the military families who continue to 
sacrifice without complaint. As chairman of the Joint Economic 
Committee, I studied the economic effects that the military lifestyle 
has on the earnings of military spouses. In 2010, the unemployment rate 
for military wives was 15.0 percent compared to 7.3 percent for 
civilian wives. One cause of this disparity may have to do with the 
numerous relocations military families undergo. In this same time 
period, 24.1 percent of military wives moved across State lines, 
compared with only 2.4 percent of civilian wives. Frequent moves 
coupled with military spouses holding jobs that require State-level 
relicensing create barriers that spouses must overcome when seeking 
employment. Therefore, I introduced S. 697, the Military Spouse Job 
Continuity Act, which would provide a $500 tax credit for military 
spouses who need to renew or transfer their professional licenses or 
certifications due to military relocations. While this specific bill 
cannot be taken up today for procedural reasons, I ask my colleagues to 
join me in a sense-of-the-Senate amendment recognizing that we must 
work with the Pentagon and State and local governments to reduce the 
employment barriers for military spouses, without whom we would not 
have the superb military we have today.
  I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting these important 
amendments.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I thank the Presiding Officer for his 
patience and long period of time in the chair today. We, obviously, 
have a couple of members in the media who have no other lives.
  Mr. LEVIN. I thank Senator McCain. He very humorously, with his 
great, good nature, kind of joshes himself comparing his patience to 
mine. My standard is not the one that anybody wants to follow around 
here; We will never get anything done.
  He is more than patient, and I am very grateful that he is standing 
there in that ranking position and sitting right in that ranking 
position. I hope he stays in that ranking position in some committee at 
least for many, many, many years--in the ranking position.
  Mr. McCAIN. I thank our distinguished chairman. Obviously, you have 
been here a long time.
  I also appreciate our staffs who, again, show that work-release 
programs are quite successful in the Senate. Thank you very much.
  Mr. LEVIN. I join in that too.
  Now, we have to close. I don't know if we have the closing. We do.

                          ____________________